Page 1131 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR KAINE (Chief Minister) (10.50), in reply: In concluding the in-principle debate on this Bill, I simply want to comment on the statements that Mr Berry made. His principal complaint seemed to be that we had not given him time to consult with "his constituency". The simple fact is, Mr Speaker, that this Bill is the product of discussions by this Government and our constituency, which happens to include the trade unions, although Mr Berry does not like to acknowledge it.
I noted with interest, Mr Speaker, that, although he followed the matter up with the Trades and Labour Council, it expressed no opposition to these amendments. The reason that it offered no opposition to them was that it had already agreed to them. That is the simple fact of it. So, when Mr Berry prattles on about his constituency and questions the relationship that this Government has with the trade unions, of course, he is on the wrong track entirely. The fact of the matter is that I do speak to the Trades and Labour Council and the executives of the trade unions in Canberra frequently. My office door is open to them and they know it, and if they have a problem they come and talk to me.
We have the Industrial Relations Advisory Committee and other bodies that this Government has put into place so that the trade unions can be represented and can express their views. They have every opportunity to consult with the Government on any matter that is of concern to them. And, of course, on a matter like this, this Government's clear instructions to the ACT administration are that it is to ensure that the trade unions are properly consulted, and that they are included in the decision making process. That is why he was unable to criticise the Government on the grounds that the trade unions object to any of these amendments, and that is why the Bill was put forward in the expectation that there would be very little debate. As I have said before, it is the product of discussions and the product of agreement and we, on this side of the house, were well aware of the fact that the trade unions would not object, because they had already agreed to all of these matters.
Mr Berry's plaintive bleat, of course, is a typical one that we have come to expect from that side of the house; it has no substance to it whatsoever. At least he had the good sense to say that he supported the Bill, because there are absolutely no grounds for him to disagree with it.
Mr Stevenson: I move that the matter be adjourned to 14 April 1991.
MR SPEAKER: The debate has been closed, Mr Stevenson. I think you have missed the bus.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .