Tuesday, 22 February 2022

Bills

Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Mr EREN (Lara) (14:51): As I was saying just prior to being interrupted by question time, this is a very important bill before the house. I have mentioned the acts that will be amended through this bill and also mentioned some of the aims of the bill, but I would like to continue on from where I left off. To just mention some further aims of the bill, it will improve entitlements for the families of deceased workers, clarify that the funds collected from infringement notices are to be paid into the WorkCover Authority Fund and make technical and procedural amendments to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013.

As I mentioned prior to being interrupted just before question time, when I was about 10 or 11, in the mid-1970s, many people know that I came here as a migrant with my family, and one of those skills that my father had which ended up bringing us to this wonderful nation was that he was a fitter and turner. My mum was also a labourer. We lived at that time at the Alfred Street, North Melbourne, high-rise commission flats, and just adjacent to where we lived, on Boundary Road, there was a company, Henderson’s Federal Spring Works as it used to be called then—I am not sure if they are still there now. It was a very heavy industry factory with a lot of dangerous equipment, mainly presses, and Mum worked there. She tried to get home before we would come home from school and do all those things that mums love to do—take care of their children and make sure that they have food when they get home. One day Mum was not there, and we found out that she had had an accident at work. Mum is deceased now, but unfortunately at the time she lost her index finger from halfway because they would not listen to her when she told the company, or her boss, that the press was faulty. She mentioned it a few times. She was asked to continue on with the work, otherwise she could go home. She did not want to lose her job and continued on with her work, and subsequently the press came down without her pressing the foot pedal and chopped off her finger. It could have been a lot worse. We did not know any of this. All we knew was Mum was in hospital, and of course she missed out on those things that she loved to do for many months after that with the rehabilitation to get her hand mobile again so she could do the things she loved.

That resonated with me. As a 10-, 11-year-old, I was very angry and upset after I found out that her calls for help were ignored and she was asked to continue and subsequently that accident had occurred. That stayed with me for a while because it prompted me when working at Ford—at the tender age of 22, I think it was, back then—on the production line to become a shop steward. I was elected by the floor and subsequently defended the rights of workers on the shop floor. We were pragmatic: if you want to milk the cow, you have got to feed the cow, and it works both ways, for employees and employers.

We managed the best that we could. But at that time the John Cain government introduced an occupational health and safety act for the first time ever, and I had an opportunity—I was asked by my union—to be an occupational health and safety officer along with being a representative for my union, which was the vehicle builders union back then. Again, Ford was a very heavy industry with a lot of machinery, and obviously there were a lot of accidents that occurred for varying reasons. I think that it is incumbent upon employees that they do the best they can—because humans are humans and we are prone to accidents and we are prone to making mistakes—to eliminate some of those dangers that may exist so that people are not injured at work. That is why it is a fine balance obviously, but anybody who goes to work should expect to come home in a safe manner, like they have attended work, and not be either injured or killed at work. That is why it is so important we have come a long way, and that is why I am so proud of this government, who have tremendously assisted along the way over the many years that we have been in government to make our workplaces a lot safer than what they used to be back in the 1970s and 80s, when a lot of people used to get injured and killed—and they still do unfortunately. It is something that we all have to live and contend with every time we leave home regardless of what occupation you do. Some industries are a lot more heavy and industry based, and of course there are a lot more inherent dangers in some of those industries, but there is a sense of an element of danger where you could get injured or obviously killed.

So to that end, the bill covers a range of issues relating to the health and wellbeing of working people and of course strict guidelines to assist and make sure that hopefully we can eliminate some of those deaths that unnecessarily occur in workplaces and injuries that occur in workplaces. These amendments are designed to improve outcomes for injured workers and their families while also enhancing the scheme’s operations and increasing WorkSafe Victoria’s ability to prevent and respond to workplace safety incidents.

If I could continue on, the bill also makes changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996. This will remove barriers to people applying for the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal scheme by prohibiting alleged offenders from being notified of or attending any VOCAT hearings in matters related to family violence or sexual offences before the establishment of a new victims of crime financial assistance scheme, which is very important obviously.

The bill will also amend the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019, the FPRC act. It will amend and extend the presumptive rights coverage under the FPRC act to Fire Rescue Victoria and Country Fire Authority vehicle and equipment maintenance employees—of course those wonderful Country Fire Authority volunteers that do so much for our broader community in times of need. It will change the method of calculating eligibility qualifying periods to count a part year of service as a full year of service, which is fantastic, and allow periods of service as a FRV, CFA or forest firefighter or as a vehicle and equipment maintenance employee to be combined.

Finally, the bill will amend the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014, the LPULA act, to strengthen the integrity of the Victorian Legal Services Board, the VLSB. This aims to ensure lawyer members of the VLSB are not the subject of actual or potential disciplinary action at the time of their appointment and can be removed if they are subject to disciplinary action during their term of office.

As I mentioned, supporting injured workers and their families is so important in so many different ways. This bill adds to the important work our government is doing in this space and makes a range of amendments to several workplace acts. We are delivering on important aspects of the Andrews Labor government’s silica action plan by improving the compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and other like diseases. Again I want to put on record that I am very proud of this legislation. I am proud to be a member of this government, and I wish it a speedy passage.

Mr D O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (15:00): I am pleased to rise to say a few words on this omnibus bill, the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021, and to follow up the comments of the member for Lara on the issue that everyone is entitled to come home safe from work at the end of every day. That is what our workplace safety legislation intends to achieve. I acknowledge the work of the member for Lara and what he has done in the past as a representative of workers and I guess support the principle, but we sometimes come at these matters from a different perspective.

I note that this legislation expands the circumstances in which prohibition notices can be issued, which may in some situations lead to overzealous application by WorkSafe Victoria inspectors, and that is certainly an issue that businesses raise with me from time to time. Obviously it is in the eye of the beholder, but I would hope that as WorkSafe goes about its business it does recognise the need to work with employers and employees and ensure that our workplaces are as safe as possible. As the member for Lara said, humans are prone to accidents, and sometimes they simply do happen. Sometimes workers make mistakes. I had a case last week where an employer rang me—not actually about a workplace safety incident; his complaint was in fact about the health system and the treatment that his worker received after an accident. In this case he said his employee acknowledged that it was simply a mistake, a lapse in judgement on his part, that this accident occurred, and the employee was, sadly, injured. I do not know where that will end up in terms of WorkSafe, but I would hope that an employer who has done the right thing will not be charged for something that was beyond his capability to address.

Certainly I hope that is the way that WorkSafe operates to ensure that yes, people come home safely but also that businesses have the opportunity to ensure they can afford WorkSafe premiums, that they are not penalised unnecessarily for accidents that do happen and that WorkSafe works with employers, not against them, and works on a basis of trying to ensure that I guess there is carrot rather than stick—that there is encouragement and that there is an opportunity for all employers to rectify any safety issues that may be identified rather than simply facing fines or prohibition notices or the like from the start. We certainly advocate a more collaborative approach between inspectors and businesses to that end, so that is what I would hope to see.

This legislation, as I said, is omnibus legislation. It also makes some changes to the situation for victims of crime with a prohibition introduced that ensures that alleged offenders are not notified of or attend any hearing related to family violence or sexual offences in the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. And, as the member for Lara and previous speakers have indicated, the change to the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019 will ensure that vehicle and equipment maintenance employees who attend fires are also covered by the presumptive rights legislation that has passed this chamber. These employees will now be provided with a rebuttable presumption that if they are suffering from a specified form of cancer it is presumed to be due to their employment.

We know this is an issue for both career firefighters and also our volunteers in the CFA. I will just take a moment to congratulate our local volunteers. We had a fairly significant fire in the Darriman area on the weekend. It started by a lightning strike, we think, on Friday night and burnt about 140 hectares in the Darriman area. Twenty-five trucks responded to that, and I thank the volunteers who came out and got that one under control. There were helicopters involved, and I am not sure but I suspect Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning firefighters were also involved because it was at one stage racing towards the South Gippsland Highway, from which it was a jump across the road to the Mullungdung State Forest, and of course no-one wanted that fire to get in there.

I rang one of the local landholders this morning who was directly affected, and she advised that other than some fencing—probably a couple of kilometres of fencing—thankfully there was no stock or building damage or anything. So I thank the volunteers who do such a great job, and I encourage the government to continue to remember the CFA.

My concern continues about the changes that have been brought in, not only since the presumptive rights legislation but since the FRV legislation as well. I know in my area, district 10, and in district 9 there have been some significant issues with the commander vacancies. In district 10 at least just before Christmas there were still a number of vacancies that had not been filled—had not been filled for months and months and months—and it is a concern that FRV is not prioritising these important positions in the CFA. So I call on the government to act on that—I have done so before—and I also call on the government to provide better support. I am very pleased that the CFA board has finally allocated capital funding for a number of stations in my electorate that I have been fighting for, but they have done so without any support from the state government for the CFA. So that is an issue that I will continue to fight for, and I am sure that the member for Gembrook may have more to say about it, because he is very passionate also about the CFA and the work of our volunteers right across the state.

There are also some other changes in this omnibus bill to the legal profession’s involvement in the Victorian Legal Services Board. There are stricter requirements introduced for the appointment of lawyer members to the Victorian Legal Services Board, ensuring that appointees are not the subject of any actual or potential disciplinary action at the time of their appointment and further that lawyer members will be able to be removed from the Victorian Legal Services Board if they are subject to disciplinary action during their term of office. That is appropriate and I guess is tidying up a loose end. Often when we establish these organisations, boards and commissions there are minor things such as this that are overlooked, and it is important that they are cleared up and dealt with.

I do just make a comment in passing on the nature of this omnibus bill. It makes sense to have an omnibus bill on a whole range of different things, for example, that affect workplace safety. It is a bit weird for us to be debating in this chamber an omnibus bill with so many different, apparently unrelated parts. It is a little odd. This is probably a rare occasion where one of those odd parts is not something designed to be a wedge for the opposition, given that we are not opposing this legislation and all the elements of this bill are agreeable to the Liberals and Nationals. But it is a little odd that these different things have been lumped in separately on issues that are relatively unrelated.

As I said, we have always a little concern as to how workplace safety is dealt with by WorkSafe and whether that is done in a balanced way. The member for Lara talked about the need for balance, and again I agree with him. I suspect we probably come at it from different perspectives when it comes to balance, but there is a need for balance in terms of ensuring that our employers are encouraged and incentivised to ensure that they are doing the right thing and that where there are mistakes they are identified and rectified rather than simply hit with the full force of the law. And absolutely, if there are wilful or extremely dangerous situations, then yes, of course prosecutions need to occur. But we hope, as the member for Lara indicated, that WorkSafe can get the balance right.

We will continue to advocate for that collaborative approach between inspectors and business to make sure that there is an incentive and understanding for employers and employees to make safety a priority. It is important that no-one is at risk when going to and coming home from work. It is critical that we do so. So the opposition is, as I said, not opposing this legislation, and I look forward to its passage through the chamber.

Ms SETTLE (Buninyong) (15:10): I am very pleased to stand to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. You really cannot find a more Labor bill than this. Workplace safety and the safety of Victorian workers have been and always will be the top priority for those on this side—the government. Our workplace laws would not exist except for a Labor government. It was in 1985 that the Cain Labor government established Victoria’s safety and compensation scheme, and it is one of Labor’s proudest achievements. Those reforms made it safer for all Victorians to go to work. More recently we have introduced what can only be described as historic protections in the workplace manslaughter laws. I really would like to acknowledge our previous Attorney-General, the member for Altona, and the extraordinary work that she did in this space.

The workplace manslaughter laws mean something to everyone on this side of the house, but for me and the member for Wendouree they have particular resonance because they came out of the awful, awful tragedy that we saw unfold in Ballarat on a worksite when we lost two workers. The families of Jack Brownlee and Charlie Howkins will never, ever be the same. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them as well. They put in an extraordinary amount of work to try and create those laws. It was a very bittersweet time for them. Those laws were never going to bring back their loved ones, but they might prevent families from going through something like that themselves in the future. The area of workplace safety is something that we on this side of the house feel very strongly about, and I think that our actions speak loudly to that.

I would also like to acknowledge Kelly Dubberley who, on the third anniversary of that tragedy unfolding in Ballarat, walked 90 kilometres from Geelong to Ballarat to raise funds for the Ballarat and regional workers memorial. Kelly was very close to the Brownlee family, but what is so incredibly important about this monument is that it stands there for everybody to see—for everyone in the regions to stop and think about the ramifications of neglect on worksites. Kelly raised an extraordinary amount of money, and I was really, really pleased that this government contributed to that monument as well.

Since we introduced those laws we have not stopped. We have continued to look at workplace safety and workplace safety legislation. This bill is a bit of an omnibus bill. It brings a few different elements together, but at its heart it is about the same thing—it is about our absolute commitment to protecting workers. We will continue to deliver on the Andrews Labor government’s silica action plan by improving the compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis. The bill will also extend presumptive rights to compensation coverage to the vehicle and equipment maintenance employees of Fire Rescue Victoria and the Country Fire Authority. The bill also makes changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 to remove barriers for people applying to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. We are making sure that WorkSafe Victoria have got the tools they need to prevent serious injuries by changing the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and directions, and including a broader range of matters to be notifiable incidents, including infectious diseases and illnesses as well as near misses.

I am sorry to say there was an article in the Ballarat Courier in February which cited the fact that young workers in Ballarat have the highest rate of workplace injuries in regional Victoria. There were a huge amount of injuries recorded, and WorkSafe Victoria as a consequence are doing a big campaign in Ballarat. I would also like to give a shout-out of course to the wonderful Ballarat Regional Trades and Labour Council. Lana Cormie, who was the wife of Charlie Howkins, who lost his life in that awful tragedy, now has gone on to work at trades hall in workplace safety. That is an extraordinary thing for Lana. I remember talking to her about it, and she felt that she wanted to use her experience to help others. So at the moment you can get workplace health and safety training at Ballarat Trades Hall, and that is a wonderful thing. I am really interested, given that we have had this report about the increase in injuries amongst young people at work in Ballarat and the high level of it, and I am really keen to encourage young workers to turn to the Ballarat trades and labour council. That is what they are there for—to advise young people in the workplace—so please do contact them if you are worried about any safety issues in your workplace.

This bill, as I mentioned, covers a few things. One of the things is around improving the compensation arrangement for workers with silicosis. I think this is an interesting one, because in May 2019 the Andrews Labor government unveiled the nation-leading and comprehensive silica action plan. It included a statewide ban on uncontrolled dry cutting of materials, a tough new compliance code, the development of Australia’s first licensing scheme and a special WorkSafe team focused on silica-related hazards. That was a pretty groundbreaking piece of work. People really need to understand the consequences. I do not think anyone knew that silica was going to cause those terrible things, but when we did we actually went out there and made sure that we changed that working environment. What this bill will mean is that it will ensure that injured workers and their dependents get simpler and faster access to entitlements, and that will include medical expenses and payment for lost wages. Whilst that 2019 work was incredibly important, this follows that through and makes sure that the support is getting to those families.

Likewise, in terms of the element in relation to the CFA, the presumptive legislation was pretty groundbreaking back in, again, 2019. I am very, very proud of this government for that legislation, and I was very proud to speak on it. I come from a long family of CFA volunteers. My dad has been in the CFA for over 40 years, and whilst I have been a volunteer myself, I have to say I am not active at the moment but certainly have grown up around the CFA. I was really delighted when we had the presumptive legislation, because they deserved to be recognised in that legislation. Of course this now extends that further. Vehicle and equipment maintenance workers are an absolutely integral part of our fire services, and this will mean that those presumptive rights cover them as well. I know that in Ballan we now have a new training centre, and it is a pretty extraordinary training centre. If anyone gets the opportunity to go and visit it, it is well worth a visit. But one really gets a sense—it is a training ground for their CFA—of everyone’s involvement when you are fighting a fire. Certainly those vehicle guys, the maintenance guys, are just as much there and deserve the same protections as everyone in the CFA. So I am very pleased to see this legislation extend those compensation rights to everyone who needs them.

The Victorian Law Reform Commission conducted a review into the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996, and this bill will follow through on one of those recommendations.

In closing, I just want to remark that this bill makes some really important changes to Victoria’s workplace laws to support Victorian workers and keep them safe. I am incredibly proud to be part of a government that has really kept absolutely top-of-the-list worker protections. We have gone a long way to develop those—as I say, everything through to the workplace manslaughter laws, but of course beginning way back under a Cain Labor government in 1985 in creating this compensation legislation in the first place—so I am very, very proud to support this bill.

Mr BATTIN (Gembrook) (15:20): I rise to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. This is a bill that will have various acts amended as it goes through. Workplace safety, as we all know—it does not matter which side of the house you sit on—is something that is very, very important. Every person is entitled to go to a workplace that is safe, where they feel comfortable and where they do not have any issues, particularly with management et cetera.

This dates back to, obviously, well and truly before my time in Parliament, but one of the first things we brought into Parliament after I came in was Brodie’s law. That was in 2011, and that was implementing some of the changes we needed around workplace safety measures, particularly around the bullying of someone in the workplace. That is something that people would all agree on—that no-one should be bullied in their workplace. I think it was very important that this legislation was brought in, and it was supported by all within the Parliament, around issues of bullying in the workplace.

Bullying obviously is something that everybody should be ensuring that they are taking up the issues around when a victim speaks up. People within the workplace should be listening to that victim—part of that was that a bullying allegation would even continue if others in that workplace then went on to question the victim who was making those allegations. I think that is something that we all need to be very cautious of, because now under that legislation a person who is the manager and oversees that knowingly and fails to act can be sentenced to up to 10 years jail. I suppose timing is everything. We saw an investigation announced via the media this week into our Premier, and you would hope that something like Brodie’s law would be taken into consideration when there are allegations that a person in such a senior position, being the Premier, was aware of an incident that was happening. More disappointing was the failure of many members of the Victorian Labor Party to come out and support the victim rather than just blaming the victim for coming out and putting accusations forward.

I have heard many members speak on firefighters in Victoria, and we have always been proud to support all of our firefighters here in this state. We note one thing with this when they are talking about presumptive legislation, which is in this bill—we have said we are not opposing this bill going forward—which I think is important we get on the record. I note the member for Gippsland South spoke about an omnibus bill and having various parts of a bill put together to try and wedge the opposition. If you talk about the reason we did not have presumptive legislation for a long period of time for our volunteer firefighters, it was because the government opted to put two pieces of legislation together: one to disrespect volunteers and at the same time a piece of legislation to protect them. A decision had to be made by the opposition on whether it would support or not support that legislation. We could not in our right mind, going out to speak to volunteers, vote for a piece of legislation that was effectively going to tear apart the CFA here in Victoria, and we are seeing the consequences of that bill, a lot of it, now coming into play. If you go out and speak to then members of the United Firefighters Union, who were with either CFA or MFB and are now with FRV, those that campaigned so hard against some of this because they were fed so much wrong information and negative information from the union management now are the ones that are coming forward and saying there are issues in relation to what happened with that piece of legislation and how the impact within the CFA is affecting the whole state, and we are starting to see that across the whole of Victoria.

When we talk about workplace safety, we understand on this side it is not just about employees, it is about volunteers in those services. Whilst we support the presumptive legislation, one of the things that is very important is for the management of CFA and FRV, including Emergency Management Victoria, to ensure that their people on the ground, no matter whether they are paid or not, are kept safe. Today we have seen reports where the leases for the helicopters that are used for fighting fires here in Victoria are ending and they are heading back out of the country, so if we have fires from today on, we are going to have less response available because the government failed to have those leases for the normal period of time. And fires will continue post 22 February; they will go into March.

I know, Deputy Speaker, that you represent an area where when a fire starts in some of the grasslands it moves so fast it puts people at risk. The best way to fight those fires is using the best technology and using aircraft—helicopters and planes—to ensure that we can get those fires out as quick as we can. The government have been in the media a lot talking about how they are going to protect our firefighters on the ground by using these aircraft. They spoke about the Chinook and they spoke about the night ops and ensuring that we can put fires out because we can control and put them out faster at night using the aircraft. Yet the Victorian government, the Andrews Labor government, have failed on every occasion other than the trial to have these night ops going because they continually fail to do the documentation to register with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. It would protect our firefighters and make it safer for them on the ground if we had those aircraft up at night. The government need to come out and explain why they have not got those aircraft going.

Then to add to it this year, we had aircraft where they ordered the aircraft but they forgot to order the belly that carries the water. Effectively we have helicopters that can fly around and, if anything, hopefully use their blades to push the wind the other way to stop it coming towards a town, because this government failed when it came to ensuring we had water available to go onto the fires. That is about protecting those on the ground. That is what work safety is. It is about protecting our firefighters. It is about protecting our emergency services. It is about protecting every person throughout Victoria and ensuring safe workplaces.

We must make sure that in the future we do this better. We must make sure that volunteers are protected the same as career firefighters in every element of workplace safety. The management of the United Firefighters Union have in the past come out and spoken about trucks and had positive changes. I will say the United Firefighters Union of Victoria have seen positive changes in the way firefighters are protected here in this state. What we do have issue with is that the government have failed to protect the volunteers in the same way. We have areas where trucks on average have an age of over 20 years. I am out in the Dandenong Ranges. We have stations out in the Dandenong Ranges where trucks do not have brakes, where you have to start the truck and wait 2 to 3 minutes before you have enough air in the brakes for that vehicle to leave. Who would want to be driving a vehicle around the Dandenong Ranges that potentially has no air for the brakes to stop? I guarantee an FRV member protected by the UFU would not do that, but our volunteers will do this. Why? Because they want to protect our state. They want to protect their community. They want to make sure that if there is a fire in the Dandenong Ranges, they respond with the water that is required to put that fire out. The government must respond to this crisis out there as well. Our fire trucks, our response vehicles, the uniforms they wear—they need to make sure they have the same and adequate protections, because if they do not, it is going to put all Victorians at risk.

I will go back to where I started on this bill. Every person deserves a safe workplace—every person—and that includes people in this place. That is why we originally introduced Brodie’s law in 2011. That is why the then opposition, the Victorian Labor Party, supported that legislation. It is a shame that today we see an absolute 180-degree flip on Brodie’s law when it comes down to someone in their own team being accused of bullying. No person should ever go to work and be bullied. No person should ever go to work and if they go out and make a complaint, have others go out against them. We need to make sure that the investigation system and the investigations are independent of government. I think one of the biggest issues here in Victoria is every person who is watching this or listening to this who is outside of this place, who is not under the thumb of the Victorian Labor Party, simply does not trust the investigations anymore. There is so much influence from the Victorian Labor Party within all of our public sector that they do not have faith the investigations will be independent. They do not trust they will be independent, and even if the member for Mulgrave has as Premier bullied someone in his own workplace or known about that and failed to act, Victorians do not have faith or trust that that will be investigated correctly.

Sitting suspended 3.30 pm until 4.02 pm.

Mr DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh) (16:02): It is a pleasure to join the debate on this important bill. It is a grab bag of very important initiatives, and the ones I want to focus on in my contribution are specifically the ones that relate to worker protections and further enhancements to those protections. In relation to those, we have already commenced substantive changes to those areas in previous bills and this bill makes amendments to further strengthen those regimes.

The first of those is the amendments to improve compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and similar occupational diseases and to deliver on aspects of the government’s silica action plan. These amendments will allow injured workers with silicosis or silica-related diseases to make further common-law applications for damages if they develop a subsequent silica-related disease. It provides injured workers who receive a lung transplant as a result of their work-related injury an entitlement to a deemed minimum level of assessed impairment.

The other element of the worker protection regime that I want to spend a bit of time on today is the enhancements to the presumptive rights that we passed in this Parliament for firefighters. This bill seeks to extend the presumptive right coverage under the relevant acts to vehicle and equipment maintenance employees. We started with firefighters and now we are extending it to people who work in other elements of firefighting, including, as I said, equipment and maintenance employees. It also seeks to amend the method of calculating eligibility qualifying periods to count a part year’s service as a full year and allows an employee’s periods of service across different firefighting authorities and agencies to be combined when assessing years of service.

For the Labor government this is standard but critically important fare, and not just for the Labor government but for the Labor Party over its 130-year history. There are so many stories to tell about the labour movement and Labor governments around the country, both federal and state, in terms of their work and their efforts to establish legislative and non-legislative infrastructure to support workers. Dating back to the Eight-Hours Act of 1916, every year—even before then, since the commencement of the Labor Party in 1891—we have fought to ensure Australians can go to work and can return safely home, not just for those Australians but critically for their families and their communities. It started with the basic entitlement to be able to survive your day at work and the basic elements of safety at work—safety in terms of being able to come home but safety also in terms of being able to come home in one piece and healthy to live another day. We have obviously extended that commitment to worker safety to a range of other initiatives in relation to worker benefits, because prior to government intervention there was an imbalance of power, and there still is. In fact the market consistently tests us with the balance of power against capital, not because capital is inherently malicious but because capital finds the best and most efficient use of resources. So the government has to respond to counterbalance that. While that sounds standard fare across all political parties, I think the history of initiatives and achievements in this regard by the labour movement, as expressed by Labor governments, shows that one side of the political fence has a particular value set that prioritises this particular policy area—industrial relations and the protection of workers.

If we look back at our achievements here in Victoria—I mean, you can look back to the days of John Curtin and Chifley in the 1940s and earlier in Australian political history—industrial manslaughter laws were passed in July 2020. When you think about that, for me it seems incredibly peculiar and a big omission that those laws were not passed decades before. How is it appropriate that a death at work does not lead to a criminal investigation of a criminal action? We passed those laws in July 2020. The criminalisation of wage theft is again another law, which we passed in June 2021. Why is it that it took until June 2021 for criminalisation of wage theft, which in many other contexts is a criminal offence but when it related to workers it never was? Then of course that legislation enabled workers to access and retrieve entitlements: overtime, leave, sick leave, maternity and paternity leave, minimum wages and award wages. There is an entire regime that tries to lift workers to an appropriate level of remuneration and an appropriate level of safety, and it is in that way addressing the power imbalance that millions of workers face across the country and in Victoria.

1984 seems like a long time ago, and despite my—I am told occasionally; maybe not today because I am a bit tired—youthful looks, I was in grade 6 in 1984. In 1984 the Hawke government, a Labor government, passed an act of the Australian Parliament to outlaw sex discrimination in the workplace. I mean, it is a long time ago, 1984, but if you look at the history of workers in this country, it is quite late in the piece to outlaw discrimination based on sex. But again, it was a Labor government—of course the Hawke government. I think of that time and my female teachers at school and other workers in the service and other industries who were female and what they would have faced, in fact what they still face today despite those laws, but they have come a long way because of the intervention of Labor governments.

Occupational health and safety laws were again passed by Labor governments, both federal and state. Protections against sexual, physical and other forms of harassment at work and paid super on all hours of work were made right in this chamber. The portability of long service leave for key vulnerable industries was a big, big reform. I think I spoke on that bill and mentioned my mum. Why should my mum have missed out on long service leave after working for years as a cleaner because the outfit that employed her changed hands multiple times? She worked in the same location for many of those years.

And then of course we have had the labour hire agency reforms in this Parliament as well.

Ms McLeish: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, the member for Oakleigh seems to be straying considerably from this bill. He has talked about the portability of long service leave—that bill was passed quite some time ago—and now he has moved onto yet another bill, so I would like to hear his contribution on this bill.

Ms Spence: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, this has been an incredibly wideranging debate and I have heard contributions from many people both on this side of the house and opposite, and I would ask that you rule the point of order out of order.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Blackwood): I do not uphold the point of order. However, just be mindful that your remarks pertain to the bill.

Mr DIMOPOULOS: Thank you, Acting Speaker. I take your guidance. Look, I suppose just in some sort of response to the member for Eildon, I think Victorians have a right to know the context, the values set and the drumbeat behind an initiative like this, any initiative that comes to the floor of the Parliament. Otherwise it just seems like a disparate, disconnected group of bills that we may pass in any one year. My point effectively is this bill is critically important, but placing it in a historical context of worker rights and a regime that protects those rights and enhances those rights is what I was trying to demonstrate. This is really important, whether it comes to the amendments in relation to presumptive rights for firefighters—extending those to those who maintain vehicles, extending those to those who have worked as firefighters in different agencies and being able to combine that collectively into one long service—or whether it comes to other workers. That is the importance of this bill. That is our commitment to the Labor cause and to workers in Victoria. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms McLEISH (Eildon) (16:12): I rise to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. Now, there is quite a bit in this omnibus bill and there are a couple of areas that I will focus specifically on, particularly workplace safety and fire services, but I also just want to mention briefly that it does touch on victims of crime and the legal profession. I was quite interested to see that with regard to the legal profession it imposes stricter requirements for the appointment of lawyer members to the Victorian Legal Services Board, ensuring that they are not the subject of any actual or potential disciplinary action at the time of their appointment. I found it quite remarkable that they could actually have been in the first place. If that needed to be tightened up, well, that is a good thing, but I was really quite shocked to think that it was some part that needed to be tightened.

With regard to the fire services, we see that this is now extending the presumptive rights legislation. We have had a couple of bills before the house with regard to presumptive rights legislation, most recently with the forest firefighters being brought under this umbrella, and that also links to their weekly benefits. I was quite surprised to think that perhaps there was that opportunity when this bill went before Parliament—it was actually passed in November last year—to have perhaps included these amendments at that time, because I would have thought that it would have fitted a lot better, but it appears that the government did not quite have their act together. I do not know whether they were dithering about whether or not to include the vehicle and equipment maintenance employees who attend fires or not. I am not quite sure of what the background is there that has brought these workers under the fold here. So this means that now, like for other volunteer and career firefighters, for forest firefighters, if they have one of the prescribed cancers, it outlines the process for accepting those claims and the fact that they can do that. So now we are bringing these guys into the fold.

While I am at it, I just do want to commend the forest firefighters. I was speaking to some very recently who were talking to me, alarmingly, about the number of fires that they have to deal with that are related to lightning strikes, which they cannot prevent, but also unattended camp fires or not properly extinguished camp fires. For too long people have not understood that the camp fire must be cold to touch, and in an area that has a lot of forest and a lot of grass it is very concerning that this is the case. So I want to just commend the forest fire workers for their work and also, with the volunteers that were already under this scheme, the work that they have done in and around our property recently with regard to fires caused by lightning strikes. It was really quite remarkable to think that despite some areas having 60 millilitres of rain overnight and the lightning strikes being early in the morning, the fires actually began much later in the day—from midday until about 3.30—because the grass had dried off significantly in that period despite there being quite heavy rainfall.

Ms Settle: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, the member at the table asked us so clearly before to stick to the relevance of the bill. I feel that she is straying here and discussing a fire incident of sometime ago and would ask her to come back to the bill, as she so succinctly asked those on this side to do.

Ms McLEISH: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, it was not sometime ago; it was only a couple of weeks ago. However, if the member likes to refer to the legislation, it does mention this, and I am happy for her to point out which part I am breaching because I can see quite clearly that it does recommend—

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Blackwood): Thank you, member for Eildon. Member for Buninyong, I do not uphold the point of order, but per my previous advice to the member for Oakleigh, could the member for Eildon contain her remarks to the bill wherever possible. Thank you.

Ms McLEISH: Now I want to move to workplace safety and particularly the prohibition notices. There are a couple of things that this bill does do. It improves access to impairment compensation for some diseases—particularly it mentions silicosis—and allows a greater understanding and access to lump sum payments because at the moment if you have this disease you are unable to pursue common-law claims. What is also important here is where diseases progress, because when people have compensation or have sought a lump sum claim and their case gets worse—if they have to have a lung transplant, for example—and they have deteriorated they can be in quite a different state to what they had been. These situations can be extremely complex. We can talk about the removal of a lung. The bill talks about permanent impairment being at 30 per cent and being assessed prior to the lung being removed and having the transplant rather than having to apply and wait after it has happened, and it makes perfect sense if you are about to undergo that operation. I would like to think that these operations are in fact urgent and there would not be an incredible wait like there are with so many other conditions at the moment. But I think this is actually a good thing, the recognition that with some of these conditions people can continue to deteriorate and their disease is what can be called progressive.

One of the other factors is that usually you need to, with the extent of permanent impairment, have your condition stabilised for 12 months before you are eligible. In some of these cases that is just not going to happen because you are going to be on, sadly, a very downward trajectory. Also this does some extra work around compensation for families, particularly families of those who have lost their lives through workplace fatalities. It puts a child with a disability on the same page as a full-time student or apprentice. They could actually have a claim until the age of 25, whereas a disability was only up to 16. It impacts on home help services as well.

I will comment on workplace fatalities. The Labor government’s record here is really quite poor. When you have a look, in 2020 there were 67; in 2019, 71; in 2018, 49; and in the years prior to that—back to 2010—these numbers were in the 20s. I think this is an absolutely serious situation where the numbers have tripled. The government really needs to take a good, hard look at what they are doing and how they are doing it because the number of families that are being impacted in a horrible way is just growing and is not heading in the right direction. You have really got to wonder what is happening in that space.

An area of concern with this bill is the expansion of circumstances in which prohibition notices can be issued. We do not have a lot of detail here. Clause 54 talks about changing from ‘an immediate risk’ to the health or safety of a person to ‘a serious risk’. So we do not have a lot of information about immediate risk compared to serious risk, and I am concerned that there could be some overzealous people out there who are pretty quick to issue these prohibition notices. That does concern me, and I know that the government often has a stick approach. Now, not all employers, especially newer ones, are briefed completely on OH&S; they are not experts, and they do need to have someone work with them to understand what their requirements are and, if they are not sure, to make a change for the positive in their workplace. When you have officers that may go into a workplace and say, ‘If you don’t fix that by next week, I will shut you down’, it is not the right approach. Other than that, they could say if they go into that workplace, ‘Look, this is a problem. Let’s help you fix that. You need to correct this’. I would rather see that sort of approach where WorkSafe Victoria employees are working very closely with the employers, because a lot of the employers really want to do the right thing. Most of them do. You get occasional ones that have not done the right thing, but we really need to see that sort of approach here.

I guess it is discretionary—the bill is discretionary—and I would like to see, as certainly our lead speaker here would, greater guidance provided on how inspectors can consistently identify risks that are likely to eventuate, because it is not immediate risk that we are talking about now; as I said, it has been changed to serious risk. We need to make sure that there is consistency between inspectors and officers that are out in workplaces working with employers, looking at these things, and I would certainly hope that in the implementation of this legislation that gets dealt with accordingly.

Ms SULEYMAN (St Albans) (16:22): I rise today to make a contribution on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021, and I echo the sentiments on this side of the house and the contributions made so far. I am proud to be part of a government that has put workplace safety and caring for workers and their families front and centre of every decision that it makes. Unfortunately and tragically we have had a number of workplace accidents across our state. Just in 2021 we saw tragically 66 fatalities, and in 2022 there have already been a further six. I know in the last few years there have been fatalities in my electorate of St Albans, and it is always quite shocking and of course horrific and tragic for loved ones, families and the local community. Every Victorian deserves to be safe at work, and every Victorian deserves to return home from work to their family, to their loved ones, to their communities.

We have already delivered key reforms in this space, whether they be through the provisional payments, the arbitration function of the Accident Compensation Conciliation Service or our nation-leading silica licensing scheme. Worker safety is everyone’s responsibility. Everyone has an obligation of care, and with this bill we are getting on with the measures that make workplaces safer for workers and ensuring that injured workers and their families get the support that they need when they most need it. Our government will always do what is necessary to protect workers, their workplaces and their families, and this is what this bill aims at actually delivering.

This bill adds to our strong record on workplace safety by putting in place important aspects of the Andrews government’s silica action plan. This bill will improve compensation arrangements for workers and also for diseases other than silicosis, and that is really important, recognising that other diseases are also factors that tragically can occur at work. We are ensuring that WorkSafe Victoria have all the tools that they need to prevent serious injury by changing the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and directions. We are underscoring the seriousness of workplace incidents by including a broader range of matters to be considered—and that is really critical to this bill—including, as I have already made reference to, infectious diseases and illnesses as well as near misses. And they do happen in workplaces; we have all heard of incidents of near misses, and that is why it is so important to encapsulate that as well.

We are also recognising what a difficult time it is for the families of loved ones who have been tragically killed or taken away at work by improving compensation entitlements. Before I move to these amendments, I recall as a kid growing up in St Albans there was a lovely Greek family who lived around the corner from me—this is probably when I was 10 and playing with the kids—and being told that their father did not return from work. It touched me back then and I thought, ‘Why didn’t their father return home from work?’. I did not quite understand how someone could not return from work. I believe at the time he worked for a local council—the father who was deceased, unfortunately. As a 10-year-old, and seeing those kids growing up without a father, it was really something that resonated in my journey growing up, to see the effects on that family of not having their father return from work at such a young age—a young family—the absolute effects it had on the loved ones, the children growing up, the mother that was left behind, the wife that was left behind to care for a young family. It was just heartbreaking at the time.

That is why when a bill like this where these amendments will improve outcomes and in particular outcomes for injured workers and their families—making sure that they are in a space where they can still have the support services, making sure that they can still pay their essential bills—and at least have those support services around families is absolutely critical in enhancing the scheme’s operation, increasing WorkSafe’s ability to prevent and most importantly respond to workplace safety incidents. We know how important response is, and having these amendments, where responding to workplace safety incidents is a priority, I think is really important. As I said, I know that these measures will make a real difference to making sure that no worker is injured; that if workers are injured, they are covered; and while we do not want to see any worker lose their life at work, if that—tragically—is to happen, that their loved ones and family are supported. That is so essential—to make sure that these protections are in place.

We have heard many contributions in relation to silica and the arrangements for disease compensation. It was just in May 2019 that the Andrews government unveiled our nation-leading and comprehensive silica action plan, a first for this country. Silica-related illnesses have a debilitating and quite adverse impact for far too many workers. I know out in the west far too many families and workers who experience this, in particular in the stonemason industry. In particular out in Sunshine, for instance, I have heard of many cases of people who are working with engineered stone, commonly used for benchtops, and other materials of course. They are at a higher risk of exposure, which can lead to deadly lung and respiratory diseases. I just want to also include that tragically since the beginning of last year four workers have died from silica-related illnesses and WorkSafe has accepted around 60 claims for silica-related diseases. So it just shows that this has been really overarching and impacting communities across Victoria.

Again, this bill is about strengthening our occupational health and safety laws to provide more support to workers, their families, their local communities and also businesses. Having those protections gives reassurance to everybody. When we look at the statement from WorkSafe’s headline ‘No-one immune from workplace tragedy’ and the incredible efforts of WorkSafe in preventing injury and fatality in Victorian workplaces, well, that really says so much. WorkSafe has been tremendous, and this bill really does provide those measures to improve the lives of so many Victorian workers, their families and their loved ones, and in particular in my electorate of St Albans. It is important. Communities rely on us to make sure that these workplace safety and compensation frameworks are in place, and it is necessary to improve compensation outcomes for Victorian workers and their families and to support families during immensely difficult circumstances, whether it is an effect on health, whether it is injury or whether someone has unfortunately and horrifically lost their loved one, and we have seen that with the example of silica and other related diseases. It is terrible, but by making these amendments and these changes and importantly these reforms, the Andrews Labor government can deliver, and I am proud to be part of the government.

Mr MORRIS (Mornington) (16:32): It is a pleasure to join this debate. I think the member for Oakleigh referred to this bill as a grab bag; I probably would not be quite that kind. But you would have to say the workplace safety issues certainly do dominate it through the Accident Compensation Act 1985, the Dangerous Goods Act 1985, the Equipment (Public Safety) Act 1994, the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019—parliamentary counsel really let themselves go on that one, didn’t they?—the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014, the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 and the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996. I guess the two that really do not fit into that overarching theme of workplace safety are the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act changes and the Victims of Crime Assistance Act changes. I certainly have no problems with the changes that are proposed for both of those acts of Parliament, but I do question what the hell they are doing in this bill. It is in that sense, as the member for Oakleigh said, a grab bag. Six acts basically cover the same area; the other two are just tacked on.

It seems to me that the only reason they are in fact there is that the minister happens to be in the same department. There seems to be no other logical connection at all. I just make the observation that that really is a bad precedent, because clearly the minister who has management of this bill is across the workplace safety aspects, across those aspects of the portfolio, but—and this is not a criticism at all—it is just not practical for that minister to be across the detail of other portfolios to the extent required. I make the point that in the briefing that was provided to the member for Ferntree Gully and a number of us I asked a question about a particular piece of legislation and the people doing the briefing could not give that answer. I mean, they went off and found the answer and got the information for us, and I appreciate the briefing and I am not critical of the fact they could not provide the information, but the point I am making is that that inability to provide information arises from the fact that these two changes have been lumped in with a package of changes to workplace safety laws, and they in my view should not have been. But that is probably enough on that.

The changes proposed by part 2 to the Accident Compensation Act improve compensation arrangements for workers with—I love the language—‘certain work-related injuries that are progressive in nature’. I think the member for St Albans talked about the impact of silicosis. This is a terrible scourge, and it is absolutely essential that we keep all legislation, but particularly workplace safety legislation, up to date because the dangers change all the time. The manner in which the condition, if unfortunately it is contracted, needs to be dealt with and the way in which compensation measures apply need to keep evolving, and what is proposed here in terms of those changes is entirely appropriate. Also the changes with regard to allowances for attendance at funerals, but that is a relatively minor part of part 2.

A number of speakers in this debate have rightly made the point that workplace safety is not negotiable, that it is a right that everyone should enjoy. To me it is not just about safer workplaces in the physical sense. In the context of these conversations we talk a lot about physical safety. We have had the conversation about particularly disabilities arising from incidents or at worst deaths, but there are lots of other ways you can be injured in the workplace. We need to protect mental health for workers. We need to make sure that workplaces are free from bullying. To me, regardless of what you are doing—it does not matter, frankly, whether you are working on the Metro Tunnel, whether you are a chippy on a block out at Clyde or whether you are working in this place—you deserve to be protected and not just physically. You need to be protected in terms of mental health and you need to be protected from bullying. We have heard lots of talk from many people on the government side not just in the context of this debate but in innumerable debates over my 15-plus years in this place where it is the high moral ground all the time. But unfortunately walking the talk does not always happen. I will not go to the obvious incidents that are current, but I think we need to be aware of the hypocrisy that unfortunately is shown so often.

There is I think a concern with regard to the changes to prohibition notices. I know there are two views on that one. The expansion of circumstances in which prohibition notices can be issued has the potential to lead to a situation where inspectors are simply issuing penalties rather than seeking to get the problem solved, and in the context of workplace safety getting the problem solved, to me, is paramount. It is not about additional income; it is about getting the problem solved, and I am not sure the legislation does that appropriately. You need to encourage collaboration. We talk about the need for collaboration between employers and employees. You need collaboration between the inspectors and the operators of the business as well. Simply whacking a fine on people does not solve the problem, and that is a concern.

Parts 3 and 4, the amendments to the Dangerous Goods Act and the Equipment (Public Safety) Act, essentially both clarify that the funds that are collected from infringements are paid into the WorkCover Authority Fund. So it is hypothecation. I know the Leader of the Nationals—and I heard the member for Ripon—talked about this. I probably have a slightly different view to some of my colleagues. Hypothecation has its place.

A couple of years ago, I think it was, I was very keen to see the amounts collected from boating licences hypothecated to the Better Boating Fund. That was the commitment that the government of the day—the current government—had made, but when we came to the legislation the hypothecation was not there. It was simply, ‘Trust me, I’m the Treasurer. Whatever comes into that fund I will allocate, but it’s still going into general revenue’. Yet in this case I think it is very different because we are talking about infringements. We are talking about penalties issued at the discretion of inspectors, not licences that are paid by users of a service or users of a particular public facility, as with the Better Boating Fund. So there is a real danger with this particular brand of hypothecation, where the penalties go back into a fund controlled by the employer. In many ways it is simply direct taxation, so I do have some concerns about hypothecation in this case. There is a real potential for some overzealous enforcement.

There are a range of other measures in this bill. As I mentioned, the two that do not slot into the workplace safety area are the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act—I do not profess to know a great deal about it, but on the surface it appears to be a useful change—and I certainly do want to acknowledge and support the changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act. It is a bill that is not exactly perfect but one that probably does more good than harm, so I am not opposed.

Mr TAK (Clarinda) (16:42): I am proud to rise today to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. This government has a proven track record of protecting Victorian workers. In my short time here we have seen the passage of some historic legislation. Workplace manslaughter legislation is one. We went to the election with a promise to make workplace manslaughter a criminal offence, and that is exactly what we did, because there is nothing more important than every worker coming home safe every day.

We have demonstrated this commitment over and over again: wage theft laws, labour hire licensing, a secure work pilot scheme and a host of amendments to justice and workplace legislation. I could go on, because there has been a multitude of significant changes—nation-leading changes, in fact—that better protect working Victorians. I am extremely proud to be part of a government that is truly dedicated to occupational health and safety and decent work for all Victorians.

I am also proud to be able to make a contribution to this debate on this bill, the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021, an important amendment designed to improve outcomes for injured workers and for families, enhance the scheme’s operations and increase WorkSafe Victoria’s ability to prevent and respond to workplace safety incidents. So it is another bill to be added to that long list.

One important change to come out of this amendment will be the improvement of the compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and similar occupational diseases, delivering on aspects of the government’s silica action plan. As mentioned by previous speakers from both sides of the house, silicosis has been and continues to be a serious issue in my electorate of Clarinda. Evidence from the department and from the Victorian Trades Hall Council demonstrates that many stonemasons come from the community, such as the Vietnamese, the Chinese and the Cambodian communities. Anecdotal evidence also suggests that stonemasons that come from these communities are not coming forward or have not come forward for testing. We have done some good work to drive awareness in our community about the dangers of the crystalline silica emanating from engineered stone and to try to encourage people to access the free screening program and seek advice on workers compensation entitlements, including a potential class action.

I also had the privilege of supporting the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019 to make it easier for workers to bring class actions in cases of silicosis and wage theft. But there is more to be done, and I am looking forward to continuing this work and continuing to support the government’s silica action plan.

In terms of the specific improvements to compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis, the bill makes amendments to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013. These amendments will allow injured workers with silica-related diseases to make further common-law applications for damages if they develop subsequent silica-related diseases. These changes also improve access to impairment benefit compensation, including lump sum payments for workers with silicosis and similar occupational diseases.

To provide some context, workers suffering from silicosis are currently not able to pursue common-law claims where they have developed further silica-related diseases after an initial award, as many other speakers before me from both sides already mentioned. The current claims process also poses difficulties for workers with progressive diseases such as silicosis in accessing impairment benefit compensation due to the nature of their disease not demonstrating stabilisation and being subject to rapid deterioration. This is a fair and sensible amendment that allows full compensation to be delivered.

As we have heard, there is scope for further impairment benefits to be made available where a worker has previously received a benefit and their condition deteriorates further down the track. There are also further amendments to the impairment benefit assessment process, which is particularly beneficial for workers that have received a lung transplant. Importantly, the bill will also allow for the provision of family counselling services to the families of workers with these eligible conditions.

To all workers and their families experiencing silicosis, I send my sincerest and best wishes, and for anyone in the electorate of Clarinda, if there is anything that we can do to assist, please reach out. For anyone out there that is unsure about or still considering coming forward for testing, it could save your life. Early and accurate identification of silicosis allows for early intervention, which can significantly improve health outcomes. An assessment can also provide a baseline for further assessments when conducted before a person starts working in a crystalline silica process or before a new process is implemented. Impressively, more than 85 per cent of Victoria’s estimated 1400 past and present stonemasons have now registered for WorkSafe’s free silica health assessment program, which is very positive. There are still free assessments available for eligible workers, so please get in touch with WorkSafe. Even if we are not talking about a person who has worked as a stonemason, if you have been exposed to crystalline silica at work, then it is most likely that your employer is obligated to pay for and arrange for you to have a health check, so please speak to your employer or speak to WorkSafe in that sense.

There are also a host of other amendments in this bill, which I would like to touch on a little bit here. The bill will amend the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and directions to better capture serious risk activities; provide for a broader range of matters to be notifiable incidents; improve entitlements for families of deceased workers; clarify that funds collected from infringement notices are to be paid into the WorkCover Authority Fund; and make technical and procedural amendments to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013.

There are also other changes in terms of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 to remove barriers to people applying to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal scheme by prohibiting alleged offenders from being notified of or attending any hearings in matters related to family violence or sexual offences before the establishment of a new victims of crime financial assistance scheme. These are also fair and sensible changes which will help to improve access to justice. There are also some minor but important amendments to the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019 regarding the extension of presumptive rights coverage and calculations of years of service.

These are comprehensive amendments which have broad support from stakeholders, and I am so happy to support these amendments that are designed to improve the outcomes for injured workers and their families and better support victims of crime as well as firefighters and legal practitioners. With that I commend the bill to the house.

Mr ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (16:51): I also rise to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. There is so much to say, so little time to say it, but we will do our best to get through. I thought we would reach the punchline first up. As my good colleague and friend the member for Ferntree Gully mentioned in his very well stated contribution as our Shadow Minister for Industrial Relations and Workplace Safety and lead speaker on this bill, the opposition will not be opposing this bill, and I think it is important to set that context at the start of this contribution.

As other speakers have mentioned, this bill is an omnibus bill that seeks to amend a number of acts in relation to the following key areas: firstly, workplace safety and improving compensation outcomes for injured workers and their families, especially for progressive illnesses such as silicosis, and I will come to that a little bit later in my contribution; enhancing WorkSafe Victoria operations to better prevent and respond to workplace safety incidents, including by amending the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and extending the range of matters deemed notifiable incidents, and I will also come back to that point; in relation to victims of crime, prohibiting alleged offenders from being notified of or attending any hearing related to family violence or sexual offences in the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal; in relation to fire services, extending presumptive rights afforded to firefighters under the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019 to vehicle and equipment maintenance employees who attend fires—these employees would now be provided a rebuttable presumption that if they are suffering from a specified form of cancer it is presumed to be due to their employment, and this will consequently enhance their compensation entitlements under the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013; and in relation to the legal profession, imposing stricter requirements for the appointment of lawyer members to the Victorian Legal Services Board, ensuring that appointees are not the subject of any actual or potential disciplinary action at the time of their appointment. Further, lawyer members will be able to be removed from the VLSB if they are subjected to disciplinary action during their term of office.

The opposition has consulted broadly on this piece of government legislation, as you would expect it would. In relation to the workplace safety elements of this omnibus bill, we have sought input from such groups and associations as the Australian Industry Group, the Civil Contractors Federation Victoria, Engineers Australia, the Housing Industry Association, the Institute of Public Works, the Master Grocers Association, Master Plumbers and the Property Council of Australia. In relation to the fire services elements of this omnibus bill, we have sought input from Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria and other stakeholders too.

It would be fair to say that we do have some concerns, although we have a not-opposed position for this bill, and some of these concerns are the following: the expansion of circumstances in relation to workplace safety prohibition notices. The expansion of circumstances in which prohibition notices can be issued may in some situations lead to overzealous applications. Without adequate guidance WorkSafe inspectors may impose prohibition notices and fines without first giving business owners the opportunity to rectify errors. In my own summary, it is my view that it is more important to fix than to fine. I hope you like that, Acting Speaker Blackwood. I thought of that all by myself: it is more important to fix than to fine. I think that is very important, because the key to workplace safety in my view—and I say this coming from defence industry, having worked for a global organisation prior to being elected to this place—is that workplace safety is all about workplace culture, and what we should be doing is not necessarily using a stick all the time but using more of a carrot for people in positions of responsibility to do the right thing by their employees.

Additionally, we have further concerns in relation to these prohibition notices. It is important to distinguish between early mitigation of a problem and unnecessarily scrutinising an issue that is unlikely to ever eventuate. Although the distinction is largely discretionary, greater guidance could be provided in this bill on how inspectors can consistently identify risks that are likely to eventuate.

And finally, the coalition advocates for a more collaborative approach between inspectors and businesses. Rather than immediately imposing prohibition notices and penalties, inspectors, we believe, should work with business owners to discuss potential issues and give business owners the opportunity to rectify notifiable incidents before a prohibition notice is issued. This approach favours assistance rather than admonition. By involving business owners in the process inspectors can foster working relationships that may reduce hostility and improve business owners’ skills in identifying and mitigating risks early. Once again to my earlier point, in my view it is more important to fix than to fine, and that is perhaps something that the government could consider in future iterations of amendments to this piece of legislation.

There are some 5000 businesses in my electorate of Sandringham, wonderful businesses that do so much for our community, contribute so much to our community, not only in the products and the services that they provide but also in the employment that they provide locals as well. I am very proud of these businesses. I do my best to visit them as regularly as I can and to support them—certainly to support them in a special way and in a more focused way over the last couple of years. To think that workplace incidents are far removed from what some members in this place might term the leafy bayside suburbs of the Sandringham district is far from reality. Only last year there was a WorkSafe investigation into a fatal fall in the Sandringham district. I have the notice in front of me here:

The 67-year-old suffered a fatal head injury after falling through a stairwell void while working alone on the site.

The death brings the workplace fatality toll to 39 for 2021.

That was reported on 21 September last year. So to say that these matters are far removed from my electoral district is simply not true. In my research to make this contribution today I did pull up an article from the Colac Herald, no less, member for Polwarth—

Mr Riordan: A fine regional newspaper.

Mr ROWSWELL: A very fine regional newspaper—I will take up that interjection. It identified a call to seek help over silicosis. The Colac Herald article reports:

Stonemasons, quarry, construction and manufacturing workers are at a high risk of developing lung disease or silicosis after being exposed to silica dust or other kinds of dust found in building materials.

That article was from 2019 but it has taken some years to introduce this omnibus bill into the Parliament, and I think it is a valid question to ask why it has taken that time when as far back as 2019 in the member for Polwarth’s district, and I am sure before that, this has been a matter of concern for the community.

I just think, in closing, credit must be given to employers for doing the right thing. I once again recall working for a global company before my time here in the Parliament, before being elected to this Parliament, working in defence industry, and I was very proud to be part of a team who actively promoted within our company of some 1500 employees, around 40 per cent of which were engineers and technicians, a target-zero policy on workplace safety. It is true to say that workplaces over a period of time have had various focuses, and rightly so, responding to the time. But in certainly the defence industry, where I formerly worked before entering this place, workplace safety was a key matter of focus for us, and rightly so. Every employee deserves to feel safe at work. They deserve to come home to their families in one piece so that they can not only continue contributing to their company and to their community but be safe for their families.

Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (17:01): Acting Speaker Blackwood, what a pleasure it is to see you in the chair this afternoon. I rise to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021, and I am also very pleased to see that the opposition will be supporting this bill. In that sense of congeniality I just want to take up something that the member for Sandringham said—and I agree—that sometimes you may think these incidents do not happen in the leafy green suburbs that we may share, but they do. As I have said before, some of my experience previous to being a member in this house was a lot to do with the safety of racking. I worked on a lot of software in that area, and you get to see, as you are working on programming that sort of software, the types of incidents that happen and where they happen. It is fair to say that incidents, whether they be in storerooms or retail shops, happen far too often—because once is far too often. But they happen everywhere, and that is why we have a culture, as others have said on both sides of the house, of not accepting as tolerable any workplace safety incident. It is fantastic to see, as I started by saying, that we are on the same page on this and that we are supporting it. I think the member for Brunswick might be coming up next and I do not want to pre-empt what he may say, but I would like to think that we all in this house share a desire to see everybody who leaves home in the morning come home in the afternoon.

The benefits of providing a healthy and safe workplace extend beyond legal compliance and reducing workplace injury; they extend to our families and to, as I mentioned before, the general tenet of what we accept. We know how important it is to support injured Victorian workers and their families when these incidents happen, and whether it is through our provisional payments reforms or establishing an arbitration function of the Accident Compensation Conciliation Service or our nation-leading silica licensing scheme, we are delivering to ensure Victorian workers are protected.

This bill adds to existing policy, making a range of amendments to several of the workplace safety acts, and others have mentioned the range of those acts. We have the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, the Dangerous Goods Act 1985, the Equipment (Public Safety) Act 1994 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013. I probably would not refer to it as a grab bag, as my colleague from Oakleigh did, but this is certainly an omnibus bill that covers a lot of areas, and I thank the Minister for Workplace Safety and also the Minister for Emergency Services and Attorney-General and the Minister for Victim Support for their work.

We are making sure that WorkSafe Victoria have all the tools they need to prevent serious injuries by changing the threshold for issuing a prohibition notice and directions. We are underscoring the seriousness of workplace incidents by including a broader range of matters to be notifiable incidents, including infectious diseases and illnesses as well as near misses. We are recognising how difficult a time it is for the families of loved ones who have been killed at work, by improving compensation entitlements. These amendments are designed to improve outcomes for injured workers and their families, enhance scheme operations and increase WorkSafe’s ability to prevent and respond to workplace safety incidents.

The bill also makes changes to the Victims of Crimes Assistance Act 1996 to remove barriers for people applying to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, and the bill will also amend the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019 to extend presumptive rights coverage to Fire Rescue Victoria and Country Fire Authority vehicle and equipment maintenance employees. Finally, the bill will amend the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 to strengthen the integrity of the Victorian Legal Services Board.

Victoria was one of the first states to adopt a health and safety act after the creation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1985. Last year we introduced a number of commonsense changes to make the legislation stronger and make it effective for keeping all workers safe on the job. The Andrews government introduced the Occupational Health and Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill in 2021 to further strengthen our laws and make Victorians’ workplaces safer, because, again, we all agree that every worker who leaves home in the morning deserves the right to get home to their family in the evening. A key change in that bill ensured that labour hire workers have all the same rights and safety protections as other workers in the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, which I have mentioned. Those changes mean that employers will no longer be able to dodge penalties.

This has been important work. Every life lost at a Victorian workplace is one too many, and we have worked hard to make our workplaces safer. We will not stop. We will continue to make our workplaces safer and to hold employers who should know better accountable—and they are a minority. Most employers—and I agree with members of the house on both sides—do the right thing and look after their employees, but there are some who do not. Employers who negligently cause a workplace death and are found guilty of industrial manslaughter now face up to $16.5 million fines, and individuals can face up to 20 years jail—a landmark reform brought in by this government to state categorically that, again, every worker deserves the right to come home.

This bill will also improve access for and deliver better support to families of deceased workers, with weekly pension payments for children with a disability to be extended from the age of 16 to the age of 25. Currently under workers compensation legislation a child with a disability is not eligible to receive the child pension after the age of 16, and this is contrary to full-time students or apprentices, who are eligible for the pension until they are 25. We are fixing this by making amendments to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 to provide for improved compensation entitlements for families of deceased workers. Importantly this will be partially retrospective and allow for eligible dependents who are between the ages of 16 and 25 at commencement to receive back payments for the period that they would have been entitled to. I think in general we should be careful when we make laws that are retrospective, but in this case it is warranted. The bill will also continue household help service payments already being received by a worker with an accepted claim, where they die as a result of their work-related injury, for six months after death.

This bill also makes changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 to remove barriers for victims, survivors of family violence and sexual assault applying for financial assistance at the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. Currently VOCAT can notify alleged offenders and allow them to appear at hearings where they have a legitimate interest or substantial interest in a victim’s application for assistance. In 2018 the Victorian Law Reform Commission reported on its review into the VOCA act, and our government has committed to significantly progressing the recommendations of this report. The review recommended that the alleged perpetrators of an offence should not be notified of a victim hearing and should not be able to attend that hearing. Removing perpetrator notifications in this bill reflects a trauma-informed approach that prioritises victim safety, wellbeing and recovery. As other members have said, the idea that someone seeking assistance would therefore have to relive their trauma is something I think we would all agree should not be there. It is one of the many changes in this bill, and I commend the bill to the house.

Dr READ (Brunswick) (17:11): Thank you, Acting Speaker Blackwood, and it is nice to see you there in the chair. I rise to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021, an omnibus bill that implements a number of changes, most of which are welcome, and two of which I will address today. Firstly, the bill, as we have just heard, improves compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis, including allowing greater flexibility for common law applications and improving impairment benefit compensation, and these are both welcome changes. As we have also heard many times today, silicosis is an occupational lung disease caused by breathing in silica dust. The most important source of this in recent years in Australia has been from cutting kitchen benchtops made of products like Caesarstone. Unfortunately there has been a resurgence in cases of silicosis due to people inhaling the dust from that work. The member for Altona, I think, progressed a silicosis action plan, which has led to an end to that being done in dry circumstances, so that now the stone can only be cut under water, which reduces the dust.

Nevertheless there is an argument that has been put forward by epidemiologists that in fact Caesarstone benchtops should be banned because it is so difficult to regulate dust completely out of the industry. Silicosis is so damaging. The important point for people who are unfamiliar with the condition is that it leads to an emphysema-like loss of lung tissue, where the lungs are replaced by scar tissue and the small air-containing spaces in the lungs effectively expand, leading to lungs that work less and less effectively, which in turn leads to breathlessness. This is breathlessness that you might experience temporarily if you run up the stairs, but people with advanced silicosis or emphysema will have it permanently. Imagine feeling forever as if you have just run up the stairs. There is a corresponding loss of exercise capability. People with advanced silicosis, for example, are too breathless to make the bed or too breathless to walk to the toilet, and of course in some rare cases individuals can die or require lung transplants. So by far the best approach is prevention, and I commend the government for their silicosis action plan, but I think we need to watch this space very carefully and see if in fact we may need ultimately to ban the product. It will just depend on how well the action plan is implemented. I also want to acknowledge the work of my New South Wales Greens colleagues, who have been relentless in pursuing the issue of silicosis through an important parliamentary inquiry in New South Wales, an inquiry into silicosis in the manufactured stone industry.

I would like to turn briefly to the issue of presumptive legislation for firefighters and for mechanics working with firefighting vehicles. Presumptive legislation in this context is something that has been through this house a couple of times in the life of this Parliament, first to guarantee compensation for urban firefighters who develop certain specified cancers which are known to be more common among those firefighters and then a second time to guarantee compensation for cancers for forest firefighters. The Greens also have a proud history of pushing for presumptive legislation for firefighters. It was Adam Bandt’s bill in the federal Parliament that introduced presumptive legislation in the federal sphere, and here in Victoria Greens MP Colleen Hartland led the debate in the other place. The term ‘presumptive’ refers to the fact that compensation is guaranteed because the cancers are presumed to be due to occupational exposure, because it is known that those cancers are more common amongst firefighters because of the work they do, because of the smoke that they inhale, whereas that may be difficult to prove in an individual case. So they acknowledge the specific and unavoidable risks that firefighters face when they enter burning buildings and they are exposed to thousands of carcinogenic toxins.

This bill seeks to incorporate into the firefighters presumptive scheme other workers in the fire services, and we absolutely support these workers also having access to a presumptive scheme. Indeed vehicle workers, it is possible—I have not had time to check—may well experience increased incidence of other cancers, particularly if they are exposed to benzene. However, we are concerned about the potential for the existing firefighters scheme to be undermined by incorporating other workers who do not have precisely the same risks and for whom the evidence of cancers may be different, and we urge the government to consider alternative means to enable vehicle and equipment maintenance workers to access an appropriate presumptive scheme for their work and to preserve the integrity of the existing scheme for firefighters. Hopefully this issue will be resolved in the other place.

Nevertheless, we support schemes of this nature, and it should be said right now that people who develop cancers should have all of their health care and all of their other care that flows from developing a cancer funded or at least within their means. There is an argument for a broader no-fault compensation scheme for a lot of these conditions. For those reasons we will be supporting the bill while noting the concerns we have about that particular issue. Nevertheless, just returning to silicosis, I think that the changes introduced as a result of this bill are very welcome, so the Greens will support this bill in this house.

Ms CONNOLLY (Tarneit) (17:18): I too rise to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. It is quite interesting following the member for Brunswick, because I think he gave a really good description of what it is like for someone who is living with silicosis and what a terrible, terrible disease it in fact is. It will affect every part of your life and your quality of life and the type of end that you will be facing when it comes to it and you die of that disease. The member for Brunswick has really highlighted why this legislation is so important, because everyone deserves to be safe at work and to go home to their loved ones, whether it is that night, the next day or in years to come. Even if they have left that industry, they still deserve to have quality of life, be with their family and live the life that they want to.

Sitting here this afternoon I listened to the contribution from the member for Sandringham. I really like the member for Sandringham, but quite often when he speaks in this house he talks about there not being a need to encourage or push industry to make vital changes. He talked about using a carrot rather than a stick and the need to encourage workplace change and change workplace culture. I do not think that workplace culture plays an integral part in keeping your workplace safe. Some employers do the right thing, and some—we know there are quite a few—do not do the right thing and incidents happen at work. People lose their lives; they lose limbs. They lose the ability to have any kind of livelihood, to go back and work. As the member for Brunswick has just pointed out, some of these people have their quality of life absolutely ruined. Exposure to silica dust is just one example that we are talking about in this bill.

I often have to question whether the member for Sandringham has ever gone down to a building site. Just go onto a building site. I was on a building site on Saturday morning checking out the level crossing removal in Hoppers Crossing at the Old Geelong Road level crossing. The amount of work—the cranes, the construction—happening on that site is extraordinary. Workplace safety laws and legislation are in place to protect the workers who are there at the coalface on these sites building the infrastructure that people in my community will use to go ahead and improve their quality of life, never actually thinking about what it was like to work on those sites. Workplace safety legislation helps protect those workers at the coalface constructing this type of infrastructure as part of our big infrastructure build right across Victoria.

I know that my husband’s father had an incident happen to him in the workplace. He was a diesel mechanic by trade, and he was making some good money here in Australia after arriving from Ireland. He actually had a crane at work run into him, and it broke his back. He never worked in that particular industry, in his trade, ever again. I remember my husband Scott saying his mother had to go and pluck chickens, pluck the feathers out of chooks at the local abattoir, to make up for the loss of income because of his father never being able to work again. In fact Jim never really did work again. He went on and he retrained later in life after back operations to go ahead and do financial counselling, I think it was, with St Vincent de Paul—a complete transition from being that diesel mechanic. He had studied and gotten that trade in Ireland and come to Australia with it for a better life.

Workplace safety legislation matters. Whether you are working as a diesel mechanic on site or whether your workplace is the cabin of a truck, people deserve to be safe at work. We have seen with the course of omicron over the past couple of months that workplace safety and protection against the omicron variant has been a major topic of discussion among Victorians, if not the whole country. We have seen supply chains in crisis, which showed us just how important our essential workers are. They cannot work from home, and if they must work on site through a pandemic like this, they deserve to work under the safest conditions that can be managed.

I am really pleased to say that the Andrews Labor government, our government, has made huge progress in the space of workplace safety and advancing workers’ rights and entitlements. In 2019 we went ahead and we made workplace manslaughter a criminal offence and made employers liable for fatalities caused due to negligent safety practices. In 2020 we made good on a solid election promise to make wage theft a criminal offence. These are key achievements of our government which I most certainly, and I am sure like many people on this side of the house, feel really proud to have played a role in, because as abstract as the concept of workplace safety can feel at times—particularly if you are someone who is used to working in the ivory towers as an office worker it can often feel abstract—it is in fact a reality for many Victorians in some of our most labour-intensive industries. What this bill does is build upon our workplace safety laws to deliver for working Victorians and their families.

Now, one of the key parts of the bill deals with improving access to compensation for workers who have contracted silicosis. It is really important that governments provide assistance for those who suffer from these lifelong diseases, because if the government at the end of the day will not, then it is probably likely that no-one will. I cannot help but cast my mind back to one of our former prime ministers, Tony Abbott, when he was health minister, when he refused to meet with asbestos campaigners. I am sure people remember that. He refused to meet with asbestos campaigners trying to get life-saving drugs admitted to the PBS. And I am sure we all remember that campaigner, Bernie Banton, who fought James Hardie tooth and nail for compensation for asbestos victims. He lived just long enough to see the Howard government defeated.

I know when it comes to asbestos in Victoria our government has been determined to reduce the safety risk to all Victorians. We have removed and upgraded old school buildings and we have replaced portables built with asbestos, not to mention clamping down on building standards, just as we are doing right now with combustible cladding. Under current legislation workers who contract silicosis and pursue common-law claims against their employers cannot make any further claims if they discover they have developed even worse silica-related diseases or complications. What we know is that silicosis is a progressive disease, and that means it may and is highly likely to get worse over time, so the full impacts on a person’s life are not always 100 per cent determinable at the point of diagnosis. So people with silicosis might settle well before they discover the full extent of their condition and the help and the assistance, importantly the financial assistance, that they will need to live out their life.

According to the Cancer Council, about 10 years ago over half a million Australians were exposed to silica dust. I mean, that is quite a confronting number. And at about the same time it was estimated that 43 000 people worldwide died from silicosis per year, which was a lot considering this rate was about 50 000 in 1990. It is pretty obvious that we know more about silicosis now than we did 30 years ago, which is why we are identifying more and more people at risk, which means we have to do something, particularly when the full extent of silicosis and the effects it is going to have on these people who have contracted it are not known there at the point where they are able to receive compensation.

This is a really important bill. It builds upon the workplace safety legislative reform and record that this government has been absolutely committed to delivering over the almost eight years now that we have been in government. I have no doubt that if we are re-elected at the end of this year workplace safety legislative reform will remain at the heart of this government and the Victorian Labor Party.

Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (17:28): It is my pleasure to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. As many of our previous speakers on this side have said, absolutely every worker deserves to be safe at work and deserves to come home safely. Unfortunately that does not always happen, and that is why we are making these amendments to the workplace safety legislation here today. But there is a part of the amendments that are in the memorandum that has been distributed that goes to the details of one of my portfolios, and that is under victim support.

As the Minister for Victim Support, I am proud to be speaking here today on a bill which includes amendments to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996. It is about removing barriers for victim-survivors of family violence and sexual assault applying for financial assistance through the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, commonly known as VOCAT. VOCAT provides assistance to victims in the form of financial assistance for support that they may need in their recovery from the crime and the violence that they have experienced, and that is to victims of violent crime under the Victims of Crime Assistance Act, the VOCAT act. Currently VOCAT may notify alleged offenders and allow them to appear at hearings where they have a legitimate interest or substantial interest in a victim’s application for assistance. From our discussions with victim-survivors in the last 18 months and with VOCAT on this matter it may not be commonly known that alleged offenders are invited to attend. The mere threat that an alleged offender may be notified of a VOCAT application is enough for so many victim-survivors to be deterred from applying for the assistance they deserve and need. They do not want to sit in a courtroom. They do not want to be in an environment where they will come up against the alleged perpetrator of the violence against them.

The VLRC did quite a substantial review in 2018 into the VOCA act, and the Victorian Law Reform Commission made a number of recommendations to improve the current situation for victims. The review recommended that alleged offenders should not be notified of a victim’s hearing and should not be able to attend that hearing. Removing this notification reflects a trauma-informed approach that prioritises victim safety, wellbeing and recovery. The VLRC report provides extensive commentary about the chilling effect this current process has had on survivors of sexual abuse and family violence in making applications to VOCAT. The Victim Survivors’ Advisory Council stated in their submission to that review:

Notifying perpetrators heightens the risk of further injury and damage on the victim survivor. The context of separation is recognised as being the most high-risk time for victim survivors, and notification to the perpetrator of a VOCAT hearing unnecessarily compromises the safety and wellbeing of victim survivors.

The design of the scheme will align with the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Family Violence. This is a really important step for many victims who choose not to pursue the assistance that they really do require in order to recover post a crime happening for this very reason that I have heard from many victims—that is, not wanting to face their perpetrator face to face if there is an option for that not to happen. I am really pleased to be leading this work as we develop the new financial assistance scheme (FAS) to make sure that we have a trauma-informed response. As highlighted through the victim support update I delivered in December 2021, the government is reforming the way victim-survivors access financial assistance by developing the financial assistance scheme which will replace VOCAT. If members in the house are wanting to know where in particular these changes sit within the bill, they are in part 9, clause 87 and clause 88. There is quite a bit of detail there around these proposed changes.

Of course this is not just a legislative change that we are committing to, it is also being underpinned by some pretty big budget commitments. The 2021–22 budget provided a record $64.5 million over four years to provide the essential building blocks for this reform. It is the largest single investment in a decade to be made into victim support. This investment will help us to build an entirely new trauma-informed and accessible financial assistance scheme for victims of serious crimes.

The scheme will also be supported by the first dedicated victims legal service, which will also support victim-survivors with their applications to the scheme. From speaking with community organisations, with victim-survivors of crime and with VOCAT members as well, I know that more needs to be done now while this new scheme is being designed, and our first priority is to reduce the backlog that currently sits at VOCAT, because we know that the current waiting time is unacceptable.

To do this our government has changed the VOCA act to create a new class of VOCAT staff called tribunal officers, and that has also come hand in hand with almost $10 million worth of investment to underpin these new roles and to help clear the backlog that has happened in this court. We have also seen an increase in the number of cases being dealt with since these measures were put in place, which means we know that we are clearing the backlog quicker and victims are getting their financial assistance and support in a much more timely way.

Our next priority is to make VOCAT safer while we build the new scheme. I have heard loud and clear from organisations such as the Women’s Legal Service Victoria and the victims of crime commissioner and from survivors on the Victims of Crime Consultative Committee how detrimental it has been to victim-survivors’ wellbeing to have an alleged offender sitting in court while their application is being discussed. Sometimes it is not just the offender, it can be the offender’s friends and family that come along to try and intimidate the victim as their case is being heard, which is why we are introducing the amendments to the VOCA act through the vehicle of this bill today. I want to thank the women’s legal service for their outstanding advocacy and the ongoing support they provide to victims and their families. They do an amazing job.

I know these changes will be of great significance to family violence and sexual assault survivors. I hope it sends a clear and strong message to all victim-survivors that we hear you, that we support you. The amendments bring forward a key finding of both the VLRC report and the Royal Commission into Family Violence before the establishment of a new FAS. Survivors should no longer be fearful of making an application to the tribunal. They should feel that this government is supporting them in our court system through the rollout of training of our police force, through the establishment and opening of our Orange Door services and through the sharing of information across our services to better support victims of crime, victims of serious abuse and also victims of sexual abuse. I recommend the changes to the house.

Ms HENNESSY (Altona) (17:37): I am very grateful for the opportunity to rise today and to make some comments on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. Before I do so could I just acknowledge so many of the terrific contributions that I have heard in the course of this debate, not just from our side, may I say. I think that there have been some really important issues, and I think that people have participated in this debate in a way that has been thoughtful and not tainted by aggressive polemic, if I can put it in those terms.

While the Minister for Victim Support is at the table, I just want to commend her for the work that she has done on the elements of this bill that she has just spoken to but particularly those changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. They sound very sensible to everyone, and people might think, ‘Why hasn’t this been done before?’. There is such a raft of reforms that this minister has been delivering in respect of improving basic processes of the justice system to be more victim sensitive, and I just want to commend and acknowledge her work while she is in the house, because she is doing a terrific job.

I wanted to really focus my comments on the elements of the bill that deal with those that unfortunately have a diagnosis of silicosis. I certainly was very grateful for the opportunity to work with many people from the industrial sectors, both from union and employer positions, but also from the medical sector as well in respect of really starting to pick up this issue around silicosis and to actually start to get some very, very strong reform put in place to respond to the risk. There have been such incredible concerns about silicosis for some time, and if there is anything that I have learned through being involved in some of those discussions and reform processes it is that when it comes to those diseases that are progressive diseases, particularly those that relate to dust and respiratory systems—we should have learned the lessons by now in respect of asbestosis and all that we saw through Wittenoom to the James Hardie scandals of the 1990s—and when it comes to people’s lives, if we are not able to build and use products that do not ultimately result in killing people, then that is not a business model that we should be supporting. I want to also place on the record my thanks and appreciation to activists from places like the Australian Workers Union and to respiratory authorities such as Dr Hoy, who is a very famous respiratory specialist who for some period of time had been belling the cat and the data had not yet caught up.

But what was ultimately being revealed was the fact of that exposure to dry cutting silica. We have got this great desire to all have wonderful kitchen renovations and to keep up with all of the shows that we all know so well—and as a cook I love a fine kitchen and a good solid bench—so with all of that and with all of the growth around housing and the commercial sectors as well there was an increase in a lot of the activity around dry stonecutting. Then what we saw of course was very young people, predominantly men—but not exclusively—who were working in those trades developing silicosis, and it is one of those illnesses and diseases where often once someone has been diagnosed with silicosis they are in a position where their outlook is terminal. So that is something that warranted very decisive action, and this government took that decisive action in banning dry cutting and the development of a silicosis action plan that was also about making sure that they were measuring and supporting the respiratory and lung health of people that were working in those industries. There were many people who worked in those industries and who ran those industries who were very, very supportive and many who were already trying to do so in a way that was safe. I have heard in the course of this debate people saying we should regulate for the best behaviour, not the lowest form of behaviour. I think when it comes to something like silicosis we cannot afford to take a light touch when it comes to regulation, because of the deadly consequences. We know where the burden of this disease has fallen. It has largely fallen on young men working in the stonemasonry and construction industries, and by the time they are diagnosed with it, it is too late. That does require us using more stringent regulation in my view.

It also means that we have got to have a compensation system that is fit for purpose, because this is not just about the lump sum common law; it is about the financial support that is provided to people if they are confronted with this horrific diagnosis. With the workers compensation system in Victoria, really it is misconceived to try and apply the needs of those that have been diagnosed with silicosis to some of the existing patterns of workers compensation, and what this bill does is it recognises that it is progressive. It recognises that if you wait until an injury is stabilised before you determine whether or not they are eligible for common-law compensation, they will often be very, very close to death and not be able to actually utilise some of those benefits that they might be entitled to.

So I welcome with open arms some of these changes. This is an ongoing pathway of reform, and I do want to commend Minister Stitt in the other place for her leadership and dedication on all of the issues that are contained in this reform but particularly silicosis. It is something that again I would remind the house—that when patients, clinicians and union leaders come to us to say that they are observing the emergence of diseases and illnesses in their members, we need to take a precautionary principle and not wait until we have a 25-year dataset before we start acting. We have got to act on those risks much more quickly. Whilst I wish we had done so much earlier in respect of silicosis, I am very glad that we have acted and we have continued with our commitment to that end.

The other area in this bill that I want to briefly touch on goes to the issue of family support benefits of course. The minister at the table, the Minister for Crime Prevention, did some really important work chairing the workplace manslaughter consultative committee. Anyone who has spent time with bereaved families who have lost someone to a workplace accident will tell you just how challenging people’s lives are above and beyond grief and the injustice. The system still brutalises people even when they are experiencing that grief. Things like, for example, a grandmother who cared for a person who has died in an industrial accident not being eligible to access things like some of the funeral payments expenses; a brother who might be 21 and has lost his brother in an industrial accident not being defined as a child or a dependent and therefore not being able to access support for things like grief counselling—we need to fix those sorts of things. The system is not meant to brutalise people who are already enduring such extraordinary pain, so it is important that when we find these problems we fix them. And whilst fixing those problems can never come too soon, I do want to commend those that have worked so assiduously to continue to respond to that feedback and to find a more compassionate and human-centred approach to compensation and support for families enduring those unbearable things.

The final issue I want to briefly touch upon is the incident notification. I welcome broadening the range of matters considered to be notifiable incidents. This bill lists a couple of those, including infectious diseases and illnesses, putting a compulsion upon employers to notify WorkSafe Victoria around the existence of those illnesses and diseases. There is another issue that is currently the subject of regulatory consultation around notifiable incidents, and that is sexual harassment. Whilst I have the attention of the chamber, I wish to communicate my support for the work that this government is doing and WorkSafe is doing. It is my belief that sexual harassment should be a notifiable incident. It is an occupational health and safety issue for people in the workplace. It does require systematic response, not just an individual having to make a complaint. We know that is so hard.

I wish the bill a speedy passage through the house.

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (17:47): It is with some pleasure that I rise this afternoon to speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. I must say it has been my joy to listen to many fine contributions made in this chamber on this particular debate this afternoon, including the two previous contributions, which were fantastic. I must say, in reflecting on this bill, the Labor Party history and more significantly the trade union history, what is pretty evident to me in reflecting on occupational health and safety is that it is often the trade union movement for a very, very long time who will champion the rights of their members to go to work, to earn a decent income and to be able to do that in an occupationally healthy and safe way. That every worker has the right to go to work and to earn an income but to return home safely is something of course that the trade union movement has fought very hard for, and I certainly know that Labor, when we are given that great gift of government, always back in what our trade unions tell us is the right thing to do for workers in this country.

In reflecting on the occupational health and safety issue, I must say it was an issue of great contest in the Victorian economy particularly in the 1970s when a lot of unions—the BLF, the AWU, the plumbers union, the Electrical Trades Union and many others—championed in their industries seeing put in place a whole raft of mechanisms to protect their workers. It was, I think, a profound achievement of the Cain government in 1985 to put in place an occupational health and safety regime through difficult contest in this Parliament and to get that legislation through, and I must say many other significant bills that get put to this place that improve the rights of workers are often unfortunately greatly contested by the Liberal Party.

I must say, in my reflection on these types of diseases that are created by effectively dry dust, it is not surprising, if we reflect on the industrial history of this country, back to the 1850s indeed when we had many people making their income, making their way in life in the goldfields of Ballarat, that those hard rock miners toiling away often found themselves exposed to dust, and back then we saw many of those workers dying at a very early age, without the medical understanding of the community at that point in time of exactly what the mechanism was. But it was known that those miners working on those rock faces drilling away day in, day out were being exposed to of course silica and were getting those injuries and dying a very painful and difficult death. We also know through history that asbestos has been known to cause death when exposed to people, and we have known that for a very, very long time too.

So often parliaments take a long time to reflect on these things and to put in place the appropriate arrangements to ensure that those workers can be safe. When I was reflecting on this bill I needed to, I think, reflect on that history, because it is worth putting on note the profound work, the profound advocacy of people in the trade union movement, those unions that I listed earlier, including indeed unions such as the Maritime Union of Australia, which championed the need to put in place these arrangements and other similar arrangements to ensure that our workers, when exposed to these things, have a set of rights and can get appropriate compensation. So I am very pleased that we have brought this bill to this place. I am hopeful of and looking forward to it passing through this chamber and the Legislative Council in the weeks to come, and I think it is so important.

In terms of silicosis, the member for Altona went through the desire of all of us in the Victorian community to have a modern kitchen. It was not that long ago that formica was the standard that we would all have in our benchtops. Over the last decade or so stone-based, stone-like products have increasingly been used, and often—and I have seen this myself touring new buildings, new homes—we have very young workers who are time pressured, who do not have the necessary training to understand what they are working with and how they are working with that product and often do not have adequate supervision. We have seen as a consequence of that silicosis dramatically rising. In fact it is almost a disease that did not exist 20 or 30 years ago, and the rapid increase in these products in our homes has seen a rapid increase in the number of people that have been exposed over a profound and long period of time and now have indeed an accumulation of silicosis in their lungs and in their airways, and are now as a consequence of that getting sick and ultimately dying in a very painful way.

I must say this government, the Andrews Labor government, has very much built on the legacy of previous Labor administrations. We put in place those presumptive rights, particularly for firefighters, particularly career firefighters who get exposed to all sorts of different carcinogens when they turn out to all sorts of different fires. This government recognised that, and we accepted the very strong argument put by the United Firefighters Union of Victoria that because of the vocation of their members they were getting exposed to it and we should not have a system in place that questioned that exposure—we should accept it and we should realise and recognise that from that exposure those firefighters have a much, much greater risk of a certain set of cancers. I was very pleased to be able to speak on that bill at that time, and I look forward to continuing to speak on behalf of workers in my area at every opportunity to ensure that they have a set of occupational laws that work for them, that protect them and that provide certainty to the industries that they are in.

I might also in the very short period of time that I have left just acknowledge that WorkSafe Victoria is these days a very proud Geelong-based institution. It is playing a significant role in the Geelong community. I am certainly very proud and pleased to have it as an employer in Geelong, which of course is a very significant industrial city in its own right. To have WorkSafe based in Geelong has been a fantastic outcome I think for Geelong but also indeed for the greater region.

It will be interesting to see in the years to come what COVID has meant for workplace injury. I suspect we may find that there are some additional risks that we did not think of pre the pandemic. There may be some additional injuries that we need to think about and reflect on, and maybe there is a need to have some future reform to ensure that the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 is fit for purpose for people who may spend more time working at home.

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (17:58): It is a pleasure to rise and speak on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. At the outset it is interesting to hear many members of the Labor government talking about their proud record on workplace safety. We are certainly not opposing this. We believe workplace safety is absolutely important. Therefore particularly in elements of this dealing with the workplace, dealing with victims of crime, fire services and legal professions, all of the elements in this bill cover important steps to ensure that workers and workplaces are kept safe.

But it is quite disappointing to see the behaviour of the government, particularly not leading by example in terms of how they have treated members of their own party in terms of some alleged workplace bullying. We have certainly seen that play out, and we know that the Premier’s office is under investigation at the moment for workplace bullying. Certainly the comments of many senior members and ministers of the government are very disappointing when members of their own government have made these reports. I would think when we have had people of this Parliament, and a Parliament and a government that should be leading by example in how they behave, rather than actually allowing the process to take its course once one of their members, a member for Western Metropolitan, Kaushaliya Vaghela—

Ms Thomas: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, while I understand this is a workplace safety bill, it does not canvass any of the issues that the member for Caulfield is talking about. Indeed he is talking about things that have nothing to do with the bill, and I ask that you bring him back to speaking on the bill.

Mr SOUTHWICK: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, this bill is about workplace safety. If bullying is not part of workplace safety, I do not know what is. I ask the member for Macedon, who is a minister, rather than trying to cover the issues that her government is dealing with in regard to workplace bullying, to give us the opportunity to talk about it. I think it sends a very important—

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Suleyman): Thank you, member for Caulfield.

Mr SOUTHWICK: I am actually talking about the point of order and relevance. Can I finish my point of order?

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Suleyman): Are you on the point of order? Okay. Go ahead.

Mr SOUTHWICK: I would say that I am being very relevant to the bill. When it comes to workplace bullying, we have an obligation in this Parliament to ensure that we do the right thing in this Parliament and in this government to set an example to the rest of the community, so I believe that I am speaking on the bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Suleyman): Thank you. At this point, member for Caulfield, I do understand that you are setting a context, but I would draw you back to the bill and ask you to keep your contributions to the bill.

Mr SOUTHWICK: Yes. I would like to seek further clarification, please, on this. I do not understand why, when something is dealing with workplace safety, bullying does not actually fit as part of workplace safety. I am sorry, but many members speaking on this bill prior to me have actually spoken on this and have not been pulled up, so I do not understand why I am not able to use this as context. As part of the bill, it is very important to deal with workplace safety.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Suleyman): Member for Caulfield, there is no point of order. I would encourage you to come back to the bill.

Mr SOUTHWICK: As I was saying, it is very important when you are dealing with workplace safety that workplaces are in fact safe, and that applies also to members of Parliament. So when we have had members of Parliament that have raised issues that are now being investigated by WorkSafe Victoria, which are a current live matter before WorkSafe, it is very, very concerning. I think certainly we have had a number of members of government that have effectively called this victim blaming, which is very, very concerning. And I would think anybody in any workplace would be very concerned if they raised a matter that was then taken to WorkSafe and the workplace did not take that seriously. I think that would be a real concern.

In the first element of this bill, when it comes to workplace safety, which is a key element of the first part of the bill, it talks about things like compensation outcomes for injured workers and their families, especially for progressive illnesses. I think that when looking at that in terms of workplace safety, we do need to ensure that that applies to everybody. We certainly have a very important obligation to lead by example in this Parliament—a very, very important obligation to do that—and when we have serious allegations and claims that have been raised in a workplace, regardless of what workplace, they need to be properly investigated. Any worker, any business or any employer that does not do that is failing their obligations. I think, as I have cited before, that this government that is bringing this bill before the house needs to lead by example, quite frankly. And when we have seen this in one of their own members that has raised something which is now being investigated by WorkSafe—it is a live investigation by WorkSafe—the fact that the Treasurer has called it out and said that this person needs some kind of mental health support is victim blaming, and I think it is appalling.

Ms Thomas: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, once again I want to make the point that the member for Caulfield is failing to speak directly to the bill. He is talking about allegations, and he is talking about a live investigation before WorkSafe. I would ask that you counsel him against doing that, making assumptions about what may be any outcome of that investigation, and that he is best to stay focused on the actual bill.

Ms Britnell: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, I would like to state that the bill is called the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill, and it is specifically a bill about the workplace and the safety of the worker. I do not believe that the member for Caulfield has actually compromised in any way, shape or form any investigation, but raising these issues as part of the workplace environment is part of discussing this bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Morris): I do not uphold the point of order because this is well-travelled ground in this debate. I have been in the chamber for the bulk of this debate. But I do ask the member for Caulfield to come back to speaking on the bill rather than on extraneous circumstances.

Mr SOUTHWICK: Thank you very much, Acting Speaker. As I have stated, workplaces must be safe, they must be kept safe, and anybody that raises allegations—albeit they are allegations—that then end up investigations by WorkSafe itself should be properly investigated. They should not be tarnished. They should absolutely not be tarnished. That is why we on this side of the house are not opposing this bill: because we believe that all workers should be kept safe. But we think that government members of Parliament should be kept safe as well, which is clearly not the case here, because this is a workplace. Obviously this government is very touchy about that, because they do not want the truth.

Mr Edbrooke: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I may not have seen notice of this or the emails that went around, but I have not heard of any members of Parliament or employees in this house suffering from silicosis, which is literally what this bill we are bringing to the house is about. It is a very, very important subject to address. Yes, it is about workplace safety, but I ask you to draw the member back to the bill on this very, very important subject.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Morris): I ask the member to come back to the bill. I would be obliged if he now did.

Mr SOUTHWICK: Absolutely, and as I have said, right at the heart of this bill is workplace safety, which includes silicosis, and it is a very, very important issue.

Ms Thomas interjected.

Mr SOUTHWICK: The member for Macedon might be laughing, but her government and her Premier are under investigation for bullying, which is disgraceful—absolutely disgraceful.

Ms Thomas: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, not only is the member for Caulfield failing to show you the respect that you deserve by failing to direct his comments to you, he is once again raising what are allegations that are the subject of a current investigation, and he is outside the scope of the bill. I ask you again. This will be the third time we have asked you to ask him to come back to the bill, and I ask that you do so.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Morris): The member’s time has expired.

Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (18:08): Since the beginning of last year four workers have died from silica-related illness, and WorkSafe has accepted about 60 claims for silica-related diseases. This goes to the absolutely critical point of why this bill will strengthen our occupational health and laws to provide more support to workers and families affected by the debilitating effects of silicosis and similar occupational diseases. The government knows how important it is to support injured Victorian workers and their families, and these provisional payment reforms establish an arbitration function at the Accident Compensation Conciliation Service or our national leading silica licensing scheme. That is what is being delivered here in this legislation.

This bill adds to all of this important work by making a range of amendments to several workplace safety acts. We are delivering an important aspect of the Andrews Labor government’s silica action plan by improving the compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and other like diseases. The government is making sure that WorkSafe Victoria has all the tools needed to prevent serious injuries by changing the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and directions. This is an important shift to make sure that more people are protected. The government is underscoring the seriousness of workplace incidents by including a broader range of matters to be notifiable incidents, including infectious diseases and illnesses as well as near misses.

The government is recognising how difficult a time it is for families of loved ones who have been killed at work by improving the compensation entitlements. I think this is timely and important legislation, particularly with silica and how the incidence has been revealed over time—the impact that it has on people. These amendments will allow injured workers with silica-related diseases to make a further common-law application for damages if they develop a subsequent silica-related disease. Workers suffering from silicosis are currently not able to pursue common-law claims where they develop further silica-related disease after the initial award. The current claims process also poses difficulties for workers with progressive diseases such as silicosis in accessing impairment benefit compensation due to the nature of their disease not demonstrating stabilisation and being subject to rapid deterioration. That is important in this bill—that it seeks to address the identified issues by allowing workers with certain occupational diseases which deteriorate over time and can progress quickly to receive further compensation.

These changes also provide for waiving of the current requirements to demonstrate that a disease has stabilised for a period of 12 months for workers with specific diseases to access impairment benefit compensation. The bill provides greater support to Victorians who have received a lung transplant due to work-related injury and importantly extends compensation for counselling services to families of workers diagnosed with an eligible disease. The government is leading the nation in supporting workers in Victoria affected by the terrible risk of crystalline silica.

I want to take this opportunity to raise an issue that I think has similar sorts of concerns that can happen, and I have raised it previously. Just as we see that issue particularly for men—for stonemasons, with silica—I have raised this issue: if you go past some of the beauty salons for women, you can actually smell for quite some range what I would describe as the probably toxic chemicals in what is used for nail polish removal. I have one of these salons near my office in the shopping centre at Broadmeadows. It has a large number of women who are migrant women who have low-paid jobs, and I just want to put on the record that this could be an emerging area. It certainly is of concern. I have raised this previously with WorkSafe, to actually have a look at what is happening here, because I just know myself that it clears your sinuses from about 20 paces just walking past the door. I just want to put that on the record, that I think that is an area to be looked at. Do it now. Let us make sure we have scrutiny, accountability and compliance so that women are safe from these sorts of jobs where there is no question that just from the chemicals being used, I would argue, over time this would have to be deleterious to your health.

One of the other key points on this bill is the family support benefits. This bill also improves access to deliver better support to families of deceased workers, with weekly pension payments for children with disability to be extended from the age of 16 to the age of 25. That is a really important amendment. Currently under workers compensation legislation a child with disability is not eligible to receive a child pension after the age of 16, whereas full-time students or apprentices are eligible for the pension until they reach the age of 25.

The government is fixing this by making amendments to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 to provide for improved compensation entitlements for the families of deceased workers. Significantly, this will be partially retrospective and allow for eligible dependants who are between the ages of 16 and 25 at commencement to receive back payments for the period that they would have been entitled to.

The bill also continues household help services payments already being received by a worker. What is happening here is a claim will be accepted when they die as a result of their work-related injury for six months after their death. We are all aware of the difficulties of losing a loved one, and extending household help services will provide greater assistance to families particularly in this time of grief. The family support benefits charges also allow for the payment of overseas funeral costs following a work-related death, and this is in recognition of the many Victorian workers who were not born in Australia and may be repatriated overseas following their death.

So I think on a wide range of issues this bill is important. It is timely, and it takes care of a lot of our vulnerable workers. I commend the bill to the house for what it is doing, particularly on silica and how we have seen that evolve, and I raise a further issue: let us look at how a number of women, particularly poor migrant women, can be in vulnerable circumstances in other areas, in shopping centres all around the state. I call attention to that and use this opportunity in this contribution to say: let us get on top of this now. Let us make sure that these women are safe as well and not find out in years to come the detrimental impact that this has had on their health. With that I commend the bill to the house.

Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (18:17): I would like to focus on how this bill assists the most vulnerable individuals in our community, reflecting the commitment of our government to protecting and assisting all Victorians in their time of need. I would just like to say a few words about the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996. I would also like to make some reference to the firefighters presumptive rights amendments, the family support benefits and the Victorian Legal Services Board changes and finish with work safety.

One of the most important aspects of this bill is how it alters the Victims of Crime Assistance Act, which we will call VOCAT. It is not difficult to comprehend the potential harm to a victim-survivor of having the perpetrator at the VOCAT hearing in matters relating to family violence or sexual offences. We are dedicated to a trauma-informed approach and the prioritisation of victim safety, wellbeing and recovery. Indeed we are all well aware that the Royal Commission into Family Violence mentioned:

… the important role that schemes such as VOCAT can play in recovery.

The royal commission heard of situations where the tribunal intended to contact the perpetrator and/or invite them to participate in the proceedings. This is an absolutely unconscionable approach. It is unacceptable that victims could be retraumatised in this fashion. That is why we are changing this law as our approach is shaped by the royal commission and the trauma suffered by victims and survivors. The current state of the law is that alleged offenders are allowed to appear at VOCAT hearings in which they have a legitimate interest or substantial interest in a victim’s assistance application.

The 2018 Victorian Law Reform Commission’s Review of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 recommended that the alleged perpetrator of the offence should not be notified of a victim’s hearing and should not be able to attend that hearing. Indeed this bill represents the ongoing fruition of this approach as we support survivors of family violence and sexual assault and are steadfast in our belief that individuals should not be afraid of making an application to the tribunal. This follows the $64 million investment over four years in the 2021–22 state budget that will allow the building of a brand new, trauma-informed accessible financial assistance scheme for victims of crime. This reform will be centred around our belief that victims of crime deserve a financial assistance system that is victim centred, accountable, accessible and culturally safe.

I must say that I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak on this matter. I really had not had much association with victims of crime until I was standing in the seat of Hawthorn, when another candidate—it does not matter from which party; there were half a dozen of us standing—marched someone from the victims of crime around the West Hawthorn shopping centre, and they were just reduced to tears about the inadequacy, in their opinion anyway, of a judge’s sentence of an abuser, a person who had abused their daughter. I thought it was a shameful use of somebody like that, I must say, and this was the first time I had actually come across victims of crime in this sort of way. So I am delighted that there are some measures being taken to make sure that they are not going to be further punished.

I would like to say something about the firefighters’ presumptive rights amendments. The traditional threat of bushfires in this country that has marked our history is being increasingly amplified by climate change—nothing new about that. Our defence against it is the brave firefighters we rely on every summer, who are truly some of our most remarkable Victorians and some of the best firefighters in the world, I have no doubt. In the future we sadly may have to rely on them even more. Today it is our turn to protect them. These amendments reflect that sentiment and will operate to extend the compensation scheme available under the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019. This historic scheme exemplifies how we work with our emergency services in order to ensure that they are safer and better supported. Specifically, these amendments will allow vehicle and equipment maintenance employees suffering from specified cancers to rely on a presumption that their employment caused the cancer, in the absence of evidence to the contrary. These employees attend fires, often for extended periods during large bushfires, which then create extended health issues. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the CFA, the FRV and the AMWU for their continued work and support on this issue.

And thirdly—the family support benefits. We all know how profoundly difficult the experience of losing a loved one is. For this immense emotional strain to be compounded by financial hardship would be resolutely unjust. That is why another positive improvement contained within this bill is how it changes the support given to the families of deceased workers, extending weekly pension payments to children with a disability aged 16 to 25. This improves on the current workers compensation legislation in which a child with a disability is not eligible to receive a child pension after the age of 16, whereas full-time students or apprentices are eligible for the pension until they reach 25. This legislation remedies this issue by amending the Accident Compensation Act 1985. Additionally, household help services payments already being received by a worker with an accepted claim where they die as a result of their work-related injury will be continued for six months after their death.

I would like to go to the next one, which is the changes to the Victorian Legal Services Board. We have all seen the threats to the integrity of the legal profession over the last few years, especially in relation to the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants. That is why it is necessary for us to take measures to shore up confidence in the legal profession. Our legal system is of absolute importance to our democracy, and we must do everything in our power to ensure it remains in excellent shape. That is why this bill will have the practical effect of reinforcing the Victorian Legal Services Board governance arrangements as part of the process of reinforcing the integrity of our legal system. And the changes that are envisaged here will go a long way towards that.

On workplace safety, the final one: one of the hallmarks of our government has been our commitment to protect our workers. We saw this with the introduction of our workplace manslaughter laws and the Occupational Health and Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 not that long ago. It goes without saying that we as a government are absolutely committed to protecting our workers. This bill shows how we continually deliver on this commitment through a number of vital changes. Importantly we are delivering on the Andrews Labor government’s silica action plan, and you have heard details about that. We are also making sure that WorkSafe Victoria have all the tools they need to prevent serious injuries by changing the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and direction. As well as this, we are underscoring the seriousness of workplace incidents by including a broader range of matters to be notified. This is on top of the aforementioned improvement in compensation entitlements for family members of those killed at work.

In conclusion, may I say the bill makes a range of changes, many of these having the practical effect of helping Victorians in their time of greatest need. It backs our firefighters, covering vehicle and equipment maintenance employees; it protects victim-survivors of family violence; it shores up the integrity of our legal system; and it keeps our workers safe. This signals how we as a government continue to strive to be there for all Victorians.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Morris): The member for Narre Warren South.

Mr MAAS (Narre Warren South) (18:27): Thank you, Acting Speaker Morris, and it is good to see you in the chair this evening. I too would like to make a contribution tonight to the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021, and in doing so off the bat I would like to commend the Minister for Workplace Safety, Minister Stitt, for bringing this bill to the house. Minister Stitt of course has a great history of advocating—very strongly, might I add—for workers in this state, and she is now continuing to do this as a valued ministerial member of the Andrews Labor government.

Ms Thomas interjected.

Mr MAAS: Well, she has been shown to be a very fierce advocate in the past and through her ministerial portfolio is still advocating incredibly strongly for workers by improving the operational scheme of the various acts to improve the lives of workers and their families.

Indeed we know how important it is to support injured Victorian workers and their families, whether it is through provisional payment reforms, establishing a proper arbitration function through the Accident Compensation Conciliation Service or our nation-leading silica licensing scheme—and we are delivering. The bill adds to all that important work by making a range of amendments to several workplace safety acts. We are delivering on important aspects of the government’s silica action plan by improving the compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and other like diseases too.

We are in the process of making sure that WorkSafe Victoria will have all of the tools that they need to prevent serious injuries by changing the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and directions. We are underscoring the seriousness of workplace incidents by including a broader range of matters to be notifiable incidents, including infectious diseases and illnesses as well as near misses, and we are recognising how difficult a time it is for families of loved ones who have been killed at work, by improving compensation entitlements. The amendments are designed to improve outcomes for injured workers and their families, enhance scheme operations and increase WorkSafe’s ability to prevent and respond to workplace safety incidents.

The bill also makes changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 to remove barriers for people applying to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. The bill will also amend the Firefighters’ Presumptive Rights Compensation and Fire Services Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2019 to extend presumptive rights coverage to Fire Rescue Victoria and Country Fire Authority vehicle and equipment maintenance employees. Lastly, the bill will amend the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 to strengthen the integrity of the Victorian Legal Services Board.

In May 2019 the government unveiled a very comprehensive silica action plan. Silica-related illnesses have a debilitating impact on far too many workers in the stonemason industry. People who work with engineered stone, commonly used for benchtops, are at risk of exposure to respirable crystalline silica dust, which can lead to deadly lung and respiratory diseases, including silicosis. Tragically since the beginning of last year there have been four workers who have died from silica-related illness, and WorkSafe has accepted around 60 claims for silica-related diseases in that time.

What the bill will do is strengthen our occupational health and safety laws to provide more support to those workers and their families affected by the debilitating effects of silicosis and similar occupational diseases. The bill makes amendments, as aforementioned, to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 to improve compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and similar occupational diseases. Workers suffering from silicosis are currently not able to pursue common-law claims where they develop further silica-related diseases after an initial award. These amendments will allow injured workers with silica-related diseases to make a further common-law application for damages if they develop a subsequent silica-related disease.

The current claims process also poses difficulties for workers with progressive diseases such as silicosis in accessing impairment benefit compensation, due to the nature of their disease, in not demonstrating stabilisation and being subject to rapid deterioration. The bill seeks to address the identified issues by allowing workers with certain occupational diseases which deteriorate over time and can progress quickly to receive further compensation. These changes also provide for waiving of the current requirements to demonstrate that a disease has stabilised for a period of 12 months for workers with specific diseases to access impairment benefit compensation. The bill also provides greater support to those Victorians who have received a lung transplant due to a work-related injury, and importantly extends compensation for counselling services to families of workers diagnosed with an eligible disease. We are leading the nation in supporting Victorian workers affected by the terrible risks of crystalline silica.

In terms of family support benefits, the bill will also improve access and deliver better support to families of deceased workers, with weekly pension payments for children with a disability to be extended from the age of 16 to the age of 25. Currently under workers compensation legislation a child with disability is not eligible to receive a child pension after the age of 16, whereas full-time students or apprentices are eligible for the pension until they reach 25. We are fixing this by making amendments to the Accident Compensation Act and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act to provide for improved entitlements for the families of those deceased workers. Importantly, this will be partially retrospective and allow for eligible dependents who are between the ages of 16 and 25 at commencement to receive back payments for the period they would have been entitled to.

The bill will also continue household help services payments already being received by a worker with an accepted claim where they die as a result of their work-related injury, for six months after their death. Losing a loved one is indeed hard enough. Extending household help services will provide greater assistance with the family’s transition. The family support benefits changes also allow for the payment of overseas funeral costs following a work-related death. This is in recognition of the many Victorian workers who are not born in Australia carrying out this work and who may be repatriated overseas following their death.

The bill makes a number of important changes to Victoria’s workplace safety and compensation framework that are necessary to improve compensation outcomes for Victorian workers and their families, to ensure the effective operation of Victoria’s workplace health and safety laws and to support WorkSafe to improve operations and deliver on its objectives. The bill also ensures that survivors of family violence and sexual assault are not subject to further trauma when seeking this assistance. It is a good bill. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms CRUGNALE (Bass) (18:37): I rise to speak to this very detailed legislation, the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. As its name partly describes, in scope it is quite detailed. Eight acts are affected by the changes, and while time dictates it cannot be all addressed in one 10-minute time slot, I do want to highlight some of the areas in the bill. Six separate elements of the workplace safety portfolio are contained in this bill—and anyone watching WorkSafe Victoria advertisements over the years would know the message quite clearly that everyone should be safe at work. That is more than an expectation, it is a right to be safe while you are at work and safe from workplace harm later on. This legislation speaks to this right, because workplace harm is rarely accidental. I am proud to live in a state where our government takes responsibility for our workers, and I am proud to be a part of a Labor government that seeks to better protect all workers from immediate and long-term risks.

Injuries are not always immediately obvious, and this amendment bill speaks to one of the most horrible conditions, the danger from crystalline silica, silicosis, which is horrible and has no cure. It is chronic and often silent for years but always deadly, with families left watching the awful inevitability of lung disease. This work builds on the great work announced by the Minister for Workplace Safety in the other place last June acknowledging the risks. Our government’s comprehensive silica action plan included developing Australia’s first licensing scheme for engineered stone; regulations prohibiting dry cutting of stone; and oversight across all industries, including construction, protecting construction workers in my electorate of Bass—because silicosis comes from lots of different construction settings, not just the increasingly popular benchtops. A specialist WorkSafe team focused on silica-related hazards, and there is still more to do—and we are doing it.

Without this current legislative change we leave workers unable to pursue common-law claims when they have developed further disease after an initial award payment. This change will allow a worker to make a claim for damages if they develop a subsequent silica-related disease, and it means no more shutting the door in their face and kind of saying, ‘That’s it’. We know there is unpredictability in the journey of this disease, which is why we are waving the current 12-month stabilisation requirement for workers to access impairment benefit compensation. In the past we have made workers wait until after a lung transplant and stabilisation of the disease to be assessed for impairment benefits. We made them wait. We made injured workers, many of them with not much time left, wait as well. So you wait, suffer, hope, fight—words that have no right to be in a workplace.

This was leaving their families to suffer as well. A child with a disability left behind by a work-related death in the family only receives benefits until the age of 16, whereas a full-time student or an apprentice has assistance until the age of 25. This bill changes that by amending two acts, protecting families and fairness, continuing family household help services for six months after a work-related death and providing family counselling services to families as well as family support benefits allowing for the payment of overseas funeral costs following a work-related death. We recognise the contribution of many Victorian workers not born in Australia who may be returning to their homeland following their death. Our government does care and knows that it does not matter where you were born.

By fulfilling our election commitment and amending the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, WorkSafe will have the power to deal with a broader range of notifiable incidents, responding to risks and preventing illness and injury. It is prevention because silicosis is entirely preventable. The last two years have taught us all simple disease prevention measures like the benefits of wearing masks. These changes will allow WorkSafe inspectors to identify and prohibit cumulative risk activities. To say ‘It’s only a once off’, ‘It’s only a little’ or ‘It doesn’t matter now’ does matter now because it can lead to serious lifelong illness.

So many things need changing, and I thank our government for never giving up, for speaking out, for seeing when something is wrong and fixing it and for agreeing to accept in principle all 100 recommendations made by the Victorian Law Reform Commission in 2018 in reporting on its review into the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996. One of the other matters in the title deals with victims of crime. Allowing an alleged offender to be present when a survivor is making an application to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal on the basis that the offender has a legitimate interest in the application is no more. Survivors no longer need to be fearful of making an application and no longer fearful that they will be in the same room with a person who abused them, and we send them the strongest message that we support them. From now on it will only be prohibited to notify an alleged offender of a hearing that involves family violence or sexual offences. It will also be an offence for an alleged offender to attend a hearing, and I thank the Minister for Victim Support for highlighting changes to help survivors in the Victim Support Update last December. A record $64.5 million was announced in the 2021–22 state budget for reform as well as $10 million to address the backlog of applications at the tribunal.

This bill is complex and broad. As well as dealing with workplace safety in mining and stone cutting, we are bringing parity and fairness in other areas as well. Our Andrews Labor government corrected many wrongs last year with the Forests Amendment (Forest Firefighters Presumptive Rights Compensation) Bill 2021. Now we are taking this legislation further by extending the presumptive right to compensation to both vehicle and equipment maintenance employees employed by Fire Rescue Victoria and the Country Fire Authority. We acknowledge that workers attending fires to maintain and repair vehicles and equipment will be exposed to the same carcinogens as those who fight the fires. I mentioned before that workplace harm is really accidental, but despite providing safety equipment we cannot control the possibility that carcinogens are present in smoke.

To the east of my Bass electorate in the Latrobe Valley let us never forget the Hazelwood mine fire eight years ago this month burning for 45 days, 25 firefighters treated for smoke inhalation and the smoke and ash that settled on Morwell. Again, people were issued masks. We are also consulting further after questions were raised on the Forests Amendment (Forest Firefighters Presumptive Rights Compensation) Bill 2021 around different types of cancer, and once again our Minister for Emergency Services in the other place has undertaken to investigate the issue.

Still on the issue of our brave firefighters and maintenance workers, qualifying periods will include the provision that a part year of service counts as a full year to ensure consistency between all sectors and allow periods of service across the different services to be combined. We have acknowledged that forest firefighting is seasonal. I also want to thank the Australian metal workers union for their support of equipment maintenance workers and their words of acknowledgement thanking our government for keeping workers safe. As always we have consulted widely, bringing people with us, and I thank the many unions and legal firms that offered support, the industry groups and associations that know we care about Victorians. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr PEARSON (Essendon—Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Regulatory Reform, Minister for Government Services, Minister for Creative Industries) (18:46): Acting Speaker Morris, it has been a long time between drinks, but it is good to see you in the chair. I am delighted to make a contribution on this bill, and in reflecting on this contribution it is worth thinking about the journey that we have been on as a society. I remember studying a bit about the Great Depression, and up until the Great Depression you would have those mutual companies that were in existence to be able to provide a level of comfort and support for workers who required that level of support, and they worked quite well. They worked quite well in terms of providing that level of support for when workers were injured or when workers were unemployed. But as a consequence of the Great Depression the rush on the funds of those mutuals saw many collapse. I think AMP was probably one of the few that survived, but many collapsed. So as a consequence you saw the withdrawal of those sorts of services, and what was a minor economic contraction that started with a drought in Australia in 1927 followed by a minor stock market correction became a full-blown Depression by 1932.

I seem to recall, Acting Speaker, you and I having a conversation about the Legislative Council committee room being the scene of the Premiers Conference of 1931 where Sir Otto Niemeyer from the Bank of England emphasised the need for a balanced budget, which then really resulted in the collapse of the Labor government, and ‘Red Ted’ Theodore, who was the commonwealth Treasurer but who had stood down because of the Mungana royal commission, was unable to implement some of Keynes’s ideas. But nonetheless, that led to a withdrawal of that level of support, and as you saw the reconstruction efforts of the 1940s after the war and the rise of a modern welfare state you started to see the state taking more of an interest in these roles.

Obviously given the fact that you had conservative rule from December 1949 until December 1972, the decision to try and go down this path and regulate in these areas was not the want or the desire of the conservative governments, but what you did see was the emergence of some of those private sector entities who were offering that level of support for injured workers. What became apparent by the 1980s under the Cain government was that that model just was not working effectively, that the market was not effective—because effectively what you would have would be very safe bets being able to have policies written for them, but the greater likelihood of you attracting a premium. You could not do that. And when the Labor government was able to briefly—and I mean briefly—seize control of the other place, the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1985, which then led to the establishment of the WorkSafe Victoria scheme, or the WorkCover scheme as it was known, came into being. This scheme has been really important because it has provided that level of support for injured workers—that level of certainty and security that you have got the ability to have that level of coverage if you need it.

WorkCover for me has been something that I have recognised the value and importance of, not so much from my own personal family circumstances but certainly from my wife’s family. My father left school at 15. He was a butcher. Butchering is a hard game and it is a tough way to earn a dollar, but provided you do not rush with the knives and you take some precautions, you are not likely to have a serious workplace injury as a general proposition. I am not saying that is universally the case, but as a general proposition butchering has long hours and it is hard, physical and demanding work, but you are not likely to experience a traumatic workplace injury.

My father-in-law, on the other hand, was a bricklayer, and he had a number of workplace injuries. Jeff will turn 70 next month, and it has been incredibly distressing to see what impact his work as a bricklayer for 50 years had on his body physically. My father-in-law has been diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. He should have had a happy retirement. You know, he had a hard life. He worked hard and he pushed his body to the limits. You kind of think that in the remains of the day you can just quietly reflect on a rich life that has been lived. He is still married to my mother-in-law, with three kids, eight grandchildren and another on the way. You would think you would have that opportunity to quietly reflect on a life well lived. Unfortunately COPD is an awful disease. It robs you of so much. Mentally you are there, but you cannot do anything. I have no doubt, absolutely no doubt whatsoever, that the fact that he worked on building sites, the fact that there was dust in abundance and the fact that he inhaled chemicals, dust and fumes over a lifetime has had a significant deleterious impact upon him, and it has impacted my family. It is awful to see a person being robbed—after a lifetime of endeavour, of hard work—of being able to experience that richness of retirement and to enjoy that life. To be denied that is something I find incredibly distressing, and I know it is something that has greatly upset my wife and my wife’s family. The reason I raise that is that having a strong WorkCover scheme, both from the point of view of an insurer but also in relation to ensuring that high standards of occupational health and safety are maintained, is a really important initiative because it sends a clear signal that we as a government and we as a community take these matters seriously.

I have gone to Trades Hall on a number of occasions when they have their memorial day for workers who have lost their lives. I remember going there a few years ago, and the member for Preston in his capacity as the then minister responsible for workplace safety—I think that was the correct title—spoke. In addition to him speaking and being in attendance there was a husband and wife who had lost their 18-year-old son in a collapse at a building site in Buninyong, I think. This guy would have been I think 19 or 20. I think he was an apprentice plumber. His colleague also died when the trench they were digging collapsed. His colleague was married—had two kids, I think. To hear the parents speak about the loss of their son—you just think about that for a moment. The notion that you have spent all those years raising a child, you have spent all that effort making sure that they are safe, that they are clothed, that they are fed, that they are educated, that they are protected from harm, and you send them out to work and you get a call to say that they have passed away. They had everything in front of them. It still sticks with me now just the grief and the trauma that those parents went through for something that really just should not have happened.

I think making sure that we have got a really strong legislative framework in place and making sure that we have got a well-functioning, well-structured compensation scheme plays a really important role in providing that level of protection, because invariably it is working people who will bear the brunt of these injuries. I am not suggesting for a moment that if you are working in a comfortable white-collar job in an office environment you do not experience workplace stresses or strains, that you will never lodge a workplace injury claim. It happens, it certainly happens, and it has been known to happen. But the issue here is making sure that people who do not have those opportunities, who work in those sorts of really hard, physical industries, have an appropriate WorkSafe scheme to provide that level of protection to them. It is making sure that they are protected. It is making sure that if something happens to them, there is an appropriate regulatory regime in place to support them, and if the worst happens and they lose their life, there is an appropriate level of compensation payable to their families. This is an important bill, and I commend it to the house.

Mr McGHIE (Melton) (18:56): I rise today to contribute on the Workplace Safety Legislation and Other Matters Amendment Bill 2021. This bill seeks to build on the excellent work that the Andrews Labor government has already done to ensure Victorian workers are safe at work.

In my previous capacity as a paramedic I attended many incidents where people were seriously injured or killed at work, and I have got to say you never forget those incidents that you attend. You always consider the families when their loved one is not going to return home. I can best describe going to traumatic incidents, whether they be at the workplace or in any other situation, where emergency services workers and healthcare workers have this movie theatre in the back of their mind and tend to recall these tragic incidents. As I speak here 27 years later after coming off the road as a paramedic with Ambulance Victoria I can actually see pictures of some of the events that I went to that were workplace incidents and workplace deaths. As I say, you never, ever forget them. They are all very tragic and in most cases, if not all cases, very avoidable.

This bill seeks to improve our reforms by improving compensation arrangements for workers with silicosis and similar occupational diseases and deliver on aspects of the government’s silica action plan. We are also making sure WorkSafe Victoria have all the tools they need to prevent serious injuries by changing the threshold for issuing prohibition notices and directions. We are underscoring the seriousness of workplace incidents by including a broader range of matters to be notifiable incidents, including infectious diseases and illnesses as well as near misses.

I will cite that in representing paramedics as the union secretary and assistant secretary over 23 years, I dealt with a lot of WorkCover situations. One of the very basic situations that we had to battle WorkSafe on was when paramedics would be infected by their patients in the back of an ambulance with just the flu or some other communicable disease. We had to fight tooth and nail to get their claims up in regard to it being caused by their work.

We are also recognising how difficult a time it is for the families of loved ones who have been killed at work by improving compensation entitlements. These amendments are designed to improve outcomes for injured workers and their families. They enhance the scheme’s operations and increase WorkSafe’s ability to prevent and respond to workplace safety incidents. The bill also makes changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 to remove barriers for people applying to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. Finally, the bill will amend the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 to strengthen the integrity of the Victorian Legal Services Board.

This government stands up for workers, and these amendments are designed to improve outcomes for injured workers and their families. I have spoken on many occasions in this house about my previous experiences as a paramedic and attending to, as I said before, many workplace incidents and seeing the impacts of those incidents and the struggle with their health that injured people have.

Business interrupted under sessional orders.