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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 2 Hansard (27 February) . . Page.. 535 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

As you can see, Mr Berry, if this Assembly is to decide on the public holidays, the union picnic day should not be one, because this day has already been dealt with. This is subject to a Federal award and a Federal award, as Mr Kaine has already explained, takes precedence over this Assembly, to the extent that there is any inconsistency. That is a very important word. I know for a fact that none of this was explained to the crossbenches when Mr Berry briefed them on this legislation. Your haste in trying to overturn the umpire's decision could easily put us in front of the Federal Court. That is not my opinion but that of highly-qualified lawyers with expertise in industrial relations law. I urge members to read the legal opinions properly, because they should make this Assembly stop and think about what we are about to do here or what it appears we are about to do. I agree with what Mr Kaine said. This is dumb legislation. There is every chance that it will be challenged - and I understand that is the intent of some organisations - and every chance that that challenge will succeed. How is that going to help people who claim to be fighting for the workers on this issue?

Let us talk about the umpire for a moment. I want to remind members of Mr Berry's comments. They have already been spoken about in this place, but I think it is important to say it again. In this Assembly, exactly one year ago to the very day, Mr Berry made some comments in relation to a decision by the Industrial Relations Commission. These are Mr Berry's very words:

We were supportive of the umpire, of course, which has not been the case with this Government. It was the umpire who was supported by the Australian Labor Party, and will ever continue to be so.

"And will ever continue to be so, until there is a determination that we do not like". He forgot to put that bit in. "As long as we agree, we will continue to support the umpire". The Labor Party might have changed its name, but it cannot walk away from that comment. It was made. I thought Mr Berry meant it. Obviously not. This Bill was drafted for only one reason, and Mr Berry knows it - to take the umpire out of the equation. This matter went to a Full Bench of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission, and because the Trades and Labour Council lost its argument it has employed the political arm of the union movement to override the umpire. I want the Greens, Mr Moore and Mr Osborne to think for a moment about the number of times the Labor Party demanded that the Government adhere to the decisions of the commission during the enterprise bargaining dispute last year. Where is their consistency now, Mr Moore and Ms Tucker? If you set out to overturn the umpire's decision, you do set a very dangerous precedent.

Mr Moore: The fact is that it is not.

MRS CARNELL: The fact is that it is, Mr Moore. The reality is that our positions are backed up by a number of legal opinions. The reality is that Mr Moore does not like the legal opinions. I am sure that other courts will have an opportunity to look at that.

Mr Moore: They did not read the awards.

MR SPEAKER: Order!

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