Page 280 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 12 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
With that in mind, it seems to me that the proposal that Ms Szuty has put - that a select committee be appointed to inquire into and report on youth unemployment in the ACT, with particular reference to the level of youth unemployment and strategies to alleviate the impact on the community - is a very, very sensible one. The fact that Ms Szuty has also moved that the committee shall report by Thursday, 10 September - a very tight reporting time indeed - indicates clearly that her intention is that this committee work quickly, work hard and try to look for some very sensible solutions and try to find some new ideas that will perhaps alleviate the unemployment of youth in this area. If the ideas result in only 30 or 40 or 50 new jobs, it will have been worth it.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (8.46): The debate over the last half an hour or so has convinced me of one thing, that we do not want any further committee consideration of the matter. Everybody has said - it is unanimous - that we have to do something about youth unemployment, yet here we have a proposal that would defer it for another four months while another committee has another look. It is absurd. If this Government, with all the facts before it, cannot make a decision to create some jobs for our youth, what is another committee inquiry going to contribute? The answer is: Absolutely nothing; it will simply contribute another four months' worth of delay. I do not think one month's delay, let alone four months' delay, in attacking this question is good enough.
The Government has had ample opportunity. For a year now the Chief Minister has talked about job creation for unemployed youth. When she was taking government at this time last year, one of the major points that she made in her speech was, "In our budget we are going to deal with youth unemployment". A year later, where is the delivery? There are more committees, more bureaucracy, more delay and more hypocrisy. It has to stop. For that reason, Madam Speaker, I will not support the amendment, and I will not support the motion. I want the Government to do something and to stop talking about it.
MR BERRY (8.48), by leave: I move:
That the motion be referred to the Standing Committee on Social Policy for consideration and report as to the necessity for a select committee and further inquiry.
Having moved that motion, I will go to some of the reasons that the motion has been moved. The motion which has been placed on the record by Ms Szuty first emerged during the course of proceedings this afternoon - somewhere around 4 o'clock, methinks. I suggest that there is an element of theatre attached to the motion, but it is such a serious issue that theatre ought not be attached to it. I say that because in my view, and if I were handling the matter, if something were so serious and so precious, I would take it up with the government of the day with a view to having the matter considered. But the Government was not aware of the detail of this motion until the matter was placed before the Assembly. There was no effort to discuss the issue with a view to arriving at some sort of consensus on the matter. That is not to say that the Government might have agreed with the motion; it is merely how matters ought to be progressed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .