Julia Gillard unveils $1 billion jobs creation plan

[not_an_eloi]

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has made a pitch to blue-collar workers, unveiling details of the Government's new $1 billion jobs package.

The legislation is designed to improve the benefits Australian companies see from large-scale projects undertaken in the country. Ms Gillard says concerns have been raised that major projects undertaken by multi-nationals tend to lean towards using international suppliers and importing material and equipment.

Under the plan, large companies will be required by law to give local firms the opportunity to bid for contracts before they are sent offshore. "When there are projects worth more than $500 million, they will need to have an Australian industry participation plan," Ms Gillard told a press conference in Melbourne. "They will need to look to how they can involve Australian businesses and create Australian jobs in what they do." Ms Gillard says the plan is designed to keep the local manufacturing industry competitive despite the high Australian dollar and other economic pressures. "I believe that modern Australia can have a great blue-collar future," she said. "We can continue to be a manufacturing nation, we can be a nation in which people make their living through blue-collar jobs that aren't intermittent or insecure or low paid, blue-collar jobs that are highly skilled and highly paid. "But we aren't going to get there by accident. We have to make sure that we shape that future."

A series of new manufacturing precincts will also be established to develop new products and skills to break into new markets. Industry and Innovation Minister Greg Combet says the precincts are a key part of the plan. "A lot of our research effort in Australia is pure research and a lot of great research has been done," he said. "But we don't perform well by international comparisons in commercialising the research effort that we make in this country. "And I think one solution to that is to get industry far more active in directing the research effort we have." The Government predicts the plan will inject $1.6 billion into the economy. Ms Gillard says the plan will be funded by removing a tax concession for big businesses. "Bigger businesses currently benefiting for a special research and development tax advantage will be forgoing that advantage," she said. The national secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, Paul Bastian, says the jobs package largely reflects what it has been campaigning for. "We're now going to have in legislation that any project worth more than $500 million in this country will be required to have an Australian industry participation plan to show how those projects are giving our manufacturers the opportunity to bid on a fair and reasonable basis for work," he said. "That is a big tick for us."

followed by the usual negative fud from liberal's mirabella

[nevynreally]

I didnt read that , but I dont think thats the case , I think the child applies for it and it gets paid to the child ?  So I dont get the signing over to the kids bit ... It is their money , unless im mistaken 

here is the link for eligibility 

i havent read it , but im sure its the kids that apply for it and get paid it , not the parents 

again , if im wrong , im happy to e educated on this if im mistaken 

The part you're not getting is the parents have to fill out part of the YA form. Yes, it can go to the childs account, or the parents. YA replaces the other benefits for children the government gives to those who need help to educate/clothe/feed their children which is stopped once the child is 16. They moved onto YA, but it's meant to be for the same purpose.  It should never be pocket money, but it is to some.

[freakiness]

shiny - earlier in the thread, it was bought up that there is an option to have it signed over to the kids and paid into their accounts and there wewre examples given of how it was deemed pocketmoney for the kids.

That's where I'm coming from - the fact that if it's not needed to support a dependent child, that it is still paid to them.

It isn't paid to everyone. There is a means test.

Signing it over doesn't make it a free for all spend up.

My girls cooked, washed their own laundry and cleaned. If they're old enough for that they're old enough to look after their money and learn to budget with it.

[nevynreally]

Yes I know it's means tested. Perhaps that's something they need to look at. 

This is not about your children or mine. We were discussing those who think it's okay for their children to use YA as their pocket money. That is not what it's for.

[izabsmiling]

Crikey Mate wrote :One of my kids recently went into Centrelink to apply for Youth Allowance? (I think that's what it was) CRIKEY! The stuff they wanted to know - (which I suppose is a good thing) - just reeked of a way for them to get control of our lives and get us into a cycle of welfare dependence - I told him to run for the hills and generate his own money another way.

Crikey , did you actually look at the paperwork and the stuff the wanted to know ? You seem to be asking a lot of questions.If your own son went in to Centrelink recently you should be able to be informing others rather than asking questions...but then you weren't even sure of the name of the payment ?

[purple_haize]

Crikey Mate wrote :One of my kids recently went into Centrelink to apply for Youth Allowance? (I think that's what it was) CRIKEY! The stuff they wanted to know - (which I suppose is a good thing) - just reeked of a way for them to get control of our lives and get us into a cycle of welfare dependence - I told him to run for the hills and generate his own money another way.

