❓ Hon. Ljiljanna Ravlich questions the Minister for Commerce regarding a worker's compensation claim by Mr. Geoff Barkla, specifically concerning the insurer's alleged failure to issue a Form 3B and WorkCover WA's oversight. The Minister defends the insurer and WorkCover WA, citing court affirmations of the original decision.
AnsweredQoN 970Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
GEOFF BARKLA — WORKERS' COMPENSATION CASE
970. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH to
the Minister for Commerce:
I refer to
the minister's response to my question in this house on Tuesday,
13August 2013 regarding the worker's compensation claim by Mr Geoff
Barkla.
(1) Who
advised the minister that the insurer was not required to issue a form 3B in
relation to Mr Barkla's claim; and can the minister explain the reasons
for the deviation from the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management
Act 1981 and Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Regulations
1982?
(2) If no to
(1) why not?
(3) Is it
acceptable to the minister that the insurer Allianz has failed to comply with
the act and regulations in relation to Mr Barkla's claim by disputing
liability without issuing the regulation form 3B and that WorkCover WA has
failed to ensure compliance by the insurer with the act and regulations?
(4) If not,
why not?
970. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH to
the Minister for Commerce:
I refer to
the minister's response to my question in this house on Tuesday,
13August 2013 regarding the worker's compensation claim by Mr Geoff
Barkla.
(1) Who
advised the minister that the insurer was not required to issue a form 3B in
relation to Mr Barkla's claim; and can the minister explain the reasons
for the deviation from the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management
Act 1981 and Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Regulations
1982?
(2) If no to
(1) why not?
(3) Is it
acceptable to the minister that the insurer Allianz has failed to comply with
the act and regulations in relation to Mr Barkla's claim by disputing
liability without issuing the regulation form 3B and that WorkCover WA has
failed to ensure compliance by the insurer with the act and regulations?
(4) If not,
why not?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this
question.
(1)–(4)
I am advised by WorkCover WA that there has been no failure on the part of the
insurer to comply with the act and regulations. I reiterate my response
provided to the member for question without notice 321 in Hansard that this particular matter has been considered by various
Courts of Appeal by Mr Barkla, which affirmed the WorkCover WA arbitrator's
decision, as well as that agency's advice to me on this matter.
question.
(1)–(4)
I am advised by WorkCover WA that there has been no failure on the part of the
insurer to comply with the act and regulations. I reiterate my response
provided to the member for question without notice 321 in Hansard that this particular matter has been considered by various
Courts of Appeal by Mr Barkla, which affirmed the WorkCover WA arbitrator's
decision, as well as that agency's advice to me on this matter.
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.