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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Wednesday, 30 June 2004) . . Page.. 3027 ..

to consider the concept of growing business and building the economy and at the same time making sure that we actually improve the lot of the employee. We are here, certainly, to improve the lot of business, the employer, but we are also here to improve the lot of the employee.

MR HARGREAVES (11.47): Mr Speaker, I will be speaking just to the amendment, not closing the debate. Members need to have a close read of the amendment moved by Ms Tucker because it is not as comprehensive as the first half a dozen words might give the impression of its being. The amendment talks about having a comprehensive and targeted employment strategy that addresses the long-term unemployment, underemployment and needs of those groups in our community that are particularly disadvantaged in the labour market.

I cannot support the amendment because I do not think that it is right. We have had successive governments quite specifically address this issue. I do not think that it is fair to say that any one government can claim to have done the best thing for all of those things. Incrementally, we get better at it. For example, the former government and this government have quite significantly and deliberately supported institutions such as Koomarri, which has an element that specifically goes about trying to find long-term employment for those people who are physically and intellectually incapable of doing so by themselves.

That is something that this government has supported and the previous government, of which Mr Smyth was a minister, supported. It has been part of the commitment of both governments to try to level the playing field for those people. That is just one example. If Ms Tucker is saying that we need to have a comprehensive and targeted employment strategy for all of the bites of difficulty within the employment regime, I suggest that she is being a little bit unreasonable.

We cannot isolate one particular part of the employment regime. We need to consider the global picture. We need to consider the partnerships between business and Labor. We need to consider the incentives that businesses are putting forward. This government has put in place incentives to try to get small and even smaller businesses moving and being able to provide employment opportunities.

The major reason for bringing forward this motion highlighting the Hudson Report figures was to show what the environment is like. What is the environment like for getting a job here in Canberra? What are the opportunities like for our kids? One of the big things that I picked out of this report was the fact that employers are having difficulty finding jobs for people. I suggest that they are having difficulty finding jobs for people a little bit more so than places in other parts of the country.

I do not think that it is appropriate to water down that point by suggesting that there is a lack of a comprehensive and targeted employment strategy, because that is not true. The economic white paper talks about employment opportunities. It talks about employment opportunities for older people. A lot of our discrimination legislation is all about making sure that those people have an equal opportunity. The Human Rights Act that the government has brought in is all about doing these things.

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