Page 321 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 7 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In summary, the WorkChoices legislation does not advance the cause of work safety. It is a backward step. The recent legislative adventures of the federal government in workplace relations have failed to deliver the simplicity or the fairness that were promised. Perhaps we could hold out some hope that this experience will discourage the commonwealth from future forays into areas of occupational health and safety and workers compensation, because protecting the health and safety of workers requires a clear and enforceable legislative framework. It should not be put at risk with further legislative venturism from the commonwealth.
Before I conclude, Mr Stefaniak did raise some issues in relation to WorkCover. Members may be aware that yesterday I tabled a quarterly report from the commissioner. I am pleased to advise that, in terms of inspections, investigations and compliance activity during the final quarter of last year, there were 897 workplace visits and compliance actions undertaken by staff in the workplace safety and workers compensation inspectorates. Of those, 455 were workplace visits by staff in the workplace safety inspectorate, with 178 in construction, 82 in the retail sector, 31 in manufacturing, 30 in property and business services, 27 in accommodation, cafes and restaurants and the balance across other industry sectors. Four hundred and forty-two were compliance checks or workplace visits by staff of the workers compensation inspectorate, with 42 in accommodation, cafes and restaurants, 39 in communication services, 36 in retail, 28 in construction, 24 in property and business services and the balance across other industry sectors.
In terms of injuries and dangerous occurrences during the reporting period, there were 225 incidents reported to ACT WorkCover, 201 being injuries and 24 dangerous occurrences. I am pleased to advise that on the enforcement side, 25 improvement notices, 19 prohibition notices and two infringement notices were issued during that reporting period. It remains a busy time for WorkCover. I am advised that 3,817 telephone contacts were made with ACT WorkCover officers. (Time expired.)
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella) (5.26): I will be speaking against Mr Stefaniak’s amendments. I seek leave to move an amendment that has been circulated in my name.
MR SPEAKER: We will deal with Mr Stefaniak’s amendment first. Once we have done that, you may then wish to move your amendment. Subsequent to your speaking to your amendment, you may wish to close the debate, subject to other people who may wish to speak on the matter. We have to deal with Mr Stefaniak’s amendment, and the question before the Chair is that Mr Stefaniak’s amendment be agreed to.
Mr Stefaniak: In relation to that, Mr Speaker—
MR SPEAKER: Mr Stefaniak, you have already spoken to your amendment.
Mr Stefaniak: Under standing order 133, I ask that the amendment be divided.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Gentleman will speak to the amendment. We have not got to the question yet. The question is that Mr Stefaniak’s amendment be agreed to. Mr Stefaniak, you can raise the matter of dividing the amendment when we get to the stage of putting the question.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .