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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 5 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1310 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

I am confident that during the ACT industrial action earlier this year there were lots of ACT Government employees who simply did not want to be part of it; but were they given a choice, Mr Speaker? Was choice an option for those people when their particular union told them, "You will go out and do these sorts of things."?

The Liberal Party and the Howard Government believe very strongly in choice in industrial relations and everywhere else in our community. As Mr Humphries says, we believe very strongly in flexibility, in giving employees the opportunity to enter into an arrangement with their employer themselves or via a union. We believe that unions have a very important place for those employees who choose to use them. We just do not believe that employees who do not choose to use them should be forced to do so. Those opposite often talk about choice, but it is interesting that the people of Australia were very determined earlier this year that choice was the appropriate way to go.

It was interesting to see some of the surveys that were done on the unfair dismissal legislation by people who actually employ people - small business people, people whom Mr Business over the other side often claims that he has an understanding or a oneness with. We are not talking about BHP. We are talking about people who run shops, service businesses, and so on. When asked what the one significant issue or policy that stopped them employing was, what did they come up with? They came up with the unfair dismissal legislation, or the unfair dismissal requirements.

What is happening? What is the basis of the industrial relations legislation that the Deputy Chief Minister spoke about in the ministerial statement? It is about choice and it is about encouraging business, particularly small business, to employ in this country. It is fascinating, and I am sure - - -

Mr Berry: Why has it not worked here for you?

MRS CARNELL: Because we operate under Federal industrial legislation, Mr Berry. That is exactly the point we are making. What is small business in the ACT saying is a problem? They are saying that it is unfair dismissal legislation. They are very up front about it. I suspect that this is the only government in Australia still facing people like those opposite who seriously believe that everybody should be forced to go down one single path; to be part of a union; to do exactly what that union says; to endure unfair dismissal legislation, lack of choice and lack of flexibility. All of these things make regular employment in our work force very difficult for women. They lack flexibility and the capacity to enter into an agreement with their employer that suits them and their families. The people of Australia made very clear earlier this year what they wanted.

Last year in the ACT government election the people showed that they simply are not interested in the loony Left philosophy, the philosophy of those among whom, as Graham Richardson said, Castro is still spoken about in heroic terms. Flexibility, choice, the rights of the workers and the rights of employers are not taken on board at all by those people. They are a party that, though it may still exist in the 1990s, is really operating in the 1950s when it comes to political philosophy and the rights of individuals.

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