Page 2695 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
we come to the punch line -
being an entitlement of the kind provided for in the Parental Leave Case decision.
What Mr De Domenico sets out to do is to undermine the parental leave case decision, which flies in the face of what the Government sets out to do. It sets out to lock in holus bolus the parental leave case decision and what Mr De Domenico sets out to do is to undermine its effect.
Mr De Domenico: No; I am just seeking to remove certain words from that definition.
MR BERRY: Only certain words. Now we are getting to the bottom of it.
MR CORNWELL (3.46): Madam Speaker, we still have not had an adequate response from the Minister. What Mr De Domenico has stated is that by putting in this definition it is making it mandatory for the employer, whether it is convenient or not, to employ a full-time employee on a part-time basis. It will be mandatory, under the circumstances set out in the definition. We still have not obtained an explanation from the Minister as to why the Government will not accept this perfectly reasonable amendment. Mr De Domenico wishes not to make it mandatory but to make it negotiable between the employee and the employer. We still have not had an explanation from the Minister - not an adequate explanation but an explanation at all - as to why the Government is opposing this perfectly reasonable amendment.
MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (3.47): No; this clearly sets out to undermine provisions in the parental - - -
Mr De Domenico: No, it does not.
MR BERRY: You do not know what it does, in that case. I think you should go back and have another look at the legislation.
Mr De Domenico: What it does is give the employer a chance to negotiate with his employee whether it is satisfactory for the employee to - - -
MR BERRY: They will have that entitlement if they are covered by an award.
Mr De Domenico: What if they are not covered by an award?
MR BERRY: Precisely. If they are not covered by an award, they will be covered by the parental leave case decision, because that is what this Bill requires. You are setting out to undermine the effects of the parental leave case decision. You just said that you were. You are trying to make it negotiable in the workplace, but it is not negotiable. What this amendment sets out to do is to undermine the parental leave case decision, and the Government will be opposing it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .