Reece

As we move towards our 200th year, it is worth noting that hopefully, the Budget handed down on September 15th by Paul Keating will in fact serve to almost balance our books by this time next year. That will be a great step forward for Australia’s fiscal credibility and quite seriously a step in the right direction for the future generations of young Australians that will inevitably inherit the fruits, good or bad, of OUR monetary actions.

On the defence side though the frugal budget only served to cast a general gloom over the aspirations and claimed achievements of its popular and hard-working Minister, Kim Beazley.

Mr Beazley has his share of problems- manpower attrition is reaching critical proportions, projects are being delayed or scuttled (Waler, F-111, AEW etc. ) and little is being offered in their place as viable alternatives.

It is worth noting that when Labor campaigned to win office back in 1983 they promoted heavily (to allay the fears of swinging voters who traditionally view Labor as defence vandals) the fact that they would increase defence spending in real terms by 4. 5% per annum. A big promise indeed and one that obviously a majority of the electorate believed but like most election promises inevitably held as much credibility as a three dollar bill.

In 1986 came the Dibb Report and a stated aim of spending an extra 3% per annum to achieve the wide-ranging benefits that this controversial document promised. The Dibb Report of course was molded into shape over a period by the Chiefs of Staff to then form the basis of the March 1987 White Paper. The White Paper was very well received but relied upon an increase in spending of $25bn over the next 15 years for it to be taken seriously. Almost hot on the heels of the White Paper came Paul Keating’s May 13 economic statement that only served to make even the optimists within our Services question the ability of the White Paper to survive the test of time.

And so onto Budget Night and the inevitable announcement that Defence had gone from 4. 5% real growth to 3% real growth to 1 % real growth to a real world result of -1% for 1987/88. Beazley tried to put a bright face on a worn body though and pointed to the hope that the “focus of debate should shift from how much is spent- or is promised to be spent how efficiently and effectively it is spent”. (Our full budget report appears in Defence Update elsewhere in this edition)

Furthermore, while it is now promised that for the next budget, Defence will see a 1. 5% gain, Treasurer Keating has verified that growth in the following two years will be limited at best to a target of 2%. In other words, Defence has as much chance of fulfilling the long-term objectives of the excellent White Paper as this writer has of owning a Learjet! This of course does little for the morale of the forces, who additionally have been cut back by a further 918 men and women, and even the much-publicised announcement of $75m being made available for forces housing glosses over the fact that much of this was for projects already in being for new dwellings being constructed at Tindal and Rockingham, which are new bases and naturally required housing anyway.

The men and women within our Defence forces simply have to be treated better than they have been by successive governments. Their pay and conditions have consistently slipped behind the national average. Over the last six years the average national wage has risen by 56% while that of the ADF has increased by only 28%. Living away from home allowances are significantly higher for regular public servants than they are for Defence personnel and the same situation exists in terms of pensions in spite of the fact that Defence personnel contribute more to their fund.

The number of people who wanted ‘out’ during 1986 was a record at just under 9000. For 1985 it was 8548 and for the year before 7400. Since the early eighties, the overall loss rate has averaged around 8% with nowadays Defence looking to losing upwards of a third of its total highly trained manpower every three years. Obviously, this cannot continue to occur if we are to retain a credible defence force in the years to come.

There is simply too many good people, too much irreplaceable expertise, too many old hands leaving the forces because they are fed up with being treated as second-class citizens.

Aircrew are now in most cases down to near parity levels. Given how much it costs to graduate one pilot from Pearce isn’t it time something genuine was done to retain these highly trained specialists? You would think so but it seems that those responsible within Defence for formulating what has been suggested for years, keep needing more time to think about it – they had better hurry though before there is nobody left to sell their grand schemes to.

A Breath of Fresh Air

The vast majority of air travellers (70% +) who don’t smoke will be overjoyed by the recent decision by the Federal Government to ban all cigarette smoking on domestic flights. Caucus voted 54 to 20 to implement the ban which was mooted earlier this year in federal Parliament. The legislation to enact the decision into law is expected to be brought down during the course of this issue.

The decision will save the Australian domestic airline system millions of dollars annually in reduced air filtration maintenance, a reduced cabin cleaning requirement and slightly lower fuel bills. For the bulk of travellers, it is a breath of fresh air that is considered by the vast majority as long overdue.

For the smoker, it will offer them the unique opportunity to give their body a break for an hour or so and to be able to perform its assigned functions without being constantly force-fed with a smorgasbord of white corpuscle-reducing toxins including carbon monoxide, nicotine, assorted tars and radon gas.