House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time WorkCover WORKCOVER Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly MacKillop WORKCOVER Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (15:09): My question is to the Deputy Premier in his role as the Minister for Industrial Relations. Were the minister's comments that WorkCover is 'buggered' an admission of policy failure of his 12-year-old government? The Hon. J.R. RAU House of Assembly Enfield Deputy Premier Attorney-General Minister for Planning Minister for Industrial Relations Minister for Business Services and Consumers WORKCOVER The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (15:09): I thank the honourable member for his question. I can give him either the short answer, which is no, or the longer answer. Would you like the longer answer? Members interjecting: The Hon. J.R. RAU House of Assembly The Hon. J.R. RAU: I gave you the short answer. The short answer is no. If you want some more, I can keep going. The Hon. J.J. Snelling House of Assembly The Hon. J.J. Snelling: Keep going. They've run out of questions, so you'd better help them out. Mr Williams House of Assembly Mr Williams: For the benefit of the Minister for Health, if he wishes to move that question time be extended half an hour, I will gladly support it. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: I warn the member for MacKillop for that impromptu speech. The Hon. J.R. RAU House of Assembly The Hon. J.R. RAU: Let's just look at what is going on here with WorkCover. WorkCover has two statutory elements to it. One is the WorkCover Corporation legislation, which I am optimistically informed will be amended in the other place today, so that is something we are getting through there. The second bit is the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, which is one that defines all the benefits and sets out the scheme arrangements. That is probably the most amended piece of legislation in this parliament. Every single government since 1987 has had a chop at it. What you have there is layer upon layer upon layer of change—many of those layers do not relate to each other properly—and what you have is an entrenched position of disappointment and anger (more than disappointment) amongst all sections of the community who have to interact with that arrangement. The government has tried, during the course of its tenure, on a number of occasions, to make improvements to that legislation. The last substantial attempt was made in 2008. At that time, we were reliably informed by consultants that the changes that were going to be introduced in that legislative change were going to make a difference to the performance of the scheme. I do not think it is responsible of me, having gone through the process of studying this scheme intensively for the last nine months, to report to my colleagues on this side of the house or to cabinet, or indeed to the parliament or the public, that my examination has discovered the scheme is working beautifully and everything envisaged in 2008 has happened. It has not. So, having attempted a number of different ways to improve the scheme, and now having gone through the process myself of examining the scheme quite thoroughly, and having satisfied myself that nothing that was anticipated to improve the scheme has performed anywhere near what was expected, I am being completely frank with the public, with my colleagues, with everybody, in saying that is not good enough and we have to do better, and we will.