Julia Irwin (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The starting point for the Joint Standing Committee on Migration inquiry could be taken from the 2006 report of the Productivity Commission called Economic impacts of migration and population growth, which concluded:

Compared with other countries, the Australian regime for assessing and recognising overseas skills and qualifications is well-developed and generally achieves its goals. However, there is evidence that, in some instances, the skills assessment and recognition arrangements for Australia could be improved to better meet their objectives.

The Productivity Commission identified the need for better arrangements for recognition of overseas qualifications and skills, as well as consistent regulations and licensing requirements across jurisdictions, with links to competency standards. The work of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration and this report go a long way towards addressing those areas identified as being in need of improvement. It should go without saying that as a nation we benefit from using the skills of our population to the greatest extent. But as was pointed out to the committee, as many as one in five independent migrants do not use their qualifications in Australia, and that is a waste of our most valuable resource—the skills of our people—a waste we cannot afford as a nation.

This was also shown during the committee’s inquiry in relation to the not uncommon situation where a successful tradesperson applying under the general skilled migration program is later unable to satisfy licensing or registration once they have arrived in Australia. There are also cases where successful applicants under the general skilled migration program choose for whatever reason not to work in the trade for which they qualified.

It may be that we have the most highly qualified taxidrivers in the world, but it must be said that there are factors within the trade recognition system which deter qualified migrants from working in their trade. I could add that location, which was the subject of the committee’s 2001 report on state specific migration, may have some effect on the willingness of skilled migrants to work in the field of their qualifications or skills. Another factor which the committee identified was that skilled migrants increasingly come from non-English-speaking countries, and poor English skills will reduce the chances of the migrant being able to work in his or her area of skill until they have improved their command of the English language.

This leads to the well-recognised situation where the skilled migrant works in an area below his or her skill level, while they attempt to improve their English. Many find that they become locked in a low-skill occupation which does not challenge them to improve their English. It is a catch-22 situation and, while the committee recommends continued monitoring of the English language component of the migration program by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to ensure that migrants possess appropriate levels of vocational English, it is clear that intensive English programs can help to break the cycle of skilled migrants not using their skills and qualifications to the full.

Another thing which affects people, particularly those from non-English-speaking backgrounds, is the difficulty and delay experienced in assessments by Trades Recognition Australia. The committee heard from a number of witnesses, and in submissions, who were critical of the delays experienced in the processing of applications and of the process itself, including the lack of a genuine appeal process. While there was some comment which suggested that the trade recognition authority has lifted its game, it was clear to the committee that radical change to the role of the TRA and its processes will be necessary if it is to fulfil its role in a fair and timely manner.

While the TRA has the task of assessing overseas qualifications, it also has the task of assessing domestic skills in electrical and metal trades. This often means that applications are handled twice—once overseas for migration purposes and then on arrival in Australia for licensing and registration, including for an Australian recognised trade certificate. The committee noted that the trade recognition authority is not the only body capable of accrediting electrical and metal trades. This accreditation may also be carried out by registered training organisations, although it should be noted that the TRA places greater emphasis on work experience alongside qualifications such as an Australian Qualifications Framework certificate III.

The committee’s recommendations calling for the Tradesmen’s Rights Regulation Act 1946 to be repealed and for Trades Recognition Australia to cease to conduct domestic assessments of skills in electrical and metal trades and confine its activities to international assessments are, as I said, quite radical proposals and will need to be reviewed by the Council of Australian Governments. Leaving the Australian recognised trade certification system to state based systems may not overcome the double-handling problem of trade certification.

While the committee looked at the issue of skills recognition as it applies to a number of visa classes, the glaring omission in this report is the question of 457 visas. Now, for other visa classes, we are of course looking at migrants who will become permanent residents. As part of the selection process, we ask for levels of qualifications and skills which are in demand in Australia. But the whole 457 process seems to get around this. We do not check the qualifications of those coming to Australia to fill temporary skills shortages, even though this may lead to permanent residency. There is no assurance that 457 visas may not become a back door for permanent entry to Australia and, as the member for Fremantle pointed out earlier, the situation for family members is very uncertain. My main concern is that, while Australia has gone to great lengths to ensure that our high standards of recognised skills and qualifications are maintained, the admission of lower skilled workers into Australia can seriously compromise those standards.

The effect of this was related to me recently—and you will see just what this means for the Australian workforce. A young man with a family who was a boilermaker by trade took a job with a contractor where he was working alongside about 10 other tradesmen welders on 457 visas. As a qualified tradesman he was able to carry out all of the demanding tasks on the job. He soon found that the overseas welders were not capable of carrying out many of these tasks and, while he found himself busy for the full day, the other welders could stand around waiting for him to finish a task. When he queried this with his boss, he was told that he was being paid $18 an hour because he was a boilermaker and they were only being paid $16 an hour because they could not do some of the work. He complained that, since he was doing much more work than the others, he deserved even more money and said he was leaving unless he was paid more. His supervisor went to see the site manager and said he could pay him $28 an hour, but the young man refused and went and found a job as a forklift driver. He explained that the work was not as demanding and paid better than the $18 an hour that he had started on in the other job.

That is what we need to keep in mind when it comes to skills recognition, whether it is in the trade area or the professions: if we dilute our standards, whether through relaxed recognition of qualifications or through a flood of unqualified 457 visa holders, then we will find that the bad drives out the good. Australians with qualifications and skills in demand in a world market will not sit back and see their wages and conditions eroded by an influx of overseas workers.

This report deals with the important question of skills recognition, but until this parliament takes a closer look at issues such as 457 visas we will run the risk of seriously undermining a whole range of recognised skills to the great cost of the people of Australia.

In the short time I have left, I want to thank the great staff of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration. The secretariat have done an excellent job and they all deserve a great pat on the back. I thank them dearly.

Debate (on motion by Mr Neville) adjourned.