Alex White (Labour)

I, too, will be opposing the Order of Business for the reasons outlined by Senator Fitzgerald. I made exactly the same points last week. Unfortunately on the basis of my experience, I do not believe the Leader has the slightest intention of responding in a positive manner to the points made by the Opposition on the ordering of business. He did not respond to my point last week, which has been repeated today, when I asked why the business in this House cannot be ordered in a manner throughout the year where legislation is paced to ensure important areas such as criminal law are debated publicly before being dealt with properly in both Houses. I do not understand why that cannot be done. Notwithstanding that I am one of those Members the Leader repeatedly refers to as relatively new, I cannot see why he does not address that important issue and give Members an explanation. Perhaps it is because there is no explanation other than that the Government, with the support of the Leader, has little or no respect for the role of this House on important legislation. That is the conclusion to which I have come.

My party leader made it clear today that there ought to be Government intervention in the electricians' dispute. When the parties get back around the table, as they undoubtedly will, and we hope it will be sooner rather than later, they will come to an agreement but people are entitled to expect that when an agreement is arrived at, it will be observed. That is the difficulty at the moment. There is a dispute because a tried and tested means of determining pay in the sector has been jettisoned by the employers. People went before the Labour Court and had the matter dealt with over a period of weeks but are now being told that the conclusion of those solemn negotiations is to be thrown out of the window. Why should people not be sceptical about negotiations and agreements when that happens?

There have been many calls on the trade unions to exercise restraint and there will be more before the hour is out. They should exercise restraint, but the employer bodies also need to exercise restraint, including in the language they use. It is simply not good enough for the head of the CIF to describe people who are exercising their rights as lunatics. He might consider for one moment, in view of the current economic circumstances, the contribution some of his own members have made to the catastrophe we now face. He might look a little closer to home to find the lunatics.