Page 2162 - Week 07 - Thursday, 16 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
ever got to the treasury benches - is, "Here is the Bill. Go to buggery". That seems to be her attitude. If she is not prepared to accept that there is a process which says that you go through this consultation period, she is in effect saying, "Here is your Bill. Go to buggery". Trying to studiously ignore these comments is just not good enough. I think it is pretty typical of the way that Mrs Carnell sees public administration. She does not see it.
Ms Szuty, I believe that we have substantially answered and addressed the questions and concerns of APESMA in relation to how they see the new system working. In their submission to the committee ACTEW said that they are substantially happy with the way in which this new process will work. They have some concerns about their continuation as a commercial entity. This Government wishes to see them continue as a commercial entity, and we wish to see them succeed. That is a position that we have put time and time again in this Assembly. I believe that the substantial issues that were put in the ACTEW submission to the inquiry have also been addressed.
Let us have a look at what remains. There is the Legal Aid Commission. How many people are there in the Legal Aid Commission? Let us say that, at the best count, there are 70. How many are there in the DPP's office - 30, 35, 40? How many does that leave us, in reality? About 80 employees out of a total of 22,000 may be disgruntled, may have a cause for concern. If that is the case, then it may be appropriate for the matter to be dealt with in the ways which have been suggested by some members.
One thing for sure is that this Government has a duty to protect the interests of its employees. The conditions which they currently enjoy they should enjoy on day one. Not only have we delivered on that in this Bill; we have gone one step further. This is something that Mrs Carnell does not understand. This is something that the one-page logic of the Leader of the Opposition cannot come to grips with. We have provided 14,000 employees with an opportunity that currently does not exist. As a responsible employer, we are attempting to treat all of our employees the same - a noble cause. When I last spoke on this matter, I pointed out the absolute mayhem that had been caused in the Northern Territory because of the stratified employment arrangements that were put in place when they achieved self-government in the 1970s. Again, that is something that Mrs Carnell fails to understand. With her view of the world that is predicated on one-page logic, I can understand why she fails to understand it.
Madam Speaker, what we have here is a government that embarked upon a process over 18 months ago, that has gone through a negotiating exercise throughout the ensuing period and that has set a legitimate goal of 1 July on advice from the Commonwealth Government that that is the day of separation preferred by them. I believe that we can now achieve that goal. Because of the goodwill that has been engendered by this Government amongst the great majority of its employees, I believe that that is an attainable goal. It will mean that this Assembly will need to sit one extra day to consider the detail stage of the Bill, but that does not reflect on the genuine intentions and desires of the majority of our employees to have this matter settled. I think there is a legitimate desire on the part of the majority of the employees of the administration to have this matter finalised and to have the new service come into effect on the proposed day one.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .