Book 8 - Parliament of Victoria

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
1698 COUNCIL Thursday, 2 June 2011
exercised as a last option, not as the first option. I note
that the — —
Hon. M. P. Pakula — On a point of order,
President, as a matter of clarity, the question Mrs Coote
asked the minister was about a development in the
federal industrial relations sphere. I am just wondering
whether the minister’s answering of this question
means that he will now be required to answer any and
all questions about industrial relations in the federal
sphere in the future.
The PRESIDENT — Order! My view as Presiding
Officer is that if there are industrial relations matters
that occur in the Federal Court that impinge upon
Victorian administration, then the house is entitled to
believe the minister may well have comments to make
on those matters. Victoria has referred its powers, but
there are issues for the Victorian economy and for the
minister’s administration. I think the question that the
minister is responding to today is an appropriate
question, and I think he is proceeding with an answer
that is apposite to what he has been asked.
As I said, whilst the decision might have been in the
jurisdiction of the Federal Court and whilst Fair Work
Australia is a federal agency, there are implications for
Victorian industry. I think the minister is aware of that
and has made comment about that in various
contributions to this Parliament in the past. I would
expect that questions might well reflect that going
forward.
Hon. R. A. DALLA-RIVA — I think Mr Pakula
would be aware that we ceded most of our industrial
relations powers to the commonwealth in 1996.
However, I think it is important to put on the record that
that does not mean we will not act to protect the
interests of Victorians. It is important that as a state we
strengthen Victoria’s industrial relations reputation. We
need to encourage future investment and sustained
economic growth for all Victorians. I am confident that
our government will support industry in Victoria by
making sure it is up to the challenges that exist at a
most difficult time, such as those arising from shifting
patterns of trade and the like.
I note that in the context of the decision that was
handed down yesterday the federal workplace relations
minister, Senator Evans, is promising a review of
Labor’s Fair Work Act 2009 in the first half of next
year. Our view is that the review cannot come soon
enough. Workplace laws should be encouraging
productivity and competitiveness and not inviting
pre-emptive strikes. If Labor’s workplace laws have the
effect of discouraging investment and the jobs that go
with it, Labor must be held accountable. We cannot
compete with low-wage economies on labour costs, but
we can compete by increasing our productivity. We
need to build on our reputation for quality and
reliability through the development of higher end
products and services.
For the record, in the 1990s Victoria’s productivity
growth exceeded the national average, but from 2000,
under Labor, it fell below the national average. Victoria
has been underperforming on this key important issue.
We need to understand that if we are to reverse the
position that Labor has put this state in and give its
people the economic opportunities they need for a
prosperous future, we need to encourage innovation and
build our skills base. We need our industries to be
dynamic, outward looking and agile, and we need a
workforce that is highly skilled and highly adaptable.
As I said, the review undertaken by the federal
workplace relations minister, Senator Evans, is
undertaking cannot come quickly enough.
Health: commonwealth-state agreement
Mr JENNINGS (South Eastern Metropolitan) —
My question is for the Minister for Health. As the
minister is well aware, as part of the commonwealth
allocation of $16 billion to support the health industry
across Australia, the intention is to establish a national
accountability and health pricing mechanism. The
minister has commented on that in recent times. Can
the minister tell the house what constructive proposals
he has put to the commonwealth to enable the degree of
transparency and accountability that it requires to
secure that funding for Victoria?
Hon. D. M. DAVIS (Minister for Health) — The
Victorian government is committed to greater
transparency and a more effective health system. We
are also committed to working collaboratively with the
commonwealth government to deliver that. What I
would say to the member is that one suggestion we
have made to the commonwealth is that if the new
National Health Performance Authority is established
in the form that is being mooted, it ought not have an
excessively large bureaucracy, it ought not be an
intrusive bureaucracy and it ought to work
collaboratively with the states. We have also made the
suggestion that that body could be much more effective
if it also scrutinised commonwealth health activity.
Another constructive suggestion we have made is that
the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare could
take on a larger role in ensuring transparency and
greater scrutiny of the health system. It has a
well-established reputation, it is respected by the states