Page 1998 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 24 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
case, who is going to be willing to be one? Because this is such an important and integral part of the legislation and it is important that a voluntary position like that ought not have any penalties attached to it, it would take away from many of the goals of the legislation. What we have here is a very good piece of legislation that will require a few minor changes in accordance with the recommendations of that first select committee, of which I was a part and on which I learnt so much.
MR WOOD (8.48): Mr Speaker, in tune with the fairly reasoned debate we have had tonight, I want to add my call for logic on one matter in particular. I was very pleased to hear Mr Moore's comments on a number of these issues. I recall the debate in the committee concerning the size of the designated work groups. What happened over a long period was that somewhere down the track there was a proposal that a designated work group not have any specified number of workers to be established. Then there were counterproposals - that you need 30 or so - and, by a process of bargaining, the legislation proposed a minimum of 11.
Then on a matter, I suppose, of principle or dealing or of having to feel that a group was responding to people outside, there was an amendment to change that to 12. I think everybody would agree - even those who proposed it - that changing the minimum number from 11 to 12 really had no logic to it and did not do anything except marginally weaken the legislation. As this matter is further debated, I would hope that the logic of it would impose itself upon members' minds and they would hold to the terms of the Bill.
If you look at the process you will see that that number was fairly arbitrarily arrived at and there was bargaining over a period, and realise that when it came to the committee in the first place it had already been a matter for consensus between employers and the Government. Already the number had been changed for that reason. Then to change it further, by one, seemed rather an odd point. It is on that matter only that I rise tonight. I hope that there will be no amendment to the Bill when this is voted on later.
MR DUBY (8.50): Mr Speaker, I rise tonight to talk about the Occupational Health and Safety Bill.
Mr Moore: Oh, what a good idea!
MR DUBY: Yes, absolutely. That surprised everyone, did it not? But, more to the point, my comments are directed at the value to this Assembly of having a committee system at all. We have heard from the Government and the opposition that there are numerous amendments coming through. A number of those amendments, I believe, are a direct result of the recommendation of the Select Committee on the Occupational Health and Safety Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .