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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 3 Hansard (7 March) . . Page.. 758 ..

Mr Kaine: They don't fight fires like they used to 50 years ago, either.

MR BERRY: They don't do it with a wet bag any more. Things do change, but in these circumstances we have to forget this rusted on view that economic rationalism and contracting out is good, and it forms some part of social capital. I think the Liberals opposite think that social capital is a cocktail party you have downtown after the bottom line improves. You try to create the impression that you have got a little warm and fuzzy bit somewhere in there, but by your actions in cases like those involving these workers we are all reminded that it is tungsten steel. It has nothing to do with social capital.

What worth is mouthing the words "social capital" to a 58-year-old worker who is dumped on the scrap heap? There is no point to muttering "social capital" at him. He will not believe you, or he will not understand what you mean and will say it is meaningless. If you have any concept of social justice you will apply yourselves in a more compassionate way to the plight of workers like these.

This motion is about this Assembly saying to this government, "For these workers, no involuntary redundancies." That is what it is. It is this Assembly saying to this government that there will be no involuntary redundancies in the case of these workers. That is what we are saying.

The amendment moved by the Minister for Urban Services, to add the words "without the approval of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission", is merely an attempt to water down the decisions of this Assembly and to tinker with whatever powers are left in the Industrial Relations Commission. I am certainly not going to come in here with an analysis of the Workplace Relations Act to work out whether this is a good thing or a bad thing for these workers. What would be a good thing for these workers is that they say, "I don't want to be retired," and they are not retired; that they are looked after by the government and recognised for the contribution they have made to the community.

Mr Speaker, I heard Mr Smyth refer to a former union official who had informed the Liberals that Labor had done something in the past. If it is a former union official he must be a disgruntled one if he is a friend of the Liberals, and I must say I think the evidence would have to be regarded by most as just a little bit thin. Mr Speaker, the issue here is what this government is doing to workers.

Mr Humphries: We will check it out, Wayne. Is it true?

Mr Smyth: He said it is not true.

Mr Humphries: He is not denying it though, is he?

MR BERRY: Mr Humphries, you have dusted off the old undergraduate speech. Tuck it away for another day. You live in the past. You are a man of the past, still fighting the battles of the greedy 1980s and the Berlin Wall. Forget it. It's over. We are in 2001 now. The wall has come down. You can turn around the picture on your wall. Communism is gone. Turn around the picture on your wall. It's over. We have moved on to 2001.

Mr Humphries: Oh, I can't call you comrade.

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