Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment Participation) Share this | Hansard source

I say to the member for Stirling, who now wants to try a better argument because he failed for the last five minutes to say anything of any cogency: the fact is that it is not just the proportion that has changed, otherwise his argument might have some bearing; the numbers have changed. There has been a numerical increase from 75,000 to 110,000 this year in the very long term unemployed. So both in proportionate terms and numerical terms, the figure for the very long term unemployed has risen and this was at a time of the most unprecedented boom in the minerals industry. We had a modern-day gold rush and the previous government failed to address the concerns of the very long term unemployed and that is why that figure grew both by proportion, as I have said, and by number. So I have to refute the assertions made by the shadow minister opposite.

I do agree with him, however, that it is a real problem and we have to get it right. We have to make sure we do not have people indefinitely on income support. We have to make sure that if people have the capacity to work then we have to find new ways to ensure they work, because currently, under the arrangements that are in place, it is not working. Every time that unemployment fell while we were in opposition, every one of us welcomed the decline—as we should. But I can tell you now that when I was appointed minister in this portfolio I was surprised to learn the extent to which the previous government failed to address the concerns of the very long term unemployed. That is why we have changed the arrangements to allocate resources pertinent to the needs of job seekers. We have now shifted some resources to ensure that those job seekers are indeed provided with better opportunities so that they get off income support and get into work.

I say in relation to the member for Boothby’s comments earlier about those people in stream 1 not being provided resources: we do not need resources being provided if those job seekers are work ready. We do not need to provide too many resources in one area when people are entirely capable of finding work and at the same time neglect those people who have vocational and non-vocational barriers to employment. That would be a nonsense. There is a thing called deadweight loss. If the member for Stirling wants to understand it, deadweight loss is wasting resources by allocating them in a way that will not change the outcome whatsoever. The taxpayers of Australia would not want us to do that. We will not do that. Instead, we have made sure that the resources provided are based on the needs of job seekers. This is the result of extensive consultations throughout this country with job seekers, employers, employment service providers and registered training organisations, and they all agree we have to do more to focus on those people who have great disadvantage.

I have heard the arguments by those opposite and I do not agree with any of the arguments they have put. Those points are wrong, the arguments are weak and the facts are quite often wrong. I ask the opposition to reconsider their position in relation to this bill as they would be doing employers and jobseekers a disservice in this country if they did not support the government’s bill.

See this speech in context