Question Time

WORKCOVER CORPORATION

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite—Leader of the Opposition) (14:16): My question is to the Premier. Why have the Premier's personal convictions on workers' rights shifted since 1995? During debate on the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation (Benefits and Review) Amendment Bill 1995, the Hon. M.D. Rann, as leader of the opposition, stated the following:

Behind the rhetoric and behind the weasel words lies a proposal to cut significantly the income of most injured workers.

He argued against a measure in the bill to reduce injured workers' payments to 85 per cent after six months. The Hon. M.D. Rann said:

WorkCover benefits will be so low the injured workers will be shunted onto commonwealth benefits.

He then said the following:

It will condemn people who want to work and their families to a lifetime of poverty and dependence.

He concluded:

And if we in the Labor Party are accused of being passionate about injustice, of being passionate about the rights of injured workers, of being passionate about the need for a fair go, about the needs of those least able to defend themselves, then we are guilty.

The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (14:18): I am delighted. Can I just say, if we are going back in history, I would like to—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Do you want to talk? Do you want to keep talking?

Mr Hanna interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: I heard the honourable member calling on someone on this side of the house to resign. Of course, he has left more parties than Paris Hilton; we all know about that. We saw what he did to Bob Brown. If you want to go back in time and history, I suggest you go back to probably the most definitive work that I have seen in the history of this state on this subject; that is, the publication Limbs, Lungs and Lives, which was published in about 1984. That publication lays down what has to be done in parallel between occupational health and safety reform and, in fact, a no-fault compensation scheme. If you want to go back in time and history, go and look at what I wrote back then in the 1980s, because I am very proud of my involvement in this area. But there is one hell of a difference between the two of us—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: —and that is that people on that side of the house have never given a damn about workers, and no-one in the working field and no-one in the unions will ever believe you did, because we remember what you wanted to do to WorkCover. By contrast, what we are insisting upon is that we get rid of the unfunded liability, which your government failed to do, that we are fair to workers, and at the same time we lower the premiums. At the moment, we have a system that isn't good for business, isn't good at returning injured workers to work, and it has an unfunded liability. We are going to fix it because you did not have the guts to do so.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!