Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Human Services (Senator Ludwig) and the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Senator Carr) to questions without notice asked today relating to the 2008-09 Budget.

From the performance that we have seen over the last couple of question times from Senator Carr and Senator Ludwig, you cannot help but be left with the impression that Labor ministers are now being mugged by reality, and the reality is that Labor has delivered a very old-style, big-taxing, big-spending budget that will increase, not decrease, pressure on inflation and—this is the critical point—see up to 134,000 Australians lose their jobs in the current year. Labor’s first budget after 13 years is actually increasing unemployment at the same time as it is trying to deal with inflation. What is emerging from the way that Senators Carr and Ludwig are trying to approach their portfolios is that they really do not have their ducks lined up in a row and they cannot take steps to keep the economy growing, to keep jobs secure and to keep inflation in check. It is really quite extraordinary that the government’s foray into so-called fiscal management is bound to end in tears.

Labor was left with the strongest fiscal position in the history of this country. Labor promised to ease the pressure on working families but failed the very people they promised to help. They project fewer working families and, in fact, more welfare families. How can this possibly be consistent, with all of Labor’s ranting, raving and rhetoric about the importance of increased participation and productivity, when they have unemployment increasing following the budget, with Treasury forecasts showing 134,000 fewer people in jobs? I do not think that is the end of it and I will come to that in just a moment. There is an inherent contradiction. Despite all the rhetoric about an education revolution and lifting productivity, eventually you get mugged with the reality that the participation rate in the workforce has been forecast by Treasury to fall. I think that either Labor do not know what they are doing or they are in for a very rude surprise. You cannot have it both ways.

Leaving aside Treasury forecasts, following the budget announcement concern is growing for the welfare of jobs throughout the entire public service sector. I must say that my concerns have been fortified: slashes to Centrelink funding have already sparked a prediction of 2,000 job cuts. Apparently Mr Whalan is going. I hope he is going voluntarily and that he is not being punished by Labor for predicting a loss of 2,000 jobs, which he did earlier this year. The Community and Public Sector Union now holds fears for 3,300 Commonwealth Public Service jobs as a result of the budget. It is evident to me that the Rudd government is deliberately setting out to increase unemployment in the public sector with indiscriminate and poorly thought out application of an across-the-board two per cent efficiency dividend that is going to have a dreadful impact on the so-called working families that Labor professes to care about.

Labor is introducing new reviews and systems to Centrelink programs, such as means testing the baby bonus, launching a new welfare debit card and cutting staff to the organisation and other areas of the Public Service. After Senator Ludwig’s performance during question time, I do not think that anyone could have any confidence that he is actually across what this is going to do not only to Centrelink, which he tried to deal with today, but also to the Child Support Agency, which is going to lose a further 435 jobs, and to the Medicare office, which is going to lose 171 jobs. Senator Ludwig, who cannot even find the page in his brief to answer a question, is going to preside over a department that will lose 816 jobs from agencies that are tasked with delivering essential services for very needy Australians.

The Department of Human Services is tasked with the efficient delivery of payments to people who really need them. It needs to be efficient and accountable, yet what we have seen from Senator Ludwig is that he dodges responsibility. He did not even know that carers payments are not indexed. Whilst the Prime Minister might now talk about a modest rise in unemployment, it will be cold comfort to the 3,000 or so Australians who are going to lose their jobs. (Time expired)

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In taking note of answers this afternoon, let me assist in taking note of Senator Carr’s excellent, innovative and forthright answer in respect of the CSIRO. We need to place on record that there is in fact an increase—a ‘modest’ increase, to quote the minister—in the budget of the CSIRO, which will now get an allocation of $676 million over 2008-09.

I know that my constituents in the Territory who work at CSIRO or who used to work at CSIRO under the previous government will be able to relate to this: the previous government were the ones responsible for closing down the plant industry division in the Northern Territory—an division that was doing innovative research on mangoes, bananas and such crops of the north—and decided, in absolute blindness and stupidity, to ensure that those officers were relocated to Canberra. I cannot see too many activities relating to mangoes and bananas happening in this climate, I have to say. If we want to look at track records in respect of the CSIRO and job losses, do not look any further than the people opposite me. They gave no care and no thought whatsoever to the innovation and research that was happening in the Top End of this country. Contracts were not renewed—eminent scientists in that division were forced to move to Brisbane to undertake their work.

We have now a minister who is passionate about research in this country. He has been tracking the work of CSIRO over many years and has ensured that CSIRO will get a modest increase in their allocation. Why is that? The increase will be modest because we have said from the beginning that this is a responsible budget. This budget will put us into the future. It will allocate increases to programs where they are deemed to have a capacity to build our country, to ensure that research and innovation become front and centre of what we do in this country. That is why a modest increase is going to the CSIRO. Some programs have been streamlined and new priorities will contribute to the fiscal discipline. We know that savings will be applied to ANSTO and to CSIRO, resulting in $47 million over four years, I might add. The bottom line is that the CSIRO will enjoy a modest increase, taking their appropriations for 2008-09 to $676 million.

This government is actually putting the future of this country—our industries, development and innovation—front and centre. I have not in my years in this Senate seen the previous government—the opposition now—try to defend its record, and now it is trying to attack us on our record. This will not stack up at all when you look at the history of the previous government’s treatment of the CSIRO and research and innovation.

We have an innovation policy that will be aimed at ending the brain drain, an innovation policy that will work in partnership with business. It will tackle climate change and provide more effective support to small business and innovative companies. We will be about driving productivity and economic growth, through advancing our industries in this country. You do it through research and you do it through no better organisation in this country than the CSIRO, so we will be increasing their budget. We will make sure the research they do is relevant and appropriate to their industries. Unlike the people opposite me, we will be ensuring that industries such as the plant division in the Top End would stay in places like the Top End and not be relocated around this country and closed, or contracts not renewed and jobs lost. We are a government that will place research such as that done by CSIRO front and centre of our future reforms and the future growth of this country. We have done that through this budget. We will continue to do that through our priorities. (Time expired)

Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I likewise take note of the answer given by Minister Carr to the question asked by my opposition colleague Senator Sandy Macdonald in relation to funding and job cuts in the nation’s premier research body, the CSIRO. In that question, the minister was asked to confirm whether 85 people were to lose their jobs as a result of the government’s decision to slash $44 million from CSIRO’s budget—not a modest increase, as Senator Crossin just claimed, with typical government spin; a $44 million slashing of funding from CSIRO’s budget. Of course, as we no doubt have come to expect from this minister in the few weeks that parliament has sat, he failed to answer Senator Macdonald’s question. Instead, he chose to run the Labor Party’s standard line about cutting inflation.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong interjecting—

Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, Minister, it is quite ironic that, while the minister believes research funding is a cause of inflation in this nation, he and his colleagues apparently do not believe that increasing the price of things such as alcohol, cars, health insurance and energy will have any upward impact on inflation. But then of course it is asking far too much to expect any understanding of economics from the Labor Party. In his answer, as I said, Senator Carr launched into typical spin about the Labor Party’s claimed dedication to science and research, and that spin we just heard reiterated a few moments ago by Senator Crossin in a vain attempt to defend the minister and this decision.

The reality is that, over the next three years, the CSIRO will have $44 million less than it did in the last year of the Howard government. Clearly, the Liberal and National parties are committed to scientific research and some of the amazing results which are beneficial for the Australian community that can ensue from such research. But the Australian Labor Party and this appalling government, already showing its colours, are only interested in short-term headlines and spin.

The Labor Party went into the last election with a policy claiming that it would revitalise our public research, including the CSIRO. Today Minister Carr claimed that he stands by that policy. Well, it is fair to say that the hypocrisy of this government knows absolutely no bounds, when Minister Carr stands up, in the face of a clearly defined budget cut, and claims that the policy that the Labor Party took to the last election is being implemented. How can the minister honestly stand in this place, claiming to stand by the claim that his party will reinvigorate the CSIRO, while on the other hand slashing $44 million from its budget? This is yet another broken promise in the short period that the Labor government has been in office. It seems to have come into this process of government believing that people will just listen to its spin rather than actually reading what is in the budget papers. It is fair to say that the Australian people are owed much more respect than that from this new government.

Australian scientists have made many outstanding discoveries through their scientific research that have benefited not only our community but people right around the world. Take the development of things like the cochlear ear implant, which has made a world of difference in people’s lives right round the world. There are deaf people not only here in Australia but right around the world who now have the capacity to hear because of that dedicated work of Australian researchers. More recently, the cervical cancer vaccine, Gardasil, was developed in Australia through scientific research which will simply save the lives of thousands of young women. Clearly, this sort of scientific research does not meet the Labor Party’s short-term objectives of positive media headlines.

Surely there must come a point at which the government recognises that it has a responsibility to do the right thing, irrespective of whether that is going to provide it with a short-term media or poll boost. All Australians, irrespective of where they live, deserve the benefits of publicly funded research to improve their lives, and this government has failed every Australian in this budget in relation to CSIRO. We will never know what life-saving discoveries will not be made because of these budget cuts to CSIRO, but we certainly know that this government has let down not just those directly involved with CSIRO but in fact every Australian who will lose the benefit of their researchers’ tireless work, which has been truncated by this slashed funding.

Senator Carr, the minister, should be ashamed, not just because of the budget slashing of CSIRO or for the CSIRO staff who will lose their jobs, but because he came into this place and, rather than being honest about this appalling policy, delivered more spin and absolutely no answers for those CSIRO staff working hard to keep Australia at the forefront of scientific research. (Time expired)

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The senator has pointed out that the Australian public do not read budget papers, and I think that is a really important issue to take up, because we need to have some honesty about the focus of the current budget and also what will be put in place. It has been said so many times—and will continue to be said in this place and across the community—that the budget was put in place facing a clear economic process in this country. No-one can deny the issues around the increasing inflation and the threat of further inflation in this country. No-one can deny that. The opposition cannot deny that. They can pretend that everything is rosy, but it is not. The indications are that a budget had to be formulated which took into account the future—and the effective future—of our country. No-one was hiding from that. The Treasurer, when he produced the budget, said that there would be areas of needed response. He made no mistake.

Senator Coonan has focused this debate on the answers relating to Centrelink and CSIRO. I was present at the last Senate estimates when this wonderful figure of Centrelink losses was brought up. I am very sorry at the way it was done, because when we were sitting there asking questions about the future—before the budget was brought down—the CEO of Centrelink, Mr Jeff Whalan, was engaged in a discussion in which issues were raised about what would happen in the future of that agency. There was natural concern that there could be management decisions that would involve some job losses. No-one denied that. In terms of process, what we were looking at for professional public sector organisations was how those organisations in this country would manage the process into the future with the budget that they were allocated. No-one was running from that. There was no denial.

Now that the budget has been brought down, the strength, professional nature and efficiency of the public sector will ensure they work with government and the community to see that the programs they are charged to deliver will be effectively delivered for all Australians. This is not a surprise. Anyone who has worked in the Australian Public Service, as I did for many years—and I still describe myself as an Australian public servant—knows that restructuring changes and working with budgets are a daily challenge for all of us. That is not new.

What we have now is the typical process that happens after a budget when people are trying to maximise their positions. It is quite a worry to me that senior opposition shadow ministers are using scare tactics to cause uncertainty and fear amongst Australian public servants—people who are working for us and for the community. Since the budget, Senator Coonan, in particular around the issues of Centrelink and Human Services, has been in the media throwing out allegations about the job losses that will occur in the public sector. This has not been validated. And the more that exaggerations are made, the more that fear is created, the more difficult it is for the people who are trying to do their jobs effectively—that is, to concentrate on the program expectations to ensure that they know what their jobs are and that they can work effectively into the future.

