Question Time

Industrial Relations

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (14:20): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Treasurer regarding industrial relations.

Leave granted.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: In recent months, the Treasurer has often described various employee representatives as being unreasonable or not being sensible when they stand up for their members. The Liberal government's undermining of those representing frontline emergency services workers continued yesterday as the Minister for Health and Wellbeing doubled down on his attacks on ambulance officers when he said that union bosses do their members a disservice.

My questions to the Treasurer are: does the Treasurer consider the hardworking representatives of firefighters to be sensible and reasonable? What has the Treasurer's dispute with the MFS cost in terms of revenue? Exactly where is this industrial relation dispute up to? Would the Treasurer consider delegating his responsibilities if he can't resolve it?

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (14:21): In relation to the last question no. The government, and I on behalf of the government, have made it quite clear in relation to the enterprise bargaining negotiations and industrial relations issues that have ensued that no amount of industrial action taken and led by union bosses gives me, on behalf of the taxpayers, one extra dollar to solve the particular claims or issues that union bosses may well ask in relation to various disputes.

As proof positive of that, the teachers' union led industrial action, we had protest marches in the streets, we had Johnny Farnham songs being sung loud and clear by thousands of protesting AEU members—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Wortley is out of order.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: Even the powerful singing of Johnny Farnham songs in the streets of Adelaide didn't give me one extra dollar to resolve the particular issues. Pleasingly—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: —in relation to that particular dispute, and similarly with the nurses' union dispute when industrial action was engaged, we took the position quite clearly on behalf of the taxpayers of South Australia that we were prepared to offer sensible and reasonable salary settlements and wage and condition settlements, but we wouldn't respond to industrial action.

We have adopted the same position in relation to the MFS-related issues and the industrial action that has been utilised by the union there. We have adopted exactly the same position in relation to that, and that has been a consistent position of the government. If we were in the wonderful situation of having unlimited money and unlimited resources, and we could give everybody everything they wanted, what a wonderful world we would live in. We would all love that world, says he looking at his ministerial colleagues. But we don't live in that sort of world.

We are already running a $2½ billion deficit this year. We are being criticised by the opposition and others for massive increases in public sector infrastructure being funded by debt and borrowings. So on behalf of the taxpayers we have to be frugal, and we will call out those union bosses who are unreasonable in terms of some of their claims. We will not respond to threats of industrial action to in essence try to force the government into positions which we believe the taxpayers just cannot afford in relation to a union dispute or an enterprise bargaining arrangement.

In relation to the second or third question in relation to the indicative costs of protest actions taken in relation to the MFS, I think we have previously provided to sections of the media early estimates of what that cost might be. I am happy to pull out those or have those numbers pulled out and provide them on notice to the leader.