Mines Safety and Inspection Amendment Bill

HON ALISON XAMON (East Metropolitan) [11.36 am]: The Greens (WA) also support the Mines Safety and Inspection Amendment Bill 2009. It is a very positive initiative that is long overdue, and we welcome it. We believe that the idea of cost recovery from the mining industry for the purpose of regulating the industry and ensuring worker safety is heading down the right path. The mining industries in Western Australia have done very well for themselves over the past decade and, despite the global financial crisis, they are still doing relatively well. The Greens believe that it is in order for the mining industry to contribute to ensuring that the safety of its workers is paramount. Since 1999 there have been 47 deaths in mines. I find that figure very sobering; we think about not only those who have been killed but also those who are left behind. I am always mindful of the human cost. We are talking about parents who have been left to bury their children, and about children who will never see their mother or father again. The question I have is: what price are we prepared to put on lives when that is the cost we are talking about? Any loss of life is a great tragedy, but it is particularly tragic if it is avoidable. This legislation goes in the right direction in addressing that sort of issue.

My understanding is that the experience in Queensland, which has a fairly similar regime, has been of success, and I hope that we will enjoy a similar level of success from this regime, but also learn from the mistakes of the Queensland regime and see where improvements can be made. We are hopeful that raising additional funds will ensure not only greater numbers of mines inspectors—it is a very specialised field—but also that we will be able to attract them in the first place. We will need an appropriate level of remuneration for them to compete with the private sector. We are looking at quite competitive wage structures. I share the sentiments expressed by Hon Jon Ford and I also share some of the concerns that he raised. It is a rather skeletal bill—it is not terribly huge—and the detail will be in the regulations. I have not received a copy of the draft policy on the regulations. Even then, it is just a draft that must be signed off on. We are not quite sure how it is proposed that this regime is to be enacted. I understand that there is a bit of concern from some stakeholders that there be adequate consultation in the development of these regulations. As I said, the devil can be in the detail of how the regime will be enacted, but I have confidence that the intent is good.

I certainly hope that, in the consultation process, due regard is given to the unions in particular. I say that because I came from the union movement and I am aware, having worked in the movement, that the unions are often most aware of what is happening on the ground. They have the delegates working in the mines who will be able to give very direct feedback about what is happening. Of course, it will be up to the minister to determine how that consultation process rolls out. However, I would like to put on the record the proposal that, in putting together the regulations and looking at the overall make-up of a representative or consultative body, perhaps the minister could look at moving beyond one peak body, which in this state is of course UnionsWA, and have at least a few unions that work on the ground in various areas in the mining industry that can be consulted to provide various levels of expertise. I certainly feel that a collaborative approach to putting together these regulations is more likely to ensure that we have the best outcome and an outcome that everyone feels very positive about.

I also congratulate the Minister for Mines and Petroleum for putting this bill together. I think the mining industry is getting off relatively lightly under this bill; I do not think it has anything to complain about. I understand that under the Queensland regime, mining companies are obliged to pay about $800 per full-time equivalent, yet in this state companies will have to pay a measly amount of $250 per FTE. That is less than a third of the amount that companies are expected to pay under another state’s regime. Certainly, if there are any complaints on that front, I will have very little sympathy for them. I think it is a perfectly reasonable expectation that the mining industry pay something to ensure that it looks after human life. As I say, the mining companies in Western Australia are getting off relatively cheaply compared with those in other regimes.

Like the Australian Labor Party, the Greens will not seek to go into committee on this bill. I will not repeat the questions that Hon Jon Ford has asked, but I look forward to hearing the minister’s response to those questions. I hope that his questions will go some way towards putting on the record concerns about how we move forward. Ideally, when we talk about mine safety and workers’ lives, we should rise above party politics. It seems to me that there is too much at stake. Again, that is why I urge a shared understanding of or a consensus about the way that the regulations will be developed. I agree with Hon Jon Ford’s comments when he asked that we be given the opportunity to scrutinise the regulations before they are agreed to.

On that note, I again congratulate the Minister for Mines and Petroleum for this measure. It is a good one. It is going in the right direction. However, I have reservations about how the regulations will be rolled out. I look forward to a collaborative approach to the development of the regulations. We all want the same thing—that is, to basically minimise the number of deaths of workers, or, dare I say it, completely eliminate the workplace deaths of any more workers. Every death is a great tragedy and we should strive very hard to ensure that they do not happen.