Small government? Public service will expand under the Coalition
|
The opposition has been giving the impression they’re all about slashing and burning to get the federal Budget back to surplus faster than Labor, right down to yesterday copying $1.4 billion worth of Labor savings, causing some momentary embarrassment to Joe Hockey who had bagged one of the measures. But once you tote up its election commitments, the party of small government turns out to be anything but. The Liberals have, true, committed to a public service staffing freeze for two years, a clunky and unworkable way of trying to cut public service numbers — they’d announce actual cuts but it would put Gary Humphries’ Senate spot in jeopardy and ensure they couldn’t win Eden-Monaro. The freeze, which will kill graduate recruitment into the public service for two years, with flow-on effects for a decade or more, is designed to pay for Greg Hunt’s execrable “soil carbon” drivel. And among the Labor cuts they adopted yesterday was an increase in the public service efficiency dividend in 2011, guaranteed to make life difficult for small agencies. But this is undermined by a number of policies that call for more public servants, in the style of the last years of the Howard government, when the public service had to grow rapidly at a time of rising labour shortages to hand out money under all the spending programs set up by the Liberals.
This comes on top of the welcome establishment of a new ‘Parliamentary Budget Office’, one of the few good ideas of the Malcolm Turnbull era to survive the intellectual devolution that has gone on under Abbott — who said back in June would cost around $2 million a year. Remember this is in addition to a host of new programs across areas like tourism infrastructure, community crime programs and handouts to favoured groups that, as happened under the Howard government, require warm bodies at desks in spending agencies to hand the money out. While Labor promised to take a meat-axe to the public service in 2007, no one ever really believed it could embrace the role of slashing the size of government. But the Liberals are supposed to at least start off slashing government, even if they undo all their good work after a couple of terms in office. This time around, they’re not even proposing to do that. The party of small government will arrive in office needing more public servants than ever. |
|
|
|








6 Comments
Just more proof, as if it was needed, the Coalition are an economic disaster area…it is horrific to contemplate what would happen to this country should they somehow gain power.
Tony Abbott’s priorities
Show him a man of excellence.
He promises austerities,
An office of due diligence
So Treasury authorities
Display no more incompetence.
He’s making no apologies
For asking hypervigilance
In laying out new boundaries.
These levels of intelligence
Required of Oz bureaucracies
Do not incur further expense.
No internet technologies,
Nor use of video conference.
Such words he says are blasphemies.
Simple tax receipts with statements
Of expenditure for Aussies
Are all we need for governance.
Why aren’t the Labour Party spin doctors and advertisers bringing these factoids to public attention ? Surely, with the financial resources available to the Party they could mount a halfway decent campaign? A few of the informational facts cited here could, without challenging anyone’s attention span, be slipped into some of the debates and campaign speeches. Who are running Labour’s campaign strategy? Time to find a wall and line them up to be shot ! Bring on the real Labour Party, I say.
Dr Harvey M Tarvydas
Thanks BK for doing the work and putting together a top summary.
So working journalists still exist or would you rather I call you a journalist that does the work?
@PatriciaWA - you little poet you (and is bloody OK)
WTF is the “Office of Due Diligence” supposed to do? We already have spending proposals going through the Public Service, Treasury, Finance, PM&C, Cabinet and of course Parliament. What will they add to it? What criteria will they use? What will happen if they say that a pet and politically smart Coalition policy is a dog?
It’s one of the more bizarre and meaningless proposals of this surreal campaign, which is saying something.
If people read Lindsay Tanner’s speech at the National PRESS Club prior to the 2007 election, they’ll see just how big the Public Service was under Howard. Senator Boswell had 9 extra members of staff leading up to the 2007 election.He was not a Minister, nor did he have extra ‘duties’ to perform in the Parliament. It was to do most important work - help Boswell get re-elected??
There was the buying of the grog for Kirribilli and The Lodge, plus the ‘expert’ to purchase same. Who remembers the new carpet in Howard’s dining room in Parlt House, plus the new dining chairs at a thousand or two dollars each. Then the gardens were renovated at both PM’s houses at ???cost. The PM’s plane had a couple of extra fuel tanks removed for more comfort furniture???at the cost of many thousands, only to have this reversed some time later???Needed that ‘extra’ fuel after all!
There was the gold carriage for the Queen’s golden anniversary present, that cost over $300,000, and we weren’t even asked! It went on and on ad nauseum! They fell in love with the power and lifestyle and we weren’t even told about most of it?They treated us and our taxes as their automatic right to use and abuse at will -their will! There were the tax and super changes that meant, that Howard & Costello would receive an extra $2 million between them on retirement - let’s also mention the very generous tax concessions after retirement. All their protestations re overspending/extravagance etc leaves me somewhere between rage and cynacism or both!