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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2862 ..

At 5.00 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted. The motion for the adjournment of the Assembly having been put and negatived, the debate was resumed.

MR PRATT: I refer to recommendation 47 of the Select Committee on Estimates report which says:

The Committee recommends that workplace managers must seek full involvement of workplace employees in the first instance for the negotiation of workplace general agreements, and guarantee that while workers will have the option to appoint any union to represent their negotiations, they are not bound to union representation if they desire to represent themselves.

This was a recommendation which I thought went to the heart of democratic and fair process with regard to employer/employee relationships within the government. Mr Deputy Speaker, it enshrines the rights of employees to appoint union representation if the employees at a work site so desire. Importantly, the committee recommendation sought to encourage the government to enshrine, as the first action, the full involvement of employees without union interference.

It is disturbing to see the government reject this recommendation and their rather limp reply-perhaps limp in keeping with their visionless way of doing business:

The government recognizes the importance of employees being involved ... in the development of certified agreements.

As its preferred option, the government continues to press for the involvement of unions. This is code for political pressure to allow the unions the whip hand in all workplace relations matters. I hope the government will not turn back the clock on workplace relations matters.

The previous government introduced legislation which put in place provisions and initiatives which were much fairer than those which had previously existed. Had these workplace relations initiatives been allowed to develop further-at least through the life of this government-there would have been far-reaching benefits for, firstly, the ACT community with more productive and enterprising government services and, secondly, for the individual workers in terms of justice and fairness.

Mr Deputy Speaker, another issue of major concern is the government's stated intention to phase out Australian Workplace Agreements in the public service. During the estimates hearings, when I questioned the government on what benefit this might accrue in both budgetary and management terms, the only response I received from both the minister and his department was that this would bring efficiencies.

Mr Corbell: You did not ask that, at all.

MR PRATT: I did.

Mr Corbell: You did not.

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