Page 929 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 29 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It was later last year, I believe, that those groups with a high level of peer employment picked up on the discussion and were able to engage. Many of the service providers amongst the drug and alcohol sector were very concerned about the impact that the new system would have. Some, I understand, were under the impression, rightly or wrongly, that if there was anything bad in a person’s background they would lose their job, which would rule out large segments of their workforce. People were concerned that previous events involving driving offences, domestic violence or even mental health treatment orders could prevent them from keeping their jobs. To quote comments made to my office in August last year, “The sector has no idea what the government is proposing and is assuming the worst.”
I believe the peaks of these community sectors have worked very hard to try and amend the process as best they can and have established a process of proactively and positively engaging with the government. Over the last six months the sector has brought the engagement a long way and has provided important policy contributions to the department and the Office of Regulatory Services who are responsible for devising the implementation of the scheme.
Over the last six months the Greens have also had a number of conversations with the community and have tried to be constructive and encouraging in coming up with a positive process that could see a collaborative and good outcome. This process has been about trying to get groups of people to work together so that we can come up with a fair system that will protect children, young people and vulnerable adults and that ensures that people with lived experience, who make the best employees, can continue to be employed.
I understand ORS and the department are still working through the draft workplace screening assessment guidelines with segments of the community sector, and a good process was in place to work through the key issues on these guidelines. It therefore came as a surprise to us and to parts of the community sector when this bill was listed for debate today, as the community sector had been advised it would not be debated until June. They feared that if the bill was passed before the guidelines were finalised, there would be a disruption to the good process that is currently occurring.
I have to say that there have been difficulties in preparing for today’s discussion because of the timeliness of advice from the government. Statements regarding the regulations have not been clear and it is difficult to understand why the government has chosen to keep its amendments under embargo. They have obviously been circulated now, but we did not receive them until very late in the process. There are also assurances needed about what kinds of time lines ORS will set for itself in responding to people’s applications, as this will have a significant impact on organisations’ ability to employ people in a timely way.
There are, however, other areas about which the Greens and sections of the community sector have raised concerns and which we believe have not been adequately responded to by the government. These issues include the panel of experts, the ability for applicants to request reviews of decisions, the change from position-
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video