Page 188 - Week 01 - Thursday, 9 April 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, it is one question for a union to press for proper conditions for its members; it is an entirely different question to interfere in the process of effecting better management whereby vital and much needed savings can be achieved and a more efficient service can be provided.
The Government has a mandate to manage the affairs of the Government in the best interests of Canberra, and especially in the best interests of the taxpayers, not the TWU. Strong measures and, if necessary, strong action should be taken against the TWU if it continues to pursue this course. There is no question that the TWU must certainly be involved in the process of consultation. It must certainly be given the opportunity to put its case. But the ultimate decision and the responsibility for effecting efficiency must lie with the ACT Government.
Government must demonstrate strong leadership in this regard. It cannot allow the school bully to throw its weight around. The Government has the support of the Opposition in this matter of improving the efficiency of ACTION. It has the support of the Canberra community. So, let us get on with it. The case against the union action is strong. They have no credibility in the matter of the strikes of last week.
The TWU claims that it has the interests of the Canberra people at heart, but how does it explain to the people of Canberra why it created such a considerable inconvenience to the Canberra public, especially to the schoolchildren? Madam Speaker, this is a classic case of the union shooting itself in the foot as it were. Where is its credibility? Where is its genuine interest in Canberra commuters? Where is its interest in producing an efficient bus service? As one Canberra citizen quite rightly asked in a letter to the editor of the Canberra Times on 7 April:
When is ACTION going to run the ACT bus service for the public and not the unions and the drivers? It's a disgrace and a joke.
Madam Speaker, there is no sympathy out there in the community for this type of action by the unions, and there would be little sympathy also for the Government in the unnecessary overspending of the taxpayers' hard-earned money on a service that can achieve considerable cost savings without affecting its service. In fact, changes to the operation can increase efficiency in every respect. It can be made more attuned to the commonsense principles of supply and demand. I am sure the Government would agree entirely that the TWU cannot be permitted to obstruct progress in achieving efficiencies within ACTION.
Madam Speaker, I would like to run briefly through what we see as the glaring inefficiencies at present. There is clearly no commonsense in running large buses in off-peak periods, although we can appreciate that sometimes it is necessary to keep those in reserve as they have to be used in peak periods. There must be a more flexible approach to handling these off-peak periods. This is clearly a target area for rationalisation of ACTION.
A public bus service could be provided in some instances by private operators, which could make the service more flexible and efficient, especially through some of the suburbs. Purpose built minibuses or medium size buses could be utilised.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .