Mr HATTON (4:41 PM) —`Oh Lord, it is hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way.' That could in fact be the little slogan we could have not only for the proper minister but also for the minister who just deals with employment services. We did not see the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business in here today, defending himself in regard to this MPI. What we did see was the junior minister attempting to turn the question around and look at Labor's record. I am actually very proud to have been a staffer to the former member for Blaxland for 11¼ years, because one of the things that is extremely helpful, having worked in an electorate office for that period of time, is that I actually do know the record of the Labor government over 13 years. I did deal with the problems that people had. I do have a race memory of what the Liberal Party and the National Party in opposition did from 1985 until 1996, and before 1985 I was actually listening and watching, and I know what the government did between 1975 and 1983. I know what John Howard, the member for Bennelong, did as Treasurer, and I am pretty sure that even some members of this current coalition government backbench know that, somewhere in the dim, dark misty past, the member for Bennelong was actually responsible in some way for very high unemployment figures.

Mr Kelvin Thomson —That's right.

Mr HATTON —The member for Wills will remember as well—I am sure he does—that, when we came to government in March of 1983, we had double digit inflation and double digit unemployment.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—The member for Dickson would do well to observe standing order 56.

Mr HATTON —I can ask a rhetorical question of the House: who was the Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1982-83 responsible for double digit unemployment? And who was the Treasurer of Australia in 1982-83 responsible for not one, not two, not three and not four but five quarters of negative growth? They have just missed out on a second quarter of negative growth. We have seen a big boost in activity within Australia, and that is a good thing. That boost has come, in large part, from massive government expenditure: more than $16 billion worth of expenditure poured into the economy to try to kick-start it again. But we on this side remember that John Howard—the member for Bennelong, the then Treasurer, the current Prime Minister—had double digit unemployment, and he was the one primarily responsible for it. Every day that he gets up in this House at question time and berates the Labor Party because of our unemployment record during our period in government, I intervene—not loud enough, apparently, for him, but I am sure he gets the message sometimes—to tell him that I remember that it was him, that I remember that he had double digit unemployment and he had double digit inflation.

I also remember that there was $9.6 billion that he did not own up to prior to the 1983 election. The budget deficit for that year was $9.6 billion. When first asked, he said, `Oh, it's about $4 billion.' Under pressure, a week later—about six days before the election—he admitted to it being more. We found out, when we opened the books afterwards, that it was $9.6 billion.

Mr O'Connor —Liberal debt.

Mr HATTON —In today's money, that Liberal debt would be $26 billion worth of budget deficit, which he tried to hide. The current Prime Minister is joined wholeheartedly by the current Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business—and what a `special' he is! It is utterly true that the adverse consequences of government social and economic policy on unemployment entwine these two. Both are ideologues; both are attempting to make their mark by the hardness of the stances they take. Both are entirely uncomprehending in terms of the social consequences of their economic policies.

The current minister for employment actually tries to argue a philosophical case that is broader than the narrow conservatism of the Prime Minister. In the last year we have seen some whoppers of speeches from him, such as the reflections of the new boy to the H.R. Nicholls Society. He said, `The member for Flinders was pretty good as minister for employment; I hope to do better, and I'll take my mark from him.' He has also given us this beauty: `combating the culture of despair'. This is a philosophical minister. This is someone who talks about `tackling the moral deficit' in Australia—not just a budget deficit but a moral deficit. So what does he actually think you should do to tackle the problem of unemployment in Australia on a practical basis? This is a person who does not believe in the `third way'; this current minister always has to come up with something new. He says:

that is, the score of restoring full employment—

Pretty devastating stuff.

Mr O'Connor —PP.

Mr HATTON —PP: pragmatic personalism—not a third way; Tony Abbott's way, the minister for employment's new way. What it means very few people within the Commonwealth of Australia would be able to work out. But what people really know—those people who are unemployed, those people who have been kicked to death by this GST, those people who have had the boot put into them by the provisions that this minister and the previous one put on them—is that unemployment is high. They know that in the past year unemployment has gone up. As the shadow minister indicated, we have a one percentage point increase in the levels of unemployment.

The Roy Morgan group is not a group of researchers renowned for the fixity of their support for the Labor Party. In the past, they were the official researchers and pollsters for the Liberal Party for a couple of decades. However, they have gone their own way, and Mark Textor has now taken on that job. Roy Morgan has had a bit of a look at the unemployment figures, and he has had a talk to the Australian people about what they think of them. One of his respondents said this:

Tell me one person in Australia outside the coalition government who does not know that that is true: that most of the jobs they have put on—even though in the last year we have had a dramatic increase of almost one percentage point in the level of unemployment—have simply been part-time, casualised jobs. `Part-time' can mean one hour of work a week. The government and the minister have said, `It's always been done that way.' A third-party endorsement for our position—not theirs—comes from Roy Morgan, who says that unemployment at 6.8 per cent is some 3.7 points lower than real unemployment. He says:

He also points out that there have been `recent changes in the ABS questionnaire'. I wonder what the recent changes did, Mr Deputy Speaker. Do you think they might have clarified the situation? Do you think they might have demonstrated that unemployment was higher than has actually been shown before? You would be surprised to know, I am sure, that in fact those changes in layout have caused a downward revision of ABS employment data back to 1986. Interestingly, what is the effect of that? Oh, there have been fewer unemployed for the last year—less unemployment by almost 0.3 per cent at least. It just so happens that, in the six months before the election, the current minister has been at work not only labouring on those philosophical speeches but rejigging the way the ABS does the numbers. With his philosophical bent, he has made sure that he has pointed out to people that they should not really be worried about being employed part time. In answer to a question from a reporter about whether there is a problem with jobs being part time, he said this:

He says that many people want a part-time job and that they are really happy with how things are. This minister for employment should have been in here today to answer for himself, to answer for the effects of the GST, to answer for the one percentage point increase in employment in the last year. This minister, who is more concerned with building his image as a philosophical counterweight to John Howard and as a future political aspirant, should be in here to give us an answer about how he has rigged the way the ABS calculates unemployment in this country. (Time expired)