Insight 5: Providing advice to Government

The Taskforce inquiries focused on respondents’ roles in developing and delivering the Scheme, however, the work of the public service is undertaken in context of the broader function of Government. The APS program and policy delivery is directed by the Government of the day.

Within the laws established by parliament, it is ministers who decide what is in the public interest and how it should be brought about. Agency heads and employees advise and implement. The role of the APS is to serve the government of the day and to assist in developing and delivering its policy agenda and priorities. Ministers make decisions and issue policy guidelines. Employees must comply with those guidelines when implementing policy. Such ministerial decisions and policy guidance must, of course, comply with the law.[16]

In the context of the Scheme, the Government of the day set a policy agenda, and there was an expectation that the relevant agencies would deliver in accordance with that policy agenda. Notwithstanding the question of the Scheme legality, the policy objective set in motion a course of action which agencies and public servants undertook to deliver. Independently, each respondent was working towards a collective outcome within this broader policy objective, effectively ‘doing their job’.

However, the public servant’s role is to also provide frank and fearless advice to the Government to ensure that decision making is properly informed, including in respect of legal, operational or ethical risks, and the policy or program delivery is effective, efficient, legally sound and ethical, a task which can be challenging under pressure. Cabinet government is most effective when all relevant agencies, including central Agencies, contribute to the analysis that informs decision making. The same point is true within a multi-agency portfolio. A Minister is entitled to hear the views of all their relevant agencies (including service delivery and policy agencies) and will make better informed decisions if they do. It is a matter of public record that, in the case of the Robodebt Scheme, the (at times quite critical) views of Department of Social Services (DSS) were not adequately reflected in the briefing of Ministers at critical points.

The Impartial Value provides for an APS that is apolitical and provides the Government with advice that is frank, honest, timely and based on the best available evidence:

Advice provided to the Government must also be:

1. objective and non-partisan
2. relevant, comprehensive and unaffected by fear of consequences, not withholding important facts or bad news
3. mindful of the context in which a policy is to be implemented, the broader policy directions set by the Government and its implications for the longer term.[17]

In delivering the Scheme, some public servants heard and accepted a call to action, however they appear to have lost an impartial perspective. In these instances, an apparent culture of prioritising delivery of Government objectives at all costs created a reluctance to identify risks and identify alternative paths to delivery. In the course of these inquiries, the Taskforce observed examples of poor behaviour by senior leaders being overlooked in pursuit of achieving results. These leaders were often identified as ‘deliverers’, people who could be counted on to deliver on Government priorities with little regard for the costs to staff wellbeing, workplace culture and good public policy.