Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

This is an important area of debate and there can be no doubt that there is a significant skills shortage in Australia. Like many political debates, there are a range of perspectives and it is not as black and white as either side thus far has presented. It is clear that one of the reasons there is a skills shortage is the extra employment places due to the health of the economy, but it is also beyond denial that there has been massive underinvestment in training, higher education, skills development and knowledge development across the board by this federal government over a 10-year period. Even to use the argument that the skills shortage is a sign of economic success is to ignore the fact that there has been a failure to plan adequately to ensure as much as possible that significant and problematic skills shortages did not develop in the Australian economy through underinvestment. We cannot have an honest debate about this issue without acknowledging that basic fact. To that extent, the Democrats strongly support the suggestion put forward by Senator Wong that the government must bear a lot of culpability for its failure to adequately invest in training as well as other areas of skills development.

It simply cannot be avoided in this debate. The linkage with skilled migration and skilled visa categories is raised continually. It has been raised again today and is intertwined in a public debate. While it is totally valid to criticise this federal government for their lack of forward thinking, their lack of investment in skills development, in training and in higher education, it is completely invalid to use that as a reason to attack the skilled migration program and the 457 visa category. There are certainly issues there, as I have acknowledged a number of times. One reason there has been that dramatic increase is the government’s failure to adequately invest in skills development among Australians, but I get very uncomfortable with juxtaposing the two and saying that we need to be training up Australians or else foreigners will be coming in and taking our jobs. They are not saying that that specific statement has been made by people in this chamber today, but that is part of the political debate and the argument out in the community. Any notion that migrants are coming here to take Australians’ jobs is not only very dangerous, with a long historical legacy which we need to avoid, but on the whole it is not borne out by the facts. The skills migration program, as long as it is administered properly, is an important component.

I draw the Senate’s attention and the attention of people who are interested in this issue to the survey done in a report by Graeme Hugo, Peter McDonald and Siew-Ean Khoo from the ANU titled Temporary skilled migrants’ employment and residence outcomes. It makes positive findings about the overall gains to Australia as well as to migrants themselves from the skilled visa categories. Developing the skills and the knowledge base of Australians will not just mean that they are all going to immediately jump into jobs in Australia and fill those gaps here. In the same way, having a liberal—in the proper sense of the word—migration program that allows people with skills into Australia, within appropriate protections and frameworks, means that Australians have the opportunity to go overseas and utilise their skills elsewhere. That is often portrayed negatively as a brain drain, but in many cases there are long-term benefits for Australia. It is part and parcel of the global economy and the free flow of skills and labour around different parts of the world. While some people are uncomfortable with that, I think that is a very positive thing. It always needs to be managed well, but it is certainly better than trying to prevent that from happening or curtailing it.

The core of this MPI is one that I support. I think it is a very valid point that needs to be continually made. I think the fact that the Prime Minister made his sudden announcement about this matter is a recognition of the failure of this government to date to do more. Frankly, I think the federal government needs to do more again. But at the same time it should not be intertwined with unreasoned attacks on the underlying substance of migration programs.