Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee, , 3:07:08 to 3:40:00
Officials reflect on lessons learned from the Robo-debt scandal and the ongoing efforts to strengthen ethical conduct and transparency within the public service.
Topics: Public service staffing, Integrity, Law reform
Speakers: Dr Gordon de Brouwer PSM, Dr Subho Banerjee, Barbara Pocock, James Paterson, Hon Katy Gallagher, Andrew Nipe, Blair Exell, Karen Grogan, Richard Dowling
>> Thank you, Chair, and thanks everyone for being here. And I add my congratulations, Dr. Drow, for your contribution over many years in the public sector and your leadership um in recent times particularly, which I have seen very clearly exhibited um in your ambitions for a strong ethical public sector. So, thank you for all of that and I'm a strong and supporter of retirement and doing other things. So, I hope you have a wonderful retirement. Um, I wanted to ask some questions uh minister about the um future appointment. You've spoken about wanting a wide field and uh that you'll follow uh the outcomes and recommendations the Briggs review in relation to it. So, just want to check that you are committed to a public advertisement of
>> Uh yes. Well, I imagine I haven't seen a final brief about the how that's the um position is going to be finaliz you know the process is going to be finalized but we want an open process and therefore I think advertising is a key part of that.
>> Thank you. And uh will you appoint an interim APS commissioner or wait until the um position is substantively filled?
>> Dr. Banerjee is going to fulfill that role. >> Thank you. I think that was announced with your Yeah.
>> Oh, I apologize. I missed that announcement. Congratulations, [laughter] Dr. Benji. Um, as this is a voluntary retirement, I assume there's no payout of Dr. Drow's contract.
>> That's That's exactly right, Senator.
>> Thank you. Um, I want to ask you, Dr. Dau, a couple of questions about your statement, which um, uh, was a really interesting statement on your retirement. uh you referred to, I quote, the disgrace of robo debt. Um and I'm sure many of us would agree with you, especially those who have been damaged by it. Um I wonder I wonder if you're willing to offer some reflections about your confidence um your level of confidence that such a disgrace will not happen again given what you see of the service now. Are there any reflections you want to give us on that front?
>> Yeah, thank you and thank you for your comments, uh Senator. I appreciate them. Um yeah, I I did refer to Robot as a disgrace and I I think that uh we had a very thorough independent forensic examination that was proper uh through that and uh so I think we certainly from the public service we did that assessment of uh what that means. I I I think when you you talk about the future there's never any guarantee. So how do you deal with the probability of these things happening? I I I think there are some structural elements that that are helpful to support uh so sorry to avoid sort of events like roboet happening again but there also deep cultural and leadership elements and I think a lot of the focus has been on accepting that senior officials are responsible for their advice and their conduct and I think the the legislative change to clarify that former agency heads are responsible uh still accountable that that's a very important step um to be clear that you have to conduct yourself as a leader in a particular way uh and that you bear responsibility over time for that. I think there's been a lot of focus on how to develop leaders who uh can can act properly in those circumstances and that is create open cultures uh have really professional advice to to ministers around what's what's proper and what's not. uh and so we put a lot of focus on leadership and capability development uh throughout the service and I I think those things those things do bear fruit. Uh I I'd say that the introduction of stewardship as a value for all public servants is a very clear statement that every public servant has responsibility in their domain of work for what they do and that they not only have responsibility but they have agency to to do things. And that's really that's a way of empowering people to do their job properly which is in line with the public service values. and again excellence in delivery and excellence in in in ethics. So I I I the service has gone through quite a tumultuous reflection on on robo debt. Uh and I'd say a very clear rejection of that sort of behavior and instituting I think ways to address that very explicitly. I'd also say that things like capability reviews are a way of reflecting institutionally, you know, are are institutions focused on their purpose? Are they engaging with communities properly? Uh do they have the the ethical sort of and integrity in their systems? And we take an institutional lens across that. So I think those reforms all put together hopefully reduce the probability of events like robo debt which were unacceptable.
>> I think one of the things that um reading the history of robo debt that's really striking is the the long period in which there was uh a failure to be honest about what happened and concealment of advice and its consequences. That is a real concern uh taking on uh practices which were clearly absolutely malfunctioning for citizens. Do you think that culture about concealment um and honesty is
>> I think there's a lot less of that. Uh and I so I think I think uh it's it's it's uh considerably and noticeably >> but we're never we're never in a perfect And it's also then a matter of emphasizing and continuing that sort of training and leadership that that ethical ethical conduct matters. Uh and at the end of the day, that's how you maintain trust in public institutions and that's how we maintain our democracy.
>> So I'm wondering about how adequate exhaltation and codes of practice are to change behavior. Um, for my money, I'm always interested in consequences and some of the consequences for robo debt have been less than the level at which some of us would expect. How what's your reflection on exaltation and code of conduct versus um real consequences for for really significant malpractice?
>> Yeah. Yeah. Uh so that that question when it's coming to rode on the conduct of public servants my my perspective is going to be from what are the tools and instruments that are available to the public service as a public service not what are what are the other instruments that available legally and there's a whole lot of other systems around that I I think in terms of what we do but personally um I think the lesson learned is if people don't really internalize uh doing their job really well and doing that ethically then you'll never get anywhere. You'll never get to that state. So it has to be deeply internalized and people have to feel that. So there is a role for exitation and there's a role for people being talking about values and talking about what our purpose and our place in our system is. So I think that is important. Senator, uh I I do think that there there were consequences for for robo debt uh for the public servants involved and they may not be so people's people may not think that they were enough, but they were certainly within the law of what's in the public service act and what our engagements are in this respect. Co code investigations are an employment matter and the employment relationship is is private. It's not a not a public matter of it's not a matter of criminal law or or or civil civil law. It's a it's an employment law matter and the law is very clear around the privacy that has to attach to those investigations. So all I can say is that we we do this by law properly with the law and the law says how we do these things including the use of protected information. Now I I I we we this these processes were done independently. They've got special sanctions advisers. You can only do that if someone's still in the public service. If someone chooses to resign, we just don't have any instruments to lean into that. So we have to act within the law. And I think that's part of the dissatisfaction of people is that they don't seem to be consequences outside of employment. but all we can do is talk about the employment relationship. So, it's our context, Senator.
>> Well, thank you. Thank you for those um reflections. I I want to move on to um another matter, and that's um the termination of Secretary James. Um she was terminated uh partway through her 5-year term as Secretary of Department of Employment, Workplace Relations. Um and yesterday we heard uh the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet confirm in estimates that her term was terminated and the termination did not relate to misbehavior or misconduct reasons. You're nodding. You're agreeing with that. Um can you tell us why her term was terminated? What other reasons can there be? I
>> I think I really have to take you back to Prime Minister and cabinet. uh the employment relations and employment context for a secretary is a matter for PMC. The commissioner's role is subsidiary. The primary role is with PMC and that really is a matter for PMNC. Senator, I I I can't provide any other any other insights beyond what was provided yesterday by PMNC. Um, we did
hear from PMNC yesterday that uh under section 594 of the public service act before recommending to the governor general the appointment of a secretary be terminated a report be prepared for you. Um, and they said that such a report had been uh prepared. Is that correct?
>> Well, the reports prepared by the secretary of PMC for the prime minister in consultation with the and consult the commissioner in in preparing that report. So I was consulted uh senator.
>> So I I understand that under section 59 um it it that section does not outline under which circumstances secretaries can be terminated. Um section 293 of the public service act outlines reasons that APS employees can be terminated and that includes unsatisfactory performance of duties. Are secretaries subject to the same grounds for termination outlined for APS employees in section 293 or is there more discretion?
>> Uh they're separate parts of the legislation, Senator. So secretaries the termination of a secretary appointment is within section described by section 59. It's really a matter for PMC Senator and I'm not trying to shift it, but it's really it's it's theirs. It's it's their
responsibility. So uh can you give us any insight about her termination uh and whether it related at all to the findings of the ombbudsman in relation to the targeted compliance frameworks?
>> I think I'd go back to what Mr. Walter said yesterday that it doesn't reflect um uh misbehavioral code matters.
>> Okay. And and you believe that relates to anything connected to that that [snorts] ombbudsman's report?
>> Well, I I'm not drawing that connection. That's really a matter. It's that's a matter for PMNC to talk about, not for me. And I'm not I'm sorry, but it's really a matter for them, Senator. It's
>> Thank you. Thank you for that. I'm now
>> I'm going to now Senator Pocock and we'll go to Senator Darling.
>> Thank you, Chair. Uh I had some questions about uh further reducing expenditure on external labor in the public service. Uh, and in the mid-year economic fiscal outlook, which I was rereading over Christmas, I saw that um that there's plans to further achieve $6.8 billion of savings over four years by reducing spending on external labor and other non-wage expenses. And specifically, the APS will reduce its reliance on external consultants by making uh the Australian government consulting permanent. So could you outline a bit of what the plans are to to both grow and expand the the services available within the Australian government consulting?
>> Thank you Senator for the question. Um you've referred to the relevant part of the MAF announcement which which was confirmed that the government um has committed to expanding and making permanent um Australian government consulting uh in the department of the prime minister and cabinet. Um we expect to grow um AGC top to 150 people over over the next five uh four years sorry um and we've uh discussed previously in this hearing kind of the um the approach to uh our cost recovery and I think the my documents sets out that Australian government consulting will transition to a full cost recovery basis from 26 to 27. Um we have started that expansion. I'll pass to Mr. KN to talk about that expansion process and the next steps in that growth.
>> Thanks uh Senator Andrew Knip uh first assistant secretary prime minister in cabinet also uh the lead on Australian government consulting. Uh so uh we have uh commenced recruitment and started to grow. We uh on the 1st of January sat at 37 uh staff um with the plans to expand to up to 150 by 2930. Uh and actually yesterday morning went to market to uh further recruit um and we'll be on a a rolling recruitment basis over the next few years growing at a um a fairly uh uh fast pace but also one that we can manage because we're starting quite
>> Yeah. So what are the sort of main categories of work that uh Australian government consulting is is really being able to sort of take the pressure off um external labor costs and where do you think the opportunities are in the future to to grow even further in the main categories of work?
>> Thanks Senator. So uh AC focuses on uh three uh interrelated service lines that we call strategy uh organizational performance and policy reform. uh we've done 37 uh 35 projects rather as of the 1st of January. Um uh we started charging in the last financial year and are working towards uh cost recovery. Um uh the projects range across those three different service lines. So there are examples where we have worked with uh department heads to shape up impact strategies for a whole of department reform. Uh sometimes in response to for example a capability review that might have been undertaken. Uh so there are some of the examples of uh of say strategy work. Uh there are a number of times where we have worked with the department to stand up an in-house capability that's a bit like ours. So it could be a policy reform uh unit. Uh we'll work with them to um establish an [clears throat] operating model um to help build the capability of the team and then to work alongside those teams for a couple of projects. We've done that with uh the department of health and also agriculture. Um there are uh a number of instances where we've done policy or delivery reform. Uh so we worked with DQ on a consumer energy resource uh regulation uh technical regulatory framework. Um and we also worked with uh DU for example on the self-employment assistance program. Both of those uh either working with stakeholders or working with the department about how to improve uh performance and we've done a range of organ organizational transformation projects including the the ones where we're standing up teams. Um in addition to those there are times where we will help the rest of the service uh improve the value that they get by going out to consulting. So that's what we'd call our buy better stream. Um that includes a consultancy playbook that we've done and providing periodical advice to line agencies that approach us.
>> Okay. No, thanks for those examples. Obviously clear examples that may have been outsourced in the past, but is there a good level of awareness now about what your services are and what you do or do you need to do sort of more sort of educational advertising activities across the public service?
>> Uh both, Senator. So we've been quite careful to make sure that we weren't while we're still quite small relative to the rest of the market, uh drumming up so much demand that we would just be saying no to lots of people and essentially wasting their time. uh and so we've been pretty cautious in how much we uh kind of go to market um but we uh will be growing that proportionate as we grow. So there is very strong awareness the demand uh definitely exceeds the supply and we'll be working with our partners across the APS to make sure they're aware of kind of what we have done and what we can do particularly in those three areas of strategy policy and organizational
>> Just one minute we we just to be clear we don't have a formal communication sorry advertising sort of budget we have no kind of campaign running just to be clear on one of the questions
clarification
>> it's much more word of mouth inside
>> Senator Paterson
>> thank you chair um Dr. Brown, in response to questions I asked on notice, um it's been revealed that the APS-C has spent more than $400,000 on executive retreats and training in an environment where government spending is very high, inflation is rising, and interest rates are increasing. Do you think that is a publicly defensible use of taxpayers >> Why do you think uh it is necessary to spend $400,000 on Southern Highlands retreats for public servants to train them? Are there no cheaper ways to conduct training like that?
Sorry. Just let me uh so those those training courses Senator uh about leadership uh for leadership programs and uh they are go back to actually go back to what Senator PCO raised around how do we ensure that we avoid um some of the failures of the past of poor leadership and these leadership programs are an essential part of doing that. They uh I we're very mindful of u public expenditure uh and of how we spend public money and it is public money. It's not our money. It's taxpayers money. But this is a really important way of investing in people to ensure that we get the best outcomes. I might ask my colleague Dr. Banerjee and I have complete confidence in this program. Senator
>> Shimra Banji, deputy commissioner, head of APS Academy and capability. Uh, Senator, these leadership [clears throat] programs uh are based on evidence about organizational performance that's drawn across many different sectors. They're long-standing programs in the APS. They follow similar leadership practices in the private sector, in the not for-p profofit sector, uh, in a range of different areas, indeed in the defense force as well. uh we through those programs look to make sure that we have an opportunity for senior leaders to reflect on uh their practice on uh what it means to be a senior public servant how you think about the APS values including the new value of stewardship that's been encoded and work through that individually and then as a cohort we're very very mindful of uh proper expenditure and making sure that we achieve value for money in uh making sure that these courses run well. They a number of the courses have a residential component which is very much typical of leadership courses of this sort and again is a long-standing feature. We have tended to run those courses in uh a number of different locations uh city locations in uh in Sydney in in Victoria as well as well as regional uh locations in Victoria and New South Wales. Each time we run one, we take quotes, we have a look at uh value for money based on the facilities and uh the other costs that are incurred and we look to uh get the best deal that we possibly can for the expenditure. Uh in the uh in the press reporting today, Senator, I note that the per participant figure that was given uh for one of the uh one of these courses was incorrect. It was uh this is the SCS span 3 or stewardship program. Uh the correct figure there is $343 per participant.
>> So I I completely accept that training and development is an essential part of core business of the public service. We want people to be capable and I am not someone who says it's not necessary. But is it necessary to go to the southern highlands to do that? Is there no other cheaper way to do that?
>> Senator, as I said, we've gone to a number of different locations over time. We have had uh we've had uh these programs in Sheperton. We've had these programs uh in Sydney in Sydney CBD as well. We've uh had them in a number of other locations as well. Uh in Cayama uh in Jalong uh there are a number of different locations for thinking about these things. It depends a little bit on the intent of the program, what we're trying to do, but it also does depend a little bit on logistics. Uh so we're looking for a central location that is easily accessible to SCS. Uh and then as I mentioned, we're looking at the facilities that are available for for uh for the venue. The uh Southern Highlands location that you've mentioned, as I said, uh the the actual cost of that is $343 per participant uh per night. That is in the mid-range. The average is about 370 for these offerings and it's well below uh what would be incurred if we're in uh a Sydney CBT location.
>> Sure. But I mean many not all but many of the SCS officers who are your target audience are CRA based. Did you consider hosting any of these in CRA?
>> So Senator we have thought about this. Uh so two two things that are on our mind in thinking about these courses. The first is that it's only roughly a third of uh public servants that are CRA based now. So we actually have a substantial national footprint and understandably uh SCS officers who are outside CRA are keen also to be considered in terms of whether or not we can look to minimize the travel burden on them. We do uh follow the practice of having a residential component because the unequivocal evidence of the learning impact is that bringing a group together makes a difference. Mhm. >> And so if you if you have it in the immediate work location, uh for busy senior people, inevitably that means that they're pulled away into their day job in a different way. So we're trying to balance all these different things. I think it's a very common model >> for leadership development. We take the value for money considerations very very seriously. We take multiple quotes and we think about moving into different places so that we can test different environments.
>> Sure. I mean those that answer is slightly contradictory. On the one hand you said you tried to organize it where people are and the other hand you said we need to take people away from where they are. I mean
>> a residential component.
>> How many SCS officers are based in Sheperdan or near it?
>> I'd have to take that on notice.
>> Probably not many. Can we take a guess?
>> As I mentioned on the way through it depends on the circumstances of the program. The Sheperdan program is the band two leadership program which specifically looks at engagement with community. So in that program we were specifically looking to go to a location where we could talk to a range of different community leaders who would have different perspectives that are outside a mainstream capital metropolitan setting. So part of our our rationale there was to think about a different form of program and the best location for that different program. That's the flexibility that I was mentioning before that we think about a range of different circumstances when we're thinking about where to locate
these programs. Sure. Um that SCS ban 3 agency head program you talked about it it did cost $43,000, didn't it?
>> Senator, there was a response to the quan that was provided to you.
>> Yep.
>> Uh that itemized two two aspects of the cost. >> Uh the for some I could check uh against the quan, but uh the numbers that were
it was $43,000 for that program, um how just explain the math to me. How does that work out to $340 per participant? I mean,
component two two components of the cost cover all participants plus facilitators and everyone that needs to run the program, >> So it might have been [clears throat] that the division that was done that was not provided in the quam. So the the number that was the number that was quoted today was not provided in the Guam was clearly off a different base.
>> So but hang on. Are you saying that the $340 cost per night does not include all expenses associated with the program?
>> No, I'm saying it does, Senator. I'm saying that the base of the number of people that are considered in those two component pieces >> is most likely the reason for the difference. I I didn't calculate the other number, Senator, so I can't give you the maths for the other number.
>> Sure. Well, we can only go off the information you provide us, and the con does say that that program cost $43,000, but you're telling me the cost per night was $343. So, either it's a very long program or there are thousands of officers participating in it in order to get it up to that level or hundreds at least.
>> Senator, I'm happy to provide our working on on data if that's helpful to you. But, as I say, my guess without having access to how the other number was calculated >> is that the difference is in the base in some form. But, we didn't calculate the other number. We calculated cost per participant for a range of other programs in that quantum which we would step set stand behind. Y >> the average the average cost per participant per night is of the order of $370 which is roughly cognizant with all the other consistent with all the others that are calculated from us in that table. >> The number that was quoted this morning was not from us. >> I don't know how that was that was
quoted. So just so we're clear that the $370 average figure and the $340 figure for this particular program that is inclusive of all costs. It's not just accommodation. It includes transport, guest.
that were given to you. And yes, that's all costs.
>> Well, were there any components of the cost that weren't given to me? >> No. So that's all inclusive transport per DM's, you know,
>> it's all inclusive in the APS-C's expenditure, >> right? When someone attends uh generally an agency would cover some aspects of their costs as well.
>> Ah so it may not include their flights for example if their home department
>> That's could well be the case senator.
>> Right. Well how else are they going to get there if they have to fly there?
>> Yes sir.
>> Right. So we don't have the total cost of this program and it could be more than $370 a night if you include transport costs paid for still by taxpayers but just not by the APS-C.
Senator, the question was about costs incurred by the APS-C and we've given you an accounting of the APS-C costs.
