Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in regard to Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2008-2009, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2008-2009, Appropriation Bill (No. 5) 2008-2009 and Appropriation Bill (No. 6) 2008-2009. The purpose of these bills is to seek appropriation authority from parliament for the additional expenditure of money from the consolidated revenue fund to meet requirements that have arisen since the last budget and from policy decisions since the last budget. The additional funds will enable the government to respond appropriately and quickly to current circumstances and to implement programs and initiatives that will not only immediately assist the Australian community and the economy but provide long-term benefit.

At a time when families throughout the country are looking to the government to take a firm leadership role in seeing the nation through the current difficult times, it has been instructive for Australians to see how negative the opposition has been in respect of the government’s nation-building and jobs initiative. This is in marked contrast to the reaction of community and private sector leaders and state, territory and local governments who have welcomed the Rudd Labor government’s proactive and constructive responses to the global financial crisis and the urgent need for the government to have a long-term vision for the Australian economy. I have no doubt that at the next federal election Australian voters will remember the negative contributions made by federal Liberal Party members and their coalition mates from the Nationals to the policy debate at a time when the world is experiencing the worst economic outlook since the Second World War. I must say, however, that it has not really surprised me. In reality, it is simply a continuation of past form.

The constant hogwash that comes out of the mouths of the members of the opposition about how well the Howard government managed the Australian economy is now being seen for what it always was—self-serving rhetoric. And what did Australians get as a result? They got an economy riddled with holes big enough to drive a truck through. Australian voters were very aware of this when they voted in the Rudd Labor government in 2007. For example, it became glaringly obvious that the state of Australia’s essential public infrastructure—and I hope you are listening over there—was already affecting the prospects of the long-term economic growth and was becoming a serious drag on productivity. As well, Australia was beset by a critical major shortage of skilled labour, such as has never been seen since Federation. The effect of the skills shortage flowed into every area of the economy. For an example we only have to look at Australia’s manufacturing sector. In May 2007, a background paper entitled ‘Australia’s manufacturing sector’, prepared by the then Australian Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources, made the following points:

Since the early 1990s there has been a transformation in the composition of the manufacturing workforce. There has been a considerable change in the skill mix required. Over the last 10 years, the percentage of total hours worked in the economy by high-school labour has increased by seven percentage points to around 30 per cent, while the percentage of hours worked by low-skilled labour has fallen by seven percentage points to around 32 per cent.

In other words, in almost all sectors of the economy, long-term economic growth has become closely linked to the skill level of the workforce. The fact is the higher the level of workforce skills, the higher the capacity for the economy to grow and to compete in an increasingly competitive global marketplace. This applies to manufacturing as much as it applies to other sectors of the economy. It is no wonder that Australia’s manufacturing sector languished under the Howard government. It is totally misplaced thinking to believe that it is in Australia’s interests to have a declining manufacturing sector where we eventually become totally dependent on imports to meet our need for manufactured goods.

In 1996, manufacturing provided approximately 16½ per cent of full-time jobs in Australia. This amounted to more than one million full-time jobs. By 2007, the proportion of full-time jobs in manufacturing had fallen to 12½ per cent. This is equivalent to a loss of approximately 300,000 manufacturing jobs. If this trend were to continue over the next 20 years—in other words, twice the period of the Howard government—there would be virtually no jobs left in manufacturing in this country. This would mean the loss of well over a million jobs. And don’t let anyone be fooled that the coalition party stands for job creation. Nothing—and I say nothing—could be further from the truth.

Let me turn briefly to the need to upgrade and expand Australia’s public infrastructure. For years the Howard government simply ignored the decline in the quality of Australia’s essential public infrastructure. It consistently failed to appreciate that ensuring the quality and capacity of the nation’s public infrastructure is essential to sustaining Australia’s long-term economic growth. It was blindly obvious to almost everyone else that the provision of essential public infrastructure was falling behind the needs of Australia’s growing population and growing economy. Industry leaders and the country’s trade unions desperately tried to get the Howard government to take notice.