Mr WILKIE (1:07 PM) —There are a number of issues that the government needs to understand pertaining to Work for the Dole. These issues need to be realised and finally put into perspective. Firstly, above all, the Work for the Dole scheme is no panacea for the structural and technological changes that are affecting society. The government abrogated its responsibilities on this matter by slashing labour market programs such as Skillshare, Jobstart and others which were highly accountable and, given their client base, extremely successful and cost efficient.

Secondly, Work for the Dole is in reality not the employment generating scheme it is purported to be. In fact, the government were so concerned about its possible lack of placement rates that they did not even promote it as a labour market program—that is, its purpose is not to actually see people obtain employment or training. This can be illustrated by the way that the minister reports the benefits of the scheme to the House when he informs us that this or that percentage of participants actually believes that their prospects for obtaining work have improved—that is, not that they have been successful in obtaining work but that they believe their prospects have improved.

If Labor had tried to get away with that while it was in government, with its Working Nation programs, the then opposition would have created a storm. Their primary argument would have been: where are the placements? What are the outcomes? Where are the real jobs? By creating a scheme that is totally unaccountable and by not having jobs as a primary focus, the government have been able to avoid the level of scrutiny that they would have demanded of us. Also, in comparison, if the `Do we believe our prospects have improved?' criterion had applied, a significantly higher percentage of clients would have responded positively to Working Nation programs.

We need to consider what information has been forthcoming from the department about the outcomes of Work for the Dole. For all the nonsense spread by the minister, there appears to be absolutely no conclusive evidence that Work for the Dole is succeeding. I would be interested in a study comparing Work for the Dole job outcomes with the level of placements in work obtained by a comparison group who had only received normal Job Search assistance. I am concerned that the figures would be very similar and that the money spent on this program would therefore be better spent elsewhere. It is interesting that the recently released review of the Work for the Dole program made no such comparisons. This is as opposed to the Labor Party's labour market programs which were exhaustively tested for outcomes. It must also be remembered that Work for the Dole is a part-time activity providing limited training opportunities, but the government needs to give young people full-time activity and realistic expectations.

What is the government now proposing for Work for the Dole? They are suggesting that the scheme should be expanded into other areas. One such example is the area of child care. Those of us who have children know the importance of having fully trained and competent people looking after them in child-care facilities and acknowledge the raft of courses available to cater for this need, including full-time TAFE courses, traineeships and even university qualifications. However, this government believes that part-time Work for the Dole participants should fulfil this role. Maybe we could have Work for the Dole for nursing, bank managers and the teaching profession—or, given the increase in efficiency likely to occur, a part-time Work for the Dole minister.

Let us look at Labor's philosophy. Labor believes in a system based on an active approach to try to get people back to work. This means government identifying and meeting its obligation to the unemployed by offering programs tailored to the special needs of particular individuals. This is an approach based on what is known as reciprocal obligation—that is, that there should be compulsion but, in return for that compulsory requirement, there needs to be an investment by government to try to get those people job ready and back to work.

Since coming to power, this government has progressively dismantled the comprehensive labour market programs of the former Labor administration, but is the mover of the motion, the member for Forde, aware of a de partmental review of the Work for the Dole scheme which shows that this scheme is less effective in funding work for the unemployed than the job clubs and the Jobstart programs that her government slashed? If so, will she insist that the minister reinstate Jobstart, which provided real wage subsidies, not wage cuts, as a more effective way of getting the unemployed into real jobs? Will the member for Forde also insist that training programs such as Skillshare be reinstated?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl) —Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.