Mr EDE - 1996-02-20
Last week, the minister told ABC radio:
Well, we have said [to the union] if you are going to start banning doing these sorts of things, we will just
remove you from all of those boards and committees, and we will get teacher representatives on there, so we can
get together input to address it, but it will not be the prerogative of the trade union to run these things.
Does the minister intend to amend the Education Act and the regulations in order to exclude representatives of the Australian Education Union from education bodies and committees? If so, this can be interpreted only as an action taken against a particular group of people solely because of their membership of a trade union. That is a clear breach of the Anti-Discrimination Act. I ask the minister whether he intends also to amend the Anti-Discrimination Act to enable him to pursue his vendetta against education and other trade unions in the Northern Territory.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, that cute interpretation is totally inaccurate. Let me make the situation very clear. It was the Australian Education Union, commonly known as the teachers' union, which decided as early as August last year, while negotiations were proceeding, to lodge a series of bans and limitations affecting the quality of education of the children of the Northern Territory. Despite that, our government continued to negotiate and did not take any form of retaliatory action although it had every right to do so. In the spirit of reconciliation, in the spirit of trying to have things sorted out, we continued negotiating. In fact, 2 or 3 offers were made in the second half of last year in an attempt to find a resolution to this dispute. It was all to no avail. At the end of the day, the Australian Education Union initially rejected the offer before the teachers went off on school holidays. We suggested that they think about it over Christmas because that was the last offer. We extended it until 9 February ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: What was the union's response? Over Christmas, it said that, when schools resumed, it would whack us with about 60 bans and limitations on what teachers would do in terms of delivering education to children of the Northern Territory. It followed that with a mass meeting to confirm those bans and a day's strike generally throughout the Territory by a number of teachers. Yet, it is surprised when our government, in the mildest of responses, says quite clearly that, if the trade union intends to take that type of action and impose that type of work-to-rule, the government will impose a retaliatory work-to-rule.
It is as simple as this. The union has had the opportunity to participate on promotion appeal boards, curriculum committees and other related bodies within the department. It has no statutory right in that regard. It was a privilege that we gave to the trade union to have a representative ...
Page 1153
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: That is the organisation, not the person. We are not in any way restricting or limiting the rights of a trade union member to be a member of any of those committees. They can be present as a teacher representative. No teacher is excluded from participation. What we are saying is that the trade union per se will not be represented, but teachers will. I am advised that there are 2 boards on which the teachers' union has a legal right to representation: the Education Advisory Council and the Board of Studies. We have not yet taken the decision to look at amending the legislation to remove the union's right to representation as distinct from teacher representation. That has not been decided on at this stage.
Page 1154
Well, we have said [to the union] if you are going to start banning doing these sorts of things, we will just
remove you from all of those boards and committees, and we will get teacher representatives on there, so we can
get together input to address it, but it will not be the prerogative of the trade union to run these things.
Does the minister intend to amend the Education Act and the regulations in order to exclude representatives of the Australian Education Union from education bodies and committees? If so, this can be interpreted only as an action taken against a particular group of people solely because of their membership of a trade union. That is a clear breach of the Anti-Discrimination Act. I ask the minister whether he intends also to amend the Anti-Discrimination Act to enable him to pursue his vendetta against education and other trade unions in the Northern Territory.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, that cute interpretation is totally inaccurate. Let me make the situation very clear. It was the Australian Education Union, commonly known as the teachers' union, which decided as early as August last year, while negotiations were proceeding, to lodge a series of bans and limitations affecting the quality of education of the children of the Northern Territory. Despite that, our government continued to negotiate and did not take any form of retaliatory action although it had every right to do so. In the spirit of reconciliation, in the spirit of trying to have things sorted out, we continued negotiating. In fact, 2 or 3 offers were made in the second half of last year in an attempt to find a resolution to this dispute. It was all to no avail. At the end of the day, the Australian Education Union initially rejected the offer before the teachers went off on school holidays. We suggested that they think about it over Christmas because that was the last offer. We extended it until 9 February ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: What was the union's response? Over Christmas, it said that, when schools resumed, it would whack us with about 60 bans and limitations on what teachers would do in terms of delivering education to children of the Northern Territory. It followed that with a mass meeting to confirm those bans and a day's strike generally throughout the Territory by a number of teachers. Yet, it is surprised when our government, in the mildest of responses, says quite clearly that, if the trade union intends to take that type of action and impose that type of work-to-rule, the government will impose a retaliatory work-to-rule.
It is as simple as this. The union has had the opportunity to participate on promotion appeal boards, curriculum committees and other related bodies within the department. It has no statutory right in that regard. It was a privilege that we gave to the trade union to have a representative ...
Page 1153
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: That is the organisation, not the person. We are not in any way restricting or limiting the rights of a trade union member to be a member of any of those committees. They can be present as a teacher representative. No teacher is excluded from participation. What we are saying is that the trade union per se will not be represented, but teachers will. I am advised that there are 2 boards on which the teachers' union has a legal right to representation: the Education Advisory Council and the Board of Studies. We have not yet taken the decision to look at amending the legislation to remove the union's right to representation as distinct from teacher representation. That has not been decided on at this stage.
Page 1154
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016