❓ Question regarding the Acting Premier's support for the Minister for Employment Protection amidst criticism of his stance on Australian Workplace Agreements and the Kim Beazley industrial relations plan. The Acting Premier defends the Minister and criticises the federal government's industrial relations policies.
AnsweredQoN 440Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION - AUSTRALIAN WORKPLACE AGREEMENTS
I refer to comments made about the Minister for Employment Protection, firstly, by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia, which accused him of attempting to deceive employers with his comments about replacing Australian workplace agreements with common law contracts, and, secondly, by Kevin Reynolds, who said that the minister was a lightweight who was a suck and busy sucking up the backside of BHP Billiton. (1) Why has the Acting Premier failed to support the minister? (2) Given that the attempt to window-dress Kim Beazley’s industrial relations plan has failed, how does the Acting Premier explain ongoing support for the Beazley plan to the Western Australian business community? Mr E.S. RIPPER
I refer to comments made about the Minister for Employment Protection, firstly, by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia, which accused him of attempting to deceive employers with his comments about replacing Australian workplace agreements with common law contracts, and, secondly, by Kevin Reynolds, who said that the minister was a lightweight who was a suck and busy sucking up the backside of BHP Billiton. (1) Why has the Acting Premier failed to support the minister? (2) Given that the attempt to window-dress Kim Beazley’s industrial relations plan has failed, how does the Acting Premier explain ongoing support for the Beazley plan to the Western Australian business community? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
(1) Why has the Acting Premier failed to support the minister? (2) Given that the attempt to window-dress Kim Beazley’s industrial relations plan has failed, how does the Acting Premier explain ongoing support for the Beazley plan to the Western Australian business community? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
(2) Given that the attempt to window-dress Kim Beazley’s industrial relations plan has failed, how does the Acting Premier explain ongoing support for the Beazley plan to the Western Australian business community? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
(1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
(1) Why has the Acting Premier failed to support the minister? (2) Given that the attempt to window-dress Kim Beazley’s industrial relations plan has failed, how does the Acting Premier explain ongoing support for the Beazley plan to the Western Australian business community? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
(2) Given that the attempt to window-dress Kim Beazley’s industrial relations plan has failed, how does the Acting Premier explain ongoing support for the Beazley plan to the Western Australian business community? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
(1)-(2) I think the member for Vasse should look at this newspaper article, of which I have a clipping. It states “Big firms shun IR revolution”. It is an article by Michael Bachelard. The opening paragraph states - Big business is opting out of the Howard Government’s industrial relations revolution. It further quotes Woodside - The IR manager at petroleum producer Woodside, Ian Masson, said collective agreements with various unions have “provided stability for Woodside over many years and already deliver the flexibility and systems we seek”. We have an ideological federal government supported by an ideological state opposition that will not stand up for states’ rights and which has been deserted by the very employers whom they seek to advance and defend. The employers are saying that they do not need the legislation. It is very significant that a major resources employer such as Woodside is saying that it believes that collective agreements gives it the stability and flexibility that it needs. With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
With regard to my colleague the Minister for Employment Protection, I have the highest regard for him. I absolutely reject the criticisms that have been made of him and referred to by the member for Vasse. I absolutely reject the criticism made of him by Kevin Reynolds. I do not think there is any need for me to say that because the criticisms are obviously not worthy of reply. The minister has my full confidence. He has spoken correctly on this issue. Big business is saying that the existing system provides them with the flexibility they need. It is right that common law contracts can provide the individual arrangements that some employers seek. We do not want what is happening in the security industry and the cleaning industry: we do not want individual contracts that undermine people’s working conditions and wages and contribute to a race to the bottom. At this time of economic prosperity we want all our people to have a chance to benefit from the prosperity. We want to bring all of Western Australia along with us as we go through these times of great economic prosperity. Members on the other side want some to benefit, but not all.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.