Page 1057 - Week 04 - Thursday, 1 April 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, on this side of the house our aim is to resolve the problems with that enterprise agreement and make sure that an agreement is entered into which is fair and equitable, which does maintain consistency with the ACT public sector enterprise agreement which some 15 unions are already a party to, and which also includes elements of the local productivity agreement which was previously negotiated between the ETU and ACTEW. That is what we are on about. I have no interest whatsoever in the kinds of alarmist and divisive tactics that members opposite seem to attribute to people on this side of the chamber. It is simply not the case. Madam Speaker, I think it is a case of wishful thinking over there that really is a little bit sad, in view of recent occurrences within the Liberal ranks.
We are concerned only with coming to an agreement which is fair to all parties and which, as I have said, mirrors the agreement that other unions are a party to. We are also extremely concerned that there not be inconvenience to the Canberra public. Again, that is an aim, and through continuing negotiations, continuing discussions, rather than trying to escalate problems, we intend to meet that objective.
MR DE DOMENICO: I have a supplementary question, Madam Speaker. Can the Chief Minister explain to the house whether the views of her Government are similar to the views of the Federal Labor Government and the views of the ACTU in terms of enterprise agreements?
MS FOLLETT: The Government's approach to enterprise agreements mirrors the Commonwealth's approach on such matters. In our current issue that is exactly the outcome that we are looking to achieve, as I have said many times. We have an ACT public sector enterprise agreement and we regard it as very important that other agreements - agreements made subsequent to the December agreement - are consistent with that. That is precisely the situation that the Commonwealth has adopted as well, as far as I am aware.
Community Medical Practitioners
MS ELLIS: My question is directed to the Deputy Chief Minister in his capacity as Minister for Health. The Australian Medical Association last night claimed on television that ACT Health subsidisation of 17 community medical practitioners is an extravagance. Is there any basis to that claim?
Mrs Carnell: It costs $3m a year.
MR BERRY: Madam Speaker, I hear Mrs Carnell interjecting and coming onside with the AMA. That does not surprise me because Mrs Carnell also supported the AMA in the recent election campaign where the AMA was moving to outlaw bulkbilling, and the people of Australia gave them a good drubbing for that. The claim by the AMA is misleading because it does not address all of the facts. Community medical practitioners provide an important service to the people of Canberra, a service that the people of Canberra want to continue. I am surprised a little at the remarks by the AMA. I would not have expected that sort of a remark, given that it is a criticism of their fellow health professionals.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .