Page 2376 - Week 06 - Thursday, 10 May 2012

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

DR BOURKE: I thank the member for his question. The ACT construction industry portable long service leave scheme is in its 31st year. The scheme started on 1 October 1981 in conjunction with the commencement of the new Australian Parliament House project. The scheme was designed to ensure that workers in the construction industry, who generally move from one project to another, could accrue a long service leave entitlement throughout their career. Without such a scheme, many construction workers would never fulfil a normal requirement of long service leave, working for a single employer.

The ACT leads the country in the protection of long service leave for workers in high mobility occupations while ensuring portability of their benefits. Currently the construction scheme has registered over 5,068 employers since inception and has 1,497 active employers and 22,059 active employees, of which 13,435 are currently registered on employer returns. Since its inception, it has made 11,497 long service payments totalling $61 million. The cleaning scheme has registered over 270 employers since its inception and has 88 active employers. There are some 5,263 active employees, of which 3,877 are currently registered on employer returns. Since its inception it has made 852 long service leave payments, totalling $2.1 million.

MS BRESNAN: A supplementary.

MR SPEAKER: Yes, Ms Bresnan.

MS BRESNAN: Minister, given your commitment to portable long service leave, why did you not support the Greens amendment to bring in portable long service leave for the security industry on 1 October this year rather than 1 January next year?

DR BOURKE: I thank the member for her question. Allow me to reiterate the points I made in the debate the other day, which I am sure the member was listening to or could refer to in Hansard. I will go through them anyway.

Firstly, there needs to be an actuarial report on the appropriate levy. This needs to have work done with the industry to determine the nature of the employment and the employees. Secondly, there needs to be discussion with the industry and awareness raising about the implementation of the scheme.

Mr Barr: With great relief, I ask that all further questions be placed on the notice paper.

Supplementary answer to question without notice

Roads—pedestrian crossings


MR BARR: Mr Speaker, Mr Seselja asked me a question in question time earlier relating to the timing of pedestrian crossing sequences. I have received some advice from the very efficient team in Territory and Municipal Services that, yes, they certainly are able to look at particular crossings on a case by case basis. I understand Mr Seselja referred to one particular crossing in his question. If there are any others

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