Crikey , did you actually look at the paperwork and the stuff the wanted to know ? You seem to be asking a lot of questions.If your own son went in to Centrelink recently you should be able to be informing others rather than asking questions...but then you weren't even sure of the name of the payment ?

so, your point is??

[purple_haize]

The part you're not getting is the parents have to fill out part of the YA form. Yes, it can go to the childs account, or the parents. YA replaces the other benefits for children the government gives to those who need help to educate/clothe/feed their children which is stopped once the child is 16. They moved onto YA, but it's meant to be for the same purpose.  It should never be pocket money, but it is to some.

Exactly!!

[shinynewid]

That is exactly what it is  for , It goes to the child not the parent 

It is to cover ( or partially cover )  the cost of them living whilst looking for work etc ( bear in mind they dont all live at home ) 

as I said , if they are living  at home yes they should contribute to the cost of living in the household same as if they get a job whilst living at home they should pay board 

and those that  are claiming it as a YA not Austudy dont get it instead of having to work , they have to adhere to a pathway to employment rogram same as dole recipients , they have to apply for jobs etc to retain the benefit 

the payments DO NOT get signed over from the parents , centrelink pay direct to the applicant

( the child) 

show me any different .... It is effectively dole money for those aged under 22 ( those 22 to 25 are on newstart ) 

im not saying its an ideal system but thats the way it is ,.isnt it ? 

i keep saying im prepared  to be educated on this but until you can show any different 

im fairly sure thas the way it is 

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/spw/customer/forms/resources/ci004-1301en.pdf

[nevynreally]

That is exactly what it is  for , It goes to the child not the parent 

It is to cover ( or partially cover )  the cost of them living whilst looking for work etc ( bear in mind they dont all live at home ) 

as I said , if they are living  at home yes they should contribute to the cost of living in the household same as if they get a job whilst living at home they should pay board 

and those that  are claiming it as a YA not Austudy dont get it instead of having to work , they have to adhere to a pathway to employment rogram same as dole recipients , they have to apply for jobs etc to retain the benefit 

the payments DO NOT get signed over from the parents , centrelink pay direct to the applicant

( the child) 

show me any different .... It is effectively dole money for those aged under 22 ( those 22 to 25 are on newstart ) 

im not saying its an ideal system but thats the way it is ,.isnt it ? 

i keep saying im prepared  to be educated on this but until you can show any different 

im fairly sure thas the way it is 

The majority do live at home, which has been my point. 

Any child still at school should not be able to use that money as pocket money. 

I do concede that the criteria and the name of the benefit may have changed in the past couple of years. 

[purple_haize]

That is exactly what it is  for , It goes to the child not the parent 

It is to cover ( or partially cover )  the cost of them living whilst looking for work etc ( bear in mind they dont all live at home ) 

as I said , if they are living  at home yes they should contribute to the cost of living in the household same as if they get a job whilst living at home they should pay board 

and those that  are claiming it as a YA not Austudy dont get it instead of having to work , they have to adhere to a pathway to employment rogram same as dole recipients , they have to apply for jobs etc to retain the benefit 

the payments DO NOT get signed over from the parents , centrelink pay direct to the applicant

( the child) 

show me any different .... It is effectively dole money for those aged under 22 ( those 22 to 25 are on newstart ) 

im not saying its an ideal system but thats the way it is ,.isnt it ? 

i keep saying im prepared  to be educated on this but until you can show any different 

im fairly sure thas the way it is 

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/spw/customer/forms/resources/ci004-1301en.pdf

Yes, that is the way it is, my stepson is on it and it gets paid to him, not his mother or stepfather or his father........it goes into his own bank account.

[shinynewid]

Well I dont knowo whether the majority do or dont live at home 

i would guess that a majority of students might but those simply unempoloyed 

might be a different percentage m,aybe not the 16-18 year olds but certainly those over 18 years old 

the fact remains , the benefit is paid direct to the claimant ( the child ) 

not to any parent , so there is no signing over from oarent to child 

if it were paid to the parent it would form art of the parents taxable income 

its not , it is rightfully counted as the recipients taxable income 

and also as I said those that live at home should pay a good percentage of it as board