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
Tuesday, 8 May 1973
Page: 1808

Mr Clyde Cameron (HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA) - I shall reply briefly to the honourable member for Flinders (Mr Lynch). The purpose of the deletion of Part X of the existing Act which deals with the registration of industrial agreements is to enable those agreements which legally could be registered under Part X to be registered under section 28 of the Act It has been held by pretty high and eminent counsel that there is nothing that Part X can do that cannot already be done under section 28, because it has been pointed out that if Part X agreements deal with matters that are truly industrial agreements, then those industrial agreements can be registered under another parliament. If they are dealing with agreements that are different from industrial agreements, then of course they are invalid. Any agreement that was not a truly industrial agree,ment could not be registered under the Act because the High Court of Australia has held that an agreement cannot incorporate things or be certified by the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission if it includes anything which could not be included in an award.

Mr Lynch - For example?

Mr Clyde Cameron (HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA) - For example, an award cannot be made unless there is a dispute and there cannot be a dispute unless the parties have been served with a log of claims. The parties cannot go outside the log of claims in pursuance of that dispute; if they do they are out of ambit and the award could not be made out of the ambit of the original log of claims. That would be one reason. We also could not make an agreement which dealt with things that impinged upon managerial prerogatives. If this occurred, it would be outside, the power of the court or the Commission and if the Act purported to give the Commission such power, the Act would be ultra vires the Constitution. It is as simple as that and I hope that the honourable member for Flinders will now see that to retain Part X of the Act is a superfluity which cannot be justified in the circumstances.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 5 (Interpretation).

Suggest corrections