>> Yes. But Dr. Banji, I think you understand that the important thing for taxpayers is not how much it cost the agency, but how much it cost them. How much did they pay for this training to take place?
>> Not responsible for like they're responsible for answering the questions that you have asked of them and they've done that.
>> Yes. But I was left with the very strong impression that this was the total cost of the program. Now we hear it's the total cost of the program borne by the APS-C and there may in fact be costs not included. So the $370 figure per night might give a misleading impression to Australians about how much they are actually paying for this training to
>> Well, if we can see if there's anything further we can provide you. But the question as to APSC's responsibilities have been answered.
>> Yeah. Minister, you're you're the finance minister. Do you think Australians are entitled to know what the total cost of these programs are?
>> Well, we answer the questions that we're >> Yeah. Well, so let me finish. Uh I am supportive of leadership training and capability building across the APS and I as finance minister as always are keen to make sure that there's good value for money as appropriate as agencies do when they determine these uh matters. Uh and we you know we'll provide all the information to questions that you have. Senator Paterson, I note when you did leadership training that you declared on your register, it was a scholarship program. There isn't scholarship programs in the APS for that. Your your leadership training was in the Hunter Valley. It was a residential program. It was valued at the cost of $32,000. So obviously there's merit. You've seen there's merit in in going on leadership training. I'm sure it's helped you do the job that you're doing today here. I support it as well. Um, but we are accountable for taxpayers for the expenditure of that money. There are no scholarship programs that like the one that you went on that are able to be provided to our SCES. So therefore, the >> the uh uh taxpayers or public funds are used to support that training. And yes, I totally support trying to get the best out of our SCES uh leaders, including developing new leadership to come through the APS.
>> Like you, I support training for SCES, but I think it's completely legitimate to understand what taxpayers are paying for
>> and we'll we'll answer any question you have and we have APS-C have answered the question that they were asked and for the information that they have available.
>> Yep. Well, what
>> would you like to rotate the call?
>> Thank you. Let me conclude on this chair and please then do rotate the call. Um can I ask you to take on notice the total cost for participants total cost to taxpayers for participants including any costs borne by their home agency or department
>> if we I mean let's let's see what's possible um you know about how do we answer that if you leave it with us. We understand the question you're asking. It may be very difficult for APSC to coordinate that information but we'll see what we can provide. Well, just to
clarify, Minister, if that's not possible to provide, then how would taxpayers know what the actual cost?
>> Presumably, you would lodge a question on notice for uh departments like you do thousands every every day cuz I have to sign them off.
>> It's not thousands. Some of the senators do that. I hope
>> it feels like it. I think for people answering them and signing them off,
>> transparency is hard sometimes. I think taxpayers are entitled.
>> It's not hard. It's not hard. I have a view that I think it should be more targeted. I never took the approach that the opposition takes now which is just to reloge thousands of questions on notice across departments uh routinely like seriously every 3 months the same question asked. Um that wasn't the approach I took in opposition because I wanted to use it as genuine transparency not a fishing expedition but you have the approach that you've taken. Uh, I see no reason why you could not put a question on notice blanketed across the APS as you do with certain questions and ask them to to provide that information. It's not really the APSC's job uh to go and basically do that work on your behalf.
>> Minister, sometimes when those questions are asked, we don't get the information. and we just get a copy and pasted sentence probably out of the PMO manual uh on to how to answer questions through Senate estimates that provides no information for
>> I sign off a lot of cons to you Senator Paterson and they have information if there has been no change since the month before where you've asked that you might get a referral back to the previous time that question's been answered um but you know we take our responsibility to answer questions seriously
>> on that I am going to rotate the or we
will be um just for people's uh understanding we will be coming back after the lunch break with um the APSC. >> Um hope that doesn't uh
>> Are there more questions? >> There are. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah.
>> Um Senator PCO, would you like to take us out to the lunch break at um 12:45? >> Sure. Um so I I wanted to turn to the Briggs review minister um and its review into the jobs for mates culture in the public sector uh in relation to board