OPINION
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
While prime ministers have been nominally responsible for the public service their interest has been spotty. They have lots on their plates and getting down to the tedium of administration, as important as it is, isn't much of a vote snagger.
Whitlam was encouraged to set up and owned the Coombs Royal Commission. Fraser introduced radical administrative law changes, established machinery for considering the Coombs report and, when beset with problems in parts of the public service, set up the Reid Review. Hawke introduced the biggest machinery of government alterations since the Second World War and gave John Dawkins room to make major changes earlier in his government's terms. One of Howard's first acts as prime minister was to sack, for unexplained reasons, six departmental secretaries; he then became relaxed and comfortable. Rudd allowed a review and then Gillard withdrew funding for the implementation of most of its recommendations. Abbott - not a lot to see there. Turnbull established another review which is yet to report.
![Former Prime Minister John Howard with then secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Dr Peter Shergold in 2007. Picture: AAP Former Prime Minister John Howard with then secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Dr Peter Shergold in 2007. Picture: AAP](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/fdcx/doc6te4gstwiqbcwz18lnv.jpg/r0_0_3000_2258_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
Now Morrison has made himself responsible for the public service and he's beginning to throw his weight around. After the election he gave heads of departments a pep talk, undertook to improve service by the Department of Human Services and in August he made a major speech outlining his intentions for the public service as a whole.
The speech has copped mixed reviews. Some have said it's been well received. Others have been tartly critical. Some have hopped into Morrison for things he hasn't said. For example, Rick Morton in The Saturday Paper reckoned that "The Prime Minister warned...that the public had lost faith in the bureaucracy...". Although that claim is not in the transcript of his speech that didn't stop the ANU's Dr Jill Sheppard from saying that "There is absolutely no evidence for Scott Morrison's claim that trust is declining in the public service...". If anything, Morrison's speech is full of extravagant, cloying praise of the public service, some of which may be warranted.
The speech, however, is within the reach of criticism. For example, it is imprecise, ambiguous and contradictory.
It fails adequately to reflect on the consequences of government decisions affecting the public service, many adversely.
![Prime Minister Scott Morrison addresses representatives of the Australian Public Service at Parliament House on August 19. Picture: Alex Ellinghausen Prime Minister Scott Morrison addresses representatives of the Australian Public Service at Parliament House on August 19. Picture: Alex Ellinghausen](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/fdcx/doc76q568clblh1ewywydd0.jpg/r0_0_4174_2569_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
It largely shies away from analysing problems notwithstanding the PM's avowed liking of "problem solvers".
It contains few practical suggestions about how to secure the idealized conditions he desires, and it overflows with dispiriting management clichés including those hoary old false prophets, agility and innovation.
Morrison is at his most baffling in explaining, in a manner of speaking, the ways politicians and others not standing for election feel about accountability. Here he invokes what he says his football coach called "the bacon and egg principle, the chicken is involved, but the pig is absolutely committed to the task." What could that mean? Is it that the chicken produces the egg and lives and the pig provides the bacon and dies? On this basis, the PM would be over-qualified for a job as the oracle at Delphi (Greece) in any post ministerial employment even if that prospect may be in the far distant future.
It's possible Morrison's speech would have been better if it had been informed by the Thodey Review report on the public service. But he's in a hurry and unfortunately, among its regrettable shortcomings that review has failed by months to meet its reporting deadline thus providing what could be one if its most useful lessons - the need for advice to governments to be timely.
Read more
After kicking off his speech with elaborate homage to the military which he appears to imagine as life's highest calling, Morrison says that the public service needs to be "professional, capable, flexible, technology-enabled, citizen-focused" ... "while upholding the best traditions of integrity at the same time, accountability and service ...". He then sets out half a dozen "guideposts" to give the public service "a greater understanding of how the APS can better support government and ... our nation."
Guidepost one deals with getting the "relationship right between ministers and the public service." Here Morrison offers what he calls "a straight-forward formula" - "respect and expect". That is, ministers should respect the public service's "policy advice and implementation skills," and once the policy is settled "expect them to get on and deliver it". This is fine as far as it goes but it doesn't go very far. Better relations between ministers and the public service must rest on institutional arrangements that go beyond three-word advertising-style slogans. Morrison has nothing to say about the present manifest weaknesses in these arrangements and the simple things that could be done to address them.
He then steps into ambiguous territory saying that while he wants "excellent policy advice", it's for governments to set policy and that the public service "is at its best when it is getting on with the job of delivering the services". Does that mean it can't also be at its best in providing policy advice and, if so, what does this say about the government's view of the public service's role?
This leads to Guidepost two - "It's about the implementation". "You," Morrison says to public servants "are the implementers." That's true, but so are ministers and implementation will be at greater risk of failure if they leave implementation to officials. Then, spending little time examining problems affecting implementation, including mindless squeezes on resources from efficiency dividends and the requirement that agencies fully fund improvements in remuneration, Morrison provides equally little by way of practical suggestions for change that go beyond getting on with "congestion busting" and "revitalizing" regulatory reform via a Deregulation Taskforce. Abbott promised much the same. Sadly politicians are often better at complaining about the evils of red tape than doing anything about it. Whatever, guidepost two is slim pickings. Among other things, better services will require more resources and that's not acknowledged.
Guidepost three is "Look at the scoreboard" - setting targets, getting related information and evaluating results. As Morrison says, this is "not new" but his speech contains no reflection on why attempts at such things have faltered in the past. It's as though he's willing to ignore those lessons as he conjures solutions without defining the related problems. "My government will set clear priorities and strong targets for the APS," Morrison says, and a Priorities and Delivery Unit has been established in his department. All of this has been tried before but there's little indication that Morrison, or anyone else, has much reflected on the mixed lessons of that experience and learned from it.
Let's be frank - this bubble business is bullshit.
Guidepost four, about which Morrison says "I'm sure you'll love this one," is "look beyond the bubble". Let's be frank - this bubble business is bullshit. The Prime Minister invented the notion as a device to avoid answering awkward questions. "Oh, that's just the Canberra bubble," he'd say when he was backed into a corner. Morrison says he wants public servants to break out of the bubble (which he's created) and for them "to have a laser-like focus on serving ... quiet Australians." Who these people are is given no definition except to say that "you never hear from [them] largely, they're too busy doing life", as if "doing life" inevitably reduces people to silence. Presumably noisy wireless spruikers Alan Jones and Ray Hadley will be switched off in the Morrison household. That would be a step forward.
Morrison seems to equate "quiet Australians" with "middle Australia" but obviously quiet ones are to be found at all levels of society. This guidepost, to the limited extent it is comprehensible, is unhelpful to all public servants and irrelevant to many. The Prime Minister is imposing a vague political perspective. Does he, for example, expect staff in the Tax Office to have a "laser-like focus" on the tax obligations of quiet Australians to the detriment of others? The Tax Office should deal with all taxpayers in an even-handed way according to the law. Moreover, a concentration on "quiet Australians" will be irrelevant to scientists in defence, foreign affairs staff in overseas posts, customs officers in Home Affairs, and so on. All staff should have a "laser-like focus" on their duties and not afford special consideration to any one group except as required by those duties and the law.
Worse, concentrating on "quiet Australians" is insidious as it implies that the government will look after them while making those who complain and make noise, no matter how justified, take second place. Morrison says he wants to govern for all Australians while giving "quiet Australians" the inside running.
Guidepost five is based on the alleged work habits of a "rugby league legend" who could "read the play and stay ahead of the game." To achieve this Morrison suggests:
- staff exchanges with the private sector, although he doesn't reflect on why previous such efforts have largely died on the vine - maybe he doesn't realise he's backing something that's not been a great success
- breaking down "bureaucratic silos and hierarchies", another set of problems that is not explained or defined, and;
- making "greater use of digital technology".
Worthwhile perhaps but again Morrison has no suggestions as to how these things should be done or give any hint that he might be prepared to put his money where his mouth is.
Guidepost six is something called "honour the code". Here Morrison refers to an unreferenced "unbreakable code" in the military. He then goes on to suggest that the code might not be all that unbreakable saying that "where that code breaks, then we know what the consequences of that can be." Hands up those who know what those consequences are or what the "code" is. Morrison says "it's all about governance and integrity across the service" adding that he reaffirms he's for "an APS that is apolitical, merit-based and committed to the highest standards of integrity." Those sentiments would be more worthy if the Prime Minister were to swear off giving jobs to mates and do something about the secret workforce of tens of thousands of contractors and labour hire staff doing work in public service jobs without going through the merit recruitment procedures in the Public Service Act and whose integrity cannot be assured by the act's code of conduct.
To put them starkly, Morrison's "guideposts" for the public service are "respect and expect", "it's about the implementation", "look at the scorecard", "look beyond the bubble", "read the game and stay ahead of the play" and "honour the code". Got it? Good luck.
Morrison's speech on the public service is baffling and if he's taken the trouble to reflect on the major problems and difficulties facing the service and how he would like to overcome them in a coherent way, that doesn't come through.
With any luck the report of the Thodey Review should fall into the Prime Minister's lap within the next six months or so. That would provide him with the opportunity to think more deeply about the kind of public service he wants and then to express himself cogently and with a level of intellectual heft that is lacking in his folksy August attempt.
Other prime ministers have done so, most notably through the annual Garran Orations - Gillard, Rudd, Howard, Hawke, Fraser and Whitlam have all had a crack. Morrison should read these speeches to get a feel for what's required. He should then ditch the obscurity of the "eggs and bacon principle" and see if he can "man-up" with his predecessors.
- Paddy Gourley is a former senior public servant. pdg@home.netspeed.com.au