The move was widely seen at the time as a cost-cutting exercise (despite government protestations to the contrary) and there has been a view in some quarters since that the whole has turned out to be less than the sum of its parts.

Development policy expert and former DFAT official Cameron Hill says while integration arguably helped in bringing together initiatives such as the Pacific labour mobility scheme, "the net result has been an aid program that has been less effective and less transparent than it was, and that has not been in Australia's interests".

Mr Hill says the "maximalist" approach adopted to the integration, with AusAID staff and resources allocated within the existing DFAT structure rather than retaining a separate and coherent development function, has come at a cost.

Former AusAID deputy director general Richard Moore, who avows no nostalgia for his former organisation, is similarly concerned about the impact the merger has had on Australia's standing and influence in the region.

Mr Moore, who undertook an independent review of the integration in late 2018, says the merger resulted in the loss of up to 2000 years of development expertise, particularly through the departure of senior locally engaged staff and specialists.

READ MORE PUBLIC SERVICE NEWS:

While the department has been able to continue to deliver programs and work towards development goals, it has "struggled to set strategy for the circumstances we now face".

A 10-year review of DFAT's capabilities, recently undertaken by ANU foreign policy expert Professor Allan Gyngell, is expected to focus heavily on how to improve the department's development capacity.

Similarly, the government's new development policy due out later this year is tipped to call for much greater ambition for Australia's development efforts and new thinking about how to achieve them.

The reviews coincide with calls from the Australian Council for International Development for the May budget to include $30 million to improve DFAT's development capacity, including the appointment of an Associate Secretary for International Development and Humanitarian Assistance.

Gearing up for the first referendum in 24 years is kind of a big task, and Public Eye doesn't envy the Australian Electoral Commission's workload.

Next on their to-do list: order 90,000 plastic bags to parcel, label, and transport ballot material.

The commission recently awarded a $71,000 contract to a Victorian supplier for the plastic bags. (Bit pricey for a plastic bag too, at 79 cents each.)

The AEC is all over the environmental impacts, a spokesperson said, but they have very specific requirements around ballot transport to adhere to.

Ballot papers must be bundled and parcelled for transport under The Referendum Machinery Provisions Act, and the commission also needs to be prepared to conduct the referendum come rain, hail or shine.

"When it comes to environmental impacts, the AEC is unique from other public service agencies," the spokesperson said.

"We run an in-person event with every Australian - it can only be done with a lot of hard-copy materials and a lot of transport. We don't have a choice in that.

"We continue to look at what we can do within those constraints to minimise the environment impact of electoral events."

The good news is the low-density polyethylene bags "can be both reused and are 100 per cent recyclable if returned to the contracted supplier". Kind of. (But not really.)

If the AEC sends them back, they have to consider if freighting the bags from all corners of Australia is environmentally sound.

And if they don't send them back? "Most used bags will be affixed with a label (again, a requirement of the Referendum Machinery Provisions Act) which is required to be retained," the spokesperson said.

"The process to retain these labels means the bags will be destroyed and cannot be reused. In this instance, the bags will be disposed of as general waste," they said.

Suppose that's one way to keep the secret plastic bag cupboard from getting too unruly.

Which minister has received the most reading material from their portfolio departments since taking on the role?

That's what Liberal spokesperson for the public service, Senator Jane Hume, wanted to know at Senate estimates in February.

The answers are trickling in, and so far Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong has come out on top.

Senator Wong has received a hefty 1048 briefs from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, ever since the first one slid across her desk on May 23, 2022.

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs Andrew Giles is hot on her heels though. He's sifted through 919 ministerial submissions from the Department of Home Affairs ever since June 14, 2022.

Special mentions go out to the Department of Social Services for churning out 910 briefs for Social Services Minister Amanda Rishworth since May 2022, and the Attorney-General's Department for 860 briefs written up for Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus since June 2022.

The results aren't final though. Public Eye has only seen answers from five of the 16 departments, so stay tuned.

Returning to our focus on iconic pairings this edition, more than 1000 budding intelligence officials at the Australian Signals Directorate have swiped right for a mentor.

We mentioned a while back the agency had contracted tech company OK RDY to deliver an app which uses AI to pair up women seeking career advice, and those eager to give it.

The initiative is being delivered in partnership with the Women in Security Mentoring Program.

The algorithm for a mentor is calculated based on a combination of values, social causes, skills, hobbies, alumni, mentoring goals and types of mentor or mentee.

Since October 2022, nearly 1000 mentors and mentees have matched, more than 650 mentoring sessions have occurred, over 500 hours and more than 3000 people have requested mentoring.

We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on The Canberra Times website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. See our moderation policy here.