Page 1727 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 17 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
WORKERS COMPENSATION
Ministerial Statement and Papers
MR WHALAN (Minister for Industry, Employment and Education), by leave: Mr Speaker, the question of prevention and management of work related injuries in the ACT is a matter of importance for this Government, as such injuries involve substantial costs, both in the human terms of the injured workers and in the resulting costs to ACT industry. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has estimated that the cost to ACT industry of workers compensation in 1987-88 was of the order of $529 per employee. When the indirect costs, including lost productivity, are added it can be seen that the costs to the ACT economy of occupational injuries are very high.
The Government's commitment to reducing these costs, both in money terms and in the human costs involved, is reflected in the fact that the first piece of legislation introduced into this Assembly was the Occupational Health and Safety Bill, aimed at creating a safer working environment in the ACT.
The Government believes, however, that this was just the first step. The Government is aware of widespread criticism of the current workers compensation scheme, from both industry groups and the trade union movement. It is not indisputable that, for whatever reasons, the ACT workers compensation scheme is the most expensive in Australia for employers. To underline this point, I now table a comparison of some selected ACT recommended premiums, compared with New South Wales premiums for the same industries.
In tabling the document, Mr Speaker, I draw attention to some of the rates, to demonstrate the sorts of comparisons. In the case of abattoirs, the New South Wales rate is 8.4 per cent; in the ACT it is 21.21 per cent. In relation to workers involved in the manufacture of asbestos sheet, it is 5.8 per cent compared with 29.7 per cent. In bakeries, the rate in New South Wales is 4 per cent compared with 16.45 per cent in the ACT. In the building industry, in New South Wales it is 8.4 per cent compared with 40 per cent in the ACT. In carrying and carting, it is 5.8 per cent in New South Wales; in the ACT, 19.92 per cent. In laundries, it is 4 per cent in New South Wales; 17.08 per cent in the ACT. In painting, it is 8.4 per cent in New South Wales; 22.75 in the ACT. In the poultry industry, the insurance rate is 8.4 per cent in New South Wales; 35.13 per cent in the ACT. So the comparisons go on. I seek leave to table that document and have it incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
Document incorporated at appendix 1.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .