Page 433 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 8 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
numbers coming to Australia. I have not got the reference in front of me, but I recall its citing that even our immigration mix was more in line with the historic pattern for Australia rather than emerging trends with new countries starting to lead in terms of immigration. I think that we need to look at it more thoroughly because there are enormous commercial spin-offs.
My colleague Mrs Dunne will talk at some length on the training elements within this motion, which I also think are rather frivolous and lacking in credibility. In the remaining time I have, I would just draw the attention of members to the fact that a range of initiatives are employed by the Australian government in terms of apprenticeships. There is the innovation incentive. The innovation new apprenticeships incentive provides for an additional $1,100 incentive, paid on commencement in an identified occupation.
There is the school-based new apprenticeships initiative, whereby employers may receive an additional $750 commencement incentive for employing a new apprentice and $750 for continuing to employ the young person after he or she has completed year 12. There is the mature aged worker incentive, whereby an employer of a disadvantaged worker may attract a special $750 mature aged worker commencement incentive and a $750 mature aged completion incentive. Many other incentives are available and can be seen by looking at the web site for the Australian government’s new apprenticeships incentives program. It is a long list of incentives. It is fallacious to say that apprenticeships are not supported.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (11.11): I appreciate the intention behind Mr Gentleman’s motion. It is important that migrant workers have a rewarding experience when they come to our city. Despite their discrepancies, recent reports that migrant workers have been treated illegally under the commonwealth immigration act should be of great concern to our community.
I address what appears to be a flaw in paragraph (1) of the motion. This paragraph fails to recognise that a skills shortage strategy that looks to import skilled workers rather than skilling up our own will not solve the skills shortages in the long run. The ACT Greens poverty motion of late last year touched on this topic and called for further support for low-skilled workers who are at risk of unemployment and underemployment.
We must recognise that importing skilled workers is only a short-term solution. It fails to address the heart of the problem. People in our own local region who, for various reasons, have missed out on training can ease the problem long term. Not only is such a solution good for our workers, giving them a reason to stay here, it is also good for government as it will reduce the requirement to provide support services to these low-skilled workers in the long run.
Canberra has a history of being a city that people come to and live and work for a period—sometimes for as long as a number of years—but too often they see their homes as being elsewhere. And elsewhere is often where they return. We need policies in place that bring here people who wish to stay and that support people from our region coming to Canberra, even if just for a few years, because we know that they will come back to Canberra to do their shopping and will treat this as their centre city.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .