Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Tuesday, 18 February 2020] P669a

Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Tuesday, 18 February 2020] p669a-722a Mr Peter Katsambanis; Mr Bill Marmion; Dr David Honey; Mr Simon Millman; Dr Mike Nahan; Mr Kyran O'Donnell; Mr John Carey; Mr Zak Kirkup; Mrs Liza Harvey; Mr Stephen Price; Mr Sean L'Estrange; Mrs Alyssa Hayden; Ms Cassandra Rowe; Mr Peter Rundle; Mr Vincent Catania; Mr Terry Redman; Dr Tony Buti; Ms Janine Freeman; Ms Margaret Quirk; Mr Bill Johnston WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY BILL 2019 SAFETY LEVIES AMENDMENT BILL 2019 Cognate Debate Leave granted for the Work Health and Safety Bill 2019 and the Safety Levies Amendment Bill 2019 to be considered cognately, and for the Work Health and Safety Bill 2019 to be declared the principal bill. Second Reading — Cognate Debate Resumed from 27 November 2019. MR P.A. KATSAMBANIS (Hillarys) [3.40 pm]: I rise as the lead speaker for Liberal Party on the Work Health and Safety Bill 2019 and to highlight that in the division of tasks in our party, the lead speaker for the Safety Levies Amendment Bill 2019 will be my colleague and friend the member for Nedlands. Mr W.R. Marmion: Sorry; am I the lead speaker? Mr P.A. KATSAMBANIS: You are for the Safety Levies Amendment Bill. On the Work Health and Safety Bill, clearly, I, personally, and the Liberal Party, 100 per cent support the concept that someone, anyone, should leave home in the morning, or at any time that they leave home, to go to work with the expectation that they will complete their day or evening’s work, leave the workplace and return home safe and sound—absolutely. I think everyone across our community supports that. It is axiomatic to us as a society that we have workplaces that are as safe as possible, and that everybody going to work knows that they will be able to return home to their families and loved ones. It is also axiomatic that if someone is responsible through their recklessness, their negligence or heaven forbid through a deliberate act for causing harm to someone at a workplace, they ought to be prosecuted and punished. That is absolutely axiomatic. Over a number of decades in workplace safety we have seen that as a society and as a community we have made major steps forward in improving workplace safety. We have not reached the goal of zero deaths and zero injuries, but we are a lot closer than we were 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago or 40 years ago, and that has not happened by accident. We have debated other bills in this place during this term of Parliament, especially in 2017. I have spoken about the changing culture and attitudes that have driven those safety improvements. It has been a move away from the “us and them” culture to a more cooperative culture, in which everyone in a workplace— employers, employees, and any contractors on that site—come together to create the safest possible workplace that there can be. That has continued to evolve over time. The last time we discussed this legislation, we were passing changes to the existing law. I spoke of the good work that everyone has done in that space. Employers, trade unions and workplace health and safety officials have been leaders in that space. When we look at a snapshot of what it was like 20 or 30 years ago compared with where we are today, we see that everyone involved deserves a major pat on the back. Some of that change has been driven by legislation and some by the fear, if you like, of penalties, but I would suggest that the majority of the improvement has taken place because of changes in culture and attitude, and a strong view that everyone in a workplace is in it together and that they are working together to effect improvements that will lead to safer and better outcomes—and, yes, I think it is an appropriate to work towards the goal of zero workplace deaths and zero injuries. “Zero Heroes” should be celebrated, and we, the Liberal, Labor and National Parties, do celebrate them. It is not a big-p political issue, and it has not been for many generations, and that is a great thing. That brings me to the legislation before us. At the heart of it, this bill introduces the principle of a harmonised work health and safety legislative environment across all Australian states. That was the genesis of this bill. More than a decade ago, the Council of Australian Governments national reform program led to the Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council agreeing to harmonise occupational health and safety laws across Australia. That was in 2009. After that, there was consultation on a model act. Eventually, in 2011, the initial version of the model act was finalised. A lot has happened since then. Every state and territory in Australia apart from Victoria and Western Australia has moved to adopt the model act or a version of the model act. Interestingly, New Zealand has also introduced legislation based on both the principles and the provisions of the model act. Given our strong economic ties with New Zealand—closer economic relations and all the other work that is done between the two nations—that is a good thing. Also, it should be noted that especially in the last decade we have seen a strong movement of workers between New Zealand and particularly Western Australia. The harmonisation of laws makes sure that everyone is working on the same page and cognisant of the legislative environment as well as the cultural environment built up around workplace safety. That is all a good thing. [1] Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Tuesday, 18 February 2020] p669a-722a Mr Peter Katsambanis; Mr Bill Marmion; Dr David Honey; Mr Simon Millman; Dr Mike Nahan; Mr Kyran O'Donnell; Mr John Carey; Mr Zak Kirkup; Mrs Liza Harvey; Mr Stephen Price; Mr Sean L'Estrange; Mrs Alyssa Hayden; Ms Cassandra Rowe; Mr Peter Rundle; Mr Vincent Catania; Mr Terry Redman; Dr Tony Buti; Ms Janine Freeman; Ms Margaret Quirk; Mr Bill Johnston Until now, Western Australia was one of only two states that has not moved to that model act. Again, interestingly, in the lead-up to the 2017 election, although a green bill was floating around, no commitment was made by the then opposition, the now government, to introduce a harmonised work health and safety model. It was not an election commitment. The minister can correct me if I am wrong, but I am certain that it was not. The spokesperson at the time, who is now the President of the Legislative Council, had indicated that there did not appear to be a driving need to move down the path of harmonisation and that our laws as they stood, and as they stand amended now, were sufficient for what we required in Western Australia. Irrespective of that, after the election, in July 2017, the Premier announced that work would commence to develop modernised work health and safety laws for WA, and that the basis of those laws was to be the model act. A ministerial advisory panel was formed to advise on how to harmonise the existing laws with the model act and to take into account the specific requirements that we have in Western Australia due to our workplace health and safety laws interacting with other acts and our very well developed safety regime in the mining industry, in which we are a world leader. All that was done. After that ministerial advisory panel’s work, we have ended up with this bill, and I will come to that in a minute. This bill includes certain things that were not part of the model act at all. They are, specifically, clauses 30A and 30B of the bill before us, which relate to industrial manslaughter. That was not part of the workplace relations ministerial council agreement, the model act, any agreement at the Council of Australian Governments, or anything of that nature. Importantly, it was not an election commitment of the current government. Again, the shadow minister at the time, who is now the President of the upper house, indicated in many forums that she did not believe that there was any need for specific industrial manslaughter laws and thought that our existing laws covered off on that area. Interestingly, when the current minister became minister and introduced amendments to our existing occupational health and safety laws, he also indicated that he thought those laws, as they were being amended, would be adequate and that there was no reason for Western Australia to move to introduce industrial manslaughter. However, industrial manslaughter provisions, in the form of clauses 30A and 30B, are included in this legislation. In my contribution today I intend to deal with the harmonisation issues, except for clauses 30A and 30B. I will deal with those clauses separately. There has always been debate in Western Australia about whether we need to go down the path of harmonisation of work health and safety laws or carve out our own path. That has not been limited to one side or the other of politics. As I said, in the lead-up to the last election, the then shadow minister indicated that she did not think that there was any need to go down the path of harmonisation and had done so at a number of forums. Interestingly, the then opposition and now government did not include harmonisation in its election commitments. It is very fond of always saying that it is bringing in legislation to give rise to its election commitments, but this was not an election commitment.

Load more