Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Jobs and Skills Australia Amendment Bill 2023, and in doing so I would like the House to note that the coalition has been constructive when it comes to Jobs and Skills Australia and supported its establishing legislation. Indeed, the legislation establishing Jobs and Skills Australia was the first piece of legislation introduced by the Albanese government, and I'm proud to say we worked closely with stakeholders, with the crossbench and with the minister and his office to finalise that first tranche of legislation.

Today, we are assessing the second tranche of legislation, and that will seek to finalise Jobs and Skills Australia. As we assess the second tranche, I would like the House to cast its mind back to 2019, when this policy for this agency was first announced by the now Prime Minister. It was one of his first policy announcements as opposition leader, and, as we listen to his words, I want you consider if this legislation delivers that. He said:

Jobs and Skills Australia will be a genuine partnership across all sectors—business leaders, both large and small; State and Territory governments; unions; education providers; and those who understand particular regions.

…   …   …

It will be legislated, just as Infrastructure Australia was…

…   …   …

I see Jobs and Skills Australia as the basis of a new compact.

…   …   …

As Infrastructure Minister, I established Infrastructure Australia.

And it worked.

I envisage a similar model for Jobs and Skills Australia.

A collaborative model to guide investment in human capital, just as Infrastructure Australia guides investment in physical capital.

That quote was from the now Prime Minister. Four years on, in this chamber, we should rightly assess whether the Prime Minister and his Minister for Skills and Training have lived up to the hype, because this legislation purports to be the final piece of the puzzle.

According to Infrastructure Australia:

Infrastructure Australia is an independent statutory body with a mandate to prioritise and progress nationally significant infrastructure We provide independent research and advice to all of levels of government as well as investors and owners of infrastructure.

Infrastructure Australia has an independent board and is an independent agency. This is the model the Prime Minister promised Australia, and today this is the model he has failed to deliver, because, on face value, Jobs and Skills Australia will not be independent. Jobs and Skills Australia will remain a creature of the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. Its additional funding does not go into the forward estimates, and it appears that it will be set up in a way reactive to ministerial directions rather than taking a proactive and strategic posture, independently assessing Australia's workforce and skills requirements.

Whatever government may say, Jobs and Skills Australia cannot credibly claim that it will be truly independent. We've raised these concerns with government and we've been surprised with the response. We were not told that this approach would deliver better outcomes nor that it was informed by expert advice or stakeholder input. No, we were told that this is a cost-management exercise, that in a fiscally tight environment this government cannot find the money to properly fund what we were promised would be a game-changing and independent workforce agency.

This is a government that just yesterday put us $15 billion further into debt through the National Reconstruction Fund against the advice of the International Monetary Fund. That is quite an extraordinary admission from those opposite. Apparently this agency that the Prime Minister said would be the basis for a new compact does not warrant sufficient investment to establish as a truly independent agency in the interests of Australia's workforce. To say we are underwhelmed by what we've ended up with is an understatement, and we aren't the only ones making that assessment. Many stakeholders have told us that this is a missed opportunity from the Albanese government. It is a worrying trend that we're seeing big promises made but, when it comes to the detail and the delivery, the Albanese government keeps falling short.

That is all important context for how we have approached this legislation. We have assessed it with clear eyes and open minds. We support Jobs and Skills Australia. We support its establishment. In fact, we wish that this legislation did more than it does. But it does not. As the Leader of the Opposition and I have said, we will look at each piece of legislation on its merits. Where it is in the interests of the country to support what the government is proposing, we will. Where it is not, we will hold the government to account.

Now, as I've said, this bill is the second tranche of legislation related to Jobs and Skills Australia and it seeks primarily to finalise governance arrangements for the agency, which sits within the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. The bill outlines that the minister must commence a review into the operation of the act within two years of the commencement of the relevant section. The bill provides that the agency must prepare and provide a report to be tabled in parliament each calendar year, examining Australia's current, emerging and future skills and training needs and priorities. This reflects an amendment the opposition secured in the establishment of Jobs and Skills Australia, and it's important for transparency.

Of particular note, the bill establishes the ministerial advisory board of the Jobs and Skills Australia agency, mandating the following: a chair, two members representing the interests of the states and territories, three members representing employee organisations, three members representing employer organisations and not more than four other members. The bill also widens the remit of Jobs and Skills Australia to include the impact of workplace arrangements. The coalition is pleased that the agency amounts to an evolution of the arrangements we put in place for the National Skills Commission. It's an admission from this minister and this government that our approach was working. Unfortunately, where we were promised an independent agency in the mould of the National Skills Commission, we are not seeing that today.

I would like to thank the crossbench for engaging constructively with the coalition on this legislation. The skills portfolio is an importantly policy area, and I look forward to continuing to work together as it progresses through the parliament. I also do want to thank the minister's office for their open approach, and I thank them for making themselves and departmental officials available to brief my office too. It was a reminder of the outstanding people we have in our Public Service, and I thank them for making themselves available. It allows us to gain a deeper understanding of what the government is seeking to achieve with this bill.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the coalition has a strong record to stand on in the Skills and Training portfolio. During the pandemic, we ensured that apprentices were protected with our wage subsidy measures and we supported jobseekers and young people in getting the skills for the jobs of the future through low-fee or fee-free training through the $2.1 billion JobTrainer Fund. JobTrainer created around 478,000 training places in areas of skill need. This included 48,000 places in aged-care training. The coalition committed over $13 billion to the skills sector through the pandemic, including a record $7.8 billion in our final financial year in office. We saved more than 530,000 apprentices and trainees through our wage subsidies through the pandemic, with total pandemic apprentice wage subsidy support reaching over $7.9 billion. We delivered a record 240,000 trade apprentices and trainees, the highest number since 1963. We invested a further $2.4 billion from 1 July 2022 to upskill apprentices in a new streamlined Australian apprenticeship incentive system, which I'm happy to say those opposite have continued to date.

We will always look at legislation on its merits in order to allow the government to build on the strong foundation and legacy we left to them when they assumed office. So we were disappointed to see that the bill, instead of formally establishing a fully independent agency to drive Australia's workforce forward, predominantly focuses on establishing a new appointed board with taxpayer funded roles. It's a board that doesn't, in our view, have sufficient balance. While the coalition has been constructive when it comes to Jobs and Skills Australia, we are not going to give the government a blank check to create taxpayer funded board roles that are set aside for union representatives, which this bill effectively does. We don't think it's appropriate and we do not think the Australian public would either, especially given the sorts of union representatives this government has given a platform to since taking office.

We remember the threats Christy Cain and the self-described militants in the Maritime Union of Australia made at the Jobs and Skills Summit. We saw the appointment of Andrew Dettmer to the forerunner of this board, the Jobs and Skills Australia Consultative Forum. He is a self-described socialist who has levelled unacceptable attacks on coalition politicians and clearly conducts himself in completely unprofessional ways. Time and again this Labor government has given a platform to aggressive men, and with this bill it would seek to give those same aggressive men a golden handshake paid for by the taxpayer, and we're not going to stand for it.

I appeal to the crossbench on this issue. We believe there should be a role for unions in the consultation Jobs and Skills Australia undertakes, but we hope that those opposite can see why we have taken the position we have. We do not think Labor should be using taxpayer funds to give a platform to this sort of aggression—men who talk over women in meetings, men who insult the appearance of women and men who don't believe in compromise or hearing the views of others. It is from this viewpoint that we are coming. In the appointments that the government has made to date it's these sorts of aggressive men who keep getting a gig on these sorts of boards. This is an important point. Jobs and Skills Australia will be charged with identifying skill needs across the economy and developing a policy response to build Australia's workforce. It will play a key role in advising Australia's migration program, as well as providing advice on how to reform our skills and education systems. This important work cannot be overshadowed by Labor's predilection for helping out their union mates, many of whom, as I said, have this track record of being aggressive to and dismissive of women.

So we will move amendments to remove the mandating of three members of employer organisations, unions, on the ministerial advisory board of Jobs and Skills Australia. These amendments will mandate the inclusion on the ministerial advisory board of a small-business representative and two rural, regional and remote representatives. We will also move an amendment to ensure that each state and territory is represented on the ministerial advisory board—that is to say that there is someone from each state and territory represented on the board. These changes will deliver a more balanced board and ensure union officials do not get an automatic and overrepresentative presence on the board.

Further, we also do not believe that two years is appropriate when it comes to reviewing the agency and its performance. We need a more responsive review timeline to make sure we're on the right track. Those opposite can drink all the Kool-Aid they like when it comes to Labor's mess on skills and training, but the facts are that the Liberals and Nationals cleaned up Labor's mess and invested record amounts into the Australian skills system, which delivered the higher number of apprentices on record. We don't want to have to do it again, especially with an agency as important as Jobs and Skills Australia, which strongly reflects the coalition's National Skills Commission. Under the arrangements we propose through our amendments, the government would still be able to appoint officials from unions as general members of the board, if they think it is defensible to do so, but they would not be earmarked for these positions. The government would have to justify that these individuals meet the professional experience and temperament benchmarks for appointment to this important committee.

We will also move an amendment to mandate the commencement of an independent review into the operation of the act no later than 12 months after the commencement of that section, and if we do not gain support for our amendments, we will oppose the bill. We're not going to sit idly by and allow this government to use the taxpayer to stitch up dedicated jobs for union mates. Incredibly, when we raised issues about Andrew Dettmer's role in JSA, the government's response amounted to, 'Well, we've known him for a long time, he knows what he's talking about and he's a good bloke.' Their defence to why he should have a formal role in Jobs and Skills Australia boiled down to, 'He's one of our mates,' and this is the problem: I thought Labor was ending jobs for mates. The government would not be prevented from putting representatives from employee organisations on the board; we're simply removing the mandate to do so.

Furthermore, as a cornerstone of the government's election platform, we believe the review into the operation of Jobs and Skills Australia should commence within 12 months, not two years, so that the Australian public has the ability to measure the Albanese government's delivery of this important promise. We believe our amendments are sensible and minor changes. Our amendments offer the government a choice: who do they value more—the unions; or small business, regional and rural Australians and a balance of voices from across the country? If they oppose our amendments, that's the choice they're making: jobs for mates over a platform of merit. We hope they can meet us in this offer, and we hope we can land a better balance in the interests of all Australians. I thank the House.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context