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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Thursday, 4 March 2004) . . Page.. 796 ..

The last amendment by the opposition is a proposed new clause in chapter 10, part 10.2—“Chief executive to promote Act”. Proposed new clause 205A states:

The functions of the chief executive under this Act include—

(a) developing and providing educational and awareness programs to promote understanding, and acceptance of, and compliance with, this Act; and

(b) promoting understanding and acceptance of, and compliance with, this Act.

As per the examples given in the proposed amendment for paragraph (a), under this provision we would expect the chief executive to authorise ACT WorkCover to initiate and undertake education programs about safety duties to Canberra businesses, which may include briefing sessions—which I know were undertaken in a limited way across Canberra for the industrial manslaughter legislation—comprehensive direct mail campaigns, ensuring all registered Canberra businesses are reached, and print media and radio programs.

Training sessions about the safe manufacture, packaging, handling, transport and storage of dangerous substances would be expected to be undertaken by ACT WorkCover, possibly in conjunction with major business organisations in Canberra, to ensure practical training is given to assist Canberra businesses, in compliance with the act. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of the stakeholders who gave the opposition feedback on this legislation. I hope that members find these amendments as necessary as the opposition does. Again, I implore the government to accept these amendments and implore my colleagues on the cross bench to support this amendment as well.

MS TUCKER (5.57): I move an amendment to this amendment circulated in my name [see schedule 4 at page 817].

Basically my amendment to Mr Pratt’s amendment would take out the requirement for the chief executive to provide training programs, as that would run across the duties of the employer, which is to train employees in the safe handling of dangerous substances, and lies outside the bounds of the duties and expertise of WorkCover. I have considered including in the amendment a clause that explicitly stated that nothing in the new clause would lessen the responsibilities that an employer has for the safe management of dangerous substances. I was advised very clearly, however, that other provisions in this bill make that emphatically clear and that such a disclaimer at this stage is of no benefit.

MS DUNDAS (5.58): The Democrats will be supporting Ms Tucker’s amendment to Mr Pratt’s amendment. As Ms Tucker has stated, I think it is very important that we take out examples in relation to training. Training should not be the sole responsibility of the chief executive. It is up to the organisations themselves to make sure that training takes place. The chief executive can develop those training packages. We are crossing some grey areas here. Whilst making sure that the chief executive has the function to promote the act, let us not confuse that in relation to the rest of the legislation.

MR PRATT (5.59): We will not support the Greens’ amendment. I must take issue with a point made. Ms Tucker is right: it is certainly the responsibility of peak organisations

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