On the eve of the 2013 federal election (September 6, 2013), Tony Abbott explicitly promised: "No cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS" [1].
The initial cuts announced in Budget 2014 were:
- A 1% efficiency dividend on base funding for both broadcasters
- Combined savings of $43.5 million over four years (slightly higher than the $40 million claimed) [3]
- Termination of the ABC's $223 million contract to run Australia Network [4]
- Cancellation of the Australia Network contract, which had been awarded to ABC under the previous Labor government, just over a year into its ten-year term [5]
The ABC subsequently announced approximately 80 job cuts in its international operations as a direct result of the Australia Network contract termination [6][7].
The claim omits several important contextual elements:
**Historical Precedent:** The "efficiency dividend" mechanism used for these cuts was not unique to the Coalition.
The 1% cut was relatively modest compared to efficiency dividends applied to other departments [9].
**The Australia Network Controversy:** The Australia Network contract itself had been controversial.
The tender process was terminated and the contract was directly awarded to the ABC, bypassing competitor Sky News Australia [10].
**Subsequent Larger Cuts:** The initial $43.5 million over four years was significantly expanded in November 2014 when Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced total cuts of $308 million over five years following an efficiency review by Peter Lewis [11][12].
This broader cut package came after the initial budget announcement.
**Comparative Context:** While Abbott explicitly promised "no cuts," the use of efficiency dividends for public broadcasters has been a bipartisan practice.
Factually accurate on this story, though framing may reflect News Corp's ongoing tensions with the ABC [14].
- **The Age** (Source 3): Fairfax publication (now Nine), mainstream center-left newspaper with generally reliable political reporting [15].
- **YouTube** (Source 2): Would contain original footage of the interview; useful for verifying Abbott's actual words [16].
The SBS interview where Abbott made the promise is the most authoritative primary source, as it contains the original video evidence of the commitment [1][2].
**Did Labor do something similar?**
Search conducted: "Gillard Labor government ABC SBS funding cuts"
**Finding:** While the 2013-2016 period saw significant ABC funding discussions under Labor, including the controversial Australia Network tender process, direct comparable cuts are less clear.
* * * *
However:
- The **Australia Network contract** that the Coalition cancelled was itself initiated and awarded under Labor, in a controversial process that saw the tender terminated due to leaks and the contract directly awarded to ABC [10].
- **Efficiency dividends** have been applied to the ABC by governments of both parties over decades, though typically as part of broader public sector efficiency measures rather than targeted cuts [9].
- The **2012-2013 Labor budgets** implemented significant cuts to other programs (single parent payments, university funding, and deferred defense spending) while protecting the ABC from explicit targeted reductions during that specific period [17].
**Comparison:** Labor's approach to public broadcasting funding during 2010-2013 focused more on maintaining base funding levels (while embroiled in the Australia Network controversy) rather than explicit cuts.
Tony Abbott's statement on September 6, 2013 was unambiguous: "no cuts to the ABC or SBS." Within eight months, his government's first budget included precisely such cuts [1][3].
However, context matters:
**The Government's Position:** The Coalition argued that the cuts represented an "efficiency dividend" rather than programming cuts, and that the Australia Network termination was about prioritizing domestic services over international broadcasting [11].
Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull stated that the $308 million in savings "should not affect what Australians see or hear" [12].
**Independent Analysis:** The cuts were indeed implemented, with real consequences including 80 international job losses [6][7].
The efficiency dividend mechanism, while standard across government, was applied to a broadcaster that had received an explicit funding protection promise during the election campaign.
**Political Context:** The "no cuts" promise was part of a broader package of commitments (no cuts to education, health, no changes to pensions or GST) made in the final hours of a close election campaign.
Several of these promises were subsequently broken or modified in the 2014 budget, suggesting the commitments were made for electoral advantage without full consideration of fiscal realities [18].
**Comparison to Precedent:** While both parties have adjusted ABC funding over time, Abbott's explicit "no cuts" pledge makes this case distinct from typical efficiency dividends applied without such pre-election commitments.
The subsequent $308 million in cuts announced in November 2014 represented a substantial reduction in public broadcasting funding [11][12].
**Key context:** This was a genuine broken promise, though the mechanism (efficiency dividend) is a standard budget tool used by both parties.
Within months, his government's first budget imposed efficiency dividend cuts totalling $43.5 million over four years, followed by larger cuts of $308 million over five years announced in November 2014.
Within months, his government's first budget imposed efficiency dividend cuts totalling $43.5 million over four years, followed by larger cuts of $308 million over five years announced in November 2014.