Page 1059 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 2 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
unemployment in the country. That is quite right. The Chief Minister has said so himself many times.
Any state or territory government that is courageous enough to deny the following point would, I hazard a guess, be flying solo in a policy vacuum. That point is that the Howard government has taken the chance—and that needs to be noted—to move us forward as a modern and competitive nation and economy in the 21st century. In terms of reform this is best served by instigating a single set of workplace relations laws.
If it is the wish of the Stanhope government, through instructing its backbench to constantly pull together matters of public importance designed to discuss federal matters, then some easily digestible points should be placed on the record in the Assembly about why the Howard government is prepared to take calculated risks and implement the obvious reform to workplace relations law that complements previous reform made to the taxation system in line with welfare reforms.
WorkChoices in Australia is on the move towards a better workplace relations system that allows Australia’s employers and employees the freedom and the choice to sit down and work out the arrangements that best suit them. The Labor Party would have us believe that every worker out there is some sort of dummy, that they cannot speak for themselves or that they are not going to be able to come together with their employer and get a sensible work package and agreement together. I find that really insulting.
WorkChoices makes the necessary changes to move away from an outdated and inefficient system that no longer meets the needs of a modern Australian economy. WorkChoices moves to a system that gives employers and employees a tangible stake in what happens in their workplace. Is that right or is that wrong? At the end of the day a fair society relies on a strong economy with productive workplaces.
But of course Labor again want to labour the point that everybody is going to be left on the fringes; nobody is going to be able to debate their workplace package. I have said it before, and I am happy to say it now: not everything that is happening out there is good and positive. As Mr Gentleman has said, it is good that we have got people and organisations like WorkCover that stop accidents from happening. I fully and wholeheartedly agree with him.
It is a strong economy that enables employers to pay their workers in an equitable manner, that reduces unemployment and that delivers, just as it has done over the last decade, more jobs, improved conditions and higher wages for all Australians. WorkChoices is founded on the principle that the best arrangements are those developed by employees and employers at the workplace.
This is perhaps where the unions could come in. If people are members of unions, the unions could work in a more positive way with employers rather than in a negative way, as they always seem to want to do. Guilty until proved innocent are business people in the situation that Mr Gentleman poses. Let us make sure that the impact of modern working conditions on Canberra families is lessened and that we all try to move together in the same direction. Good people need to be looked after. Nobody would deny that. I do not think anybody is saying that people in a modern work force are not going to be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .