Bruce Billson (Dunkley, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Sustainable Development and Cities) Share this | Hansard source

Zero—not one. Not one green loan was provided in a program that was supposed to have started on 1 July 2008. So, at that level, I suppose the minister could say he is really firing on all cylinders, having 36 participants taking up this opportunity from 1 July through to 12 August.

The other thing is the 6,000 local jobs focused on environmental sustainability. Again, we need to look at what this is actually about. The package targets bush regeneration, erosion control, community information and education projects, beach and dune rehabilitation, and habitat protection. All of that activity, previously addressed under the Howard government’s Green Corps and Work for the Dole programs, is being hung out as if it is something new. Sadly, my area is suffering significantly from the mismanagement of the economy by the Rudd government. We have seen our area designated as high-risk. There is activity surrounding local employment coordinators and the like. That is at least recognition that things are tough.

In South-East Melbourne, in September 2009, the unemployment rate was 9.3 per cent. One of the key reasons why I entered public life was youth unemployment, having seen young people and the despair they faced about limited prospects for the future. We were able to turn that around over the years of the Howard government, but it is all trending up again. In September 2009, 14.2 per cent was the unemployment rate for younger people in our area. These are worrying trends. Our area has been designated as an area of employment vulnerability. I often talk to people about that and how their jobs are going. They recognise the importance of economic growth and that if there are resources around they should be deployed on productive infrastructure. There is a regional and local government community infrastructure program happening now.

I take these few moments to urge local communities, particularly local councils, to focus on activating projects that are productive and will generate economic and employment vitality in our area. I think of the Frankston Safe Boat Harbour project, which I have been closely involved with—carefully analysing successive projects over the last 20 years to make sure that the very important and valued beach area at Frankston is not damaged by this project. I believe the hydro-dynamic analysis as to the site at the base of Olivers Hill proves that we can have such a facility and not damage the beach. Isn’t that a perfect project? Why wouldn’t the government consider investing in the sea wall—a piece of public infrastructure that would enable private investment and activity to support community use, such as the simple retrieval and recovery of boats.

In a storm event in Port Phillip Bay, if you are stuck at Brighton—I think that is where you would have to go up to—or down at Mount Martha, there is no safe place to go. This safe boat harbour would offer that facility. Its boat storage, maintenance and repair activities would activate economic and employment opportunities. Its onshore retail and hospitality activity would also complement the local economy and highlight that Frankston is the city by the bay with so many great things going for it. I would have thought that taxpayer funding going into the public asset of the sea wall would achieve multiple objectives that support public use, more regular boat recovery and coastguard operations. We have a range of lifesaving club activities and the like that could use that facility. Even visiting vessels could moor there. People could enjoy that wonderful coastal atmosphere. That is the kind of project where taxpayer funding would make a durable economic and employment difference. That is the kind of project that I would urge people to consider. In the lead-up to the last election, I made the commitment that a re-elected Howard government would invest in that sea wall and would be a catalyst for that project. I would urge the government to turn its mind to projects like that which make a durable difference in the local area. These announcements, most of which I have explained and provided evidence to confirm, are rebadging exercises and not of the nature they have been described. They are about top-ups on training and work placement opportunities. They can be important, but let us not overlook what is going on here.

In the minute or two that is left to me I would like to touch on another issue, and that relates to this concept of green jobs. It worries me a bit. I do not know anybody who wakes up in the morning not wanting to make their contribution to the sustainability of our economy and natural systems. But to go around characterising jobs as ‘some are green and some are not’ I think is not that helpful. It reminds me of the seventies when safety officers were very popular. If you wanted to prove your workplace was safety conscious you employed a safety officer. All of us have seen examples where that kind of token interest in safety was not what was required. There was a need to inculcate safety right across the workplace and its activities. In fact, everybody’s business was safety business.

That was in the seventies and we have learned that but I fear we are going down a similar path now with green jobs, and somehow we will artificially be saying ‘That is a green job and that is not’ when we really need to inculcate sustainability principles in all that we do. We could argue that we in here are offering green jobs because we are trying to improve the sustainability of our economy and work out how we can put it on a cleaner growth trajectory for the future. Would that make our jobs green? I am not quite sure. It is a branding exercise that is not necessarily helpful. Moreover, it is not recognised that everybody can make a contribution in terms of green jobs.

The thing I am encouraged by is that at least the additional training elements, dressed up as green job places in this package, are actually putting in some sustainability skills development in the traditional training streams and qualifications. That is good. That is the kind of thing I am talking about, where sustainability is everybody’s business. I do not think going around saying one job is a green job and another is not is particularly helpful.

In closing, the thing that I hope comes out of this is some help for community organisations, like Mornington Peninsula Youth Enterprises. They are struggling at the moment because of the enormous cuts to funding in the Work for the Dole program and the new supervision regimes that require a permanent supervisor for a certain number of program participants. These changes have seen work placements become the norm for Work for the Dole, because separate activity—like the very activity that this bill argues it supports—cannot be carried out. So while land management revegetation, dune rehabilitation and erosion control can be pursued through this funding package—which is limited and not as generous as the scheme previously in place and runs out after two years—other government programs that could achieve that very same goal within a broader program framework, such as Work for the Dole, are having funding cuts. Programs such as this are now no longer viable.

I have been liaising closely with Russell Ardley of Mornington Peninsula Youth Enterprises. I said to him, ‘You might find this ironic but the very thing you are doing now maybe relevant to a new program that is kind of like the old one you used to help with, but not quite, and it is not able to have the same participants as the old one, but there you go’. Let us see if we can get some support through this for the Mornington Peninsula Youth Enterprises’ peninsula training and employment program. Why? Because they have been doing good work for years. What has let them down are the Rudd government’s cuts to funding for Work for the Dole and the way that has undermined their viability.

They now need to turn their minds to this funding stream, as limited and as constrained as it is, to see if they can keep doing good work with young people in the greater Frankston and Mornington Peninsula region. It is good work that has improved young people’s employability and job prospects; good work that has delivered benefits for the natural environment, coastal areas, riparian habitats and land management areas—public land, overwhelmingly, such as the Briars—that have faced challenges. Let us hope that good programs can now be supported through this belated acknowledgement of this valuable work. I will be doing all I can to support Mornington Peninsula Youth Enterprises and other organisations trying to get some of this action. (Time expired)

See this speech in context