Red Rag

Justice Heydon Dyson refused an interlocutory injunction against the Government’s IR campaign, because the unions could not give an undertaking as to damages (because the cost of the ad campaign is undisclosed, but tipped to be at least $20 000 000). However, Justice Dyson agreed that the constitutionality of the propaganda expenditure was “a serious question to be tried,” and the Full Bench will hear the matter next week. If the Government continues to argue that the ACTU’s public relations campaign have created “an emergency situation” (!), next week’s hearings should be entertaining.

As Kim Beazley pointed out that even toilet breaks are on the chopping block and the RSL said Anzac Day as a paid public holiday was “non-negotiable”, the Government became very confused about what its reforms actually mean. Mark Vaile “appeared to expand the new minimum working conditions from four to seven” (which wouldn’t be the first time he’s got it wrong). John Howard also claimed public holidays would be safe, saying, “We will preserve all the protections that are there now.” These are weasel words — he means public holidays will stay in awards, but because the no-disadvantage test is going to be scrapped, public holidays can be excluded on the AWAs Howard will aggressively promote.

Dirt unit mastermind Mr Hanke is hunkering down in his new job with Kevin Andrews. They attempted to smear Kim Beazley by saying his staff were employed on AWAs — but Beazley’s staff are employed by the Department of Finance and Administration, not their political boss. DOFA sent the advisors a letter demanding they sign an AWA: “Until we receive the original signed and duly completed Australian Workplace Agreement (AWA) and Filing Application Form, you will be paid a lower non-AWA salary and Ministerial Staff Allowance (MSA).” The non-AWA salary is 30-40% lower — and these inflated managerial AWAs are used by Howard to fiddle the figures in his propaganda.

In a strange op-ed for the Australian Financial Review (Friday, p27), Greg Craven suggested that widespread opposition to the proposed reforms is not because people are worried about their wages and job security, but because they are all committed States-rights conservatives: “Given a choice between the states and the HR Nicholls Society, theychoose the states, and do so with a pungent determination.” I think he’s overstated the size of that constituency, but his conclusion is spot on. He says that if the view that Howard has a profoundly radical agenda “ever comes to be the accepted wisdom Howard will face serious problems. … Honest John sounds a lot better than Radical Jack.”

Please email Kim Beazley to tell him now is not the time to go soft on industrial relations.