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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3320 ..

Mrs Carnell: We do not.

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell chirps up, "We do not". But why did you issue a "notice of appearance to object to an application for common rule"? You objected to it, and you objected to the award. You clearly misled this house, and this house should censure you for that.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (3.53): It is a pity that Mr Berry again embarrasses himself by not checking his facts first. What about a quick phone call? I am sure the commission could have enlightened Mr Berry on what has actually happened. I am confident that the industrial relations people in Mr Kaine's department could have done the same. Mr Berry has shown no interest at all in finding out the background of the whole issue.

As I am advised, the commission instructed the ACT to appear before it, for a number of reasons. I am also advised that the commission required us to use the form that Mr Berry quoted from. I am advised that there is no such thing as a form that allows you to have no position. If you appear, you have to have a position, I am told. I am also told that if you are going to appear - the commission wanted us to appear, asked us to appear, instructed us to appear - then you have to appear with a position. There was no option, I am advised, but to use the form that the commission asked us to use. Commissioner Larkin's office has advised that we can appear in October. We will put a submission on the funding issues. I can guarantee to this Assembly that when we put the submission forward in October we will not support or oppose. The whole basis of our appearing, at the instruction of the commission, is to put a submission on the funding issues involved.

Mr Speaker, this is a technical issue. The words that Mr Berry quoted are the required words, I understand. I state again quite categorically that the ACT Government does not support or oppose the SACS award implementation. I can guarantee to the Assembly that in October, when we put our submission on funding issues, that is the position we will take again. This is a technical issue. This is the approach that the commission required us to take in this circumstance. The Assembly has both the Minister's undertaking and mine that we do not support or oppose it. In fact, we did not oppose that part of the motion in the Assembly yesterday. We do not. It is that simple. But this is the way the commission works and, on my advice, that was the form we had to use.

MR KAINE (Minister for Urban Services and Minister for Industrial Relations) (3.56): Mr Speaker, I can only confirm what the Chief Minister has already said. There is a pro forma through which one appears before the Industrial Relations Commission. The fact is that the Government has not yet presented any case to the commission. It will do so early in October. Then, of course, we will present a submission that merely provides information that the commission has sought from us. It will not take a position one way or the other but will provide information which the commission has sought and which, no doubt, it finds necessary for it to consider the matters before it.

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