Senator STOTT DESPOJA —My question is also to Senator Alston representing the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. In developing a legislative response to the AIRC junior rates report, will the government acknowledge, as the commission does, that age-based discrimination in determining wages is a serious issue and that a formal process for assessing discrimination will be needed in the Workplace Relations Act? Will the case by case assessments of junior rates be required to acknowledge that age-based discrimination is undesirable? And will Australia continue to share with the Nether lands the distinction of being virtually the only industrialised country to regard 19-, 20- and 21-year-old workers as juniors when it comes to pay rates, even though they are considered full adults for the purposes of most other legislation?

Senator ALSTON (Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) —I think what Senator Stott Despoja is really asking me is: `Am I aware that at least she—and maybe others of her colleagues—take the view that we should not be particularly concerned about maximising the employment opportunities of young people and about the fact that many young people and their parents take the view that junior wage rates are a very important means of providing those opportunities?' The amended bill—I was going to say `which, to their credit, they support,' but they obviously looked at the opinion polls and decided they had no choice—which the Labor Party are supporting, removes the threat to junior rates and to youth jobs that has existed since 1993. It achieves this by permanently exempting junior rates from the age discrimination requirements of the act. This will protect the jobs of more than 220,000 young people in the retail industry alone.

I do not know whether Senator Stott Despoja says, `Well, that really does not matter. We are not concerned about protecting their jobs. We somehow think that discrimination is where it starts and finishes. As long as you are not being discriminated against, we really don't care if you've got all day sitting on the sidelines to celebrate the fact that you are unemployed but not discriminated against.' So the amended bill goes beyond just protecting junior rates; it introduces, for the first time in workplace relations laws, objects which require the AIRC to protect the competitive position of young people in the labour market, to promote youth employment and to assist in reducing youth unemployment. In exercising its award making and other functions the commission will be required to further these objects to the benefit of the employment prospects of young people.

Does Senator Stott Despoja disagree with any of that? Presumably she does, because she says, `Well, but that constitutes some form of discrimination. So I don't want the commission out there trying to provide them with jobs, because it might technically offend against some discrimination provision. I want their job prospects to depend entirely on whether they regard it themselves—or someone else regards it—as discrimination.' That is not the basis on which the commission will operate. It is not the basis on which this law will operate. It is not the basis on which the major parties in this parliament believe the law should operate.

Senator STOTT DESPOJA —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. While I appreciate the minister's rephrasing of my question, I would like to ask him again: will the government's legislative response to the AIRC's report involve a formal process for assessing discrimination in the Workplace Relations Act? Will the government also acknowledge, as the commission has done, that discrimination on the basis of age is a serious issue? I am wondering whether the minister has read the AIRC's report and whether he can acknowledge, for the benefit of the chamber, that that report does not unequivocally place a correlation between wage rates for juniors and employment prospects.

Senator ALSTON (Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) —Yes, we do regard age discrimination as a serious issue. If people say, `You are performing brilliantly but you just happen to be over 65,' I do not think that is too fair. But if they say, `You're 17. You are doing a good job. We'd love to keep you on but you turn 18 next week. We have to pay you an extra 50 bucks and we cannot afford it,' I do not regard that as discrimination; I regard that as a rational response to the cost of labour.

Senator Cook —Sack the young.

Senator ALSTON —You take a different view, do you, Senator Cook? What is this expression? Sack the gun? Is this something they trot out in the trades hall council. It is a new one on me.

Senator Stott Despoja —I raise a point of order on relevance, Madam President. In the time remaining, would the minister answer at least one question, and that is: will a formal process for assessing discrimination be included in the act? How are you going to assess discrimination, Minister, and will you include it in the act? Perhaps he could answer one element of my question.

The PRESIDENT —That is not a point of order.

Senator ALSTON —I will say it again. The bill achieves this protection of youth wages and jobs by permanently exempting junior rates from the age discrimination requirements of the Workplace Relations Act.