Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (9 May) . . Page.. 1289 ..
MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):
not to the ACT community. I did not hear the interview, but I am pretty sure that that would be what was being referred to there.
Mr Speaker, as Mr Hargreaves would have heard if he was listening to my earlier answer, we were not consulted about this issue before the decision was announced, so we have taken up the issue with the federal government and I hope that we will get a satisfactory outcome.
MR BERRY: My question is to the Minister for Health and Community Care. Is the minister aware of concerns raised by the Australian Nursing Federation that changes to the federal fringe benefits tax law will result in a loss of net entitlements for nursing staff who were strongly urged to accept salary packaging as part of the most recent round of enterprise bargaining at Canberra and Calvary hospitals? Will the minister give the assurance sought by the ANF that additional federal funds extracted by the Democrats in return for their support for the fringe benefits tax changes will, in fact, be used to ensure that no nurse will suffer any loss of entitlements arising out of the changes to the FBT? I have asked two questions: are you aware of the concerns raised by the Nursing Federation and will you give us an assurance that they will not lose anything?
MR MOORE: I am aware that concerns have been raised about the fringe benefits tax. I have to say that the concerns will be much more likely to be concerns for medical officers than nurses because of the line that was drawn by the Democrats. These are issues. I have to say also that the nurses and the doctors entered into an enterprise bargaining agreement that made it very clear that changes to the fringe benefits tax would not deliver any extra financial benefit to the nurses that was not already within the agreement.
Mr Berry, I have to say that details of the compensation arrangement are not available to the ACT at this stage, so it is going to be difficult to predict how it will be used. You will remember that there is a transition stage of a $17,000 cap with the provision of grants to public hospitals through the states of $88 million in 2001, $80.5 million the following year and $72 million the year after that. That phases out to zero the year after that; in other words, in 2003-04. That is basically at the end of the current health care agreement.
To answer your question more specifically, yes, I am aware that there are concerns there. In terms of finances-the money that has been wrangled through the agreement with the Democrats-we will look at the most effective way of delivering them and try to ensure that we do not disadvantage any of our workers.
MR BERRY: I have a supplementary question. Will you ditch the fraudulent requirement of the current enterprise bargaining agreements that precludes the reopening of negotiations if pay rates and conditions are cut as a result of FBT changes? Was the government's anticipation of these changes the reason for insisting that the current enterprise agreement with staff at Canberra Hospital specifically exclude any FBT changes as a trigger for reopening pay talks? Do you expect the nurses just to cop it sweet now?
MR SPEAKER: Order! That is enough.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .