Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (27 November) . . Page.. 4865 ..

MS MacDONALD (continuing):

At the moment, Mr Deputy Speaker, that is not necessarily the case; it doesn't apply to large corporations. This bill will close that loophole and make sure that those corporations are held accountable for their actions, which is as it should be.

Mr Deputy Speaker, previously in the gallery I noticed there were some representatives from business organisations. I am not surprised they were here. The employers' response, in the main, has been that the sky will fall in. Well, Mr Deputy Speaker, in my six years working in the industrial movement, that was always the employers' response whenever we talked about progressing the rights of workers. "No, you can't give those employees a 50c a day increase; you can't have them claiming their laundry allowance; you can't have them doing this; you can't give them the overtime rates that they work hard for and deserve to have; you can't give them their meal break allowance because the company will go bust, the company will move out of town."Mr Deputy Speaker, it was always their response in my negotiations within the Industrial Relations Commission and of course outside the Industrial Relations Commission whenever we were talking about improving the conditions of workers.

I anticipated this response. It is no surprise to me that the employers gave this response. That is part of their strategy. I accept that; it is part of the way that you-pardon the phrase-play the game in industrial relations. One side puts in an ambit claim; the other side puts in an ambit claim, ups the ante and says, "No, no, you can't do that now"or "You must do that"because of whatever.

However, Mr Deputy Speaker, there is one thing that is really not appreciated within this campaign, and that is misinformation being spread by people on the employers' side. I have absolutely no problems with the employers saying that they are worried about it and that they think it is wrong but, when they start spreading fear amongst small businesses that small businesses are suddenly going to be prosecuted for things that are beyond small businesses control, then I think that is really quite despicable, Mr Deputy Speaker.

In regard to that, I would actually point out that the explanatory statement which was circulated on the introduction of this bill says, on page 4:

An employer will only commit the offence if the employer's conduct caused (substantially contributed to) the worker's death and the employer's conduct was either reckless or negligent.

Then again, Mr Deputy Speaker, on page 5:

A senior officer will only commit the offence if the senior officer's conduct caused (substantially contributed to) the worker's death and the senior officer's conduct was either reckless or negligent.

So if you had nothing to do with that person being killed, then you can't be prosecuted.

Mr Deputy Speaker, pretty much everybody in this place knows that I worked in the union movement for six years-six years that I am very proud of. I worked for white-collar unions. I have to say that the prospect of death for the members that I represented was very remote. In fact, in comparison to my fellow union officials in areas such as

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .