Page 2840 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 21 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Connolly should agree with me entirely. Mr Deputy Speaker, the government is not, and must not be, synonymous with the trade unions. The union movement must look, as we all must, at our present and future needs, and they must make their inputs to government policy as do all other interest groups, from outside rather than from a privileged inside position.
There is no more crystal clear message that industrial relations and labour market reform is necessary in the ACT, and the nation, than that exemplified by our unemployment crisis, our failure to recover from the deep recession that we had to have, and the stagnation in new business investment. Here in the ACT 56 per cent of 15- to 19-year-olds are unemployed and 8.3 per cent of people seeking work are unable to find it. Part of the problem is that Commonwealth awards in the ACT have priced many people out of the employment market. No matter how good the economy gets in the ACT in the future, 3 to 5 per cent of people looking for work are likely to be unsuccessful, even in the long term, because there simply is not enough money in business to employ them and the Government is not going to employ them.
Across the country micro-economic reform initiatives recognise that higher labour costs dampen business investment just as much as stagnant consumption does. Where labour consumes 60 to 80 per cent of the cost of goods, profit margins must be small. Profit is the resource of investment in new businesses, new research, new products, greater productivity and greater employment. It must be seen in this light by unions and Labor governments alike, rather than being seen as something reprehensible.
In this technologically sophisticated world, labour is disadvantaged by laws that constrain business flexibility to react to new market opportunities and demands. Working men and women and their employers need to be able to adjust quickly to changing market conditions to maintain productivity, profitability and employment opportunities. In the ACT we have a private sector dominated by retailing, tourism and other service industries - small businesses that need flexibility and freedom to act locally. We are not a factory State like Victoria or New South Wales, and Commonwealth awards designed for those States are inappropriate here.
We need, Mr Deputy Speaker, a new and different approach. Interestingly - I am sure that the Government will find this interesting - the principles in the Jobsback policy announced yesterday by Mr Howard are acutely relevant to the ACT. They provide flexibility for employees and employers to enter enterprise specific agreements, making conditions relevant to individual businesses' ability to stay competitive and to maintain employment. Working hours will be freed from the artificial restraints of these Commonwealth awards. Workers will be able to enhance their family and community lives, while businesses will be able to maximise the productive value of overhead costs. Employees will have the protection of minimum wages, standards for agreements and advocacy in the negotiation of agreements and in disputes, and at the same time there will no longer be the coercion to join the union. Employees will be free to choose union membership or a workplace enterprise agreement. Contractors will be free to work as independent businesses, negotiating their own contracts without the compulsion of union representation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .