The long service payments scheme is funded by a levy on building and construction projects that cost $25,000 or more, not by any payments from workers or employees themselves. Last year $55 million in payments was paid under the scheme, which covers approximately 280,000 workers. It is worth highlighting how important this sector is to the New South Wales economy—280,000 workers shows how the construction industry plays a critical role in the New South Wales economy and how we should do all we can to support it and the workers who participate in it.

Since the Act was established in 1986 there have been changes in technology, terminology and industrial relations practices. The bill reflects these changes. I will detail those changes very briefly. Anomalies and inefficiencies have been identified in the scheme, which the bill seeks to correct. Schedule 1 [4] and [5] clarify the registration process so that it is clear it is the employer's responsibility to inform the corporation when a worker has started work. This must be done within seven days of the work commencing. The bill also closes a loophole by introducing a reserve regulatory power to state a minimum and maximum rate of pay used to calculate a long service payment. The intention of this provision is to prevent the scheme being exploited, something that the Opposition understands. Further, a limit on the number of hours used to calculate a long service payment is now stated at 38 hours.

The amending bill also acts on recommendations from the New South Wales Audit Office to address the large numbers of inactive workers on the register. The clarification of provisions, including the definition of "suspend" and "suspended", will enable the removal of the names and details of inactive workers whilst making provision for appeals and reinstatement. That is also important because if workers do not agree on their minimum and maximum rate of pay, or indeed hours, there are appeal provisions, which the Opposition also supports.

Schedule 1 [11] makes an amendment in relation to calculating the number of days' service for part-time workers. If a worker has worked the majority of the day in a building/construction capacity it will be considered a full day of employment; and the day will be disregarded if the majority of time has been spent on non-building/construction work. In circumstances in which employers pay the long service payments for the worker, schedule 1 [15] and [16] enable the corporation to deduct these periods from the scheme.

The scheme now utilises online technology, which is also supported by the Opposition. The Government must look at its own workforce in much more detail than it has currently. This technology will enable workers to check their service records at any time. Schedule 1 [10] removes paper-based requirements such as the issuing of certificates of services and periodical notices, which is a significant step forward. Section 42 provides that the corporation may pay a refund to a person other than the person who paid the levy, such as in the circumstance that a builder goes into liquidation or administration. The changes that have been outlined and proposed in the legislation make sense and are supported by industry.

I have looked at the balance sheet and it is clear that according to the Audit Office the corporation has not performed well financially over the past two years. Indeed its net liability is $121 million as at 30 January 2009. Obviously that is principally the result of negative investment returns for the past two years, something that has also been suffered by every other fund manager in the country and indeed globally. Importantly, the corporation currently has sufficient funds to continue operations in the medium term. If a net liability position continues to exist the corporation will have to examine options to return the scheme to a net asset position.

The Opposition hopes that there will not be an increased levy in relation to this industry, which is such an important part of the economy, and that workers are not responsible for part of the financial performance of the fund that sits there. The Opposition hopes and expects, given what has transpired, that the net liability position improves in the coming year. The Opposition notes that one of the principal investments is the New South Wales Treasury Corporations Long Term Growth Hour-Glass Facility, which it hopes will turn around and help to improve the net liability position.

The Opposition supports the bill. It understands that considerable consultation has occurred within industry over a long time and supports improving the efficiency of the scheme. The Opposition notes it has taken sometime to get to this point, but, as I said, better late than never. The Opposition supports what is proposed and hopes that the industry appreciates the changes as this bill passes through Parliament.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Phillip Costa and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

Write Comment