Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence. I refer the minister to comments by the Assistant Minister for Defence on the ABC's Q&A program, where he said, and I quote:

I just run the department. … I just make Defence actually work.

Given that the Prime Minister's office is making all of the decisions on Australia's future submarine project, the Defence minister was overruled on his preferred candidates to write the Defence white paper, he has had staff imposed on him by the Prime Minister's office, the minister has refused to intervene about the new pay deal for ADF personnel that cuts their wages and he is continually being undermined by his senior cabinet colleagues, Minister, who is actually running the Defence department? And who is making it work?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Defence, Senator Johnston, could answer elements of that question that are directly relevant to his portfolio.

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Let me just go through some of the things that we have done, in stark contrast to the mess that we inherited: 58 Joint Strike Fighters; eight P-8 surveillance aircraft; managed a shortage in replenishment ships; and got submarines back into the water. I have had something like 35 bilaterals regionally with my colleagues. I have been to the Middle East several times to assist us to get into Iraq.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, they do not want to hear the facts, Mr President. They do not want to hear what we have been doing.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And, of course, then we have taken the share of GDP for the Defence budget from 1.56 per cent—as I have said, the lowest since 1938—to 1.8 per cent in one budget. Of course, $14 billion was ripped out in the years previous to us coming to power. We have sought to repair that and have a funding envelope that projects Defence forward. These are things that they over there, Mr President, do not understand. We have been assiduously working to repair the damage that they did to Defence.

Opposition senators interjecting—

You can roll your eyes! May I say, Mr President, Senate estimates has become just a doddle for the shadow minister. There was not a single bit of pressure put on the department. I really think that, if none of us had turned up, it might have been more fruitful than wasting a day with the senator over there. The fact is: Defence is back on the road after being devastated by you. I do not want to take the credit for it, but we over here take the credit for it, because we are a government that knows what good government looks like.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer to Senate estimates when the defence minister said he did not attend a National Security Committee meeting because he—and I quote—'was not going to add much'. Can the minister confirm that his inability to add much is also the view of his fellow members of the NSC?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle, I am going to give you the opportunity to reword your question. That was a reflection upon the minister.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Order! It was a reflection on the minister. It does not just have to be words; it can be the way it is implied and given in the question. So, Senator Sterle, you have the opportunity to reword your supplementary question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Mr President, perhaps to seek some guidance. The quote that Senator Sterle put to the minister is a quote of the minister. I am not sure which bit you would like us to reword. Perhaps we could get some guidance from the chair.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was not the quote; that is on the record. It was the way he phrased the question. It impugned upon the minister. Senator Sterle, you can ask the question.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Conroy, I do not need your assistance.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will start with the quote from the minister, in Senate estimates, when he said he did attend the national security meeting when he was asked. And in his words, he answered—because I was in the room, Mr President—that he 'was not going to add much'. I just want to confirm if that is the opinion of the rest of his committee, the NSC. There is nothing hard about that.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In that case, your question is out of order because he cannot give an opinion of someone else's opinion. The question is out of order, Senator Sterle. Do you have a final supplementary question?

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Why can't the minister add much to national security meetings?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is in order, Senator Sterle.

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do appreciate the opportunity to answer, Senator Sterle. The fact is: I knew the subject matter before the National Security Committee. They did not bear directly upon my portfolio. But the point is this: we show respect to a committee of this chamber and Senate estimates is a very, very important part of the process. And I take it seriously. That is why I turned up to Senate estimates. I take it seriously; I have always taken it seriously. It was very clear to me that when your former Prime Minister sent her bodyguard to Senate estimates she did not take it seriously. We all take it seriously over here, in stark contrast to the political nonsense and game you think this really is.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is a further supplementary.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ruled the first supplementary out of order, so you had your final.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You gave him a chance to reword—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He did, and I ruled it out of order. Senator Conroy, are you reflecting on the chair again?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You invited him to reword it, and he did.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I reworded it.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! And I ruled the question out of order.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Then he reworded it again.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, then he asked a supplementary question. He got the chance to reword it once. I am not going to argue about this.