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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Thursday, 4 March 2004) . . Page.. 797 ..

to carry out briefing and training programs. However, we believe that, if the government and ACT WorkCover are going to introduce and implement this program, the chief executive has a responsibility to ensure that training is carried out and that sufficient briefings are undertaken as soon as possible after the act takes effect. We stress that this is very important, particularly with complex acts such as this.

This is not a bad act in some respects. It takes a responsible direction in general terms, but it is complicated. If organisations are to implement this quite complex act properly, it is important that they be properly trained and properly briefed; therefore, it is imperative that ACT WorkCover exercises a leadership role not only in assisting the government in the introduction of this act but also in stepping forward and taking on a training role. We stress the need for that. We implore our colleagues to accept our amendment and not to accept the counter amendment put forward by the Greens.

Ms Tucker’s amendment to Mr Pratt’s amendment negatived.

MR SPEAKER: The question now is that Mr Pratt’s amendment be agreed to.

MS GALLAGHER (Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services, Minister for Women and Minister for Industrial Relations) (6.01): The government will be opposing this amendment. A fundamental responsibility of government for administering legislation is to promote understanding and acceptance of, and compliance with, the legislation. It is unusual, however, for this to be specified in legislation. An example of where it has been specified is in section 25B(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which spells out the functions of the Occupational Health and Safety Commissioner. This indeed appears to be the model for subclause (b) in Mr Pratt’s proposed amendment. An important difference, however, between the OH&S Act provision and the proposed amendment is that it is necessary to explicitly provide for the functions of a statutory office holder.

Mr Pratt’s amendment indicates that he is concerned that the government provide information and education to the community on this legislation. I agree that this must be done. In relation to the dangerous substances legislation, it will be particularly important to carry out a comprehensive information campaign as part of the implementation of the legislation. The government is committed to this and ACT WorkCover will be essentially involved over the coming months in rolling this out. The government will also continue to provide information and guidance to the community and interested parties as part of its general responsibilities for ongoing administration of this very important regulatory scheme.

I note that others also share responsibility for information and guidance in relation to the requirements of the legislation. Duty holders, such as employers, manufacturers, suppliers and others, must also discharge obligations for information guidance to not only their workplace but also consumers of their products and, where appropriate, these duty holders must also provide education and training.

Inserting this proposed amendment would have consequences that I doubt Mr Pratt intends. I am particularly concerned with the implications of proposed subclause 205A(a). Most importantly, the use of words like “training program” could give rise to an extended interpretation to the effect that the government has a direct responsibility for

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