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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3234 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

I have stood here on many occasions and said that I have a way of getting money. It is a bed tax. I like a bed tax. The AHA gives me a very hard time about it, and the Government gives me a hard time about it. I have not yet heard Labor say that they will support a bed tax. That is just one method of raising money. This is the sort of thing we can do if we have access to the money to do it. When the Leader of the Opposition puts up a motion like this that is going to cost $4.2m, he has to say where he is going to get the money from. That is the rational way to deal with it. That is the issue on which I feel that I am put out, because I have allowed the Government to have its budget. I think it is a matter of high principle that a government should have its budget; but at the same time I think the sentiment expressed in this motion is a positive sentiment, a strong sentiment, and entirely appropriate.

I would like to support it, and I would love to support it when Mr Berry is Chief Minister in six months' time. I may have that wrong. It might be a bit more than six months; but whenever it is that he is Chief Minister, in seven or eight months - - -

Ms McRae: We could do it before. It could be two or three.

MR MOORE: Ms McRae says that it could be two or three months. Heaven knows, it could be tomorrow. No, we need a week. We have to know where the money is coming from. I think that is critical to this style of motion.

MR BERRY (Leader of the Opposition) (3.42): Mr Speaker, I seek leave to move the amendment which I have circulated.

Leave granted.

MR BERRY: I move:

Paragraph (1), add the following words: "and urges the Government to support the application before the Industrial Relations Commission".

It is a straightforward amendment. I think it is self-explanatory. I do not need to say anything further.

MS REILLY (3.42): What we are talking about here is a matter of principle. We are talking about what conditions and what salary levels people working in the community sector should have. Any government committed to having a strong community sector and ensuring that we have workers who are recognised and valued would support this principle of a common rule award. That is the issue before us today. This is an issue that has been discussed a number of times in various guises since I arrived in the Assembly last year. I consider it quite shocking that we are still discussing it now and we do not seem to have moved very far forward.

The Government, by allowing the matter to continue without making a decision, without showing support in any way, is de facto supporting poor working conditions for people working in the community sector. They are supporting people's work not being valued and people being paid as they are for the work they do. With no award, there is a variety of ways in which people's salary levels are reached. A number of organisations have

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