Page 2003 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 May 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
words of his motion, particularly where it talks about working with industry peak bodies and unions to ensure positive and inclusive safety cultures in all workplaces across the territory. In his rant he claimed that only the labour movement cares about safety on work sites.
It is a Labor government that has been here for the last 11 years and overseen this record when it comes to safety on our work sites. It is this Labor government that has overseen that shocking safety record. I reject the claim in Mr Gentleman’s speech that only the unions care about safety on work sites. I think that that is offensive. I think it is offensive to the vast bulk of good employers. I think it is offensive to those industry bodies who Mr Gentleman is seeking to attack. I think it is aimed to be a distraction, as the self-congratulatory nature of part of the motion is, from the fact that it is this Labor government that has overseen this shocking safety record.
In the ACT we can expect—this has occurred under this Labor government—on average that every working day one construction worker will sustain an injury somewhere in Canberra. In the ACT, under this ACT Labor government, we have a serious injury rate one-third higher than the national average. In the ACT, under this Labor government, each year one in every 40 territory construction workers can expect to receive an injury at work that results in their being off work for at least one week and in some cases much longer.
In the ACT, under this Labor government, in terms of long-term injuries in the construction industry, the ACT’s results have been deteriorating—currently more than 50 per cent worse than any other jurisdiction and approaching double the Australian average. This is highly distressing, especially for such a small jurisdiction. Of course, it is distressing for those people who are affected by such injuries. It is for that reason that we cannot support the self-congratulatory nature of Mr Gentleman’s motion. This is a serious matter, and claiming that the government has somehow been exemplary when the facts tell a completely different story, I think, would be fundamentally dishonest. That is why we will support Mr Rattenbury’s amendment to the motion.
The Canberra Liberals endorse the intent of the Getting home safely report, as there must be change to bring down the number of injuries and deaths. No workplace death is acceptable. One workplace death is one too many, and we need to be vigilant and we need to work hard. We should not be pitting employers against employees, though I think that is the very clear tenor of Mr Gentleman’s speech.
We are concerned that the government gets the implementation of the recommendations right. There is no indication that the ACT government will act in a timely manner to take action on the recommendations given how many years they have had to act while the injury rate has increased. Additionally, I am concerned about arbitrarily assigning powers and responsibilities to organisations and groups that will not always act in the best interests of our construction workers, businesses and the broader community.
What we do not want to see is a situation where workplace safety is used as an excuse, as a proxy, for union bullying. We have seen that. That is one of the reasons why the Building and Construction Commission was set up. It was because of union bullying
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video