1 00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:01,520 Speaker 1: First of all, though it's been a bit of a 2 00:00:01,600 --> 00:00:04,160 Speaker 1: day for Jerry Browne, hasn't it. Not only has the 3 00:00:04,200 --> 00:00:06,960 Speaker 1: Speaker indicated he thinks the Marty Party punishment is too harsh, 4 00:00:07,040 --> 00:00:09,719 Speaker 1: but he also said he should not have allowed Labor 5 00:00:09,760 --> 00:00:11,760 Speaker 1: to ask the question that led to Brook van Valden 6 00:00:11,840 --> 00:00:14,600 Speaker 1: dropping the sea bomb yesterday. Chris Hopkins is the Labor leader. 7 00:00:14,640 --> 00:00:17,000 Speaker 2: Hey, Chippy, how are you? As Jerry Wright? 8 00:00:17,040 --> 00:00:17,880 Speaker 1: He shouldn't have let it go. 9 00:00:18,840 --> 00:00:21,079 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think he's probably right on both counts. I 10 00:00:21,120 --> 00:00:24,200 Speaker 2: think we probably both the question and the answer probably 11 00:00:24,239 --> 00:00:29,240 Speaker 2: shouldn't have been allowed. You. I mean, ultimately, I'm all 12 00:00:29,240 --> 00:00:33,360 Speaker 2: for robust debate, but probably the column in question sort 13 00:00:33,360 --> 00:00:35,440 Speaker 2: of crossed the line in parliamentary gems. I'm not going 14 00:00:35,479 --> 00:00:38,400 Speaker 2: to form a judgment in terms of what editorial decisions 15 00:00:38,400 --> 00:00:41,120 Speaker 2: newspapers should make, but Parliament does have to set a 16 00:00:41,159 --> 00:00:43,360 Speaker 2: standard and hold itself to that standard. 17 00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:45,920 Speaker 1: I mean, come on, Chippy, you don't have to You 18 00:00:45,920 --> 00:00:48,720 Speaker 1: don't have to make a call on editorial standards, but 19 00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:50,680 Speaker 1: surely you can make a call on whether you think 20 00:00:50,720 --> 00:00:53,760 Speaker 1: it's okay to attack women with a gendered slur like that, 21 00:00:54,720 --> 00:00:55,680 Speaker 1: Like that's not okay. 22 00:00:56,320 --> 00:00:58,959 Speaker 2: Certainly not language that I would use. But having said that, 23 00:00:59,240 --> 00:01:02,240 Speaker 2: the journalist and is a woman with a long history 24 00:01:02,280 --> 00:01:04,639 Speaker 2: of feminist advocacy, and I'm not going to tell. 25 00:01:04,480 --> 00:01:08,120 Speaker 1: You what bes women can be women haters too. I mean, okay, 26 00:01:08,200 --> 00:01:09,960 Speaker 1: so are you telling me so? Just say this so 27 00:01:10,000 --> 00:01:12,399 Speaker 1: that I completely understand exactly what your position is on this. 28 00:01:12,959 --> 00:01:17,280 Speaker 1: You think it's okay for senior female cabinet ministers to 29 00:01:17,280 --> 00:01:18,240 Speaker 1: be called the sea word. 30 00:01:19,600 --> 00:01:21,560 Speaker 2: That's not what I've said, and I've said it's not 31 00:01:21,640 --> 00:01:23,440 Speaker 2: language that I would use. I've just said that I'm 32 00:01:23,480 --> 00:01:26,080 Speaker 2: not going to start making newspaper editorial decisions for them. 33 00:01:26,200 --> 00:01:28,360 Speaker 2: But I have said us not language that I would use, 34 00:01:28,400 --> 00:01:29,600 Speaker 2: And I don't think it should have been used in 35 00:01:29,640 --> 00:01:31,040 Speaker 2: the House, and I don't think we should have quote 36 00:01:31,080 --> 00:01:32,839 Speaker 2: it from the same article in the House. 37 00:01:32,920 --> 00:01:35,240 Speaker 1: My problem with your position on this is because you 38 00:01:35,319 --> 00:01:39,240 Speaker 1: went like over the top defending just Cinda anytime somebody 39 00:01:39,319 --> 00:01:42,000 Speaker 1: sneezed something nasty in her direction. So why would you 40 00:01:42,000 --> 00:01:43,160 Speaker 1: not defend other women too? 41 00:01:44,080 --> 00:01:47,840 Speaker 2: Well, I will, and you know where I think that 42 00:01:47,840 --> 00:01:51,760 Speaker 2: that's appropriate. But in this okay, it's a newspaper editorial decision, 43 00:01:52,760 --> 00:01:53,360 Speaker 2: So okay. 44 00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:56,760 Speaker 1: Put it like, Okay, Let's say that I in my 45 00:01:56,880 --> 00:01:59,920 Speaker 1: Sunday start, in my Sunday column on the Herald on Sunday, 46 00:02:00,320 --> 00:02:03,560 Speaker 1: write something horrendous about one of your MPs and call 47 00:02:03,640 --> 00:02:05,160 Speaker 1: them the sea bomb. Do you think that's going to 48 00:02:05,160 --> 00:02:05,600 Speaker 1: be okay? 49 00:02:07,040 --> 00:02:11,040 Speaker 2: Look, you're asking me a hypothetical question without seeing what 50 00:02:11,080 --> 00:02:12,960 Speaker 2: you're right. No, I'm not going to form a judgment 51 00:02:13,040 --> 00:02:13,440 Speaker 2: or something that I. 52 00:02:13,440 --> 00:02:15,360 Speaker 1: Have any The thing is no, of course it wouldn't. 53 00:02:15,360 --> 00:02:17,440 Speaker 1: It wouldn't be okay, Nor is this okay? This is 54 00:02:17,480 --> 00:02:19,959 Speaker 1: what you said in twenty twenty three. There is no question. 55 00:02:20,080 --> 00:02:23,200 Speaker 1: Unfortunately women in leadership positions, women in politics, but women 56 00:02:23,240 --> 00:02:25,560 Speaker 1: and other leadership positions are the subject of far more 57 00:02:25,560 --> 00:02:28,240 Speaker 1: abuse and vitriol than men. I think we have a 58 00:02:28,280 --> 00:02:30,800 Speaker 1: responsibility as men to stand up, to step up and 59 00:02:30,800 --> 00:02:32,400 Speaker 1: condemn that and speak out against it. 60 00:02:32,480 --> 00:02:35,200 Speaker 2: That was you, yes, and I stand by that statement. 61 00:02:35,200 --> 00:02:38,920 Speaker 1: Okayle Now, are you going to reverse the changes that 62 00:02:38,960 --> 00:02:41,359 Speaker 1: the NATS are the coalition government is doing to the 63 00:02:41,360 --> 00:02:42,520 Speaker 1: pay equity legislation. 64 00:02:43,520 --> 00:02:46,120 Speaker 2: I've said yes we will, but let's be clear that 65 00:02:46,160 --> 00:02:49,000 Speaker 2: doesn't necessarily mean going back to the law exactly as 66 00:02:49,000 --> 00:02:52,000 Speaker 2: it was in starting the clock all over again. So 67 00:02:52,600 --> 00:02:53,799 Speaker 2: one of the reasons we can't, Well, one of the 68 00:02:53,840 --> 00:02:55,440 Speaker 2: reasons we can't be more specific is I think the 69 00:02:55,520 --> 00:02:57,440 Speaker 2: last thing that we want to do is if we 70 00:02:57,480 --> 00:02:59,440 Speaker 2: get eighteen months down the track and those women have 71 00:02:59,520 --> 00:03:02,160 Speaker 2: started them whole process again, they're further along the process. 72 00:03:02,280 --> 00:03:03,640 Speaker 2: I don't want to do to them what the National 73 00:03:03,639 --> 00:03:06,240 Speaker 2: Party's just done, which has changed the law, and basically 74 00:03:06,320 --> 00:03:07,519 Speaker 2: start the clock all over again. 75 00:03:07,639 --> 00:03:09,200 Speaker 1: No, but you wouldn't have to. You wouldn't have to 76 00:03:09,200 --> 00:03:11,160 Speaker 1: start the clock again, would you, Jippy, Because the thing 77 00:03:11,240 --> 00:03:14,320 Speaker 1: is you would be more lenient. Therefore they could simply 78 00:03:14,360 --> 00:03:16,280 Speaker 1: progress with their claims as they were. You don't have 79 00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:18,440 Speaker 1: to stop the claims. You don't have to be you 80 00:03:18,480 --> 00:03:20,720 Speaker 1: don't have to be retrospective. You can change it without 81 00:03:20,760 --> 00:03:22,200 Speaker 1: being retrospective. Would you do that? 82 00:03:22,840 --> 00:03:26,000 Speaker 2: But that's exactly the point. So yes, But that doesn't 83 00:03:26,000 --> 00:03:27,720 Speaker 2: mean a direct reversal of the law change that the 84 00:03:27,760 --> 00:03:30,760 Speaker 2: government have made. So basically, I mean, maybe I'm getting 85 00:03:30,840 --> 00:03:33,280 Speaker 2: hung up on the technicalities of parliament. We're not directly 86 00:03:33,320 --> 00:03:36,440 Speaker 2: repealing the law, but we will put the situation back 87 00:03:36,480 --> 00:03:38,720 Speaker 2: that women can claim what they were able to claim previously. 88 00:03:38,760 --> 00:03:40,920 Speaker 1: Okay, so you will take it back to sixty percent 89 00:03:41,240 --> 00:03:42,200 Speaker 1: workforce as women. 90 00:03:42,960 --> 00:03:45,480 Speaker 2: That's correct, because why should the secondary school teachers not 91 00:03:45,640 --> 00:03:48,080 Speaker 2: be able to claim equity but primary school teachers. 92 00:03:47,840 --> 00:03:50,080 Speaker 1: Care and you would take it back to the setting 93 00:03:50,120 --> 00:03:52,560 Speaker 1: where they're able to use the comparators that exist at 94 00:03:52,600 --> 00:03:52,960 Speaker 1: the moment. 95 00:03:53,960 --> 00:03:56,280 Speaker 2: That is correct, because actually, if the government doesn't like 96 00:03:56,320 --> 00:03:59,200 Speaker 2: the comparators that are being used, it can negotiate different comparatives. 97 00:03:59,280 --> 00:04:01,200 Speaker 1: The librarian comparing themselves to. 98 00:04:01,200 --> 00:04:05,240 Speaker 2: Again, well, but that's not the point, because it. 99 00:04:07,160 --> 00:04:08,360 Speaker 1: Was aviation workers. 100 00:04:08,760 --> 00:04:10,560 Speaker 2: I don't have them all memory would you allow that again? 101 00:04:10,960 --> 00:04:13,960 Speaker 2: But job title is not the issue. That the value 102 00:04:13,960 --> 00:04:16,240 Speaker 2: of the work is the issue, because otherwise you get 103 00:04:16,240 --> 00:04:18,440 Speaker 2: a situation under the current law that the government have 104 00:04:18,520 --> 00:04:21,520 Speaker 2: now passed where women will be comparing their jobs to 105 00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:25,120 Speaker 2: even less relevant roles. So under the current law, for example, 106 00:04:25,360 --> 00:04:28,560 Speaker 2: the only available comparator for someone like an aged care 107 00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:31,520 Speaker 2: worker is a gardener. That's the law that the current 108 00:04:31,600 --> 00:04:32,880 Speaker 2: the government have just passed. 109 00:04:32,960 --> 00:04:35,120 Speaker 1: Now, that doesn't sound outrageous to me. 110 00:04:37,120 --> 00:04:40,960 Speaker 2: Why is that outrages because you're talking about different levels 111 00:04:41,000 --> 00:04:41,640 Speaker 2: of qualification? 112 00:04:42,360 --> 00:04:44,880 Speaker 1: Is what is the qualification required to be an aged 113 00:04:44,920 --> 00:04:45,560 Speaker 1: care worker? 114 00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:47,640 Speaker 2: But that's not my judgment to make. 115 00:04:47,680 --> 00:04:51,320 Speaker 1: That's the zero qualification required to be an age care worker, 116 00:04:51,400 --> 00:04:53,760 Speaker 1: just like there is zero qualification required to be a gardener. 117 00:04:53,960 --> 00:04:54,880 Speaker 1: That seems fair to me. 118 00:04:55,560 --> 00:04:58,159 Speaker 2: The whole point of the pay equity process is you 119 00:04:58,240 --> 00:05:00,120 Speaker 2: go through each of the jobs that you want to 120 00:05:00,160 --> 00:05:02,599 Speaker 2: compare line by line. You look at the level of 121 00:05:02,600 --> 00:05:05,360 Speaker 2: skill required, You look at the level of qualification required, 122 00:05:05,400 --> 00:05:06,960 Speaker 2: You look at the working hours, you look at the 123 00:05:07,000 --> 00:05:10,200 Speaker 2: working conditions. You look at all of those things to 124 00:05:10,279 --> 00:05:12,640 Speaker 2: make sure that you are comparing like with like, even 125 00:05:12,680 --> 00:05:15,320 Speaker 2: if the even if the work being done is different. 126 00:05:15,640 --> 00:05:18,159 Speaker 2: You make sure you are comparing jobs that are you know, 127 00:05:18,240 --> 00:05:21,720 Speaker 2: comparable work of comparable value. And I think that's the 128 00:05:21,839 --> 00:05:24,080 Speaker 2: key point here because in some many of these female 129 00:05:24,120 --> 00:05:28,920 Speaker 2: dominated professions, there aren't male dominated comparators that look or 130 00:05:28,960 --> 00:05:30,760 Speaker 2: sound the same. That's the point. 131 00:05:31,000 --> 00:05:33,560 Speaker 1: Okay, Chippy, thank you, I appreciate your time. It's Chris Hopkins, 132 00:05:33,680 --> 00:05:34,479 Speaker 1: Labor Leader. 133 00:05:34,720 --> 00:05:37,880 Speaker 2: For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to 134 00:05:38,000 --> 00:05:41,039 Speaker 2: news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow 135 00:05:41,080 --> 00:05:42,840 Speaker 2: the podcast on iHeartRadio.