Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) congratulates the Government on honouring its election commitment to change indexation arrangements for Defence Forces Retirement Benefits and Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits military pensions;

(2) condemns the $17 billion in cuts made to the Australian Defence Force (ADF) under the former Labor Government to its lowest level since before World War II;

(3) recognises:

(a) that those budget cuts caused job losses among the 3000 small and medium businesses which service the ADF; and

(b) the extra risk placed on Australian service personnel by Labor's failure to purchase new artillery;

(4) condemns the cuts by the former Labor Government to entitlements of unmarried soldiers for flights to see their families;

(5) recognises the depletion in force readiness caused by Labor's reckless decision to cut reserve training days by up to 30 percent; and

(6) repudiates the decision to cut funding to the Australian War Memorial.

Madam Speaker, the liberties we enjoy in this country come at a cost. They were fought for and defended by thousands of Australians, many of whom laid down their lives in service of their country. We on this side of the House recognise that those of us who enjoy these hard-won freedoms have a debt we can never repay in full. But that does not mean we should not try.

As I have noted previously in this place, my electorate of Ryan is home to the second largest military base in Australia, Gallipoli Barracks, home of the 7th Brigade. I am proud to be able to serve the brave men and women of that base. It was gratifying that the Prime Minister acknowledged my representations on their behalf during the latest pay negotiations. I am also proud to have strongly advocated for certain leave entitlements to be retained in the latest ADF pay deal. At any time our defence forces could be called into action and they need to know that we at home support them.

The challenges to the defence budget are firmly sheeted home to Labor and the Greens. They took defence spending in Australia to its lowest level since before the Second World War. They tore a multi-billion-dollar hole in the heart of the defence budget—enough to actually build Australia's next generation of submarines that they kept promising but never delivered. Did they spare a thought for the flow-on effect those cuts would have on the 3,000 small and medium Australian businesses directly affected? Of course not. These cuts cost people their jobs and sent businesses to the wall. They even banned the ADF from using local businesses for basic support such as vehicle repair, forcing them to send vehicles to the other side of the country. So they were slashing the budget on one hand and wasting money on the other.

As part of the billions of dollars worth of cuts came other reckless decisions which directly endangered the lives of our military forces. They cancelled the planned purchase of new, modern self-propelled artillery for our Defence Force, lessening the force capability of the Australian Defence Force. Self-propelled artillery is longer range, has a higher ratio of fire, can manoeuvre into a firing position, is faster and is crewed by fewer personnel than 'towed' artillery currently in use. What did Labor do? They cancelled it.

Labor's shambolic approach to the Defence Capability Plan, including program cuts and delays, was a recipe for disaster that would leave our troops without the equipment they need—when they most needed it. Our armed forces are some of the best trained forces in the world, yet Labor cut the number of training days to our reserves by 30 per cent. Our training regime means that we experience fewer deaths in conflicts which have claimed more lives in other countries' militaries. Training is also what makes Australian armed forces respected the world over. It is incomprehensible to me that a government would cut back on training. Yet Labor did just that.

Not only did Labor wilfully lower Australia's force readiness and capability but also it cut funding in real terms to the Australian War Memorial by not increasing their funding for the entire term of their government. That is the contempt they have shown to the place where we honour those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for our country. Their contempt for serving personnel was not just limited to cuts in force readiness and capability but to morale as well. The Gillard government cut the entitlement of single personnel to have flights to see their families at Christmas. That cut affected 22,000 serving men and women. Fortunately, the coalition, and particularly the member for Fadden, working with the crossbenches, successfully forced Labor to withdraw this mean-spirited act.

The Abbott government has honoured its commitment to change the indexation arrangements for DFRB and DFRDB military pensions. Labor promised but never delivered. I will always fight for the rights of our Defence Force personnel to have the best possible equipment, training, pay and conditions, as I did in the last round of pay negotiations. If those opposite want to join me in providing those things for the people who defend us, I urge them to pass the government's budget measures. My support for our Australian Defence Force is unwavering. I commend this motion to the House.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

David Feeney (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Justice) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased indeed to rise to speak to this motion and to rebut that farrago of nonsense which the parliament was forced to endure. While those opposite like to present themselves as the champions of Defence, it is plain from the last contribution made that they would do well to enliven themselves with some facts.

This motion begins by congratulating the government for its improved indexation arrangements for the DFRB and DFRDB retirement schemes and the legislation that passed this place with the support of both sides of the House. But let us just remember the precise dimensions of this promise made by the other side. After 11 long years of John Howard doing absolutely nothing to improve these pension schemes, we then saw the then Abbott opposition on the eve of the previous election make a commitment to improve the indexation arrangements. Indeed, upon coming into government, their government kept their word—one of those very rare occasions when the government kept a promise. They kept a promise and improved the indexation arrangements around these two schemes. Bravo! Well done! But let us remember a couple of key points.

The first key point is that both of these schemes have not accepted a new member into their ranks since 1991, so they are schemes that cater to fewer than 60,000 persons. They are schemes that have not admitted a new member for a generation. The vast bulk of the men and women serving in the Australian Defence Force today are not members of those schemes. In order to pay for this, however, the government then embarked upon a series of measures which has left the ADF and our veterans community absolutely aghast. While the government improved the indexation arrangements for those 60,000 persons, it then proceeded to cancel the current military superannuation scheme, the MSBS—cancelled, no announcement, no pre-warning. The current men and women of the Australian Defence Force found that the scheme they were in was cut and that, henceforth, members of the ADF will attract a superannuation rate of 14 per cent as opposed to the 28 per cent that previously prevailed—a dramatic change in the circumstances of our ADF. Of course, it goes right to the fact that retaining the men and women in the ADF—people who are highly trained—and their services has just become that little bit harder.

But not to be undone, the coalition's wrath and havoc was not finished there. What we then saw them do was cut the indexation arrangements for 280,000 veterans—some 310,0000 payments. Some 280,0000 persons had their indexation arrangements changed so that those arrangements became less attractive. We will now see those pensions slowly but inexorably decay against the living wage.

While the government has now leapt to its feet and congratulated itself on improving the DFRB and DFRDB, when you tell the whole story you can see that literally hundreds of thousands of people are worse off and the future ADF will find itself working with an inferior superannuation scheme to that which this government inherited when it came to office—so a truly scandalous set of arrangements. The fact that a government backbencher has had the sheer front to get up in this place and try to turn it into a positive is a remarkable thing. And it will echo through the veterans community even as I speak, because I am sure there will be absolute astonishment that anyone from the government would get up in this place and try to pretend that they have improved the circumstances of the ADF.

But the resolution was not concluded there, with that particular rhetorical point. The member for Ryan went on to the next impossible cause—defence spending. The motion seems to be suggesting that defence spending under the former Labor government fell to the lowest level since World War II. I think the member for Ryan may be confusing which government she is seeking to talk about, because for six of the 11 budgets handed down under the coalition from 1996 to 2007, defence spending fell to the lowest level since 1938 as a percentage of GDP, whereas in 2008, under Labor, spending rose to 1.94 per cent of GDP—the closest we have come in a generation to spending two per cent and much closer, I might say, than those opposite have done or will ever do.

In the 2013-14 budget Labor provided Defence with a record $114 billion across the forward estimates and a further guidance for over $220 billion to be spent over the subsequent six years. These were the greatest commitments made to Defence in the history of the Commonwealth. The previous Labor government was the first government in this land to commit more than $100 billion over the forward estimates. By the time we left office, we were the 12th largest spender on defence in the world. How did the then opposition respond to this fine and outstanding record? They went to the last election promising to spend the same as we spent. They said that an Abbott government would commit to spending the same amount of money on Defence as Labor. That was their great contribution to the debate and now, of course, they have the front to get up in this place and insist that our record does not do this nation justice, a record which they pinned themselves to at the last election. To add insult to injury, they insist that Labor cut the defence budget by $16 billion. I invite the member to nominate where that $16 billion exists. The number is a fantasy. We spent between $25 billion and $30 billion on defence year in year out—every year—and I challenge the member opposite to tell me in what year $16 billion suddenly disappeared. It never happened. It is a made-up number.

In relation to job losses resulting from budget cuts, those opposite are experts in this field. We have seen a succession of defence ministers over the course of the Abbott government achieve precisely nothing. We have seen in the shipbuilding space and future frigate program this government assiduously make no decision for 18 months. On the submarine project, I would need another 10 minutes—suffice it to say those opposite have made a shambles of it too.

Regarding the LAND 400 project, the modernisation of our Army, again, we have seen 18 months of delay and dissembling. These major projects that go to the modernisation and future of our services have withered on the vine under this government. The cost has been jobs and the cost has been investment. I invite the member opposite to read the occasional newspaper where he will find Australian industry bleeding and haemorrhaging on the street and jobs being shed from our shipyards week in, week out while the government fiddle like Nero and do absolutely nothing. Your excuse for the last three months of doing nothing has been a new minister who, in his defence, knows nothing about defence and, prior to that, 18 months of absolute gridlock.

Yours is a scandalous record. But then, not content to shine a torch on those two atrocious defence policy failures on your part, you then have the temerity to come in here and talk to us about defence training days. Under Labor and Plan Beersheba, we saw the Army reserves develop a level of capability that is simply unprecedented in this nation's history. We were deploying 1,000 Army Reserve personnel every single year on operations—operations in the Solomon Islands, Timor, Afghanistan and a range of others—that saw reserves achieve a level of operational experience that is simply unprecedented since the Second World War. But you would know nothing of that.

We saw changes to the Army Reserve. They became an operational reserve. The Army's force generation cycle integrated them with our regular brigades. There was the application of new capabilities and, I might say—the honourable member opposite had the temerity to talk about morale—an Army Reserve in this country whose morale had never been higher. They had never been better equipped. They had never been more utilised by their government. It has always been us on this side of the House that have understood the capability of the Army Reserve. We have always sought to enshrine their role in the defence white paper. It was, of course, a Labor government many years ago that introduced the Ready Reserve concept and, of course, it was the Howard government that swept that aside and cast our reserves back into the abyss. We saw Labor in the last term of office bring the reserves back to centre stage because we understand that they can provide a real capability, and we deploy them at a level that is simply unprecedented.

Lastly, I turn to the War Memorial. Again, the member opposite had the sheer effrontery to suggest that the War Memorial had suffered under the previous government. Again, the real villains sit opposite. It was their most recent budget that cut the War Memorial's budget by $800,000. We saw Brendan Nelson, the Director of the War Memorial, come out and immediately have to cancel the popular travelling exhibition program. Again, resources, people, and travelling exhibitions were cut. Hundreds of thousands of Australians across regional Australia are no longer able to see those important exhibitions because of your budget cuts.

How does Labor's record stand in contrast? We built the budget of the War Memorial. We built the budget of the Anzac Centenary. Even in our final months in office we provided an additional $7 million to the War Memorial so that it could renovate its World War I gallery. So, on every single measure of this rather remarkable motion, we say that the government should look at its own record and it will find nothing but embarrassment and humiliation. (Time expired)

John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak on this motion, and I congratulate the member for Ryan for raising these important issues. As a close parliamentary colleague and fellow member of the class of 2010, I have observed the member for Ryan's unwavering commitment to veterans affairs issues since her first day in this place. This commitment stretches back generations, to her great grandfather Sir George Pearce, who served in this place as Minister for Defence and established the Royal Australian Air Force. It is fitting that the member for Ryan should represent a region that includes the Gallipoli Barracks at Enoggera. This is home to several units, including the 6th RAR who represented our nation with such distinction and at great loss in Afghanistan.

The member for Ryan's maiden speech highlights her dedication not only to her troops but also to this very issue she has raised in this motion here today. With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to quote from this speech:

Let us never forget these brave Australians and all of our troops and veterans who have answered the call whenever their country has asked. Equally we must never forget that these courageous men and women have volunteered knowing that they put their lives at risk to ensure our safety. It is timely to remind the House of the coalition’s commitment to ensure that their entitlements reflect the contributions and sacrifices they have made through the indexation of the DFRDB and the DFRB.

It must therefore give the member for Ryan and her constituents such pride to read the first line of this motion:

That this House:

… congratulates the Government on honouring its election commitment to change indexation arrangements for Defence Forces Retirement Benefits and Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits military pensions;

Of course, this change was only possible with the election of a coalition government. Since coming to office just 18 months ago, we have delivered on our commitments to veterans and their families. We recognise and understand the unique nature of military service, and this financial year will deliver more funding to support veterans and their families. We have restored veterans' advocacy funding, which was cut by the previous Labor government, providing an additional $1 million each year to the Building Excellence in Support and Training program.

This coalition government has also mental health at the forefront with a commitment of more than $179 million to meet the mental health needs of the veteran and ex-service community. This includes funding for online mental health information and support, GP services, psychologist and social work services, specialist psychiatric services, pharmaceuticals, PTSD programs, and in-patient and out-patient hospital treatment. The government's funding for veteran mental health treatment is demand driven and is not capped. We have expanded eligibility for services provided through the Veterans and Veterans Families Counselling Service; broadened the comprehensive system of health care for veterans with certain mental health conditions; and deepened our engagement with younger veterans through an online presence, including social media. Veterans can now access specialist treatment for certain mental health conditions, with a referral from their GP, and there is no need for a veteran to submit a claim for compensation in order to be eligible to receive this treatment.

The Department of Veterans' Affairs provides training and resources to mental health practitioners, and last year the Prime Minister and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs launched the Prime Minister's Advisory Council on Veterans' Mental Health. It is abundantly clear that this government is committed to the veteran community and that it will continue to do all it can to support our veterans and their families into the future. I have regular contact at meetings and community events with many members of the local Bennelong veteran community, so ably represented by: Bernie Cox, President of Ryde District RSL Sub Branch; John Curdie, President of Epping RSL sub-Branch; Cecil Williams, President of North Ryde RSL Sub Branch; and Chris Cody, President of Gladesville RSL Sub Branch.

I refute the contribution of the member for Batman. I again commend the member for Ryan for her unflagging dedication to these issues, applaud the government for our efforts in this area and proudly commend this motion to the House.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

With all due respect to the member who put up this motion, it is complete nonsense. The member for Batman has gone through it point by point to highlight the farce and nonsense of this motion, and I echo those views and will support the member for Batman in his forensic assessment of this motion. I do so because I find it galling to listen to those opposite complain about decisions Labor made when we were in government, when this government has continued to show a complete lack of respect for Defence personnel since it was elected.

We are already onto our second Minister for Defence, which has caused significant disruption in defence planning, defence procurement and defence sustainment. It causes significant disruption because things need to move to the right, waiting for the new minister to be briefed and for his decisions to be made. But not only have we had two defence ministers under this government; this government has also cut the real wages of ADF personnel. The member who moved this motion said in her speech that the ADF has served this country so well, that it is a debt we can never repay in full. One way that you can start making that repayment is to pay them fairly.

The issue of fair pay for our ADF personnel is an issue I have been campaigning on for months now, and it is a decision that the Australian people are still reeling from. At the end of last year the government cut the real wages and conditions of Australia's service men and women. ADF personnel were offered a below inflation pay rise while at the same time their precious Christmas leave and recreation leave were being slashed. After widespread community outrage at this decision, the Prime Minister backtracked on parts of the offer. While Labor welcomed this backdown, the Prime Minister in our view did not go far enough. He is still cutting the real pay of our service men and women. He is still cutting the real pay of the people who defend Australia and our national interests, who we put in harm's way.

As I said, this unfair pay offer caused outrage in ADF ranks and among their families and the wider community—and rightly so. There was a flood of complaints on social media, a rally in Townsville and a petition presented to the Leader of the Opposition, all opposing the outrageous offer. In fact the petition—created by Tony Dagger, who is the father of a serving ADF member—has collected more than 65,000 signatures. ADF members do not have a voice in their pay and conditions negotiations. They cannot vote and they cannot take industrial action, unlike public servants. That is why Labor has stood up and will continue to stand up for our ADF personnel and fight this unfair pay deal.

But the attacks do not stop with ADF personnel. The government is also targeting Department of Defence staff. Defence staff have recently been offered a below inflation pay increase of 3.16 per cent over the next three years, which averages to just 1.05 per cent each year. Defence staff will not only see their real wages fall under this insulting offer; they will also lose a range of conditions. They will lose two days leave a year, including Christmas leave, and they will have a slower progression through pay rates. This unfair deal is even worse than what was offered to ADF personnel. Even the defence department secretary, Dennis Richardson, has labelled this wage offer 'regrettable'.

Over the last week, we have seen what the government has planned for ADF superannuation. Under ADF Super, the government contribution rate will be 15.4 per cent, increasing to 18 per cent for those engaged in warlike operations. This two-tiered system will undermine the team ethos of the ADF. Last week the Chief of the Defence Force also raised concerns with the government's approach, saying:

My preference would be to try and do a flat rate which is a midpoint, which does not have the clunkiness between the warlike operations and the peace time …

The Defence Force Welfare Association has also criticised the government over its lack of consultation on the new scheme. On ABC Radio last week, the president said, 'the consultation has more been information sessions on what the administration is coming up with rather than listening'. So it has just been talking and not listening. The member for Ryan omitted mentioning the axing of the three-month backdating of veterans' disability pensions for successful claimants, as well as the planned privatisation of DHA. This is a nonsense— (Time expired)

Fiona Scott (Lindsay, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today in support of the motion before the chamber on Australian Defence Force funding. I would like to thank my good friend the member for Ryan for raising this matter today. The people of Lindsay have a long and proud history of serving our nation—from the men who joined the early militia to serve king and country in the Boer War to those who heard the call and joined the Coo-ee March, which 100 years ago this year made its way through the main street of Penrith. Like the people of Lindsay, I myself share in this rich military tradition—from my grandfather, Lesley Allan, and my Uncle Gary back to my great-grandfather, Arthur Booth, who as part of the Luddenham Light Horse joined the First World War.

As a country we pride ourselves on the Anzac spirit of loyalty, mateship and rising above adversity—often against the odds. It is a spirit which continues to be an integral part of our nation's DNA. To the present day, the Nepean region is home to numerous RAAF bases both inside and outside the electorate, including Orchard Hills, Richmond and Glenbrook. Historically, we were one of the key military communications and transmission sites, through Eastern Creek, Londonderry, Bringelly and Wallgrove Road—and still at Glenbrook. For many years, the 133 Signal Squadron were stationed at Kingswood.

I am proud to be part of a government that acknowledges the service of our military personnel and their families by providing fair indexation of the DFRDB and DFRB pensions. This fair indexation will benefit 57,000 superannuants, together with their families. It will give these ex-serving military personnel the fair go they have long deserved. The Abbott government is getting on with the job of delivering to our Defence Force personnel and its former serving members. In recognition of the unique nature of military service, we will maintain a stand-alone Department of Veterans' Affairs to tackle mental health challenges faced by veterans and their families and to provide adequate welfare and advocacy support.

We have heard over and over again the claim from some that they are the sole voice in defending the pay and conditions of serving and retired Defence personnel. The truth is that, by their actions, they have probably done more harm than good. For the record, let me remind members opposite exactly what their actions have caused. Firstly, they cut $17 billion from Defence Force spending, cuts almost as big as what this nation spends on Medicare each year. With cuts as big as this, how can you reasonably argue that conditions can improve for Defence personnel? In fact, Labor's cuts to defence budgets put the sector’s spending at its lowest since World War II. Labor's cuts have resulted in military equipment being run into the ground and our personnel being put at risk through having to use tired old equipment. On top of that, there was a further cut to military training—it was slashed by a third—all this while our forces were on active duty internationally.

I am proud to be part of a government that has listened and is now delivering. Delivering on this promise will see a further $160 million go into the pockets of our Defence Force retirees. It will end the inequity in these pensions—especially for those who have served our nation for twenty years or more. Military pensions and benefits will now be indexed at the same rate as any other pension. This includes pensions through the Defence Force Retirement Benefits scheme and the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits scheme. The coalition believes that 57,000 Australians will be better off as a result of these changes.

Alan Griffin (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to pick up on a couple of points by the previous speaker, the member for Lindsay, in her response to the motion moved by the member for Ryan. The member for Lindsay talked at the very end about the fact that what the government were doing was changing the indexation arrangements to make them fairer and to ensure that they would be in line with other pensions—except that they are changing the other pensions. They are changing the other pensions. She said the government are improving the indexation measures for up to 60,000 Defence Force superannuants across a couple of schemes, and that will improve their living standards. Yes, but at the same time they are proposing, from 2017—and they have maintained this commitment—to alter the other benefits that these people are often entitled to and to adjust their indexation methodologies down. If you are someone who is a TPI pensioner, someone who suffered most grievously for your service for your country and you happen to also be a DFRDB recipient, the bottom line is your superannuation will go up by less than your pension will effectively go down with respect to what the changes would have been. It is just a joke.

But, rather than hear from me as a politician or from other politicians, let us hear from some of the ex-service personnel organisations what they have been saying about these particular changes from this government. In a media release, the National Round Table of Defence and Ex-Service member Organisations, which covers all the major ex-service organisations other than the RSL—and I will come to them in a minute—said:

The budget proposal to reduce the adjustment of the Veterans Disability Pension by reverting to using the CPI only will hit our disabled veterans hard and particularly our most disabled veterans who are totally and permanently disabled and rely on the Veterans Special Rate Disability Pension for the compensation payments. Implementing this decision would reverse a hard won concession legislated for with crossparty support by the Australian parliament in 2007.

The recent pay decision which purportedly "in no way reflects the value that the Government places on ADF personnel" is but one of a number of decisions in the 'employment package' for ADF members which have the effect of reducing the value of their total remuneration in a time of rising living costs hitting those in the lower ranks disproportionately.

Again I quote, from a media statement by ADSO, the Alliance Defence Service Organisation, who, I might add, were the group of organisations who led the charge in pushing for the changes in respect to superannuation indexation. The heading of their statement is:

GOVERNMENT'S CHRISTMAS PRESENT TO ADF FAMILIES—HIGHER RENTS AND CHARGES

It says:

'This is a total betrayal by the Government to members of the ADF and their families', says National President David Jamison. 'Not only do they grudgingly provide a pay increase that is less than CPI and therefore an effective pay cut, but they then impose charges on ADF members and their families that are higher than the 1.5%.

'A total betrayal': this is from the guy who led the charge in pushing for those changes in relation to superannuation indexation. Those two organisations between them cover a range of associations, from the Vietnam Veterans Association and Vietnam Veterans Federation, the SAS Association, the RAAF Association, the Naval Association, Legacy and War Widows Guild to the Defence Force Welfare Association. And this is what the RSL said in a statement:

… the National Board of the Returned and Services League of Australia (RSL) passed two motions deploring recent decisions about rates of pay for the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and the indexation of some veterans' entitlements by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) …

It goes on:

Concerning the change to indexation arrangements for some veterans' entitlements in 2017, Rear Admiral Doolan—

that is Rear Admiral Ken Doolan, RSL National President—

said 'this decision is at complete odds with the earlier welcomed decision of government to move away from the CPI for the indexation of superannuation entitlements for some DFRB and DFRDB recipients. In putting forward that welcome legislation in 2014 the Government argued that indexation by CPI was unfair. How can they now contends that indexation by CPI for some veterans' entitlements from 2017 is fair?'

That is a very good question, and a question completely ignored in the motion moved by the member for Ryan. Again I quote, from the Vietnam Veterans Federation:

Before the election, indexation that was linked with increases in the cost-of-living only was declared by the Coalition to be unfair whilst indexation that was linked to increases in the average-wage as well as the cost-of-living, was declared by the Coalition to be fair.

…   …   …

That change will disadvantage 180,000 veterans and war widows.

Were we taken for a ride?

Did the Coalition promise fair indexation for a restricted group of military superannuants simply to get veterans on side for the election knowing they'd get much more for their money back by inflicting unfair indexation on a very much larger group of veterans after the election?

Should veterans and war widows be treated like this?

Should they? Of course they shouldn't.

This government needs to get honest with the veterans community and with the defence community about what it has actually done and what it is trying to do, and the impact that will have on veterans and Defence Force personnel in this country. (Time expired)

John Cobb (Calare, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like others who have spoken before me, I rise to support the Defence Force motion moved by the member for Ryan, Mrs Jane Prentice, and to congratulate our government on Defence Force Retirement Benefits and, particularly, Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits pensions. It is unfortunate that the member for Bruce has already left the chamber. I have known him for probably longer than anyone else in this parliament, through strange circumstances. It is good to see him defending the Defence Force, but it is a little strange that he left out what happened during the six years of the previous government in terms of support for that same Defence Force and its role, so much so that it causes me to have to draw the House's attention to Labor's record, because that is what we have, in a sense, the unenviable but responsible job of correcting.

The previous government, the now members of the opposition, spent a lot of time promoting their responsibility for and outstanding treatment of our Defence Force. But, unfortunately, it was nearly all talk and, certainly, it was a fabrication. They showed a total disregard for Australia's national security and the thousands of people involved in delivering that. Time after time, they failed to deliver on their promises; they reneged on funding announcements and agreements; they cancelled, changed, downgraded vital equipment purchases—and I will come back to that and the consequences that can have not just for our security as a nation but as a trading nation; and they had countless policies that led to thousands of job losses. But possibly the biggest untruth from Labor came when they reduced the defence budget to its lowest level as a percentage of GDP since 1938. That is a heck of a long time ago. It is nearly 80 years.

Does that sound like a government that has considered the best interests of the Defence Force and Australia's security and all that they involve? Of course it does not. If we learnt anything from the Rudd-Gillard government it is that that government could not be trusted and that Labor could not and still cannot be trusted. Unlike the opposition, we can show the proof of that. For example, in 2010, Labor under Prime Minister Gillard declared they would continue to provide budget certainty for defence. They promised to honour the defence funding commitment. Unfortunately, what they did, as I said earlier, was reduce the defence budget as a percentage of GDP to its lowest level since 1938.

That is what happens when a government gets itself and the nation into so much trouble by promising a budget that will show surplus, which it did not. The one thing a nation elects a government to do is look after its defence and security. Those opposite ignored that in order to try to keep to their commitment that they were going to show a budget surplus. They let Australia's security go down the gurgler because of that. What they actually did was deliver was a disjointed and unfunded disaster. They did things like cancel the purchase of new self-propelled artillery from Korea because they were trying to get the budget in surplus, or not to make the deficit as bad as it was. In doing that, they so upset the Korean government that it would not negotiate with Australia on a trade deal, which badly hurt our beef industry, amongst others. I am not talking about beef just because I am a farmer. What an example! They left us hanging in the air under America because they simply could not deliver. (Time expired)

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am proud to rise to speak in the debate on this motion on the Australian Defence Force because I am absolutely sick on these vicious and uncalled for attacks on the patriotism of the Australian Labor Party. The previous speaker and the member for Lindsay suggested that we were wilfully putting ADF personnel at risk in the field. That is incredibly offensive.

The previous speaker is absolutely right in saying that national security is the first role of government. Let us look at the history of the other side. They are the party whose god is Robert Menzies, a man known as 'Pig Iron Bob', a man who prosecuted waterside workers for refusing to load scrap iron going to fascist Japan because they knew it would come back at us. The Liberal Party support Pig Iron Bob Menzies. They are the party who brought us into Vietnam on a lie. They are the party who brought us into the second Iraq war on a lie. They are the party who tried to politicise the ADF through the children overboard affair in order to win the 2001 election. The Liberal Party cloak themselves in patriotism, but when you look at their actions you see that they will use the ADF and national security for petty political purposes. I say, 'No more.'

Let us look at the facts of the matter. Let us look at LAND 17, the acquisition of new artillery pieces. The truth is that the Army wanted the German self-propelled howitzer. They were not particularly interested in the Korean piece. The Liberal government, when they were in power last, did not supply enough funds to support the purchase of the German howitzer, so the project was cancelled. Let us look at their broader acquisition history. Of the top 30 acquisition projects currently being pursued by Defence, 87 per cent of the total schedule slippage has occurred in projects approved by Liberal governments. That constitutes 81 years of schedule slippage. Let me repeat that: 87 per cent of the scheduled slippage of the top 30 projects currently being managed by Defence, culminating in 81 years of deferred capability, occurred because of decisions made by Liberal governments. These are platforms that the ADF need that are not in service now because of the incompetence of those opposite. Let us look at the list of projects of concern—these are projects that are put on a high-profile list because they are in trouble. Of the 10 projects featured on that list, all were approved by coalition governments. They cannot acquire projects, 81 years of schedule slippage; they repeatedly bring us into wars on lies; their God, their ultimate politician, stopped waterside workers from refusing to export scrap iron to fascist Japan. Those on the other side should be ashamed of themselves for bringing this motion to parliament.

Let us look at the current debate on submarines. The government have been very concerned to run down the capability of the Collins class submarine, a submarine that is seen around the world as one of the best conventional powered submarines in the world, a submarine that can be the platform for our next generation of submarines. This is all part of the broken promise that they took to the last election to build a new generation of submarines in Adelaide. This is a broken promise that will see the Prime Minister end the jobs of 4,000 to 5,000 shipbuilding and submarine workers in this country, including 900 in my region at Forgacs at Tomago.

The truth is that we had a plan to bridge the shipbuilding valley of death. We had a plan that we were in the process of implementing. They have no plan except to end the jobs of 5,000 shipbuilding workers and to get submarines made in Japan, which will not be fit for our purposes, in order to secure some sort of stronger relationship between Prime Minister Abbott and Prime Minister Abe. The truth is that you cannot trust the Liberal Party to manage defence acquisition—81 years of schedule slippage under those opposite. You cannot trust them to put the national security of this nation first if you look at their actions in Vietnam, their actions before World War II, their actions before the second Iraq war and their actions on children overboard. Those on the other side are content to cloak themselves in patriotism, but when the real test comes to put petty politics aside and act in the national interest they are found wanting. They are found wanting consistently. They will be condemned by history for their actions. I proudly oppose this motion.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting.