Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

She says, ‘I am.’ It is important that the government give constructive reasons as to why these amendments ought not be passed. Just a few hours ago, I went to the launch for Matt Peacock’s book Killer Company: James Hardie Exposed, which is about the disgraceful way that company conducted itself, particularly in relation to a product that has killed thousands of Australians and will kill thousands more, the way there was a cover-up and the way the union movement played an important role. Greg Combet, now a member of the other place, played a key role in holding James Hardie to account. What he did and what people such as Bernie Banton did must not be forgotten. It puts into perspective the importance of effective occupational health and safety laws in this country. Some countries are getting away with their workers and consumers of their products literally being killed because their product is inherently unsafe or they have unsafe work practices. That is why it is important that we have the best possible occupational health and safety laws.

While the intent of the Safe Work Australia Bill 2008 [No. 2] is about establishing an independent statutory body to handle occupational health and safety outcomes and workers compensation arrangements, it does not embrace greater openness and accountability for this body. It is disappointing that the government is not prepared to ensure that both the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the ACTU, the two peak bodies, have a guaranteed say at the table to ensure we get the best possible outcome in relation to this matter. I will be supporting this bill but I support it with a considerable degree of disappointment.

The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Deputy Prime Minister said that she opposed these changes because they would undermine the agreement between the Commonwealth and the states—that is, according to a report in the Australian Financial Review on 21 October 2008. The question has to be asked: what sort of agreement is undermined by more accountability, more effectiveness and more independence? It just does not make sense that the government is taking this approach. It does not make sense given the way the Deputy Prime Minister conducted herself during the Work Choices debate. As I said before, I think she did a magnificent job of shepherding a complex piece of legislation through the House. She listened, she consulted, and amendments were made which, I think, made the legislation much better. Even in the award modernisation process, where there have been some problems with respect to some awards, the minister has shown a willingness to intervene and to ensure that there are no adverse outcomes. That is to be commended. So I am disappointed that the minister has not gone down that path in relation to this piece of legislation.

I look forward to the Rudd government bringing forward other legislation on occupational health and safety. I am still a patron of the Asbestos Victims Association of South Australia. I know first-hand from talking to its members and from going to the funerals of people who have died of mesothelioma how important are effective occupational health and safety laws. In my time in state parliament, I moved legislation for industrial manslaughter laws. I believe that is one reform which the Commonwealth ought to undertake. To have industrial manslaughter laws in this country—and the Commonwealth has the constitutional power to do that—would be a great leap forward. I am convinced, when it comes to the disgusting behaviour of James Hardie and its executives, that had we had industrial manslaughter laws where those executives knew they would face a jail term—not just a fine, not just a bean-counting exercise where they would have to pay more compensation for the workers they killed—their conduct would have been very different. I think they would have taken that deadly product off the market much earlier, given that we knew 100 years ago how dangerous asbestos is. It beggars belief, given the mounting evidence, that asbestos was marketed by James Hardie up until 1987.

I welcome these changes—they could have been better—but until the Rudd government bites the bullet and implements industrial manslaughter laws in this country, we will not get the reforms in occupational health and safety that Australian workers deserve to protect them from rogue employers who do not give a damn about the health and safety and the lives of their workers.