Fairfax’s Peter Martin has revealed today that the Australian Treasury has disowned many elements the latest Intergenerational Report, which is being used by the Abbott Government to discredit Labor’s fiscal management:
In Parliament, Prime Minister Tony Abbott continued to claim the report was a Treasury document, pointing to its table comparing Greek debt to what it said would have been Australia’s government debt had Labor’s policies been continued.
“I know they don’t like looking at the expert document produced by the Treasury but here it is,” he said, holding aloft…
[But] asked about the political content of the report, Treasury deputy secretary Nigel Ray told a Senate hearing the content was “a matter for the government”…
Mr Hockey also described it as a Treasury document on its release
The loss of independence and the politicisation of the public service, whereby governments of all persuasions are only too willing to outsource policy development, is unfortunately a growing trend across the federal government.
While working at the Australian Treasury in the early-to-mid-2000s, I witnessed the questionable use of consultants and this loss of independence first hand.
When working on the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement (US FTA), the Howard Government commission the Centre for International Economics (CIE) to undertake the modelling on the agreement, even though the Productivity Commission (PC) was available (and wanted) the job. It was the belief of many at the time that the CIE was chosen over the PC because it would provide more favourable modelling results, making it easier for the Government to sell the deal to the public. By contrast, the PC was inherently skeptical of preferential trade agreements (for good reason), and it was feared that it would provide a poor assessment of the US FTA if commissioned to undertake the work.
There are obvious reasons why governments increasingly prefer to outsource advice rather than use the public service.
First, it provides them with cover. They can claim that a given policy is based on “independent advice”, even though the results are often pre-determined and effectively purchased. It also allows governments to deflect blame to the consultancy firm (read cover their arse) in the event that a policy goes bad.
It’s a sad truth that the days of “frank and fearless advice” has been usurped, often in favour of spin and bought analysis designed to support a pre-conceived agenda.
unconventionaleconomist@hotmail.com
