TAFE SA (PRESCRIBED EMPLOYEES) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 1 May 2013.)

The Hon. J.S. LEE (17:41): As the shadow parliamentary secretary for education and training, I rise today to speak on behalf of the opposition about the TAFE SA (Prescribed Employees) Amendment Bill. This bill is a consequential bill to the TAFE SA Act 2012. The member for Unley, the shadow minister for education, Mr David Pisoni in the other place, has made significant and passionate contributions outlining why the opposition will not be supporting this bill.

The opposition previously supported a TAFE SA Bill 2012, which has passed through both houses. We have also supported the Statutes Amendment and Repeal (TAFE SA Consequential Provisions) Bill 2012, which was passed in the Legislative Council with Liberal Party and Independent amendments. Sadly, the government rejected that particular bill and instead introduced this replacement bill.

The member for Unley pointed out that this bill is another attempt by the government to complete the transfer of TAFE SA from the Department of Further Education, Employment, Science and Technology to an independent statutory corporation. The TAFE SA (Consequential Provisions) Bill passed the Legislative Council in July 2012—almost 10 months ago. It has since been the subject of five deadlocked conferences. The TAFE SA (Prescribed Employees) Amendment Bill is a replacement bill. It was confirmed at the ministerial briefing on 11 April 2012 to the member for Unley, Mr David Pisoni, and myself that, without one of these bills passing the parliament, TAFE SA employees remain without official access to the Teachers Appeal Board with regard to disciplinary and industrial matters.

Let us refresh our memories at this point. The consequential provisions bill was amended by a majority of elected members of the Legislative Council who have representation for the whole state. The amendments to the Education Act 1972, moved by the Hon. Rob Lucas on behalf of the opposition and the Hon. John Darley, aimed to remove the Australian Education Union's exclusive right to appoint employee representatives to education boards and committees, such as the Teachers Registration Board, the Teachers Appeal Board, etc.

I remind honourable members in this council that the fundamental nature of these amendments did not in any way restrict union access to these appointments. It offers a more open and transparent mechanism, which is to remove the domination by the AEU. The amendments opened up positions to all members of the teaching profession, whether or not they were union members.

The amendments that were supported and passed in this council had the effect of removing the exclusive monopoly that the Australian Education Union had to appoint delegates from its own membership base to these important bodies, such as the Teachers Registration Board and the Teachers Appeal Board. It is important to emphasis that no-one is trying to stop or prevent the union or union members from having access to these positions.

The member for Unley, on behalf of the opposition, had clearly outlined that the intention is to give all teaching professions a fair go. We believe people in the wider community would see these amendments as being fair and reasonable in an open and democratic Australian society where these positions are open to all employees. It was very disappointing that the government refused to accept these amendments and enable all teaching staff the same opportunity. Time and time again, we see the Labor government responding to the pressures of the unions rather than looking after the interests of all members of the community.

The other reason for these amendments to the Education Act was to remove any discrimination against non-union members. As I understand it, in the olden days, union membership was about 75 per cent of the workforce. Today, union membership is about 17 per cent of the general workforce and about 13 per cent of the private sector workforce. With these statistics in mind, it is the responsibility of politicians not to be seen as supporting legislation here in South Australia that contains clauses that would discriminate against teachers who are doing the same job simply because they are members of a union and, in this case, those who are not in the Australian Education Union.

By introducing a replacement bill such as the TAFE SA (Prescribed Employees) Amendment Bill to parliament, the Labor government is wasting taxpayers' money and the valuable time of honourable members here. The government should have accepted the previous bill that was passed through the Legislative Council because those amendments by the opposition and the Hon. John Darley support the democratic rights of our Australian society. These amendments enable all teachers, regardless of their ranking and whether or not they belong to the union—all teachers, we are talking about—to be given the same right to nominate and vote on who they believe will be the best to represent them on such important bodies as the Teachers Registration Board and the Teachers Appeal Board.

The government previously rejected amendments to the Statutory Amendment and Repeal (TAFE SA Consequential Provisions) Bill 2012 to preserve, I believe, their unbreakable bond with the union when non-union members are being discriminated against. It is time for the government to recognise that all teachers are equal and, therefore, all teachers should be given the same opportunity and not be judged, whether they are affiliated with an organisation or not.

The Liberal Party consulted widely with stakeholders on the previous bill, to which there was no stakeholder opposition. Those same stakeholder groups, particularly in the private training sector and those affected by changes to the Education Act (such as principals and non-unionised educators), were supportive of the amendments limiting the Australian Education Union monopoly on employee, board and committee positions. They believed it was long overdue and that it would be of benefit to educational outcomes and the management of the education system here in South Australia.

As the member for Unley suggested, the Liberal Party invites the government to reintroduce its previous legislation with amendments by the majority of members of the Legislative Council and calls on the government to support basic democratic rights in the workplace. It is important to note that these amendments did not in any way restrict union access to these appointments: they merely removed their exclusive monopoly, opening up the positions to all members of the teaching profession, whether members of a union or not—fair and reasonable in anybody's mind. No-one should be given an unfair advantage. We are not getting in the way of TAFE acting as a statutory corporation. We supported that. We believe that it is important for TAFE in this more competitive environment to have choices and be free to make decisions and free to be in control of their own leaders.

On the advice of the member for Unley (the shadow member for education), we understand that the original bill passed in the Legislative Council can be reintroduced and passed in the lower house and that would enable the government to achieve what it wishes to achieve, and that is to deal with its employees through the Teachers Appeal Board and manage employees of TAFE as it intended.

In conclusion, I speak on behalf of the Liberal opposition and we will not be supporting the TAFE SA (Prescribed Employees) Amendment Bill today. We call on the minister to stop wasting the valuable time of parliament and reintroduce the original bill with our amendments.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. K.J. Maher.