❓ Hon Simon O'Brien questions Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich about a briefing note regarding restricting SSTU industrial action against outcomes-based education. Ravlich defends seeking advice, stating the SSTU wouldn't agree to restrictions and it could violate the Industrial Relations Act.
AnsweredQoN 485Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
OUTCOMES-BASED EDUCATION - BRIEFING NOTE
I refer to a briefing note request - numbered ministerial DK 032006 and dated 15 May 2006 - with the introduction “The Minister urgently requires advice regarding EBA Curriculum Implementation SSTU Industrial Action.” (1) Question 1 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) can be placed into the new EBA to restrict any industrial action being taken by the SSTU to hamper or stop the implementation of new cubiculum courses e.g. Outcomes Based new courses of study?” What response did the minister receive to that question? (2) Question 2 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) if any, in the existing EBA can be used to restrict SSTU industrial action in delaying the new courses of study? What response did the minister receive to that question? (3) Who responded to the minister’s briefing note request? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
I refer to a briefing note request - numbered ministerial DK 032006 and dated 15 May 2006 - with the introduction “The Minister urgently requires advice regarding EBA Curriculum Implementation SSTU Industrial Action.” (1) Question 1 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) can be placed into the new EBA to restrict any industrial action being taken by the SSTU to hamper or stop the implementation of new cubiculum courses e.g. Outcomes Based new courses of study?” What response did the minister receive to that question? (2) Question 2 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) if any, in the existing EBA can be used to restrict SSTU industrial action in delaying the new courses of study? What response did the minister receive to that question? (3) Who responded to the minister’s briefing note request? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
(1) Question 1 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) can be placed into the new EBA to restrict any industrial action being taken by the SSTU to hamper or stop the implementation of new cubiculum courses e.g. Outcomes Based new courses of study?” What response did the minister receive to that question? (2) Question 2 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) if any, in the existing EBA can be used to restrict SSTU industrial action in delaying the new courses of study? What response did the minister receive to that question? (3) Who responded to the minister’s briefing note request? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
(1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
(1) Question 1 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) can be placed into the new EBA to restrict any industrial action being taken by the SSTU to hamper or stop the implementation of new cubiculum courses e.g. Outcomes Based new courses of study?” What response did the minister receive to that question? (2) Question 2 asked by the minister was - What clause(s) if any, in the existing EBA can be used to restrict SSTU industrial action in delaying the new courses of study? What response did the minister receive to that question? (3) Who responded to the minister’s briefing note request? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
(1)-(3) The member is referring to a front-page story - the member actually has a copy of the briefing note - that I referred to yesterday in this place, when I was accused by the opposition shadow spokesperson - Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Ken Travers : Who is it today? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The member might well ask who is it today! The article claims that I had attempted to blackmail teachers. I want to put this in context. Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Norman Moore : You might answer the question. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : Yes. First, I put on record that we are the last state to implement outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12, even though we signed the 1999 Adelaide agreement with the commonwealth government, as the members would know. Secondly, there were three enterprise bargaining agreements prior to this EBA - which has not yet been agreed to - in which there was a commitment to the ongoing implementation of outcomes and standards into the whole of years K-12. The time line was 2003. Clearly that had not happened. Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Peter Collier : Was it conditional? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : No. Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Within that context, I have to say that as the Minister for Education and Training I am within my rights to seek advice of an industrial relations nature, or, indeed, a legal nature, if that is what I want to do. Clearly, as the Minister for Education and Training I need to have a clear position on what my options are. The only problem members opposite can make out is that the EBA that is on the table is an EBA that I fought for very strongly. It is probably the best EBA that has been presented to teachers in the past 15 years. It also happens to be an EBA that was already on the table prior to this advice being sought. The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
The advice from the Department of Education and Training was very simple. In response to the question about what clauses could be placed into the new EBA, the advice was that no clause could be placed into the EBA, because the State School Teachers’ Union would not agree to such a clause. That is fine, because at the end of the day we can have an agreement only if there is agreement between the parties. Therefore, it would not really matter what I tried to do, because if the SSTU said it was not acceptable, it would not happen. In addition, the advice was that that would not be allowed in any event, because any such clause could contravene the objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1979. Having received that advice, that was the end of the matter. In fact, I have never even spoken to the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union about the agreement. When the media telephoned the secretary of the State School Teachers’ Union to ask whether he had been blackmailed, his response was, “Well, the minister has not even raised this with me.” Frankly, I do not know how we go from - Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon Norman Moore : Who do you seek advice from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : From my department. Frankly, I do not know how we go from a position in which a minister seeks advice, and then does not act on it, and the EBA is already on the table, to a front-page story in which the minister is accused of blackmail! Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
The PRESIDENT : Order, members! The minister has been asked a question. She is answering it. Members should not ask further questions of the minister when she is on her feet answering the question that has been put to her. I call the Minister for Education and Training. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH : The final point I make is that I intend to continue seeking advice in those areas in which I am not a technical expert. If I want a legal opinion or legal advice, or if I want industrial relations advice, I will seek it from my department. In my view, I would be negligent in not seeking that advice.
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.