National Press Club, Canberra
| GREG JENNETT, HOST: Minister, thank you. There is a bit to get through there and I think most people in the room, as you are, would be aware that it is a sitting week. We have a good number of media colleagues here so we will get to questions from them very shortly. Before we go to individual elements of the new system you outlined today, I wanted to begin with a very broad question of design because, as you outlined, the current system is based on a market of third-party providers, which, in fact has become quite concentrated in recent years. I think by ACOSS analysis, the number of providers in that market is only just above 40 at present. If the market is failing and the services are of poor quality, why are you sticking with that fundamental design? Why not consider, or did you in fact consider, bringing back a full government run free employment service? AMANDA RISHWORTH, MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS: Well firstly I would say that our employment services, whichever stream you're in, will be free. And I would acknowledge that we have seen, through stream one, investment in the Australian Public Service. So stream one and the digital offering will be really important and will be delivered by the Australian Public Service. But what I'm focused on in this new system is making sure the incentives are right underneath this system and delivering high-quality services and we need the people that can do that best delivering that. GREG JENNETT: So those providers aren't up to scratch for that tier? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Well, what I'm saying is that we need to get the incentives right first in how we pay providers. But secondly, we want to see the best people doing the job. I'm not going to guess who those people are now, but I would point out that when we're talking about the very complex job seekers, we know that employment service providers will have to work with them to address non-vocational barriers as well as vocational barriers. And that includes mental health services, that includes domestic and family violence services, potentially homelessness services. The Commonwealth doesn't run those services, and so what I'm saying when it comes to employment services, we need high quality, we need those that are deeply embedded in the community and can deliver what is going to be a different service offering to the one we currently have. JOURNALIST: Minister Rishworth, can you provide a bit of a breakdown as to how many people you expect to fit into each stream? You must have done some modelling, i.e. are we going to have more people under the first stream with less support than those who require more support? And under this more flexible mutual obligation system, won't it require more bureaucracy and intervention and potentially end up costing taxpayers more dollars? AMANDA RISHWORTH: I'll deal with your first question first. We still have design work and modelling to go about how many people will be directed into different streams. But I would say already we've got one in five sitting in unemployment for more than five years. So there's an obvious percentage of the current Workforce Australia caseload that will need to be looked at how we divert them. But secondly, when it comes to mutual obligations, the mutual obligations have to be meaningful. And I believe that if mutual obligations are more meaningful to the participant, then you will get more people engaging in those activities. But, what you're really talking about is not mutual obligation, you're talking about compliance, and that is something that will be in the system. There will be compliance in the system. But where that compliance is used, we will be working through. And I'll give you an example. In Inclusive Employment Australia, as we designed that system, compliance was first and foremost. That now has been changed to be a last resort. So I don't believe that people are going into the system and deliberately looking out of how not to engage and contribute, but we need to make those mutual obligations meaningful to actually getting a job, and at the moment too many are not helping people get a job. JOURNALIST: Thank you, Minister. A question on behalf of my colleague, David Marin-Guzman. The current system already includes a loading to get long-term unemployed into the job market, and you've highlighted how service providers effectively ignore that and focus on the easy wins. How- can you flesh out how these streams, particularly stream three, what kind of level of incentive on top of the easy wins can be achieved to refocus the efforts there? And can you provide a real world example of how you see that happening? AMANDA RISHWORTH: That is still detailed design that we're working through, but just as an example, at the moment, individual participants get top up in funding, both in service fees and outcome fees in the current system. We want to fund organisations differently to deliver this service in recognition. We'll be designing how we get those payments correct, but it will not just be a top-up of the current system that currently exists. It will be a different funding model to make sure we're getting the outcomes we want. JOURNALIST: Thanks for your speech, Minister. You spoke there about the new assessment process. What specific criteria or technology will be used in that new assessment process that will, I guess, replace the current JobSeeker method, and will it use AI? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Look, thanks for that question. I mean, this is designed and will be designed as a personalised assessment process. At the moment, I indicated there's one instrument that is used. There will be a number of other instruments and assessments used to understand. We are going to work to make sure that it is inviting for participants. They're encouraged to disclose, because at the moment some participants do not disclose. They don't feel comfortable, so we want to make sure that the assessment process is trauma-informed. And so I haven't worked out and neither has the department every element of that assessment process, but by definition of making it more personalised, more streamlined and more approachable in its presentation, then it will have humans involved. GREG JENNETT: Alright. I hope I'm not stealing the thunder of Zach who's about to ask the next question, but I will just slip in another one. On mutual obligations, Minister, they take many forms. Work for the Dole is but one of them. There's also a minimum number of monthly applications for a job. Will both of those continue? Will that minimum number continue to be four? Will they be centrally reported and recorded? AMANDA RISHWORTH: So as I outlined in my speech, the type of mutual obligations will differ depending on how far someone is from the labour market. So if you are close to the labour market, then putting in job applications in jobs that you're interested in and that are in your goal plan are clearly an appropriate activity. If you are very far from the labour market and do not have work-ready skills, there is no point in that participant putting in endless applications before they have got those work-ready skills. So we need to actually stop thinking of this one-size-fits-all approach to mutual obligations and recognise that mutual obligations will be different depending how far someone is from the labour market and what steps they need to take. So the type of examples you've said will vary across the different service streams and will vary depending on someone's individual goal plan which is critically important. GREG JENNETT: Okay, so no hard and fast quota of applications for each and every individual? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Across the whole caseload, the mutual obligations will look different. It may be for some people that job search and putting in applications is the step in their journey that they are ready for and that is part of their mutual obligations. For others it might be getting skills they need to actually participate in work for others, it might be attending, for example, paid work experience or participating in a social enterprise. It is going to- needs be much more individualised and much more appropriate for what will actually help that person get a job. JOURNALIST: Thanks Greg, and you've segued nicely into my question. On mutual obligations, there have been a number of legal questions around the stripping of payments from people who may not have met their mutual obligations including, I think, two reports from the Ombudsman. Under your changes, are you confident that you will address those legal questions? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Well, that's a great question, because I'm not waiting for the new system to deal with those legal questions - we are dealing with those legal questions right now. So, my department has accepted all the recommendations from the Ombudsman review and are implementing changes. We put funding in the previous MYEFO to actually fund more humans, for example, in the decision-making process. So, as we move forward, we are fixing some of those concerns that exist in the current system. But when it comes to compliance into the future, we will be continuing to work through when that applies, but, of course, compliance will be part of the new system. GREG JENNETT: As much as that compliance has been described as punitive and harmful under the present design, the special house committee that looked into this and reported in late 2023 also noted that over a 12 month period of job active, while the number of people who committed mutual obligations failures, I think is the term, was relatively high - above 50 per cent. Only one per cent, or less than one per cent of participants actually had their payments reduced. So, is it actually as punitive as generally described? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Well, I think one of the challenges is making sure it's not necessarily the compliance that's the problem, although we do have to fix that, it's what activities people are undertaking. I mean, the biggest complaint that I get from job seekers is particularly that the mutual obligations they're engaging with don't help them get a job. They're not linked to where they want to go to and the job they want to get, and may not be linked to actually jobs in their local area. So for me it's fundamentally, how do we get the settings around mutual obligations correct so they're effective? And then we will look at compliance after that and how that applies. And as I said, it's not just about the settings in compliance, but it's also about when we use compliance. And that is all being consulted through as we go through this redesign process. JOURNALIST: Thanks, Minister, for your speech. Your Government just handed down a budget that was focused on intergenerational equality. You've got a bunch of students now heading into their university studies who could be looking at a very different job market on the other side because of AI. How do you go about ensuring support for them so they can keep long-term employment? And does a system like this have the tools it needs in a market where roles are increasingly being replaced by AI? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Look, thanks for that question, because it does go to the broader impact of AI across the workforce. One of the key reasons we want to make sure people get the right support at the right time is to prepare for if there is any disruption in the labour market for whatever reason going forward. So, making sure we have an effective, efficient employment services system is so critical. Your question goes, though, to how are we preparing people within the system for support around AI, and that is a really important question. And I think thinking about how AI skills really need to be considered a foundational skill going into the future. So, there's a question about how we best prepare people in workforce or the new employment services system, but also how we disseminate that economy wide. And of course, there's been a lot of conversations - businesses, along with unions, along with a whole range of different organisations. TAFEs, training, universities, schools, are all contemplating the question of how do we prepare people and students into the future to use AI. I would say that Jobs and Skills Australia particularly have said it's much more likely that AI will augment jobs rather than replace them in the medium term. So, that even focuses our mind in a greater way about how we make sure people have the skills so that they are able to augment their job and be competitive when they're applying for jobs. GREG JENNETT: Just going back to the question of cost and budget, which I think you indicated to Rosie Lewis at the outset, Minister, that more work goes into this. But is it anticipated that, apart from the $312 million you plugged into this month's budget, the general $2 billion figure, all of this can be restructured within that existing funding envelope? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Well, I don't want to pre-empt the design of the system, but it's our expectation that we can reorganise this system in a more effective way, which allows us to move resources to where they're needed most. And I think, for me, my focus is in how we get the most effective service system. And obviously, there'll be investment up front, but in an ongoing way we want to have the most effective service system. And what the current system's not doing is focusing on those that need the intensive service and, at times, potentially over-servicing people that don't need that intensity of support. So, we believe that significant reform can happen without adding huge dollars to the system. JOURNALIST: Thank you for your address, Minister. Going back to your response to Zac's question before about the oversight of mutual obligations compliance. Now, for those watching along at home that is a largely, or has been a largely automated system in the past called the Targeted Compliance Framework. And ACOSS, as recently as last month, said it believed thousands of decisions made under that system were questionable. You just now said, more people had been hired to oversee that compliance system. Has automation been removed from the targeted compliance framework? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Firstly I would say, in terms of the compliance framework, the Government in MYEFO has been very focused on how it complies with the law, and that includes funding for more human decision makers. Of course, the government is working on automated decision making and a framework across whole of government. That work is being undertaken by the Attorney-General. To suggest there will be no automation is just incorrect - there will be. But where it materially affects people, we are looking at how we make sure there is more human decision makers in place at the moment, and that is also the consideration of the Government's whole of government framework. JOURNALIST: Given how badly TCF went though, are you concerned or are you confident in your department's ability to roll out what is clearly going to be a very sophisticated digital framework, given how that went? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Well, look, I absolutely have confidence that we can achieve this as a Government. There is no doubt that this is complex reform - I said that at the end of my speech - this is not easy reform, it's complex reform. But I'm absolutely committed to getting it done. I'm absolutely committed to get the settings right and making sure that we can deliver this, because we have an obligation to all of those job seekers that deserve a fit for purpose system. JOURNALIST: Minister Rishworth, Alexandra Jones, SBS World News. Long-term unemployment and reliance on JobSeeker has risen over the past decade from 15 per cent to 20 per cent. Under these changes you've announced, how many more people on JobSeeker currently has your modelling estimated to find long-term employment? And also, how will it address specific skills gaps in the labour market? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Look, thank you for that question. I would say that the JobSeeker, as a proportion of population, has been relatively stable. But we have seen, as I outlined, too many people stuck in the employment services system and stuck receiving income support, and we need to make sure that we've got a service that actually supports them. So this is all about- your question goes to all about the reforms that we are delivering. How do we actually get support for people? And when we look at that stream three service, we recognise it needs to be a much more holistic support. It needs to support people with their vocational barriers, which does include skills gaps at times, low educational attainment. But there’s also non-vocational barriers that people have to address as well, and so it will take some time. But we need a concerted effort to support those people build their confidence, because when I speak to people that have had the opportunity for work, that have for the first time got their full time job out of a long period of unemployment, the impact is profound. And so many now-employed people that had been jobseekers have shared their stories. So the redesign of this system is to make sure that those long-term jobseekers are not parked and put in a too-hard basket, that we’re actually saying we are- to supporting them getting to meaningful jobs. Now, what that pathway will look like, what those barriers will look like, will be different for different people. There might be a skills gap. I mean, when I speak to older people, they talk about age discrimination, so we need to look at how we address these different issues. They will be different for everyone, and that’s why the employment goal plan, along with a better calibrated intensity of service and appropriate mutual obligations are the key levers to actually ensure that that occurs. JOURNALIST: Just a follow-up question, if I can. Reasons that some may fail to satisfy their mutual obligations or remain in long-term unemployment have been noted as mental health, illness, injury, drug and alcohol dependence and homelessness, to name a few. Will your new system include any measures to address these underlying causes of unemployment? Any interactions with other social services? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Look, I think it's a really important question to recognise that a person needs to be seen holistically, and so there will be other barriers that are non-vocational barriers identified. I don't envisage the employment service system being wholly responsible for addressing those barriers. Of course, that is why our stream three providers will have to demonstrate a deep connection to community so that they can connect and support people that may have certain barriers to- at the same time as addressing their vocational barriers, be supported to address their non-vocational barriers. I think that's really critical. And perhaps being through- government services traditionally have been very siloed, and so it is acknowledging the connection of that. And that's why in the stream three service, the mutual obligations will look very different to those in stream one, because we recognise that if you're in stream three, you do have different barriers that the service, along with other services, will support people to address. JOURNALIST: Thanks, Minister. I'm also representing Australian Industry Group, which is about 60,000 employers who you know well. I don't imagine it would have been easy to get a $300 million spend across the line in this budget. And so justification of this simplification, which we welcome in terms of the employers, what is this change actually going to mean in terms of any forecasts around how many more people in the workforce or happening more quickly, like it'll be six months instead of 18 months or something? I'm just wondering if you've done some work on that. AMANDA RISHWORTH: We haven't done specific modelling on the exact numbers, but certainly the design, and we'll work through the detail of this design, is we are hoping that this will make sure people are able to get the right service at the right time, which means they won't have to move through different services at different times, or get into a job that's unsuitable and recycle back. So we think that this absolutely has the potential to ensure that people that have been excluded from the labour market get the opportunity to participate. Now, we know that unemployment in this country is still low, and we also know that of course that a lot of employers are still calling out for employees. We are hoping that this service, and we certainly are determined to deliver a service that will make sure that people that have been not deemed suitable by employers before are job ready, are supported and can enter into the labour market. JOURNALIST: Thanks. GREG JENNETT: Before we go back to Rosie Lewis and possibly if time permits, Holly Tregenza, we do have a question that's been fed in by a member or guest, Minister, and I'll convey it to you. Elon Musk, the soon-to-be trillionaire, has estimated that 15 per cent of the workforce could be wiped out by AI. And as a consequence, he's mounting an argument, I presume at least in the United States, that there be a universal wage to supplement that bombshell development across the workforce. Is that something your department has modelled for at all? Either the universal wage side, or if you like, the 15 per cent catastrophe? AMANDA RISHWORTH: I mean, forgive me if I don't take all my policy advice from Elon Musk. He has had many positions on many things. But what I would say about AI and jobs and the impact on jobs, my department is doing work, and we will be releasing work done very shortly. Looking at a snapshot in time about the impact that AI is having on our labour market, I mean, it is very reassuring. I've seen some early work. It's being tested and retested about the impact that that's having. We are not seeing quite the disruption that's been predicted. But, of course, we've got to continue to monitor that. I've also recently visited the Centre for Decent Work that does a lot of interaction around technology, and of course they predict that there will be a lot of new jobs that will be created. Jobs and Skills Australia of course also has indicated, as I said already, their prediction in the medium term is a lot more augmentation. So I'm not going to stand here and predict what the future will hold in terms of AI. What I would say, though, is our responsibility across the board, and this is employers and governments and organisations, is to make sure that we are skilling our people and ensuring that they have the skills to augment their jobs. And what I've said in another speech recently is what we don't want to see is just employers saying, well, you don't have the skills, we're just going to disregard you. What we need to do is have a national effort to make sure that we're upskilling workers so that we can get the productivity advantage that comes from AI. JOURNALIST: Just sticking on AI, the Fair Work Commission says it's being swamped by claims, and a lot of these are being generated by artificial intelligence, which is distracting them from their major reviews. Will the Albanese Government take any concrete steps to assist the tribunal as these claims are flooding it? AMANDA RISHWORTH: We really recognise that the Fair Work Commission does an enormous amount of work, and we have increased their funding to do that work. The Fair Work Commission has raised, of course, both publicly and across the board, concerns with some of the interactions around AI and some other issues. I take those issues really seriously and I'll be working, as I have, across the board with employers and unions to see what, if anything, we can do to support the Commission do its important work. JOURNALIST: Do you have any initial ideas at this stage? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Look, we're working through different ideas. We have- under legislation, we have some great tripartite institutions. We’ve been actually working through those. We had the Fair Work Commission present to our tripartite group, and we'll continue to work through what can be done to support the Commission do its important work. JOURNALIST: Thanks very much. Last month, you had a forum. You brought together unions and employers and government, and you spoke about AI at work. I'm wondering what specific commitments or concrete actions came out of that meeting, and given how fast AI development is moving, how workers will actually notice the difference in the next 12 months from the outcome of those meetings? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Well, firstly, I would say what was really consistent across the board was how important a role we all have in supporting the Australian community, including workers, on the question of trust. Now, this is a really important question because as I've said, workers are and I think the broader Australian community is anxious about AI. And we need to ensure that we are working together to demonstrate and elevate trust as a really critical part of this discussion. This group will continue to work together. It was its first meeting and, of course, was discussing a range of issues. But there was a lot of goodwill in the room on how we can work together to ensure that AI can be adopted in a way that enhances productivity but isn’t- that doesn't leave workers behind and feeling that distrust. GREG JENNETT: Holly, thank you. And just one final question that I admit, Minister, is only tangentially related to our discussion here today, because I did have cause in preparation to go back to that House Select Committee report from late 2023. And although you weren't the minister at the time, my eye was drawn towards Recommendation 7, and that is that the government create a permanent administrative traineeship position for disadvantaged jobseekers in the electorate office of all members of the Parliament. And these placements could go between nine and 18 months. So the question is, have you done that? Would you do that? AMANDA RISHWORTH: Look, I think giving young people that haven't had their first job an opportunity to get their foothold into the labour market or into a job like that, there is no specific training course to be an electorate officer. I have to say, you need a lot of skills. And so I've been really lucky in my electorate office that we've been able to employ people, young people in their first full-time job and they've been provided, I think in some instances with some people that come through the door, a really steep learning curve of how to support people and assist people they certainly will tell me that they've learned a lot and they've really developed. So I've had some- I've been really lucky to find some younger people. It's been their first full-time opportunity, and I tell you, they've really thrived – as I have employed older participants as well, because there's nothing more calming in an electorate office than having someone with that experience that can really show empathy for people coming through the door. |
[ENDS]