The Coalition will hold its nose and continue working with upper house MP Mark Latham on amendments that would change the definition of sexual harassment, says Opposition Leader Mark Speakman.
The proposed amendments to the government’s workers compensation bill could prevent some employees who are subject to unwanted sexual advances from claiming compensation.
Under the Coalition amendments, for behaviour to qualify as sexual harassment, an accused worker would have to “know” or “should reasonably know” that their sexual advance or conduct was “unwelcome”.
While the NSW government’s bill takes the victim’s opinion into account, the Coalition amendments state that an alleged perpetrator’s “knowledge and intent” should be the primary factor.
Mr Speakman said the changes would still protect workers from “ignorant bigots” but wouldn’t necessarily allow employees to claim compensation if a colleague “makes a pass” at them.
“It’s not just whether the worker who makes a complaint says it’s unwelcome,” Mr Speakman said.
“It’s whether there was knowledge, or somebody who was reasonable, ought to have known [it was unwelcome].”
Mark Speakman has just returned from leave amid media reports surrounding Mr Latham’s alleged conduct. (AAP: Dan Himbrechts)
Latham’s behaviour in parliament ‘deplorable’
A series of amendments to the workers compensation bill carry the name of both Mr Latham and Damien Tudehope, the leader of the opposition in the upper house.
They were circulated before news broke that Mr Latham’s former partner, Nathalie Matthews, had sought an apprehended violence order against him.
Family and domestic violence support services:NSW Domestic Violence Line on 1800 656 4631800 Respect National Helpline on 1800 737 732Lifeline on 131 114Men’s Referral Service on 1300 766 491Mensline on 1300 789 978Full Stop Australia on 1800 385 578Emergency services on triple-0 if you need immediate care
Police are not involved in the matter and the independent MP has labelled Ms Matthews’ claims “comically false and ridiculous” whilst vowing to defend himself in court.
Last week, it also emerged that Mr Latham had sent disparaging photos and comments about some female MPs to Ms Matthews, which he said was part of an “in-joke” that had been taken out of context.
He has since apologised, describing the photos as “ill-advised”.
Mr Speakman, who has just returned from leave, said Mr Latham’s behaviour on the floor of parliament was “deplorable”.
“I would not for a moment condone the reprehensible behaviour of Mr Latham,” he said.
“But they’re the cards with which we’ve been dealt.”
He said Mr Latham had been duly elected by the people of NSW, so the Coalition would continue to work with him.
“Sometimes you’ve got to hold your nose,” he said.
Mr Latham has since apologised for disparaging photos and comments he made about some female MPs via text message. (ABC News: Gavin Coote)
During a lengthy media conference on Saturday, Mr Latham said he’d had numerous conversations with government ministers about the passage of legislation.
Mr Speakman said it showed the government was being hypocritical in its repeated demands that the Coalition sever ties with the independent MP.
“What we won’t do is pretend, like the government does, that we don’t work with Mark Latham.”
Speakman says sexual harassment claims ‘relatively easy’ to make
The state government introduced its workers compensation bill earlier this year, in an effort to reduce premiums for employers, which are rising by an average of eight per cent a year.
Under the changes, workers would be cut off from regular compensation payments after two-and-a-half years, unless they can prove a whole-person impairment of at least 31 per cent.
The measure is designed to significantly reduce the benefits being paid to employees with psychological injury claims, which are rising rapidly.
Mr Speakman said the government’s plan would cut off support to victims of “severe” sexual harassment, when it should be preventing claims which have little merit.
“[The problem] is not long-term benefits for a subset of workers,” he said.
“It’s the relatively easy way in which claims can be made in the first place.”
He said that changing the definition of sexual harassment would be “much fairer and more productive” and denied it would excuse poor workplace behaviour.
“If you have a bigot, who should know better, and makes unwelcome sexual advance, that will be covered by the amendment we proposed.
“If the government wants to come up with alternative wording, we’re happy to look at that,” he said.