Mr PETER DRAPER (Tamworth) [5.02 p.m.]: I welcome the concessions that the New South Wales Minister for Commerce, the Hon. John Della Bosca, has made in introducing the Occupational Health and Safety Amendment (Workplace Deaths) Bill. The Minister's reconsideration of the flawed Occupational Health and Safety Legislation Amendment (Workplace Fatalities) Bill and its replacement with a revised, more targeted piece of legislation demonstrates that the Government is willing to listen. It also demonstrates, however, that it is critical for community members to assess on merit proposed legislation which stands to affect them and to not be swayed into acceptance by the Government's use of rhetoric.

In the recent second reading speech of this new Occupational Health and Safety Amendment (Workplace Deaths) Bill, the Minister for Mineral Resources, Kerry Hickey, stated that the vast majority of employers have nothing to fear from this new provision. Disturbingly the Hon. John Della Bosca, in his ministerial statement on the now-defunct draft workplace fatalities bill gave the same assurance stating that hardworking, responsible employers have nothing to fear from this bill. He went on to say the 2004 bill was aimed at a minority—"the rogues whose indifference to health and safety ? results in death". Who are these rogues? Have Australian Business Limited [ABL] and Employers First and other representative groups sat down with the Government to identify the rogues? What is being done to target the rogues?

The rhetoric was what employers wanted to hear, but the Minister got it wrong on the first occasion. Hardworking responsible employers from my electorate indicated to me they had plenty to fear from the original legislation as it was not in fact targeted at rogue employers: rather, the bill lumped all employers together, regardless of their safety record, and made them for the first time subject to gaol terms and hefty fines. The Minister admitted that he missed the mark by withdrawing the original legislation and introducing a revised version, the Occupational Health and Safety Amendment (Workplace Deaths) Bill. This bill appears to aim squarely at those who need to be brought to justice—rogue employers.

However, with the same assurances given on the first flawed bill now being applied to its successor, it is hard to be assured that employers' fears have been allayed. An industry lobby group, Australian Business Limited, seems to have been convinced. I believe that on this occasion the tightening of the legislation and its more targeted approach to irresponsible employers are acceptable. ABL credited Tamworth as the turning point in the campaign to make the legislation fair and workable for responsible employers. The meeting I convened in Tamworth, which attracted 300 people, was the first major rally of a number which rolled out across the State, attracting thousands of employers, farmers and concerned citizens. The Tamworth meeting was preceded by a gathering organised by the Gunnedah and District Development Board that attracted 50 people and provided the inspiration to hold the larger, more comprehensive public forum in Tamworth.

I pay a particular tribute to the President of the Gunnedah and District Development Board, Mick Brockman, and executive officer, Anne Sims, for having the foresight and the vision to conduct the very first meeting of its kind in this State. I also received hundreds of letters from concerned employers, business people, farmers, community organisations, lobby groups and community members opposing the legislation and I forwarded them to the Minister for consideration. I am proud of the fact that the Tamworth electorate is such a proactive community and that it made such a worthy and effective contribution to the debate on this legislation. In March this year, figures were released that showed work-related fatalities and employment injuries had dropped to their lowest levels in 15 years, with fatal injuries occurring in the workplace having decreased by almost 33 per cent. I believe this reflects the fact that the vast majority of employers take occupational health and safety laws very seriously—so seriously that some have considered exiting their industry simply because they feel that compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act regulations is beyond their reach.

The threat of gaol terms and enormous fines in the unfortunate circumstance of a death in the workplace seemed to be the final straw for many. At least now if the welfare of workers is regarded first and foremost in their conduct, when there is a fatal accident employers will not face the prospect of being prosecuted as a rogue with no recourse for appeal. Commonsense has been applied and employers, controllers of work premises, directors, managers and employees will not face gaol or fines unless their behaviour was demonstrably reckless and indifferent in regard to safety of the victim. The fact remains that the Occupational Health and Safety Act remains a thorn in the side of the business and farming communities. Farmers in particular face considerable challenges in complying with the Occupational Health and Safety regulations as they require farmers to remove 100 per cent of the risk of an accident from their farms.

By virtue of the way that a farming workplace is structured, this is impossible and is placing unnecessary stress on farmers who are baulking at employing workers. The absence of employees seems to be the only way of guaranteeing that an accident involving an employee will not occur. An employee's actions are a factor in any accident and it is therefore unreasonable and not possible for employers of any kind to guarantee their safety 100 per cent. I look forward to contributing to a review of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which I believe will take place later this year. In the meantime I commend the Minister for listening to the concerns of business groups, farmers and others, and for amending what was a flawed piece of legislation.