SpeechJAN LOGIE (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. I'd just like to take a short call following up on the same topic actually around the SageBush strategic baseline review of WorkSafe and to get the Minister's impressions of that. We've seen WorkSafe's response to that report but I am interested in hearing more on the Minister's response. The previous speaker Paul Goldsmith has canvassed some of their findings and I will just recap very few points around that. But where they looked at performance summary: the number of measures achieved 14; number of measures not achieved 10; number of measures not measured or achievement cannot be assessed 8. So in effect less than half of the measures are showing significant progress which is from the outside concerning on the face of it. Then WorkSafe's response really struck me. Around the substantive issues it was really just—it read to me as if they were saying Actually we think the regulatory functions are covered in operations." which was a concern that was raised that they weren't. They said that they thought there were. There were concerns that the strategy wasn't well enough articulated or flowing through in terms of the organisation's goals and outcomes. Their response was that they think the strategy is adequately covered in their statement of intent but they acknowledged they could do more to tell their story. They were saying also about responsiveness to regulation where there'd been significant gaps pointed out in that where they used Talley's as an example of being really responsive to regulations which was a surprising example considering Talley's workplace safety record. Also they round up by saying that most findings from SageBush are according to WorkSafe a normal part of the way they operate as a modern regulator. So I guess I take it from that that they see that the SageBush review is based on outdated ideas of health and safety regimes and how they're effective but it's not clear to me and I'm not having the evidence to back that up. Part of my concern is that in some of the questioning we've had with WorkSafe in front of the committee over time around their change in practice and where we've asked about the stalling of progress around the workplace fatalities—which is the only one where they have achieved it. But that was stalling and the reason for that where they said that they couldn't say why but then went on to say that actually—so they said directly "We don't know for sure why that's happening because there's always a lag between the data that we get and our ability to analyse it." But it poses the question: if we're not going to get the continued decline in those statistics through the current activity what do we need to do differently? That's why we're taking this different approach which for me Minister is concerning because if you don't understand why things are stalling how can you be sure that your new approach is going to respond to the problem in the system? We've heard also from them mixed messages about where the evidence is clearly telling us that what will make the biggest impact is worker voice employer leadership and risk management jointly between those two parties but then they also go on to say that they are changing their approach to be looking at more upstream causes of accidents. While in the health sector I've seen absolutely the importance of that conversation around upstream decision-makers and I can understand why you would shift away from a focus on employers and employees so strictly. But I haven't heard the justification in other contexts and I haven't heard them make those links for us as a committee let alone the public."