Public servants will find themselves at the awkward centre of a re-energised debate about the shape of their workplaces before the federal election. They can blame this dubious gift on both Malcolm Turnbull and those MPs who engineered his downfall.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Mathias Cormann, who emerged from the rubble of August's Liberal leadership meltdown as public service minister, is proving a motivated advocate for the Coalition's signature decisions about bureaucracy staffing and contractor spending.
Under previous ministers Michaelia Cash and Kelly O'Dwyer, the government let Labor and unions take control of the debate over its handling of the Australian Public Service. Last Wednesday, Cormann mounted the Coalition's first concerted attempt to regain lost territory, amplifying his defence of its contractor use, job cuts and the cap on agency staffing.
Should federal bureaucrats be happy to have a public service minister so interested in the beat? Public servants won't forget the legacy of the last minister who felt this strongly about their workplace. By calling for more cuts to their numbers, Eric Abetz hasn't let them, even if they tried.
Cormann's first speech as public service minister last week, addressing the "APS Wide" conference, included an indirect rebuke to Labor's policy to remove the staffing cap and return control over public servant numbers to agency heads, while keeping a ceiling on their spending. Labor and the Community and Public Sector Union, another avowed critic of the Coalition's contractor use, will no doubt clash again with the new public service minister as he redoubles the government's defence.
His speech ignored legitimate concerns that the staffing cap simply creates a costly reliance on contractors to fill the gap. But there's an honesty – critics would say brazenness – to Cormann's defence of the Coalition's mark on the public service that is relieving. A government disinterested in the public service would be worse than one that has formed views, made reforms and is willing to advocate them. Cormann laid out his vision for the public service's role in the Australian economy, framing it as an indispensable interface with the public and source of policy advice bound to standards of integrity and thrift. Absent was the rigid ideological hostility found in the rhetoric of some Coalition MPs.
Cormann's appointment to the public service ministry is coupled with another subtle change to the bureaucracy's direction. Diplomat Peter Woolcott's entry as new Public Service Commissioner could bring a shift if he takes a less combative approach to enterprise bargaining, although the strict policy governing any talks will stay.
For all the criticism of its painful cuts, staffing caps and contractor spending, it is highly doubtful the Coalition is happy to let its bureaucracy languish. Turnbull pulled it into the spotlight by setting in motion what is expected to be its largest review since the Coombs royal commission in 1974-76. Cormann makes his entry as public service minister at a pivotal moment for the bureaucracy, and depending on the review's findings, he could wield a powerful mandate for an overhaul. He could also refuse to make changes. The risk of having a public service minister with convictions is that these will close Cormann's mind to the review's recommendations.
If it's worthwhile, the review will shed light on whether the policies Cormann defends have equipped the public service for the tasks at hand. The Coalition's response will be a test of its commitment to the health of the bureaucracy.
