Page 1528 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 4 May 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
interested in the practical things we can do. I have touched on a lot of those today; there are many more. These will be issues that will continue to occupy our minds—all of us—for some time to come. We have to be thinking about the specific needs of specific elements of our community. I assure you the ACT Greens and I are doing that, and you will see a reflection of that as we bring forward some of the ideas we have during this year’s election campaign.
MR DOSZPOT (Molonglo) (4.47): I will talk to the amendment and eventually close. I will reflect on a couple of points Mr Barr made before I speak to Dr Bourke’s amendment. Mr Barr is correct. I was not at his territory address but I am simply reflecting the views of many of the people who were there, who did listen to Mr Barr and who were offended by what they heard. If Mr Barr wishes to explain what he meant to say, then maybe he should use this motion as an opportunity to do that. But to simply stick to the statement that he just made here contradicting what a lot of other people said—it is not one or two, there are quite a few who have come to me because they have been very disappointed in what they heard Mr Barr saying—if that is where Mr Barr is going to leave it, I think it is rather unfortunate for Mr Barr.
But getting back to the amendment that Dr Bourke has put, while I appreciate the intent that Minister Bourke is attempting to deliver in this amendment—namely, protecting and supporting his Chief Minister—I do find it somewhat amusing that the only suggested action for the ACT government is to continue to implement the active ageing framework. Once again, they are not listening to what the community is saying. I am simply reflecting the views of the community.
Like so much of what this government produces, it is very long on rhetoric—and again we are talking about one of the many glossy brochures that the government produces—but it is very short on action and real action. This document is presumably what will guide and influence the Minister for Veterans and Seniors in his advocacy and support for his constituents. However, the pamphlet is likely to offend and frustrate many, particularly those seniors who are in the workforce and wish to remain in the workforce when this brochure uses the ABS’s definition of mature age workers, not seniors. Mature age workers in that definition start at age 45, and Mr Barr is knocking on the door of that age group.
The goal of getting mature age workers supported in the workforce is probably quite easy to achieve in comparison. If 45 years of age is the starting point, I would suggest most senior level public servants are in that category. So for the minister to suggest that supporting mature age workers is the same as protecting jobs for seniors, then he needs to better understand his brief. Given the direction and focus of my motion today was to draw attention to the fact that we have an ageist Chief Minister leading this government, it might be more appropriate for Minister Bourke to seek an appointment with his Chief Minister to take him through his waffly pamphlet as a start to the Chief Minister’s better understanding of the needs of seniors in the community.
It is obvious, while we are talking about the document, that neither the Chief Minister nor his minister for the ageing have read or understood this document, otherwise they would not have deleted 90 per cent of my motion, which covers some of the very issues that the active framework is also meant to be addressing and implementing.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video