Socialists, Democrats debate youth policy
WENDY ROBERTSON and PAUL BENEDEK spoke to NATASHA STOTT DESPOJA, deputy leader of the Australian Democrats, and MARINA CARMAN, the Democratic Socialists' NSW Senate candidate and a leader of the socialist youth group Resistance, about their parties' solutions to youth unemployment and economic discrimination against young workers.
Stott Despoja and Carman agree that the Coalition and Labor have no serious strategies to combat the chronic level of youth unemployment. Latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures report the rate of youth unemployment at 29.9%. With the abolition of many apprenticeships and jobs traditionally performed by young people, the situation is getting worse.
Stott Despoja told Green Left Weekly that the Democrats encourage investment "in sustainable, meaningful and long-term industries" to create jobs. "Possibly, we need to cordon off public sector jobs for youth", she suggested.
Carman said the Democratic Socialists demand "massively increased government spending on job creation to fulfill the crying social and environmental needs of the community". She pointed out that, even though workers are producing more than ever before, and far more efficiently, "the benefits from such productivity do not flow to young workers.
"Those with jobs are working longer hours, while many young people can't find work at all. We need to shorten the working week, without any reduction in pay, to share the existing work around, spread the benefits of improved productivity amongst the working people, and make all our lives that much more comfortable."
The Democrats support employers being paid incentives by the government to take on young people as apprentices, Stott Despoja said. "Incentives would encourage employers to keep young people on as permanent, full-time employees. We need a combined government and private industry effort that can create permanent jobs."
Carman objects to such an approach. "Why argue for youth training subsidies when employers are under no obligation to make the jobs permanent or full-time? The money would be far better spent providing socially useful, public employment to young people at full wages and conditions.
"Only when resources are in public hands and democratically controlled can we guarantee young people permanent, full-time jobs. If businesses refuse to take on young people or, as they so often do, sack people, a socialist government would nationalise them and allow the workers to run the enterprise collectively."
Work for the dole
Both candidates hit out at compulsory work for the dole. Stott Despoja described the scheme as a "a cynical ploy which blames youth for their predicament". Carman added that, "if there is work to be done, young people should be paid full wages, and be entitled to the same conditions and union rights as other workers."
However, Stott Despoja saw merit in the idea of "voluntary" work for the dole: "My party acknowledges that voluntary work and community work are worthwhile — particularly to repair the environment. Some forms of work for the dole are exploitative, but some young people also ring me to tell me that it has boosted their self-esteem."
Carman disagrees:"'Voluntary' work for the dole is not about choice. The only 'choice' a young person has in that situation is between marginalisation through lack of a job and poverty and being used as scab labour to be super-exploited. A real boost in self-esteem can only come from a fully paid, permanent job — not from slave labour."
Youth income is an important issue, Stott Despoja and Carman told Green Left. Stott Despoja said the Democrats "have always advocated a livable income. The level should be well above the poverty line.
"Along with the Greens, we put forward amendments to the common youth allowance, but these were defeated by the major parties. Under Labor and Liberal we've seen a reduction in the real level of payments, and the eligibility criteria for payments have narrowed."
"The situation faced by most young people is disgraceful", Carman said. "Under 18s, and some under 25s, can't get any benefits and are forced to rely on their parents for income — or beg in the streets, or worse! The Democratic Socialists believe social security payments for all young people should be raised to the adult level."
Tax
Dr Neil Warren, one of the authors of the Coalition's original Fightback program, which contained the idea for a GST and was rejected by the electorate in 1993, recently stated that Howard's GST proposal underestimated the effect of the GST on the poor.
On August 19, Meg Lees, parliamentary leader of the Democrats, issued a media release suggesting that the Democrats would not necessarily oppose a GST in the new parliament.
It said that the Democrats "acknowledged that the task of bringing [Howard's tax] package up to the fairness threshold was huge — but not yet impossible". Lees stated that "the questions of food exemptions, whether the compensation is adequate, sustainable and guaranteed needed to be looked at".
When quizzed about her leaders' support for some form of GST, which would disproportionately hurt young people who survive on government benefits, youth wages or Austudy, Despoja responded: "Am I supporting a GST? Absolutely not. I have never ever said that we are supporting a GST ... The current form of the GST is a regressive tax that gives tax breaks to the rich.
"I have no idea what my party room has decided or debated on this issue. But I will never support a GST that unfairly impacts on low income earners and students."
Carman was clear on where her party stood on the GST: "The Democratic Socialists oppose any form of GST. The GST is designed to shift the burden of tax further on to the shoulders of ordinary working people and the poor, and away from the corporate rich.
"Even if food was exempt, many young people who do not now pay any tax because they are too poor would be worse off. I find it impossible to believe that Natasha Stott Despoja, the Democrats' deputy leader, doesn't know her own party's position.
"But supporting the Coalition's anti-worker GST would be consistent with the Democrats' past record. Let's not forget that the Democrats voted for the Coalition's draconian Workplace Relations Act, which also disproportionately affects young workers."
Union rights
The main "concession" won by the Democrats in voting for the Workplace Relations Act, Carman pointed out, was an investigation into youth wages so that they could be subject to a review. "As it turns out, the Liberals' reneged on the 'concession'."
"Young people are some of the lowest paid, least organised and most vulnerable sections of the workforce. Centralised awards meant that the gains won by the better organised workers used to flow on to all workers.
"Now, with individual contracts, negotiations take place on an individual and a workplace basis. Young workers, who are less organised and more isolated, have an impossible task to defend their already meagre wages and conditions. The best strategy for young people to improve their lot is to act together with other workers, but this too has been made illegal by the act, which outlaws solidarity strikes."
Stott Despoja told Green Left Weekly that, at this stage, she and the Democrats would not support the repeal of the Workplace Relations Act. To overcome discriminatory youth wages, Stott Despoja said, the Democrats will work closely with the Australian Youth Policy and Action Coalition and youth affairs councils to mount a campaign against low wages and job losses. "I hope to see a court case and the recommendations go into laws", she added.
Carman concluded by pledging that the Democratic Socialists and Resistance will build "campaigns to force all parties to repeal the Workplace Relations Act in its entirety, along with all other anti-union laws and laws which institutionalise discriminatory youth wages."