Page 1495 - Week 05 - Thursday, 12 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is one thing, however, to oppose the legislation because they do not believe in it. It is quite another to ensure that the legislation is a dead letter in the ACT because, as the government of the day and holding the reins of power, they happen to have the capacity to say, "We will not enforce this law. We will make sure that this law, in which we do not believe, is ineffective in doing the job that it was designed to do". That is what this Government has done, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr Connolly: No, no.
MR HUMPHRIES: I know that Mr Lamont and Mr Connolly are going to bleat, "We are not doing anything about these matters. The Federal awards are the culprits here. The Federal awards are the ones that allow discrimination to continue to occur". Mr Connolly is a great champion of attacking discrimination. He has introduced amendments to the Discrimination Act. He was the great propounder of an end to discrimination in this Territory. What has happened to the principle of not having discrimination?
Mr Connolly: You are just dressing up your anti-unionism in the clothes of the discrimination law.
MR HUMPHRIES: No. The principle is important. Either it is important or it is not important. If it is important it should be acted upon. It is no excuse to say, "My supporters, my friends, the parties and party that make me powerful, want me to keep this particular form of discrimination in place and therefore I will not act upon it". That is an intellectually corrupt and unacceptable argument, but it is the one that is advanced by the Australian Labor Party today.
Mr De Domenico genuinely has raised in this place several matters that have occurred in this Territory. We have not plucked these cases out of the air. They have occurred. He said, "We think that they constitute discrimination as outlawed by the Discrimination Act of the Territory". Indeed, Mr Connolly acknowledged in a response to a letter Mr De Domenico wrote to him that it may well be that there was discrimination contrary to the terms of the Discrimination Act practised on the site of the Woden Valley Hospital redevelopment. He acknowledged that, but he said, "Let somebody else look after it. I am not interested in this matter. Let the Human Rights Office take care of this matter".
Mr Berry: No, that is not what he said.
MR HUMPHRIES: That is what he said. I can table it if you like, Mr Berry. It might not be what you would have said. He probably made sure that it did not get into your hands, Mr Berry, but the fact is that he took a Pontius Pilate approach and washed his hands of the matter. You people are the Government, for better or worse. If you have a law directed at discrimination in this Territory, you should be enforcing it.
These are the facts. A courier went to Woden Valley Hospital. He went there on 26 November 1993. He went to deliver something or to pick something up, and he was refused access. He was told by a union organiser that he had to produce his union card. He did not have a union card. He was not a member of the union, apparently.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .