Former senior public servant, Gary Sturgess, has raised concern today about the declining role of the public service, whose influence has been eroded, leading to a raft of poor policy outcomes. From The Canberra Times:
[Modern public servants are] outgunned by well-staffed ministerial offices looking for solid direction amid the onslaught of the 24-hour media cycle…
‘‘Some people have said to me the public service has given up the field,’’ he said.
‘‘There is a role to play in making sure ministers don’t rush ahead and act contrary to the public interest and public servants are custodians of that wisdom’…
Mr Sturgess said federal Labor’s home insulation fiasco and corruption inquiries in NSW were reminders of recent occasions when public servants should have been ‘‘pushing back’’ more against politicians…
Concerns about the declining effectiveness and politicisation of the public service have grown in recent times.
Earlier this month, Dr Don Russel, former secretary of the Department of Industry, gave an address to the ANU’s Crawford School of Public Policy in which he questioned the federal government’s use of the public service in decision making, as well as the timidity of departmental secretaries, who have allowed the public service to become overly subservient (read “yes men”).
And in late 2012, the Business Council of Australia’s Jennifer Westacott called for a mandatory code of conduct prohibiting advisers from directing public servants, fearing that the public sector had lost its independence and integrity.
In a similar vein, former Productivity Commission head, Gary Banks, lamented last year that Australia has experienced “a decade in which spin has often triumphed over substance in policy making”, whereby poorly thought-out government policies have come “out of the blue”, introduced without proper stake holder consultation.
As someone that has worked in both the Australian and Victorian treasuries, I share the above concerns. When working at the Australian Treasury in the early-to-mid 2000s, I encountered a number of staff complaining how a bunch of budget measures (essentially pork barreling) had been introduced at the 11th hour, without Cabinet scrutiny, just prior to the release of the Federal Budget. Similar practices are rumoured to have occurred under the Rudd Government, including the introduction of the First Home Buyers’ Boost in the wake of the GFC (apparently against Treasury’s advice), in addition to the ill-fated introduction of the Resources Super Profits Tax, which despite being a good idea, was introduced without proper community consultation and thereby implemented poorly. And who can forget the pink batts fiasco?
The rise of the 24-hour news cycle is partly to blame. Politicians at all levels have spent too much time and effort “massaging” their message and responding to the latest media attack, rather than just getting on with the job and developing sound policy. And with it, the public service is often left chasing its tail, preparing defensive briefings and question time briefs, rather than concentrating on higher order policy issues.
While it is still early days, the Abbott Government seems less inclined to engage the 24-hour spin cycle than was the case under the Rudd/Gillard Government’s reign, which makes the prospect for reform more likely. Indeed, recent indications around retirement policy and negative gearing are encouraging, along with the Government’s refusal to bow to Opposition and/or industry pressure to rule out reform in these areas.
With the great mining unwind and budget squeeze upon us, Australia will require strong political leadership and frank and fearless advice from the public service in order to ensure that that the nation prospers into the future, with a dynamic and competitive economy.
The alternative is ongoing reform inertia, poorly formulated defensive policies, stagnating productivity, a deteriorating Budget, and declining international competitiveness.
