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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3323 ..

MRS CARNELL: Yesterday we did not say that we supported it either. We were quite clear that we did not support or oppose. That continues to be our position. There is not a form, I understand, that allows you not to take a position. We were quite clear that we did not support it or oppose it; but you have to go in with something, so we did. It is a technical issue. I state again that we have not said something different today. We have said exactly the same thing today as we said yesterday; that is, we do not support or oppose it.

The submission that we will put forward in October will be a submission on the funding issues involved. We probably would not have put a submission forward at all if the commission had not asked us to. I understand that the commission asked us to because a member of the union at the last hearing said, "It really does not matter what you do, Commissioner Larkin, because the Government has always topped these funds up". My understanding is that Commissioner Larkin's office suggested that that meant that the ACT Government was involved and that information about this claim would need to be brought to the commission. That is my advice. The commission instructed us to appear. You have to fill in the support form or the oppose one. We do not support or oppose, but you have to fill in one of them. It is that simple.

Mr Berry: So you filled in the oppose one, and then you told us you did not oppose it.

MRS CARNELL: We do not support and we do not oppose.

Mr Berry: You do now. You support it. Remember the motion yesterday.

MRS CARNELL: Our position is that we do not support or oppose. The Assembly put forward a motion yesterday, but our position remains the same. It is a technical issue. I can guarantee, Mr Speaker, that the position we put forward in October will be on funding and it will not support or oppose.

MS TUCKER (4.07): I am a little bit concerned about how this debate is going at the moment. It seems that two issues have arisen. There is a censure motion - and I will talk about that in a minute - but I just heard Mrs Carnell say twice or three times that the Government does not have a position; that they do not support or oppose. I just heard her say also that there was a motion in this place yesterday, but the Government still has this position of not supporting or opposing. I think a censure motion is due if that is the case. Mrs Carnell cannot disregard the will of the Assembly in that manner. Yesterday's motion urged the Government to support the application. That was the effect of an amendment added to the first part of the motion, which was:

That this Assembly supports the introduction of a common rule award for all social and community service workers in the ACT.

To my mind, that is a pretty clear direction to the Government on this matter, and I do not think it is acceptable for Mrs Carnell to ignore it in the way she has today. I would like her to clarify her position on that for the Assembly during this debate. Otherwise, I will be sorely tempted to move my own censure motion on that matter.

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