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    
Tuesday, 2 April 1968

Mr Devine (EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES) asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

1.   Now that permanent employment has been introduced on the waterfront has the democratic right of the waterside worker to transfer from one stevedoring company to another been taken away from him?

2.   What procedure is now to be followed by the waterside worker in order to obtain such a transfer?

3.   Has the stevedoring company of Patrick and Co. consistently breached regulations on this matter and opposed the transfer of waterside workers to other stevedoring companies?

Mr Bury - The answers to the honourable member's questions are as follows:

1.   The General Report of the National Stevedoring Industry Conference sets out the agreed arrangements for allocating operational employees to individual employers on a permanent basis. These are based on initial choice by the employees and balloting where necessary. These arrangements were endorsed by the Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia and its branches.

2.   The procedures under which a waterside worker may terminate his employment with an employer are set out in Clause 40 of the Waterside Workers' Award.

3.   No.

Army Interrogation in Vietnam (Question No. 83)

Mr Daly (GRAYNDLER, NEW SOUTH WALES) asked the Minister for the Army, upon notice:

1.   What is the name of the warrant officer who was involved in the 'water treatment' interrogation incident in Vietnam?

2.   Was the warrant officer charged wilh any offence by the Army?

3.   If so, what was (a) the nature of the charge, (b) the date and place of the court martial or inquiry and (c) the name of the presiding officer?

4.   What was the decision of the court martial or inquiry?

5.   What action, if any, was taken against the soldier concerned?

6.   What is the soldier's present rank and location?

Mr Lynch (FLINDERS, VICTORIA) (Minister for the Army) - The answers to the honourable member's questions are as follows:

I.   lt would not be proper for me to release the name of the Warrant Officer concerned. The matter was dealt wilh to finality by proper authority tit the time. As there is no question of court martial or trial at this stage, the Warrant Officer would have no opportunity to defend himself against any adverse comments which might now be invoked by the release of Ins name. 2. No. 3 and 4. Not applicable.

5.   The warrant officer was paraded to the Commander of the First Australian Task Force, censured and removed from interrogation duties.

6.   The soldier's rank is still warrant officer class 2. I am unable to disclose his present location for the same reason as stated in the answer to question 1.

Suggest corrections