Page 2248 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 31 October 1989

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


MR BERRY (Minister for Community Services and Health) (8.46): I support what Mr Duby has said, but I think the most important part of the debate is the strategy of the Liberal Party and the way it has approached this thing. Mr Stefaniak committed a sin of omission by not mentioning clause 36.

Mr Duby: Is that "omission" or "emission"?

MR BERRY: Well, it could be both. Clause 36, of course, is very clear that this division of the legislation applies only in relation to an employer who employs more than 20 employees, as it will be now, with the Residents Rally supported amendment.

Mr Collaery: Sunset amendment.

MR BERRY: I must say I am very pleased to hear the Residents Rally leader's mention of a sunset proposal. I think that, at least, is heartening news for workers who have not had occupational health and safety legislation in the past. But really it comes back to a strategy of the Liberal Party to spike this legislation wherever possible. I think that they are supporting a phantom group of employers because I do not think reasonable employers would oppose occupational health and safety in the workplace. The positive and progressive employers that appeared before the committee, on the information that we have received here tonight, supported strong occupational health and safety legislation. Mr Stefaniak also made it clear in his speech that this sort of proposal was supported by the majority before the committee. So, in essence, that, compounded by the strategy of the Liberal Party to spike this legislation, is sufficient in my view to warrant the support of every single person in the Assembly.

One other issue that I would like to raise is the issue of concern that was mentioned by Mr Stefaniak about the effect on some small business people. What has not been said amongst some of the half-truths that have come before the Assembly is the fact that occupational health and safety legislation will provide a level playing field - to use a term that has been popular here on other occasions in relation to other matters - for those groups of employees. This is because it has application across a broad group of employers, except of course those that have been limited by the fact that the designated work groups will only apply in relation to groups of employees above 20.

I just repeat that this is truly a strategy of the Liberal Party. I, for one, have seen through it, and I am sure that most other members here have seen through it. This amendment can only apply in relation to this division, and the division applies only in relation to an employer who employs more than 20 employees - or 10 as it was originally proposed, but 20 as it has been amended with the support of the Residents Rally party.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .