Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields) (10:05): — I lead for the Opposition in debate on the COVID‑19 and Other Legislation Amendment (Regulatory Reforms) Bill 2022.
Over the past two years, the COVID pandemic has significantly changed the way we live, how we deliver services, the way we work and socialise and the importance of a well‑funded and functional public health system.
In particular, the pandemic has shown us how technology has accelerated to become a much more permanent fixture in every aspect of our personal and professional daily lives.
Working from home, or WFH, is undoubtedly a permanent fixture in the way employees and employers engage in the workplace, and it is no different for the delivery of public administration. The use of technology for meetings, interviews, discussions, debates, and to conduct group meetings and ballots, is now much more common than it was prior to the pandemic.
The general thrust of the bill makes permanent changes in allowing technology to be a permissible and legal way to conduct workplace and public administration activities. The bill covers a diverse range of portfolios ranging from strata management, environmental planning, mental health, retail leases, community land management, contract cleaning industry working arrangements, and flexibility in accessing long service leave, just to name a few.
The bill permits, for example, the use of technology to conduct formal meetings, hold public hearings, conduct interviews between parties, undertake assessments, vote and conduct ballots, lodge documents, manage records and indeed, under the Interpretations Act 1987, it allows the tabling of documents in Parliament even when the House is not sitting, but excluding when the Parliament has been prorogued.
Labor will not be opposing the bill, but it will be proposing some amendments to improve it. The proposed amendments are reasonable and aimed at minimising the risk of inadvertent adverse outcomes as a result of adopting the bill in its current form.
The vast majority of the proposed changes are administrative and involve non‑complex public administration functions or processes. This simplicity may not apply to the proposed use of technology for complex scenarios involving individuals in our community who are experiencing serious mental or emotional health difficulties.
Further, the proposed changes to long service leave are significant and change the original intent of accessing and using long service leave.
Whilst technology will continue to play a much greater role in our daily lives, both personal and professional, it should never be a first option or an automatic substitute for face‑to‑face meetings, interviews or assessments for situations which are personally complex and involve the human frailties of people who are in very difficult personal, emotional or psychological circumstances.
For example, schedule 1.12 amends the Mental Health Act 2007 to allow a medical practitioner to use an audio-visual link as part of an examination or observation of a person's mental state. The findings from this examination or observation could result in that particular individual being placed under guarded public supervisory care for an unspecified period. This is a sensitive and significant outcome for any individual and their close family or personal support network. Whilst technology may be an option, in difficult and complex situations like this we should be careful and not instantly use technology as a replacement for face‑to‑face meetings. It may be more efficient to use technology, but that does not mean it is more effective.
An audio-visual assessment will present difficulties in taking into account the contextual nature of the examination and the individual's response. Full body language movements, close facial reactions, tonal responses and physical surroundings are important factors that create a more accurate understanding of what a patient is saying or not saying and provide clues as to why responses are being provided in a particular way. An inaccurate assessment could lead to an individual being allocated guarded public supervisory care. These are the issues that we have raised, and there will be ongoing discussions with the Government.
Once those amendments are finalised, they will be presented to the Legislative Assembly and perhaps even to the Legislative Council. Given the complexities of the situation and the difficulties and challenges that the individuals involved are currently experiencing, this is not an unreasonable amendment.
We owe it to individuals and their families to ensure that the most accurate form of assessment takes place, rather than one that is technologically more efficient and timely.
In agreement with the Treasurer's office, the Opposition will move amendments to include that a review be conducted within 18 months so that the proposed changes being put before the House operate effectively and efficiently, as originally intended.
In addition, the amendments will require that the Treasurer table a report to the Presiding Officers of both Houses by 30 December 2023. As agreed with the Treasurer's office, schedules 1.4 and 1.5 and schedules 1.11 and 1.15 will be excluded from the review. Therefore, the amendment to the Constitution Act 1902 is temporarily extended until 26 March 2023.
The amendment to the Interpretation Act is for clarification purposes, and the amendments to the Retail Leases Act 1984 are designed to preserve the protections that were granted to eligible tenants during the pandemic.
I also briefly refer to schedule 1.11 regarding long service leave. Historically the purpose of long service leave was to allow an employee to take leave in blocks to ensure that they had a well-earned rest after long service.
There was a distinct difference between long service and annual or flexible leave. The proposed changes are significant as they change the entitlement to any additional leave or perhaps an additional flexi day.
But during the pandemic a number of employees accessed their long service leave to meet their specific personal circumstances. A number of workers felt that the flexibility in the changes to long service leave worked to their advantage. However, that flexibility already exists because an employer and employee can come to an agreement on when long service leave is taken.
Labor will continue to monitor how the proposed changes to long service leave work to ensure that when they are adopted in future they will continue to benefit both employers and employees in creating a productive workplace.
Labor wants to ensure that when employees take long service leave under this flexible arrangement, it is done in the spirit of cooperation and mutual benefit to both the employer and the employee.
During the pandemic frontline workers in our health system and transport sector—as well as teachers, carers and retail workers—worked hard to keep us all safe and our economy moving.
Labor's amendments are based on good faith to ensure that the bill can be improved and does not inadvertently disadvantage workers.
Creating productive workplaces ensures that the changes proposed operate effectively and efficiently, as they were originally intended. That is why the review requirement plays an important part in the amendments.
Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields) (12:21): I move Opposition amendment No. 1 on sheet c2022-012B:
No. 1 Report on amendments made by COVID-19 and Other Legislation Amendment (Regulatory Reforms) Act 2022
Page 2. Insert after line 10—
3 Report on effectiveness of amendments under COVID-19 and Other Legislation Amendment (Regulatory Reforms) Act 2022
(1) The Treasurer must, within 18 months after the commencement of this Act, conduct a review of the amendments made by this Act, other than the amendments made by Schedule 1.4, 1.5, 1.10 and 1.15 of this Act.
(2) The purpose of the review is to determine whether the amendments continue to —
(a) operate effectively and efficiently, and
(b) achieve the intended policy objectives underlying the amendments.
(3) The Treasurer must, by 31 December 2023, give a report about the review to the Presiding Officer of each House of Parliament.
(4) A copy of a report given to the Presiding Officer of a House of Parliament under subsection (3) must be laid before the House within 5 sitting days of the House after it is received by the Presiding Officer.
(5) This section is repealed on 31 January 2024.
The amendment speaks for itself. It is a review clause to ensure that we monitor the changes and that they operate effectively as originally intended.
TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Sonia Hornery): The question is that Opposition amendment No. 1 on sheet c2022-012B be agreed to.
Amendment agreed to.
