HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-11-23 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

WORKCOVER CORPORATION

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (15:19): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Industrial Relations questions regarding WorkCover.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY: Last year, I met with the then minister for industrial relations, the Hon. Paul Caica, to discuss alternatives to address tail claims, which at the time were in the order of $1.2 billion. During these discussions, it was revealed that WorkCover had no measure or definition for return to work. As a result, when a file was closed, it was difficult to determine whether it was because an injured worker was rehabilitated and returned to work or whether the file was closed because there was a discontinuance of the payments or a redemption was accepted.

Following this meeting I received a letter from the minister dated 13 August 2009, which stated that WorkCover was developing a new survey-based measure, similar to the Victorian model and that the first results from the South Australian measure would be available in the near future. My questions are:

1. Given that return to work is one of the key objectives of the WorkCover scheme, why was EML not required to have a measure for this and keep appropriate records?

2. Can the minister advise whether WorkCover now has a return to work measure? If so, can the minister provide details of this measure and the results from the first South Australian survey?

3. If not, can the minister advise why there has been such a significant delay in developing the measure?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (15:21): I thank the honourable member for his important question. He is absolutely correct that return to work is a key element of WorkCover. Indeed, it is not only essential to ensure that the costs of the WorkCover scheme are competitive with those in other states, but it is also essential to ensure the best health of workers who are injured. We know that the longer workers are off work, the less likely they are to return to work and the more likely they are to develop depression and other illnesses, the longer they are away from the support they receive in the workplace. So yes, it is important.

I have had some discussions with the CE of WorkCover about statistics and how we measure that. I know there have been some deficiencies in that in the past. I am not that familiar with the situation that applied before I came minister for this area, but I think it is an important question. Certainly, as I announced some weeks back, the government has renewed the contract for EML, although for a relatively short period. One of the things the government will be looking at is a better performance from EML in relation to a number of areas. Obviously, measuring return to work performance is a key part of that.

The honourable member's question is an important one. As I said, I would need to go back and find out why, in the past, EML had not taken those statistics. I would have to look back at the history of that, but it is an important question. I am happy to take it on notice and respond to the honourable member as well as provide him with a considered response on what improvements have been made. He is certainly correct; improvements did need to be made. I have had advice that WorkCover has strengthened its measurement of return to work outcomes through developing the return to work survey. It is important question, and I will get a detailed answer for the honourable member.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT