9. Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) Link to this
to the Minister of Conservation
What services will be cut and how many jobs will be lost at the Department of Conservation as a result of the $54 million cut in funding over 4 years?
Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Conservation) Link to this
Let me repeat the essential point already made by the Prime Minister today in response to what was, essentially, exactly the same question. The $54 million of savings over the next 4 years have to be seen against the context of more than $1.5 billion of expenditure and the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression. For the last 5 years money has been pouring into agencies of State; this Government is demanding productivity enhancements. I am happy to say that the Department of Conservation is among the better-managed agencies, and I am confident that it can achieve these extremely modest savings without compromising any of its core objectives. In respect of job retention, I say that we are seeing a large number of vacancies; the department will be relying on them, plus natural attrition. I am confident that the core objectives will be achieved.
Has the Government cut funding for the output class “Management of natural heritage”, which covers weed and pest control in national parks and other Crown land managed by the Department of Conservation, by $9 million this year alone?
The Government has made a variety of very modest savings, which have been expected of the department, including some low-priority pest and weed control. On the other hand, the department will be getting increased funding for a number of other conservation objectives that I think are a much higher priority.
Does the Minister know that weed and pest control are labour-intensive and are a relatively inexpensive source of jobs in a time of recession, and that this funding cut may result in the loss of as many jobs as have been saved by the 9-day working fortnight?
I have already made it clear that the department will be relying on vacancies and natural attrition to achieve its objectives. We have also increased spending on two of the non-departmental votes that will contribute to exactly those objectives, and I am confident that the core principles of the department will be adequately maintained. I note that the total spend of $419 million is $100 million more than the department’s budget as recently as 2007.