Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is for the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Minister, independent analysis from the Parliamentary Budget Office has shown that Labor's budget assumes that the Public Service will decrease by more than 20,000 over four years from 1 July 2025 compared to the current level of 209,150.

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators on my right, I can barely hear Senator Hume.

Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The PBO has calculated that it will cost the budget an additional $11.1 billion to retain these public servants—money that the government has not budgeted for. Minister, on behalf of the Prime Minister, can you confirm that the government has not yet decided to keep the Public Service at its current level or do you have an $11 billion black hole?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very happy to take this question from the shadow minister for finance. She obviously is so worried about how well Senator Gallagher will answer the question that she isn't prepared to put the question to the minister she shadows. I can understand why. I'm also happy to take a question from the shadow minister for finance about APS job cuts given her policy is that 36,000 jobs will go. That's the policy that she is advocating for. I'm also happy to take a question from the shadow minister for finance from a party that took jobs out of the Department of Veterans' Affairs, which left veterans without the support they deserved. There were some 42,000 veterans with unallocated claims that you presided over, because you weren't prepared to fund the Department of Veterans' Affairs. These are just some of the highlights of the way in which those opposite have no credibility when it comes to these issues. Every question from them on this and every utterance from the shadow minister for finance should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

I would make this point: the exact same methodologies are employed to forecast wages and salaries in our budgets as occurred under the former government. Entities make forecasts on how much of their departmental budget will be spent on wages and salaries, and these entity forecasts are aggregated into the budget documents. I know that the shadow minister for finance wants a bit of spooky music to try to get some headlines, but the reality is the big black hole is the one Mr Dutton is presiding over, with his $600 billion black hole for the nuclear fantasy. (Time expired)

Hon. Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order across the chamber! Senator Hume, first supplementary?

Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The analysis by the PBO confirms that the government has either been deliberately dishonest in hiding the true cost to retain this bloated Public Service or Labor's budget is simply not credible. The minister states that these figures reflect decisions that have not been taken, but then states that the Public Service will remain at current levels under Labor. Can you confirm that the Prime Minister has decided to keep the Public Service at current levels?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think all of us are a little bemused at which line the shadow minister for finance is actually running. Is she saying the Public Service is too big or too small? It's interesting—they want to have it both ways. What we do know is that Mr Dutton wants to remove some 36,000 jobs, and we know what Liberal governments have previously done when it comes to the Public Service. We also know what's in the budget papers. Either the shadow minister for finance is unable to read the budget papers properly or she is being deliberately misleading about what those budget papers contain. What I'd say to her is that these are the same methodologies that governments past have used in relation to the forecasting of wages and salaries. I'm sorry if you can't understand that, Senator Hume.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Wong, please resume your seat.

Senator McKenzie, come to order. Senator Hume.

Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order on relevance. The question was: have you decided to keep the Public Service at current levels? That's it.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is being relevant to your question. Minister, please resume your seat.

Withdraw those comments, Senator McKenzie and Senator McGrath.

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I'd say to you is that I think Senator Gallagher responded very clearly and very well on this on Insiders yesterday with excellent— (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hume, second supplementary?

Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yesterday, in relation to the size of the Public Service, the Minister for Finance stated:

… I think we've resourced it properly now.

Yet the PBO costing in Labor's own budget confirms that 'the budget will assume a reduction in the APS' that the minister has in fact ruled out. Given the Prime Minister has committed to being honest about his budgets, how does he explain this shoddy deception?

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! On my right. Minister Gallagher, order!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The political exercise by the opposition ignores that the approach to APS wages is exactly the same as it was under nine long years of LNP government. It's calculated in the same way. But if the shadow minister for finance actually is a fiscal conservative, I look forward to her telling Australians where the $350 billion reduction is going to come from—where those cuts are going to come from. We think it's probably health and education, judging by past practice. I look forward to her being upfront with the Australian people about the $600 billion to be spent on the nuclear fantasy. The reality is that we know Mr Dutton has said very clearly that he is going to cut, but what he won't say to Australians is what he's going to cut. We know from past practice that the Liberals always cut health and education.