In parliament today, I moved a motion on the importance of a strong public service. The motion and speech are below.

A Strong Public Service
Private Member's Motion
21 May 2012


To move—That this House:

(1) recognises the important role played by the Australian Public Service in upholding and promoting our democracy and its key role in ensuring stable government;

(2) commends the Australian Public Service on continuing to be one of the most efficient and effective public services in the world; and

(3) condemns plans by the Opposition to make 12,000 public servants redundant.

I rise to speak today about the dire plans the coalition has in store for the Australian Public Service and to contrast them with Labor's optimistic plan for a strong Public Service.

For the 11th time, the member for North Sydney on 16 May 2012 has gotten wrong the growth in the size of the Australian Public Service. For the 11th time, the member for North Sydney, Mr Hockey, has claimed that the government has grown the Australian Public Service by 20,000 when he knows in fact the true growth is 12,000.

The member for North Sydney's inability to grapple with the facts about the size of the Public Service speaks volumes about the coalition's attitude to the Public Service. Last August the member for North Sydney was offered a briefing at the Australian Public Service Commission to get his numbers right, to cease using a number that includes Defence Force reservists as public servants. But he has so far refused to take that up.

The opposition, if they are to be believed, have a plan to cut 12,000 public servants. In fact, repeatedly, when the opposition are asked how they will fill their $70 billion black hole, they point towards slashing the Public Service as their plan for meeting their budget black hole.

The member for North Sydney is a little like Rick Perry, the inept Texas governor who ran for the Republican nomination for President, saying that he would get rid of three US federal departments. The only difference is that the member for North Sydney, unlike Rick Perry, can actually remember the three departments he intends to scrap: they are the department of health, which he says is out of control, despite the fact that it employs about as many people as when the Leader of the Opposition was health minister; the department of climate change, despite the fact that, under a coalition Direct Action program, more administration would be required than under the government's much more straightforward carbon pricing plan; and the Defence Materiel Organisation.

So the coalition has said that they will scrap 12,000 Public Service jobs, but it is entirely possible that they will scrap many more than that. Asked on 7.30 on 8 May whether or not the coalition would get rid of 20,000 Public Service jobs, the member for North Sydney refused to rule it out. At the same time, the coalition has plans for a 15,000-strong standing green army without any detail whatsoever as to how that proposal would operate.

The opposition has formally placed on the table plans to cut 12,000—or maybe 20,000—Public Service jobs, but it is entirely possible that this is the tip of the iceberg. I have a copy of the Liberal-National Party's public administration policy, which the coalition took to the 1996 election. That policy said:

‘Our plans to reduce department running costs by 2 per cent will involve not replacing a proportion of those who leave, up to 2500 positions over the first term of Coalition Government, a process of natural attrition with no forced redundancies.’

What did the coalition actually do when they came to office? In 1996-97, they retrenched 10,070 public servants; in 1997-98, they retrenched 10,238 ongoing employees; and, in 1998-909, they retrenched 9,061 ongoing public servants. In total, upon winning office in 1996, the coalition retrenched 30,000 public servants—that is in clear contrast to their election policy's statement that said they would be not replacing 2,500 positions. Indeed, the number of public servants who eventually lost their jobs after the coalition won office in 1996 was more than 10 times the number whom they said would be made redundant.

It is interesting to note, if we turn to the bottom of the 1996 election policy, that it is printed and authorised by a Mr A Robb, who is now the shadow finance minister.

He is the shadow finance minister under Mr Abbott—the man who says that you do not trust anything he says unless he writes it down—and he is the person who said, prior to the 1996 election, that there would be only 2,500 Public Service job cuts. In fact, upon winning office, the coalition got rid of 30,000 public sector jobs. When asked why they would want to get rid of Public Service jobs, the member for Dickson noted that the federal department of health does not see one patient, does not run one hospital, does not employ one doctor,  nurse or pharmacist. It might surprise the member for Dickson to know that that is exactly how things have always operated in the Department of Health and Ageing, which administers a vast health promotion program, oversees health research and maintains a network of public hospitals throughout Australia. The coalition may be surprised to learn that the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations does not have schoolchildren walking its corridors. They might be shocked to learn that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry does not regularly partake in office fishing trips. We can only hope that the coalition does not call on the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism to demand room service and more towels.

Those opposite simply do not understand the important work of public servants. They do not understand the critical work that is being done to support Australian prosperity by the hardworking public servants in Australia, including the many public servants in my own electorate of Fraser. On this side of the House, we are proud of public servants. It was public servants who did so much to get us through the global financial crisis with a temporary, timely, targeted fiscal stimulus program that was recognised by international economic authorities, such as the IMF, as being a world-beating fiscal stimulus program because it was put into place quickly and efficiently. When those opposite see public servants, they only think of how to beat them up to win votes.

It is true that in the current budget we have made savings across the board. In the process of making savings across the board, there has been an impact on the Public Service. For example, there are redeployments from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations across to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. There have been changes in the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency as result of some of the pre-carbon pricing programs coming to an end. We have been honest about those changes, which will take total Australian Public Service numbers back to about where they were in 2009. Having had modest growth year on year in Public Service numbers under the Rudd and Gillard governments, this budget now sees Public Service numbers returning to about where they were in 2009.

This has been difficult for some public servants, including those in my electorate of Fraser. I have been keen to work with departments to make sure that redeployment policies are followed and to make sure that unfilled vacancies are filled. Where we are able to, we will redeploy across federal agencies and the ACT government, which is often struggling to find talented public servants. The cuts are difficult in the ACT, but they do come at a time when, according to the latest vacancy survey, there are around 4,900 job vacancies in the ACT. I do hope that the Canberra Business Council, which has spoken of the skills shortage in the ACT, is able to employ anyone who has taken on, for example, a voluntary redundancy and is able to grow and prosper in the current environment. In conclusion, Labor appreciates the value of a strong Public Service. Those opposite believe only in cutting it.

On 28 March 2012, I spoke at the Sydney Battle of Big Thinking about some of the ideas in my book Disconnected, and how we can forge a stronger civic community in Australia.http://www.youtube.com/v/nsh-44Wb9rE?version=3&hl=en_GB

An article in Fairfax papers today asks several MPs' view on raising unemployment benefits. Not surprisingly, it contains only a snippet of the conversation that I had with journalist Stephanie Peatling. So I thought it might be worth setting out my thoughts on the issue in more detail.

Unlike pensions, which are aimed at being ongoing for multiple years, unemployment benefits are designed to be a temporary payment. Nonetheless, I share the feeling of many of my colleagues that the current level of unemployment benefits are an extremely low amount to live on. If we doubled tax revenue, I’d raise unemployment benefits in a heartbeat. But tax revenue has actually fallen (from around 24% of GDP under Howard to 22% now). So anyone who proposes an expensive policy like significantly increasing unemployment benefits needs to identify which taxes they’d increase or which spending programs they’d cut. (And in the current parliament, how they'd get the change through both Houses.) For example, if you asked me ‘would you scrap an NDIS to raise unemployment benefits?’, I’d say no.

As an economist, I think about tradeoffs, which I’m starting to realise may be somewhat atypical in politics. Perhaps some people answer the question as ‘if the money was free and you didn’t have to lose any of your favourite programs, would you raise unemployment benefits?’. If that’s the question, count me in as a supporter too.

I’m also concerned about the social consequences of intergenerational poverty, since it does look like there may be adverse impacts of welfare dependence in families with children. This is something I’ve worried about quite a bit while since when I was an econ prof at ANU (see for example this paper, or this recent speech). So the JET scheme (which provides childcare to high-needs parents for 10 cents an hour) strikes me as important for the next generation. The ANU ‘Youth in Focus’ study has some valuable insights on the issues too (though the links to it are alas broken at present).

We're calling for tenders to build the Majura Parkway, funded 50/50 by the federal and ACT governments. Media release below.

Anthony Albanese
Federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister

Andrew Leigh MP
Member for Fraser Katy Gallagher

ACT Chief Minister
Minister for Territory and Municipal Services

MAJURA PARKWAY: CONSTRUCTION TENDER CALLED

From 26 May construction companies interested in building the new Majura Parkway – the Territory’s largest ever road project – will have two months in which to submit their best bids under the tender process to be conducted by the ACT Government.

Federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Anthony Albanese said following many months of community consultations and detailed design work it was now time to begin building this long-awaited piece of infrastructure.

“Assessed and recommended by Infrastructure Australia, this new road is expected to generate long term economic, social and environmental benefits worth almost $1 billion,” said Mr Albanese.

“All up, Federal Labor has increased annual infrastructure spending from $72 to $114 for every man, woman and child living in the nation’s capital. Over the next 12 months we will not only begin work on the Parkway but also complete the duplication of the Monaro Highway between Canberra Avenue and Newcastle Street.”

The Majura Parkway will be an 11.5 kilometre long dual carriageway, with its construction being jointly funded by the Gillard ($144 million) and Gallagher ($144 million) Labor governments.

ACT Chief Minister and Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Katy Gallagher, said the packages of work associated with the northern and southern sections of the project will be tendered together under a single contract.

“Qualified and experienced construction companies will have until Tuesday 31 July 2012 to submit their best bids,” the Chief Minister said.

“We are making an investment in Canberra’s future and once completed in 2016, the Majura Parkway will make it easier for Canberrans to get around the city.

“The Parkway’s final Forward Design took into account the feedback received from the public information sessions and stakeholder meetings conducted over recent months.

“A Development Application has now been submitted to the ACT’s Planning and Land Authority and approval by the National Capital Authority has been sought. Both processes are expected to be finalised in coming months.”

Andrew Leigh, Federal Member for Fraser, welcomed the co-operative efforts of the Gillard and Gallagher Labor governments. “Once constructed, the Majura Parkway will provide an important north-south transport link, directly connecting the Federal and Monaro Highways.”

“This will play a significant role in improving the main national and regional freight route, and the ACT will also benefit from additional capacity in its road network,” Mr Leigh said.

An industry briefing session will be held at 11 am on 5 June 2012 at Dame Pattie Menzies House in Dickson to further inform interested parties. For more information about the project, go to www.majuraparkway.act.gov.au.

Statement Ends 18 May 2012

I spoke today at the McKell Institute in Sydney on Australian economic history, with some ideas for the future. The speech is below.

What Do We Eat After the Low-Hanging Fruit? A Brief Economic History of Australia, With Some Lessons for the Future*

Andrew Leigh MP
Federal Member for Fraser
www.andrewleigh.com
[email protected]

18 May 2012
McKell Institute, Sydney

In the Pacific Ocean, off the west coast of South America, sit the Galapagos Islands. Although they straddle the equator, the pattern of ocean currents have a cooling effect, making them an ideal breeding ground for tortoises, iguanas, penguins, finches, albatrosses, gulls, and pelicans.

Because the islands are volcanic, what’s striking about animal life on the Galapagos Islands is that all of it came originally by flying or floating nearly 1000 kilometres from Ecuador. And yet for the species that survived, life on the Galapagos Islands was perfect. Migrating birds lucky enough to be blown off course found an environment with few natural predators. Tortoises that floated here found beaches perfectly suited to their breeding environments. Life flourished.

Looking back across Australian economic history, I am often struck by the extent to which luck has similarly played a part in our success. Politicians are sometimes reluctant to talk about luck – preferring to focus on the things we can control than those we can’t. It is true that ‘chance favours the prepared mind’. But I think it’s still worth talking about the role that luck has played, if only to help understand what preparations we should be making. If we don’t do that, we’re like the Galapagos tortoise, which must have thought itself the luckiest species on earth, until British sailors discovered the islands in the late-eighteenth century, and ate them in their thousands.

Over the 2¼ centuries since European settlement, there have been half a dozen strokes of luck, each of which has tangibly boosted average living standards.[1] Let me take a moment to talk about them in turn.

Read more

Canberra's paper of record has a terrific writeup of Gweneth's BLOOM exhibition. You can read it online here. The exhibition is on at the Gallery of Australian Design at Reconciliation Place until 9 June.

On 2CC this morning, I spoke with host Mark Parton and Liberal Senator Gary Humphries about the government's economic reforms, the importance of putting a price on carbon, and maintaining strong employment outcomes in the ACT. Here's a podcast.

I enjoyed tonight's community forum at Dickson very much. Issues raised included human rights in China, development in Campbell, support for hearing-impaired people, support for mental illness, income taxes & intergenerational equity, government advertising, carbon pricing, minerals taxation, public sector jobs, superannuation, trust in government, and clean energy investment. In particular, I appreciated some of the people who were willing to share very personal stories about mental illness, disability support and human rights.

If you'd like to come along to a future mobile office or community forum, a full list of dates is here.

Today I joined ACT Chief Minister Katy Gallagher and Senator Don Farrell in opening the ACT's own National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme station. Technology is developing at such a rapid rate that what was state-of-the-art only a few years ago soon becomes obsolete, and now households can recycle their unwanted televisions and computers. See media release below:

Senator Don Farrell
Parliamentary Secretary for Sustainability and Urban Water

Katy Gallagher MLA
ACT Chief Minister
Minister for Territory and Municipal Services

Gai Brodtmann MP
Member for Canberra

Andrew Leigh MP
Member for Fraser

15 May 2012

FREE TV AND COMPUTER RECYCLING SCHEME OPENS FOR BUSINESS IN THE ACT

Australia today celebrates a major milestone in waste management with the first services under the National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme opening for business in the ACT.

Householders delivering unwanted TVs and computers to the Mugga Lane waste transfer station in Canberra this morning were greeted by Parliamentary Secretary for Sustainability and Urban Water, Senator Don Farrell, and ACT Chief Minister and Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Katy Gallagher.

“This is an exciting first step for this important initiative, made possible by the Gillard Government’s landmark Product Stewardship legislation,” Senator Farrell said.

“People dropping off their unwanted televisions and computers for free here today, and in the future, can do so with the knowledge that these products will be recycled in an environmentally friendly way.

“Hazardous materials contained in these products, including lead, mercury and zinc, will be prevented from entering the environment through landfill. Valuable non-renewable resources, including gold and other precious metals will also be reclaimed for reuse.”

Services under the Scheme will be progressively rolled out across Australia, boosting television and computer recycling rates to 30 percent in 2012-13 and 80 per cent by 2021-22, providing a long-term solution to television and computer waste.

In the ACT, DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Ltd is providing the free, ongoing recycling service, enabling households and small businesses to dispose of unwanted televisions, computers, and computer products such as printers, keyboards, mice and hard drives.

The scheme does not cover other electronic waste, such as mobile phones, which are already covered by the voluntary recycling scheme MobileMuster.

ACT Chief Minister Katy Gallagher said Canberra is at the forefront of innovation in recycling and waste management.

“I am delighted that the ACT is the first jurisdiction in the country to implement the National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme,” the Chief Minister said.

“The new scheme gives Canberrans the opportunity to dispose of their televisions, computers and computer products, free of charge, in a way that greatly reduces the risk to the local environment by stopping these products going into landfill,” she said.

“It is also hoped the scheme will help alleviate some of the ongoing issues in the ACT around illegal dumping, especially around charity bins.

“It is likely the Mugga Lane and Mitchell Transfer Stations will be very busy in the first few weeks of the new scheme. The ACT Government encourages residents to consider holding their items for a while longer to avoid long queues, especially on weekends. The free e-waste recycling service is a permanent arrangement so there is no need to rush.”

Member for Canberra Gai Brodtmann said she expected the service to be well used.

“Canberrans are great recyclers and this new scheme will be a popular, quick and easy way for families and small businesses to dispose of their unwanted TVs and computers,” she said.

Member for Fraser, Dr Andrew Leigh, said technology is developing at such a rapid rate that what was state-of-the-art only a few years ago soon becomes obsolete.

“The faster our computers and televisions keep improving, the more important it is that we have a good recycling program for e-waste,” Dr Leigh said.

From today, the DHL Supply Chain services will operate from the Mugga Lane and Mitchell Transfer Stations, which are open from 7.30am to 5pm, seven days a week.

The National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme is funded and implemented by the television and computer industry and regulated by the Australia Government under the Product Stewardship Act 2011 and the Product Stewardship (Televisions and Computers) Regulation 2011.

Further information on the scheme can be found at www.environment.gov.au/settlements/waste/ewaste/index.html

Further information about the scheme in the ACT can be found at http://www.tams.act.gov.au