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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2426 ..

MS GALLAGHER (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children, Youth and Family Support, Minister for Women and Minister for Industrial Relations) (12.23): I move amendment No 9 circulated in my name [see schedule 3 at page 2446].

Amendment No 9, like amendment 8, merely substitutes for the words “employee organisation” “registered organisation”.

Amendment agreed to.

MS GALLAGHER (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children, Youth and Family Support, Minister for Women and Minister for Industrial Relations) (12.23): I move amendment No. 10 circulated in my name [see schedule 3 at page 2446].

This amendment inserts the words “and chief executive” after the word “occupier”. The effect of the amendment is to require an authorised representative to provide a copy of a written report following exercise of the right of entry to the chief executive. This function will be delegated to the OH&S commissioner. Currently the representative is only required to give the report to the occupier. This amendment is important, as authorised representatives do not have any enforcement powers under the act and it is left to a WorkCover inspector to decide whether any coercive enforcement is necessary. As such, it is appropriate that the government is made aware of any possible contraventions discovered by a person exercising right of entry under the act.

MR PRATT (12.24): I rise to talk against the clause, and indeed I will be moving to oppose the clause in its entirety. I do not really care what has been done to it in the last 15 minutes. As I stated in my previous speech when we were debating the bill, this amendment to oppose a clause regarding right of entry provisions for employee organisations stems from the concerns raised by several major Canberra business organisations. Under these provisions the conditions of entry as stated in the bill are very general and can be used by various organisations as a way inside non-affiliated organisations if they suspect that a contravention of the act is likely to happen.

There is no doubt that there are responsible unions which have negotiated consultative and civilised arrangements with employers. Good luck to them! But there is plenty of evidence around of some rogue elements that will seek to exploit such opportunities, by using the pretext of suspecting that a contravention of an act is likely to happen, to enter the premises of a business. This is not at all acceptable to the Liberal opposition. The only people who should be allowed right of entry into the workplace, under suspicion of proof or contravention of the act, are ACT WorkCover inspectors. These inspectors are not affiliated with any organisation and they represent the government in preserving the provisions of the act. Therefore, we oppose the clause.

I point out that I do not see anybody proposing that employer groups exercise right of entry to union movement meetings. We talked about registered members of unions having a right of access, but the point is that they are not suitably qualified. People are talking about a three-day course to get people up to speed and then have them registered with ACT WorkCover, but anything short of an ACT WorkCover inspector with a certificate 4 qualification is simply not acceptable. We are talking about making sure that

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