Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Friday, 3 December 1976


Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Is the Fawnmac group of companies still for sale; if so, what is the best offer received for the companies to date.


Mr Hunt -The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

The Government decided in February 1976 that I should, in consultation with the Treasurer, investigate the possibilities of selling the Fawnmac group, preferably to an Australian company, and report back to the Government. No decision has yet been taken on the enquiries that have been received. As the matter is still under examination it would not be appropriate for me to disclose details of offers at this stage.

Federal and State Co-operation on Industrial Matters (Question No. 1604)


Mr E G Whitlam (WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES) am asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations upon notice:

(1)   When did the Prime Minister write to the Premiers suggesting co-operation between the Federal and State Governments on industrial matters (Hansard, 10 November 1976, page 25 14).

(2)   Did the Prime Minister's letter raise the implications of the judgment of 25 February 1 969 in Moore v Doyle about which I have asked the Minister questions without notice on 25 February 1976 and 9 September 1976 (Hansard, pages 260 and 858) and put question No. 1 129 on notice for him on 15 September 1976.


Mr Street - The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1)   The Prime Minister wrote to the Premiers on 22 October 1976 suggesting that the State Labour Ministers meet with the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations to discuss matters of common concern in industrial relations.

(2)   At the subsequent special meeting of the Conference of Ministers for Labour held in Melbourne on 12 November 1976 one of the matters discussed was the problem highlighted by the judgment in Moore v Doyle.







Suggest corrections