Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Wednesday, 30 June 2004) . . Page.. 3023 ..

can tender for and manage, and it will not result in ongoing monitoring of local employment outcomes.

New jobs in the ACT should mean lower unemployment. However, these new jobs do not appear to be providing work for the long-term unemployed. They are still as marginalised as ever. The white-collar white paper that the government put out was still focused on the high knowledge end of the ACT business sector. We are not targeting jobs to support those who have never been through university, who did not have the best outcomes when they left school at either year 10 or year 12. A lot more work needs to be done in those areas.

Entrenched youth unemployment is a problem that is not being addressed by growth in IT and government jobs. The ACT still has a high rate of youth unemployment, despite the figures put forward in the Hudson Report. Between December 2002 and December 2003, the number of young people in the ACT seeking full-time work doubled. In percentage terms, youth unemployment went from just over 11 per cent to 22 per cent.

Reports have shown that the number of ACT kids classified as at risk has doubled between 1999 and 2001. This means that 17 per cent of our young people living in the ACT today will fail to ever reach full-time work or study—they will never have a full-time job; they will never complete university. Where are the programs to help these people? Vocational programs are crucial for helping these kids at risk, but the cost of courses excludes many. Not all kids excel at academic study and vocational education suits many of them much better. The cost of school based vocational education courses is still too high for many children from low-income families, so in the end they drop out of school and end up in an ongoing cycle of unemployment.

We will see if the new budget initiatives will support the majority of these young people. They are targeted programs to support the most at risk or the most in need young people, but there are still many more out there. Seventeen per cent of young people in the ACT need broader support. We need that focus, that recognition, from the government that not everybody is going to go to university, that not everybody is going to be capable of a high-skilled job. We need to support diverse industries.

Youth unemployment can adversely affect health, happiness and future job prospects for a lifetime. We must ensure that school based vocational education is within the financial reach of all students or youth unemployment will just continue to rise and that will have a long-term impact on our economy. The employment of people with a disability is also another issue that needs to be addressed. The government’s disability access strategic plan had only two lines on employment for people with disabilities. In my submission to that plan, I noted that the government needs to do more in this area—to set targets for each of its departments and to support bringing people with disabilities back into the government sector so that they are able to contribute to the community.

I hope the action plans that sit under the strategic plan include greater targets for support and that that turns into a reality. I will be supporting Ms Tucker’s amendment because I am concerned that there is a lack of planning, a lack of comprehensive and targeted employment strategy to help the long-term unemployed and underemployed. As we have mentioned, other groups—young people and those with a disability—are still left out of the labour market. The Hudson Report does not show a positive outcome for them. Rosy

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .