Page 2627 - Week 12 - Thursday, 16 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That the Assembly takes note of the following papers:
Workers compensation -
Comparison of some NSW and ACT premium rates.
Ministerial statement, 17 October 1989.
MR STEFANIAK (11.46): After debating a Federal matter, the coalition's tax policy, for more than an hour, it is good to get back to something which concerns the ACT. The prevention and management of work related injuries in Canberra is a very important issue for the overall future of the ACT. This has been recognised for many years by different organisations and individuals who have expressed concern about the ACT workers compensation scheme.
Industry groups and trade unions alike have been criticising the cost and inefficiencies of the ACT scheme constantly. These criticisms of workers compensation legislation have not been centred on Canberra alone but are Australia-wide. Most of the States have acted with widespread amendments. It is now time for the ACT to bring workers compensation up to date, ready for the year 2000 and beyond.
In his ministerial statement, Mr Whalan gave a detailed history of workers compensation in the ACT so I will not go into such detail but I will briefly outline some of the salient points. The Workmen's Compensation Ordinance was introduced in 1951. Since then there have been only three amendments to this ordinance - amendments which had little effect on the overall interpretation of the law, but which were, as Mr Whalan said, for finetuning purposes.
A working party was established in 1983 to examine different aspects of the 1951 ordinance. Its aim was to look at the ordinance and improve it in such a way as to enable workers compensation arrangements to function effectively. In 1984 the report from the working party made 37 recommendations, three of which have been implemented.
Seventeen other recommendations are ready for consideration by the proposed industrial relations advisory committee when it is formed. It is unfortunate, however, that these recommendations were not implemented back in 1984. The 17 recommendations were unanimously agreed to by unions, insurance companies and the private sector and, if introduced, would have certainly reduced premiums for workers compensation in the ACT and today we would have had a much more efficient and cost-effective workers compensation scheme for employers and workers.
Unfortunately for the ACT, four separate Territory Ministers thumbed their noses at these recommendations and put workers compensation into the too-hard basket. The Liberal Party congratulates Mr Whalan for biting the bullet and calling for a total review of injury prevention and management in the ACT.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .