Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be contributing to the debate on the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Green Army Programme) Bill 2014. This bill seeks to establish a new payment, the Green Army allowance, to pay those people participating in the government's Green Army Programme. It is, of course, a key component of the establishment of the Green Army Programme, but it does not establish the Green Army itself. The Green Army will be governed by agreements between the government and Green Army service providers and, unfortunately, the details of these agreements have not yet been developed, and neither have the tender documents that will outline the details of the Green Army Programme been provided to the opposition, despite our requests for the government to do so. So the details of how this program is actually going to work remain a mystery. Rather than reveal the details, the government is asking us to vote for a payment that will be part of a scheme we still know very little about, so it does make it very difficult to judge the merits of this program. We cannot be sure at this point how it will work.

Let's be honest: at the moment, the government's record on environmental management, whether it is what can only be described as regressive moves on climate change or undoing protections on the world's largest marine reserves, hardly inspires confidence that this program will be a glittering success. Let us not forget this government's position on cattle grazing in the beautiful high country of Victoria and that is just after six months in office.

So we do have some significant concerns about how this program will work. Of course we want to do everything we possibly can to help young people into work and to get ready for work. That being the case, we want this program to be the best it can be. We, like everyone, want to make sure that the Green Army participants will be protected if they are injured, but there is no clarity about what the rules will be. We want to make sure that participants get appropriate training, that they get access to quality support to assist them in the transition to work. We want to know what risks there are in terms of displacement of existing workers. Put simply, we have not received adequate assurances that these matters are being addressed. We are concerned that this bill does not provide sufficient protection for participants in this Green Army scheme.

As I said, in regard to occupational health and safety, it specifically concerns workers compensation and rehabilitation. We believe greater consideration needs to be given to the implications of why participants are not deemed 'employees'. This exemption means that participants are not afforded protection under a range of Commonwealth laws including the Fair Work Act 2009, Work Health and Safety Act 2011 and the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.

We are also concerned about the possible risks the bill may pose to the employment opportunities of existing workers. The government really needs to assure Australians that employees will not lose their job because an employer instead prefers a Green Army participant.

We have very considerable concerns about training provisions. I want to focus my attention now on these matters. In previous iterations of this program, training was in fact a compulsory component of the scheme—whether it was the Howard government's Green Army where there was a required program of accredited training, or under Labor's 2009 amendments where the program committed participants to 130 hours of accredited training. This meant the participants in the programs under previous Liberal and Labor governments had real opportunities to build their skills so that they could then take them on to future work.

Yet, under the current scheme, the government has said that, while training is a component of the program, it will be negotiated with each participant and there will be no minimum hours. So we have moved the second reading amendments today, highlighting our concerns about the lack of detail, and we want to make sure these matters are addressed between the time that it takes to get this bill through the House and before it gets to be voted on in the Senate. The reason we all want to see this scheme work is that at the heart of it is something we care very deeply about—getting young people into work. We do know that the very difficult transition from school to work is unfortunately becoming increasingly hard.

These challenges were highlighted in the Council of Australian Government Reform Council's recent report Education in Australia 2012: Five Years of Performance, about which I have spoken in the House before. The chapter I want to particularly refer people to is the one dedicated to students' transition from year 12 into work. The findings are very concerning. The report found that from 2006 to 2011, the proportion of 17- to 24-year-olds who were fully engaged in post-school study, training or work, had fallen by more than one percentage point to 72.7 per cent. We know that more than a quarter of Australians aged between 17 and 24 are not fully participating in work or study after they finish school.

Despite nearly 30 years of decline in the rate of youth unemployment in this country, it is clear that the global financial crisis has had a dramatic impact on young people's employment prospects. It is the case that youth unemployment today in Australia is far too high, sitting at more than 12 per cent, double the overall rate of unemployment. More than one in three unemployed Australians are aged between 15 and 24. Unfortunately, it seems that the problems are becoming rapidly worse.

Just this morning, the Brotherhood of St Laurence released a report which analysed new data on the increase in youth unemployment in particular areas around Australia. This makes for very sobering reading. Their analysis shows that, in at least one area, over the past two years youth unemployment has risen by as much as 88 per cent. In other areas it has grown by similar amounts. It is clear that in some places around the country youth unemployment is becoming increasingly entrenched. The report indicates that, under current trends, youth unemployment could hit 46 per cent in parts of Australia by 2016. This is a serious wake-up call for all of us to say that we must do more to help young people into work or study. The bill will only support young people if the training provisions in the scheme are the best that they can be. It will only be a success if it facilitates a transition to work. What none of us would want to see is for it to develop into a low-paid, low-skilled workforce. I want to emphasise again that that is why the training provisions of this program are so important. The OECD report Learning for Jobs indicates that:

Vocational education and training can play a central role in preparing young people for work, developing the skills of adults and responding to the labour-market needs of the economy.

Australia's changing economy requires a highly skilled workforce. Many of the unskilled jobs that existed even 10 years ago no longer exist. They have been replaced either by new technology or the jobs have been moved overseas

I just want to emphasise how critical it is that the Green Army proposal gets the training provisions right, and it certainly is not at this point. The training must also reflect changing employer needs and build a strong foundation of basic and transferable skills for participants so they have every opportunity to transition from this Green Army scheme into proper employment. That is why we are requesting again of the government that they provide further clarification on the details of the training aspects of this program.

We know that we need stronger investment in skills and training more broadly and a high-quality vocational education and training system, and that is why we so strongly support our TAFE system. Many of us have been very concerned to see the huge cuts, particularly in my home state of Victoria. There has been $1.2 billion ripped out of TAFE in Victoria since the Liberals came to office in 2010. This has resulted in nine per cent fewer students enrolling in TAFE in Victoria during the first three-quarters of 2013. That is such a short-sighted view of the training needs of our country.

We understand how important it is to invest in TAFE and to invest in vocational education and training. We do want to make sure that this bill is improved. As the shadow minister for the environment indicated, we will not oppose the passage of the bill in the House but we do want to see the bill improved before it gets to the Senate. All of the issues that are referred to in the second reading amendment must be attended to, especially the issues around the training needs of young people and making sure that their safety is looked after when they are part of these Green Army programs. Youth unemployment and participation is a critical issue for our country, a critical issue for young people and a critical issue for the economy. We have to do everything in our power to make sure that it does not become a crisis.

See this speech in context