Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Lateline Business -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) Government thinks the recession

is going to be worse next year,

and I think it's put climate

change, unfortunately, and it's

wrong-headed on this, on a

Backberner. If it could go to a climate change double

dissolution if you like at the

expense of the Opposition, it

would try that. The analysis

is that the Greens will come

out stronger in the Senate as a

result of the next election and

if it's on climate change, we

Greens will be the constructive

Opposition going to the

Australian people with a much

brighter prospect for the

future. Capitalising on the

opportunity. It's not time for

a party political broadcast.

I'm interested, though, you've

been in politics a long time, do you think this is what's happening? Because the analysis

of a lot of people watching

what's happening here is that

the Government is trying to

pinon the Opposition, the

Coalition in particular and in

a way, force a trigger. Do you

think that's what's

happening? Firstly Tony, I'm a

Green and I'm here to put that

point of view, but my analysis

is that the chances are 20% and

it's increasing rapidly. I

think the Government is lining

up all the required moves for a

potential double dissolution.

But let me say this, and I've

got a long memory. I can

remember '84, where Bob Hawke

very, very popular went to a

double dissolution and nearly

came off by losing government.

Kevin Rudd should serve out his

3-year term. This is a time of

great challenges facing this

nation, not least climate

change and the recession, and

it's his job as elected leader

of this country to stay there

for three years and not to be

lining himself up for a

potential double dissolution. You're obviously

planning for an election with

climate change as a major

issue. You've got a series of

ads going to be released

tomorrow. Did you have this in

mind? Yes, we knew that the

Government would go in this

direction and at partyroom last

week, The Greens, we were very

united in going for the 40%

reduction and allowing for a

25% reduction if the rest of

the world failed. But we want

Australia to make the rest of

the world a win on climate

change and time is very short.

I remember maggie Thatcher

saying in 1990 that every

year's delay would make it more

costly to tackle climate

Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull change, and I think both Kevin

should reflect upon that now.

We Greens will be putting out

some advertisements on

television. This is a serious

matter. We're going to the

Australian people to explain

the better alternatives that we

Greens would put in Government

and are insisting upon as a

bottom line for the future of

this country, threatened with

both an economic crisis and

dangerous climate change.

Bring those together and you'll

get a good, rich jobs

outcome. Final question - how

did you know a week ago we

might be heading towards a

double dissolution

election? There's other issues

like alcopops and the Senate

Opposition blocking very

important electoral reform that

Senator John Fawkner's had

forward and you can see that

the Government has the triggers

becoming available . Climate

change is a big issue and the

Opposition's performing badly

on it, and the Government sees

an opportunity there, and

that's politics. We want to

see real action on climate

change, not an election. Bob Brown, we thank you very much

for joining us once again.

We'll speak to you no doubt as

this unfolds in the near

future, thank you very much. Thanks, Tony.

Researchers in Sydney have

found that as people age the

brain's white matter, or

information pathways,

deteriorate faster than grey

matter. So if you want to hold

back the years, the message is

to use it or lose it. Geoff

Sims reports. Just three

months short of her 100th

birthday Marion Rice is a

bridge nut. Without it, she

accepts she might have cashed

in her chips long ago. I'd

probably be dead. She lives

alone, does all her own

housework and says she manages

just fine. And in bridge,

she's a master. I think I can

hold my own. They all do -

that's bridge for you. As you

know, today is a special day.

Once a year this club supports

the "bridge for brains"

research. Players have doubled

as guinea pigs in a project to

study the way brains

deteriorate. Healthy people

from 46 to 92 were studied over

time and 30% of their white

brain matter deteriorated,

where only 5% of grey matter

did. It turned conventional

thinking on its head. What it

means is that computers still

work, but the cables stop working, or you lose

connections. It is important

to use it or lose it. Our

brains respond best when they

are physically and mentally

challenged. No veging out, OK?

The findings reinforce the

importance of keeping your mind

active which, of course, has

been known for many years. As

the man said - use it or...

something or other? If you've

already lost it, don't think

you'll get it back. Reverse

abnormal brain changes, the

jury's still out there. From

that, you can read it's not on

the cards. Tom Calma the

Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Commissioner has been assessing Islander Social Justice

the Federal Government's

handling of Indigenous affairs.

He says there's been much

progress in the years since the

apology to the Stolen

Generations, but the Government

needs to keep up the momentum.

Brendan Trembath reports. Each

year, Australia's Human Rights Commission assesses the rights

of Indigenous Australians, and

for once, there's less gloom

turnaround now, where and doom. We've seen a real

Government is starting to talk

much more to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

people. The commissioner said

last year's national apology to

the Stolen Generations was a

defining moment and is pleased

the Federal Government took his

advice and formally endorsed

the declaration on Aboriginal

peoples. Other prominent

Aboriginal people are just as

step in the right hopeful. There's been a big

direction. But there's still a

great deal of room for

improvement. The Federal

Government has pledged to xroef

low levels of literacy and

numeracy among Indigenous

Australians. Indigenous

education experts say it's a

worthy goal, but they're wary. I think there's some

concern about the fact that

really making a substantial

inroad into those statistics is

going to require a lot more

resourcing. And another worry

is climate change. Today Tom

Calma also launched the annual

report on native title. It

says that global warming poses

a major threat to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

lands, waters and resources.

These are probably the

commissioner's final reports.

His 5-year term ends in July.

While there's still a good deal

to be done, he remains

optimistic. It helps in his

line of work. 'Lateline Business' coming up

in a moment. If you'd like to

look back at tonight's

interviews with Andrew Robb or

Bob Brown, you can visit our

website. Now, here's 'Lateline

Business' with Ali Moore.

Tonight - a mixed report card

from business on the

Government's changes to carbon trading. Additional costs will

make us more uncompetitive and

the carbon leekage, the capital

flow offshore is a true threat

to our industry and to jobs in

this country. The Government

is making a sensible decision

to take account of both the

deep economic circumstances

that we're facing presently and

secondly, the pace at which the

rest of the world is

moving. Investors react

surprisingly well to Macquarie's surprise capital

raising. On 26 February,

Macquarie came out saying it

was well capitalised and there

were no capital raisings in the

wings. The share price was less

than $20. As soon as the share

price got to level and

acceptable, it reached for the


Australian shares continue to

rally strongly. The All Ords

added 108 points, led by strong

gains in mining and banking

stocks. The ASX200 climbed 3%

to a near 6-month high. Hong

Kong's Hang Seng surged 5.5% as

fears of swine flu subside. In

Japan, the Nikkei was closed

for a national holiday, as is

the London Stock Exchange. The Minerals Council of Australia

has slammed the Government's

changes to emission trading,

saying they only provide a stay

of execution for mining jobs.

The Energy Supply Association

says the changes do nothing to

fix fundamental flaws in the

scheme. Other business groups

are more supportive, but still

warn meeting carbon reduction

targets will be difficult.

Shortly we'll speak to Woodside

CEO Don Voelte and Orica chief

Graeme Liebelt, but first this

report from Neal Woolrich.

Mining has been one of the

driving forces behind

Australia's recent prosperity,

but industry leaders fear it

will bear the brunt of the

proposed Emission Trading

Scheme, notwithstanding the

latest changes announced by the

Government. Instead of facing a

$10 billion hit over 5 years,

we'll now hit a $9 billion.

90% of Australia's mineral

imports will face the highest

carbon costs in the world, even

under these revised

changes. The date date will be

pushed off.

We think we've got the

balance right. This is hard

policy, difficult policy, but

one thing I know for certain is

that every business

organisation we've spoken to wants a certain investment

environment for the

future. Heather Ridout says the Australian Industry Group's

wish list has largely been

granted, but warns that

achieving a 25% reduction in

emissions by 2020 will be difficult. Of itself, for

Australia to undertake that

kind of target would be unrealistic and arguably

totally reckless. But when you

put it in the context of the

conditions the Government has imposed, we're satisfied there

is sufficient conditions on

that 25% target to give

protection to Australian

industry. And the Australian Chamber of Commerce and

Industry is concerned about the

rising price of energy once

market-based carbon pricing

commences in 2012. That's an

issue for business, especially

business that can't necessarily

pass on those impacts of higher

energy prices. That can refer

to a number of small and

medium-sized enterprises across

Australia where they may suffer

higher energy cost but have difficulty passing that onto

final consumers. While the main

Business Lobby groups are

largely supportive of the

Government's changes, there's

much greater concern from industry groups at the

forefront of emissions trading.

The Minerals Council says the

Government should have phased

in the introduction of carbon

permits, like most other

economies are planning to

do. There's a great deal of uncertainty throughout the industry, both at management level and all the way down to

the rank and file worker. They

fear for their jobs, they can't

understand why it is that a

government would impose a tax,

a cost to the bottom line of

our businesses that is not

going to deliver the environmental benefits that

we're all after. The Energy

Supply Association says the

latest amendments do nothing to

rectify critical flaws in the

original plan. There needs to be ongoing investor confidence

in the sector to ensure future

energy supply and we need to

see that there are no increased

risk premiums to the sector as

a result of stranding assets in

our sector and we also need to

ensure there's the confidence

of what the long-term carbon

price signals will be to

deliver that future

investment. And, the Australian

Bankers' Association says the

changes will add to complexity,

uncertainty and costs and

inhibit the ability of

businesses to manage their

carbon price exposure. The

range of business concerns

means that Kevin Rudd and Penny

Wong's efforts to win over

their political woes might just

be half the battle when it

comes to introducing laws on

emissions trading. One company

that's not been won over by the

changes is oil and gas producer

Woodside Petroleum. Its CEO

Don Voelte has been a vocal

critic of the scheme since its

inception and he's less than

impressed with today's 1-year

delay and pricing cap. I spoke

with Don Voelte a short time

ago. Don Voelte, welcome to

Lateline Business. Good evening, Ali. You've described

today's announcement of a delay

in the Emission Trading Scheme

as putting lipstick on a pig.

Why? There's three possible

outcomes. There's bad

legislation, no legislation or legislation that can be

improved upon. I guess the

devil's in the details. When

you take a look at the

emissions draft legislation

that we have the real problem

isn't the attack quite yet.

There's still going to be

uncompetitiveness of our export

products until there's a either

regional or global solution.

The little bit that's been

carved out a little bit more feeding doesn't really address

the problem until we get to

that solution. Even though

you've got a year's delay,

you've got a catch price at $10

a tonne for a year and you've

got the increased compensation

that, really is Tink aerngd the

edges? Well, it is for us.

When we're investing $20

billion $30 billion on a

50-year product, one year delay

really doesn't mean anything.

It's just basically one more

year until we get to a start of

a decades along issue. What

we're talking about is the one

year of reduced pricing. What

about the other 30 years? What

about the other 40 years if

there is no solution? Until there's a global solution,

until our other competitors

have the same costs that we

have to bear, there really

needs to be a no net increase

in cost solution in the

legislation. Now we're all for

what the Government is doing.

Clearly they indicate that they

know they have a problem. By

tinkering around the edges

here, clearly they know the

solution they've offered up to

this point is not acceptable

. What does no net cost for

your industry mean? Because

under the white paper you were

accepted to get 60% of your

permits free. Under those

changes that will become 66%,

in essence you want 100% of

permits free? Well, for our oil

and domestic gas we're subject

to a level playing field immediately and we're happy for

that. But for our export

products, you have to be

careful. The devil is in the

detail. When you read the

draft legislation, even though

the 60% is the amount that they

list, that's for the previous

projects that have been

unveiled. For projects which

will create billions for

governments in rents and

royalties, great economic

opportunities and jobs, the

real permits when you figure it

out comes out to about 30%. In

other words, the 60% melts to

30% immediately and then you

have a 1.3% decay on top of

that. By the time we get our

projects up and running,

there's virtually very little,

if any, free permit

protection. What do you want,

but at the same time, accepting

there needs to be an incentive

to drive lower emissions? Clearly, we're

saying about 75% of our

business would immediately be

subject to it through our oil

and gas opportunities. But for

natural gas, we need to make

sure we can continue to invest

in these projects until the

other suppliers like Yaem an,

Malaysia, Indonesia, until

these countries have the same

types of costs. Australia is

fairly high cost in the

development of their natural

gas resources. Any additional

cost will make us more

uncompetitive and the carbon

leakage, in other words the

capital flow offshore is a true

threat to our industry and to

jobs in this country. You are

talking 100% of permits free

for the LNG industry? Just

until there's a regional or

global agreement. Let's go to

Copenhagen and take a look and

see what happens. Don Voelte, a

number of the broader business

groups have welcomed today's

changes. Is the business

community becoming fractured on

this topic? Is there a risk

you'll be shouting from the

sidelines? I don't think so.

Frankly, up until this recent

set of changes I don't know

anybody that was for the draft

legislation. I think when

people - this is a little bit likity white paper when

Woodside came out early on and

said "There's a problem here?"

We're coming out again saying,

"Not quite right yet" . We are

the experts in LNG construction

in this country. We have to be

heard. Frankly these industry

bodies are the lowest common

denominator. They have to

agree with many companies that

feed into them. Frankly, we

have to go to the large

companies that basically

produce this jobs in this

country and talk to them. I

suspect you're going to see in

the coming days a lot more

people coming out that said

"These changes are pretty minor

in effect and they don't really

change the equation". It's clear that even with these

changes - and they're minor in

our mind - that half of

thelining that should get built

in this country by 2030 less

than half of it will be urn

these new rules if they're implemented as they are now.

We don't want to let that

happen. Don Voelte, thanks for talking to Lateline Business.

Well, the business community is

not united in its views on the Emission Trading Scheme. While

most in the mining sector are

nervous about the carbon

trading scheme, the world's

biggest maker of mining

explosives, Orica is generally supportive of the new

framework. Orica appears well

placed to absorb the cost of

such a scheme after delivering

a $220 million interim profit,

just 2% down on last year and

bang on expectations.

Investors cheered the lack of

surprises and pushed shares 11%

higher by the close. I spoke

with Orica CEO Graeme Liebelt

about the result and emissions

trading earlier this evening.

Graeme Liebelt, welcome to

Lateline Business. Thanks. If I

can start by asking for your reaction to today's

announcement in the delay of an Emission Trading Scheme,

especially given many of your

big customers are some of these

trade exposed industries. Do

you welcome the changes? Yes, I

do. We're partly trade exposed

ourselves, as well. The reason

I welcome them is I think the

Government is making a sensible

decision to take account of

both the deep economic

circumstances we're facing

presently and secondly, the

pace at which the rest of the

world is moving. So I think

having gone through Copenhagen

at the end of the year, the

Government will be in a better

position to see how well the

rest of the world is moving and

I think the delay is helpful in

that regard. Do you support it

as it stands with no further

changes? I haven't studied the

deal and I'm not sure whether

the arrangements as they were

announcements are still in presently mooted by today's

place. Subject to those various concessions and

considerations still being

there, I think we'd support an

Emission Trading Scheme and

we'd like to see Australia move

in parallel with the rest of

the world. Could you say,

though, that now the price is

being capped for a year at $10

not $40, now we've got a delay

of a year as well and we've got

some greater compensation for

trade exposed industries, does

it amount to a featherduster

that industry is being whipped

with, if you like? I don't

think it can be regarded as a

featherduster. Even smaller

targets are going to take quite

some cost and difficulty to

achieve and in per capita

terms, my guess would be that

the 25% target that's

potentially in play now,

provided other countries move

along just as quickly as we

would wish, it has to be

remembered is perhaps more the

40% reduction per capita. So

these are big reductions. But

that's highly unlikely, isn't

it? It's really only 5% bottom

line on the table at the

moment? That's true. I think

the political difficulties of

getting the appropriate

agreements are quite high,

actually. So we'll have to just wait and see how that

plays out. One of the reasons

you haven't had a chance to

look at the fine print if you

like is because you had your

first-half profit today and

it's a result you described as

'excellent'. That's not a word

I've heard in recent weeks and

months. Given the working

environment, did you actually

surprise yourself? We said " excellent in the circumstances"

and I think that's right. We

had hoped and anticipated that

our business would be fairly

resilient in the face of this

downturn. Our strategic work,

which has been done since we

became an independent company

back in 1997 has been to shift

the focus of our business

towards mining, but mining

volumes, not mining commodity

prices. And so we had hoped

that we'd be fairly resilient

in the face of this downturn

and so far that's the

case. What about looking ahead

at the current half, are you

just as optimistic? The reality

of what we face in the next six

months is business conditions

will get a little tougher.

There's no-one really

announcing any significant

expansion plans so really it's

only going to go one way in the

reality over the next six

months. I do expect, though,

there'll be more optimism and

more of a tone of good news

flowing through and perhaps we

might see some growth coming

back into the economy during

2010. What about in terms of

the mining sector so vital to

your business. How much have

you seen of the slowdown to

date and how much further have

you to go? Through the mining

boom volumes only really grew

by 3-4%. Most of the mining

boom was about commodity

prices. Our current outlook is

we might see a small decline

during the course of this

financial year, just depending

on how the sec half goes. So

the swing in volume terms has

not been all that large, and

we'd expect, therefore, a

relatively moderate rate of

growth during the course of the

next 12 months. You said for

the whole of 2009 you expect

growth. Am I right in saying

normally seasonally your second

half is stronger? Seasonally

our second half is stronger and

it was stronger last year, too.

Whether we see growth in the

business over 2009 financial

year remains to be seen. I think that will be touch and

go. You said you were surprised

in the current, or the first

half, about the Sloanedown in

the construction sector and the

infrastructure sector - what

surprised you about it? It was

deeper than we anticipated, to

see the quarry and construction

sector decline by up to 30% in

both Europe and in North

America was quite a surprise to us. We might have anticipated

10-20%, but not really 30%. Do

you think you've seen the worst

of it? I hope we've seen the

worst of it. It's not

impossible it could get worse

from here. There are some

signs it's bottoming out where

it is today. You did say today

and you made the point you've

got a strong balance sheet.

Not everyone in your sectors

are so well placed, do you

think you'll be doing cleaning

up of the smaller players? As

opportunities arise, we'd like

to look for smaller bolt on

acquisitions. They've been

successful in the past and

providing they're close to what

we do today, we are attracted

by those. We will, however,

continue to manage the business

quite conservatively, even

though I think it's fairly low

probility, we can't eliminate

further shock through the

system. We're managing

accordingly. What's a Bolton,

how much could you comfort ably

spend? Sub$100

million. Anything on the

cards? No, not presently. Many

thanks for joining us. Thanks,

Ali. Shares in the Macquarie

Group performed remarkable well

given the group tapped the

market for more than half a

billion on Friday. The

announcement of a capital

raising took investors by

surprise and analysts expect

Macquarie to use the fund to

mop up distressed years over

the coming year. As he

unveiled Macquarie's first fall

in profit in 17 years last Friday, chief executive

Nicholas Moore summed up one of

the most difficult trading

periods in the bank's

history. The year has been a

lot about strength of financial

institutions' balance

sheet. Institutions were quick

to snap up the new shares at

$26.60 each - a 20% discount to

last Thursday's closing price.

And when small investors

complete their purchases by the

end of the month, the total

capital raising could be well

over $700 million. For

Macquarie watchers such as The Intelligent Investors's Greg

Hoffman, the share issue is an

indication the group is not as

well capitalised as it would

like. On 26 February, Macquarie

said it was well capitalised

and there were no capital

raisings in the wings. The

share price was less than $20.

As soon as the share price got

to a level management deemed

acceptable, it reached for the

capital. Which raises the

question, what will Macquarie

be doing with the capital it's

hoarding. Peter Warnes is head

of equity research at MorningStar and believes there

are many opportunities,

including those created by the

end of the mining boom. On the

Rio deal, when BHP was making

its moves, there've made nice

money in the US with their

energy trading operations,

acquisition of Scone stellation

is a good move. I think

dovetail that in with their

experience in that commodities

trading sector of their

Treasury and commodities

business, they're decoalface of

a lot of opportunities

there. One thing is certain -

listed satellite funds

containing highly leveraged

assets will play a diminishing

role in Macquarie Group's

future. That role if you like

is well and truly broken and I

think they'll find another way

of harnessing their capital,

investing their capital in a

more efficient way without tying too much of it

up. Macquarie Group took $2.5

billion in writedowns last year

and despite the current

strength of its balance sheet

remains at the mercy of falling

asset values, and even if

investment markets continue the improvement they've shown so

far this year, The Intelligent

Investors's Greg Hoffman

believes the group won't be

able to avoid more big writedowns. The listed funds

for a start, if those share

prices don't bounce

significantly, it will be

harder and harder for Macquarie

to make the case to its awedors

to hold those well above market

prices. Secondly, it's got

around $1.2 billion of unlisted

funds. Now they're harder to

ascertain a true value of.

We'd be surprised if there

weren't some of those funds

that would incur substantial

writedowns over the next year

or two. Greg Hoffman tips they

could top $1 billion. I spoke

earlier to Charlie Aitken at

Southern Cross Equities. It

was a very impressive start to

the week, why such

optimism? The market started

very strongly. I don't know if

it's actually optimism, I think

it's a lack of pessimism. You

can see the major fear gauges

like the VIX industry, US

Treasury bonds and gold are

falling. It's a combination of

factors, investors are slightly

more risk tolerant recently. Even Macquarie shares ended up a big

count? Shareholders who took up

the placement at $27 got a nice

bonus, that comes down to

Macquarie only gave new equity

to people who already held

their shares. People who were

short had to cover their short positions. That combined with

a better tone from overseas saw

Macquarie up for the day, which

surprised a few people. You

talked about a lack of

pessimism, but the big news of

the day was the announcement of

a delay with the introduction of the Emission Trading Scheme.

Stocks were well up before that

delay, but can you give us an

idea of how shares reacted? A

tremendous day if you're a big

polluter. Anything that's a

relatively large polluter had a

good day, anything from coal

stocks to BHP and Rio Qantas,

BlueScope Steel, Orica,

building materials, anything

that was going to be a net

loser from carbon emission

trading had a good day as it

gets pushed back again. That's

relatively understandable.

