Biosecurity jobs to go as DAFF chases savings

[shortly]

Biosecurity officers are in the firing line, as the Federal Department of Agriculture tries to address what it's called its "unsustainable" budget position.

In a memo to staff on Friday, obtained by the ABC, department secretary Paul Grimes said about 220 voluntary redundancies will be offered in coming months, after attempts to cut staffing through natural attrition failed.

In the Budget in May, the then Labor government imposed an efficiency dividend on the Department of Agriculture which required it to shed about 230 jobs, or 5 per cent of its workforce, to reduce operating costs.

ABC Rural reported at the time that the department would seek to achieve those cuts through natural attrition.

On Friday, Mr Grimes told staff those attempts had failed, and 220 voluntary redundancies will be offered as the Agriculture Department tries to address a budget situation that is "not sustainable" and which requires "urgent and decisive action" to restore it to balance.

The memo indicates that frontline biosecurity jobs will be among the first to go.

"In the first instance, offers will be made in Border Compliance Division in Canberra and the passengers, mail and cargo programs in the regions," Mr Grimes' email told staff.

"The analysis we've done and continue to do, including through the transition committees, will allow us to manage biosecurity risk effectively.

"Further offers will be made progressively in other areas of the department as our budget business priorities are identified."

Mr Grimes said that he wants to make sure that workloads for remaining staff are sustainable, and that the delivery of Agriculture Department services remains effective.

 

The department will be carefully prioritising work to maintain core [biosecurity] functions.

Department of Agriculture statement

 

Labor's agriculture spokesman and former agriculture minister Joel Fitzgibbon says the job cuts will put Australia's domestic production and food exports at risk.

He acknowledges that Labor had imposed the efficiency dividend on the department.

"All governments impose efficiency dividends, we certainly did so as a government in very difficult global financial times.

"But we would never have taken a decision to cut frontline services that put at risk our clean green image as a food exporting nation," Mr Fitzgibbon said.

"It's up to Minister Barnaby Joyce to clarify the cuts, indeed I challenge him to clarify them, and in doing so, challenge him to give us a guarantee that our clean, green, safe image will be protected as a nation."

In a statement, a spokesperson for the Federal Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce said that questions relating to staffing should be referred to the department, but that he is aware of the call for voluntary redundancies and is glad the call is voluntary.

"The Secretary will ensure these [biosecurity and other] functions can continue as he implements the staffing reduction necessitated by Labor's last efficiency dividend," the spokesperson said.

"The Secretary has advised the Minister that the department is reviewing its structure and functions to ensure efficiency while maintaining core functions, as well as sustainable and manageable workloads."

"The department originally forecast the need for staff reductions in the Portfolio Budget Statements at the May budget. The required reductions were not achieved by natural attrition. Accordingly the department has indicated the need for 220 voluntary redundancies in the coming months."

In a statement, the Department of Agriculture told ABC Rural that reviews of staffing are "a normal part of business for a government department that has a responsibility to use tax payers' money efficiently."

 

If the department and the Minister can say that this will not affect those risks in any great way, then people could understand that. [if not] farmers will be asking questions.

Matt Linnegar, CEO, National Farmers' Federation

 

The department says a shortfall in cost-recovered revenue is a significant contributor to its budgetary problems, but that a "major proportion" of its operating expenses are salaries.

"Our overall budget position means the department will need to achieve a modest reduction in staff. The department is reviewing its structure and functions to ensure efficiency while maintaining sustainable and manageable workloads. The department will be carefully prioritising work to maintain core functions [such as export clearances and biosecurity functions]."

The National Farmers' Federation's chief executive Matt Linnegar said that the farmer's view "will always be that they don't want to see the threat of biosecurity risks increased."

"Traditionally, quarantine measures have had a strong frontline focus, but there's also work done before and after the border too," he said.

"If the department and the Minister can say that this will not affect those risks in any great way, then people could understand that.

"If they're unable to do that then farmers will be asking questions."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-11/agriculture-department-redundancies/5083142

[PhoenixSon]

more necks on the chopping block,

stirring up an ant nest, hopefully people remember all these jobs losses etc when its time to vote again, hopefully im not asking too much.

[Darklight]

The thing that totally shits me about all these cuts to DPI and probably other areas is that a massive amount of expertise and experience is being lost which will take a full generation to replace if it can be done at all

I spoke to about a dozen staff members at various Ag Dept/ DPI research places last year, all of whom were either directly affected by the cuts and finishing up, or were going to be the skeleton staff for what was formerly a larger research project, and facing an uncertain future. Reduced staffing means that there are scant guarantees those left can achieve required project outcomes with such a small workforce remaining

Between them they had an incredible amount of expertise. Unbefuckingleivable. And not the sort that you walk out the door after an undergraduate degree either. The sort of experience you get from working within a specific field for a generation or more.

They were exactly the sort of people you want working or advice from on say, a grain project- they were extremely well versed on practical matters, having extensive experience in field matters, the performance of a wide range of varieties within a particular climate, the advantages and disadvantages of different fertiliser regimes, soil types, pathogen resistance.

Granted their specialisations were a bit narrow, you might have found their conversation dull if you were seated next to them on a long bus trip for example- but they were networked, very happy to share what they knew. That too is increasingly less common these days with IP an issue for many institutions.

But if you wanted information on, I dunno, the processes of sorghum self pollination or fungal resistance or a comparison of variety performance in dry years these people would happily rabbit on about it for hours until they were sure you understood- and where they couldn't help, they would know someone up the road who worked on it ten years ago and here's their number, tell 'em I sent you.

Google will not replace them. It can't. Much of their knowledge was not documented in the first place because it was 'common' within the field, only it's not any more because they are now almost all redundant.

Some of the agricultural facilities are almost like ghost towns

We aren't going to notice they're gone for another few years. By then we won't be able to replace them

And small, rural communities will suffer, because a lot of these people resided in them and contributed heavily to their economies. Fuck knows what they will do, they can't all open up B&Bs or move to the coast to live near the grandkids

[gtarman]

Just another example of Australian short-sightedness I guess. Because we definitely need the government to give us more examples of that

Australia is like the hot 21-year-old girl who thinks she's gonna be hot forever. She goes out and drinks and takes pills and hooks up with random dudes in a non-stop orgy of party-going. But one day she's going to wake up and realize she's not hot anymore, and that she has nothing else going for her. No natural resources, no innovators, no skilled workers, no science or research. She's gonna be nothing but old and used up and unwanted, is little Miss Australia. I hope she has fun while it lasts.

Edited November 12, 2013 by gtarman

[Halcyon Daze]

Last time the Libs did this Fire Ants got in and we haven't got rid of hem since

[DiscoStu]

Just another example of Australian short-sightedness I guess. Because we definitely need the government to give us more examples of that

Australia is like the hot 21-year-old girl who thinks she's gonna be hot forever. She goes out and drinks and takes pills and hooks up with random dudes in a non-stop orgy of party-going. But one day she's going to wake up and realize she's not hot anymore, and that she has nothing else going for her. No natural resources, no innovators, no skilled workers, no science or research. She's gonna be nothing but old and used up and unwanted, is little Miss Australia. I hope she has fun while it lasts.

actually australia was the hot 21 year old but it wouldn't stop partying and now it's turned into the 35 year old crack whore blowing truckers in parking lots and exposing its crotch to passing cars all for a few scraps of rock thrown at it from a couple of rich pimps.

[watertrade]

I know someone who just retired From a long career in DAFF and after writing /rewriting biosecurity policy over the last 3 years. Actually, he retired years ago but has spent the last 5\6 years taking contracts on hundreds of dollars an hour to help them get things done. Just before he left - a new area executive started initiating a process model based exactly the as one of the main Aussie airlines. (?) whitch funnily enough wouldn't work in a biosecurity context. I think this was the last straw. He walked out. Most of the long career academics there feel the same way.

From those I know working ar CSIRO it is the same. Australia is in a pretty funny place at the moment.

Edited November 12, 2013 by watertrade

[PhoenixSon]

a lot of contract work around thats for sure in a lot of professions!~

I thought the DPI was defunct well still around but different name.

kind of like re-inventing the wheel.

Australia should be the innovative country it once was, and that innovation should of stayed within Australia and fostered to fruition but sadly most things are seized upon by others(outside of aus) who are willing to invest some coin for profit and produce down the track.

Major slashes in all government owned "assests" but what worries me the most is health and education. Which i believe are paramount, it used to be the cream of the crop who in turn could teach, now it's some drone reading out of a book.

Now i feel like an old nag bitchin bitchin bitchin but bloody bitchin for a good reason!!

[GoOnThen]

In the Budget in May, the then Labor government imposed an efficiency dividend on the Department of Agriculture which required it to shed about 230 jobs, or 5 per cent of its workforce, to reduce operating costs.

I spoke to about a dozen staff members at various Ag Dept/ DPI research places last year, all of whom were either directly affected by the cuts and finishing up, or were going to be the skeleton staff for what was formerly a larger research project, and facing an uncertain future. Reduced staffing means that there are scant guarantees those left can achieve required project outcomes with such a small workforce remaining

more necks on the chopping block,

stirring up an ant nest, hopefully people remember all these jobs losses etc when its time to vote again, hopefully im not asking too much.

Last time the Libs did this Fire Ants got in and we haven't got rid of hem since

Cheers

Got

[watertrade]

Just before he left - a new area executive started initiating a process model based exactly the as one of the main Aussie airlines. (?) whitch funnily enough wouldn't work in a biosecurity context.

I should clarify here, the new changes which effected just the biosecurity area were not compatible with my friends work. I.e. he and they wasted three years of work. And of course probably millions of dollars.

[shortly]

I should clarify here, the new changes which effected just the biosecurity area were not compatible with my friends work. I.e. he and they wasted three years of work. And of course probably millions of dollars.

I suspect that is standard practice for pretty much every grubbyment dept since the beginning of time.

was it the replacement of inspections with approved auditable‎ processes designed to reduce risks?