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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1248 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

We then came to the second, or current, round of certified agreements. On 6 April 1998, the Liberal government advised that agencies would be provided with an increase of only just over 1 per cent of their budget to cover wage increases. One per cent. Those are the figures they took account of when they decided how much they were looking to pay their employees in future years. That meant that agencies were unable to pay a fair wage outcome to the work force.

Is this just about public servants being paid more, or is it about something more important than that? It is certainly about making sure people are paid fair and reasonable amounts of money, but it is also about making sure that, as a territory, we have a public service that can attract and retain well qualified and suitable people. What did the previous government do in that regard? Nothing. They set aside a mere 1 per cent in their budget to take account of any increase in government wages.

That was an appalling decision. That decision has meant that this government is left with a massive legacy to address, if we are to make sure ACT government employees are paid rates anywhere near the rates of their counterparts in the Commonwealth. On top of that, the previous government put in place an extremely inefficient bargaining arrangement. They put in place 59 agreements for only 15,000 public servants!

Mr Humphries: Flexibility, it is called.

MR CORBELL: Flexibility-is that the argument? Let us compare it with the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has over 100,000 officers and there are just over 100 agreements. We have 15,000 officers and 60 agreements. Is that flexibility, or simply inefficiency? Let me put it to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that it is not flexibility, it is inefficiency. It is inefficiency because it has meant that the wage outcomes from the current round of certified agreements are extremely poor in comparison with the outcomes nationally, in both the public and private sectors. Those wage outcomes consistently receive 3 to 4 per cent per annum. ACT government employees got only around 5 per cent over three years, where their counterparts get 3 to 4 per cent per annum-three times as much.

This is a miserly position by the previous government. It is one of the key factors as to why this government has additional pressures placed on it in the budget context. Unlike those opposite, we believe we must pay employees a decent wage, and take account of the factors which influence their decisions to either stay in the ACT government service or move to another jurisdiction, particularly the Commonwealth.

If we want a good public service-a public service that is able to attract and retain effective officers with relevant qualifications and experience-to deliver good services to the people of Canberra, we need a good wages policy.

The previous government did not have any wages policy, and set aside only 1 per cent of agency budgets to accommodate any increase in wages. That was a miserly and irresponsible approach by those opposite. Coming into the next round of bargaining, this government is going to need to make some very clear and important decisions. We will need to rectify the problems and-

Mr Humphries: Spend, spend, spend!

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