Module Three: Administrative Accountability and Acumen

Introduction to Module Three

In Module 2 you examined the concept of responsive and responsible government, the types of organisational arrangements designed to support this, the place that government frameworks played in decision making, the need for a focus upon values to guide behaviour and the requirement of public sector leaders to act strategically and demonstrate political ‘nous’.

The business of government in Australia is extensive, diverse and complex and involves annual expenditure is fast approaching one trillion of taxpayer dollars across the three levels of government. For example, just the Commonwealth Government expenditure planned for 2023-24 will be $684 billion (Australian Treasury 2023).^[1]. Governments may have been responsive to the voter’s wishes and delivered on their promises but has it been efficient (not wasted money) in so doing, and what are the outcomes (net benefit to the community)? And whilst the interests of the majority may have been served, have the minority been protected or improperly disadvantaged as a consequence? In the provision of services, have special interest groups secretly benefitted from access to resources, information, services or largesse not available to all? In achieving the ends were the means ruthless, unjust, or illegal?

Political corruption is widespread around the world and endemic in many countries. It would be naive to imagine Australian politics is free from corruption. Sadly, it is alive and well here too (even before we consider behaviour which is simply unethical). Since 2012, Australia has been declining in Transparency International’s Corruption Index and now sits at number 14 in the list (New Zealand is at number 3, the UK at 20)(Transparency International, 2024)^[2]. Recent examples, include the seemingly mild and relatively harmless, such as Mark Bailey who was sacked from the Queensland Government for using personal email accounts for Ministerial work (Mellor, 2017)^[3]. But there are examples of serious criminal behaviour too, such as Mayor of Ipswich, Paul Pisasale, who went to jail for corruption, fraud, extortion and sexual assault (Brewster, 2022)^[4] or NSW MP Daryl Maguire who was found by ICAC to have engaged in “serious corrupt conduct” and was subsequently charged with criminal offences (Doak, 2023)^[5](Parkes-Hupton, 2022)^[6]. Additionally, there are regular examples of perceived government mismanagement (e.g. in funding for commuter car parks, in Snowy-Hydro 2.0, in building under-city tunnels and in the so-called Robodebt scandal). As a consequence, public cynicism and distrust of politicians and government has grown sharply in recent decades.

In response, there are a number of institutional measures designed to ensure more accountability. This module examines the methods by which government is held accountable to the people.

The bureaucracy receives a budget from the government, which needs to be targeted to programs agreed by parliament, and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are established to ensure it meets its goals. These indicators can be measured and the results can be reported back to Parliament and in turn (in a transparent government), be available for the community to scrutinise. Through human resource frameworks, individual contribution can be determined and performance measured to assure the public that the council worker ‘leaning on the shovel’ as ‘Jane public’ drives by, is entitled to a rest having delivered productively on behalf of the community (These concepts are explored in Topic 1: Accountability).

No-one is above the law, so public and common law rules can be applied to ensure accountability, and those who violate the law are assuredly punished as discussed in Topic 2: Rule of law. It may generally be a taken for granted assumption, but you need to ensure your dealings are within the law.

Public servants make decisions which, annually, impact on thousands of individuals and corporate entities and, occasionally, the decision does not go the way the citizen may have wished it to go. What are they to do to seek redress? A system to enable these decisions to be appealed, or reviewed, is available in all jurisdictions. Bodies reporting to the parliaments, like Ombudsman and administrative appeals tribunal as well as the High Court and the various supreme courts the judicial review systems, exist to ensure these review processes are available to the public. In addition, some bodies review the internal workings of the public service and government, like the various Auditor’s-General, public service commissions, integrity commissioners, and inspector of prisons at the various relevant jurisdictional levels. These institutions are discussed in Topic 3:  Right of Redress and your awareness of their structural roles are important to ensure you understand the implications of your behaviours in these matters.

In a complex world, government also has to advertise, to the wider community, those laws, regulations, services, and impositions that affect the citizenry. Modern parliament, with opposing parties, relies on argument and debate in the battle of ideas, and this drama makes excellent news. The media play a role in distributing information through news and playing a part in the political theatre through comment and investigative journalism. Media scrutiny of Bills and political behaviours adds another leg to the ‘separation of powers’ ideology. No government wants to be exposed by the press for displaying poor thinking, bad behaviour, mistakes, or lack of planning. The media acts as a system of review and control over the political system and their role is discussed in Topic 4: Media. You may not have direct involvement in this aspect of government, but you need to ensure that you appreciate the role the media plays and to keep your business off the front page unless it is a good news story.

Government is a major collector of, and repository of, information. In addition, when making decisions, government should be able to demonstrate the basis upon which a decision is made and, in particular, what information was available to make it. Citizens in a democracy are expected to have access to information, which is stored about them, especially if such information could be detrimental to their best interests. Right to Information and Freedom of Information laws exist to enable citizens and business to procure the information, from inside the bureaucracy, which they believe impacts upon them. This aspect will be discussed in Topic 5: Right to Information.

As we learnt in Module 1, parliament itself has review committees, which scrutinise Bills and parliamentary expenditure and an important committee for this module is the Estimates Committee. (Topic 6: Parliamentary Committees).

Committees are not the only way in which parliamentarians can attempt to scrutinise the government and hold it to account. Every parliamentary sitting day, MPs and Senators have the chance to ask questions of Ministers (whether they get a decent answer is another matter!). Question Time in parliament is the focus of Topic 7: What is the purpose of parliamentary question time?

Modern governance processes take account of the role that ‘values’ play in keeping participants accountable. Desired values and guidance around ethics in the public sector ensure a focus on doing the right thing and are discussed in Topic 8: Ethics and the Code of Conduct.

Each of these areas will be discussed in turn, as you explore the concept of accountable government, during this module.