Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The truth is, Member for Blair, that under Labor you failed young people. In fact, after six years of Labor government in Australia 200,000 more Australians were unemployed as a result of six years of Labor administration. The youth unemployment crisis that you described occurred under Labor. Labor members failed to mention the range of positive initiatives that this government has undertaken to address what is a blight on the landscape for young people in our country.

Australia is a proud country because we understand fundamentally what our culture is, what it means to be Australian—to have a go. These are things that most Australians, from whatever background, understand. They also need to know that their government understands and measures against a test of fairness. Indeed, this bill meets that test of fairness. Among Australians, in that context of fairness, in that context of having a go, there is an absolute rejection of what we might colloquially call the bludgers. We understand that actions do have consequences—or in this case the lack of action.

Most reasonable people can see that the changes proposed under this legislation, the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Stronger Penalties for Serious Failures) Bill 2014, are reasonable and fair. This is not a draconian or over-the-top measure. It is a reasonable expectation in line with the Australian welfare system, which is based rightly on a principle of mutual obligation. It is not a 'shoot first, ask questions later' measure. It is about providing support wherever we can to help young people to find employment, to do the things that are good for them—for their families, for their future—to do things that deliver better health outcomes and better community outcomes but also to help themselves. Indeed, there are exemptions within the bill for those people with special circumstances. I acknowledge the member for Blair's interest in mental health and his commitment to supporting and looking at better policy in this area. But those are not the people this bill is targeting at all.

We understand that the taxpayers of Australian, who support those people looking for work, reasonably expect those people to do as much as possible within reason to seek paid employment if they are receiving benefits from other taxpayers. To improve their chances of being offered employment and where appropriate accept suitable offers of employment, activities that are expected of a job seeker include: appointments, naturally enough, with employment service providers to discuss progress; feedback from interviews; and strategies to enhance opportunities to get into paid employment.

Logically, they must undertake a job search process, be that knocking on doors—indeed, over the last few years there are a lot of doors that I have knocked on as a result of my campaigning and it is a great way to talk to people and businesses and understand what their needs are, and opportunities do present themselves; it is the same for job seekers—or reading newspapers and online services to look for suitable employment opportunities. Where appropriate, with the full and clear intention of trying to deliver more opportunities to be better prepared for paid employment, this government will make it obligatory for young people to participate in activities and programs such as the revised Work for the Dole program. Most Australians understand that these programs are designed to better equip people to get into the workforce.

Programs like Work For The Dole have shown their effectiveness over many years, particularly under the Howard government. This is probably one area that statistics do not always do justice; but most people in this place—and, more importantly, outside this place—would believe that, if we can have any success in encouraging and supporting young into paid employment, such programs are overwhelming justifiable. That is particularly so for those kids of families who have challenges around long-term welfare dependence.

In pockets of my state, there is 30 per cent youth unemployment. The Social Security Act sets out penalties in the event that job seekers do not comply with the requirements as outlined. What is designated as a 'serious failure' includes refusing a suitable job offer and persistent noncompliance in respect of appointments with employment service providers. The act provides for a non-payment penalty of eight weeks in the event of serious failures.

But at the heart of the issue are the amendments introduced in 2009 by the previous government that allowed for such penalties to be waived provided there is 'intensive activity' in job searching. Effectively, it meant in practice that job seekers who persistently refuse employment or are persistently noncompliant can avoid any financial recourse or penalty. By way of comparison, in 2008-09, as a legacy of the Howard government's initiatives, there were 644 penalties applied for refusing positions that were offered. In 2012-13, as a result of the changes made by the previous government, there were 1,718 serious failures, but in 68 per cent of these cases the penalty was waived. Even though there were three times as many serious failures, there were only 550 financial penalties applied compared to 644 in 2009. It does not meet the reasonableness test. In the instance of serious failures for repeated serious noncompliance in 2012-13, there were 25,268 instances but in 73 per cent of these cases the penalty was waived. In essence, the whole integrity of the system was undermined. The notion of mutual obligation with the taxpayers of Australia was compromised.

As a coalition, we are doing everything we can to support young people to get a job or, in the case of our trade support loans scheme, to provide appropriate financial assistance for those who choose to do an apprenticeship. The extension of the higher education reforms to sub-bachelor and diploma courses is truly a reform that will benefit my state of Tasmania. In many areas of regional Australia these are the courses that young people go to university for the first time to do. They may then go on to do a degree course—it is true—but these are the courses that are predominately used in universities around regional Australia, such as the University of Tasmania in my home state. There is the trade support loans scheme, as I mentioned, and the extension of the Higher Education Loan Program to diplomas and sub-bachelor degrees.

Incentives for employees include the job commitment bonus for job seekers aged between 18 and 30 and relocation assistance to support those needing to move more than 90 minutes away from home to take up work. My first job when I left school was 200 kilometres away from my home on a farm. Let me tell you, it was the longest eight months of my life. It was hard. It made me realise that I did not want to do that for the rest of my life. But I got a start, and I was really grateful for that. In my home state, the Tasmanian Jobs Programme offers employers $3,250 to take up someone who has been unemployed for six months. Additionally, under the Restart subsidy, employers may be eligible for a further $10,000 over two years on top of this $3,250 figure if the employee is over 50 years of age.

Most people do the right thing. Most people understand, value and appreciate the contribution being made to support them by Australian taxpayers when they are seeking employment. I do not want to be misunderstood: we are talking about the exception, not the rule. Most people want to get into work and this government is doing everything we possibly can to get more young people into paid employment, because a job is absolutely the best form of welfare.

Labor have a dismal record on employment. While they were in office, unemployment went from 4.4 per cent in November 2007 to 5.7 per cent in September 2013. When Labor were voted out of office last year, there were 200,000 more unemployed Australians than in November 2007, when the coalition were last in government.

Indeed there are nearly 18,000 people in my home state of Tasmania currently unemployed, looking for either part-time or full-time work. The latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, for May, reveal that Tasmania's unemployment rate is 7.8 per cent, still substantially higher than the national rate of 5.9 per cent. The youth unemployment rate for Tasmanians aged between 15 and 19 remains the worst in the country, with more than 4,400 looking for part-time or full-time work. The youth unemployment rate in some parts of the state is as high as 30 per cent. It is bad for the individual, it is bad for their family, it is bad for the community, it is bad for the nation, it is bad for health outcomes and it is bad for educational outcomes. It is just bad, and we must do and are doing everything we possibly can to change that—because employment is the best form of welfare.

We know most people aged 35 who are on Newstart—not all of them, but an overwhelming number of them—were on Newstart at 18 years of age. It is simply unacceptable that, as a nation, we expect, allow or condone young people leaving school and going immediately onto benefits. It is not good for them, it is not good for their families and it is not good for the community. We need as many people as possible to participate in this country's workforce to the extent that they can—to help turn Australia's economy around.

As a nation we absolutely need to have a serious conversation about the demographic challenges we face. In 1960, there were 10 working-age Australians for every person over the age of 65. Today—I sound like Prime Minister Abe, don't I?—there are five working-age people for every person over the age of 65. It is predicted that, by 2050, there will be 2.8 working-age Australians for every Australian over the age of 65. We need to have this conversation as a nation. We need to have this conversation about the demographic challenges for all of our systems: the health system, the education system and the welfare system more broadly—and we welcome the review of the welfare system being conducted Minister Andrews over the next few months and encourage submissions in this area. We know these things and we are up for the challenge.

This bill ultimately aims to stop the serious failures, those people who consistently fail to comply with the requirement to look for work. These regulations are tough because they have been developed to deal with one of the most difficult groups of unemployed Australians—those who have every opportunity to take up paid employment but ignore those opportunities. The rules will be tightened on the waiver of penalties for job seekers who fail to accept or start a suitable job. They will incur a mandatory eight-week non-payment period. Job seekers who are persistently noncompliant will be given one opportunity to become compliant, but any further episodes of noncompliance will mean an eight-week non-payment penalty. It is reasonable and it is what Australians would expect.

I know that in your electorate of Braddon, Deputy Speaker Whiteley, just on the boundary of my electorate of Lyons, there are many opportunities in the fruit-picking sector. There are also opportunities in that sector in Cressy and Longford in my electorate. In the member for Bass's electorate, at Hillwood, there are opportunities in, for example, strawberry picking. Strawberry picking in Tasmania extends over seven months. At the moment, most of those jobs are taken by backpackers. For seven months of the year they are employing backpackers from China, Taiwan and Korea. Why? It is not because they do not want to employ young Tasmanians. It is because young Tasmanians will not put up their hands. They come along and they get a start, but, after three or four days or after a week or after two weeks, they leave. I want to know why that is and I am having a conversation with the Minister for Employment about putting in place an exit survey for these people—to understand why it is that they are not prepared to keep those jobs, jobs which are available to give young people a start. I started at the bottom. I have not gone much further up the pole, but that is what we need. We need young people to take that chance and grab that opportunity. We need them to seek the opportunities that come from having paid employment.

See this speech in context