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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2405 ..

happen, but we will vote against this legislation because this is not the way to do it. This is not the way to engender trust on both sides of the equation; this is not the way to get people to work together to make it better for everyone—employee and employer—in the workplace; this is not the way to raise the profile of and equip WorkCover with the tools they need to do the job they are entrusted with, under the statutes that exist and might exist into the future.

That is what you would have been doing over the last two years if you were truly committed to occupational health and safety: instead of ignoring WorkCover, you would have made sure that they had the resources and extra inspectors if required; you would have put in resources to help the current inspectors and new inspectors raise their level of training; and you would have been expanding the education unit, not destroying it.

These are not the hallmarks of a government supposedly committed to occupational health and safety. It is with a great deal of scepticism that the business community has looked at this legislation, and it is with a great deal of scepticism that the opposition looks at it. This brings me back to 57B (1) (b), which says:

(b) the premises are a workplace where members of the organisation (or people who are eligible to be members of the organisation) work.

The purpose of this legislation is simply to trawl for members for the union movement in the ACT.

MRS BURKE (11.07): I obviously agree with the comments my colleagues have made so far. It is quite clear that this bill is just another attempt by this government to flog the business community and wield the big stick. Let’s face it: no sensible and reasonable person would for one moment say that anyone found to be negligent in their duty of care should not be penalised. It is just a pity that this government now seems to be picking and choosing when this rule will apply.

I wonder if the minister is telling us that we have a crisis in regard to injuries in the workplace. Mr Smyth asked, “Where are the figures to bear out the desperate, burning need for this legislation. Where are the details? What has brought this on?” Is this issue really and truly about safety? I think not, Mr Speaker. It is more about control and power, to be quite frank. It is a draconian bill, which takes us backwards and does nothing to foster good relationships between business, employees, unions, WorkCover and the government. If this is not a case of jobs for the boys, I do not know what is.

Reading from the OH&S bill tabling statement by Ms Gallagher, I find some of the language unbelievable: “an enhanced compliance and enforcement framework”, “measures in the bill reflect contemporary regulatory requirements in the area of work safety”, “The bill is the culmination of the first phase of a comprehensive review of work safety legislation.” “The legislation…will…encourage everyone with workplace safety responsibilities to comply with their obligations.” How can you possibly stand over employees every minute of the day?

That is why businesses are fearful. I have talked to many, and I was in business myself many years before coming into this place and understand fully the ability to comply with keeping people safe in the workplace. You lot over there have no idea. None of you has

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