Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, , 1:17:30 to 1:40:41
Discussion focuses on the notification process for 10,000 affected personnel and the mental health support provided following site closure announcements.
Topics: Public service staffing, Workplace culture, National security
Speakers: Celia Perkins, Hon Jenny McAllister, Hon Michaelia Cash, Hon Sarah Henderson, Raff Ciccone
>> 67 sites is correct, Senator.
>> Thank you. And just in terms of the estimate of the number,
>> just give me one moment. Thank you very much. >> My folder back open, Senator, >> and I'll be with you. Yes, we do. So, of those 67 sites, uh around uh 9,000 uh people are resident currently.
>> 9,000 resident across the sites,
>> all those sites. And I'll give you the breakdown into those categories you just referred to. >> Thank you. Um, there's around 1,500 permanent ADF.
>> Permanent.
>> That's uh about 2.5% of the permanent force. >> Yep. >> Around 1,650 APS members.
>> APS public servants. Yep.
>> Yep.
>> Uh around 3,200
>> Reserves.
>> And 2,550
>> 2550 cadetses. Thank you very much. Um so yes, so defenses fact sheets if you go to your website does say just under 10,000. So that is indeed correct uh in terms of the evidence you've just given. Um in terms of those you've just referred to uh the cadets, the officials, the reser, the APS, etc. who utilize the sites, when were they first notified that they would be displaced?
>> Last Wednesday.
>> Last Wednesday. How were they notified?
>> Um, last Wednesday morning, the the day that the deputy prime minister and assistant minister Minister for Finance made the announcement, we undertook a range of staff engagements in defense, that commenced with um a a message from the CDF and the secretary to all defense staff
>> via what form of communication?
>> Um, it was emailed to all staff, uh, posted onto our defense internet site and followed up with a quirky thing we do in defense called a def Graham, which is a key way we communicate internally. So across the course of the morning we engaged um uh all defense staff that the report had been released where to find the information on that support. Uh we also um uh started from Wednesday undertaking all staff online consultations that focused on uh the impact of staff. I led the first of those on the Wednesday afternoon followed up on the Thursday as Mr. Webster said we've done eight uh eight of those so far.
>> Eight so far across Australia.
>> Yes. So they are online but nationally this week we've been doing them in more refined geographic locations. We've also shared um with all of the elements of defense, the three services and the other groups uh details on where their impacted staff are geographically and a package of communication for what we would call commandled engagement so that each of us in leadership roles can engage with our people affected uh on that change. and we will roll next week into in-person engagements on those sites.
>> So, can I just confirm then that the affected personnel and as I said, I'll I'll say the figure on your website just under 10,000 uh first found out that they would be displaced. Uh realistically, when they read it in the paper that morning before the actual announcement,
>> uh we we timed the announcement to be before the government announced the review.
>> No, no, I'm talking about the newspapers when they published this. So they woke up in the morning to find out that they were being displaced. That's that's realistically what happened. An announcement may have occurred an hour later, 2 hours later, 3 hours later, 4 hours later. You may have sent them communications, but it was briefed out and nobody had the courtesy to actually tell these people who serve our country that they were going to be displaced. Is that
>> Senator? I think that that misstates the evidence that Miss Perkins has just provided to you. She's described to you very direct communications that have been provided to impacted staff. I think the government is very clear that one of our primary objectives in stepping through this transition is to support staff. Uh I'm really pleased to hear Miss Perkins report to this committee about the work that is underway uh to engage very directly and the reassurance that is being provided uh to a range of different um people whether they are defense employees, uh service personnel, reserveists, cadetses, other users of these sites engaging very directly to ensure that they are supported and have the information that they need through a transition.
>> Uh, with all due respect, Minister, that does nothing to add to the point that I was making and I'd get you to confirm it. Therefore, that I am not having Miss Perkins. She is outlining what the timeline was. The government briefed the story out. The story was published in newspapers across Australia. that morning when people wake up or if they're like us at midnight when they are checking the front pages of all of the newspapers as we do they found out that they were being displaced. So, Minister, I ask you therefore, do you accept that that is a courteous way to treat 10,000 or thereabouts people who serve our country that they wake up to an announcement only to then have it formally announced and a communications process is put in place? Do you think that's courteous,
>> Senator? The government takes its responsibilities to the people who serve our country as service person.
>> That's not my question. With all due respect, Minister, is that a courteous way of announcing this to these service
men and women? >> Minister,
>> I have the call. Thank you, Chair. Senator, the government takes it very seriously our obligations to the men and women who serve our country in uniform and to the many public servants who work diligently within the defense department uh to support our defense efforts. Uh we also understand deeply uh the relationship that many other Australians have with these sites. It is why so much preparation and thinking has been done not just about day one but about days 2 3 4 5 30 365 the days which follow this announcement to support people through this transition. It's an important transition. It responds to advice we've received about our changing strategic circumstances and the need to ensure that our defense assets are aligned with our capability requirements. But that doesn't mean that change isn't challenging and we are deeply committed to ensuring that people are supported
respect, Minister, and this is my personal opinion, I find the answer you've just given quite demeaning given the time frame that has been outlined by the official at the table. You say you care. Was any thought then given by the government on the impact to as the defense website says around 10,000 just under that would be affected by this that they actually in the early hours of the morning when they found out that the site they were working on and the life that they knew was about to be displaced because the government was undertaking a fire sale. Did the government give any thought to the fact that maybe it was better to let them know as the affected people given you so deeply care to use your words rather than briefing it out to newspapers to have it announced
there? Senator, I don't accept your characterization as a fire sale and I think that >> is a unnecessarily cheap approach to what is actually a serious and strategic policy conversation about how to align the assets that defense holds and uses in support of our national security
The men and women of the Australian
>> that announced the outcome was made by the deputy prime minister just after 10:00 a.m. last Wednesday and defense communications were provided to staff ahead of that announcement. I reiterate the point that this will be a long change process and Miss Perkins has spoken to you about some of the work that defense is prepared to do with affected personnel and a range of other stakeholders to support them through
that transition. Uh, is that why the defense website now does direct affected individuals uh who wake up to this announcement as opposed to in my language having the courtesy of the government uh letting them know uh before they read it in the newspaper or online? Is this why that you've actually had to direct the individuals to a list of hotlines and services including Beyond Blue and several bespoke defense services?
>> Disgrace. >> Senator, what a disgrace. Of course, supports are provided and a range of supports are provided to defense personnel. Uh we seek as a government to ensure that people are supported through every aspect of their employment.
>> How many phone calls has defense received on the hotlines since the sale was announced?
>> I'll take that on notice, Senator.
Uh are you monitoring them to ensure that you understand the impact?
>> Yes, we are. And um I'll I'll describe that because I think it's valuable. Um, as I've already described this morning, we've undertaken eight um online virtual sessions uh where staff the format has been to provide a detailed briefing supported by my colleagues in defense people group who are our um change and support experts uh and question and answers. We've captured all of those um question and answers and we've been analyzing those to understand where staff concerns are and to add that to our proposed approaches for support during transition. Um we have um we have a central defense hotline for all uh services called 1800 defense.
>> Is that 24/7?
>> Uh it's not 24/7 but it is a phone and email capacity. So that gets us overnight and we will be able to give you uh statistics on the calls they have taken and as you said we have as we usually do in any significant change in defense um reminded staff of the supports that are always available to staff uh and we um do retain data uh on um uh confidential services but the the number of people accessing those services. So that is a number we can get for you.
>> Thank you, Miss Perkins. Can I also then get you to take on notice um how many hits you have had on the web page as well. Um when you say you provide phone and email capacity, um I think you then said, and I I don't want to paraphrase you, so if I've misheard you, please um correct the record. That gives you that capacity overnight. So, in terms of if I'm at 9:00 at night needing to talk to somebody because I've read this announcement and obviously it's affecting me, um, who do I speak to
then? >> So, all all all defense, so I'll break it down. Um, 1800 defense, um, which is a phone number, but also a web capacity is the way all defense people can communicate when they have a service delivery need. And that that's everything. um uh uh and many of our people start there and that team can direct people to the right part of defense for service. All people in defense ADF and APS have access to a number of additional support services through our employee assistance program. Um the the reference on the website you referred to is a a way to refresh and remind people how to access those services. um uh and and that is um um uh email and phone referrals to that
>> Um Minister, when this was announced, uh the Minister for Defense said his priority wasn't the revenue and it wasn't housing. Can I ask what was the priority? Uh given in particular the evidence, I would almost put to you that it was the media and managing the announcement over our war fighters and
their families. Senator, the priority, as has been communicated uh in answers to many questions this morning, is aligning our national estate with our strategic interests. We received advice by way of the defense strategic review that suggested that that was not the case. Uh that there were a range of sites that were uh underutilized, not fit for purpose. uh and that what was needed was a cleareyed approach to what is required for our national defense. Uh as a consequence of that advice, an audit was commissioned that went through this in a very detailed way and as Mr. Herkins indicated to the committee earlier. Uh there was then subsequent analysis undertaken on the recommendations put to defense by the audit. This has been a long serious significant piece of policy work and it is of course really important that the defense uh assets are aligned with the objectives in our national defense strategy.
>> Uh when you say it's been a long and serious piece, when did this begin?
I'll ask officials to talk you through the timeline.
>> Thank you, Minister. Um, as I mentioned this morning, um the the direction to undertake um an independent order of the estate was a recommendation of the defense strategic review delivered in 2023. Uh their work was undertaken in the latter part of 2023 and the report was handed uh to ministers in uh the 23rd of December, I think 2023. My copy came wrapped in Christmas paper from the secretariat. Um, as I mentioned this morning, um, after initial considerations, the deputy prime minister directed defense to undertake detailed analysis of the recommendations to develop a a a fully detailed implementation approach. That work um continued over 2024 and 2025. Uh, and we returned to government um in the um latter part of 2025 with defense's recommendations. The government has considered that uh and led to the
announcement last week.
just in terms of minister, can I ask you what is defense's greatest asset
>> Senator the defense frequently describes its greatest asset as its people?
>> Correct. Absolutely. uh on this we are going to agree. Uh I in that regard can I ask question >> um prior to the announcement can you take me through how the people in particular that have been affected uh and will be displaced how their views were taken into consideration.
>> I'll have Miss Perkins talk about some of the work that was undertaken through the audit and any subsequent work undertaken by defense. But I'll reiterate some of the advice I've already provided this morning. We acknowledge the very deep connection that our people, our families, serving personnel, and former ADF have with the establishments where they live and they work and they train. It's why the arrangements that Miss Perkins has stepped you through have been put in place and it is our intention to work very closely with these communities as we step through this very important transition. The
issue I have is that everything you're saying is post the announcement.
>> Add to this evidence by speaking about some of the work that's been undertaken.
>> Minister, can I just just ask one question.
>> Sorry. Did you want to hear about the work had been done in response to Minister Cash's question or that was not you're not actually interested in the answer?
>> You hadn't completed your answer.
>> Miss Perkins has additional information to provide about how defense approach
this today. And can I just say, Miss Perkins, given time, can you limit your answer to the sale of the 67 sites?
>> Yeah, thank you. Um, as I mentioned earlier, the independent audit leads um consulted with around 50 uh people within defense um across the services and groups uh as they develop their work. Um and in the analysis that defense undertook before returning to government on an implementation approach uh the services and groups were a core part of understanding that there's two principles that have been really important as we've planned for transition from these sites. The first is that wherever possible, we will retain people within a posting locality or a regional or metro area. So that that the the disruption is limited uh to a a a place as nearby as possible. Uh and that we will use the natural posting cycle to make these changes. So our ADF members are typically on a site for a posting period and then they will move to it is very normal part of service to move from location to location and we will seek wherever possible to use the posting cycle as the the natural break in which those people transition from that site. That will of course be a different experience for our APS members. And again, I'd reiterate the principle that we relocate them to a site nearby where they currently work. And we work with them through the change process to understand the impacts that might have around things that matter to them. And what we're already hearing that will be transit times, it will be childcare arrangements and things of that nature. And that's the support we'll be leaning into as we plan
>> Do you want just jump in and ask, can you ask one? >> Yeah. There was some clean up questions.
to um to to address the particular concerns in relation to the sale of the Swan Island Golf Course, which is next to a highly secure facility on Swan Island. In fact, it's guarded by the military. You cannot enter Swan Island unless you have specific permission. I'm not going to go into the details, but we all know that this is a highly secure and sensitive facility. How on earth could this government contemplate selling off land adjacent to this facility which could potentially go to anyone including foreign buyers? >> I I have to say there's someone who's represented the Jalong and Berin region. The defense minister represents Jalong also. It is a disgrace. And Fort Queens Cliffe, one of the most historic bases in this country which guarded Port Phillip from 1860s. What on earth, Minister, are you thinking in selling off assets like
Senator, I've explained already the framework, which is that we've received advice that the defense estate is not aligned to our national defense objectives. Uh you've raised a number of specific sites and specific questions. Uh and Miss Perkins can talk to you about the approach with each of those sites. Um >> but let's go to island. Senator, you
know the drill here. Let the minister And I will be moving the caller along. So
>> let's go to Swan Island. >> How are you going to stop the Chinese are the Chinese able to purchase land?
Thank you everyone. Just a moment. Minister, can you conclude your answer please?
>> Uh thanks very much. Um, [clears throat] of course we intend to uh observe the heritage arrangements that do attach to many of these sites and Miss Perkins can talk about how that will be accomplished. He's already indicated to you that uh Department of Finance and the Department of Climate Change Energy and Water have already been engaged in some of the work around this uh and I will allow her to speak to questions generally around national security. I think you will and should understand Senate Senator Henderson that there are some limitations about what usually is discussed in these public forums around national security
questions. That's why I've been very sorry minister. That's why I've been very careful with my discuss
forum but there'll be limitations on
being very careful with my words in relation to Swan Island. Can I ask that question to be addressed? How is the Swan Island facility going to be appropriately protected when you are proposing to sell off land adjacent to that facility? You haven't even made it clear that this won't go to foreign interests. I mean, this is a this is sending shock waves through our nation, including in Victoria. So, um, Miss Perkins, please explain how you are going to protect our national security when you are proposing to sell off land adjacent to the Swan Island facility
>> and then we'll move the call along.
Perkins, >> thank you, Senator. Uh, starting with the Swan Island golf course, the point I'd make as a headline is it's already a publicly accessible golf course. Um, uh, and in the approach to market
>> controlled by the military though.
>> Thank you, Senator Henderson. Let M Perkins finish otherwise I'll move the
>> I in the approach to market that the department of finance will lead certainly part of our preliminary conversations will be uh where there are sites on the devestment list where there may be a security requirement to understand that there is the capacity to build that into the conditions of sale. Um that would certainly be our intention at a number of sites that are adjacent to existing and continuing defense capability. And I would note of course that that would include foreign investment um provision. So that would be how we would intend to um respond to uh the security needs of the existing uh capability at that site adjacent to that site.
the call along. So we'll come back to the opposition later. Thank you, Senator Henderson. >> It's not a public. >> Thank you. You don't have the call, Deputy Chair. Um >> you've got to correct Senator Whiteaker. >> So you've got to correct your evidence. >> Thank you, Senator Whiteaker. You have
the call. They cannot mislead this committee