Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Palmer United Party) Share this | Hansard source

The government's unfair pay deal for Australian Defence Force personnel cuts real pay and takes away vital Christmas and recreational leave. I thank Senator Moore and the Labor opposition for today introducing this very important debate to Australia's Senate chamber with their matter of urgency motion. Their urgency motion was a simple statement of fact which even the government cannot disagree with. No-one can argue against the motion's proposition that the government's pay offer to the men and women of our Defence Force is unfair and demoralising. No-one can argue against the motion's proposition that the government's pay offer to the men and women of our Defence Force cuts real pay and takes away vital Christmas and recreational leave.

The government's excuse for their cruel behaviour is the lame and untruthful argument that Australia cannot afford to fairly pay members of our Australian Defence Force. No-one believes Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey when they say that Australia cannot afford to make a fair wage offer to our diggers that keeps pace with inflation. How much will a wage increase of three per cent for members of the Defence Force cost us? Using figures from the government's annual reports, I have calculated that the annual cost of awarding a 1.5 per cent pay increase to members of Australia's Defence Force will be approximately $121 million. It follows that a three per cent pay increase for members of the Defence Force will cost approximately $242 million. When our Prime Minister and Treasurer say we cannot afford to double the wage offer to our soldiers from 1.5 per cent to three per cent, they are therefore saying that Australia cannot afford an extra $121 million per year.

To the average person, $121 million is a lot of money, but to a government with an annual budget of $442 billion, it is not a matter of affording it; it is a matter of priorities and principle. Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey are happy to send more than $5 billion in foreign aid overseas every year, including $500 million annually to Indonesia—which has a military ground force almost 10 times the size of Australia's. According to one media report in Crikey, the ANZAC centenary will cost Australian state and federal taxpayers nearly $325 million. When compared with those figures, an extra $121 million a year in wages to guarantee a fair pay deal for our troops—people who are prepared to die for us and people who do not have a voice or union—is not excessive. It is modest and could be delivered without damaging the Australian budget.

While I acknowledge the significance of the matter of urgency motion proposed by the Labor Party—and I repeat my thanks to Labor opposition members—it is valuable to acknowledge that we can do more. We must do more in this place to force the government's hand on this urgent matter of national security. Most will be aware of my commitment to voting against government legislation in this place—as a matter of conscience and as an attempt to force the government to listen to reason over the Defence Force pay betrayal. I repeat my call for unity from non-government members of this Senate. We need to rally around the men and women of the ADF and vote down government legislation as a matter of conscience. I take this opportunity to foreshadow that, if that fails—and my negotiations with government ministers on a range of different budget matters leads me to think that it will not fail—I will introduce a private senator's bill which will link the pay increases of politicians to the pay increases of members of the Defence Force or to the CPI, whichever is greater. This piece of legislation, if passed by the Australian parliament, would forever solve the Australian Defence Force pay crisis created by Mr Abbott.

Members of our Defence Force do not have a union. They do not have a strong voice in the room when their pay and conditions are negotiated. Our diggers cannot go on strike if their government forces them to take a pay cut or a loss of holidays and entitlements, yet our diggers are expected, as part of their normal work conditions, to risk being killed or terribly wounded. Who could reasonably argue against the proposal that our diggers, who are prepared to shed blood in war for us, should have their remuneration linked to the remuneration of those who send them to war? I support the opposition's motion today and I ask that, when the time comes for more concrete action on Defence Force pay, they act as well as they talk.