Page 2120 - Week 10 - Thursday, 26 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Leave granted.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 6 (Voluntary workers etc.)
MR STEFANIAK (11.42): I move:
Page 5, lines 15-28, omit the clause.
The reason for this, Mr Speaker, is that during the course of the submissions that were made to our committee it was brought up - I think very ably, especially by CONFACT - that there were problems with this particular clause covering voluntary workers. I did make mention of this in my additional comments from which these amendments that I have proposed emanated. I suggested there that CONFACT's objections to clause 6 should be accepted.
CONFACT indicated, Mr Speaker, that the section poses special problems for the private sector employers who currently offer students work experience opportunities on a voluntary basis under the guidance and supervision of the ACT Schools Authority. Given the Government's promotional strategies in the area of youth employment, inclusion of this provision in the Bill at this time will result in employers refusing to offer students these positions in the future. CONFACT recently conducted a survey on this and similar issues of concern to students and schools, the Schools Authority, coordinators, unions and others. According to CONFACT, the results of that survey indicated that employers are well aware of the safety implications and will not take on a student if there is any perceived risk of safety.
Concern was also expressed that voluntary workers who may be members of a family sharing the load of domiciliary care with a paid professional are similarly affected. It was felt that the application of this clause could cause untold damage and it is for these reasons, Mr Speaker, that I think the clause, certainly as drafted, should be deleted.
MR WHALAN (Minister for Industry, Employment and Education) (11.44): Mr Speaker, we do regard this as quite an important clause and we would persist in saying that it is better retained in the legislation. The important response to some of the classes of persons who have been identified by Mr Stefaniak is that no class such as he has mentioned would come under this particular clause unless it is first declared by the Minister. So that is the important thing. Those categories of persons that he referred to are not automatically deemed to be employees or employed for that purpose.
It must also be borne in mind that such a declaration is - I take you to subclause (2) - a disallowable instrument under the Subordinate Laws Act 1989. As such, it would be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .