Budget documents from May 2014 confirm the merger between the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and the Department of Immigration was allocated $480.5 million, with an estimated 480 jobs to be lost in the integration process [1][2].
The Australian Border Force Act 2015 established the ABF with two distinct categories of workers:
1. **APS employees** within the ABF - These employees ARE subject to the Public Service Act 1999, including the APS Code of Conduct [3][4].
2. **Uniformed "sworn officers"** (Border Force Officers) - These officers are NOT employed under the Public Service Act 1999 [5].
However, they are subject to a specific Direction requiring them to conduct themselves "in accordance with Professional Standards consistent with those required of Departmental employees and other Australian Public Service employees under the Australian Public Service (APS) Values, APS Employment Principles and the APS Code of Conduct" [5].
The claim's reference to "Defence Force laws" is **misleading** - customs and immigration officers have never been subject to Defence Force laws or protocols.
The claim omits several critical pieces of context:
1. **Policy rationale**: The merger was recommended by the National Commission of Audit (NCOA), an independent body established by the Abbott government to review government expenditure [6].
The stated rationale was to create "a single, integrated border agency" to improve efficiency and coordination at Australia's borders.
2. **Cost per employee**: The $711 million total integration cost (slightly higher than the initial $480.5 million figure) represented approximately $52,000 per public servant affected [2].
This was for a department with approximately 13,600 staff merging with Customs' operations.
3. **Historical context**: The creation of a consolidated border agency followed similar models in other countries (US Customs and Border Protection, UK Border Force).
The concept was not unique to Australia or the Coalition government [6].
4. **Legal framework**: While sworn officers are not APS employees, they operate under the Australian Border Force Act 2015 with specific professional standards that mirror APS requirements.
The original sources provided with this claim have significant credibility concerns:
1. **The Guardian piece** (First Dog on the Moon cartoon): This is a political cartoon/opinion piece, not factual reporting.
While The Guardian's factual reporting has improved significantly (upgraded to "High factual" rating), its opinion and commentary pieces maintain a progressive orientation.
2. **Green Left**: This is an explicitly left-wing activist news outlet.
**Did Labor do something similar?**
Search conducted: "Labor government immigration department restructure customs merger"
Finding: The Rudd and Gillard Labor governments (2007-2013) did not merge the immigration and customs departments.
* * * *
However, Labor implemented significant border protection policies including:
- The "Pacific Solution" re-establishment under Gillard (offshore processing on Nauru and Manus Island)
- Resumption of boat turnbacks (after initial dismantlement by Rudd in 2008)
- Creation of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service as a separate agency
The departmental merger and ABF creation was specifically a Coalition government initiative following the National Commission of Audit recommendations in 2014 [6].
However, both parties have engaged in significant border protection restructuring:
- **Labor**: Established the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service as a separate agency (2010), increased offshore processing capacity
- **Coalition**: Merged Immigration and Customs into ABF (2014), expanded maritime enforcement capabilities
While critics argued the ABF merger reduced accountability by creating a para-military structure exempt from standard public service oversight, the government maintained the restructure would improve border security coordination and operational efficiency [1][6].
**Key factual clarifications:**
1.
The claim about exemption from "Defence Force laws" is a false comparison - immigration and customs officers were never subject to Defence Force protocols to begin with.
While uniformed ABF officers are not APS employees, they are subject to equivalent professional standards through the Australian Border Force (Immigration and Border Protection Worker) Professional Standards Direction [5].
3.
The $480 million figure represents the cost of integrating two large government departments with approximately 13,600 staff - a significant administrative undertaking involving IT systems consolidation, workforce retraining, and operational restructuring.
**Comparative context:** This type of departmental consolidation is common across Australian governments of both parties when seeking administrative efficiency.
The Coalition's approach was more extensive than Labor's previous border protection reorganizations, but the concept of restructuring border agencies is not unique to either party.
While uniformed ABF officers are not employed under the Public Service Act (technically true), they are subject to equivalent professional standards through specific legislation [5].
The sources provided (Guardian opinion piece and Green Left) are left-leaning/partisan and do not constitute objective factual reporting on this issue.
While uniformed ABF officers are not employed under the Public Service Act (technically true), they are subject to equivalent professional standards through specific legislation [5].
The sources provided (Guardian opinion piece and Green Left) are left-leaning/partisan and do not constitute objective factual reporting on this issue.