Politicisation of the public service sets a dangerous precedent in shunning the independent expertise of officers who were appointed for their skills and not their political alignment.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The problem is that to stack a public service with compliant bodies alienates real expertise, fosters self-censorship to the point of sycophancy and almost guarantees mediocrity, when what is most desperately needed is fearless expertise. Dissent is not necessarily a bad thing when it comes from the experts employed to advise you.
But the disregard for the fundamentals come as little surprise in an age when federal ministers have decided to treat the divisions of powers with contempt and spuriously criticise the judiciary for the sake of political point scoring.
It is a clear indication how sour these relationships have become and how venal and short-sighted the politicians who feel this is a game worth winning. The latest step in this history of public petulance comes again from the Attorney-General who in a combination of myopic self-importance – certainly devoid of grace or statesmanship – failed to even thank an office holder who has served his government.
Traditionally, when a government announces a high-level appointment it takes the opportunity to thank whoever is being replaced. Not so for Gillian Triggs, the outgoing Australian Human Rights Commission president. George Brandis made no mention of her. In this kind of display, Brandis has form. His very public and poisonous feud with the Solicitor-General another example of how toxic these relationship can become.
Professor Triggs, after five years leading the human rights watchdog, may have been dogged by controversy over issues such as the treatment of asylum seekers but ultimately her role was to stand up for the very things the government was treating with contempt.
Whatever your position on 18C or some juvenile prank at a Queensland university, even if you feel it warrants expanding volumes of broadsheet pages, there is a key issue that can be too easily violated for cheap effect. The problem is that the dictates of form are enshrined to implement some neutral ground where despite differences, there is an agreed objective to maturely get the job done.
When this maturity is so sadly lacking, it is little wonder the festering relationship hits a new low and public contempt for politicians is returned in kind.