Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Historic. I have looked at this issue of harmonising state OH&S legislation. My dealings with it go back to the early to mid 1980s when people talked about this. It recalled the Robens style occupational health and safety legislation that was promulgated in the 1970s. We then moved to that by the 1980s and the 1990s. The idea of getting OH&S legislation harmonised across all the states and territories is not a recent invention. It has been desired because it would provide much better outcomes for achieving reduced numbers of injuries in workplaces and greater outcomes for people in terms of their safety in workplaces.

I think we are now left with a position where the opposition and minor parties may be championing causes other than those which would achieve occupational health and safety outcomes by harmonising the legislation. If we look at the intergovernmental agreement, it has provided a mechanism to spread the voting across the states and territories, with each having a representative. It allows the CEO to have a casting vote. The council obviously spent—at least from the records I have read—a significant amount of time working through the arrangement, and I think the parties are settled with the arrangement and would like the Senate to similarly accept that they have reached a historic agreement and to pass the legislation. I think that is the point we are at now. I cannot say it any more plainly than that. I think the Senate does play a valuable role in pointing all these things out. I have always said that: the Senate does play a very valuable role.

It is sometimes the case that the Senate does not get its way. Sometimes the Senate is asked, even when it does have the numbers, to let those go. The Senate is being asked to accept that there is a historic intergovernmental agreement and to allow Safe Work Australia to be established. It can always continue to have an interest in the outcomes of Safe Work Australia and to ensure that it is delivering OH&S benefits for Australians. That is the Senate’s role. It can act in an obstructionist way. It has happened in the past that parties have sought to use their numbers when they have had the majority in this place. We accept that sometimes the opposition, when the government is putting a case, can accept the position that this is for the interests of OH&S overall and accept the position the government is putting. It is not unusual for that to happen either. A number of times in this place, when we have been in opposition, we have accepted the government’s position, although it might not have been perfect in our view and might not have been what we would otherwise agree to. We would continue to have an interest in the issue and to ensure that the government would maintain its outcomes as promised. In this case it is improved OH&S outcomes. We accepted that the amendments that we might otherwise have wanted passed would not be put and would not be pursued and we have withdrawn them accordingly. Those things are not unusual for this place. It is not a case where we are seeking to trample over the rights of the Senate. The Senate has an interest.

What we are in a position of asking for today is that the Senate recognise that the government has reached an agreement. We would like the Senate to acknowledge that and allow the Safe Work Australia legislation to be passed.