HANSARD EXTRACT
|
Matters of Public Importance: Defence Equipment |
| 15 February 2006 |
Mr HAYES
(Werriwa)
(5.03
p.m.)—I
would like to join in this MPI. I am not doing so on the same basis
as the member for Cowan or the member for Kennedy or the member for
Wakefield, who have all had previous military experience. My reason
for joining in the debate is that I have had experience of
representing a particular class of persons who work in a particular
occupation in a disciplined service. As the member for Dickson would
be only too aware, for a large period of my life I have been
representing police officers and looking to ensure that they have
adequate and proper protection through the equipment they need. I
know from first-hand experience what is required in ensuring that
the equipment that is supplied to those officers in that style of
service meets the demands and rigours of that occupation.
This MPI is about a series of complaints that have been received
from military personnel, dealing with operational efficiency and
also occupational health and safety based issues. When we are
talking about a disciplined service where there is a chain of
command, I do not believe we can adequately quarantine these issues,
as they apply to one another. I understand what has been said about
the RODUM system, and I understand that that is essentially a system
to maintain at least a reporting provision in relation to real-time
reporting of operational efficiency of equipment.
But what we are concerned about is that, notwithstanding that, we
have a situation where military personnel have actually taken upon
themselves to set up their own website to log complaints that have
been made about equipment by colleagues throughout the ADF. One site
was set up by a veteran of
Iraq and East Timor, one Dane Simmonds. In that site,
Mr
Simmonds logged complaints from many soldiers from various areas of
the ADF that concerned their clothing and their equipment. As a
consequence of the number of complaints that were received and his
attempts to process those complaints, he was ordered to shut down
that site. That does not sit well when you think that that site
almost, to that extent, runs in competition with the military’s
RODUM reporting scheme.
I believe that there has to be a proper auditing process for the
Defence Materiel Organisation. That organisation runs to a budget of
$7.2 billion. We know that the military has only recently been sued
for breach of copyright or at least in respect of plagiarism of
tender documents. We also know that the ADF’s Inspector-General has
recommended that certain charges be raised or disciplinary action
taken against two officers of the DMO.
I know my time is very limited. I say to the minister, in his new
role, that this is an organisation that, for various reasons—probity
and otherwise—requires complete investigation. Apart from the
probity issues, it is the responsibility of the Defence Materiel
Organisation to provide our troops with the safest and best
equipment to suit the purpose at hand.
Return
to Speeches Menu.
