Page 5117 - Week 16 - Wednesday, 27 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
doubt it. Has he floated the proposal with employer groups? Has he got a view from employer groups about the industrial relations implications of this sort of legislation? Again, I doubt it. It is a knee-jerk Liberal Party reaction - a chance to wave the ideological flag about compulsory unionism and flash around a bit of rhetoric.
In terms of the contribution to the debate on human rights legislation, it adds not a jot. No other jurisdiction has thought it sensible to go down this path. No group in the community has suggested that it is sensible to go down this path. It is purely a piece of political puff, and I would urge members to reject the amendment.
MR STEVENSON (5.21): I listened carefully to what Mr Connolly said, trying to hear any valid practical argument that would suggest that people should be forced to join a group or a union. He talked about massive consultations with unions and employer groups being required before such an amendment was introduced. He asked Mr Stefaniak whether he understood the possible ramifications of such a measure. What Mr Connolly means is, of course, union action. Would such union action be just, or would it simply be maintaining the power they have over individuals, protected by the Government, to force them not only to join a union but also to contribute - - -
Mr Berry: Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order.
MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Berry, I am sorry, but Mr Stevenson is talking about unionism and joining unions. That is what this amendment - - -
Mr Berry: Yes, but that is not what this is about.
Mr Connolly: You have not even listened to his point of order, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker.
MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: I know what he was going to say.
Mr Connolly: On a point of order, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker: How can you possibly say, when Mr Berry raised the point of order, that you know what he is going to say?
MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Connolly, would you resume your seat please. Okay, Mr Berry, continue.
Mr Berry: We are in no position to argue that the provisions within the Federal Act are right or wrong or indifferent. What we are talking about is the relevance of placing a provision within the Discrimination Act, or whatever it might end up being called, which conflicts with a Federal law. So, he ought to keep his comments to that issue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .