Page 2216 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 31 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In our role as legislators we must look at the point of view that we do not create more problems than we resolve. Mr Moore and others have mentioned the point: how many languages; how many dialects? If it has to be in different languages, if you have one person in an organisation of perhaps 100, or someone coming in there for a shorter period of time as an employee, once again that would be a legal liability if there were a problem.
As far as Mr Collaery's well-made point is concerned, that an international company probably would not find it difficult to spend a few more dollars, or even a few more hundred or even a few more thousand, to put various signs on equipment, well, that is true, but the point is that this legislation does not just cover international companies. It refers to "an employer". We know the lack of limitation on the size of an employer, and we must be cognisant of the fact that it is the small business area in Canberra that is going to make the difference between Canberra moving on successfully into the future and not doing so. So we must not place unwise burdens on small businesses.
I agree absolutely with Mr Moore that, if we allow this legislation to pass containing those three words, "in appropriate languages", it would bring about the non-hiring of people with other languages. Obviously that is not what we want to get involved in. I, too, ask people to really have a look at this with perhaps a new viewpoint. If there are any problems, why not use education more than legislation?
I think one of the problems we have to some degree, and governments have in general, is that we tend to rush into legislation before fully looking at the details. I notice Mr Whalan laughing and I wonder whether it has anything to do with what I am saying. Perhaps Mr Whalan feels that the idea is to legislate, legislate, legislate. I think a lot of people are concerned that these things are done without due viewing of the problems, certainly without due consultation. It has been brought out in this Assembly recently that there has not been fair consultation in this area.
Perhaps the union standpoint has carried the day, instead of having an across-the-board look at it and valid consultation with people - not only the people that are doing the work, but the people that are enabling those workers to have a job, the employers, whom this legislation affects. So once again let us have a look first of all at the need for the legislation, but let us make sure that we do not create more problems initially than we solve.
MR WHALAN (Minister for Industry, Employment and Education) (4.03): Mr Speaker, I have had discussion with my advisers. It has been confirmed that the Government does see the point raised by Mr Moore and Mr Duby. We accept
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .