JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

Recruitment drive for cyber security specialists will bring challenges for government

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announcing the new cyber security policy.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announcing the new cyber security policy. Photo: Fairfax Media

A recruitment drive for cyber security contractors is likely to present the federal government with a number of challenges after the launch of a $230 million strategy, consultants have warned.

Last month, the government announced it was prepared to strike back against foreign cyber attacks with funds to be spent recruiting hundreds of police and cyber security specialists.

The funding boost comes after another $400 million was allocated to pay for staff with hacking experience to work for the Australian Signals Directorate, a key intelligence agency.

Karen Evans, managing director of talent management firm Acendre, said she expected the government to launch a recruitment drive with up to 900 positions filled in the coming year.

Around 800 new roles in intelligence, space and cyber security divisions were announced in the Defence white paper with another 100 to be stretched across government departments.

The government has capped the number of public servants within the Department of Defence at 18,200, prompting unions to fear close to 1000 staff will be made redundant given current staffing of around 18,000.

The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation is scanning universities for graduates with experience in computers, software development, data analysis and mathematics.

"The volume of 900 new positions is going to present a number of challenges to the government," Ms Evans said.

"There is likely to be a lot of interest in these roles although, as always, there will be interest from a number of people who are not qualified to fulfil the role."

According to the government's cyber security strategy, specialist officers will be hired and trained at the Australian Crime Commission and the Australian Federal Police to improve technical analysis and forensic assessments.

Ms Evans said the government would need to consider the cost of recruiting cyber security specialists with many likely to be hired on a temporary basis.

"A number of professionals want to go on contracts because they can earn more money, which brings a challenge of being able to afford them," she said.

She said the government also needed to consider whether it could build and maintain talent sharing arrangements with the private sector.

"We know the banks have been looking into this for some time," she said. "Can the government build global networks to share talent globally?"

But Professionals Australia ACT director David Smith, whose union represents technical staff at defence, said the recruitment of contractors was problematic.

"Using temporary or contract staff in cyber security roles, indeed in any national security roles, creates an unnecessary security risk and will come at a premium," he said.

"Uncertainty of ongoing employment is not only disliked by your bank manager but it is a weakness that can be targeted by other organisations."

Mr Smith has also raised concerns the majority of new roles at the Department of Defence would require specialist knowledge unlikely to be found in the existing workforce.

According to the white paper, the new roles will be accommodated by ongoing cuts to the bureaucracy and existing staff will be retrained to perform specialist functions.

"Defence has identified the need for 1200 new roles but they have to do it within the envelope of 18,200 APS employees," he said. "1000 will have to go. It's that simple."

61 comments so far

  • For continuity for part time service, then they can be invited to join the Australian defence reserves, subject to appointment standards.

    Commenter
    billt
    Location
    ACT
    Date and time
    May 02, 2016, 4:08PM
    • Billt, these are civilian positions, not military.

      Under the scenario you are suggesting, what happens if the people filling these positions do not meet the ADF's fitness standards?

      Commenter
      SWAF
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 8:38PM
  • IT private sector rubbing their hands with glee.

    Commenter
    fred
    Date and time
    May 02, 2016, 4:15PM
    • So what do you suggest? Do nothing and save the money/jobs?

      Commenter
      John
      Location
      Canberra
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 7:22AM
    • @ John

      Yes, do nothing. The idea of a thousand "Cyber security specialists" is just this side of ludicrous and another example of the "Secret Squirrel", "little boys playing spies" nonsense so happily pursued by governments of all colours, but particularly the LNP.

      Honestly, what is this all for? Tit-for-tat retribution for whenever some Chinese agency hacks one of our 'sites? Some sort of stupid Doctor Strangelove-style concept of a "War on the Internet" against our foes?

      Pointless waste of time and money.

      Commenter
      Xolin
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 9:56AM
    • Xolin – maybe you should understand that the term “Cyber security” means protection of one’s cyber assets as opposed to attacking another’s cyber assets. “Do nothing” means that our assets are vulnerable up-to and including another entity having full knowledge of our commercial and military disposition and strategy, and apparently you think that is OK.

      Commenter
      John
      Location
      Canberra
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 10:54AM
  • How many Defence staff do we need ? Following Abbott's departure I would expect few "boots on the ground" troops, and fewer in the Dept to manage them ??? And then there are the "Border Control" and lord knows how many others in the shadows . . .

    Commenter
    MST
    Date and time
    May 02, 2016, 4:16PM
    • It may come as a shock, but very few APS manage the ADF. But approx 40% are very highly trained engineers, professionals, scientists technologists who work hard to deliver and maintain capability for the ADF. Even when not "at war" the ADF relies upon this group to keep the machines working. Also in the APS approx 30 to 40% are exservicemen who have a lot of military experience. The majority of these people are also injured while serving and can continue to serve as APS. So I wonder if you are advocating that the government cull the injured ex servicemen who probably wouldn't be employed anywhere else because they, in some cases, carry significant injuries from their time in the ADF serving the nation so people have the right to stay at home and say what they want.

      Commenter
      The Grim Reaper
      Location
      Canberra
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 8:17AM
    • But they're protecting us (note cynicism)

      Commenter
      Fairm
      Location
      Sydney
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 8:20AM
    • The Grim Reaper - MST was not referring to "injured ex servicemen" but I suppose you know that and just wanted to kill off a thought that goes against yours.

      MST - To cynically answer your first question, the ADF need enough people to maintain their recently created Defence Bank (formerly a credit union). The ADF won't be downsizing any time soon.

      Commenter
      Wellingstone
      Location
      RealWorld
      Date and time
      May 03, 2016, 9:51AM

More comments

Make a comment

You are logged in as [Logout]

All information entered below may be published.

Error: Please enter your screen name.

Error: Your Screen Name must be less than 255 characters.

Error: Your Location must be less than 255 characters.

Error: Please enter your comment.

Error: Your Message must be less than 300 words.

Post to

You need to have read and accepted the Conditions of Use.

Thank you

Your comment has been submitted for approval.

Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.

Related Coverage

HuffPost Australia

Follow Us

Featured advertisers