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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2403 ..

that some breach of the act has been made, in two days they have got to report the finding to the occupier, but they also must inform WorkCover. I do not know how many authorised representatives there will be, but if, as the government maintains, this work needs to be done, there will be a mammoth increase in the work referred to WorkCover.

We all know WorkCover is working to its limits at the moment, but from a government that claims to be interested in workers’ rights and protecting the workplace there has been no massive infusion of funds for an increase in the number of WorkCover inspectors, for an increase in their level of training or for an increase in their resources or whatever it is they have needed to do their job in the last 2½ years.

First and foremost, perhaps the minister can tell us how WorkCover will cope with any level of increase from what might come out of this bill when she has not increased WorkCover’s resources. Second, let’s look at this government’s lack of attention to occupational health and safety and the role and nature of WorkCover after the last 2½ half years. The minister’s excuse will probably be, “I’ve just taken over the portfolio, and I’m getting used to it.” We know that the minister before, Mr Corbell, was not interested in anything except for planning.

We have infringement notices that, three years after they were put in place by Mr Berry, still do not work. We have got training that is to be undertaken for WorkCover inspectors to raise their levels of skill. If there is a recognised need, where are the additional resources to make that occur? There has been the loss of the educational unit that used to operate inside WorkCover. “It’s been devolved back to the inspectors, and everybody’s an educator now.” But unless you have a specialist education unit that can target what it is you want to achieve, we know that will not happen.

The gamekeeper cannot be the poacher; the poacher cannot be the gamekeeper. You cannot do both sides of the fence, and education and inspection enforcement are different sides of the equation. The problem with making sure that the inspectors are the educators is: what role are they appearing in when they get to a premises? With that level of confusion, you do not get what you want, which is a solid, focused, outcomes-driven education program that raises the level of occupational health and safety. That is what we used to do.

We took the data from the database, identified the industries that were causing the most grief, looked at the sorts of injuries that were occurring and came up with concrete strategies for encouragement and assistance to help employers make the workplace more safe. But that unit has gone—disappeared, gone. “We aren’t doing education that way any more; we’re doing it our way.”

I would suggest that, if we have a problem that needs such heavy fines as are outlined in this legislation, the problem stems from the fact that the government got rid of the education unit. They have not been reminding people of what they should be doing—helping them break that cycle if such a cycle exists. But, again, we have not got the data.

No case has been made for this level of activity. If there is a problem, would somebody please define it? I doubt we will get from the minister what the level of the problem is. We need this legislation, but we do not know why we need it. Perhaps we will get some

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