Parliamentary Debates (HANSARD) FORTIETH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION 2017 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Thursday, 15 June 2017 Legislative Council Thursday, 15 June 2017 THE PRESIDENT (Hon Kate Doust) took the chair at 10.00 am, and read prayers. SHIRE OF ESPERANCE — LOT 12 KIRWAN ROAD — LANDFILL SITE Petition HON COLIN DE GRUSSA (Agricultural) [10.02 am]: I present a petition containing 304 signatures, couched in the following terms — To the President and Members of the Legislative Council of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned residents of Western Australia are opposed to the landfill site proposed by the Shire of Esperance for Lot 12 Kirwin Road (via Merivale Rd), Esperance. Our information based on expert hydrological sources, shows that it poses significant environmental risks, in particular to RAMSAR wetlands of international importance. A due diligence report produced by contracted Consultants, concludes there are no constraints on the waste facility being constructed, and has been accepted by the Shire of Esperance. This is contrary to our understandings. Based on the information contained in the due diligence report which the Shire will supply to the EPA, the EPA may decide that the potential environmental impacts may not be sufficiently significant for the EPA to assess the proposal formally enabling the Shire to proceed with the landfill site. Your petitioners therefore respectfully request the Legislative Council to ensure that the highest level of environmental scrutiny be place on the proposed landfill site. And your petitioners as in duty bound, will ever pray. [See paper 273.] PAPERS TABLED Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house. PILBARA PORT ASSETS (DISPOSAL) REPEAL BILL 2017 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Hon Robin Chapple, and read a first time. Second Reading HON ROBIN CHAPPLE (Mining and Pastoral) [10.05 am]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. On Tuesday, 24 November 2015, notice of motion was given in the other place by the member for Cottesloe, the then Premier, to introduce the Pilbara Port Assets (Disposal) Bill 2015. The bill then proceeded to be debated in that chamber commencing on the following day. The long-term lease of the Utah Point bulk handling facility, which was then a public asset vested in the Pilbara Ports Authority, was being prepared by the then government for divestment and sale. Utah Point, a part of the Port Hedland harbour, was one of the first assets announced for consideration as part of the then government’s asset sales program. The bill progressed through both houses of Parliament. In the Legislative Council, debate commenced via the second reading given by Hon Helen Morton, the then Minister for Mental Health, on Thursday, 25 February 2016, and was subsequently referred to the Standing Committee on Legislation by Hon Jacqui Boydell, member for Mining and Pastoral Region, on Tuesday, 22 March 2016. The committee was given the power to inquire into and report on the policy of the bill. The committee was chaired by Hon Robyn McSweeney, MLC, and consisted of Hon Ken Baston, MLC; Hon Dave Grills, MLC; Hon Ken Travers, MLC, substituting for Hon Dr Sally Talbot, MLC; and me, substituting for Hon Lynn MacLaren, MLC. The committee invited submissions from interested parties on matters relating to the scope, purpose, policy and structure of the bill, and received nine public submissions. The Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, Dampier Salt Ltd, Atlas Iron Ltd, Brockman Mining Australia Pty Ltd, Consolidated Minerals Ltd and Mineral Resources Ltd raised many written concerns over the proposed sale. 942 [COUNCIL — Thursday, 15 June 2017] In the public hearings, evidence was taken from a wide range of stakeholders with concerns over the proposed sale, with Mr Graham Short, national policy manager, Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, providing an overview of the mining industries’ opposition to the legislation. After one extension of time to report, the Standing Committee on Legislation handed down its thirty-third report, “Pilbara Port Assets (Disposal) Bill 2015”, on 25 August 2016. The committee was not able to obtain conclusive information relating to various aspects of the disposal, including the retention value to be ascribed to the asset—that is, the estimated value of retaining a state asset compared with the amount obtained from disposing of the asset—and the details of the future access and pricing regime at the port, including port charges. The committee noted that these were important elements of the transaction and should be clarified prior to the disposal. The committee also identified specific clauses in the bill that should have been amended or clarified for the Legislative Council’s information. The committee recommended that the bill be amended according to recommendations in its report. I urge all new members to review the legislation committee’s thirty-third report on the Pilbara Port Assets (Disposal) Bill 2015 and the transcripts of industry evidence prior to debating this repeal bill. The report made 17 recommendations and three minority recommendations, and produced 12 findings. After the handing down of the thirty-third report of the legislation committee on Thursday, 25 August 2016, the Legislative Council continued the second reading stage of the bill on Thursday, 15 September 2016, and went into Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, 20 September 2016, continuing until Thursday, 10 November 2016. The bill was read a third time on Wednesday, 16 November 2016, the day after the then Premier said in front of a large crowd gathered on the steps of Parliament that the government would take all its privatisation policies to the election. The passage of the Pilbara Port Assets (Disposal) Bill 2015 took almost a year to debate and was then hurriedly passed, with the other place notifying the Legislative Council that it had agreed to the one government amendment made by the Council. That was on the last day the Legislative Council sat in the thirty-ninth Parliament. The Labor Party and the Greens opposed this privatisation legislation from the outset and unsuccessfully moved 18 amendments recommended by industry and the thirty-third report of the Standing Committee on Legislation, “Pilbara Port Assets (Disposal) Bill 2015”. The former Premier said he would take privatisation to the election and he subsequently lost that election, so it is only right that this draconian and industry-damaging piece of legislation, so roundly opposed by the current government and the Greens, be repealed. Pursuant to standing order 126(1), I advise that this bill is not a uniform legislation bill. It does not ratify or give effect to an intergovernmental or multilateral agreement to which the government of the state is a party; nor does this bill, by reason of its subject matter, introduce a uniform scheme or uniform laws throughout the commonwealth. I commend the bill to the house and I table the explanatory memorandum. [See paper 274.] Debate adjourned, pursuant to standing orders. CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (INDUSTRIAL MANSLAUGHTER) BILL 2017 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Hon Alison Xamon, and read a first time. Second Reading HON ALISON XAMON (North Metropolitan) [10.12 am]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. The Criminal Code Amendment (Industrial Manslaughter) Bill 2017 seeks to introduce the offence of industrial manslaughter into the Criminal Code and to ensure that penalties for this offence mirror existing manslaughter provisions. Work is something that should be rewarding, enriching and the basis of our families’, communities’ and state’s welfare and prosperity. Workplace laws should be fair and protect all workers from unjust treatment and unsafe conditions. Every worker has the right to a safe and healthy workplace and all workers are entitled to expect to be able to return home from work safe and well. Unfortunately, this is not always the case; on average, one person is fatally injured in a workplace every 19 days in Western Australia. This tragic statistic has remained relatively stable over the last 16 years. Given the persistence of deaths and injuries in Western Australian workplaces, it is clear that reform is needed to address this unacceptable situation and to reduce the number of people dying during the course of their work. This bill seeks to implement an important component of this much-needed reform by ensuring that culpable employers are held responsible for workers’ deaths. It overcomes difficulties in holding directors criminally responsible by explicitly creating an offence of industrial manslaughter. [COUNCIL — Thursday, 15 June 2017] 943 Currently under the Criminal Code, it is difficult to prosecute a company for manslaughter. Furthermore, existing manslaughter legislation allows for the prosecution only of individuals who have directly caused the incident that has led to a worker’s death. This bill means that senior managers will be liable if they make a decision that knowingly allows an unsafe workplace. If that decision leads to a fatality or injury, those senior officers can be prosecuted. The adoption of industrial manslaughter legislation will serve to elevate considerations of workplace safety in boardrooms. Introducing the ability for individual officers to be found liable expands responsibility for workplace deaths from the relatively abstract company level to the personal. The need for the introduction of criminal offences to improve workplace health and safety, and their role as a deterrent, was identified by the “National Review into Model Occupational Health and Safety Laws” of 2008–09. The review noted — Making non-compliance with a duty of care a criminal offence not only reflects the seriousness with which such conduct is regarded, but also reinforces the provision’s deterrent effect. This offence has precedent in other jurisdictions and is recognised in the United Kingdom and, closer to home, in the ACT.