Page 197 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 26 February 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I will begin by quoting from page 15 of the transcript. Senator Wong indicated to the committee that the minister, Senator Cormann, had made a number of political statements on the basis of the finance department’s advice. Senator Wong says:
Obviously that puts the department and you—
that is, Mr Tune—
personally in a very difficult situation—your advice—
that is, Dr Tune’s advice—
being used in this way.
Senator Wong went on to say that the hearing presents:
… an opportunity for us to make sure we are clear about what the facts are. Obviously the political rhetoric is a matter for the minister but not for you. Let’s go back to the start and remind ourselves what was in fact announced in the economic statement and the budget.
Senator Wong asked Mr Tune to remind the committee and the Australian people, in terms of the policies and measures that affected the public service, what was in the 2013-14 budget. Mr Tune replied:
In the budget there were two measures of relevance. One was a targeted reduction in staff in the APS, and that was directed at certain groups inside the APS, by level rather than by agency. The second one was a reduction in the square meterage that we allow in our costings for property—a reduction from 16 square metres to 14 square metres over time as leases expired. That was the budget.
Senator Wong asked the question:
…it is the case, that the former government had a redeployment policy, which was issued by the Public Service Commissioner and also reflected in public statements from the then minister. It had been in place since 2011 and it made clear that the first priority in approaching savings measures was non-staff savings, whether they were an efficiency dividend or otherwise, and that compulsory retrenchment should be avoided. Is that correct?
Mr Tune replied:
That is broadly correct, yes.
Senator Wong followed up:
But the first priority was non-staff cuts in terms of the policy of the previous government.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video