Non-Government Organisations Occupational Health and Safety Legislation
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: My question is directed to the Special Minister of State, and Minister for Industrial Relations. Is it a fact that the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001 have introduced a series of complex, interlocking obligations that have made safety management issues extremely demanding and expensive? Is it also a fact that these new requirements limit any defence for employers, especially in situations where non-government organisations have implemented and minimised control measures but not eliminated the risk? How will the impending new Safety Packs enable non-government organisations to meet these new legislative requirements? Will the Minister please explain what type of assistance WorkCover is considering providing in order to assist non-government organisations in meeting these new legislative requirements?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I thank Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes for that very good question—I am surprised that Opposition members have not been asking similar questions. I take this opportunity to point out that WorkCover has been promoting the new occupational health and safety requirements under both the Act and the new regulations. Only yesterday, without much clamour, the new regulations became obligatory for all employers across the State. We allowed a significantly longer lead time for micro businesses before the occupational health and safety obligations became obligatory for all businesses.
It is important to remember the problems we were trying to solve by having a new Occupational Health and Safety Act and regulations. The first problem was that the old Department of Labour and Industry Act and its associated Acts were not consolidated. The obligations for safety by employers were spread across three or four different Acts. I am advised by my department—I have not done exact calculations—that by the time the old Act ceased to have effect it covered slightly less than one-third of the work force in New South Wales. The vast majority of workers in New South Wales were not covered by the old arrangements.
The second problem we were trying to solve was the opposite of what is suggested by the honourable member’s question. The old occupational health and safety requirements and the various pieces of legislation were much more complex and prescriptive. They created a whole set of obligations that limited the flexibility of employers to make appropriate arrangements with employees to make commonsense decisions about occupational health and safety. The new regulations, although they make those obligations very clear to employers, provide by way of suggestion and guidance a whole set of measures to deal with health and safety risks in the workplace in a much more effective and flexible way. For instance, the old laws mandated how long the lunch table had to be and how many coathangers had to be in lockers and were almost useless in the context of the modern workplace. The new arrangements are much more flexible and make those obligations clearer.
In February, the Government launched its small business assistance strategy in line with the recommendations of the 2002 Work Safety Summit to provide additional advice and education for small business owners and operators on their obligations under the new occupational health and safety laws, including risk management. In recognition of their particular needs, small businesses were allowed an extra 12 months time, as I said, in which to implement their risk assessment obligations under the new safety provisions. That transitional period came to an end on 1 September. During the past two years WorkCover has been working tirelessly with industry, employer associations and unions as well as a wide range of small, medium and large business operators and the community to allow them to understand the new occupational health and safety requirements and their obligations under the new Act and regulations. The new regulations reflect the various guidance materials industry uses. For example, builders use the Building Code of Australia as a basis for the occupational health and safety—
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: The builders are not happy about it.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The Hon. Melinda Pavey said that the builders are not happy. I cannot make everybody happy. [Time expired.]
