Page 5164 - Week 16 - Wednesday, 27 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
How many of you realise that clause 30, paragraph (1)(b), exempted industrial awards, and that that decision is not accepted at Commonwealth level. Western Australia and South Australia have no such exemption and the Victorians have recommended its removal. The Women's Electoral Lobby and a whole lot of other groups opposed it on the basis that minimum wages and terms of employment should not be set in breach of principles of equal opportunity laws. We are not getting a debate tonight. If the Government is not able to debate the provisions it has adopted, then I will lead the debate in future. Why should I respond this way and try to work my way through it? The Attorney has the resources of the Law Office. I put that on the record. I am not happy.
I trust that members have read and understand the implications of the clauses that relate to genuine occupational qualifications. I will put on the record now that I do not want to be a devil's advocate on my own Bill. There have been a number of comments about this matter. One of the bases for some of this is gender hiring. For example, there has been trouble getting women doctors for women's health centres, women's refuges, and so on. That should be understood. The New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board looked towards a provision that allowed some exclusivity in rape crisis centres and women's refuges, and I hope that is understood as well.
The issue of exemption for artists and photographic model work is of interest. Members should note that sometimes people of a certain sex or race, or with a certain impairment, are employed for reasons of authenticity because a body wishes to photograph a particular disability for the purposes of a disability education program, or the like. That is why that is there, but it is capable - - -
Mr Duby: Or a Negro for a Tia Maria ad?
MR COLLAERY: Yes, quite correctly, or a Jamaican for a Tia Maria ad. Members should be aware that in giving this exception we can allow some exploitation of those provisions by sham arrangements. That is a point.
Finally, I want to flag paragraph 34(2)(g), which is to do with separate sleeping accommodation, sanitary facilities and the rest. I want to flag that because after this provision I want to move an amendment to take into account the situation in pastoral areas of Australia where pastoralists are not able to provide separate gender sanitary facilities, and other issues such as where they do want to have, in a shearing shed, a male tea boy, as the term used to go, and all the rest. There are issues there that we need to approach.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .