Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I know exactly what I am debating, member for Gorton. I am giving plenty of examples as to why this bill is a good bill. This bill provides direction, instruction and inspiration to others in the building industry to conduct themselves appropriately. As far as we are concerned, transitional arrangements are not necessary. Stage 2 will apply only to new contracts and funding agreements entered into after the date of the commencement of these amendments, which is 1 October next. By implementing this particular scheme in two stages, smaller builders have been given time to better understand the operation of this scheme and get used to the principles in this scheme. They have been given adequate time to set up and prepare their management systems so they can become accredited under this scheme and gain access to Commonwealth work. Stage 2, which starts on 1 October next, was announced on 23 October last. So the government has given plenty of time to those businesses interested in that sort of work to get themselves involved and ready. In addition, the Federal Safety Commissioner has undertaken significant consultation on these various stage 2 recommendations with a view to bringing people with us as we create a cooperative and positive environment.

This scheme is certainly not part of any federal takeover of occupational health and safety. Through the Council of Australian Governments process, we are trying to bring about the harmonisation of OH&S legislation by working with state and territory requirements. I remember a few years ago working on the Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services and talking to people in the railway industry, by way of example, about the ridiculous range of safety requirements in that particular industry. The same is true in the building industry, where the various types of credentials, occupational equipment and rules and regulations differ from state to state. If you are credentialed in one state, you run the risk of not being able to work across the border. In places like south-east Queensland, this silliness has to be overcome by the harmonisation of this legislative requirement. In that part of Australia, building contractors and building people generally move from one state to the other and they need all of their credentials organised and able to be readily recognised by both state authorities. This scheme therefore is a way to achieve that, and is just one of the tools the government are using to address some of the unacceptable OH&S performance records we have seen in various parts of Australia.

I acknowledge the member for Gorton’s observations about those who are hurt in our workplaces. I acknowledge that anybody hurt in a workplace on any given day is bad news for all of those in that profession and industry. It is bad news for those who hire them and employ them, as the purchaser of those services. It costs the building and construction sector enormously. Anything that can in fact drive down the cost to industry generally has got to be a good thing. Anything that can improve the working conditions of people on the tools in this industry has my complete support, but not the puffery of saying, ‘If it’s not the union training them, it can’t be any good.’ From our point of view there has to be a sense of trust in the workplace. Under the government’s Workplace Relations Act that is exactly what you have in Australia today. There is an opportunity for individual workers with quality credentials and experience to trade those credentials and experience, and gain a larger pay packet. As we will find in legislation introduced today, and which is up for debate in the next parliamentary sitting, people will be able to go forward instead of backwards. They will be guaranteed that their circumstances can only be improved upon—a further example of the sort of prestige that we attach to people with trade skills in this country.

Changes under this bill are designed to streamline administrative processes for engaging and appointing federal safety officers. The current process, as originally prescribed, is inefficient. We want to see an end to the system whereby a person first has to be engaged as a consultant by the secretary of the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations before the Federal Safety Commissioner can actually appoint them as a federal safety officer. The amendments in this bill will allow the Federal Safety Commissioner to engage consultants for the purposes of appointment as FSOs and determine the terms and conditions of their engagement. So, again, this will allow them to be proactive in every possible way.

The engaging of consultants will still be subject to standard Australian government procurement processes. One of the things we will not require is that they have to be a member of a union to be an FSO. If the Australian Labor Party forms government later in the year, it will be: no ticket, no start. You will not see an FSO in a workplace anywhere around Australia unless they are a member of a union—that would be the way the Labor Party would run it—because, unless they are involved with a union, they cannot be trusted. We will see that impact right around Australia in every small business. Union officials will be standing by the till deciding who is hired and who is fired, who is working safely and who is not working safely. These sorts of matters are of grave concern to the people of Australia today.

See this speech in context