Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) | Hansard source

This legislation, the Public Service Amendment Bill 2023, begins the process of rebuilding trust and confidence in public servants and the information, service and advice that they provide. For too long since governments of all persuasions began a process of outsourcing government services to the private sector, there has been a notable decline in the services provided and in the culture and self esteem of our Public Service workforce. Claims that the private sector can provide public services cheaper and better do not always stack up, and that is becoming increasingly apparent. One of the most glaring examples of that comes to mind when almost each day I hear someone say to me, 'Please bring back the CES, the old Commonwealth Employment Service.' There are many other examples, of course, that I can point to, where the projected savings from outsourcing or privatisation are not achieved when all other factors and costs are taken into account.

However, financial savings and inferior service are only part of the problem. A more serious problem with outsourcing is the security of confidential information, as we are seeing now with several examples of data breaches. As we are also seeing right now with the PwC scandal, the risks of corruption or leaking of confidential information are much higher and much more difficult to prevent when the private sector is engaged and in possession of critical information.

The issue of security particularly concerns me. I was recently alerted to the Peever report, commissioned by the Morrison government, into the defence innovation system. It was the latest of several reviews conducted over recent years into the operations and future of the Defence Science and Technology Group, otherwise known as DSTG. The DSTG, throughout its long history, has been one of Australia's most capable and respected research institutions. Working in collaboration with our defence department and similar research centres within Australian defence partners, the DSTG has played a crucial role in defence weaponry development and national security. Over the years, some of our nation's best scientists have worked there. The Peever report, when finally released earlier this year, was so highly redacted as to make its release worthless. Whether it recommended that Australia follow the path of both the US and the UK, where, I understand, similar organisations to the DSTG now outsource much of their research, I don't know. However, I'd be very concerned if that was the case, and I urge the Deputy Prime Minister—who, as the Minister for Defence, has oversight over the DSTG and to whom I wrote about this matter earlier this year—to ensure that the DSTG remains Australia's leading defence research public institution. I also take this opportunity to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his response to my letter, in which he, too, refers to the DSTG as 'a national jewel contributing countless world-leading innovative defence capabilities'.

The outsourcing of skills training from the public TAFE organisation and into private training providers also saw billions of dollars wasted through rorts and unfinished or worthless training certificates. The reality is that, as the name 'Public Service' itself implies, government-paid workers are there to provide a service. They are public servants who are there to provide public service, unlike within the private sector, where entities are there, essentially, to make a profit. Last week I visited the Modbury Centrelink offices and spoke to Centrelink, Medicare and NDIS staff who work there. Their commitment, professionalism and compassion, particularly for some of our community's most vulnerable people, is indeed commendable. They deal with matters sensitively and always with an objective to resolve any point of difference and to assist people with their needs. I thank and commend the team at the Modbury Centrelink offices for the work they do and for their focus on service.

This legislation essentially responds in large part to the Thodey review, which others have referred to. It may not pick up all the recommendations, but the recommendations that we are pursuing with this legislation essentially arise from that review. They are recommendations that were widely consulted upon. And yes, maybe they don't meet everyone's expectations, but they were widely consulted on and generally were put together after that consultation period. They go directly to ensuring good governance, accountability and transparency. That is, in my view, what the Public Service would like to see and what the public expects of the Public Service: accountability and transparency. Of course reviews will be carried out from time to time to ensure that they meet those very objectives that we talk about. One of the important aspects of all of this is also that government ministers will not have direct influence on some of the decision-making that might have occurred in the past, and that is also a good thing, because public servants are expected to be apolitical.

I close with these remarks. For decades now the Public Service of this country has served this country. Incredible expertise has been built up through the people who work in Australia's Public Service, at both the federal and the state level. One of my disappointments is how often I've been told that the expertise is being lost, that those years of experience, where people know how to deal with issues, has been lost because of outsourcing and the like. It is good to see that this government understands and values our Public Service and is in the process of rebuilding it so that we can all have confidence in the advice it provides to government and in the services it provides to the Australian people.

See this speech in context