Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

ANN () (): I'm pleased to speak on the Public Service Amendment Bill 2023. It's quite sad that we have to do this, but the previous government under prime ministers Morrison, Turnbull and Abbott simply degraded the Public Service. We saw the arbitrary staffing cap imposed in 2015, and labour hiring and privatising and outsourcing in the Public Service. The Australian Taxation Office, Services Australia, the Department of Veterans' Affairs, Defence—tens of thousands of people being engaged, with billions in contracts being engaged by the former government in labour hiring. Many of the people assessing claims for Veterans' Affairs under VEA or DRCA, and many people dealing with Centrelink claims, Medicare rebates or indeed applications for visas, were not experienced public servants; they were outsourced through multinational labour hire companies. And this continued to grow and grow and grow.

The previous government ignored David Thodey's review back in 2019, so we are left with the situation where the recommendations of the Thodey review are being implemented by this government. A change of government was necessary. We saw its various stages. The Department of Veterans' Affairs was in a position where 50 per cent of the people that were dealing with claims were labour hire. The evidence that was given to the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide of the impact on people's lives is troubling—it's really disturbing. If you get the Public Service wrong and you treat public servants poorly, if you don't listen to impartial, honest, fearless and frank advice, if you degrade the Public Service, if you labour hire and outsource it, there are consequences for people's lives, and the royal commission that's currently looking into veterans and defence issues, mental health, suicidal ideation and the tragic suicides of defence personnel and those who have served our country in uniform is clear evidence that government decision-making and the votes that we cast in this place and in the other chamber have an impact on people's lives.

This bill, in and of itself, may look a bit sterile. It may look like it's not something that's very interesting. It's not a page turner, if I can put it like that, having read the bill and the explanatory memorandum and everything I can about it. But it has a real difference to make for people—the people engaged with government, the people who go to that portal each and every day, the people whom we deal with in our electorate offices who have challenges working with government, the people who had delays in citizenship applications that we're now addressing, the million people seeking the visas that failed to be processed under those opposite. The legislation before the chamber today has a real impact on people's lives, and that's why I'm pleased to speak about it. It's part of the necessary agenda of this government. It will make a difference. It is about rebuilding the Public Service.

The CPSU and the Services Union have been talking about this for years. I give them thanks and I praise them for their advocacy and the work they've done in this space. This particular legislation is a bill to amend the Public Service Act 1989. Millions of Australians interact with the Australian Public Service each and every day. They think that on many occasions they're dealing with a public servant, but they're not; they're dealing with someone who is not an experienced public servant and probably doesn't have the skills and the ability and the training and the expertise to deal with their claims. They deal with public servants on the phone for support. They receive subsidised medicine through the PBS. They apply for a passport.

The Albanese government is delivering on its promise to rebuild the Public Service. We have said that. We made commitments in the last campaign and we're doing it now. After a decade of neglect, we're cleaning up the mess left by those opposite, who gutted the Public Service, reduced its capability and outsourced billions of dollars of work to consultants and contractors. At its heart, this bill is about broad APS reform to restore the public's faith and trust in government, the Public Service and the institutions of government and make sure that the service delivery that I talked about before is delivered fairly, on time, with expedition and with expertise so that it strengthens the core purpose and the values of the Public Service and builds its capability and the skills necessary in the APS to provide the kind of good government that we think is necessary and that the public expects, and that's a government of honesty, transparency and accountability.

There's the provision for the new APS value of stewardship. There's a requirement for an APS purpose statement. There's strengthening of the relevant provisions in the Public Service Act to make sure that ministers can't direct agency heads on employment matters, and that's so important in terms of integrity. It's about making sure that those people who make decisions at lower levels can do so without fear of retribution.

It is making sure that we have capability reviews on a regular basis. It is making sure that we publish annual APS employment census results. It is ensuring that we have at least one long-term insights briefing each year.

The challenges we face are immense. Listen to those opposite. There are not many speakers from those opposite, but, when I listen to their speeches, I do wonder why some of them actually decided to engage in political representation, which is a form of public service, because some of them were ministers. They dealt with the Public Service. They know the value of the Public Service. They know the integrity of the Public Service. They know the competency of the Public Service. If you have served in any ministerial capacity, from an assistant minister to minister to cabinet or prime minister, you know how capable these people are and how competent they are.

It is very, very important that we have people who can deal with the public in this way. But those opposite constantly denigrate them. I cannot believe the way that some of those opposite have spoken on this bill, belittling the importance of the bill and belittling the importance of the Public Service, because that is what we are engaged in—public service. There are many people in this place who, if they were interested in financial security, would not have run for politics, but they are interested in public service, because we think that is an honourable profession—serving the public as a parliamentarian—and those opposite degraded public service generally.

We saw some egregious examples of failure under those opposite. Robodebt was a classic example, a massive failure of public administration with catastrophic consequences. I saw it day in day out in my electorate office, a scheme that, through the royal commission hearings, we have learned had shocking details, with three ministers and one former prime minister required to take the stand to explain their role about what they knew and what they did, showing the great power and value of these inquiries. We watched the public servants on the stand, with one official after another official not want to deliver bad news to the Morrison government—ministers were focused on delivering government service—but they were not able to give robust and competent legal advice. Ministers were not wanting to know. The former minister for government services, the former member for Fadden, invoked cabinet solidarity as an excuse for making false statements about the legality of the scheme.

So reform of the Public Service is absolutely critical. Robodebt might just be the worst example of everything that was rotten about the previous government and its arrogant minister who knew everything. It is an attitude of the Public Service we need to reform, and this bill is a step on the road to reform. Devaluing and debasing the APS was also about the politicisation of public appointments. We saw repeated audits from the Auditor-General in relation to a whole bunch of funding arrangements of those opposite—car parks, regional sports—in a whole range of areas where they were criticised by the Auditor-General in report after report. There are consequences for that. People lose faith in government when those things happen. You could not make that stuff up. It simply would not have happened in a professional and responsible government. So the legislation is critical.

We have lost a decade and we have seen the cost of those failures each and every day in health, in Medicare, in aged care, veterans' affairs, the NDIS, the NBN, energy and climate, the environment and Indigenous affairs, housing, arts, immigration, overseas assistance, and in areas of data and digital. Those are just a few areas. As MPs, we have borne the brunt of the previous government's failure, because our electorate officers were busier than they would otherwise have been if the previous government had not failed. Our officers were dealing with a huge volume of constituent inquiries relating to failures and delay from government agencies. If only those agencies, those public services, had been properly resourced and empowered to do their jobs, we would not have had to deal with quite so many matters. Never again can we allow those opposite to try and get away with the propaganda of being the superior economic managers—what nonsense, complete rubbish. Under those opposite, there was budgetary vandalism. They ignored the big challenges, thinking they could get away with it.

They kicked the can down the road for another government to deal with the cost of delay. We can't let this go on. That's why this legislation before the chamber is so important. I support it. I think it is absolutely crucial that we engage in Public Service reform. This is about the integrity, honesty and transparency of government. I support the legislation. I think it is absolutely crucial for the benefit of the Australian public.

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context