Page 2555 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 23 August 2006

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


worry about conditions of workers in the ACT community sector, whose workload grows ever greater, as the federal government’s policies on welfare-to-work kick in, as housing affordability decreases and homelessness increases, and the budget cuts reduce services.

I mentioned yesterday that the community sector has been sorely disappointed by this government, which promised much with its social plan. I have watched, as I am sure members of the government have, people burn out in the community sector where there is so much to do. There is so much goodwill and desire to do it but a lack of resources to provide the capacity. Of course this was already happening before the commonwealth’s WorkChoices legislation came in. Mr Gentleman’s concern for workers is, as always, exemplary, but it is always at some remove from where I believe he could actually do something very directly to support them.

I note Mr Gentleman apparently does not think that I should ever leave my seat, even for health-related purposes like the taking of nourishment, toilet breaks and mental health purposes. I have noted that that is something that comes up every now and again. It would be good if he could find something substantive in my arguments to attack, not my inability to be in two places at the same time.

The erosion of working conditions and the impact on workers’ health began, I believe, some time ago, not just with WorkChoices. In fact it was quite active around the time the accord was brought in, which I believe was by a Hawke government—and I think that was an ALP government—and I believe that Mr Barr himself noted that Mr Howard made a similar comment. I would like to hear Mr Gentleman move from WorkChoices to welfare-to-work reform.

MR SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.

MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Business and Economic Development, Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Minister for the Arts) (3.51): As my colleagues on this side have pointed out, the negative impacts of the WorkChoices legislation on the health of workers is clear. Studies—and we are aware of this—constantly show that workers exposed to poor working conditions, particularly insecure employment, suffer worse health outcomes. It now appears certain that the health, mental health and occupational health and safety outcomes of workers will suffer incrementally as a result of the WorkChoices changes. The most obvious impact will be on workers’ occupational health and safety.

Dr Toni Schofield, senior lecturer at the University of Sydney, has suggested that the cuts to union rights will have a dramatic impact on occupational health and safety. This is largely because the reforms are aimed at freeing up small and medium-sized businesses from regulatory supervision and union involvement, exactly the businesses where large numbers of injuries occur and where the intervention of a safety conscious union is most needed. The impact on big business can also not be underestimated, particularly when coupled with the federal government’s attack on union involvement on construction sites. The safety of workers will undoubtedly be put at risk without unions like the CFMEU on site to ensure safety corners are not cut.

These changes are also likely to see an impact on the wider health system. Last year the New Zealand health ministry released a report, Decades of disparity: socio-economic


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