Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

The coalition does not oppose the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill 2009. In saying that, the legislation does prevent non-government employers from seeking access to the Comcare scheme. That is a matter of concern to us in the coalition, because it removes an option for employers in their ability to access safety rehabilitation and compensation type schemes and, especially, requires employees to go back to their state schemes. It seems that Labor simply dislikes flexibility and options—everybody has to fit into their straitjacket. Of course, we now know what happens with these sorts of straightjackets in state jurisdictions, and one wonders what the pressure was on federal Labor not to allow employers into the Comcare scheme if they wanted to so move, given that the scheme was providing appropriate support and protection. Indeed, to all intents and purposes it is run by the Commonwealth government. So why would you try to get private employers out of this scheme and back into their state jurisdictions? I have no doubt where the pressure came from on this: it clearly would have been New South Wales Labor, against whom, thank goodness, the High Court of Australia yesterday ruled seven to nil while making very condemnatory comments about their occupational health and safety scheme. Indeed, one of the judges, Justice Hayden, went so far as to say that the authority that sought to prosecute a Mr Kirk and his company did so ‘very unjustly and in a manner causing them much harm’. His Honour also said:

It is absurd to have prosecuted the owner of a farm and its principal on the ground that the principal had failed properly to ensure the health, safety and welfare of his manager, who was a man of optimum skill and experience—skill and experience much greater than his own—and a man whose conduct in driving straight down the side of a hill instead of on a formed and safe road was inexplicably reckless. It is time for the WorkCover authority of New South Wales to finish its sport with Mr Kirk.

Those are pretty damning comments about a New South Wales scheme set up by New South Wales Labor in 2001. As an aside, I say to some of the employer organisations in this country that it may be worth while to get a bit of backbone and stand by your principles. This corrupt scheme started in 2001, but it took one man—a small business man, Mr Kirk—to have the courage to take this all the way to the High Court to finally get the result that all of us who believe in the rule of law, natural justice and fair procedure wanted.

Where were these organisations in championing the rights of small business especially against this sort of outrageous authority and the actions referred to by His Honour Justice Hayden? Where were they? Indeed, where were the civil libertarians? You know the ones: those who always have so much to say about our border protection policies but who are deafeningly silent when it comes to Australian citizens being abused by a New South Wales Labor authority—and, might I add, with unions as well, because unions themselves could bring prosecutions under this legislation. Quite frankly, some of those civil libertarians are only civil half the time, and I am not sure about their libertarian nature the other half of the time, but I say to those employer organisations—