House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate Employment Figures EMPLOYMENT FIGURES Mr PISONI House of Assembly Unley Mr PISONI (Unley) (15:18): What shocking news we heard today in the ABS labour force statistics! It is bad enough that there are now 8,800 fewer Australians in jobs, but here in this state in South Australia there are 9,000 fewer South Australians in jobs in a single month, so that means we have seen job growth around the country but South Australia on its own has been wholehandedly responsible for the number of job losses in the country in August of this year. This is despite the fact that this government on 28 February 2010 made a promise that it was going to create 100,000 new jobs. The exact term used by the government was 'a further 100,000 jobs' which is 'ambitious but achievable', which is what the government said. What has actually happened since then? Here in South Australia not only did we lose 9,000 jobs in the month of August but there were 30,000 fewer South Australians working full-time than when Mike Rann was premier in June of last year and there are actually fewer South Australians working now than there were when Labor made that promise. There are 2,200 fewer South Australians with jobs now than when Labor made that election promise. There is a clear message for South Australians out of these employment figures today and that is that Labor has no plan. It put all its eggs in one basket—Olympic Dam. A couple of other eggs went into defence, but we heard more bad news about defence for South Australia today. In the meantime, those very businesses that have built this state up over the last 30, 40, 50 years, the small business sector here in South Australia, have been left hanging and have become tax collectors for this government, in the highest taxing state in the nation. We have to remember that taxes for small businesses, particularly regressive state government taxes, are a much bigger part of a small business's turnover than of the big businesses that the government has been telling us are coming to South Australia for the last 10 years. Two election promises, two election wins on the promise of the Olympic Dam expansion and a new economy here in South Australia. There is no new economy in South Australia. It is interesting that, whenever we have bad unemployment figures, those opposite, those in the government, will refer to the Olsen-Brown years compared to the Rann-Weatherill years. Let us just have a look that comparison. In December 1993—remember that? That is when the state was absolutely broke after the State bank collapse—there were 79,100 South Australians out of work. That is 11 per cent of those living in South Australia in the workforce who could not find a job. By March 2002, when this government came to office, there were only 52,000—27,100 South Australians taken off the unemployment queue under the Brown-Olsen Liberal government. That is 3,387 South Australians a year who were found jobs and taken off the unemployment queue under the Liberals. What do we have as a comparison here in South Australia? In March 2002 when this government came to office, 52,000 South Australians were unemployed. As of today there are 49,700 South Australians unemployed, just 2,300 South Australians taken off the job queue in 10 years, or 230 per year. What was the Liberal figure? It was 3,387 jobs per year—3,387 South Australians taken off the unemployment queue in the Liberal term, compared to 230 per year under Labor. This is a true comparison of where this government is going. It is interesting where it has taken us and where we are heading under this government. It is interesting that the government said the initiative of 100,000 new jobs is going to be great for women in the workforce, for women's participation. There were 20,500 women unemployed when Labor made that announcement 2½ years ago. There are now 22,000 women unemployed. If you look at the number of men, there are 2,100 more men unemployed now than women unemployed. I am sure that nobody who was listening to the government at that time thought that growth in women's employment would be at the expense of men's employment; but both sexes have lost jobs under this government. Time expired.