AG2004/2979, Transcript of Proceedings [2004] AIRCTrans 2479 (2 July 2004)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

ADMINISTRATOR APPOINTED

Level 7, ANZ House 13 Grenfell St ADELAIDE SA 5000
Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

O/N 1869

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O'CALLAGHAN

AG2004/2979

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
OF AGREEMENT

Application under section 170LK of the Act
by Quality Tyre Sales Pty Limited and Another
for certification of the Quality Tyre Sales Pty
Limited - SA Retread Plant, 2004 Certified
Agreement

ADELAIDE

10.05 AM, TUESDAY, 22 JUNE 2004

PN1

MS J. RANN: I appear on behalf of Quality Tyre Sales Pty Limited.

PN2

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You are representing employees, is that right?

PN3

MR S. ROWAN: Yes.

PN4

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr Rowan. Now, I can advise the parties that I've read both the agreement and the statutory declarations. The questions that I have for the parties this morning are going to fall into two distinct categories. There are some questions that I have about the process that was followed, and then there are some questions that I have about the proposed agreement itself. The questions that I have about the proposed agreement itself will not invite the parties to necessarily rewrite the document, although that is an option that you will have in this instance. The immediate question that arises about the process that was followed reflects the answer to the question in paragraph 5.4 of the statutory declaration. Mr Rowan, do you have a copy of that statutory declaration?

PN5

MR ROWAN: Yes, I do.

PN6

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You have a copy of the agreement?

PN7

MR ROWAN: Yes.

PN8

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very good. Can I ask you to look at 5.4 in that statutory declaration? That answer indicates that written notice was provided to employees on 11 May prior to voting on 21 May. Now, that is a period of, at best, 11 clear days. The difficulty that I have in that regard is that section 170LK(2) requires at least 14 days notice in writing prior to approval of the agreement by employees. So the first issue that I want to address goes to whether or not that answer to 5.4 is correct. If it is correct then the parties are going to need to go back and repeat the voting aspect of that particular agreement. I'm sorry, I do need to make you talk in this instance?

PN9

MS RANN: Senior Deputy President I think that, my apologies, is a typographical error on our behalf, because they were given the 14 plus 1 day in order to make their vote.

PN10

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So when was the written notice provided to employees?

PN11

MS RANN: It was actually provided a week prior, is my understanding.

PN12

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I see.

PN13

MS RANN: I can get a copy of the document.

PN14

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The next question that I have is whether or not you have a copy of that written notice?

PN15

MS RANN: I can certainly provide you with a copy of that. I don't have it with me, but I can fax that through to you today.

PN16

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. Those two issues then become fairly critical. The first goes to the time frame within which that written notice was provided to employees, and the second goes to the actual content of the notice of intention to make the agreement. I'm not going to be able to make any decision relative to whether or not the process set out in section 170LK was properly followed, until I can look at both of those two different pieces of information.

PN17

MS RANN: Yes, I can certainly get that through to you today.

PN18

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Now, let us assume for a moment that a number of things happen. If I'm satisfied in terms of the questions that I have about the agreement, such that the agreement itself meets the requirements of the Act necessary for certification, and if the information that you provide to me confirms that the requisite 14 days was provided and the notice was in a form which is consistent with the requirements of section 170LK of the Act, then we might be able to proceed from that point.

PN19

If there is a problem with either of those issues, then it might be best that I ask the parties to come back in here and we have a look at what we might be able to do to salvage something from the exercise, rather than necessarily asking you to repeat the process in its entirety with a degree of uncertainty about what it is that you might have to do. Yes, thank you, Ms Rann. Now, Mr Rowan, you are here as the employee representative, is that right?

PN20

MR ROWAN: Yes.

PN21

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: How did you come to be chosen as the employee representative - elected as such?

PN22

MR ROWAN: I chose my myself.

PN23

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So was your choice of yourself endorsed by the other employees?

PN24

MR ROWAN: No.

PN25

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So is it correct then for me to understand that the agreement was negotiated with all of the employees, and you are simply here today as an employee who is covered by the agreement?

PN26

MR ROWAN: Yes.

PN27

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You don't happen to have a copy of that notice of intention with you, Mr Rowan?

PN28

MR ROWAN: No, I don't.

PN29

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You don't, very well. Now, Ms Rann, there is another issue relative to that notice of intention. Before providing that notice to me, I'm wondering whether I could get you to run it past Mr Rowan, so that he can agree that that was the notice that he received - - -

PN30

MS RANN: Yes, I can certainly do that.

PN31

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: - - - and that he received it on the date upon which you indicate that it was forwarded.

PN32

MS RANN: Certainly.

PN33

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Am I to understand that the proposed agreement was circulated to employees with that notice of intention?

PN34

MS RANN: Yes, Senior Deputy President.

PN35

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I'm sorry, despite your cold, you will need to answer - - -

PN36

MS RANN: Yes, that is fine.

PN37

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: - - - because the transcript recorder won't be able to pick up a nod. What I'm going to do now is ask a number of questions about the agreement. I will preface those questions by saying normally those questions do not invite any of the parties to rewrite the document that was endorsed by employees. In your case, if the requisite 14 days' notice was not provided to employees, or the notice did not meet the requirements of the Act, then the parties have got a choice as to whether or not they choose to rephrase the document in any way.

PN38

Now, can I take you first of all to clause 4. This is the clause headed: Coverage of agreement, on page 3. Now, I must say I'm a little confused as to how that clause operates. It purports that the agreement will operate to the exclusion of the Boral Team Charter, but it also excludes, as I understand it, the Bridgestone Retread Plant Certified Agreement of 2000, which is an agreement that would by now have reached its nominal expiry date. I'm wondering whether you might help me out in this regard?

PN39

MS RANN: Senior Deputy President, the two agreements in question, you may or may not be aware in the year 2000 we acquired several companies, one of which was Boral. The Boral Team Charter was in place for employees that were acquired as part of that overall acquisition. We haven't to date had that particular EBA terminated. We haven't sought for termination of that. The same applies with the Bridgestone Australia Limited (SA) Retread Plant on Production Road was a previous facility we had, and those employees were made redundant prior to the expiry of that particular agreement. Again, we haven't sought to have that particular agreement terminated at this date, however, we are also looking at relocating our current facility back to that address, so that is why we seek to exclude those.

PN40

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. The provisions of clause 9 relate to the dispute resolution process. Reference is made in that clause, in particular in 9.7, to the NUW union official. Now, there are a number of references to the union in various parts of the agreement, starting if I recall it correctly, at clause 6. Should I take it, first of all, that where there is a reference to the union, that reference is to the NUW?

PN41

MS RANN: Yes, that is correct.

PN42

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: In that regard, should I understand that the employer position consistent with the statutory declarations is that no union, let alone the NUW, sought to be involved in the negotiation process associated with this agreement?

PN43

MS RANN: The union did, in fact, seek to be part of the process, however, the employees stated they did not want them involved. However, the employees have asked that we roll-over specific clauses which applied in the previous agreement where the union was actually a party to the agreement. They want to have the flexibility to involve the union at any point in time should that be their preference. We no longer have any members of the union, however, we would like to afford the employees the opportunity the right of seeking any assistance from the union should they so require it.

PN44

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I see. How was it that the employees advised the employer that they didn't seek to have the union involved?

PN45

MS RANN: At each of the meetings we convened with the employees we offered them right of representation, and on each occasion they declined that. However, we recommended to them that they maintain contact with their union, so that if they change their mind at any point in time they were able to do so. So at one point in time the union actually made contact with the employees saying: we understand that the current agreement is due to expire, and we would like to talk to you about that. The union came on site, met with the employees, and the employees then elected to go ahead without the union.

PN46

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: If I look at clause 9.7 and 9.8, should I understand that if an employee then is a member of the NUW, then they can ask the NUW to represent them, but if an employee happens to be a member of say, a different union, or not a member of a union at all, can they have access to a representative of their choice in order to assist with the resolution of a grievance?

PN47

MS RANN: They certainly can have access to the NUW, or any other union organisation as they see fit. I suppose we've included the NUW because traditionally that is the only union that has ever come on-site or requested to come on-site.

PN48

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Now, clause 9.8 references the use of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. Should I understand that the employer would then understand or expect that the Commission would first of all try to resolve any such dispute by way of conciliation, with arbitration as a last resort?

PN49

MS RANN: Absolutely.

PN50

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Mr Rowan, is that your understanding of the clause?

PN51

MR ROWAN: Yes.

PN52

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Clause 10 references in the second paragraph, at point C, work instructions. Are those instructions relative to safety and work standards recent instructions, are they readily available to employees, and might they be changed during the life of the agreement?

PN53

MS RANN: As part and parcel of our overall safety program, we are currently accredited for standard AS4801, and as such we are required to display all the appropriate SOPs, etcetera, on machinery that is operated by our personnel, and they are dynamic documents whenever machinery is changed, etcetera, and employees are trained and kept up to date at all times.

PN54

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Clause 13, page 7, am I correct in understanding that whilst this clause should be read as obligating the union not to pursue any extra claims, given that the union is not a party to the clause, the parties intend that the no extra claims provision will be binding on both the employer and the employees. Is that a correct understanding?

PN55

MS RANN: Yes, that is a correct understanding.

PN56

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Now, clause 16 relates to shift work penalties. Should I understand that the 15 per cent is to be applied to the level 3 rate on a fixed basis. That is the rate applicable on certification being the 20 April rate, 20 April 2004 rate, or is that 15 per cent paid on whatever rate is applicable to the level 3 employee?

PN57

MS RANN: It is the latter. We had a bit of a problem with the previous agreement in that there was an error made in the pay office whereby the rate was not picked up as at the level 3 EBA rate as opposed to the award rate. So I suppose that last little bit in brackets refers back to that. It is a bit ambiguous, my apologies. It refers back to that previous instance that hereinafter whatever the level 3 rate is prevailing at the time is the level 3 rate that would be applied.

PN58

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I see. So that when the 4 per cent applicable from 20 April 2005 takes effect, the 15 per cent will be calculated on that higher rate?

PN59

MS RANN: That is correct, yes.

PN60

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Should I understand in relation to clause 17 that the employer is referring in that instance to a written request from the NUW?

PN61

MS RANN: That is correct, yes.

PN62

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And equally in terms of the deduction of union fees and the right of entry provisions and time of wages records, those provisions apply to the NUW but do not represent any obligation on the NUW? You see, if they represent an obligation on the NUW, the issue that I'm wrestling with is that the NUW were not party to the agreement.

PN63

MS RANN: There is no obligation on the union. This is a request by the employees that we leave this information in there so that should any of them at any point in time elect to rejoin the union, then they believe that they are covered by having their fees deducted, having right of entry for the union and also the time and wages records being able to ensure that all that information is valid, etcetera, for the union should they so require it at any time.

PN64

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Clause 18 deals with rostered days off. If I look at the first paragraph in that clause, it talks of a system of working. Is that system a documented system?

PN65

MS RANN: To be honest, I'm not overly certain on that particular point. I don't believe that it is. It is just a system to say that they have a rostered day off. Are you referring to whether or not their banking or their RDOs?

PN66

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, I'm just trying to establish what it is the parties have agreed to.

PN67

MS RANN: They have actually agreed to the fact that they can have one day off each 4 week period. So 12 rostered days off in a year.

PN68

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I see, and if I look at the last paragraph in that clause 18, that paragraph talks of a trial implementation. So is that a trial implementation to operate for a 6 month period from certification of this agreement?

PN69

MS RANN: That is correct.

PN70

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Now, that particular paragraph seems to envisage the removal of the RDO system and presumably the adoption of an alternative way of implementing a 38 hour week. Is that the case?

PN71

MS RANN: It talks about giving us an opportunity to review whether or not it is viable for the business and if it was not to be viable, we would then revert back to a normal 38 hour week. However, it is unlikely that we would remove it because we believe it would be something that would be very popular for the employees.

PN72

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I see. Now, I understand that in the unlikelihood of it being removed, if it were to be removed then am I safe in understanding that in order to implement the 38 hour week, there would then either be a shorter working day or a shorter working week.

PN73

MS RANN: The way in which it will operate would be that they would work the 40 hour week and bank those hours to take them off for that 1 day.

PN74

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: This is for the trial?

PN75

MS RANN: Yes, and the ongoing - should that be successful for the ongoing RDO system to apply, it would continue in that way. If it was to not apply, we would go back to the 5 day week at the 7.6 hours to give the 38 hour week.

PN76

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Now, let us work on the presumption at this stage that, for reasons unknown to the parties at the moment, the rostered day off system did not work. Is it the employers understanding that clause 18 then allows for implementation or re-implementation of the shorter working day without the need to further change this agreement or does the employer understand that if the rostered day system is to be changed then that change is, in effect, a proposed change to clause 18 of the agreement which would need to be processed as a change to this agreement in accordance with the requirements of the Act? If you don't understand my question, please seek clarification from me.

PN77

MS RANN: I believe it would be the option two, we would then have to seek to change the actual agreement but all of this would be done in consultation with the employees to ensure that it was all done and effected smoothly as well.

PN78

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Now, the provisions of clause 20(a) relating to redundancy refer in paragraph (e) to other reasons falling within the generally accepted definition of redundancy or retrenchment. What would you say to me about what I should take as the generally accepted definition of redundancy and/or retrenchment? Is it the definition contained in the parent award or is it some other concept that the parties are referring to?

PN79

MS RANN: As this agreement would be underpinned by the Rubber, Plastic and Cable Making Industry General Award, that is certainly where we would seek clarification from that document.

PN80

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. If I can then take you to page 12, just the page after the signature page. This is another grievance and dispute settling procedure. It is fundamentally, as I understand it, consistent with that set out in clause 9 but it is not referenced anywhere in the agreement. Should I understand this is included simply because it has attached to it that notification of grievance form?

PN81

MS RANN: What we generally do is those two pages are photocopied together, duplexed together, so that they are given to the employees so that they understand exactly what the procedure is because most of our employees, whilst there is a copy of the agreement displayed on the noticeboard, most of them would not necessarily have a copy of the grievance procedure should they require it. So it is to ensure that they are given a copy of what the process is as well as the form to complete so that from our perspective it is making sure they are aware of what their rights and responsibilities are in this regard.

PN82

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And appendix 1 on page 14. How should I use this set of classification descriptors to link back to the award?

PN83

MS RANN: Are you referring to as far as us signing the actual levels of pay to go with that?

PN84

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, that is a secondary step. The first step before I can link rates of pay involves the comparison of the skill descriptors or the classification levels with corresponding levels in an award. I just can't look at rates of pay unless there is some link between the jobs that the people are doing.

PN85

MS RANN: This is our breakdown of the positions and I can certainly reference them back to award levels if you would like me to do that. Do you want me to do that now?

PN86

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, it is your call. It is something that - given that you are going to be providing me with additional information, you might choose to include this with the additional information. Now, the last questions I have relate to the last page of the agreement. Now, this is the wages schedule. It made it absolutely clear in very bold print that the parties don't propose - or the employer does not propose this page for certification. Was this page given to the employees with the agreement on which they voted?

PN87

MS RANN: Yes, it was, and if I may just make comment as well that you may note that the safety net has not yet been put on to this particular page because when we did this, the wages structure, the finalisation of the wage case had not yet occurred. So we will obviously have to modify that to include the safety net, the $19.

PN88

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That is where we are a little bemused in part. I would understand that the column headed, "20 April 2003" reflects the wage rates that were applicable under the award at that time.

PN89

MS RANN: Those rates are the rates that were payable.

PN90

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Those rates were changed by the Commission to reflect the May 2004 safety net increase with effect from 3 June.

PN91

MS RANN: We don't actually apply it until such time as we get a formal notification through to us from AIG or whomever so they will then get any appropriate back pay that applies, should it apply.

PN92

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: This is where I'm endeavouring to clarify the regard that I should have to this wages schedule. You see, the wages provisions of the agreement which appear at clause 14 simply talk about a wage increase. They don't establish a basis upon which that wage increase should apply. Looking at the wages schedule, it looked to me as if the basis for the wage increase was in fact the rates applicable as of 20 April 2003. A 4 per cent increase was added to that with effect from 20 April 2004 on the basis that that 4 per cent payment would be paid or become payable from the date of certification of the agreement, that would be backdated to 20 April 2004.

PN93

MS RANN: Yes, that is correct.

PN94

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Then there is a further 4 per cent applicable from 20 April 2005 and again in April 2006. Now, I'm unclear on the basis of what you have just told me as to whether the employers intention is to then apply the May 2004 safety net adjustment to these figures prior to adding in the 4 per cent.

PN95

MS RANN: That is certainly our intention, is that - I'm sorry, let me qualify that. The amount, for example the dollar value as at 20 April which they have - - -

PN96

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: 20 April, which year, it becomes so significant.

PN97

MS RANN: We will go back and review that figure to make sure that we are paying in excess of the award rate once that $19 is included and then any back pay on top of that would apply from the date of the safety net decision.

PN98

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I see.

PN99

MS RANN: My understanding is there will only be one rate that is affected by that and that is the level 1 rate which does not have any employees who are actually on that level 1 rate.

PN100

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So the level 1 rate at the present time, that is giving effect to the May 2004 safety net adjustment, is from the first pay period commencing on or after 3 June 2004, $467.40. If I'm understanding you correctly you then propose to take the $467.40 and apply 4 per cent to that. Is that the case?

PN101

MS RANN: The rate as at 20 April for the level 1 is $466.34 - - -

PN102

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Under the agreement.

PN103

MS RANN: - - - under the agreement. If when we get to the June date that figure is below what the base level is seen to be we will increase it again at that date.

PN104

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Up to the award figure.

PN105

MS RANN: Up to the award, yes. But as I mentioned we do not have any employees who are actually level 1 but we like to have that provision there should the case arise.

PN106

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: There's a second question of a very different nature. If I understand this correctly you are proposing that I certify the agreement without this particular page being published.

PN107

MS RANN: Yes, we ask the Commission not to publish this page on the internet purely because of competitors. We would like to maintain some degree of confidentiality on the rate that we pay our people if possible.

PN108

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. You see the dilemma that I have in relation to that request - and I understand the logic behind it - is twofold. First of all, if I was to certify this agreement I would need to do so on the basis of an undertaking from you relative to level 1, such that if the award rate is higher, as indeed it is, then the 20 April 2004 agreement rate - the employer would pay the higher rate if there were any level 1 employees. That means that I will be having to specify actual rates in the undertaking upon which I would be relying for certification of the agreement.

PN109

The second dilemma that I have is that this wages schedule forms part of the agreement. The sitting Commission member isn't the person who, you would be relieved to know, publishes the document on the Commission's website. If that were to be the case I can assure you there would be a very long delay. The Act requires that the Commission provide the agreement to the Registrar, and the Registrar is the person who actually publishes the document.

PN110

If you bear with me for a moment I will recite that particular section to you, all being well. All is not being well, Ms Rann. It is an obscure section and I'm not able to find it immediately but my understanding is a very clear one in that the obligation is on the Commission member to provide the certificate to the Registrar. I think it probably best that I leave it that, depending on the decision that I adopt in this matter, I may or may not be able to accede to your request. I don't know whether I can take it any further, except to say that in the information that you have provided to me I will invite you now to indicate whether or not you want to have the opportunity to further address me on that particular issue. If the parties do want to have that opportunity I shall give them that opportunity in the event that I am going to proceed to certify the agreement.

PN111

MS RANN: Senior Deputy President, it is only a request. If at the end of the day the rates appear on the website, so be it. I understand that you have your restrictions as well.

PN112

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, all right. Thank you. Now, Mr Rowan, I've put Ms Rann's throat to some further pain. Do you agree with all of the responses that she has given me?

PN113

MR ROWAN: Yes, I do.

PN114

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: If I can just clarify again, it is your very clear understanding that the agreement was negotiated with all of the employees rather than there being a single spokesperson, is that the case?

PN115

MR ROWAN: That is right.

PN116

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Rowan, I've asked Ms Rann to provide me with certain information and I've asked her to show you that information before she sends it to me, in order to try to establish your agreement with the information. There is absolutely no obligation for you to agree with the information that she gives me. If you do not agree with it then you need to note that because we will sort out any differences if you folks need to come back here.

PN117

Ms Rann, I've asked you for a number of items of information. My suggestion is you go home to bed rather than providing them to me today, but I would expect them within the next week. Is that going to be possible?

PN118

MS RANN: I will try and get them to you today.

PN119

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. If you provide them to me within the next week, as I said that would be quite adequate, and as I have indicated to the parties if I'm able to certify the agreement on the basis of that information then I will do so, with effect from the date upon which I receive that material. If I'm not able to do so then I will re-list the matter, but I won't relist the matter for another week, on the basis that I don't want to catch whatever it is you have got. Is there anything further, Ms Rann?

PN120

MS RANN: May I just clarify my understanding that I will provide you with a copy of the memo that I sent out to the employees - - -

PN121

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That is the notice of intention.

PN122

MS RANN: Notice of intention, yes; a copy of something to align the levels together between what we have on our document as in what is in the award.

PN123

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN124

MS RANN: I think that was it.

PN125

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Not quite.

PN126

MS RANN: Not quite; one more?

PN127

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I will require advice that confirms to me the date upon which employees received that notice of intention and the date upon which they received a copy of the agreement in its final form.

PN128

MS RANN: Thank you.

PN129

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: As I indicated, if that material could be directed through Mr Rowan first of all to ascertain his agreement with it.

PN130

MS RANN: Yes, I will certainly do that.

PN131

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right, thank you. I will adjourn the matter on that basis.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.50am]