Page 2230 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 31 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
DR KINLOCH (4.58): I would like to endorse Mr Jensen's remarks. "Bitterness" and "hatred" are not words that I like to hear addressed towards anyone in this Assembly. We do not feel bitterness and hatred. I hope that all of us here would reject such notions. I hope we can deal with all our colleagues, whether in the Labor movement or outside the Labor movement, with all the affection we can muster.
My father - and I am going to be personal about this - was unemployed during most of the Depression. He was a member of the boilermakers union all his life. Into his eighties and early nineties he still kept his annual card, and he had messages as a brother of the union, as a comrade of the union. All through my academic life I was a member of the union. I tried, as some of you know, the moment I entered this Assembly to join the public service union, but I was told that was not possible. I am sorry about that. I am hoping I might come into the union movement through the ABC union. So I am not going to be told that I am unsympathetic to the union movement.
We do indeed uphold legislation for the safety of workers. I can quite see the problem of numbers here. Are 10 too few? Are 30 too many? Here we have a chance to put in place a useful piece of legislation. We are giving this a good try, a good shot, to make it 20. We have undertaken to look at this in the future, if necessary, and I commend this particular amendment.
MR BERRY (Minister for Community Services and Health) (5.00): Mr Speaker - - -
Mr Kaine: You are not going to speak in favour of the trade unions are you, Wayne, by any chance?
MR BERRY: Predictably, Mr Kaine, I am going to speak in support of the designated work groups applying in respect of groups of employees of 10 or more on any job site. One of the interesting things that struck me from this debate was the complexion of the politics of various people as they approached this issue. As my colleague Mr Whalan mentioned, the position of the Liberal Party, of course, was expected. Although he offered some forgiveness for the expectation that they might not support the trade union movement, I am not as forgiving as Mr Whalan.
One of the most interesting things that I heard from the debate, particularly as it was put by Mr Stefaniak, was his reference to Queensland. There are some connections, of course, between that part of the debate and the Residents Rally, and I will come to that in a little while. But in terms of Queensland, the issue of groups of employees of 30 was raised as having some relevance to this debate. Most Canberrans would disagree that there was any relevance between the sorts of policies that ought to be adopted in Canberra and the sorts of policies that have been developed in Queensland by the very conservative governments in that State.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .