Page 105 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 13 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the government once again is going out of its way to help these mates. The appropriate separation of government and its donors is an important matter we discussed here yesterday and that we will continue to discuss. Meanwhile, the government is doing the opposite, via the euphemistically named code. The government’s position, by default, seems to benefit the donors to the detriment of the proper separation of powers.
This motion is about thanking and supporting our workers. Whether unionised or not, I support our workers. The trouble is, the government seems to want to support certain employers, perhaps only the ones that have members or that have significant numbers of members in favourable unions. They treat companies as likely to do the wrong thing, which is the opposite of the Canberra Liberals. It is the opposite of the right philosophy.
We assume that people are good and will usually follow the law, not the other way around. This is not to mention that we know job creation is made more difficult when legislative and regulatory restrictions are increased and when local businesses are barred from government work unless undertaking an audit and compliance process for things they are most likely doing anyway—plus a few easy access clauses for unions. Unions that do their job get members. Such easy access clauses are only for lazy unions that want the government to do their work for them.
It is clear that while government members might be interested in thanking the workers who worked over the summer period—I am sure they are interested in thanking them—this government does not necessarily have an interest in making sure that those currently unemployed, or currently employed with companies that may or may not pass scrutiny or be interested in being scrutinised by the government, will have jobs over the next summer period.
The balance in the code is wrong and will restrict rather than encourage jobs growth for the very workers they are attempting to protect. The Canberra Liberals always have supported and always will support our front-line workers and shift workers in this city. We will always remain dedicated to growing our front-line workforce to match population growth and not force the best people we have in this city, with the most giving and service-driven kind-hearted natures, to shoulder a heavier and heavier burden to pay for a tram that they did not want.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (10.19): Thanks to Ms Cody for bringing this issue to the Assembly. Of course we have got a few issues which we would like to talk about in response to this motion. First of all another big thanks. The Greens would like to put on record our ongoing support for working people in Canberra. In particular, as Ms Cody has noted, this includes the many hardworking Canberrans who continue to work over the Christmas period while many of us enjoyed a break from working.
This is an issue that the Greens have talked about many times before in this Assembly, that is, the fact that people need to have reasonable breaks from work. They need rest and balance in their lives. This contributes to their health and wellbeing and helps to build a better and fairer society.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video