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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4662 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

I think, Mr Speaker, as Mr Berry has put in his argument on this issue, when we have an opportunity to look after workers - and, in this case, in a situation where the benefits that are already in place will not be affected for a number of years - I would find it very difficult to deny the workers those opportunities. I have been lobbied very heavily, Mr Speaker, on both sides of this issue. It has taken me quite some time to come to my position. In the end, Mr Speaker, I think it is appropriate that I support this Bill in principle, and that is what I am doing.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (10.47): Mr Speaker, I find it very difficult to understand why a Bill that was adjourned last week - because we were getting an actuarial report put together, based upon current information of the industry - is somehow back on this week. There is another actuarial report, which has been commissioned to have a look at the issue - - -

Mr Berry: And is in the hands of your department.

MRS CARNELL: Certainly, it is not. As I understand it, there is a draft in the hands of the board. It is not with the Government yet. We will make that document available to the Assembly as soon as we have it. We do not have it at this stage. I suppose that what we are trying to do in this situation is come up with an approach that will ensure that the end position is fair for everybody.

Mr Speaker, the issues that are, shall we say, up in the air on this one are, obviously, fair and equitable long service leave for employees in the industry, appropriate training requirements and appropriate amounts of money available for training. As, I think, Mr De Domenico has already said, there will be legislation coming forward next year on an agreed position on a training levy, which we believe is the appropriate way to go here. As you know, Mr Speaker, in the past, what we have ended up with is a situation where the long service leave levy, or some of it, has been used for training purposes. We also know that our long service leave training levy is the highest in Australia. Is that correct, Mr De Domenico?

Mr De Domenico: Yes.

MRS CARNELL: It is the highest levy in Australia. We also know that it is significantly overfunded, Mr Speaker. We know that other States have been reducing their levy, as we did once. Those opposite did not want us to do that either, if I remember correctly; but we did reduce it once. We now have a situation where New South Wales has no levy at all. In other words, it is operating on the reserves that exist. In the ACT we are currently getting information from another actuarial report to just see how we can manage a new training levy - the long service levy, or maybe a lack of it - to ensure that we can cover the commitments that people have to long service leave for employees in the sector so that people's entitlements are protected, that training is definitely there and that money is available for training in the sector as well. Mr Speaker, that is the approach that the Government is taking.

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