House debates
Wednesday, 15 February 2006
Matters of Public Importance
Defence: Equipment
5:03 pm
Chris Hayes (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source
I would like to join in this MPI. I am not doing so on the same basis as the member for Cowan or the member for Kennedy or the member for Wakefield, who have all had previous military experience. My reason for joining in the debate is that I have had experience of representing a particular class of persons who work in a particular occupation in a disciplined service. As the member for Dickson would be only too aware, for a large period of my life I have been representing police officers and looking to ensure that they have adequate and proper protection through the equipment they need. I know from first-hand experience what is required in ensuring that the equipment that is supplied to those officers in that style of service meets the demands and rigours of that occupation.
This MPI is about a series of complaints that have been received from military personnel, dealing with operational efficiency and also occupational health and safety based issues. When we are talking about a disciplined service where there is a chain of command, I do not believe we can adequately quarantine these issues, as they apply to one another. I understand what has been said about the RODUM system, and I understand that that is essentially a system to maintain at least a reporting provision in relation to real-time reporting of operational efficiency of equipment.
But what we are concerned about is that, notwithstanding that, we have a situation where military personnel have actually taken upon themselves to set up their own website to log complaints that have been made about equipment by colleagues throughout the ADF. One site was set up by a veteran of Iraq and East Timor, one Dane Simmonds. In that site, Mr Simmonds logged complaints from many soldiers from various areas of the ADF that concerned their clothing and their equipment. As a consequence of the number of complaints that were received and his attempts to process those complaints, he was ordered to shut down that site. That does not sit well when you think that that site almost, to that extent, runs in competition with the military’s RODUM reporting scheme.
I believe that there has to be a proper auditing process for the Defence Materiel Organisation. That organisation runs to a budget of $7.2 billion. We know that the military has only recently been sued for breach of copyright or at least in respect of plagiarism of tender documents. We also know that the ADF’s Inspector-General has recommended that certain charges be raised or disciplinary action taken against two officers of the DMO.
I know my time is very limited. I say to the minister, in his new role, that this is an organisation that, for various reasons—probity and otherwise—requires complete investigation. Apart from the probity issues, it is the responsibility of the Defence Materiel Organisation to provide our troops with the safest and best equipment to suit the purpose at hand.
No comments