Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

Item 2 of Schedule 7 of Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. 240, Migration Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 9) , Division 1.4E—Sponsorship: trade skills training (incorporating Subdivisions 1.4E1 to 1.4E4) and made under the Migration Act 1958 , be disallowed.

This motion seeks to abolish the trade skills training visa. The disallowance motion before the parliament is put forward on the grounds that the trade skills training visa is bad policy and was poorly thought out. We are left in a situation where the government will be doing two things with this visa: they will be taking opportunities away from young Australians and they will be driving wages down.

It is important to acknowledge what this visa is not, because it is different from two things it has been characterisedas being in some of the commentary. Firstly, it is different from a visa under the skilled migration scheme; secondly, it is different from a visa for overseas students studying at university. It is different from a visa under the skilled migration scheme because new apprentices are not skilled migrants. The whole concept of starting an apprenticeship is to acquire a skill. What we have here is vastly different from the skilled migration scheme which operates in so many other areas. While we have many objections to the lack of planning and the way in which this government has run its skilled migration scheme, and we think it could be done much better, we would never think of trying to disallow it.

The apprenticeship visa was a bad idea from the start, and it is different from a visa granted to an overseas student to study at university. In question time today in the other place the minister, in what I would regard as a rather extraordinary answer to a question—not the least because, if the pink is accurate, she referred to Belfast as a city of England—

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is dangerous.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is right. I had strong opinions about that part of her answer as well, and she has also done it in doorstops today. The minister wants to equate overseas students on the apprenticeship visa with overseas students coming in to study at universities. They are completely different. When overseas students come in you can make extra places available for them. We take issue with the extent to which places have been cut and the fact that not enough places have been made available to Australians, but you can provide overseas students with opportunities at university without cutting opportunities for Australians—it is possible to do that. But you cannot just add on extra places at TAFE, because every apprenticeship demands two things: a TAFE position and an employer able to take on an apprentice, and there will always be a finite number of employers able to do that. What that means is that in every instance with this visa we are going to see an opportunity that could have been taken by a young Australian being denied to them. That is a completely different scenario to just adding on places at university. Yet we have a minister for immigration who says that you can equate the two and it is the same sort of system.

The minister responsible can only have reached that conclusion for one reason: she does not understand the difference between university places and apprenticeships. That has been made clear in her media comments today. Therefore, because of a complete lack of understanding, we end up in a situation where we have the bad policy which is before us today and which Labor is seeking to have abolished. The visa will have two impacts, and I referred to them earlier. It will take opportunities away from young Australians and it will drive wages down. As far as taking opportunities away from young Australians is concerned, this is all in the context of some 300,000 people having been turned away from TAFE since 1998. We have the problem of young Australians, wanting precisely the opportunities that are being afforded to others through this visa, being turned away and missing out on those opportunities.

Today the minister made the comment that the trade skills training visa was designed to boost the viability of the regional apprenticeship training providers in the same way that universities have benefited from overseas students. That shows the absolute misunderstanding of what is before us. But there have been two other occasions, once in this House and once in the other place, where information has been given which was patently wrong. On 3 November last year, the then Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs said this:

This visa will not—I repeat: will not—disadvantage any young Australian wishing to become an apprentice.

He went on to say:

Employers are bound and have to make every attempt to get an apprenticeship locally—in fact, they have to prove that they are unable to get an apprentice locally.

Not true—simply not true. In the same way, Minister Vanstone misled the Senate today. She misled the Senate with these words:

... the regional certifying bodies, the people in the local area, will have to certify that an Australian was not available to take up the position.

Have a look at the forms they have to fill out. There are 50 questions that an employer has to answer, and not one of them even asks whether they advertised the position locally. Yet the minister today said that they have to certify that an Australian was not available to take up the position.

What they do have to certify at the end of form 1267—and think about the definition of the word ‘reasonably’ in this—is that ‘the apprenticeship vacancy cannot reasonably be filled locally’, with no proof having to be supplied, without having any reference to whether or not it was actually advertised, without having any reference to the extent to which checking was done—and then also having to certify things like whether or not it was on the skills shortage list. The skills shortage list deals with people at the end of an apprenticeship. This does nothing to fix that, because you have every likelihood at the end of an apprenticeship that the people who have taken these on will return to the country from which they came. So we as a nation provide an apprenticeship position, have it occupied for the life of the apprenticeship and at the end of it in many cases the skills crisis is no better off at all because that skill then goes back offshore.

So what we have are these regional certifying bodies being asked to make an assessment without having to check whether or not an apprenticeship was advertised locally. Mind you, I do not think advertising locally is enough in itself. I said this morning and I will say again: if you cannot fill a position locally, if you are having trouble filling a position in Ballarat, you ought to check in Bendigo, in Brisbane, in Blacktown, in Bankstown as to whether or not people want to take that opportunity. The minister has this bizarre concept in her head that it is completely reasonable that, to get an apprenticeship, people will be willing to travel halfway across the world but people will not be willing to travel from one town in Australia to another, so we do not need to check with them and we do not even need to check with the locality in which the position is being made available. The minister says that they have to certify that an Australian was not available to take the position but, if she wants that to be the rule, I say this: put it on the form. Put it on the form if that is what you believe, but do not get out there and say to the parliament that is what they have to check and then produce forms, available on the internet for everyone to see, where that question is not even asked. We will see young Australians being denied opportunities from this.

By the way, who are the bodies that have to certify whether or not they had trouble filling this position? You go on the web to the list of regional certifying bodies and some of them, occupying this completely independent role, are the local chambers of commerce. The local chamber of commerce is being asked to certify for one of their own members whether or not they are going to have trouble filling the vacancy! We can see exactly how this will unfold on the ground.

We also see that the areas where youth unemployment is at its highest are the areas this visa applies to. We all know from the regional members of this parliament that in regional Australia youth unemployment is at its worst, and they are the exact areas where this government is proposing to take opportunities away from young Australians. All of Tasmania is counted as part of regional Australia and yet, in the greater Hobart area, you have 26.5 per cent youth unemployment. In the Richmond-Tweed area, there is 36.8 per cent youth unemployment—yet these are the areas they decide to focus on to allow young Australians to miss out on apprenticeship opportunities. In the Loddon Mallee statistical region, there is 32.2 per cent youth unemployment; in Gippsland, 27.8 per cent; in Queensland’s south and east Moreton, 25 per cent; in north Adelaide, 27.5 per cent; and in southern Adelaide, 31 per cent. The areas they are targeting are where young people are already doing it toughest. They are the areas where young people want these sorts of opportunities. Yet, instead of saying, ‘Let’s put a bit of effort into matching the young people to the opportunities that are there,’ they say, ‘Well, let’s just send these positions offshore.’

It is also going to drive down wages, and let us not forget the context of the industrial relations laws of last year. The Treasurer said in an interview on 17 November last year on 4BC:

This is, I think, an important point to bear in mind. In an economy which is performing well, where unemployment is low, whatever you happen to be working as you have got more bargaining power and more strength than you have in an economy which is performing badly and unemployment is high …

Well, guess what? The moment you are competing with a global market for apprenticeship wages, the issue of what the local employment and unemployment levels are becomes utterly irrelevant—because you do not have the bargaining power that at the end of last year the government wanted to guarantee would be available to people, because they decided to globalise the work market at the same time. I do not think it is any accident that this visa was introduced at the same time that those industrial relations laws came in. And we are going to see the very simple situation where a young person being offered a job under this visa scheme does not just face the horrible situation that young Australians face when they are offered an AWA. It is not just a case of ‘Accept the contract or reject the job’; it is a case of ‘Accept the contract or reject the job and miss out on the visa.’ There is no negotiating power in this. These employees are going to find themselves completely vulnerable, and that has an effect on every other Australian who is lucky enough to get an apprenticeship because they then have to compete with the new low base rate for wages. That is how this is going to unfold.

Labor has a very simple policy on this: train Australians first and train Australians now. That is actually the government’s job. It is not the government’s job to take away opportunities; it is the government’s job to create opportunities and make them available for young Australians. They are being denied opportunities through this visa. It is bad policy. It has not been well thought out. Even today, with the comments she has made, the minister has made it clear she does not understand how it works. Labor says simply, ‘Don’t just amend the visa: this one ought to go.’

Harry Quick (Franklin, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against this disallowance motion, and in doing so I cannot help but wonder why you would want to oppose this training visa. I have looked at this from every angle. I have listened to the specious arguments of the opposition, I have read the transcript from the other house and, for the life of me, I cannot find one sound reason for the opposition to seek to disallow this regional apprenticeship visa—not one sound reason. It is as though Labor has no sense of what has been going on in the last five to 10 years in the labour market and certainly no sense of what is in the interests of regional Australia. That is no surprise.

There can be only one reason, and we have seen it all through the workplace relations debate. It is all to do with the relationship between the ALP and the three most vociferous unions on this matter. I refer to the metal workers, the AMWU; the meat workers, the AMIEU; and the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union, the LHMU. Let us look at their campaign contributions to the ALP since 1995-96—the last 10 years.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is this relevant?

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is very relevant. This goes to motive.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are playing grubby politics at the expense of regional Australia. That is what you are on about.

Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Beazley interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, you want to shut them up because they are losing it. The AMWU has given $5.2 million to the Labor Party; the AMIEU, $634,000; and the LHMU, $5.9 million. In the last 10 years, $12 million—nearly one quarter of all union contributions—has been given to the Labor Party. So, surprise, surprise that we see the opposition going into bat with implausible, baseless arguments, even resorting to xenophobia, to support their case. The grubby reason for opposition members doing the bidding of their union masters is the unions’ quest to regain some relevance and to increase their membership. That has been the pattern of activity since May or April last year, when the workplace relations bills were introduced. It is politics plain and simple. The Labor members know they have no case, but they persist because their union masters have demanded it.

Let us look at why the regional apprenticeship visa was introduced and at the important role it can play. This is lost on the opposition. We have a strong economy. We have had one now for a long time. The government takes full blame for having a strong economy. One of the consequences of high, continuing economic growth is very low unemployment. With unemployment at 30-year lows, you find skills shortages.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Macklin interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unlike what we saw in your era, we find skills shortages. This has been compounded by a rapidly ageing population. A study last December estimated that, in five years time, there will be 200,000 more jobs in Australia than we have people to fill them. What are you doing in considering that? Nothing! This is a dilemma, a challenge for Australia, borne out of strong economic growth and an ageing population. We need plans to deal with this. When you put these two things together, you get pressure on skills. There is no silver bullet to address the skills shortage. It requires a coordinated and wide-ranging program of policies.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why don’t you have one?

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have got one, thanks. Come right in, spinner! What have you got? You have not got a spent cartridge to deal with this problem, much less a silver bullet.

Harry Quick (Franklin, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the parliamentary secretary to address his remarks through the chair.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. This emerging skills challenge requires action on multiple fronts, and that is what it is getting. Workplace relations—

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Macklin interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, absolutely—Welfare to Work, independent contractor legislation, superannuation and taxation reforms.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Macklin interjecting

Ian Causley (Page, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Jagajaga will have her opportunity to speak.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You have not thought of those things. Superannuation and taxation reform will enable older Australians to work longer. There is a huge investment in skills training. The government has increased funding for vocational education and training by 88 per cent in real terms since 1996—the member for Jagajaga can shake her head but that is a fact—to a record $2.5 billion this financial year. The member opposite is embarrassed, but these are the facts.

The number of new apprentices in training has increased by 172 per cent, from 143,700 when Labor had control to 391,000 now. The number of students enrolled in vocational education and training has increased by 26 per cent, from 1.268 million to nearly 1.6 million. Not only that, but we will have 24 new technical colleges around Australia in the next four years. We are providing an additional 20,000 places in the next four years in the New Apprenticeships Access Program, specifically targeting industries and regions experiencing skills shortages and supplying tool kits to the value of $800 to around 34,000 new apprentices each year who are entering a skills shortage task.

Of course, immigration can and will play a big part in a range of programs across many portfolios. The regional apprenticeship training visa is all about this. It is adding one other plank to dealing with this skills shortage, this skills challenge, driven by a strong economy and an ageing population. It is part of a wider government policy program across many portfolios.

Claims that the new apprenticeship visa ignores a pool of young people in the cities who Labor claims would readily take up an apprenticeship are totally misleading and mischievous. This is a two-stage process ensuring that this does not occur. Firstly, an apprenticeship vacancy which an employer seeks to fill using a trade skills training visa recipient must be placed on the Australian Jobsearch database. Secondly, and much more importantly, the new visa requires certification from regional certification bodies that no Australian apprentices can be found to fill the vacancies.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Burke interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We can say this again and again, but you will not accept that regional certification bodies, state, territory or local government agencies, local development boards and local chambers of commerce are exceptionally well placed to judge whether an apprenticeship can or cannot be filled by an Australian citizen. If they need to advertise to satisfy themselves no Australian is available, they will. They are competent to do this. They are competent to know what measures they need to take to satisfy themselves.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Burke interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Who are you to judge whether they are competent? This is typical Labor wanting to dictate to local authorities how they will do their task.

Moreover, this government offers a great deal of assistance to young Australians under the New Apprenticeships scheme, particularly in the form of a living away from home allowance which encourages people to move to where apprenticeships are available. We have developed this visa very carefully, ensuring that overseas apprentices will not be exploited. Within three months of arrival, the overseas apprentice must sign a training contract under the Australian government’s New Apprenticeships scheme, which is then registered with the relevant state or territory government authority. As a result, overseas apprentices will have the same core protections as local apprentices and will work under relevant awards and conditions in accordance with the Australian government’s New Apprenticeships scheme. This is the opposite of the scaremongering and nonsense that we have heard from the other side of the House.

As with other temporary employment visas, monitoring activities will be undertaken in cooperation with the relevant state and territory government authorities responsible for apprenticeship training. This is a tried and true scheme. This is an arrangement that we have confidence in. This is an arrangement where, if those opposite were in power, they would have confidence in the Labor governments in the states conducting this program. This will ensure employers and sponsors are abiding by their obligations, including Australian awards and conditions. To suggest that apprentices from overseas will be exploited is a nonsense, and Labor knows it.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Macklin interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You know it. I am also surprised at the rather odd assertion that the introduction of the trade skills training visa will take skills away from regional Australia in the longer term. To ensure regional employers and their communities continue to benefit from the investment in the training of overseas apprentices, the government has ensured that there is a range of visa options for the apprentice to settle in regional areas. Once an overseas apprentice has successfully completed their apprenticeship, they will be able to apply for one of the existing regional migration visas without having to go offshore—for example, the skilled independent regional visa or the temporary business long stay visa. These measures ensure that these skills remain in the areas where they are most needed.

If we are to sustain regional Australia and if we are to sustain apprenticeship programs in regional Australia, we need to fill the gaps. Where there are gaps we need to fill them. If there are people from overseas eager to fill those gaps, we should invite them in the same way that we invite university students to come and be trained at their expense. The trade skills training visa was developed in response to representations from regional industry which is unable to fill apprenticeship vacancies.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many companies asked for it?

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In response to requests from regional industries. I want to acknowledge the initiative of Golden West Employment Solutions—

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have heard of them. Who else?

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is a whole swag of applications for apprenticeships coming in. You can see the list, go and look for yourself. This is going to be a very popular scheme.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You do not know, in other words.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not have off the top of my head the names of the 15 or 20 companies—no, I am sorry—but those opposite can have access to the list.

I want to acknowledge the initiative of Golden West Employment Solutions, a group training organisation from western Queensland, in highlighting the issues. Golden West has advised the government that it currently employs over 400 local trade apprentices and that it has around 188 apprenticeship vacancies waiting to be filled. They know their business. They are employing 400 local trade apprentices and they need another 188 to sustain apprenticeship programs in regional areas. The formula, the approach and the opposition by the opposition to this visa will close down apprenticeship schemes in rural areas. It will deny young Australians in rural areas the opportunity to obtain an apprenticeship at a local TAFE because there will not be the numbers. That is what is happening. This is head in the sand stuff by the opposition. The big problem out in regional Australia is that there are not enough students in courses.

With this visa we have a great opportunity to ensure they can undertake apprenticeships in regional Australia. It will be good for young Australians who live in regional areas. We believe very strongly that these regional certifying bodies will ensure that we can certify that an Australian was not available to take up that position. It will be a full fee paying arrangement. It is just grubby politics that we have seen from the other side. The opposition is prepared to put at risk—

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Macklin interjecting

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can laugh—you are prepared to put at risk the opportunity for regional Australia to share in the growth and prosperity of the rest of the country.

Alex Somlyay (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Jagajaga will cease interjecting.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Regional Australians deserve to share in the growth and prosperity of the rest of this country. Those opposite are seeking to deny that. They are prepared to put at risk apprenticeship courses for young Australians in regional areas because there will not be enough people taking up apprenticeships if Labor succeeds in blocking this visas. It is pathetic; it is union grovelling—that is what it is in response to. We expect better from the opposition, and I urge that this disallowance motion be defeated.

Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree very strongly with the action of my colleague the member for Watson in moving to disallow these migration amendment regulations. I want to assure the government that we will campaign on this between now and the next election. I can assure them that after the next election we will remove this blot on the Australian training agenda.

We had a lecture from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs on the fact that the Labor Party is supported by the trade union movement and receives funds from the trade union movement. I suppose if I want to be as cheap as him I could point out that he has been an official of the Liberal Party for many years and he has been scooping up loot from the business community. Therefore, I would suspect that his views are in some way or another formed by a desire to suppress trade unions not on behalf of the nation but on behalf of the business community—but I would not make that point because that would devalue this debate and bring me down to the very low level at which the parliamentary secretary operates. Nor would I make the point that, while he lectured the Labor Party for having received the odd contribution from the trade union movement, he and his colleagues on that side of the House connived recently, taking $55 million from the Australian taxpayer to advertise their industrial relations legislation, and that took the government to $1 billion being spent on advertising since it has been in office.

I do not think any other political party in this country has a record of having taken $1 billion from the Australian taxpayer to give to advertisers—but I would not make that point either. I simply mention these points because the whole tone of the debate was so grossly lowered by the parliamentary secretary.

Therefore, I will now get on to the more serious argument related to where this stands in the record of the Howard government, which has after 10 years in office presided over the development of a chronic skills crisis in this country. It is not a crisis that has arisen today or that arose yesterday; it is a crisis which has in fact been in place over this decade. We have seen every single area of traditional trade over that 10-year period report a shortage in at least eight of those 10 years, some of them in 10 out of those 10 years. This has been because it has covered with its novelties its so-called modern apprenticeship training system. Many of those novelties, as the studies of this modern apprenticeship training system show as the consumers of it are consulted, basically hide an absence of training behind a wage subsidy for a variety of businesses. The government has used the numbers in that—and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs was doing the same thing again here today—to conceal the collapse of traditional trades beneath that facade.

It is like so much of what the Howard government do. Wherever you want to be, there is the spin out there—the magnificent spin, the bright, shining arguments—but, underneath it, the reality of a drossy administrative and policy outcome performance. In no area has this been more glaring than in the area of skills. So what do they do to cover it? They decide that what they will do is not to train young Australians, even though the areas where they are going to run these apprenticeships are chronic in their youth unemployment. They are not going to train young Australians—they do not want to pay them the money. They believe the apprentices are paid too much. They do not want to pay them the money, but they want the work out of them, so there is one way to get the work out of them, and that is to get workers in from somewhere else.

The opportunity arises now. This is why it is in here now. It was not here nine years ago, eight years ago, seven years ago, six years ago or five years ago. Why is it here now? There has been a trade shortage right through that period of time. It is here now because it dovetails with your industrial relations legislation. That is why. You are placing yourself in a position now where you can effectively deny ordinary Australian workers—in this case, young Australians—a capacity to effectively deal with you because you are at last able to bring in a counterpart who will work for nothing or who will work for what are very low apprenticeship wages but which, compared with what they would get in their country of origin, look quite generous. That is just cynicism—sheer, blatant, naked cynicism. You have the opportunity arising now.

There are biblical stories that deal with this. Young people who ask for bread and are given by their fathers a stone. That is what you represent. There are biblical stories especially for you. You have spent your entire life, Parliamentary Secretary, in politics, wandering around this country acting on behalf of a narrow elite to whom you have reported and for whom you have been a faithful servant. As far as we are concerned, we know you and we know how to deal with you.

In this period of time, 300,000 young Australians have been turned away from TAFE. The minister gets up here and says: ‘There’re out there and we’ve been advertising like blazes and there are just no Australians who want to take advantage—none of them. That’s why we’ve got to do something about it now.’ There were 300,000 young Australians turned away from TAFE. In the same time, they have imported 270,000 extra skilled migrants. So they do have form in this regard. They have turned away 300,000. I will tell you why they have turned them away, Mr Deputy Speaker. I negotiated, when I was Minister for Employment, Education and Training, with John Fahey, who was then the counterpart in the New South Wales state government, the creation of the Australian National Training Authority. I promised on behalf of the Commonwealth 10 years of a one per cent per annum real betterment—that is on top of the adjustments you normally make to deal with the rate of inflation—in return for which the states would maintain real effort, with a hardline set of measures to ensure that they did.

What this government did when it came to office was to collapse it, three years into operation. Of course, when you collapse it at the national level and no longer keep your promises, you liberate the states from keeping theirs. This was a scheme which, if it had been implemented fully—and by now it would have gone about three years past its 10 years—we would not be standing here talking about skills shortages in this country.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Robb interjecting

Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you want me to debate the facts, I am giving you some facts that I strongly suspect you have never thought of. You have never thought of the consequences of what you did. When you collapsed the National Training Authority, you created a set of circumstances whereby we started to experience massive skills shortages. Then what they are starting to do to try to deal with this—in part try to deal with it: they have another agenda here that is closely bound up with this, and that is youth wages—is to make up for the consequences of 10 years worth of utterly massive neglect. Skilled migration should never be the primary source to deliver adequate skilled labour. Skilled migration is important. It is a valuable component of Australia’s cultural and economic development, but community support for it is a pretty tender reed. When this government starts to do things like this, it worries ordinary Australian parents, worries ordinary Australian youngsters. It suppresses and makes difficult in life the opportunities that are there for young Australians to get themselves proper training.

Nothing could be more calculated than to bring the skilled migration program into utter discredit. The objective of this of course is that, when an employer comes forward—and by heavens, they will be encouraged not to get young Australians out of this one—if the youngster does not agree, and I am talking about an overseas youngster here, to what are no longer controlled apprenticeship wages as awards collapse, they do not get their visa. That is all there is to it. So they are under even more of your signature or your brains on the contract than the average Australian worker, and they are in a not much better position as a result of the industrial relations legislation being put in place. The utter cynicism of this worthless, wretched government.

Fortunately, we have about 18 months between now and the next election, when the impact of that industrial relations legislation will slowly start to flow through. We will not really experience any substantial impact of it until about the middle of next year. But that will be time enough for these matters to be deliberated on by the Australian people when the next election comes round and this proposition will be part of it, because it will be used by your people and by your supporters in regional Australia. It will be obvious to many young Australians whom you have turned your backs on that you are exploiting them and you will be dealt with in those situations. I have absolute confidence in that.

This visa, as I said, goes hand in hand with the Howard government’s extreme industrial relations changes—low wages, no benefits, cheap imported labour to take Australian TAFE places and Australian jobs. Let us see how it has started already. Look at the young Ballarat apprentices who lost their chance of an apprenticeship when, instead, transport company MaxiTRANS imported welders from China. This is not a matter of theory; it is an outcome that will be seen by people in regional Australia as related to this particular proposition that you are now putting forward. You do not give a damn about the young apprentices at MaxiTRANS—you knock them off and import labour to replace them. What about Brumby’s Bakery, who hired 20 bakers from Vietnam because, even after a two-year local recruitment drive, they said they could not find locals? As a last resort, they went overseas. Yet apprentice bakers do not even qualify for federal government assistance—like the $800 tool kit allowance—because John Howard says that their skills are not in demand. They do not even qualify for this great assistance you talk about in the propositions you put forward. They do not even qualify for your assistance, then you go out and say, ‘But there’s a shortage of these people.’ Overseas workers have been flown into Adelaide to build a car-painting plant for Holden. South African boilermakers have been imported into Western Australia—

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Robb interjecting

Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and welders from China, employed by a trucking company in Dandenong. And 20 meatworkers have been locked—

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Throw him out!

Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don’t worry about him, he’s on autogibber. Twenty meatworkers have been locked out of their workplace for wanting an EBA over an AWA, and their employer is allowed to bring in Chinese workers because he says he cannot get skilled labour. You are all so arrogant, aren’t you? You are so arrogant—you just think that the world owes you a living, that you have no problems at all. This is the most arrogant out-of-touch government, and we have two of the worst culprits in it at the table. You will learn your lesson in time, my friends. You will find that you will be learning your lesson when meatworkers, for example, are locked out of their workplace for wanting an EBA over an AWA and then you permit an employer to bring in Chinese workers—after he has locked his people out, who want an EBA, which you said was voluntary—and he then says, ‘You can have an EBA, if you want.’ What an unmitigated lie! You lock them out and you bring in overseas workers to replace them.

How many of these people do you reckon you can sustain and sustain politically because you can get a lot of them? There are going to be a lot of these events—I have so far cited six of these events in the course of the last few minutes. They are now starting to snowball; they are occurring at an increasing rate. But they all have the same source. Some of them are related to these sorts of issues that we are discussing in this debate; some of them are related to other things. All of them relate to your Industrial Relations Act. I am so looking forward to this debate. Over the next 18 months, I am so looking forward to the opportunity to take on the Prime Minister. Even my supporters here are anxious to get into it now, so I am going to permit them to do so.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This week, as we see our government members dust off their tuxedos and get into their ball gowns as they prepare to revel in 10 years of office, the Howard government’s true legacy is here today, going to be seen by everyone. This true legacy will start to be felt in all homes and businesses right across Australia. It is the case that this government’s legacy of skills shortages is hurting this country. This past decade has seen a systematic failure by the Howard government to provide the skills that this country needs. The Treasurer says that economic management is the hallmark of this government’s success. There is no doubt that he is trying to meekly stake his claim, to be remembered as the ‘almost could have been’ during this week’s marathon of gala dinners. Instead, of course, he should be telling the true story. He should know—and the two ministers at the table should know—that Australia’s current economic prosperity is built on an unprecedented commodity boom. That is what it is built on, but it is thinly papering over the real structural cracks in our economy.

We are receiving record prices for our resources, but at the same time our national trade deficit is at record levels. Our foreign debt is hurtling towards $500 billion. That is what this government has created, and at the same time Australia is in the midst of a burgeoning skills crisis that is preventing Australia from paying its way in the world. Instead of investing in Australia’s skills, the government’s only solution to the crisis is to import more skilled labour. Here is a fact for you: in 1996, when this government was elected, skilled migration comprised just 27,500 visas. This year the government will increase that figure to 97,500. Since 1996 the program has been cumulatively increased by 270,000 extra skilled migrants. Two hundred and seventy thousand extra skilled migrants have been brought into Australia since the government was elected and, at the same time, 300,000 Australians have been turned away from TAFE. Now, as a result of the measure that it is trying to put in place today, the government is opening a new door for imported apprentices to come into our workshops, our factories and our businesses.

This visa is fundamentally flawed, and I certainly am very pleased to be able to support the motion moved by the member for Watson, because these measures will not fix our skills crisis. In fact, the structure of the visa will only make it worse. This new visa has the potential to deny opportunities for apprenticeships. I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs while he was speaking what the level of teenage unemployment was. Of course, he had no idea because the government do not care about Australian teenagers who want a full-time job or an apprenticeship. It is over 20 per cent and has been for a long time—and it is a lot worse in regional areas. What is the unemployment rate for teenagers in the Richmond-Tweed? It is nearly 37 per cent. Are you proud of that? In the Illawarra, where last week I visited the members for Throsby and Cunningham, it is 35.7 per cent. That is the disgrace of the Howard government.

We have 193,000 young people who are not in full-time education and not fully engaged in the labour market. They are our young people, they are our sons and daughters, who cannot get a job or an apprenticeship. And what is your answer? Bring them in from overseas. That is 193,000 15- to 19-year-olds who could be in an apprenticeship. Instead of trying to get these young Australians into limited training opportunities, this government is just opening the door to recruit apprentices overseas.

Of course we support skilled migration—we know how important it is to build Australia—but importing skills from overseas imposes a mutual obligation to train Australians, especially our young people. The Leader of the Opposition talked about Brumby’s Bakery in Queensland importing bakers from Vietnam because they could not get local workers. As the Leader of the Opposition said, the problem is that the Howard government does not think that these bakers’ skills are in demand. It not only refuses to provide the tool kit but also refuses to provide these young apprentice bakers with the Commonwealth Trade Learning Scholarship. So it is not the case that our young Australians are getting the support they need to be bakers. There are jobs going to people from overseas because this government will not help our kids get these apprenticeships. We are seeing this government turn its back on young Australians and on those apprentices who need that extra support to help them through. At the same time, of course, companies are being allowed to import skilled workers to replace them.

We know that this new visa will hurt the Australian apprenticeship system. As both the member for Watson and the Leader of the Opposition have said, that is what this is all about. The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs has tried to justify this scheme by saying it is just like international students studying at universities, but that is a false comparison. The characteristic which makes apprenticeships fundamentally different—and it seems to have escaped the ministers engaged in this debate—is that apprenticeships are employment based training contracts. You actually have to have an apprentice, a TAFE and, most importantly, an employer. Unlike our university places or other non-apprenticeship TAFE places, the ability to train our own in the trades depends on businesses’ capacity to take on apprentices. With no employer there is no apprentice—no apprenticeship available for our young people.

If companies are able to satisfy their training intake with apprentices from overseas, then of course it will be the case that opportunities for Australians will be lost. These new apprentice visa holders will not be in a teacher-student relationship with their local TAFE; they will be contractually beholden to their employers and to the jobs that they do. An apprentice has to accept the pay, conditions and work offered by the employer. They complete their training on the job or off the job with a TAFE or other registered training provider.

As others have said already in this debate—and the government likes to ignore the fact—it is no coincidence that this visa is being introduced at the same time as this government’s extreme industrial relations changes, because this apprenticeship visa invites employers to offer low-wage apprenticeships. Just imagine: a local kid in rural New South Wales refuses a mechanic’s apprenticeship on an AWA because the employer wants to pay less than the award rate, which is only $6.20 an hour—though, of course, under its extreme industrial relations policy, this government can just come along and offer them less. If the apprentice refuses, then the employer can fill that apprenticeship with someone from overseas.

Of course, that is if the apprenticeship position is even advertised. As the member for Watson says, nowhere amongst the 50 questions on the employer’s visa application does it require them to say where they advertised the job. These imported apprentices will be forced to accept whatever pay, working conditions and treatment that the boss decides to dish out or risk being deported. That is the reality. We know that these visas, as a result, will drive down wages for our local apprentices. Our local apprentices are already getting paid rock-bottom wages and these visas will drive those wages even lower, forcing our young people either to accept lower than award pay or to run the risk of having their apprenticeship taken by someone from overseas.

Another flaw we know of in the regulations that we are seeking to disallow tonight is the sham requirement that the company have ‘a satisfactory record of training Australians’. Where is that defined? Nobody knows. It is not defined in any of the documentation and the government’s Department of Education, Science and Training has no role whatsoever in advising the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs on whether a company has even trained one apprentice. There is no way that the government will check whether the company that is going to be importing these apprentices actually trains anyone. There is no satisfactory record that will be checked.

We must have a government that does better than this; otherwise, we are going to see as a result of this visa the undercutting of pay and conditions for our local apprentices because employers are not required to show what they have done when it comes to their own training commitment. We have not seen a government in this country committed to training Australians for 10 long years. We have seen a government that has taken a quick fix and brought in 270,000 extra skilled migrants while turning away 300,000 Australians from TAFE. It could start by pinching some of Labor’s policies which we have put forward in the last year: our commitment to getting rid of up-front TAFE fees or our proposal to pay $2,000 as a trade completion bonus to halve the current drop-out rate. These two measures alone would see 13,000 extra qualified Australian tradespeople. That is what we want to see. Unlike the Howard government, Labor’s priority is all about training Australians. We want to train Australians first and we want to train them now. I strongly support this disallowance motion because we want to give our kids a chance and make sure that when they get an apprenticeship they are properly paid.

Alex Somlyay (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I took the view that the deferred division should not be proceeded with until the member speaking at 8 pm had completed her speech, so I did not interrupt the member.

Debate adjourned.