Page 3826 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 19 October 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I know that the ACT, of all jurisdictions, is probably the most radical in its opposition to the federal government’s IR agenda. I noticed, though, a distinct lack of numeric support on the ground. The demonstrations have been pretty ordinary. We needed the Chief Minister to authorise that they could have time off with full pay so that they could go out and demonstrate. It smacks a bit of rent-a-crowd. Then we got a handful of the faithful out there to protest against John Howard at the Liberal Party dinner. I think Mr Gentleman brought a few of his mates and neighbours. The fact of the matter is that there is not the groundswell of concern that members opposite would like to see as a result of this.
The government’s program has to be given time to work. No doubt, time will see changes. There are always changes. I am not saying every system and change this government has put forward is perfect, but certainly I believe what they are looking to do is create an equitable environment.
Ms Porter talked about people not being able to negotiate their pay and conditions. That is what this is all about. This is about letting people negotiate their pay and conditions and not having a couple of visitors from Sydney come down here. Do not talk to me about the merits of this system. I have been in the industrial relations system in Canberra. I have seen John Morris and Peter James drive down from Sydney in a Jaguar and tell the little housekeepers at the Hyatt, “We are negotiating for you, and this is the deal.” Then they have sat down with me and said, “We have got to get back to Sydney.” Probably the races or something were on. Basically, they signed off on an arrangement with little interest for the people whom they purport to represent. This is old-style industrial relations that has no place in a modern economy.
It behoves government members to start supporting improvements, supporting an industrial system that in fact ensures that people in the workplace and the employers, those with a direct interest, have a chance to develop flexible arrangements that reflect their system—not something that is dictated by trade union officials parked up in Sydney or down in Melbourne and are done with complete disregard for the needs of their members. That is an indication of why so few people down here want to send off the money any more to join the unions. They have not been served by some. Some have been good representatives. I do not want to be critical of all.
I have tried to work, believe it or not, with the local trade union movement on this legislation. I will talk more about that a little later. Certainly time is of the essence. Let these measures be considered.
MR SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children, Youth and Family Support, Minister for Women and Minister for Industrial Relations) (11.10): I rise to support the motion of Ms Porter today. I must say that it is always good to get Mr Mulcahy on the record because Hansard lasts forever. The beauty of Hansard is that we will be able to flick back through it and reflect on those wonderful statements he has just made in support of the federal government’s workplace relations reform.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .