Page 1493 - Week 05 - Thursday, 12 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr De Domenico outlined a number of case studies - events that have occurred in this Territory in very recent times. In every case the effect of the imposition of this preference, this discrimination, is to deny people employment - "You cannot come onto this site unless you have a union ticket. You cannot attend the Labor Party convention unless you have a union ticket. You cannot come into this place and work on the fixtures and fittings, even though you are a private contractor, unless you have a union ticket, or the union says that it is okay. You cannot move garbage in the ACT, even though you own your own truck and you are working for yourself, unless the TWU says that it is okay". The Labor Party says that this is all right; that this is not discrimination, it is simply preference. I am absolutely confounded by it.
I do not understand how Mr Lamont can come into this place and defend that situation. He defends it on the basis that there is overriding Commonwealth law. That is absolute rubbish. Mr Lamont said that there is Federal law, and underneath Federal law there are Federal awards, and underneath Federal awards there are enterprise agreements, certified agreements. They are twice removed from the Federal law. Yet Mr Lamont says that something as far removed from Federal law as that overrides ACT law. If that is the case it is about time we moved to change it. A trade union can enter into an agreement with an employer, and that agreement overrides ACT law. It denies people employment; and Mr Berry, Mr Connolly and Mr Lamont say that that is okay. In a world which no longer supports discrimination, they say that that is okay. I just do not understand what kind of conscience they have.
Mr Lamont said that it has long been embedded practice in industrial relations law that we have this preference, that we have this discrimination. That is his defence; that it has long been embedded in industrial relations law. It is not so very long ago that, if you were not the right colour or the right race, or you had a couple of kids, you could not rent a house. That was long embedded in Australian philosophy too. People were entitled to say, "If you fit into this category that I do not like, you cannot rent my house. You cannot belong to my club; you cannot get a job in my business because your colour is not right; your religion is not right, your race is not right", or, "I do not like the colour of your eyes". But society has moved to prevent that happening any more. It has made it illegal. How then can the Labor Party say that this other form of discrimination, simply because it has long been embedded in the law, is still okay?
I have to say, with due respect to the Chair, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in this. All other forms of discrimination are unlawful, and the law should be inflicted with full force; but, if a trade union discriminates, that is okay. I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that it is not okay with me. When I know that somebody has been denied the right to work because he does not belong to a trade union, and that is denied because the trade union says that he cannot work, I find it unacceptable. I find it obscene. I believe it is unacceptable for any member of this Assembly to come in here and defend that and say that it is okay. If they really believe that hypothesis they should test it. They should put it on their platform, put it to the community next February, and see what sort of support they get for it. They will not do it because they would not dare. If they do not believe in their concept to that degree, they should move to change the law; and they should move to get the Commonwealth to remove this iniquitous protection that is given to trade unions and that allows them to discriminate when nobody else in this community can. Frankly, it is appalling.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .