Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Minister for Workforce Participation. Would the minister inform the House what action the government is taking to assist long-term unemployed Australians into work? Is the minister aware of any threats to this assistance?

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Minister for Workforce Participation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for La Trobe for his question and I congratulate him on the fact that unemployment in his electorate has gone down by 50 per cent since the John Howard government was elected. We have just celebrated 10 years of the great Work for the Dole program. Over half a million unemployed Australians have got a new life through this; 40 per cent are employed just four months after completing the program. While we have dropped long-term unemployment rates by 75 per cent from Labor’s peak in 1993, we still have 80,000 people who are unemployed for more than two years in this country. So we are not going to rest on our laurels, even though we have achieved the lowest unemployment rate in 33 years. We know from when Labor was in power that long-term unemployment causes disadvantage, distress—a great human cost—and intergenerational welfare dependency. The Howard government are determined to give all Australians a fair go; hence our $3.6 billion Welfare to Work reforms and our recent extension of the Work for the Dole program into a longer program for the most disadvantaged.

I am asked about any threats to the future of those now being helped into work. The major threat would be the election of a Labor government. If Labor was ever re-elected, employers’ current confidence in creating record numbers of jobs would collapse as the economy faltered, as Labor rolled back our industrial relations reforms, especially the unfair dismissal laws, and as union bosses once again asserted themselves. The second threat to the unemployed and their children is the Labor Party’s failure to clearly articulate a consistent response or endorsement of any employment programs like Work for the Dole. For example, despite Labor originally voting for Work for the Dole in the Senate, they have changed their minds repeatedly. In 1997, the member for Jagajaga said, ‘Labor doesn’t think it is fair and reasonable to expect a person to work in return for an unemployment benefit.’ But just last night on ABC radio, the member for Jagajaga said that she now supports the principle of reciprocal obligation.

Simon Crean (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We invented it!

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Minister for Workforce Participation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You invented it? Well, in 1997 the member for Jagajaga absolutely refuted the need for any mutual obligation. In the ALP’s 2001 election policy, Labor proudly proclaimed, ‘Labor is committed to retaining Work for the Dole.’ But then two years later, the member for Grayndler stated that Work for the Dole is a ‘cynical use of the unemployed for political advantage’. Flip-flop, flip-flop! So where on earth does Labor stand on assisting the long-term unemployed into work? Since Labor’s economic mismanagement actually creates record levels of unemployment, you would think they would have something to say about unemployment programs. Today, we are very pleased to see that the OECD Employment Outlook 2007 has confirmed that our government’s mutual obligation and employment programs are key to getting people back into work. I recommend the Labor Party read that report very carefully because, for a party whose incompetence creates unemployment, they really need to get a handle on what to do about the ensuing human cost.

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.