Advanced Roofing and Death of Mr Dean McGoldrick
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I thank the Special Minister of State, Minister for Commerce, for that reference. I now ask him a question without notice. Is the Minister aware that the employer of Tamworth boy Dean McGoldrick, who was killed in an industrial fall while working for Advanced Roofing on a work site at Broadway in 2001, was fined just $20,000 by the Industrial Relations Court? Is he further aware that Advanced Roofing, which is owned by Tamworth resident John Peter Poleviak, has paid only $1,800 of the $20,000 fine ordered by the court? Will the Minister explain why only the company was prosecuted, rather than the individual company directors, a decision that effectively allows business owners to liquidate and start over under a new name, thus avoiding the fine altogether? Does the Minister believe that justice was served by such a low fine in the first place? What action will he take to ensure that the full fine levied is paid by the employer in order to begin the healing process for the family of Dean McGoldrick?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I thank Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes for a very good and comprehensive question; I will try to do it justice. I will avoid giving an opinion on whether I think the decision served the interests of justice, but I will give some background to the circumstances of the case. On 1 February 2000 Dean McGoldrick was fatally injured when he fell approximately 12 metres from the roof of a building in George Street, Sydney. WorkCover took prosecution action for breaches of occupational health and safety laws against both the employer company and its sole director, John Poleviak. It is important to understand that action was taken against both the company and the individual director.
The Hon. Catherine Cusack: He knows that.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: He asked whether the law provided for the fine to be recovered from the individual employer as well as the company. I am pointing out that in fact prosecution action was taken against both the company and the sole director. The company was convicted and fined $20,000 on 25 May 2001. The director was also convicted but no penalty was imposed provided the initial fine was paid. The company failed to pay the fine in full and as a result the Local Court has directed that Mr Poleviak be required to pay the remainder of the fine personally. As honourable members will be aware, the courts and the State Debt Recovery Office administer the New South Wales fine enforcement system, and are responsible for the receipt and collection of fines and penalties.
I have raised this matter with my colleagues the Treasurer and the Attorney General, and I have directed WorkCover to take a more active management role in ensuring that those convicted of an offence and fined under occupational health and safety legislation pay their dues. The honourable member specifically asked me about jurisdiction. One reason for the relatively low level of punishment in this case—if one wants to describe it that way—was that the action took place in the Industrial Magistrates Court. Upon consideration, and some time after a number of initiatives were taken by the Government and by WorkCover in relation to industrial fatalities, WorkCover no longer prosecutes any matters involving a fatality or serious injury in the Industrial Magistrates Court, because of the caps and other matters that apply in that court.
Fatality matters are now exclusively dealt with in the Industrial Relations Commission, which has the power to gaol serious offenders for up to two years, impose much heavier financial penalties, impose fines for consequent and sequential offences, and pursue action against both individuals and companies, as well as individual directors of companies, for serious breaches of occupational health and safety duty. I think that partly answers one of the concerns raised by the honourable member. The fact is that the exact set of circumstances in the McGoldrick matter could not be repeated, and any similar prosecutions will now be launched in the Industrial Relations Commission, where the caps and limitations are not so severe.
I hesitate to expand on my views about the justice of the situation. I simply reflect on what is clearly a community concern. Probably the entire New South Wales community, including most responsible employers, are concerned about the fines and punishments that apply in cases of breaches of occupational health and safety duty which result in death, particularly of young and vulnerable workers, and when the specific circumstances set out to protect those lives are insufficient. The Government is moving to address those issues with some vigour, and I expect the matter to be placed on the legislative program. [Time expired]
