Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak about the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Youth Jobs Path: Prepare, Trial, Hire) Bill 2016. The Turnbull government's prepare, trial, hire program, or PaTH as it is known, is a program that is supposed to prepare young people for work by placing them in voluntary internships for between four and 12 weeks. This bill is designed in part to support the introduction of PaTH.

I am particularly interested in the issues surrounding getting young people to work. I represent the electorate of Brand where pockets of the community are struggling with youth unemployment figures that stand at a staggering 13.6 per cent. This is more than double the national unemployment rate average. This is despite the electorate being home to Western Australia's major industrial strip in Kwinana—home to big and small businesses, from Co-operative Bulk Handling, Alcoa and BP to smaller fabricators and contractors. Supporting this state and the nation during the construction phase of the mining boom, job seekers in WA and Brand are now having to look elsewhere, beyond the Kwinana strip, to find work now the mining industry has moved into its foreseeable production phase. The move into this phase was always foreseeable. There was no surprise with this movement of phases. It was plain to see for all. The construction boom in the mining industry of Western Australia could not last forever.

The government—I might say the state government of Western Australia as well as the federal government here—has had a long time to consider the impact of this economic change on communities in Brand, in Western Australia and across the whole country. This government has used its time to come up with, and endlessly repeat, a slogan to address the unemployment rate—'jobs and growth', they say. It seems to be a big useless loop. I am concerned that PaTH is a cobbled together program that will not provide realistic opportunities for young unemployed people. I am concerned that it will not address the lack of jobs available to young people and will instead fail young job seekers.

Let us have a look at what PaTH is. It is supposedly designed to prepare young people for work by providing job seekers aged 17 to 24 with pre-employment training and placement in voluntary internships over four to 12 weeks. Businesses will be paid $1,000 to take on an intern and then receive a wage subsidy of between $6½ thousand and $10,000 if they hire them at the conclusion of the internship. During that time interns may work 15 to 25 hours a week. In return, job seekers will receive payments of $200 per fortnight on top of their current income support payments while they are participating in the PaTH program. The program is being introduced at the same time the other government job programs, such as the Work for the Dole scheme, are hopelessly failing our young unemployed.

I see and hear regularly from my constituents who are worried about their children that are unable to find meaningful work and with little prospect of meaningful work in the near future. I hear concerns from young people themselves who want to work but have no job, and this is not from lack of trying. Of course, the reality is that when there are less jobs than there are job seekers people will remain unemployed. This is a sentiment that has been shared with me by people in the jobs service industry, who have expressed their frustrations at a lack of jobs for people to apply for.

The Kwinana strip has been a major source of jobs for people living in Rockingham and Kwinana—the two cities within Brand—for many decades. Recently, on a visit to a local job service provider in Kwinana, with the member for Chifley, I was told by these people working on the frontline trying to help people find work that the jobs that were once so plentiful on the strip, as it is known, have now dried up. The jobs for those people who want to work are just not there.

Youth unemployment in parts of Brand stands at more than double the national unemployment average, as I have mentioned before. I repeat it because the figures are astounding. What happened to the jobs and growth mantra espoused by the government during the election? Where are these jobs? Where is the investment needed to get people back into meaningful employment? The sad truth is that Australia's youth are counting the cost of the Turnbull government's failure to develop a real jobs plan for the future and a real sustainable jobs plan for our nation.

In Brand and across the country we are seeing a government that is not willing to invest in their future by investing in the productive infrastructure that can deliver real opportunities and benefits to the community. One glaring example of this failure in my electorate comes to mind as I consider this bill: the Kwinana outer harbour. I know members of this place will have heard me mention the Kwinana outer project often. It is one of those nation-changing and certainly electorate-changing—not to mention state-changing—infrastructure projects. Instead of progressing the construction of the Kwinana outer harbour project, the Turnbull government is pursuing a $2 billion investment in the Perth Freight Link, a road to a port which is fast approaching the day when it will reach full capacity and even then the road proposed does not even make it to the port. In fact, it stops about two kilometres south of the port. An alternative investment by the government, an investment in the Kwinana outer harbour project—a long-term investment in a long-term future—would instead unlock latent potential across existing industries and attract new industries into the area.

Support for the new outer harbour makes sense. It would help grow the local, state and national economies. It is estimated it would create 25,000 new jobs. That is a lot of employment opportunities for our young people. It would provide real paid jobs and training; not short-term internships off the back of a hastily put together program. The Kwinana outer harbour project would encourage innovation through the application of modern technology to port operations, and it puts people first by supporting a sustainable industrial base to underpin the flourishing communities in Brand. Such investment would create job opportunities that would give young people an employment future, and a long-term employment future. It would open up opportunities for new and developing industry to move into Kwinana to expand the large industrial estate that has been planned for there for many years. These new industries would be located next to a state-of-the-art export port.

Despite promising that it would tackle youth unemployment, the coalition has failed to deliver on the means and ends of actually doing so. According to the Department of Employment, youth unemployment nationally is at 12.8 per cent with nearly 300,000 unemployed young people between the ages of 15 and 24 unable to have productive work lives. On top of this, the department acknowledges there are another 170,000 people who have been unemployed for more than a year. We have a generation of young people who are disillusioned by the act of looking for jobs that simply are not there. It is a national disgrace.

Against the backdrop of this woeful performance, the Turnbull government has pulled together the PaTH program. I am concerned, as are many of my colleagues, that PaTH will not be a pathway to meaningful employment opportunities and will simply result in young people being exploited. We already know that the Work for the Dole program is not providing long-term solutions for young people. It is failing our young unemployed. In the case of Work for the Dole, even the government's own figures show nearly 90 per cent of its participants are not in full-time work three months after finishing the program. You would think that these results would cause a re-think on performance of this program, but, no, as we have heard from my colleague the member for Chifley, the response from the government was astounding. And I will repeat the response which was heard at last month's Senate estimates, 'The purpose of Work for the Dole is not necessarily to lead directly to a full-time job.'

It is no wonder that the failure of this program and the attitude towards young people trying to find work causes me to have concerns about this new plan proposed by the government. As you have heard from my colleagues who have spoken already on this bill, they and many others in the community are worried about whether the program represents a fair deal for Australia's young jobseekers. Under the PaTH program, we are concerned that young people will be forced to pay an even heavier price through the program's apparent flaws.

This bill is designed to provide support to participants' social security entitlements while in the program. It does this via two measures. Firstly, a provision will be inserted into the Social Security Act and the Veterans' Entitlements Act so that the $200 payment interns receive is not counted as income for social security or veterans' entitlements purposes. And, secondly, it amends the Social Security Act to allow young people to suspend their payments if they are indeed employed—against all odds. They can then restart them without re-applying if they lose their job through no fault of their own within 26 weeks.

Now, if taken in isolation the government will claim the measures in the bill are noncontroversial and should be accepted. However, a closer look shows us that the reality is very different and that our concerns are justified. We are concerned at what the future might hold for young people who are at a most important stage in life as they look to enter the workforce and as they look to prepare for the rest of their lives. The reality is that the measures proposed by the government form part of a broader new program design which could see young jobseekers exploited. I agree with the proposition that there is dignity in work, but there is not much dignity if you are the victim of exploitation. The measures could undermine workforce standards, which would have an even broader impact on the wider community and those already in employment.

Perhaps most alarming is the fact that, unlike with Work for the Dole, for the first time participants would be placed in the private sector and would be paid below award wages. The Work for the Dole program is not-for-profit- and government-organisation based. PaTH places young people into businesses. This means private businesses will be given access to thousands of young Australians who will work for the benefit of business for less than the minimum wage. The implications of this are obviously concerning and again, impacts on more people than those participating in the PaTH program itself. PaTH has the potential to be used to displace jobs with cheap labour. Families do not want to see their children used in this way. Young people do not want to be used in this way and workers do not want to be usurped out of their jobs by a cheaper and potentially untrained labour source.

In this country we have a minimum wage overseen by the Fair Work Commission. This is something to be proud of. However, with PaTH there are very real concerns raised that participants may be entering a program where they are 'working' for below minimum award wages. The program could very well see young Australians doing the same job as others, except being paid less than the minimum wage. It is a dangerous path to take and, as the member for Burt said, it is a dangerous race to the bottom.

The reality is that we are experiencing a time in this country where wages growth is at the lowest rate on record. My colleagues' concern, and my concern, is that PaTH could be used to undermine wages across industries, and this concern is very real. Not only is it worrying to young people who potentially will be paid below award wages, and not only is it worrying to their families and loved ones who will potentially watch them work for less than they deserve and for less than an award wage, but it will also be worrying to workers and employees who could see underpaid PaTH interns doing their work and taking their jobs. In such cases there would be two victims: the underpaid intern and the person who, sadly, loses their job to them. Large numbers of interns could completely remove the need for existing employees to work at certain times in certain sectors, including hospitality and tourism. Who is to say that large numbers of PaTH participants would not be used over weekends, removing the need for regular employees at those times and also removing the need to pay penalty rates for those employees?

This is counterproductive, and could potentially add to the problem of underemployment in the community. Underemployment, as we all know, is a massive concern, with people struggling to find enough work to pay the bills and to keep their heads above water. It is a time where they are seeking more hours and greater employment. There are 1.1 million Australians wanting more work, but unable to find it, and underemployment in the August quarter was at 8.7 per cent, the highest level since this data began in 1978. In these circumstances it would be irresponsible to support a program that has the very real potential of adding to this problem and to people's hardships.

Another concern is that despite repeated questioning there are few assurances that interns will be covered by appropriate workers compensation schemes should there be an accident. That is because PaTH participants will be considered as 'volunteers', not as employees. This is despite the fact they will be doing jobs and will get paid, albeit a below award amount. This is farcical and it is a clear demonstration of exploitation. It is damaging, because in some jurisdictions this could affect the way workers compensation systems would treat participants in the event of an accident—which may well be a life-changing accident.

There are no specifics about the program: there is no detail on areas where jobseekers will acquire skills. The program has been touted as a means to prepare young people for work during these times of high youth unemployment, but there is very little in the way of detail in the way it will be implemented. In fact, while the program was announced in May and is scheduled to start next April the government cannot even tell us what an 'intern' is. In Senate estimates back in May the clearest outline of training and skills outcomes Minister Cash offered us was, 'We will give you the skills that employers tell us you just do not have.'

The government has also had trouble explaining what jobseekers will be doing in the internship phase of the program—whether they would be working or just observing. To say that this is a vague outcome for participants would be an understatement. It leaves them with little scope to plan, to achieve or to develop in their work experiences. I and my colleagues are also concerned that large numbers of participants could be used within companies at any given time, with little sanction applied to employers that might 'churn' through participants as their engagement concludes. We do not know if this will happen.

The lack of information around this program and the problems not only for participants but for the wider community mean we cannot agree to this legislation at the moment. The government needs to show how these issues will be fixed and addressed. We call—Labor is calling—for this legislation to be considered by a Senate inquiry. We would be doing a disservice to young jobseekers if we just agreed to PaTH and to this legislation without amendment. We would be doing a disservice to those workers who potentially would have their jobs undermined by this program.

The government's failure to invest in jobs and in infrastructure that will provide jobs, cannot be hidden behind a poorly-put-together program such as the PaTH program. The government must address the concerns raised against this hastily-put-together internship program, and Labor demands a better deal than this for young jobseekers.

See this speech in context