❓ WA Govt opposed to Federal 'Work Choices' bill, arguing it undermines state industrial jurisdiction and lowers worker conditions. The government highlights past failures of similar legislation in WA.
AnsweredQoN 738Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Mr Speaker - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Riverton has the call. Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Riverton has the call. Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Riverton has the call. Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Riverton has the call. Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Riverton has the call. Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr A.D. McRAE : Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the minister detail to the house the nature of the submissions made by the Western Australian government to the Senate committee on the federal government’s Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, sometimes known as the no choices bill? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
I am happy to do that, but must do it very briefly. I thank the member for Riverton for representing me on Monday at the Senate committee in Canberra. I had made a presentation to the same Senate committee here in Perth a couple of weeks earlier. By all reports, the member for Riverton acquitted himself very well and was able to present the state’s case for why it is opposed to the work choices bill. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan : Why did he have to go to Canberra to address them when you had already addressed them when they were here? Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE : It covered the same area, but it dealt with a different commonwealth bill. I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
I have made public on a number of occasions that this government will go to whatever lengths required to legally defend the rights of this state against the Howard attempt to take over state industrial jurisdiction and to dictate lower conditions to working Western Australians. It was appropriate that the member for Riverton should put the state government’s position because he had been able to unseat a very competent Liberal minister who was in a safe seat and had introduced similar legislation here in Western Australia. That shows not only the capability of the member for Riverton but also that he had an issue to run on; namely, the industrial relations system that Mr Kierath and Mr Court had implemented in this state. Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Dr G.I. Gallop : That minister was competent at being unjust. Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I thank the Premier for his interjection. Western Australians suffered a minimum wage not set by the Industrial Relations Commission, workplace agreements without a decent standard that people could be forced to sign, the reduction of unfair dismissal rights, the removal of people’s ability to seek arbitration from the Industrial Relations Commission and an attack on unions. All those provisions are in the federal legislation. Similarly, therefore, we can see that the results will follow that same path. Around Australia there has been renewed interest in the failed experiment here in Western Australia and, based on that, the implications of the Howard legislation. That is the case that we put. I thank the member for Riverton for so ably helping to put that to the Senate committee.
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.