❓ Hon. Norman Moore responds to a question regarding worker safety in the resources sector, emphasizing a shift towards risk management and increased funding for safety inspections, while also acknowledging the inherent risks in mining.
AnsweredQoN 208Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
RESOURCES SECTOR — WORKERS’ SAFETY
Does the minister believe that workers in the resources sector should be exposed to dangerous and hazardous materials and substances in the pursuit of benefit for the state? Hon NORMAN MOORE
Does the minister believe that workers in the resources sector should be exposed to dangerous and hazardous materials and substances in the pursuit of benefit for the state? Hon NORMAN MOORE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. He has asked me whether I think that workers should be exposed to hazardous conditions, and clearly they should not. However, it is virtually impossible to determine what every hazardous situation is going to be at any particular place. That is why we are going down the path of a risk management way of carrying out mine safety in Western Australia. We are going away from the system that has been in place for a very long time in which someone simply ticks a box that everyone is wearing the right hat, therefore, it is a safe environment. We will require companies to develop—I use the word in its broadest sense—safety case type models for a particular work site where the company will be required to sit down with its employees and any consultants they need, and with the assistance of the government, to identify the risks on each mine site and to seek to put in place measures to make sure those risks are absolutely minimised. However, it is an obligation on the part of mine managers who run mine sites that they provide a safe environment for workers. The question is: what is the definitive definition of “safe”? Obviously, no mine site is absolutely safe in every location, just as no road is absolutely safe at any point in its construction. We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
Hon NORMAN MOORE replied: I thank the member for the question. He has asked me whether I think that workers should be exposed to hazardous conditions, and clearly they should not. However, it is virtually impossible to determine what every hazardous situation is going to be at any particular place. That is why we are going down the path of a risk management way of carrying out mine safety in Western Australia. We are going away from the system that has been in place for a very long time in which someone simply ticks a box that everyone is wearing the right hat, therefore, it is a safe environment. We will require companies to develop—I use the word in its broadest sense—safety case type models for a particular work site where the company will be required to sit down with its employees and any consultants they need, and with the assistance of the government, to identify the risks on each mine site and to seek to put in place measures to make sure those risks are absolutely minimised. However, it is an obligation on the part of mine managers who run mine sites that they provide a safe environment for workers. The question is: what is the definitive definition of “safe”? Obviously, no mine site is absolutely safe in every location, just as no road is absolutely safe at any point in its construction. We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
I thank the member for the question. He has asked me whether I think that workers should be exposed to hazardous conditions, and clearly they should not. However, it is virtually impossible to determine what every hazardous situation is going to be at any particular place. That is why we are going down the path of a risk management way of carrying out mine safety in Western Australia. We are going away from the system that has been in place for a very long time in which someone simply ticks a box that everyone is wearing the right hat, therefore, it is a safe environment. We will require companies to develop—I use the word in its broadest sense—safety case type models for a particular work site where the company will be required to sit down with its employees and any consultants they need, and with the assistance of the government, to identify the risks on each mine site and to seek to put in place measures to make sure those risks are absolutely minimised. However, it is an obligation on the part of mine managers who run mine sites that they provide a safe environment for workers. The question is: what is the definitive definition of “safe”? Obviously, no mine site is absolutely safe in every location, just as no road is absolutely safe at any point in its construction. We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
Hon NORMAN MOORE replied: I thank the member for the question. He has asked me whether I think that workers should be exposed to hazardous conditions, and clearly they should not. However, it is virtually impossible to determine what every hazardous situation is going to be at any particular place. That is why we are going down the path of a risk management way of carrying out mine safety in Western Australia. We are going away from the system that has been in place for a very long time in which someone simply ticks a box that everyone is wearing the right hat, therefore, it is a safe environment. We will require companies to develop—I use the word in its broadest sense—safety case type models for a particular work site where the company will be required to sit down with its employees and any consultants they need, and with the assistance of the government, to identify the risks on each mine site and to seek to put in place measures to make sure those risks are absolutely minimised. However, it is an obligation on the part of mine managers who run mine sites that they provide a safe environment for workers. The question is: what is the definitive definition of “safe”? Obviously, no mine site is absolutely safe in every location, just as no road is absolutely safe at any point in its construction. We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
I thank the member for the question. He has asked me whether I think that workers should be exposed to hazardous conditions, and clearly they should not. However, it is virtually impossible to determine what every hazardous situation is going to be at any particular place. That is why we are going down the path of a risk management way of carrying out mine safety in Western Australia. We are going away from the system that has been in place for a very long time in which someone simply ticks a box that everyone is wearing the right hat, therefore, it is a safe environment. We will require companies to develop—I use the word in its broadest sense—safety case type models for a particular work site where the company will be required to sit down with its employees and any consultants they need, and with the assistance of the government, to identify the risks on each mine site and to seek to put in place measures to make sure those risks are absolutely minimised. However, it is an obligation on the part of mine managers who run mine sites that they provide a safe environment for workers. The question is: what is the definitive definition of “safe”? Obviously, no mine site is absolutely safe in every location, just as no road is absolutely safe at any point in its construction. We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
We are therefore doing what has not been done before in mine safety in Western Australia; that is, requiring the industry to pay for it. Indeed, this house saw fit to pass legislation last year to give us the head of power to raise a levy. The levy will provide approximately double the number of dollars to the government to manage the resource safety division of the Department of Mines and Petroleum. We will use those funds to develop a safety case regime and models for each mine site. We will employ significantly more inspectors whose job will gradually change over time to become more like an auditor to make sure that companies have in fact identified the risks and problems and have put in place measures to minimise them. We will be looking for ways and means—which is difficult, as members opposite would understand, for people who work in the public service—to pay people the sort of money that we would need to pay them if they were working in the mining industry. However, we are working on some measures so that we can actually pay our inspectors and those people who work in the mines safety division the sort of money that will make the wages competitive with similar wages paid to people who work in the mining industry itself. I am confident that we will be able to pay competitive salaries to mines safety inspectors under the cost-recovery system. We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
We are therefore doing more than has ever been done before in respect of mines safety. There are significant changes being made. I call on opposition members and their union friends to come along with us and to work with us. As members opposite will be aware, we have initiated a task force that is implementing the new arrangements, and the union movement is involved. It is important—I have always taken this view—that safety is bottom up instead of top down. The safety case regime is about getting input from those people who actually work on sites to make sure they inform companies of risks that they have identified and that the companies put in place processes to militate against those risks.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.