Page 2000 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 May 2013

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


No bereaved family member would ever find it an acceptable proposition that a fatality occurred because safety was a lower priority than meeting a deadline or incurring a cost.

The report made some serious recommendations to businesses through local industry associations such as the Master Builders Association and the Housing Institute of Australia, which I hope all construction firms in Canberra will give serious consideration to and consider who they are putting at risk on a daily basis.

Once again I refer to the report, and I quote from page 26—the most profitable companies are the safest; there is no need for a trade off between safety and profit. One of the main points I hope business give a great deal of consideration to is the necessity of effective safety practices and procedures. The report found that while many businesses had established health and safety procedures, both employers and employees had little or no idea of the reasons behind creation of these practices and procedures.

It is usual practice, particularly for subcontractors, to employ consultants to develop these documents to satisfy regulatory requirements, with the business having very little to no input. It was made clear that safety procedures and practices are most effective when they are actively developed rather than simply imposed. This is one of the reasons WorkSafe ACT inspectors have changed to a model which focuses less on checking paperwork and more on the inspection of the actual worksite and providing employers and employees with education rather than penalties.

I would now like to go to the subject of who is actually looking after the safety of working people. Let us focus on the two main groups that represent workers and employers in the ACT—the union movement and employer representative groups.

If we look at what their listed priorities are and what each of these have to say on workplace safety and the priority they give it, we will see some interesting results. Looking at some of the employer groups, I will start with the Master Builders Association. I am very pleased to see they have listed safety on their first page. It does come in ninth overall, but at least it is listed as one of their key disciplines. I am also pleased they operate several safety-related courses. I add that they make submissions to WorkSafe and other enquires on workplace safety.

However, on reading into their submission on the ACT construction industry health and safety inquiry, I find that, after reading some 16 pages of the submission, unlike the vast number of other submissions, it states:

More regulation and by definition greater compliance obligations are therefore not the answer. Furthermore, we strongly contend that such an approach will only serve as a greater distraction to the safety effort.

This, in my view, goes against the results of the Getting home safely report, and I am concerned that this may indicate to businesses that they may see regulation and compliance for their workers as a distraction.


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