Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party) | Hansard source

Having lived and worked in the Territory my entire life, often working within or adjacent to the public services at the Northern Territory and Commonwealth government levels, I can say that the Public Service and public servants generally contribute a great deal to the functioning of our country. While it falls to the elected government to set the agenda, policy direction and framework for the bureaucracy to move towards, it is up to the Public Service to deliver on such agendas. The day-to-day operation of our government is a huge responsibility. It is the responsibility of tens of thousands of Australians around the nation.

The institution of the Public Service in a Westminster democracy is the essential cog which keeps the machinery of government running. The Public Service assesses our tax forms, delivers our social security payments, processes and assesses visas, and develops and implements policies stretching across a broad range of issues—from national security to Indigenous Australians, from agriculture to the environment. Living and working in the Territory, I can say that when the Public Service is working well and when it is independent, innovative and effective, communities prosper. When the Public Service is weak, when it does not attract the right minds, and when it is under-resourced, communities suffer.

Everyone in this place knows the Liberals and Nationals say they don't like big governments. That sentiment doesn't necessarily fit with the lived experience when it comes to what actually happened under the most recent iterations of the coalition government. But, putting that to one side, what many Australians may be surprised to know is how much the coalition like a weak and buttoned-down Public Service when they were in government—or perhaps less so now that the robodebt royal commission report is in. For almost a decade the coalition undertook a continuous and structural weakening of the Public Service. They contracted out vital policy work, spending billions of dollars in contracts with private companies, taking the public out of the Public Service. They created an environment of fear and subservience, an environment in which public servants clearly didn't feel comfortable giving frank and fearless advice. This was because they didn't want sound policy development or to have to think too hard about outcomes; they wanted a yes minister and they wanted media releases. What the Liberals and Nationals appear not to understand is that a strong and capable public service is the only way in which to deliver real and tangible change on the ground. This is particularly true in areas of market failure, and particularly where economies of scale face challenges.

One of the perfect examples of this policy trainwreck is known as the Community Development Program. I will go to the Northern Territory, and in particular my electorate of Lingiari. The Community Development Program, a Work for the Dole scheme, can be traced back to the deliberate decision by the Howard government as part of the intervention to scrap the robust and effective remote employment program we once had, which was called CDEP. CDEP was an employment program, not a welfare program. It had been developed through decades of experience and input from masterful thinkers like Nugget Coombs. The CDEP model involved funding being allocated directly to local community employers, not through the carpetbagger intermediary agencies which are currently making a fortune out of the existing regime.

The intervention in the Northern Territory delivered an outcome which transitioned Aboriginal people in remote Northern Territory communities from modest employment into total welfare dependency. The local employers under CDEP had flexibility to use other funding sources to top up hours and wages, and people regarded CDEP jobs as real jobs. The rationale declared at the time of the intervention for why CDEP had to be scrapped was that all those workers needed to be income managed. It was an enforcement and compliance measure just like robodebt. The old Community Development Employment Program found the balance of respecting individual communities' cultural and social obligations while also delivering pathways for meaningful employment. Importantly, it was also able to stimulate local economies on the ground in those communities which were providing opportunities for individuals in those communities to generate income outside of government funding. There was a reliance not on government but on creating enterprises and, therefore, sharing that wealth within communities and providing more jobs for younger people in those communities. It was not a perfect program, but it was by and large seen as delivering outcomes for people and communities.

The big winners now are contractors to whom the Commonwealth bureaucracy outsources the task of case-managing individual welfare recipients—something which was not necessary where people were directly employed by a local employer. These lucrative businesses are based in New South Wales, Queensland or wherever—far away from where the program is on the ground in Northern Territory remote communities. One of these contractors was RISE Ventures. They won big at a time when their chair was prominent coalition fellow traveller Warren Mundine. Former Minister for Indigenous Australians Nigel Scullion awarded the company many CDP contracts worth millions, and Mr Mundine had still not resigned when he was preselected as a coalition candidate for the 2019 federal election. The company continues to make millions off the back of Aboriginal unemployment.

In a recent visit around my electorate I've spent the last four weeks going into a lot of the communities, but to one community in central Australia in particular—the community of Mutitjulu. The participants and other community members were scathing, in the meetings that I had with them, about the absence of meaningful employment outcomes for their people. They are sick of the politicisation, because there is nobody working with them to try to get the jobs happening. A lot of the old Anangu, or the old Aboriginal elders out there, want their young people employed. They are really concerned about their young people.

I think CDP and the present program that has been in place for the last 15 years, and the privatisation of public service policy implementation relating to the management of unemployed people out bush, have been disastrous, particularly for the communities in the Northern Territory. The Liberals and the Nationals—and I know that people don't want to hear this—weakened the Public Service by contracting vast swathes of work out to the private sector, particularly in the Northern Territory. Then they ran roughshod over policy thinkers with decades of experience, in favour of ideological and political sugar hits. I have many good friends in the Commonwealth Public Service, people with policy brains who were employed under the previous government, who wanted to advise ministers about different ways of working, and who within 24 hours of telling them that were told to pack up their desks and go to another department, and were shovelled out. There are many people who come into the Indigenous Affairs portfolio in particular—we've got to stop this handballing of the political football and the argy-bargy that often happen in this place.

I think this amendment bill from our government is important in that we do need a strong Public Service. We have to rebuild, particularly in the Northern Territory. CDP is just one example of how the weakening of that Public Service through the elevation of political decision-making over policy-based approaches critically and negatively impacts everyday Australians. It comes from the same set of policy values which delivered robodebt.

Another example of the dangers and consequences of weakening our Public Service is robodebt. The Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme has highlighted a number of concerning outcomes which come from the Public Service losing its ability to provide frank and fearless advice, but it also showed what can happen when the Public Service is not empowered, when its values and principles, the very bedrock of government, are not respected. Justice Murphy has labelled the robodebt scheme as a massive failure in public administration. It is a failure which has cost many Australians dearly. This is not to mention the hundreds of millions of dollars spent reaching settlements and legal challenges against the Commonwealth as a result of robodebt. When we weaken the Public Service we create an environment in which maladministration is more likely to take place and we weaken the tools needed for effective government, and that is not good for anyone. So, after a decade of neglect and damage, the Albanese government is setting about the unenviable job of cleaning up after the Morrison government. A task taken with vigour is the strengthening and rebuilding of our Public Service. We are putting the 'public' back into the Public Service. We are investing in our people and in their ability to create, deliver and evaluate good policy, policy which will change people's lives.

The Albanese government is also helping to put the values and principles back into the Public Service. We all chose to come into this place to serve the greater good, and that is true of those who work in government departments. This work should be framed by values and principles and prioritise long-term change over political imperatives. To facilitate this, the Public Service Amendment Bill will be adding the value of 'stewardship'. This is not a mere change in words; it is the ingraining of a deeper purpose back into the APS. It will require the Public Service to build and maintain institutional knowledge and to monitor and reflect upon long-term trends in the government's decision-making process. This legislation will seek to coordinate and set goalposts for a myriad of government priorities and agendas. It will require the Secretaries Board, the chief executives of government agencies and departments, to map out a unifying APS purpose statement. Not only will it require this, but it will require the board to review it every five years in order to ensure the APS is fit-for-purpose in meeting key targets. The legislation also strengthens the apolitical nature of the Public Service, making it clear that ministers cannot direct agency heads on matters relating to individual staffing.

Labor has come into government committed to transparency and accountability in government, and we are well on our way to doing this. It will take much more work to rebuild and strengthen the APS, but with concrete measures like this piece of legislation, we are making headway.

I thank our Minister for the Public Service, Senator Gallagher, for her work on this. Senator Gallagher is someone who intricately understands the vital role of the APS. Her leadership on this issue will lead to improved governance and, in turn, better outcomes for people on the ground. I know that my electorate of Lingiari will certainly be grateful for a robust and strong Public Service.

See this speech in context