Page 2760 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 29 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
mental health professionals in ACT Health, to better diagnose and address problems of mental health hazards in ACT workplaces, as a first step in developing strategies to combat this problem.
We recognise the role that CMD plays in developing employment frameworks for the ACT public service and welcome the prioritisation of the equity and diversity framework, as well as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and disability employment strategies. The government should be a leader in best-practice employment, particularly in demonstrating the viability and productivity benefits of employing people from a diverse range of backgrounds, including those who are often marginalised in employment. The ACT Greens would encourage the government to increase employment of people with a disability, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
I would also like to take the opportunity to comment on the structural separation between the industrial relations policy unit within CMD and the OHS enforcement arm within ORS and the complicating factor of the department of housing and community services conducting an industrial relations survey. Acknowledging the government’s claim that such splits are usual, it seems impractical to have one minister and department responsible for the development of policy and another for the implementation and enforcement of that policy. This can lead to a lack of clarity over who is ultimately responsible for problems within that policy area.
The ACT Greens believe that the industrial relations portfolio within CMD should be looking to ensure that our industrial relations policy and legislation represent best practice for the people of the ACT.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (5.02): I would like to speak briefly on behalf of the Greens on the issue of tourism as part of 1.4 under the Chief Minister’s Department. I think there is an acknowledgement in this place, across all parties, of the importance of the tourism sector in the ACT as a vital part of our local economy.
The impact of the Masterpieces from Paris exhibition illustrated that point very well. I think, across the city, the economic benefits were felt and I think we all saw that in the occupation of the hotels, the crowds in the restaurants and cafes around town. But I think, across the city, people also felt the cultural benefits and, frankly, the joy the exhibition brought to so many people. And certainly I was one that went. Unfortunately I left it until the last minute and was in with the crowds. Nonetheless it was very enjoyable.
I think it is fair to acknowledge the role the government played in making a contribution to bringing that exhibition to Canberra. There are some good lessons in that. They are opportunities we should be looking for in the future. Of course, in saying that, it raises a discussion about which events the government should invest in. That is a difficult question.
It was interesting in the estimates process that Mr Barr acknowledged that events can be procured if you have got the money to pay for them. I thought it was a fascinating choice of words. I had never really thought about going out and procuring events such
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video