Page 995 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 25 February 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
community feeling is that a move towards a national maternity leave scheme will be positive for the whole community.
As Mr Seselja said, this is an important matter which the Liberal opposition in this place believe should be given priority by the government. We are particularly keen to see that the government’s commitment to extend maternity leave for government employees to 18 weeks is implemented quickly so that the ACT can be seen as a leader in this area and so that the leadership shown in government employment might be emulated, where possible, in non-government employment.
Like Mr Hargreaves, I have some concerns about signing up to the recommendations of the Productivity Commission report before they have been finalised. Most members would be aware of the draft inquiry report and the recommendations in that report. But at this stage these are draft recommendations. I think Mr Hargreaves was correct when he pointed to signing up to something that we have not seen. It is useful that Mr Hargreaves pointed out that there is a problem with signing up to something that we have not seen, and it is ironic that during question time, time and again, the Minister for Planning asks the opposition and the crossbenchers to sign up to something that they have not seen. So we need to have some consistency here.
I would rather take the model that Mr Hargreaves has proposed: we are in favour of a particular course of action but we will not finally sign up to it until we have seen the way that it is written and the way that it is presented. In the same way, the opposition and the crossbench, in relation to cutting red tape with respect to the schools package, agreed with the sentiment—or they may not—but they are not prepared to sign up to something that they have not seen yet. This notion of signing up to something we have not seen—
Mr Hargreaves: On a point of order, Madam Assistant Speaker: I have allowed Mrs Dunne to continue for quite some time before drawing this matter to your attention, but I think she has made the point about her perception of inconsistency. She is starting to stray away from the subject matter. This is not about the planning process; this is not about the schools; this is about maternity leave provisions. Could you please bring her back to the subject?
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ms Le Couteur): Mrs Dunne, please continue.
MRS DUNNE: Thank you. I was actually about to come back, before I was so rudely interrupted by Mr Hargreaves.
Mr Hargreaves: Vicki, that’s getting a bit tetchy!
MRS DUNNE: It was very tetchy, wasn’t it? The topic today is about maternity leave, and the Liberal opposition is broadly supportive of the approach taken by the Stanhope government in the run-up to the election. We want to see that promise made good, and we think that is the most important part of this motion. I think it is a bit of a problem that the ACT Greens feel that, this far into the Labor-Greens alliance, they actually have to remind the senior partner what their commitments were and call on them to implement them. It is obvious that the Greens are starting to feel a little
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .