Page 1853 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 19 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
These decisions in some cases were necessary because unemployment has a high human cost. While Canberra's unemployment level is below that of the States, this is no consolation if you are unemployed. This Government is committed to increasing employment opportunities in the ACT and it welcomes the additional initiatives announced last evening to tackle unemployment in the ACT and Australia as a whole. Madam Speaker, some of those initiatives are the announced projects, including the major new office construction at York Park, refurbishment at Scarborough House, the construction of the taxation regional office at Belconnen, and the construction of a War Memorial storage facility at Mitchell. These projects will boost employment in Canberra by about 2,000 direct jobs in the building and construction industry.
It is interesting to note that there has been some suggestion that this really cannot be claimed as a major initiative because people from outside Canberra may come in and take some of these jobs. That type of proposition is similar to suggesting that the unemployment rate in the ACT is not 8.4 per cent, but something significantly lower, because we have people from outside the ACT who come into the ACT seeking employment and then are registered on the CES rolls. Madam Speaker, I reject both propositions.
The simple fact of life is that the initiatives announced last evening in relation to the major building projects will create substantial direct employment in the building and construction industry, and will also provide a maintenance and enhancement of employment opportunities in related industries. In the economic model which is used by this Government, and which was used by the former Alliance Government, it is acknowledged that the flow-on employment implications of one person being employed directly in the building industry amounts to three additional persons being employed in associated industries. I believe that the figures that were announced in last evening's budget, of an estimated 2,000 additional direct jobs in the building and construction industry, augur well for associated employment in a whole range of industries and, despite the protestations of Mrs Carnell this afternoon, those industries do employ a considerable number of women.
Madam Speaker, in addition to that, the Commonwealth has also announced that, wherever possible, the use of locally manufactured goods and materials will further boost employment in other industries in the ACT. This is a critical issue as far as the ACT is concerned. It does not go to the point that the Opposition are attempting to have us believe is an appropriate one for the ACT - that is, that we put up the gates, that we put up the barricades and we say, "If you were not born in the ACT you cannot have a job in the ACT; or if it is not totally manufactured in the ACT you cannot use it in the ACT". That is the proposition that the Opposition would like to embrace.
Mr Connolly: Which opposition?
MR LAMONT: The substance of the Liberal Opposition's position can be summed up by their absence this afternoon and the absence of logic in the way that they have attempted to portray the significant announcements made last evening and the significant decisions already taken by this Government.
Madam Speaker, the Commonwealth Government announced that public service numbers would increase by 1,798 in the financial year 1992-93. The Canberra share of this increase is expected to be about 240 full-time jobs.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .