Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion moved by the member for Fraser. I note the first two points that the member's motion refers to, recognising the important role of the Australian Public Service in upholding and promoting our democracy and its key role in ensuring stable government and, secondly, commending the Australian Public Service on continuing to be one of the most effective and efficient public services in the world. These are both commendable motions, and I think that members of this House would largely agree with them.

However, the third point reflects so much about this member in particular and the way he goes about his argument. The third point of this motion condemns the plans by the opposition to make 12,000 public service jobs redundant. There is no hiding from the fact that the opposition, and the shadow Treasurer and shadow finance minister in particular, have made it very clear that we will return public service levels to reflect what was clear when we left government in 2007.

But where the member is being quite deceitful—and he does this regularly—is where he quotes some facts but leaves important facts out. The government that he is a part of, that he would wish to be a more senior part of—he desires it desperately, and he tries to prove every day why he should be a more senior part of it—is at the moment in the midst of cutting a similar amount of jobs from the Canberra public service. We did not hear a word of that during his contribution! For the benefit of the member, I will table at the end of this contribution an article by Chris Johnson from the Canberra Times. He wrote on 9 May:

Swan slashes 4200 PS jobs: ACT takes biggest hit since Howard years.

Now, if the broader macro argument that this government has tried to make on one hand about this budget that they are somehow reducing the size of the Commonwealth government to a record extent, some four per cent turnaround in the reduction of government expenditures, that would make some sense, if that were true—in an attempt to create a paper surplus to cover over their failed economic management. But, of course, you did not hear a word of that during the member for Fraser's contribution. You heard a turgid attack on the opposition and our plans to get the budget back into some sort of manageable order. You heard the member for Fraser completely avoid the fact that his own government has plans to reduce the number of public servants. And now he sits there and does not acknowledge the fact that his own government and his own local paper made this point perfectly clear.

For the benefit of the Federation Chamber I will table this article at the end of my contribution, because it says:

In the biggest attack on the federal bureaucracy since the late 1990s, when John Howard came to power and put the ACT into recession, more than 4200 fulltime jobs will go in the coming financial year alone, with few government agencies being spared …

He goes on to say:

In 2013-14 another $164 million will be saved from the government's workforce wages bill, indicating total job losses will possibly exceed 12,000 …

His own motion says, 'condemns the plan of the opposition to cut 12,000 from the public service'!

If the member for Fraser were being completely truthful and honest with this place, he would stand and amend his own motion to say, 'The member for Fraser condemns plans by the opposition and the Labor government of cutting 12,000 jobs from the Australian Public Service'. But, of course, he will not, because this is a tactic he uses very regularly. He regularly uses economic statistics which, just occasionally, exclude important facts.

Dr Leigh interjecting—

And here is an important fact, if you would like it: you should rise and amend your motion to be completely honest with this chamber, because that would be the right thing to do. But of course he will not, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, because like with so many in this government the full story is never told.

The reason that we are being very clear with the Australian public about the difficulty that is facing the Australian budget is because of the decisions that this government has made which have put the Australian economy and the Australian budget into a position of risk. When they were elected to government in 2007 they came across a budget which was in pristine condition. There was no debt, the economy was growing strongly—

See this speech in context