THANKS, FOR A JOB WELL DONE.

Senator Gary Humphries has today thanked the outgoing Chairman of the Council of the Australian War Memorial, General Peter Cosgrove AC, MC (Ret’d).

“General Cosgrove epitomises a life of service”, Senator Humphries said.

“From his distinguished military career culminating with his appointment as the Chief of Defence to his work as the head of the Tropical Cyclone Larry recovery effort, he really has made a mark in Australia’s history”.

Speaking on General Cosgrove’s retirement as the Chairman of the AWM, Senator Humphries recognised the work that he has done in growing the Australian icon.

“General Cosgrove’s dedication to the Australian War Memorial is a credit to him personally as an ultimate professional, with a passion for Australia.

“The war memorial plays a vital role in Australia’s history, here in Canberra, across the nation and indeed internationally and that role will continue well into our future.

Senator Humphries who has continually fought to keep funding for the AWM has made a commitment of support to the new Chairman, Rear Admiral Ken Doolan AO RAN (Ret’d).

“I look forward to working with the incoming Chairman, Admiral Doolan, to ensure the war memorial continues to live up to its name as one of great national institutions”, Senator Humphries concluded.

10 March 2012

ADJOURNMENT SPEECH – PUBLIC SERVICE JOBS

Senator HUMPHRIES (Australian Capital Territory) (20:13): I want to contribute to the Senate’s adjournment debate tonight by raising an issue which affects a large number of hard-working and dedicated public servants, in this city particularly. In the distractions which have been provided by the government in the course of this week it might have been easy to overlook issues of this kind but they are very important and I suspect that the end of this story is very far from us at this point in time.

I am referring, of course, to the future of public servants and the way in which government—small G—will be dealing with those public servants and their futures in the coming years.

Senator Polley interjecting—

Senator HUMPHRIES: Believe me, Senator Polley, I will have plenty to say that you can respond to. I am very happy to have your views on what I have to say. Before the election in 2007 the Labor opposition was very quick to reassure public servants that they would be safe under a Labor government. Senator Lundy said:

The overall impact on jobs in Canberra will be insignificant under a Labor Government as Labor will be just rearranging priorities …

What reassuring words they are. At the time the then leader of the Labor Party, one Mr Kevin Rudd, talked about taking a meataxe to the Public Service, but other signals from other members of the government were somewhat more reassuring. In November 2007 a Labor government was elected.

Moving forward to 2010, the government, seeking re-election, again reassured the people of the ACT and public servants in particular that their jobs were safe under a Labor government. They had to do this because during the intervening three years the government, despite its promise to leave the efficiency dividend untouched, had in fact increased it from 1¼ to 3¼ per cent over a period of 12 months. They gave assurances that people’s jobs were ‘secure’ under a Labor government. In April 2011 with the weight of the government’s excessive spending beginning to bear down on Australia’s financial system and its budgetary arrangements, we found the first cracks began appearing. The efficiency dividend was increased from 1¼ per cent to 1½ per cent. Would this have an impact on jobs in the Public Service? Not according to the member for Fraser, who said:

This is a modest change. The efficiency dividend has been in place for a long time and I’m confident that it shouldn’t lead to job losses.

In the mid-year economic financial statement late last year, the government further broke its promises by increasing the efficiency dividend from 1½ per cent to four per cent, again in breach of its commitments made at the previous election. The untruth of what was going to follow was again perpetuated. Labor members repeated the assertion that there would not be job cuts under this mounting trimming policy of the Labor government. Within a few days of the announcement of the increase of the efficiency dividend, the Department of Health and Ageing put out a call to employees to accept voluntary redundancies. They were taking them from anywhere in the department; they needed redundancies and they needed them fast. Agencies began to scramble to deal with what was obviously an enormous burden coming down onto the Public Service.

I indicated that I would take the following questions to the most recent round of Senate estimates hearings. What is the effect of this increase in the efficiency dividend? What will it mean particularly in terms of jobs? Could the commitment made by the local Labor members to the people of the ACT that their jobs would be safe—notwithstanding the broken promises with respect to the efficiency dividend—be a promise they could keep? The lessons of that questioning of departments was salutary. I could not get to every committee and every agency, but everywhere I went, every agency I asked—with only one exception—was prepared to confirm that job losses were very much in the offing. The Australian Crime Commission outlined its burden from the increased efficiency dividend: $2.2 million approximately for each of this coming financial year and the out years. With 67 per cent of resources in that agency tied up in staffing, the Chief Executive, Mr Lawler, said:

… the reality is that for the commission … there have been very significant cuts to supplier budgets, already to the tune of in excess of 50 per cent against some line items. This leaves us in a position where, in all probability, depending on how the budget falls, there will be staffing reductions, yes.

The Australian Federal Police detailed how almost $100 million would have to be found from its budget over the coming four financial years. Commissioner Negus said:

Yes, there will be staff reductions. It is a matter of trying to limit those on the front line of the organisation … but there will be some staff losses accordingly …

The Director of Public Prosecutions said:

The staffing establishment is reducing by natural attrition.

   …   …   …

To account for this measure and to account for a restrictive budgetary environment generally, I can see that we will have to continue doing that.

The Human Rights Commission was quite plaintive in their comments about how hard the increased efficiency dividend would impact on their operations. The Hon. Catherine Branson said:

My expectation is that it will result in both some staffing losses and in some program work having to be dropped.

The Department of Parliamentary Services, a department not far from the hearts of this chamber, made very clear through its acting head, Mr Kenny:

Yes, it is around 60 per cent, so it would be difficult to absorb all of that within the non-staff side of things.

It is the clearest statement that you can have that there will have to be job cuts. Ms Leonard from the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner said:

We will be looking at all our options there and attempting to manage that through attrition.

Senator BOYCE: But it will mean staff reductions, a reduction in staff numbers, at least?

Ms Leonard: Yes.

The Australian Rail Track Corporation repeated the same claim, and so it went on and on for every agency.

We were told there would be no job losses under this increased efficiency dividend and almost every agency said that it had to happen. With agencies having variously 50 per cent to 80 per cent of their costs tied up in staff and with several years of increased efficiency dividends having already been dealt with—things like travel, consultancies and stationery requirements already having been dealt with—and the hollow logs raided, it is not surprising that today those agencies are saying, ‘We cannot make these cuts without losing jobs.’ I am not going to be a hypocrite and pretend that job losses are not in the offing under whichever party wins the next federal election. My party has made it quite clear that we consider the excessive and wasteful spending of this government to be unsustainable and we consider the balancing of the budget to be the highest priority for Australians. In particular we want to do something about the billions of dollars which Australians are spending every year simply servicing debt that this government has run up. For those reasons, we will attack the cost of government, and that will have implications for the size of the Public Service. But the difference between this coalition and the Labor government that now sits on the government benches is that we went to the last election saying—honestly but to our detriment—that we would lose Public Service positions. We even gave a figure for how many we expected to lose under the implementation of our balanced budget policies. We said that and we took a hit from that in terms of our vote in seats like the ACT and Eden-Monaro, but we stood by our approach that we should be honest and up-front with the Australian people.

The Australian Labor Party did not take the same approach. It said: ‘You can trust us. Your jobs are safe under us. Public servants, come home to the Labor Party. You’ll be all right.’ And today their promises, like so many other promises made by this government in so many areas, have turned out to be nothing more than shallow, insincere statements. The same charade presents itself for the coming election, but the record will show that this government cannot be trusted on such questions.

LABOR UNFIT TO GOVERN

The resignation of Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd is just the latest episode in the ongoing saga crippling the Gillard Government and preventing it from running the country properly. 

Mr Rudd who resigned by press conference in the early hours of the morning while in Washington has stated that he cannot serve as Foreign Minister without the confidence of the Prime Minister.

“The faceless men who first deposed Kevin Rudd in the Gillard coup are clearly still working behind the scenes on who they want at the top, rather than focussing on the best interests of Australia”, Senator Humphries said following Mr Rudd’s announcement.

“With Kevin Rudd resigning in the middle of a major international meeting, what must the rest of the world think of us?

“While government Ministers scheme and plot, the real interests of Australia get tossed aside. 

“The ALP aren’t fit to govern, and the Prime Minister simply can’t be trusted to do her job”, Senator Humphries concluded.

22 February 2012

LABOR MUST END UNTENABLE RELATIONSHIP WITH UNIONS ACT

Liberal Senator Gary Humphries has called for the federal Labor Party to end its affiliation with Unions ACT.

The call comes after Unions ACT on Friday failed to discipline its head, Kim Sattler, for inflaming the Australia Day riots that endangered the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition.

“If Unions ACT don’t have the guts to separate themselves from this disgraceful behaviour, then the federal Labor Party should separate themselves from Unions ACT”, Senator Humphries said today.

“If the events were serious enough to see Prime Ministerial staffer Tony Hodges resign, surely the same events are grounds for the Labor Party to act”.

The events of Australia Day continue to plague the union boss, with video released this week showing Ms Sattler inciting the crowd to descend upon the Lobby Restaurant, despite earlier denials.

“The video evidence is now clear: Kim Sattler inflamed the tent embassy protesters to generate a racist response. On any fair reading of the situation she has done the wrong thing, and deserves no support from the Government of Australia.

“But the fact Unions ACT are standing by her should be the signal for the Federal Government to act.

“I call on federal Labor to end their links with Unions ACT to indicate that they do not condone Ms Sattler’s behaviour.

“In particular, I call on the federal Labor Party to refuse to accept donations from Unions ACT or its affiliated members”, Senator Humphries concluded.

19 February 2012

AFP BUDGET SLASHED

 Alarming figures have been revealed in a Senate Estimates hearing yesterday where the Australian Federal Police boss, Commissioner Tony Negus APM, outlined how federal funding cuts will impact the agency.

Under questioning from the ACT Liberal Senator Gary Humphries, Commissioner Negus detailed how the AFP budget would face a hit of about $100 million per year.

This is a combination of a cut of about $24million per year from the increasing of the efficiency dividend to 4% and an anticipated new enterprise agreement costing $250 million dollars over four years.

“That’s a 100 million dollars per year the AFP will have to find just to do what they do today”, Senator Humphries said.

“Given the increased tempo and operational requirement that the Federal Police are facing in an increasingly uncertain world, Labor’s reckless approach to budgeting places Australians at risk.

“The AFP’s role, from training the Afghanistan National Police to responding to the Australia Day riots, is growing more complex and more expensive by the year.

“The net result of Labor’s chaotic approach to budgeting will be job losses at the AFP”.

Commissioner Negus today could not rule out cuts to the number of sworn officers in the force.

“Australians need confidence that the AFP will be able to meet any challenges threatening Australian security. In the current environment that confidence must be lacking”, Senator Humphries concluded.

15 February 2012

AGENCIES BEG FOR MERCY

Two Government agencies have pled for relief as they try to cope with cuts resulting from the Gillard Government’s increased efficiency dividend.

In letters to the finance department tabled in the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs additional budget estimates today, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Australian Information Commissioner expressed serious concerns for the effectiveness of their organisations.

“Government agencies are seriously concerned that they are going to be crippled as a result of these cuts,” Senator Gary Humphries said today.

The head of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Catherine Branson QC, painted a very bleak picture for the small, cash-strapped agency, saying that the cuts ‘will place the Commission in a singularly embarrassing position’.

She said that the cuts may well “place at risk the Commission’s accreditation as a ‘status A’ national human rights institution.” She advised she is even catching the train to official meetings to try to reduce costs.

The Australian Information Commissioner, Professor John McMillan, is concerned that his agency ‘will not be able to discharge our functions effectively’, and warns of extensive staff cuts.

“The Labor Government’s chaotic budget management – where billions are spent on flammable pink batts and unwanted school halls one year, and drastic spending cuts are needed the next – is now leading to this threat to important services to the Australian community”, Senator Humphries concluded.

14 February 2012