HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-06-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Question Time

INDUSTRIAL ACTION

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite—Leader of the Opposition) (14:13): My question is to the Premier. When will he accept responsibility for the state of our education system and the health system and meet personally with teachers and doctors and their unions about their concerns?

The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (14:13): I am absolutely delighted to answer this question, and I hope that my response does not in any way upstage your address to the parliament this afternoon. On the issue of the doctors' industrial dispute, the state government has made a $260 million offer to the doctors' union. This offer will place South Australian Public Service doctors among the best paid in the nation.

Mr Hamilton-Smith interjecting:

The Hon. M.D. RANN: I am answering the question the way I want to answer it, just as I am sure that you will give your address with great flamboyance and maybe an international satellite audience. We will watch it on CNN. We will not clutter up the chamber: we will turn over to CNN or Sky News—or maybe even Fox News: you might get a better run there.

The offer will place South Australian Public Service doctors among the best paid in the nation. A senior doctor currently earning a remuneration package of about $199,000, I am advised, will receive an increase to about $325,000 under our arrangements. That is an increase of $126,000, or around 63 per cent, over three years. Who else in the community is getting a wage rise like that? Under our arrangements, an extra $126,000 is being offered.

Also under our arrangements, a senior emergency department doctor would earn a package of about $356,000. A senior anaesthetist without private practice could earn a package of about $325,000, or up to $392,000, with private practice. In comparison, the doctors' union is seeking an increase in remuneration packages for emergency department doctors in excess of $424,000 (an increase of over $110,000); for anaesthetists without private practice an increase to $453,000 (an increase of $184,000); and for anaesthetists with private practice, an increase of up to $552,000 (an increase of $186,000). So, that is what they are after.

They have been made an extremely generous offer, but what they are doing is totally exorbitant and absolutely out of kilter with the rest of the community. The government's package is fair and generous. It rewards doctors for the hard work they do, and it is competitive with other states. So, we call upon the doctors' union to withdraw the resignations and return to the negotiation table. I know that the member was a minister for five minutes—how long was it?

An honourable member: Four weeks.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Four weeks, a glittering, shining four weeks. It was the light on the hill of the previous Liberal government. He was there for four weeks, but he might have learnt something about industrial relations if he had—

Ms CHAPMAN: I have a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The SPEAKER: Order! There is a point of order. The Premier will take his seat.

Ms CHAPMAN: Thank you. Clearly, the Premier is not answering the substance of the question.

The SPEAKER: Yes; the Premier must return to the substance of the question.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: We call on the doctors' union to withdraw the resignations and return to the negotiation table. If they are not happy with the outcome of negotiations with the government, they can have the matter resolved by the Industrial Relations Commission, which is the independent umpire. Why should anybody be afraid of the independent umpire? We in the government are not afraid. Why should anyone be afraid?

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: The deal has always been that, if you cannot reach—

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The deputy leader will come to order.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: —finality in terms of negotiations, you go to the independent umpire to make a ruling. Those who will not go to the independent umpire, in my view, do not have a decent case. So, what the opposition leader needs to explain to the public is: would he pay the union the extra money demanded or not? Is that what he would do? After his four weeks' experience in government—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: —he would simply put his hands up and surrender, run up the white flag, the first time anyone has tried to extort money out of him. Is that the kind of premier that the Leader of the Opposition wants to be—someone who will surrender at the first opportunity, someone who will run up the white flag in terms of negotiations? The Leader of the Opposition as premier—if he got to that position—has to represent the interests of the whole state. What we have heard from this Leader of the Opposition is that he would give in to every demand. That is the gutless way. That is not leadership: that is the Neville Chamberlain approach to political leadership. That is basically, 'I'll give you what you want as long as you say nice things about me.' You have a different premier on this side of the house, because I have a different concept of leadership.

There are about 699 more doctors in the system now than there were during the Leader of the Opposition's magical period in the cabinet. There are 699 more doctors. People talk about overcrowding. Billions of extra dollars are being spent in our health system and we have 699 more doctors, I am advised, than when the Leader of the Opposition was in cabinet, when he did not give a damn about the health system.

There are about 2,500 more nurses in the system. That is the difference: we are putting massively more into health and we are recruiting doctors, but we are not going to give in to extortion, we are not going to give in to blackmail, and if the union does not like it then it has redress in the Industrial Relations Commission. Let the umpire decide.

I move on to the issue of the teachers' union claim. I am so pleased I was tipped off about this. I mean, they leak like a sieve. I know they have had some problems with their preselection.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Apparently the Liberals think that the government's slogan for the next election is 'Action now for the future'. That was actually the slogan for the budget. However, we now know what the Liberal slogan is for the next election: Martin Hamilton-Smith says, 'I surrender.' That is a different kind of leadership from mine. The Australian Education Union's claim has been costed at approximately $2.8 billion over three years—over $1 billion in the last year of the agreement.

An honourable member: Put it on Bankcard!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: That is right. The Leader of the Opposition would give in; he would put it on Bankcard. Everyone knows that if there is any slogan that will be attached to my name it will be 'fiscal rectitude', but the Leader of the Opposition will have two slogans at the next election: 'I surrender' and a fiscal policy of 'borrow and hope'. Again, we are the ones who brought the AAA credit rating back and we are the ones who deliver a surplus every year.

The union claim includes a salary claim of 21 per cent, 28 weeks' maternity leave, reduced teacher duty days from 207 to 202 (five fewer days) and six extra pupil-free days. I just heard members opposite agreeing on the issue of the maternity leave. When the opposition was in government, when the Leader of the Opposition was part of that magic period in the history of this state, the Camelot four weeks, there was two weeks' maternity leave, not the 14 weeks that there is now: two weeks' maternity leave under the Liberal government.

The government offer is worth $309 million over the life of the agreement; approximately $141 million per annum once fully implemented in 2010-11. The government has put forward an offer of 9.75 per cent over three years, which is 3.25 per cent per annum for three years. The government offer also includes a per capita funding model, extra support for beginning teachers, workload protections and increased paid maternity and adoption leave to 14 weeks—14 weeks versus the two weeks under the Liberals.

The Australian Education Union is demanding a new government offer and is claiming to want to meet only with ministers Wright, Lomax-Smith and Caica. We will be responsible and we will be fair. We have shown enormous generosity in terms of our investment in the health system, as well as in education—massively more per student in our schools by this government compared to the last government.

But you cannot be a leader by surrendering at the first whiff of grapeshot. I am happy to give some Churchillian advice, because we will walk towards the sunlit uplands of prosperity by working in partnership, not by giving in at the first battle.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT