Industrial Manslaughter Laws Controversy in State Parliament

 It's a funny controversy, Trevor Whittington the WAFarmers CEO & the WAFarmers President Ryhs Turton gave a bit of a kicking to the WA Nats for voting with the Greens and the Labor Party. To a lesser extent Shooters Fishers & Farmers Party, The Pauline Hanson One Nation Party MPs were reported as being very miffed at the Nats.

So what's the go? Lets go dot points but firstly it all revolves around, not a clause but an amendment to a clause that the Nationals voted against. The unamended clause would have maintained the current status quo. The amendment would have changed things...

1. If the amendment was so needed & without it such a cruel travesty would be delivered upon WA then why on earth did all those yelling at the Nats not oppose the amended clause. It went through without dissent. Did they relish the chance to use it as political fodder outside of Parliament or were they a bit missing in action thought wise and staple themselves to something interllectually bankrupt. For me, kinda looks the the latter at least, but possibly both.
   
   
2. If you were compliant before that clause was accepted, then you're compliant now. It is now the status quo. There is no extra or legal exposure with the amendment lost & the clause left untouched.
   
   
3. My understanding was the supporting report used to bolster the amendment was from interstate and refers to "gross negligence" which has very poor definition in WA Law so what happens over east wouldn't automatically transfer to WA without extensive reworking of other Acts to add to "gross negligence". In fact if it were passed as is were might have ended up with legislation that contains a poorly framed term which then relies on a judge to interpret it and it may get very subjective which increases variance in penalty & judgement. Not wise.
   
   

So this is a very complicated bill. It's currently in Upper House Committee. Its not law, they're review & where needed reviewing it, correcting it. I'm told there's over 400 clauses so goodness know how many amendments there'll be when all's said & done. If they conclude it this year with the small number of sitting days left it'll be a miracle.

So did the Nationals do good or did they go over to the dark side of the Greens & Labor to the detriment of Western Australia.

No, they did good. Its not Law, its in committee & that particular clause remains unamended & it remains fact none of those complaining voted against that then unamended clause. They could have shown their disdain & called for a division to have their opposing vote recorded. They didn't oppose it.

This maybe an example of Wedge Politics in 160 days left before State Polling Day but it was certainly a strange move by the WAFarmers CEO & State President. Very little media pick up on it so I think some are looking at it as a grumpy pot shot by a disaffected complainant. Who knows, its very bizarre and I look forward to hearing a better defence of the position by WAFarmers. 

Perhaps, and its only speculation, we should be reminded that the pivotal relationship in an organisation is that between the Chairman & the CEO but it is actually the board's role to over sea that relationship and their individual & combined performance. They need to keep everything in check & accountable.
Not  sure were this is at, but does look a bit adbsurdly ominous at present.

No, I'm fine with the Committee direction and the loss of that amendment & the passing of the unamended clause. No worries at all.

As that weird song goes, "How bizarre, how bizarre"