Page 418 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries: I am just asking you to ask him.
MADAM SPEAKER: I think the point has been taken.
MR BERRY: Madam Speaker, I think enough has been said in relation to the matter. People know what is going on. They know that this is a stunt. We intend to ensure that we resource that pace of change which is occurring out there. The Liberals are trying to stand in the way of it, and it will not work.
MR MOORE (11.43): Madam Speaker, taking Mr Humphries's point, I shall attempt to be brief. Some time ago I read a story by John Steinbeck called The Grapes of Wrath. No doubt many members have read that excellent novel. I am drawn, in my mind, to the scenes after the Okies had moved to California. There was a huge pool of workers there and the employers took more and more advantage of that group of employees. With the Liberal industrial relations policies that are being proposed federally and taking place in Victoria, one cannot help wondering to what extent the same sorts of principles and concepts are applying here. Obviously they are not applying to that extent because there are protections for workers. The point is that in these circumstances, as in the Okies' circumstances, we have far too great a pool of unemployed people, and the protection of those who are working would be an important part of any piece of legislation. That is why I supported this legislation a few months ago, Madam Speaker, and that is why I intend to support it again.
We have the idea coming from Mr De Domenico that they are incredibly concerned about consultation and that is why they wanted this Bill to sit on the table. They are so concerned, Madam Speaker, that nobody knew that it was going to come up until this morning, when it was tabled. Although I accept that that is a fairly normal approach in many ways to putting a Bill on the table, in this instance I think there could have been further consultation, as I have suggested with the Bill on euthanasia. That is a very controversial Bill that I will be introducing into this Assembly and people know that it is coming. Mr Cornwell even thinks there have been deals done about it.
Madam Speaker, there is no doubt that this is a stunt - that is the word Mr Berry used, and quite correctly - to do with the Federal election. We have had two or three interjections from the conservatives over here, suggesting that we will see what happens in three weeks' time. Quite clearly, their minds are focused on an election and this is part of that election campaign. It is therefore important that we do not allow them to build up the hopes of people which are simply going to be dashed and that we deal with this Bill directly.
We had the debate very clearly a few months ago. The bulk of that debate can be re-read by referring to the Hansard. The very simple and straightforward Bill we have here refers to the repealing of a very simple and straightforward Act, the most important part of which is section 4, which reads:
Section 36 of the Principal Act is amended by omitting "more than 20" and substituting "10 or more".
I know that Mr Kaine had a great deal of difficulty in reading and understanding that, as he indicated to the house earlier today, but most of us have reached the stage where we can comprehend what that means, especially considering that we gave it a great deal of consideration only a few months ago.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .