Page 439 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 8 March 2006

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


In addition, there is the $1,100 special incentive for an employer who employs a new apprentice in an eligible innovation training package qualification at the certificate III or IV level. We have got the very successful school-based new apprenticeships additional commencement incentive, which provides $750 additional incentive for an employer who employs a new apprentice in a school-based new apprenticeship at certificate II to IV level. In addition, rural and regional Australia is given special regard in this respect and there exists a $1,000 special incentive for rural and regional new apprenticeships where the new apprentice commences certificate III or IV training in an occupation identified as experiencing skill needs in a non-metropolitan area.

In terms of group training organisations, we see that they have played a critical role in the provision of competencies and skilled people in many industries. I am aware of the role, for example, they played in tourism and hospitality. We see there a $1,000 special incentive for group training organisations that support new apprentices to complete a certificate II new apprenticeship.

In addition, recognising that some people have to leave home to secure employment, the commonwealth has provided a living-away-from-home allowance. New apprentices may be eligible for LHFHA, the living-away-from-home allowance, for up to 12 months at the first year rate of $77.17 per week; a further 12 months assistance at the second year rate of $38.59; and a further 12 months assistance at the third year rate of $25 if the certificate II to IV level new apprentice had to move away from the parental/guardian home to commence or remain in a new apprenticeship or is homeless.

I struggle then with the original wording of the motion that Mr Gentleman has brought before the Assembly. He talks about the federal government’s continual starving of training funds. It therefore is appropriate that the Assembly, after hearing this information, support Mrs Dunne’s first amendment because of the federal government’s commitment to increase skills for training and apprenticeships and recognise her second amendment which seeks to amend paragraph 5 by inserting the word “unions” after the word “employers” in terms of mechanisms to ensure proper monitoring of arrangements.

I have some doubts that this is the role of DIMIA, frankly. I am not going to fall on my sword by opposing the motion as originally written, but I believe that we need to try to recognise that having multiple agencies undertaking the same task is fraught with problems and is likely to lead to a low level of compliance or enforcement.

I understand that Dr Foskey indicated that she was not going ahead with her amendments, but I would have had a real issue with them as well because I do not believe—I am not a lawyer—that it is the constitutional role of the ACT to monitor pay and conditions in terms of industrial fairness. It has a role in relation to ensuring the payment of workers compensation premiums, but I am doubtful—and I would be happy to be guided by someone who is legally qualified—that the territory has a role in monitoring fairness in pay and conditions. That is a role of the commonwealth and is precluded, I believe, under the self-government act. Those amendments are not proceeding, but the sentiment there of the ACT buying into this battle raises some constitutional questions.


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