In relation to the statement made by Minister Ludwig earlier that Mr Whalan has announced his retirement, I want to put on record my personal appreciation and respect for the job that Jeff Whalan has done, not just in Centrelink, which is where I have had the chance to meet with him over the last couple of years, but in a very distinguished Australian Public Service career. Seeing that, I think it is even worse that his name has been used in this place around figures that are not actually correct. I know that senior public servants understand the way this place works. I would hope that we would be able to gather together and acknowledge his service in that process.

It will not be easy for the Australian public sector to work through an efficiency dividend, but we are used to it. We have worked with previous efficiency dividends and we have been able to work effectively with the expectations of the community to provide essential services. That will continue. Program by program, individual public sector agencies will look at their budgets, their work plans and their people and they will work with their people to ensure that the work is achieved in our community. The message for all of us is to respect the work of the APS, to work with them and with their union—my union, the Community and Public Sector Union—to ensure that people are looked after and their work is respected into the future. (Time expired)

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given by Ministers Carr and Ludwig today on matters related to the budget, particularly the effect of changes to the income level for the Medicare levy and job cuts within CSIRO, Centrelink and other places in the Public Service.

Senator Moore has just asked for honesty when we are talking about the current budget. I could not agree more. We do need to look at this in an honest way and see what really is going on. There has been a whole series of headlines and discussions by commentators over the last few days since the budget was delivered. Many of those have talked about Robin Hood budgets and the like. But, if you have a look at the comments made by those who have some economic expertise, you will find that the general consensus of those commentators—people who actually know what they are talking about—is that the budget has been fiscally neutral in its inflationary impact.

You will also see that some commentators have commented that it is the biggest spending and biggest taxing budget that this country has ever seen. Those opposite have been arguing—and the ministers have certainly commented in their replies—that they have cut deeply and that huge measures have been incorporated into the budget with a view to reducing inflationary pressure.

Prior to the budget, the government built this up in a huge way. They were constantly going on about the inflation crisis we are having. We have heard from the Treasurer, Wayne Swan, stories about the inflation genie; we have heard comments about the cancer that is eating away at the Australian economy—that being inflation. They have built up to a huge extent the need for fiscal responsibility to make massive cuts but, as I have just commented, the reality is that most commentators with any economic expertise are saying that what has been done in this budget is fiscally neutral in its inflationary impact. The spin has not been met by the actual delivery. The government have failed to deliver on the promise.

Just today, a young student of macroeconomics came into my office to see me. She and her fellow macroeconomics students have spent the last couple of days pulling the budget to pieces, looking at it particularly from the perspective of its impact on inflation. Their conclusion was in fact that it was fiscally neutral in terms of its inflationary impact. They could not see where it relieved the inflationary pressures that, as the government continually tell us, we are currently experiencing as a nation. The reality is that, despite the spin, the government have not delivered in this budget any major changes that will reduce inflationary pressures.

At the same time, they have delivered a budget that will lead directly to an increase in unemployment in this nation. The budget papers themselves admit that there will be 135,000 people who will lose their jobs. That is in the budget papers. It is not the opposition saying it; it is not commentators having a bit of a look at it and saying, ‘This is likely to cost 135,000 jobs.’ It is in the budget papers. Treasury say that, over the next 12 months, 135,000 people will lose their jobs. I would suggest to you that it probably understates the figure, but it is in there from Treasury. In one of the papers today a spokesman for the Community and Public Sector Union was saying that the estimate of 1,200 jobs that will be lost in the public service is grossly understated. I think he said that it is probably more likely to be double that. If the union is saying that, it is probably more likely to be triple or quadruple.

Here we have a budget that not only has failed to deliver the reduction in inflationary pressures that was promised but is also putting people out of work. Rather than being a Robin Hood budget, the reality is—as has been stated by a number of the government members, including the Treasurer on the night that he delivered the budget—this is a traditional Labor budget. Why is it traditional? It is traditional because it focuses more on looking after those who have jobs than worrying about people getting jobs in the first place. They are quite happy to put people out of work. They will put in place whatever measures they need to meet their ideological desires and preferences—and hang the consequences for people. They are quite happy to put them out of jobs. They are generally more worried about the rights of those who have work than those who have no work at all. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.