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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 13 Hansard (20 November) . . Page.. 3838 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

As I say, the government is happy to support this motion, to the extent that it refers to the budget, and government support through a budget. We take it as given that it is understood that all decisions will be made in a budget context by a budget cabinet-and our support for this motion does not in any way pre-empt that.

Ms Tucker also seeks the Assembly's acknowledgment of the relatively low wages in the community sector. She also seeks future budget commitments relating to staff levels and wages and conditions in clauses 2 (b) and (c).

Mr Speaker, it needs to be made clear that the government is the funder of community-based services, not the employer. We do not have a direct say in staffing levels or the wages and conditions of these organisations, and we do not seek that. However, we already provide evidence of our commitment to assist the sector in meeting significant wage pressures.

In July of last year, the Australian Industrial Relations Commission handed down the 1994-98 safety net adjustments under the SACS award. The not-for-profit community sector was faced with increased costs that could not be met within existing funding levels unless there were reductions in services. In December 2001 this government agreed, through a second appropriation, to meet these award-related increases and hence retain the same service levels. A total of $4 million was provided to the Departments of Education and Community Services and Health and Community Care. In a third appropriation, the Department of Urban Services also received $80,000 to meet award increases for non-government housing providers.

Interim payments for 2001-02 were made to non-government service providers as quickly as possible, based on their best estimate of award-related costs. Following an independent validation process earlier this year, ongoing payments to the sector were confirmed and paid.

Services were fully supplemented for increased wage rates and associated on-costs. Subsequent decisions by the commission this year related to living wage adjustments for 1999-2002 and the minimum rates for the SACS award. It is acknowledged that this decision, which the government has not yet fully examined, poses some difficulties for the community sector. The government will work its way through the decision and decide on a course of action.

Mr Speaker, it is clear that the government has a clear track record of financially supporting the community sector where an industrial decision impacts on funding. As I said before, we are not at this stage in a position to determine staff levels set and wages paid by employers in this sector. I make that comment in the context of the wording of Ms Tucker's motion, insofar as it calls on us, in a way, to make certain budget decisions which we are not at this juncture in a position to make-or it at least suggests that possibility.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, we support the motion's recognition of the need for a viable community sector. That is very much at the heart of what we do, what we say and what we intend in our views and visions for Canberra. We agree that the sector needs to be supported by accommodation and equipment of a reasonable standard, with funding to

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