Page 5723 - Week 15 - Thursday, 10 December 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Secondly, the bill enshrines a new national framework for the approval of workplace rehabilitation providers. The framework has been developed by the national heads of workers compensation authorities and, at its core, establishes a system of mutual recognition for rehabilitation providers. Where a provider is approved in one workers compensation jurisdiction, all other workers compensation authorities will recognise that provider’s status. That is great news for the 80 per cent of ACT rehabilitation providers who work in multiple workers compensation jurisdictions.
The framework takes into consideration the variety of businesses operating as rehabilitation providers and provides an approval regime that applies regardless of an entity’s size. The framework develops an agreed and transparent national model of workplace rehabilitation, including uniform service definitions and expectations of providers that are designed to deliver high-quality workplace rehabilitation services to workers, employers and insurers. Most significantly, it provides a robust national approval system across the workers compensation authorities and reduces administrative costs and complexity for providers, employers and insurers who operate across multiple jurisdictions.
Finally, the bill amends the compliance framework underpinning the Workers Compensation Act to ensure that it operates in a robust and discerning manner to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the ACT scheme. The current compliance framework is not providing the regulator with sufficient statutory support to stop the recalcitrant behaviour of those employers who consistently ignore their responsibilities to protect their workers. The bill responds to this issue and provides for a hierarchy of penalties that culminate in possible criminal prosecution and/or a cease business provision that would operate until such time as the non-compliant employer holds a workers compensation policy.
The bill also confers a power on the chief executive to impose a civil penalty on an employer who either does not have a workers compensation insurance policy or has under-declared the wages for the purposes of the workers compensation premium calculation. The maximum value of that penalty is equal to double the avoided premium, the premium that would have been payable had the employer obtained a policy or properly declared its wages. The bill provides absolute certainty regarding the maximum penalty that an employer will face in the event it fails to obtain a compulsory insurance policy or, in obtaining that policy, incorrectly declares the wages paid to workers.
The bill also confers powers on the chief executive to reduce the penalty. The bill sets clear boundaries on the exercise of that discretion by introducing an express list of criteria that the chief executive can consider in determining whether to impose a reduced penalty. From this list, employers can clearly identify the nature and type of the information that they can rely upon in seeking to have the chief executive exercise this discretion and impose a lesser penalty.
The amending bill also includes a catch-all provision that allows the chief executive to consider any other relevant matters in determining whether a reduced penalty ought apply. Let me reiterate: the chief executive may only apply the discretion to reduce, not increase, the penalty. This catch-all consideration recognises the fact that it is
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video