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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (25 August) . . Page.. 2419 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Obviously Ministers are not the proper party to negotiate details. An EBA should be an agreement between staff and managers reached after discussion of each other's position, reflecting a compact which each is willing to be bound by. EBAs involve extensive detail which is best negotiated by staff and managers who actually work with each other. An enterprise agreement, an enterprise bargain, is just that. It is absurd for political administration to work out such details. Rather, the role of Ministers is to ensure that parties have opportunities to negotiate in good faith and to give them encouragement to do so. If not on a daily basis on very close to a daily basis, for the last two or three weeks I have encouraged the hospital to do so in good faith and I continue to encourage it. Good public administration requires that we direct our agencies to be ready to negotiate, that data and negotiation position are prepared in proper time and that discussions are undertaken in good faith with a reasonable attitude. I have done all those things.

Members should be aware that the legal entity responsible for employment conditions is the ACT Health and Community Care Service. The service employs its staff as public servants under the conditions set out in the Public Sector Management Act. Negotiations for workplace agreements are therefore conducted by management within the service, in this case the executives of the Canberra Hospital, under the guidance first and foremost of the board.

The Government oversees all negotiations and provides support and advice to agencies through the Chief Minister's Department's industrial officers. The Government maintains a policy of agency-based bargaining so as to achieve flexible outcomes as negotiated by employers and staff at agency level in the same way as the administrative staff at Calvary accepted their agreement only a couple of days ago. This principle can apply even to the level of intra-agency programs, seven of which are currently being negotiated with ACT Community Care. However, when the federation came to talk to me, I did indicate that I would have no problem with the various managers across Calvary and Community and Care and the Canberra Hospital agreeing with the federation to a common part of an agreement, even where they had a difference, on an agency-by-agency basis.

The argument that Canberra Hospital's authority or ability to negotiate is limited by government policies, in particular the budget recently passed by the Assembly, is simply wrong. Canberra Hospital managers have the flexibility to negotiate as they see fit.

The Assembly should feel confident that the Government will take all steps to conclude negotiations on a fair and reasonable outcome. However, it is inappropriate for the Assembly to involve itself in the details of negotiations between parties. The Assembly has approved a budget for the Canberra Hospital and, accordingly, financial results anticipated in that budget constrain the Government and constrain the hospital.

Mr Stanhope has been in here on numerous occasions in the last few months making sure that we manage our finances according to the appropriations approved in the Assembly and under the Financial Management Act. The Assembly cannot by motion add to the expenditure of public money. The Assembly should be aware that imposing specific expenditure increases may well result in a worsening of efficiency in patient services.

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