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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 978 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Mr Speaker, it seems to me that when that package was being negotiated, management had some idea of some of the things that they would like to achieve as well within the parameters of what I had put. You may be aware that Mr Rayment sought to change some of those on the Friday prior to the Monday deadline. Indeed, he checked with me as to whether it was my understanding that the changes would still be within the parameters that I set. As I said in my statement, I confirmed that they were.

Mr Speaker, it seems to me that being forced to vary the agreement under these circumstances is entirely inappropriate. This Assembly delegates to the executive the management of these sorts of issues. If we manage them poorly, we have people like Mr Stanhope saying, as he did in respect of my ministerial statement today, "Mr Moore, you failed. You set out to do this and this, and you failed." He has said that again and again, and that is his prerogative. Understandably, he can push that as hard as he likes in here, in the media, or wherever and say that I failed in what I set out to do. He used my statement from December as well as my statement today to do that. That is entirely appropriate.

I have to say that there will be times when members who stand here and take on this sort of responsibility will fail-except for those members who never try to do anything because if you never try to do anything you will not fail. If you set out to try to achieve some things, there will be times when you make mistakes, there will be times when you will fail to achieve your goals.

Mr Speaker, it is entirely inappropriate for the Assembly to then effectively run our industrial relations program for us. It is entirely inappropriate to tell us that we have to bring an enterprise bargaining period forward. Mr Berry can put up all the arguments he likes and make it sound as nice as he likes but we know very well what occurred when Mr Berry was the health minister and what his relationship was with the nurses union.

I have to say one thing about the nurses union: they certainly have not acted according to a passing political process. When Mr Berry was health minister they tackled him very firmly and very strongly just as they have tackled me on many occasions. I have to say that if you think I have not been successful, go back and have a look at the record of Mr Berry when he was trying to get rid of the 8:8:10 roster and take away-and I note that Ms Tucker is not in the chamber-nurses' conditions.

It is all very well to sit on the opposition side of the chamber or to sit on crossbenches and say, "Yes, you ought to be doing so and so and be looking after a particular constituency" when in fact the responsibility that I wear and the responsibility that the government wears is to look at the big picture not only of nurses and where nurses sit but also of industrial relations and the relationship of government with workers.

Mr Speaker, the proposal Mr Berry has put will not bring any direct benefits to staff or the affected agencies. Indeed, it will bring into doubt entitlement to conditions, including pay increases and expiry dates. This is not a sensible idea at all. In fact, bringing this forward is one of Mr Berry's most stupid ideas. Mr Berry does this for one purpose and one purpose alone: the thing that drives Mr Berry above all else is a possible chance that there may be industrial action which will embarrass the government and which he can personally capitalise on. Members understand that that is what drives him in this circumstance. Mr Berry, this is not a sensible proposal at all. It is a silly proposal.

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