Page 2746 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
hope that the government has plans to take these issues on board in the next couple of years as, in the eyes of most employees, they do act as a balance on contests over pay rates. If, as seems clear, there will be less money available for wage increases, the government needs to be working more industriously on other employment-related issues.
The three bills being introduced on Thursday will give us a better idea of what direction the government is providing in this area. But it is also a matter of how government relates to the workforce. If there is going to be a good result in terms of EBA negotiations, whether that be with teachers or ACTION bus drivers, we will need to see issues addressed with goodwill at the start of the process. Given workforce wages are going to be an issue this year, positive engagement might well be the line that ought to be followed. You need to not have barriers with your workforce. You need to work in a positive way to get good outcomes.
I want to comment briefly on Mr Corbell’s comments on Indigenous services. I think Ms Le Couteur was actually referring to the Gugan Gulwan literacy program for young Indigenous people.
Mr Corbell: No, she also mentioned the Women’s Legal Centre.
MS BRESNAN: That was one of the programs. The estimates committee asked a number of departments about this program, which saw the ending of its funding after the winding up of the community inclusion funding, and it took some questioning before a minister took responsibility for this program. We now know, obviously, that the Department of Education and Training has funded this program at its current rate for 2009-10, but we would hope to see ongoing funding for this very important and successful program.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (7.46): The government challenged us to stand and talk about land rent. I am happy to stand and talk about land rent. What Mr Corbell has forgotten is that it starts on page 50, volume 1 of the select committee’s report on estimates. It talks about the land rent scheme and the things that we discovered. And it goes on to make two recommendations.
But before I go to the two recommendations, the fundamental question was: were you told that people would back the land rent scheme and what reasons did they give for backing it or not backing it? The interesting thing is that we had the disgraceful article in the Canberra Times where a spokesperson on behalf of the Chief Minster—something the Chief Minister has never denied—came out and said that the reason the insurance companies, the mortgage insurance companies, would not back land rent was that they were afraid because of their exposure under the GFC. That was the reason.
The reality is that the letter back from the major mortgage insurer to the government—something the Chief Minister denies ever knowing about—says that they did not want to lend against it. And it is interesting because, when you go to the last paragraph of the letter to the public servant, the senior manager of strategic project facilitation, the one in charge, they actually say they will back OwnPlace.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .