David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Ballarat proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government’s failure to train Australians in traditional trades thereby undermining the job security and employment conditions of Australian workers.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have called on this debate today to draw attention to the plight of 39 workers in my electorate forgotten by the Howard government. Last year, Labor drew the attention of the House to the decision by the Ballarat company MaxiTRANS to import 25 Chinese workers. Earlier today, it was revealed that the company has sacked 39 Australian workers over the past three weeks. Notwithstanding the company’s claim that the workers have lost their jobs due to—and I am going to quote the part of the press release that the minister seemed a bit reluctant to quote—‘uncertainty and a softening of the market’, the imported labour has been kept on. That this has happened is remarkable enough. That it has been greeted by nothing more than a shrug of the shoulders by the Minister for Vocational and Technical Education, who is at the table—and the Howard government in general, from the Prime Minister down—says much about this government’s misplaced priorities.

I regret the company’s decision, but I absolutely condemn the Howard government for the policy inertia that permitted the displacement of Australian labour by skilled foreign workers. Make no mistake: the sacking of the MaxiTRANS 39 is an indictment of the Howard government. Thirty-nine workers in my electorate are out of a job today because the Howard government has taken the low road on fixing Australia’s chronic skills crisis. It has gone after a quick fix that facilitates the importation of skills at the expense of training for Australian workers. These are the facts of the MaxiTRANS matter. Last year MaxiTRANS, like other Australian manufacturers, was struggling to find the welders, metal fabricators and boilermakers it needed to meet its contracts. It took the decision to bring in 25 skilled workers from China. According to the company, that decision was made because it needed skilled workers immediately. Around the same time, the company recruited a number of Australian apprentices—and I congratulated it for that—but it then put on hold eight of those apprenticeships when the Chinese workers arrived.

In the last three weeks, the company has laid off 39 Australian workers from the Ballarat plant alone. While employed through a labour hire firm, some of them have been working at the plant for up to 20 months—that is, longer than the Chinese workers have been at the plant. At least two of them have been engaged in general welding and the rest of them have been engaged in production. They are semiskilled workers, and all of them wanted the opportunity to train and to keep their jobs. All of them have been employed under conditions that are inferior to those enjoyed by the permanent workers at the plant—including, as I understand it, the Chinese workers. They have received no sick leave, no annual leave and no holiday loading, and there were no long-term employment contracts. There was not much real security there, but at least they had a job. Now they have no job at all. The voice of real people does not often get heard in this House. It should be heard more often. Voices of people like this MaxiTRANS worker who has just got his notice should be heard. He says:

I would have loved to be trained as a welder. I know that out of the unskilled labourers Maxi-TRANS would have easily sorted their shortage. But... we’re unemployed now, it is as simple as that.

The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union is concerned that MaxiTRANS is using imported labour to undercut the conditions and wages of its Australian workers. So far I have given the company the benefit of the doubt on this, but this round of sackings gives me cause for doubt. Whatever the company’s motivations, one fact is abundantly clear: the Howard government is content for Australian businesses to import labour in preference to training Australians. In the midst of the greatest skills crisis in this country in living memory, it is nothing short of absurd that employers find it easier to source skilled labour from overseas than from Australia. If the government had done its job over the past decade, there would have been enough skilled tradespeople in Ballarat to fill the positions filled last year by the Chinese welders. That is the fact of the matter. If the government had provided incentives for MaxiTRANS to skill up these semiskilled workers then there would be enough trained tradespeople today to fill these jobs. It is policy failure on a grand scale.

It is not just impacting on manufacturing businesses in my electorate. Across industries, and across the nation, the consequences of the Howard government’s skills policy inertia are being felt. It is not as if the current circumstances are a surprise to anyone. Employers have been shouting it loud and clear. But what has this government done? Absolutely nothing. It has restricted, not expanded, training opportunities for Australians. Under the Howard government, the skilled migration program has been increased by an extra 270,000 skilled migrants since 1997. Yet since 1998 the government has turned 270,000 Australians away from TAFE —that is, 270,000 Australians, young and old alike, have been denied the training opportunities they deserve.

While skilled migration is up, skilled vacancies are rising, particularly in regional Australia. The skills vacancy index reveals that the Howard government has not started to address regional skills shortages in several critical trades, including carpenters, joiners, fibrous plasterers, bricklayers and solid plasterers. As MaxiTRANS knows only too well, welders, boilermakers and metal fabricators also feature on the skills shortage register. In fact, metal fitters and boilermakers have been on the national skill shortage list for eight of the last 10 years. Machinists, refrigeration mechanics and welders have been on the list for nine of the last 10 years. Mechanics, auto-electricians, panel beaters, chefs, sheetmetal workers, nurses and medical technicians have been on this damning list for every single year of the past decade. Be it due to complacency or arrogance, the Howard government has been unwilling and unable to fix this problem.

I cannot help but contrast the growing skills shortage with rising teenage unemployment in regional Victoria. There is something seriously wrong when you have such high rates of teenage unemployment at the same time as local companies are crying out for skilled workers. As I have said, it is policy failure on an absolutely grand scale.

I am not opposed to skilled migration. None of us on this side of the House are opposed to skilled migration. But while it is an important element of our immigration program, it must not be pursued at the expense of Australian workers and their families. The City of Ballarat in partnership with the local business community has actively sought to attract new residents, including migrants, to our area. As a community, we have supported the Chinese workers. They have taken advantage of an opportunity they were offered, and we all say, ‘Good luck to them.’ But sadly, good luck has not come the way of the MaxiTRANS 39.

It is time the Howard government reconsidered its skills policy inertia and embraced Labor’s commitment to train Australians first. The people of Ballarat do not want much. We want a strong economy, we want jobs and we want to be sure that our community can offer our kids the education, training and employment opportunities they need to make the most of their lives. We know that by neglecting skills training the Howard government has let us down. Skilled migration must not be permitted to replace training for local people. It must not be allowed to act as the fig leaf covering up nine years of skills policy inertia by the Howard government.

Australian workers, including those categorised as unskilled and semiskilled, are the backbone of Australia, not the Prime Minister or the minister at the table. Australian workers built this country and must be supported, not consigned to the scrap heap by this government. Thirty-nine people in my electorate of Ballarat have now been put on the scrap heap by this government while imported workers from overseas remain. Make no mistake: this is a direct result of the Howard government’s incompetence on skills.

The requirements for importing temporary skilled workers from overseas mean the Chinese workers at MaxiTRANS have the protection of a contract, while the 39 local workers who have lost their jobs were left with no contract, no sick leave or annual leave entitlements and no protection from sacking. After working for MaxiTRANS for up to two years, they should have had the chance to do extra training to get a formal trade qualification instead of being replaced by imported skilled workers.

Many of the workers at MaxiTRANS requested further training but were denied this opportunity. The 39 sackings at MaxiTRANS are a terrible blow to the affected workers, many of whom have mortgages and will have a tough time getting another job in Ballarat. The fate of these 39 Australians is an example of what the Howard government’s policy failure on skills is doing to Australian workers.

I have no doubt that the Minister for Vocational and Technical Education is about to get up here at the dispatch box and heap personal abuse on me. That appears to be the style in which he answers questions. That is certainly what he did in question time. He will get up and he will falsely claim that in raising this issue—in daring to speak out for 39 workers who have been sacked in my electorate—I am somehow criticising Maxi-TRANS, an employer in my electorate that employs a large number of people, and that I am criticising the Chinese workers. That is absolutely not what I have done in raising this issue. To claim anything else will be simply untrue.

This minister needs to get up and explain to those 39 workers who today do not have their jobs why they were not provided with the opportunity for training so that they could get a trade qualification in welding and keep their jobs. The minister needs to be able to look those 39 workers in the eye and tell them why the government failed to allow them to get training. The reality is that the government has got the balance wrong. It has been absolutely obsessed with attacking the rights of Australian workers at a time when it should have been investing in education and training. My electorate is forced to bear the consequences of the Howard government’s skills policy failure. I urge the House to join with me in declaring that enough is enough. Train Australians first and train them now.

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I really welcome the opportunity to contribute to this discussion. Far from heaping any personal reflections upon the member opposite—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That would be a change.

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

like she seems to think I did in question time, it is important to note that she cannot have it both ways. She cannot actually get up and use ‘Chinese imported workers’ as a foil to satisfy the AMWU’s attempt to get her to meet her particular commitment to them by raising questions today and indeed this MPI today. At the end of the matter, unlike those opposite, this government does not believe that a gun needs to be put to the head of individual employees or indeed individual employers. We in fact have record amounts—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How about an incentive?

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She talks about incentives.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Where are they?

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I actually listened in silence to you, member for Ballarat.

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Member for Ballarat!

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I do not need protection through the chair, but I make the point that the member for Ballarat wants to moralise and grandstand and put a whole bunch of things on the record, but she will not give me a chance to respond.

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

Mr Burke interjecting

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Watson wants to talk about a lack of material. The member for Ballarat had four minutes left and she wimped out, mate! We in this country at the moment are in a marvellous set of circumstances, where it is jobs looking for people and not people looking for jobs. We are also in a situation in this country today where we have a greater level of incentive, a greater level of assistance and programs which support the training of Australians.

Graham Edwards (Cowan, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary (Defence and Veterans' Affairs)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Empty waffle! He doesn’t care about families.

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Cowan should be disgraced by his comments. How dare he suggest I know nothing about families. I have a great deal of respect for you, member opposite, but you will not try and suggest to me that I do not care about families.

Graham Edwards (Cowan, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary (Defence and Veterans' Affairs)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Edwards interjecting

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

The honourable member for Cowan will cease interjecting. The minister will ignore the honourable member for Cowan.

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am, on behalf of the government, attempting to put a bit of clarity to the wild accusations made by the member for Ballarat. I do not mind the vigorous contributions from people opposite, but I will not be questioned on my commitment to families. The simple fact is that there was this enormous level of unemployment when those opposite were in power—one million people on the scrap heap—and that that million people represented, just as doctors bury their mistakes, the mistakes of the education and training system. You now have a set of circumstances in Australia where quite the opposite is occurring. We found some fundamental problems with the way our education and training system was geared.

Getting onto the MaxiTRANS matter: nobody who is a skilled worker, a tradesperson, has been sacked by this company, by their own admission. I have not seen a press release, but I have certainly seen the reports in the Age newspaper. I think there are some unfortunate points that the Age tries to make in this article, but it suits the purpose of the member for Ballarat in this argument today. MaxiTRANS have, however, laid off some non-skilled or semiskilled people only. The member for Ballarat in her contribution made the point that many of those were hired by labour hire firms—that they are in fact casuals. They are not the skilled people that are needed by this business to grow this business, to create even more than the 577 jobs which exist in the Ballarat region through MaxiTRANS’s effort. Is this right? Is a labour hire firm involved in this? If so, these people are employed by the labour hire firm, not by MaxiTRANS direct.

This sounds awfully like the example the member for Ballarat gave last year, and she mentioned it again today. The eight apprentices who were put to one side were not fully qualified tradespeople, who MaxiTRANS sought and who, by the member for Ballarat’s own endorsement in this place just moments ago, were needed to grow the business, to get MaxiTRANS working and working strong; they were in fact apprentices. According to the member for Ballarat at that time, these apprentices were sacked, but the truth was that they were employed by a group training company. They were placed in MaxiTRANS. And each one of those eight apprentices was in fact placed with other host employers.

So I am simply saying today that the member for Ballarat is on enormously thin ice of credibility when it comes down to the facts at the core of her argument. In summation, all of her assertions are plainly wrong. At the end of it, we are in this amazing circumstance of jobs looking for people, not people looking for jobs. We are also at a time when the government is spending record amounts of money when it comes to the training of young Australians, and our No. 1 priority is getting Australians trained. But we want to make sure that, for the business community of Australia, who are at the heart of every new person who is put in a position to be trained, it is not about building new buildings at TAFEs, even though we are spending more money on those sorts of things than ever before; it is about supporting the relationships in the training system that satisfy the needs and the expectations of employers, the people who trigger the process of training.

Because those opposite have not asked me a question on this for 266 days, until today, I cannot help but suspect that they really do not have too much interest in the facts when it comes to training. At the end of it, they do not want to understand what the state and territory ministers around this country are reluctantly coming around to, and that is the need to fundamentally reform a supply driven approach where the providers of training—and I am talking in particular about public training providers, and I will name them: TAFEs—dictate the terms and conditions on where, how and when training is delivered.

This sort of thing did not just happen overnight. In fact, some have suggested that, when the member for Brand’s father was the member for Fremantle and a minister in the Whitlam government, he had a lot to do with the way in which this sort of circumstance has evolved. It is worth noting that a generation ago TAFEs were demand driven, which is exactly what we want to see restored in Australia today. A generation ago, people worked for an employer as an apprentice and then, in their own time, sought and gained the technical training to back up the practical experience they got in the workplace. A generation ago, TAFEs were responding to the sort of training that was demanded of business. But since that dreadful period in Australia’s history, the Whitlam era—and, as I said, it was the member for Brand’s father who was the minister at the time and caused part of the change—the change was continued further on, when you think about the snobbish values brought in by the Australian Labor Party to the whole debate. There was a suggestion that if you do not have a university degree you are going to be a dud. You are a failure. And that is the sort of logic that has pervaded Australian society for decades and that this government is in the process of fixing.

Michael Hatton (Blaxland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hatton interjecting

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Blaxland says it is hideous. The member for Blaxland is right. The ordinary working men and women of Australia are far more represented by people on this side than by those on the other side, who pretend to be the backers of the workers of Australia but in fact have left them in a ditch. If they are not in organised labour—in other words, about 85 or 90 per cent of Australians—they are not interested in them. If they are not in an organised union structure, they are not interested in them, because that is how those opposite get here. People on this side are listening to the real job creators and understanding the ambition of parents and indeed the students, and we are now seeing record numbers of people taking up a training opportunity.

If those opposite were really serious, they would denounce those Whitlam era circumstances that began the change and that were continued on by the Dawkins reforms that made every corner TAFE a university and created a circumstance which delivered a great deal of reinforcement to the idea of ‘Get a degree or you are a dud’. And then of course the member for Brand himself, in 1993, when he was part of a government that crashed the economy, really did bring home and emphasise the point I continue to make: 30,000 people dropped out of the training system in one year as employers of Australia took their lead from the government of the day and saw the employment of apprentices as a cost their business could not justify, and we lost the benefit of 30,000 people taking on training.

That is the sort of circumstance that is a background to any of the legitimate claims that may have been the minor part of the short contribution from the member for Ballarat: the suggestion that in fact there might be unemployment issues that are alive—and I will take her word for it—in her electorate amongst the young people of Ballarat. This is at a time when you go and talk to people in business around Australia and they are saying: ‘Send me a person. Send me a hot body with two hands who wants to actually work hard at the business of learning a trade.’ That is what businesses in Australia in places like the Pilbara and in the mining regions of Queensland are saying. That is why companies like Thiess are paying 18-year-olds $85,000 a year to keep them in the mines as apprentices in certain trades—to keep those kids there so they are not sucked out to some other opportunity.

We are in an amazing employment market at the moment. Companies like Maxi-TRANS—which the member for Ballarat is now claiming, after I have drawn it to her attention, that she was not trying to attack—an employer of 577 people, has an enormous commitment to training and understands far more about it than the member for Ballarat does from her cursory once-a-year look at the subject.

We have to continue the reforms we are trying to effect. I ask members opposite from the state of New South Wales to put some pressure on their state government to deliver on the COAG reforms that the Premier, Mr Iemma—if there is a dilemma, think of Morris Iemma; it is a great catchcry—has signed up to to bring about school based apprenticeships and a change to licensing regimes—which are basically set in place because of a lack of trust in the training that TAFE delivers. Why don’t you demand of the New South Wales government that it gives training opportunities for school based apprenticeships to young people in New South Wales? What is it about the state of New South Wales and, indeed, the state of Western Australia that fears a set of circumstances relating to school based apprenticeships when states like Queensland and Victoria—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King interjecting

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Ballarat is saying, ‘And Ballarat.’ There were 190 school based apprentices in Ballarat this year. When Labor was last in office there were none. These sorts of initiatives are there to engage with business, to listen to their demands, to understand the way in which the training system needs to be geared so that training is delivered when, how and in the way that business wants and to encourage more businesses to take on training opportunities. Each of those 39 casual part-time people, if in fact they have lost their work—because they are part of a labour hire firm that may not be the case—is probably finding more work right now. I hope that they engage a company that wants to take on training and will give them an opportunity to learn, if they are ambitious to do it.

It is worth saying for the record that, under the government’s program, there is no limit to the number of apprentices who can be employed around Australia. The funding for incentives for apprenticeships is unlimited and the government will support as many apprentices as employers are able to put on, particularly in the trades. In the last financial year, over $539.2 million has been paid to employers under our apprenticeships support scheme.

We found when talking to businesses who were unable to attract anybody in the local community to take on training or who were unable to attract sufficient skilled Australian candidates for the jobs—as MaxiTRANS found when they had an urgent need for experienced welders, despite rounds of advertising and open days at the factory—that they made full use of our skilled migration program. The member for Ballarat’s contribution, short as it was, was also lacking in the detail that I think brings the whole story to the front of this discussion. It is important to note, yet again—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King interjecting

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the fact that the member for Ballarat is now trying to retract her earlier assertion in this place—

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Really?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Gillard interjecting

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Lalor says it is not true. Those opposite are completing my sentences for me. It seems to me that the member for Ballarat was trying to retract her assertion that she was not attacking the Chinese workers but was helping to make a home for them. Like their policy confusion on this issue, those opposite are very confused on exactly what the member for Ballarat meant.

At the end of the day, in an environment of record spending, record take-up of apprenticeships and record retention and completion of apprenticeships right across Australia, the government is determined to keep doing the hard work to undo the mess of Labor tradition in this area—a mess which started way back in the horror years of the Whitlam government.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not going to attempt to be kind or generous to the Minister for Vocational and Technical Education when I say that I think he performs in the most appalling fashion and indicates the worst understanding and commitment to his portfolio of any of the ministers. I exempt the Minister for Human Services, who is seated at the table with him, from that comment. I certainly feel that the Minister for Vocational and Technical Education has indicated throughout his management of this portfolio a really deep and abiding hatred of the public education system. This consistently comes through in his remarks. He has a very superficial level of understanding—

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. A suggestion of an improper motive seems a bit abrupt to me from the member for Cunningham—the public education expert she might happen to be!

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member will resume his seat. There is no point of order.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In my view, this minister has indicated a complete lack of understanding of the vocational education sector, a deep lack of interest in getting a grip on the issues of his portfolio and an entire commitment to running superficial and particularly offensive arguments on the basis that somehow history has indicated that those of us on this side of the House have walked away from those who want to take on training in the traditional trades. It is, I know, a fairly abrupt and unkind assessment of his performance, but I can come to no other conclusion from observing him since my election to this place and his attempts to address the issues of vocational education in Australia at this time.

The minister’s greatest expression of passion in response to this matter of public importance was to bemoan the fact that nobody had asked him a question for 266 days. Given the quality of his responses, it is little wonder. I will steal the statement of the shadow minister for health and say: it is not about him; it is actually about the 270,000 young people who have been turned away from training opportunities over the 10 years of this government.

The member for Ballarat quite correctly identified that these job vacancies to which the minister refers—in particular, in the manufacturing sector in areas such as welding—are a surprise to no-one. They have been on the job shortage list for the 10 long years that the government has been in office and, most certainly, on that list since the minister has had responsibility for this portfolio.

The minister talks about talking with business, which is an important thing to do when developing a national vocational education and training program. For as long as I have been involved in vocational education and training—I started as a TAFE teacher in 1995—Australia has had an internationally recognised and admired TAFE training system which has produced some of the most valued traditional tradespeople in the world. These tradespeople are snapped up when they seek work overseas because we have delivered such high-quality trade training. Under the Hawke and Keating governments, the National Training Authority was established to allow businesses to have input into the development of a national training scheme. The minister’s argument that we on this side of the House are interested only in snobbish university qualifications and do not care about trade training not only is untrue, simplistic and lazy, but also ignores the fact that some of the biggest skills shortages in this country are in engineering and nursing, which require a university qualification. The minister’s assessment of the situation either is a wilful misrepresentation or indicates his ignorance of the skills shortages facing the nation today.

Following on from what the member for Ballarat said—because she and I often acknowledge the similarities in our experiences—in the eighties we had a downturn in the steel and mining industries in my area. I have raised it with the Australian Industry Group in my area—indeed, they have acknowledged it themselves—that employers took their eyes off the ball in terms of the long-term skills needs of this country.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about the government at the time?

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will continue if the minister will let me. In taking their eyes off the ball—

Michael Hatton (Blaxland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hatton interjecting

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was your mate Keating.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whilst I appreciate the interjections, I will continue. In taking their eyes off the ball, the employers laid down the foundations for the problems that occur today. As I said to the Australian Industry Group, governments also took their eyes off the ball in that the major government instrumentalities which recruit and employ apprentices stopped doing so. The Australian Industry Group and I reached agreement that, overall, industry and government allowed the skills shortage we now face to develop. The member for Ballarat has quite rightly said in discussing this MPI that the response of government has been completely inadequate. The Minister for Vocational and Technical Education has presided over one of the most incompetent implementations of a program by a government—the Australian technical colleges—that it is possible to find. In a cobbled together brain-snap during the 2004 election campaign—

Martin Ferguson (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Resources, Forestry and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Martin Ferguson interjecting

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know that the smartcard is catching up fast, but I still think it has a fair way to go to take on the incompetent implementation of the technical colleges. During the 2004 election campaign, the minister had the brain-snap that the government would set up 24 technical colleges around the country. At the moment, four colleges are operating and the minister is running around threatening to take away the contracts from other areas. The goalposts for this idea have moved with every announcement the minister has made.

The last time the minister came to my electorate to talk to interested bodies about establishing a technical college, he said the government was going to be ‘flexible’ about meeting local demands and that a local area could put together a proposal that suited local circumstances. My understanding is that the committee in my area have been knocked back every time they have put forward a proposal to the department. They have reached the point where they are getting ready to say to the minister, ‘We can’t do anything that meets our local demands that you will tick off on.’ The minister’s implementation of this program is significantly failing to deliver in terms of the skills shortages occurring in my area. Indeed, the program itself—being flawed in that it had such a long lead time to provide skilled tradespeople—is now blowing out because the minister cannot even implement the policy correctly and get these things up and running.

The skills shortage is not a surprise; it was identified. These jobs have been on the list for the 10 years this government has been in power. With businesses screaming that the No. 1 issue of concern for growth in the future is not industrial relations but the skills shortage, the government responds by expanding not only the skilled immigration category but also the unskilled immigration category—something we have never seen before. In particular, the member for Ballarat and I share the problem of very high youth unemployment in our areas. I have a son who left school four years ago. I had five boys who, as teenagers, when they were sitting around for more than 12 months desperately trying to find a job, would have jumped at the opportunity to have a trade. The government might be pleased to hear that one of them ended up going to uni and doing science teaching—another skills shortage area. Another three eventually went off and did other things. Only one of them ended up in a traditional trade, and he travels to Sydney for that work.

The reality is that there is no snobbishness on this side of the House, nor in our communities, about trade training. There are young people in our areas who want those opportunities and jobs. They do not want a toolbox. They do not want to go back to school at some trade college. They just want investment in trade training opportunities, and the government has walked away from funding our TAFEs—our world-class, world-recognised trade training institutions—for its own ideological bent. The minister can spin and throw accusations at this side of the table as much as he likes, but he is an abject failure in this portfolio. I have little doubt that even the minister at the table, Minister Hockey, would do a 100 per cent better job in meeting this requirement. (Time expired)

Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, prior to addressing this matter of public importance, which I wish to do, I ask for your indulgence to briefly reflect for a moment on the events which have unfolded back home in Northern Tasmania. The loss of the life of one miner and today’s rescue of two missing miners bring us all together at this time. That is something which both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have agreed upon today in their reflections. It has been a very emotional and also uplifting day for the people of Northern Tasmania and indeed the entire Australian community, who have watched with bated breath. Awaking today to the news that Todd Russell and Brant Webb had finally been saved was the best start to the morning that anybody could have asked for. Their rescue has of course been a long time coming and, having found themselves trapped in a cramped cage deep underground on Anzac Day, two weeks ago, they must have experienced many feelings: I suppose relief that they were unharmed and had been protected from the rock fall but also fear for the welfare of their colleagues, their work mates, that they knew were nearby. None of us can even begin to imagine their fears and how they have had to hold their nerve as they waited and hoped for help to arrive. Couple these with their concerns for their loved ones, which would have been very gripping indeed for them, and the uncertainty and sadness that those loved ones would have been experiencing during this time.

When contact was actually made with the men eight days ago that Sunday night we all rejoiced, but none of us then imagined how long it would actually take to again see them alive. Today our prayers were answered. Today is indeed a day for celebration, but it is also one for reflection as we remember Larry Knight, a member of the Northern Tasmanian community whose funeral has been held today back home in Launceston. I know that the last two weeks have been unspeakably tough for Larry’s family, especially for Jacquie and their children, who have had to battle many emotions. At times like this we try to understand why these things happen, but for now our thoughts are simply with them. Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank you for allowing me that indulgence.

I would like to address the matter of public importance which has been raised by the member for Ballarat. It is a legitimate issue for the member to be raising in this place. However, I feel that the raising of the matter of public importance comes from a very poor understanding of the situation in which we find ourselves. She has chosen in this case to word it by making an assumption that the government has in some way caused a failure of policy and has itself failed to train Australians in traditional trades. She claims in her MPI that this has somehow caused the undermining of the job security and employment conditions of Australian workers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Australian government has not failed to train Australians. In fact, the government’s record is very strong and in a moment I will be drawing some comparisons with Labor’s record in office when they had an opportunity to play a key role in ensuring that Australia’s skill levels were high.

Very importantly, the fact that unemployment in this country today is at the lowest it has been in my lifetime should not be lost on any of us. The question really does become: does Australia have a skills crisis, as people like the member for Jagajaga and the member for Ballarat seem to constantly say, or do we simply have a shortage of labour? I would argue that when we hear people railing against the government and using phrases like ‘skills crisis’ they are walking away from the fact that this government has presided over the lowest unemployment rates in my lifetime. Across Australia the unemployment rate today sits at around five per cent. In my electorate of Bass, unemployment has fallen by two per cent in the last 12 months alone. It seems that my colleagues in the Labor Party opposite who are laughing, being scornful and refusing to listen just do not want to hear that the reality is that we do not have a ‘skills crisis’—that is their jargon—but we do have a labour shortage. This is an important issue.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King interjecting

Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Ballarat has raised this matter of public importance but does not want to hear what any anybody else has to say.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sitting here quietly.

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable member for Ballarat will continue to sit there quietly.

Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Look at the record of the government and look at the record of the Labor Party. Under Labor, youth unemployment soared to 25.5 per cent in August 1992.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is just another number and you think to yourself, ‘He’s just reeling off more statistics,’ but as they interject and they heckle they ignore the fact that in 1992 thousands of young Australians had no purpose in life, no goals in life and nothing to strive for—and, in a way, you simply ignore this because you want to win the debate today and you simply want to provide opposition to the government. You are not genuinely concerned.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Gillard interjecting

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

Order! The honourable member for Lalor will cease interjecting. The honourable member for Bass will refer his remarks through the chair.

Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are not concerned with the level of youth unemployment that has been taken away from our community. We ought to be rejoicing in this. Do I welcome the fact that there are businesses and industries—by the way, as if the Labor Party actually cares for business and job creation in industry!—facing a good problem? We should be celebrating the fact that we have a problem which is a good problem. We have a problem that this government has created, because there are so many people employed we almost have full employment.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King interjecting

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

Order! The honourable member for Ballarat has made her speech.

Michael Ferguson (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If I had a choice between the two, would I choose a situation where we had hundreds of thousands of people, even a million people, looking for jobs or would I have jobs looking for people? That is what we have in this country. We have the Labor Party walking away from their record of the past. They choose to somehow relive the Hawke and Keating years as some sort of economic miracle. We know it was not. When I was in my high school years, growing up in a home with parents who were struggling with a 17 per cent home mortgage and youth unemployment that was so high, it was no joke and no laughing matter. Look at the record. There was 25.5 per cent youth unemployment in August 1992. At that stage there were fewer apprenticeships and there was an unmet demand for vocational and technical education places. That had reached 89,300 places in 1995, of which 69,400 were TAFE places. Skilled workers—and this is a fact—were simply unable to find jobs. Is that what we are looking for from the Labor Party today? Is that their new policy direction?

What is the greatest challenge today? Go to Ballarat or Launceston and ask any business. Ask any industry in the employment market what their greatest challenge is. They will tell you that the greatest challenge is finding people to take up skilled positions. Is this a failure of the government? The government is somehow supposed to instantly produce skilled workers when all of the people who are looking for work in the job market—and a majority under good economic management from this government—have been able to find themselves secure employment.

From what Labor is saying, the opposite is true. The government has not at all presided over a failure of policy. The opposite is true. The government’s great success story is all of the people who right now are too busy to even be listening to this debate. They are hard at work. They are in their workplaces. They may have the radio on in the corner, but they are busy making money for their employer, holding their job security for themselves, improving their job prospects for the future and carving out a future for themselves.

Important as the general area covered by this matter of public importance today is, it is an absolute ruse. The Labor Party have no credibility on this issue. They are crying crocodile tears. It is shallow politics designed simply to provide opposition to the government. It is a total walkaway from their own abject failure to train and skill Australia during the Hawke-Keating years of the 1980s and 1990s.

The fact is that the Howard government, having presided over a strong economy, is able to see its young people and its older people get into a fulfilling life and be able to secure employment. They are able to do so on the basis of the very successful vocational and skilling policies of this government.

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The discussion has concluded.