Page 525 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 21 February 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
often we see multinationals, foreign-owned companies, winning contracts with government at the expense of local operators. Let’s not forget that the Melbourne City Council now mows the lawns on our arterial roads, not the locally owned business, as was previously the case. There is favour for large national or multinational companies, many of which, if not most of which, do not have a presence in the ACT.
Paragraph (1)(d) calls on us to note the success of the government’s local procurement policies, including in relation to major projects such as light rail. We heard in question time today some of the significant, substantial and worrying safety breaches that are occurring on that project. At this point I will move the amendment to this motion circulated in my name. I move:
Insert new paragraph (1)(e):
“(e) that WorkSafe ACT have issued six prohibition notices, four infringement notices and four improvement notices on the light rail project as a result of significant safety breaches;”
The purpose of the amendment is that if those in the government and on the crossbench are willing to bring forward and pass such a self-congratulatory motion it might as well bear some resemblance to the facts. The light rail project has quite an appalling track record for safety. Just this week the project was shut down for at least two days due to a prohibition notice issued by the commissioner for work safety; as the Minister for Regulatory Services said today, six prohibition notices, four infringement notices, four improvement notices, and that is just in recent time. As I said, if this motion is to pass, it might as well pass with some semblance of the truth in it.
Ms Cody’s motion also highlights the consultation currently underway for the secure jobs package and states that this package is going to: streamline the existing procurement requirements; create clear requirements that businesses tendering for government work treat workers fairly and uphold their workplace rights and safety; and enhance compliance and enforcement measures through a new unit within government.
It is clear that, whilst the rhetoric is strong in what those on other side are proclaiming this code is likely to do, it is very weak on substance when you start reading the very small, eight-page consultation paper for what is such a massive change to procurement and industrial relations in the territory.
As to IRE certificates, they are already commonplace through the construction industry for construction procurement. The problem is not in the issuing of an IRE certificate—that is a compliance and a stat dec at a point in time. The issue lies in the compliance. I would welcome, to some extent, a larger focus on compliance of government contracts, but that can be done now. We do not need these significant changes to address the compliance issue.
The biggest ticket item in the consultation paper is the introduction of the labour relations training and workplace equity plan and the intent to make that a weighted
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video