ABS staff “angry” at Turnbull following Census outage, union says

47

news The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) has said staff at the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) are “angry” at the Turnbull Government following the failure of the Census web service on Census night.

ABS’ “highly qualified and dedicated” staff should not be blamed for “decisions taken by the Turnbull Government that are the real cause” of 9 August’s Census “debacle”, the union said.

“Our members working in the ABS have slugged their guts out for months to make this Census work despite multiple Government decisions that have caused major problems,” said Nadine Flood, CPSU National Secretary. “They know how critical the information collected in the Census is to the nation and they’re absolutely gutted at the damage done to the ABS’s reputation and the Census itself.”

According to Flood, there are 700 fewer staff at the ABS now than when the last Census was conducted five years ago and staff are suffering under “massive workloads” as a result.

“Staff saw these problems coming a mile off,” she said.

She added that “critical” planning time was lost as the Government “foolishly considered axing the Census, chopped and changed ministers three times and dilly-dallied for nearly a year in appointing a new chief statistician”.

Speaking about the issue this week, the Prime Minister said: “[T]here were failures on the part of ABS and its systems provider [IBM]. All of that is subject to review.”

“Which heads roll where and when will be determined once the review is complete,” he added.

Calling Turnbull’s “heads will roll” comment “shameful”, Flood said he had taken “no responsibility for the real cause of this debacle, the decisions made by his Government.”

“It is Governments that are responsible for the reliability of public services and the Turnbull Government cannot dodge responsibility for slashing budgets and jobs,” said the National Secretary.

“Prime Minister Turnbull should be apologising not finger pointing,” she said.

According to Flood, the situation is “just one example” of how cuts to public sector staffing and capacity have gone “too far”.

“Australians are struggling to get through on the Census hotline today, but that’s no less disturbing than the one in three calls to Medicare and Centrelink that go unanswered every day,” Flood said.

“The dedication of ABS staff has ensured the Census has played a critical role in public policy in Australia for more than a century. It remains an important tool and we are urging Australians to participate despite the Government’s failings,” she concluded.

Image credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting

47 COMMENTS

  1. Great, another bipartisan mud fight. Why doesn’t the union pull it’s opportunistic head in? Turnbull and everyone else is happy with the ABS staff. It’s a group of managers that are the problem and they’ll be the ones walking the plank for their failures and poor judgements. The staff have nothing to worry about.

    • Greg
      Who is the boss of the ABS
      Turnbull should take responsibility for the stuff up
      I think you need to read this without being a liberal

      • They blamed Rudd for Pink Batt deaths caused by failure duty of care by employers.

  2. Poor didums. ABS staff are angry the incompetence of Australia’s public sector is (again) exposed.

    Given they need the same minister to run their $600m pa department it must be a problem when govts change at elections.

    ABS 2016-17 budget near all-time highs (~5% off 2011) and double 10 years ago. Yet $~10m not enough to conduct an basic online questionnaire for <16m respondents, complaining of time constraints when they know a census is performed every 5 years.

    With the data already available from other sources the spend (like much of their "effort") another waste of taxpayers money. Taxpayers take note; tomorrow they'll get another look into the “value” creation of their NBNCo GBE (how much more than $2b will they have lost in last FY). I'm looking forward to the delims' insightful analysis;-)

    • IBM… lol

      We’ve already been entertained by your blinkered, cultist rubbish again/still…

      But are you sure Mr Numbers… that it was 16m and not 60m, “this time”?

      You’re welcome

      • Well Rizz it’s funny how Richard like to blame a GBE but then they did get in IBM to help them would that mean the private sector failed as well.

    • The ABS, that is the public servants who work for the ABS take their instructions from the minister in charge of that portfolio. So I know it’s fun to blame public servants because of an irrational belief that the private market is always more efficient but you should keep in mind a few factors when assigning blame.

      1) A reduction in 700 positions would be part of a policy from the minister to meet efficiency dividends.
      2) Part of those cuts would have included the loss of experience System Architects which would have understood the requirements of the census and could have translated those needs to the vendor. They would have also been able to translate the risks and issues with design elements of the new system to management. Cutting capability from the public service induces knowledge loss.
      3) The Government in charge would be responsible for implementing the Outsourcing/Cloud first model that the ABS would have needed to abide by. It makes sense as the census this year was obviously the most efficient and best run when the service delivery of electronic portions were run by the private market.
      4) Until last years budget the ABS didn’t even know if it was going to exist in the future. If they had started any major projects or spent any money on upgrading their aging IT infrastructure people like you would have blamed them for wasting money when they clearly should have known they were going to get the axe. So when you say “when they know a census is performed every 5 years” last year they didn’t.
      5) When you say “it must be a problem when govts change at elections” sarcastically, it shows you have no idea how the public departments work. Each time you get a new minister (even from the same party) you will get a bunch of new changes which need to be implemented. The new minister always tries to make their mark even if it has no practical purpose.
      6) “With the data already available from other sources the spend (like much of their “effort”) another waste of taxpayers money. ” with absolutely no way of verifying how accurate it is – hence limiting usefulness for making policy decisions.
      7) You are delusional if you think a major IT project would not go through the minister for approval.

      Repeat after me: The minister is in charge and is ultimately responsible. The minister is in charge and is ultimately responsible. The minister is in charge and is ultimately responsible…

      • “irrational belief that the private market is always more efficient”
        Not irrational.
        1) ABS head responsibility to allocate their budget.
        2) made up tosh. We’re talking an online survey; nothing special.
        3) decision taken to go online was made a year ago, Australian statistician David Kalisch across it (well present at the media announcement).
        4) Yeah right. Of course they knew, budget for that year allocate. Show me the dept that comes under budget (rofl).
        5) Their mark is made in the typical superficial fashion popular in politics. If the ABS cant handle changes of minister they’re an even bigger disaster than exposed.
        6) Census data is verified?;-)
        7) Not claimed. Approval given, budget allocated. Execution the fail!

        • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5lZPWNFizQ

          Waxman: In other words you found your view of the world, your ideology was not right, it was not working?

          Greenspan: Precisely, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked because I’d been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well…

          Oh dear your whole lifelong beliefs (like Al’s) is nothing more than a sham… but the rest of us already knew that.

          You’re welcome again.

        • “1) ABS head responsibility to allocate their budget.”

          If the minister doesn’t appoint a chief then there’s literally no-one allowed to do that. If your acting up you can keep the status quo going but that’s about it. (short of petty cash equivalent type stuff).

          “6) Census data is verified?”

          yes otherwise there would be 200 odd Antarctic born Australians on record as well as a bunch of Religious Jedi’s.

          • 1) ABS didn’t have a chief for the past year? No, he was at the online announcement.

            6) re-read jjd’s post. Census data is no more accurate than that already available (in many cases worst). It’s an expensive PR exercise, one that’s destroyed all confidence in that dept (taxpayers fooled until now).

            That delims (beyond those like Alex et al that can’t insulate a house without taxpayers) would defend the failure to deliver a basic survey for tens of millions of dollars is very telling.

          • Lol… nice Richard…

            Free education (thanks to the socialists), tax deductible junkets c/- you quaint little people counting company and you have the chutzpah to suggest others leaners?

            BTW – how’s that MTM plan of your’s where you spend $29.5B (whoops maybe now $56B – to only be woth $27B) and for all by 2016 (whoops now 2020, maybe) going?

            I’d suggest looking at those figures, it’s going just as we told you and the rest of the blinded cultists it would…

            You’rw welcome

          • @alex if I had relied on the leftoid’s free educations I’d only have your earning potential.

            As for infrastructure reuse it’s going as expected; ambitious timeline but capex 1/3-1/2 of fibre, opex differential favours MTM, rollout pace dramatically improved and delivering speeds demand by market (84% choosing 25mbps or less). I’m four from four. Then not surprising, done in many markets.

            Contention remains an issue; but you and brisy line boy didn’t know about such things. Who’s idea was CVC pricing anyway (chuckles).

            Tomorrow’s AR16 will shed more light onto the growing taxpayer exposure. We all look forward to your analysis & insights (rofl).

          • LOL richard so

            “but capex 1/3-1/2 of fibre”
            shouldnt it be CPP not capex richard but then the extra stuff that had to bring has blown out the total cost to almost the same as FTTP

            “opex differential favours MTM” Considering the combined opex and capex cost of in the SR for S1 and S6 by 2028 and that was when S6 was $41B not the upto $56B it is now.

            “rollout pace dramatically improved” lol considering FTTN is still being deployed slower than FTTP where is this dramatically improvment.

            “delivering speeds demand by market (84% choosing 25mbps or less).” Considering the nbn is only required to deliver up to 25Mbps while 66% are choosing 25Mbps or higher they are failing the market demand

          • Earning potential… LOL.

            Listen carefully this time and let it sink in… I know there’s layers of gullible, cultist brainwashing to get through, but try again..

            Again you speak pompously sans the knowledge of whom you speak to (I say this again – as I have many times and in fact I mentioned it again only a few days ago).

            I’ve also told you many times before, you and/or your’s “will” have one of my products in your home (read that again) – I do not have one of your quaint little people counters you promoted as a mere employee.

            No it is not going as expected

            25mbps was expected to be available to all Aussies by 2016 – fully costed @ $29.5B

            But now the very people who claimed this, admit it may cost as much $56B (actually $70B according to the former Treasurer) and won’t be available to 2020.

            So the cheaper/faster trade off of obsolete copper is neither proving cheaper nor faster… but they managed 1 out of 3, obsolescence (as we told you) *sigh*

            Which part of this are you clearly ill-equipped to comprehend?

            These are the current (massaged to best case, one would assume) numbers, which you refuse to address, because it clearly demonstrates the plan you “could have been commissioned to write”, is the complete and utter debacle we told you it would be.

            It must be humiliating for you and even more so for that self inflated, baseless, H U G E EGO…

            Even using Mathew’s desperate, cherry-picked argument too I see… ROFL.

            Delicious.

            You’re welcome.

    • Tell me Richard at what point is the minister responsable for the stuff ups of his/her department? The LNP seem to measure Public service success in how much money they can save by cutting back but at no time have I seen this in anyway link to what it is they actually do and to measure if the cuts are actually reducing capabilities, yet we are seeing a reduction in Capability in public service as a result.

      This very issue with the ABS was highlighted 18months ago http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-09/abs-staff-say-data-undermined-by-funding-cuts/5801844
      more info here http://www.execreview.com/2016/08/lesson-of-censusfail-continued-funding-cuts-mean-agencies-cant-do-their-job-1/

      The issue is a culture with the Public service pushed by a focus on the Budget deficit(when the real issue should be inflation/deflation). Right now there is a measuring of the cost of everything and the value of nothing which means of the only projects they get money are those that have direct results. How do you get funding to mitigate risk when it directly deliveries nothing. We saw this with the NBN project which has huge cost overruns because no one looked at risk we see with the Census we have seen with a large number of other projects. The blame isn’t the public service and it isn’t the outsourced providers, the blame is the culture of government and the public service. When company culture results is a spectacularly failure the blame is right at the top ministers and senior execs alike should share the blame. We have seen this recently in the private sector with the VW emissions scandal and we see continually in the public services with ministers going on TV and saying they didn’t know about some failure or coverup or error when ultimately it is their job to know and it is only the culture that they have recreated(surround yourself with sycophants and yes men) that results in them not being told what is going on.

      • Funny “efficiency dividend” was continued from previous govt. You could cut most of the public sector depts by 50% and have no noticeable impact. Such is their output.

        No surprise staff complaining about cuts (that weren’t). Public sector wages continue to climb, private sector stagnant for years. Join the realworld.

        “We saw this with the NBN project which has huge cost overruns because no one looked at risk we see with the Census we have seen with a large number of other projects.”

        The NBN is failing because it is not possible for the public sector to operate such a project. Outcome entirely predictable, called out from day one.

        Cost of the VW emissions scandal carried by their management and shareholders. ABS and NBNCo failure falls on me as a taxpayer. Upset their continued incompetence is called out.

        • ** Funny “efficiency dividend” was continued from previous govt.**

          So what? If something is continued for too long, it is the fault of the party who continued it for too long. 100% responsible.

          ** You could cut most of the public sector depts by 50% and have no noticeable impact. Such is their output. **

          That is just blind ideological hatred, and absolutely divorced from the facts. Go read up on some unbiased reviews of the australian public service. They are empiracly lean and efficient.

          ** No surprise staff complaining about cuts (that weren’t). Public sector wages continue to climb, private sector stagnant for years. Join the realworld. **

          Both private and public sector are parts of the real world. The vast majority of the federal public service has had a pay freeze for the last 3 years. What you say is untrue – would you care to join the ‘real world’ some time?

          ** “We saw this with the NBN project which has huge cost overruns because no one looked at risk we see with the Census we have seen with a large number of other projects.” **

          The huge cost over-runs are entirely attributal to coalition policy. 100%. It isn’t because ‘no-one looked at risk’ it is because the coalition wilfully acted to destroy part of Australia.

          ** The NBN is failing because it is not possible for the public sector to operate such a project. Outcome entirely predictable, called out from day one. **

          Governments have demonstrably delivered massive infrastructure projects over the course of history. They can do it, they have done it. Roads, ports, rail, comms, electricity, gas. What you are saying is a lie, based on ideology over integrity.

          ** Cost of the VW emissions scandal carried by their management and shareholders. ABS and NBNCo failure falls on me as a taxpayer. Upset their continued incompetence is called out. **

          The way the coalition have damaged Australia via their willful destruction of the NBN should make you very angry.
          Yet the ruins, the destruction, the malfunctioning of the NBN is just a mirror of the psyche of the average ideologue.

          • Don’t be too harsh on yourself Richard… ;)

            But regardless, feel free to hypocritically keep sobbing abuse and bile towards poor Richard… after having just referred to someone as a nutter, without even addressing one single point he/she made…

            Apology accepted

          • “You could cut most of the public sector depts by 50% and have no noticeable impact. Such is their output.”

            We have clear evidence that this not the case as we do have a very real drop in services across multiple branches of the public service as a result of wholesale cuts.

            Small business dealing with the ATO and just about everyone in this country who will have to deal with medicare or centrelink at some point in their life. I’ve had it dealing with the ACMA regarding transmitter licenses. At the state level we see it in issue with in the medical sector as while governments are quick say no front line jobs are lost those front line staff end up spending less time on the front line as their support staff and systems disappear due to cuts.

            It is a obsession with deficit and surplus that has caused this indiscriminate cost cutting when the reality is Howard had little to do the surpluses and Rudd had little to do with the deficit and the real obsession should be with Inflation and deflation.

          • Yes Richard, ‘another nutter descends’. In other words, you went down hard.

            Bye, thanks for playing.

          • “We have clear evidence that this not the case as we do have a very real drop in services across multiple branches of the public service as a result of wholesale cuts.”

            Where? Both ATO and ACMA I’ve dealt with over a long period; service today is same as it’s always been (poor). Both budgets are massive for their required output. ATO in particular a perfect target for 100% IT operation with a small audit team. You could cut more than 50% whilst improving output.

            Get anyone at the ACMA (,ATO or practically any dept) to put an legislation opinion in writing.

    • “Yet $~10m not enough to conduct an basic online questionnaire for <16m respondents" Richards census 2 dozen questions on survey monkey.

      • Its actually closer to $20m which is the scarey part. The last contract was to basically host the sucker/provide the infrastructure to ensure it wouldn’t fall in a big heap.

    • Yes, Richard. And it Labor was in, it’d be the ministers fault. Are you even capable any more of seeing your own bias or has the dementia made that impossible?

      • Sure the minister that made the decision is responsible. As Conroy is for his decisions, Turnbull for his. However that decision is but one component, they’re not responsible for incompetent delivery. Quigley responsible for his decisions, Morrow for his…

        When you grow up you might understand how it works at the big table.

        • They are 100% responsible. They are the Minister. Please learn the basics of how the government works in Australia before you go spouting rubbish.

          Repeat after me: The minister is in charge and is ultimately responsible. The minister is in charge and is ultimately responsible. The minister is in charge and is ultimately responsible…

          • Ultimate responsibility and 100% are entirely different. Please learn the basics of how the government works in Australia before you go spouting rubbish.

          • “Ministers are accountable for the actions of their department; if something goes wrong they are expected to take responsibility for it.”

            http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/ministers-and-shadow-ministers.html

            Here is a fact sheet from the Parliament Education Office. It was designed for school kids so hopefully you can understand it.

            The fact you think that ministers are “not responsible for incompetent delivery” really shows you have no idea how the government on any level is supposed to work. The minister is responsible for the delivery of work carried out by a department under their portfolio. You claim to know how the ‘big table’ works but would fail a year 5 social studies quiz.

          • @jjd you’re repeating the same thing; minister have ultimate responsibility but not 100% responsibility. If that were the case no one in any dept at any level has any responsibility. Why ever conduct a review into anything?

            Time to move beyond a school kid’s understanding.

          • No, Richard – you are missing the mark entirely. It isn’t about who is responsible. Responsibility is shared. It is about who is accountable. The minister is 100% accountable.
            Now he needs to be held to account.

        • “The Westminster model envisages a government chosen from elected
          representatives and responsible and accountable to them. it presents the bureaucracy as simply an extension of the minister’s capacity: it exists to inform and advise him; to manage on his behalf programs for which he is responsible. Except where Parliament specifically legislates otherwise, its power to make decisions or to act derives entirely from the minister by his delegation and he remains responsible to his Cabinet colleagues and to Parliament for decisions made and actions performed under that delegation”.

          (Herbert Cole Coombs the Royal Commission on Australian Government Administration)

          And to be fair, while the report does point out that Australia does not have a ‘pure’ Westminster system in all cases (independant ombudsmans forb example). It does point out “It was constantly put to us, and we agree, that it is not possible to separate ‘policy’ from ‘administration’. We believe that departmental administration is the concern of ministers: they need to be encouraged to concern themselves more with problems of administration and implementation”. That is the Minister should be aware of the details of a national survey of every household in Australia or multibillion dollar network upgrade because it is their responsibility under bloody convention. If a minister does not have the appropriate mechanisms in place to manage the department under his or her control then they are incompetent.

          Or “A minister is legally in authority over all his civil servants. They must obey his orders and be politically neutral… Consequently a minister cannot evade responsibility because his department is entirely under his or her control. Everything a department does is in the act of the minister” (Christopher Enright, Federal Administrative Law)

          So yes 100% responsible.

          • @jjd your very quotes don’t support your position. I’m not denying minister’s have responsibility (even posted they do), however not 100% responsibility.

            The minister in this case made the policy decision to deliver Census 2016 online, approved ABS’s plans and provided a (generous) budget. The delivery was the stuff up, a simple survey too much for a $600m p.a. Dept to deliver competently. Minister quite rightly calls for a review, it’ll be surprising if anyone held to account (rarely are). Such is the accountiblity within the public service and a major reason why they deliver so little value.

          • They only support my position if you read them. The minister is 100℅ responsible for the delivery. “A minister cannot evade responsibility because his department is entirely under his or her control. Everything a department does is in the act of the minister” or “he remains responsible to his Cabinet colleagues and to Parliament for decisions made and actions performed under that delegation”.

            Everything: synonyms: each item, each thing, every article, every single thing, the lot, the whole lot, the entirety, the total, the aggregate;

    • I’ll add this Richard just in case you didn’t read the article…

      “There are 700 fewer staff at the ABS now than when the last Census was conducted five years ago and staff are suffering under “massive workloads” as a result.”

      “Staff saw these problems coming a mile off,” she said.

      “She added that “critical” planning time was lost as the Government “foolishly considered axing the Census, chopped and changed ministers three times and dilly-dallied for nearly a year in appointing a new chief statistician”.

  3. It is the same everywhere. Staff are sacked and those who remain are turned into workhorses.

    The ideological obsessions of the Liberal Party scorn the very notion of public service, public ownership and public good.

    What we have seen recently with the census debacle is clear proof of what happens when a society dismantles its scaffolding.

  4. $300 million down the gurgler. Turnbull looking for heads to roll. Head of census saying it’ll be OK, just carry on. How are ABS staff supposed to be happy when they know they’re in the sights? Why did the Census note have a the gay marriage question that would have saved hundreds of millions on doing a separate plebiscite? This has “unimaginable stuff-up from start to not even close to finished” written all over it. I’m one of the multitude who won’t bother about it till a Census taker turns up and gives me a form, as they still haven’t repealed the invasion of privacy data-matching plan that’s been in the news for over 5 months. Already having trouble remembering back to Census night, and no need to do it till mid September anyway.

  5. No surprise. Lack of money to spend on the right infrastructure, and lack of staff with the knowledge to manage such a technical contract in the first place.

    Its the same story everywhere in the public service at the moment (and especially in IT)

  6. Fight back against these fascists. They cut and smash our public services then blame those departments facing those cuts , outsourcing and job losses after.

    People this government is dangerous , reckless and pathetic. Their outsourcing and privatisation ideologies are the failure and a joke. Yet they keep doing it because they are obliged to do so after a bribe.

  7. They did keep changing the information how the system works and how data is stored. I believe they were really storing sha hashes of names and addresses not the actual names and addresses in clear text.

    Still for them to keep getting it wrong means the entire thing is not trustworthy.

  8. One of the funniest things I found is you aren’t forced to provide your date of birth (rather an ‘age’) is acceptable!

    Matching on names etc is bloody hard (scary number of duplicates and we’re not just talking about ‘John Smith’ lol). Very few people have the same name and DOB (there’s surprisingly more than one might expect even then though).

  9. First head to go should be Turnbulls, second Abbott, third Morrison, and so on down the line.

  10. The fallout continues as a result of Howard & Costello’s hatchet team slashing budgets left, right and center and outsourcing all Federal Government ICT R&D across the board.

    But it turns out, after all that conniving, the IMF tagged Howard as “fiscally profligate” and extravagant.
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/hey-big-spender-howard-the-king-of-the-loose-purse-strings-20130110-2cj32.html

    The saga continues. Lateral thinking at it’s best.

    The Australian tech scene is pathetic.

Comments are closed.