You'll find in tougher economic times environmental issues get

put back a little bit. All

those rises, but they were

extensive, would you really put

all that movement down to just delay? Were there other factors

at play? 50% of the moves were

the carbon trading emission

scheme pushback and a generally

better tone to cyclical stocks

and they led the market

today. Energy up 5% and Roc Oil

up 21%? There is a takeover

rumour there, which is quite

believable. It looks a cheap

stock. The energy sector is

trying to do better. Oil looks

like it wants to go back to

$60, $65 a bar scpel energy

stocks led by Woodside today,

did nicely. The other bit of

news we got was from the Future

Fund and the fact over nine

months - it was a paper loss,

so they shrank some $6 billion.

How did that performance

compare to many other sovereign

wealth funds? Relative to other

sovereign funds, a fantastic

effort. A good personal of

that fall is their Telstra

shareholding. Relative to some

of the Asian sovereign funds

who lost a lot of money trying

to early recapitalise stocks

like Merrill Lynch and

Citigroup that's a pretty good

outcome from the Future Fund considering the

conditions. What are the key

things to look out for? Bank

stress results in America on

Thursday. Other than that the

end of the US reporting season.

The market wants to go higher.

There's a lot of cash on the

sidelines. I said eight weeks

ago the market has bottomed.

The market has bottomed. We're

going to see more cash from the

sidelines. I expect the

markets to go higher over the

week. An interest rate decision

tomorrow as well, are you

expecting anything? The Reserve

Bank will stay on hold.

They're still monitoring the

situation. The key thing was

last week where the US Federal

Reserve said cash rates would

remain low for an extended

period. That's why we're

seeing a rally in risk and high

yield stocks are seeing

support, as well. Charlie

Aitken, thanks for joining us.

To the other major movers and a

broker upgrade helped Billabong


Disgll analysts expect next

week's Federal Budget to

forecast an unemployment rate

above 8% for 2010 - the highest

for 15 years. Job ads are

already down more than 50% this

year, which is bad news for all

workers, including executives

who were the first to be laid

off when the global financial

crisis hit. Desley Coleman

reports. In July last year, a

corporate takeover made Gerard

Velayuthen's position as

managing director redundant,

and he's still unemployed. I

have a long list. I have been

contacting all my networks, as

you call the soft networking,

contacted head hunters,

recruitment agents. And that

hunt for an executive job

doesn't look like it's going to

get any easier. Today's ANZ

job ad index showed:

Job advertisements continued

to fall in the month of April

and we've now seen 12

consecutive monthly falls in

that series. Newspaper ads were

up 3%, but online positions

dragged on the monthly figure

and were down 8%. Really since

we first started measuring jobs

online we might be seeing 2-3%

growth which was spectacular I

thought, until these declines.

These are catastrophic falls in

a number of ads and that leads

through to unemployment. A

trend Bob Oliver says is likely

to continue. Confidence is at a

historical low. There's nothing in the immediate future

I can see that gives us

confidence to believe things

will change in the short-term. Grant Montgomery

deals specifically in the

placement of job see, in

financial services and job ads

have dropped 54% since last

year, but he's more optimistic. Consecutive

employment is actually a forerunner of general

employment. It had its

downturn quite some time ago.

This is because people fire

consecutives first because they

make huge cost savings because

the salaries are here and they

tend to hire consecutives

first, because they tend to

plan the processes for the skilled and semiskilled

workers. That news will bring

comfort to some job seekers

like Gerard Velayuthen who want

to continue in consecutive

ranks. However, there is

anecdotal evidence that people

are prepared to compromise,

valuing security over big pay.

The community and public

services union says that

Government jobs are now in

demand. There's been a dramatic

surge in applicants especially

from the private sector for

public sector jobs. A

department advertised for an

entry level position late last

year and got no applicants.

They readvertised recently and

got over 50 applicants for the

one position. That story is repeated around the public

service. Gerard Velayuthen says

he's prepared to keep pounding

the pavement and hold out for

the right job. Now a look at tomorrow's business diary:

A look at what's making news

in the business sections of

tomorrow's papers.

That's all for tonight. The

Dow has opened up 58 points or

0.7%. The FTSE is not trading

because of a holiday. I'm Ali

Moore, goodnight. Closed Captions by CSI

an elite reserve regiment of the army Across Northern Australia, NORFORCE - and protection is responsible for the surveillance