Mr MARTIN FERGUSON (10:30 PM) —I rise to make a few remarks this evening about the Howard government's second birthday—and, in doing so, to pose a question about whether or not the unemployed are celebrating this second birthday. I think it is fair to say in passing that what we are now witnessing is sluggish jobs growth and, if anything, low participation—many of the unemployed at the moment giving up the desire to look for a job.

The government has made a few promises on the issue of unemployment, but I think we should deal in particular with the collapse of jobs in manufacturing industry. I refer to the fact that, in the recent ABS labour force selected summaries tables, we show a fall of 28,200 manufacturing jobs in the quarter to February 1998. I might also say that this follows a 7,900 fall in the previous quarter, effectively meaning a net loss of manufacturing industry jobs since the Howard government was elected.

It is also interesting to note that in regional Australia the unemployed are suffering very badly. The most recent figures show that unfortunately unemployment in regional Australia has risen in every mainland state except Victoria—and I am sure that the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (Dr Kemp) is weeping crocodile tears over that. I would also go to the issue of unemployment in a few of the regions, such as Wide Bay-Burnett with a rate of 19.1 per cent, and the Richmond-Tweed region with a rate of 17.3 per cent.

One of the real issues I would raise tonight is not only do we have problems with respect to a lack of jobs but also we have major difficulties with the unemployed having services withdrawn—that helping hand to assist them in getting back to work. I know that the minister likes to hide behind such statements as he is satisfied that the tender process has been conducted in accordance with probity requirements. I also note that in recent days we have had major consideration about the performance of some of these successful contractors.

This evening, for the sake of example, I want to refer to Workskil Inc. of South Australia, a company that has been discussed in the House in the last couple of days. In doing so, I would specifically refer to the minutes of the board meeting of Workskil Inc. held at 1069 South Road, Melrose Park, at 5.30 p.m. on Thursday, 9 September 1997. This meeting of the board of management was held at exactly the same time that the tender process was coming to a head. That is the position—held at or about the same time the whole tender process was under way.

I want to go to the financial standing and performance of one of the most successful companies in South Australia! I will refer to those minutes which I have identified for the sake of the House—and I understand the concern and the anxiety of the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs about the facts of the situation. I quote from page 2, item 4, of those minutes; this is about the financial standing of this company, one of the most successful companies in the tender process conducted by the minister—one that he is so proud of. This is what the minutes say:

After reading the independent report from Sims Lockwood Ms Herraman stated that our financial situation looked `a bit scary'.

The minutes then go on to say at page 3—and this is from one of the leading lights of the tender process of the minister for employment:

Mr Zimmerman—

who, I understand, is a local councillor and also a policeman—

referred to dishonoured cheques in Sims Lockwood report. Mr Cox replied that there were no funds in the bank at that time.

The minutes then go on—and quoting from page 3 again:

Ms Herraman agreed that finances are critical however, even if Murray Bridge Industrial facility is sold, how long will this take to help finances.

The minutes then went on to state:

Mr Zimmerman—

the police officer—

explained that the Sims Lockwood report has shown that Workskil will survive but that the facility must be sold in the short/long term to help finances.

Mr Speaker, what have we got: dud cheques and a company that has to sell property to try to keep its head above water. Yet that process was under way at the same time as this minister for employment was giving the big tick—`Yes, we've got probity; we've got financial understanding and requirements as to quality.' One of the major companies, located in South Australia, selected by this minister, I suggest to this House, was not able to meet real quality of standards and financial standing. (Time expired)