Page 2553 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, that the ALP Government treated occupational health and safety as a serious issue and not as an avenue to increase the job security of its mates in the trade union movement. The Liberals have seen through the cynical charade and, as I said before, will not be supporting the amendment.
Madam Speaker, let us take another aspect of the situation. There is no doubt that today, the first day of sitting after the budget situation, we are debating - - -
Mr Lamont: After the Estimates Committee.
MR DE DOMENICO: After the Estimates Committee; that is right. Thank you, Mr Lamont.
Mr Berry: Which you were not here for.
MR DE DOMENICO: I was here for part of it, Mr Berry. Anyway, I will ignore all this innuendo. The Government has tabled legislation which will create unemployment. Let us look at that as an issue. I think they are seriously wrong. Let us face it; any government is wrong when its ideological platform overrides commonsense.
The private sector unanimously - "unanimously" is an interesting word, but this is true - rejected the occupational health and safety amendments on 1 October at a meeting attended by Mr Berry. Rejection of the amendments was based on the fact that they would, firstly, impose yet another burden on small business. Might I say, Madam Speaker, that it is the first time in a very long time that even the retail sector of the ACT has shown a negative growth pattern. That is also a fact of life. Anyway, this is a burden on small business. Secondly, it will erode productivity and profitability, detract from employment opportunities and interfere with effective management. That is not me saying that; that is the unanimous view of the private sector in this town.
Last week, as we are all aware, Madam Speaker, unemployment rose in the ACT again, from 7.9 to 8.3 per cent. Like Mr Westende, I have been away, but I am not uninterested in what is going on in this place. I am also now advised, and I know, that youth unemployment in particular went up to 56 per cent. That is an amazing figure. Fifty-six per cent of our youth in the ACT are unemployed, yet we have a Minister coming into this house and quite candidly saying that he is targeting the two industries which employ more youth than any other two industries - the retail industry and the tourism and hospitality industry.
This Bill says quite simply that if you have 10 or more people working for you, whether full time or part time, whether in one place, two places or three places, they are encompassed by this legislation. It is absolutely ridiculous. Let us look at Canberra as a little microcosm within the boundaries of New South Wales. The New South Wales legislation, Madam Speaker, says that a designated work group consists of 20 people. Here is the ACT, sitting in the middle of New South Wales, and we are now reducing it to 10. Logic once again tells me that those industries that do not want to go through this cumbersome and costly exercise might even consider crossing the border into New South Wales, thus once again removing revenue from the ACT.
Mr Lamont: Absolute nonsense!
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .