<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unsworth report is a dead duck</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ozleft.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/unsworthreport2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ozleft.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/unsworthreport2/</link>
	<description>An independent voice on the left</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 03:41:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mattie</title>
		<link>http://ozleft.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/unsworthreport2/#comment-308</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mattie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:26:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ozleft.wordpress.com/?p=267#comment-308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My, yet another Labor government committee with a sole woman appointee. And to add insult to injury, in this case it’s the ubiquitous Robyn Kruk, Iemma’s ever-reliable top-notch bureaucratic enforcer.

The Unsworth committee report agrees “that it is reasonable to conclude [the privatisation proposal is consistent with ALP policy] subject to the Government addressing and implementing the recommendations contained” in the report! 

Hmm. That is not quite outright endorsement. Hospital pass indeed.

As for the recommendations. Well, you gotta laugh. Vague and uncertain as many of them already are, especially in relation to workers’ jobs and conditions, trust me, they ain’t ever gonna be implemented, despite the weasel words and government-speak of “commitment” to this job protection and “commitment” to that regional employment and “commitment” to low electricity costs for the most vulnerable. Riiiight!

As for the breathtakingly explicit direct sex-based discrimination inherent in the differential employment protection and bonuses offered mainly male generator workers as compared to the mainly female retail workers in the electricity industry, well, what else would one expect first up from the NSW ALP. Kudos to the male union reps on the Unsworth committee for repudiating this one in their minority report.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My, yet another Labor government committee with a sole woman appointee. And to add insult to injury, in this case it’s the ubiquitous Robyn Kruk, Iemma’s ever-reliable top-notch bureaucratic enforcer.</p>
<p>The Unsworth committee report agrees “that it is reasonable to conclude [the privatisation proposal is consistent with ALP policy] subject to the Government addressing and implementing the recommendations contained” in the report! </p>
<p>Hmm. That is not quite outright endorsement. Hospital pass indeed.</p>
<p>As for the recommendations. Well, you gotta laugh. Vague and uncertain as many of them already are, especially in relation to workers’ jobs and conditions, trust me, they ain’t ever gonna be implemented, despite the weasel words and government-speak of “commitment” to this job protection and “commitment” to that regional employment and “commitment” to low electricity costs for the most vulnerable. Riiiight!</p>
<p>As for the breathtakingly explicit direct sex-based discrimination inherent in the differential employment protection and bonuses offered mainly male generator workers as compared to the mainly female retail workers in the electricity industry, well, what else would one expect first up from the NSW ALP. Kudos to the male union reps on the Unsworth committee for repudiating this one in their minority report.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
