Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 64 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

I do need to mention Mr Humphries's comments as well. The main substance of what Mr Humphries was saying is that the money has to come from somewhere. Mr Humphries, in a rare fit of honesty and openness, actually conceded that it did not have to come from the rates. He said that, and I am pleased to have it on the record, because it gives the lie to what his leader has been saying all along.

Mr Berry: Another version of the Christmas speech.

MS FOLLETT: It is another own goal by Mr Humphries, another version of his Christmas speech, where he drops the rest of his team right in it - and he did it at question time as well. I think it is worth mentioning that Mr Humphries agrees with what I have been saying, that the Chief Minister's utterances on taking the pay rise out of the rates is a lie. I am very pleased that at least one member of the Liberal team has been honest enough to say so.

Mr Kaine has suggested that the Opposition Leader and the Deputy Leader - I presume that he means the Deputy Opposition Leader, not me and Tony - sit down and come to a multipartisan position to settle this dispute. Where was there ever a greater admission of failure on the part of the Government? He is begging me to fix it up for you. I am not going to. Mr Kaine knows full well - and I am sure that if he could he would say so - that this problem is one of the total intransigence of his leader, the total intransigence of the Liberal team, and the total incompetence of the Industrial Relations Minister. Mr Speaker, I urge the Government to withdraw their threats - - -

Mr De Domenico: What threats?

MS FOLLETT: The threat to withdraw payroll deduction of union dues, the threat to reduce the offer by a percentage, so that it is well under the CPI. If the Government would sit down and examine the offer made by the unions, had they read the claim and not misrepresented it, they would see that indeed the unions have put forward a package of efficiency measures in order to help pay for their increase in pay. Mrs Carnell, we know, had not read it previously. I presume that she still has not read it, and she keeps rabbiting on about fully budget funded. That demonstrates yet again her complete misunderstanding of industrial relations negotiations, because that comment by the unions is a technicality. It is to stop the Government from reopening the negotiations after the agreement is signed by arguing that the savings achieved did not match expectations. It is a saving clause the unions have very sensibly put in to stop this Government reneging on an agreement, and is very much needed.

I believe that the motion is well and truly justified, and I am very sorry indeed that what we have seen from the Liberals, and from Mr Moore and Mr Osborne, is just more of the same - more confrontation, more attempt to blame everything on Labor. It is all our fault because we will not amend the budget. I do not know what that has to do with anything. The Government must sit down with the unions and discuss the issues, because it is the Canberra community that is suffering. This Government appears determined to make that Canberra community suffer even more. The work force that is negotiating this bargain is

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .