❓ A parliamentary question regarding a teachers' strike and the Minister's handling of negotiations with the State School Teachers Union. The Minister denies any wrongdoing and defends the government's offer.
AnsweredQoN 1281Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to his claim yesterday that today’s teachers’ strike was unnecessary because the Government was negotiating through the Industrial Relations Commission. (1) Can the minister confirm that neither he nor the Department of Education and Training has formally met with the State School Teachers Union for seven weeks? (2) Can he confirm that on the day he took this matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission he refused two requests from the union for a meeting? (3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(1) Can the minister confirm that neither he nor the Department of Education and Training has formally met with the State School Teachers Union for seven weeks? (2) Can he confirm that on the day he took this matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission he refused two requests from the union for a meeting? (3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(2) Can he confirm that on the day he took this matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission he refused two requests from the union for a meeting? (3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(1) Can the minister confirm that neither he nor the Department of Education and Training has formally met with the State School Teachers Union for seven weeks? (2) Can he confirm that on the day he took this matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission he refused two requests from the union for a meeting? (3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(2) Can he confirm that on the day he took this matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission he refused two requests from the union for a meeting? (3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(3) Can he further confirm that he later refused another five requests by the union for meetings? (4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(4) Will the minister now admit that his refusal to undertake proper negotiations has been a major contributing factor in the teachers’ decision to undertake their first full-day’s strike in eight years? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
(1)-(4) The answer to the last point, one that should resonate through the answers to all the other points, is no. If the member wants a job as my appointments secretary or the person who manages the reception desk, he can apply for either of them. I do not know how many times the teachers union has phoned my office. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the Leader of the Opposition speak to the teachers today? Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did I say something funny? I can talk for hours on this matter if members want to settle down, but I will keep my answer short. We have attempted for more than six months to negotiate with the teachers union to reach an agreed position. We arrived at an agreed position with the President and the Vice President of the Australian Education Union at a table in my office when we presented the enhanced offer which meant the offer went from $175 million to $308 million. They described the offer as very, very good, as excellent and as one that should be accepted. There were things in it, and there still are, which they had not even asked for, like financial incentives to teach in tough city schools, which had not been there before, and enhanced packages for some of the tough country schools, like Meekatharra where there were major issues. It is a very good package. Up to 14.34 per cent is offered over three and a half years for senior teachers who are prepared to undertake approved and agreed professional development, which annualised is in excess of 5.6 per cent. It is a very good package. They were right. Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr J.H.D. Day: Have you refused five requests for meetings? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Please, member for Darling Range. I am answering the question. They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
They were right when they described the package as very good. It became obvious, however, that their union delegates and/or union executive did not agree with them. I spoke with them for three hours, as I have reported to the Chamber before. When I explained that I had spent three hours trying to convince the union executive, the former Minister for Education said by way of interjection, as I recall it, that he never did that. It was obvious that the teachers union was making no effort to negotiate. Talking and negotiating are different concepts. We can talk forever, harking back to the good old days when the previous State Government allowed a dispute to roll on for more than 12 months Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett: When? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It was under the minister who preceded the Leader of the Opposition in that role. There was absolutely no prospect that I would allow this dispute to roll on. I told them that if we could not come to a negotiated agreement, I would take the matter to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. They said that I should not do that. I said that I would, and I did. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr C.J. Barnett: It is an admission of failure. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not an admission of failure. There is an independent umpire, which is the reason that body exists. We got hearing dates. They called a strike because I had taken it to the independent umpire. That surprised and disappointed me. I then made an application for formal conciliation before the commission in advance of the strike so that we could resolve or at least talk through the issue and avert the necessity of the strike. As it turns out, today - the very day on which this unnecessary and, I would submit, futile strike has been called and held - formal conciliation has been taking place before the commissioner. Both sides signed up to that process on 12 November last week. That was the moment when the teachers union leadership should have said that there was no point in going on with the strike because formal conciliation was to take place. What we do not want when entering into formal conciliation is other talks on the side, because they will achieve no more than what would have happened here. The teachers union leadership was looking for a reward for having called the strike. I did not give them one, and I do not intend to do so.
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.