Wednesday, 8 June 2022

WorkSafe Victoria

Mr DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan—Leader of the Opposition) (12:17): My question is for the Minister for Workplace Safety. Minister, isn’t it a fact—

Members interjecting.

Ms Stitt: On a point of order, Deputy President, I thought we just had a ruling on being able to hear what is going on, and I cannot hear Mr Davis’s question that is directed to me.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I was just about to actually call that to account, because I was having trouble hearing Mr Davis as well. I ask for silence for the questions.

Mr DAVIS: My question is to the Minister for Workplace Safety. Minister, isn’t it a fact that WorkSafe has proposed to increase employer WorkSafe premiums from 1.272 per cent to 1.8 per cent this year, a 42 per cent increase, and had also proposed to slug businesses further by increasing the employer premium cap from 30 per cent to 70 per cent?

Ms STITT (Western Metropolitan—Minister for Workplace Safety, Minister for Early Childhood) (12:18): Thank you, Mr Davis, for that question. I completely reject your attempts to misrepresent what is occurring here. As you very well know, premium decisions are made by government each year, and as I explained at some length in the house yesterday, they are made taking a range of factors into consideration, not least of which are the economic circumstances in which those decisions are made. It was very important from the government’s point of view to ensure that businesses could recover from the impacts of the pandemic and get back to what they do best, and that is employing Victorians and having thriving businesses in our communities, and at the same time keeping premiums competitively low. You would be aware, Mr Davis, if you took the time to look at any of the facts in relation to these matters, that Victorian businesses enjoy the second-lowest WorkSafe premium rates in the country. But, as well as that, it is incredibly important that the scheme is financially sustainable in the interests of injured workers and in the interests of preventing workers from being injured in the first place. You might pretend that you care about these things, but nothing could be further from the truth. When you were in government, in the short time that you were in government, you ripped $650 million out of the scheme.

Mr Davis: On a point of order, Deputy President, my question was highly specific about what WorkSafe had proposed. It was not a general question; it was a very specific question. I have asked the minister to confirm that. She can make a contextual statement—

Ms Shing: On the point of order, Deputy President, how many times does Mr Davis have to be told that the standing orders do not permit a minister to be directed as to how to answer a question?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Davis, as you know, I cannot direct the minister. She has 1 minute and 26 seconds left, and perhaps she will answer your question in that time.

Ms STITT: In the context of Mr Davis’s question it is important to point out that premiums are a decision for government each year, and that is why I am going to those issues about what considerations occur when government is making a decision about whether premiums increase or not each year. So I stand by my original answer to Mr Davis’s question.

Mr DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan—Leader of the Opposition) (12:21): The minister has not answered the question directly. It was a question about what was proposed—

Ms Stitt: On a point of order, Deputy President, Mr Davis thinks he is on a roll in this place this week with getting his questions reinstated by inferring that they have not been answered, but I am correcting the premise of his question and rejecting the premise of how he is trying to frame his question.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It is not a point of order.

Mr DAVIS: As I stated, the minister has not actually answered the question that I asked, which was about what WorkSafe had proposed. I therefore ask very simply: given that you have rejected what WorkSafe has proposed—that is a government policy decision, I understand that completely—isn’t it a fact that the Andrews Labor government has shelved the proposal until after the state election, intending to introduce it if re-elected?

Ms STITT (Western Metropolitan—Minister for Workplace Safety, Minister for Early Childhood) (12:22): And here we have it. There it is, the scare campaign. I reject that completely. I am absolutely steadfastly committed to making decisions about the financial sustainability of the WorkSafe fund, because I care about injured workers in this state. You can sit there and pretend that this is all some big conspiracy, but it is very simple: our government stand by our record of supporting injured workers, and we will continue to do so.