Mrs DRAPER —My question is addressed to the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. I refer the minister to warnings from the South Australian government that the abolition of junior wages could lead to significant job losses among young people? Would the minister advise the House of the position of the other state governments and of the likely impact of such a move?

Mr REITH (Workplace Relations and Small Business) —I thank the member for Makin for her question. We do have reports in this morning's papers, particularly in Adelaide, about the concerns of the South Australian government about job losses if the government is unable to secure the passage of our legislation which is aimed at protecting the jobs of young people. The South Australian government is concerned; it has reason to be. The South Australian chamber and retail traders association have estimated that up to 20,000 jobs of young people alone will be lost in South Australia if we are unable to achieve the legislation which we will be introducing this week. That is consistent with the views of the Australian Retailers Association based on a survey of their own members. They believe that up to 60,000 jobs would be lost virtually overnight and, over a period of time, in the order of 200,000 young people would be out of work as a result of a failure to pass this particular legislation.

The question asks about other state governments. The position of the New South Wales government is also very relevant on this issue. We now have a copy of the New South Wales Labor government submission to the Industrial Relations Commission. It states:

New South Wales has no immediate plans to abolish junior rates . . . There has been little substantive development of competency based or other alternatives to junior rates that we are aware of in the federal industrial jurisdiction. This has also been the position in the New South Wales jurisdiction.

In other words, there is no reasonable alternative proposition being put within New South Wales. It goes on to say that it has assured New South Wales employers:

. . . that the protection afforded age-based junior rates in New South Wales will not be removed until the industrial parties and relevant industrial tribunals have had a realistic opportunity to develop an adequate alternative to age-based rates.

That is very important, because the previous Labor government spent 10 years attempting to formulate an alternative and was never able to do so. The whole issue is summed up very well by the Canberra Times , which said:

In a system such as Australia which sets wage rates for adults in a range of industries and skill levels, it is inevitable that employers will avoid employing young people if they have to pay the same wages for them as adults. And the irony will be that a law which is there to prevent discrimination on the basis of age will have exactly the opposite effect. Sure, on paper youth will be treated equally, but on the ground the effect will be they will not get a job at all. Paper equality is not of much value.

There has been far too much ideology from the Labor Party on this issue. They are opposing for the sake of opposition, with little regard to the job prospects of young people. That is why this government is determined to press ahead and protect the jobs of literally hundreds of thousands of young people.