Blogging this year has been sporadic. Miss Eagle has been living life instead including pleasuring herself in the Northern Territory during the last month. But I have to burst into print to-day over Kevin Rudd and his so called "work ethic".

Let's take a little walk down memory lane.

It is Queensland in the 1990s and Wayne Goss (Wayne Swan was State Seceretary of the ALP) has just ousted the National Party from 32 years in government. Wayne Goss was elected Premier of Queensland on 2 December 1989 and remained there until 1995. Two things characterised the Goss period of government - arrogance and aloofness - and they were demonstrated before Goss was ever sworn in as Premier.

On election night in the tally room, he famously told a group of cheering young Labor supporters who were beside themselves with understandable excitement that they should take a cold shower. In my view, it was - eventually - this same sort of arrogance and aloofness which brought the Goss Labor government unstuck so that, on the morning after the loss, Queensland Treasurer Keith de Lacey could say "There's a message in there somewhere but I don't know what it is."

And what has this to do with Kevin Rudd's so-called work ethic? Heaps - if one could just learn from the Queensland experience.

It is said that, when Rudd was interviewed by Goss for the position of Chief of Staff, Goss was taken aback when Rudd asked if there was any objection if he took Sunday off. And so the Rudd "work ethic" entered political life.

But it is not just this anecdote that provides our lesson. When the Goss government came to power it had the support of most of the Queensland Public Service. To be sure, not the support of the high-ranking bureaucrats who were put to one side with in-trays and no out-trays. But, generally speaking, the support of most members of the Queensland Public Service. Within about twelve months, the Goss Government - with Rudd as a significant player - had lost the support of the Queensland Public Service because of the way it was treated.

There was no mention then of huge work demands - they were just treated shabbily. In fact, all round many long time, long term supporters of the ALP and the incoming Goss Government were treated shabbily. However, it could also be fairly said that the Queensland Public Service was the first to feel the heat, the first to lose the faith.

So my heart goes out to the public service tribe of Canberra when people say it is a public service town, a Labor town and now people there, the "working families" there, cannot stand a fair chance of establishing the work-family balance.

I have often wondered what Kevin Rudd has learned from the Queensland experience that would change his attitudes this time around - if change there would be at all. And then I thought that Canberra is a large stage with a diverse group of players which might limit some of the attitudes seen in Queensland. Perhaps this is happening. Perhaps, behind the scenes, Rudd is receiving some astute advice - if he is not too arrogant and aloof to listen.

But - as I have always said to my kids -

if you don't chose to listen and take on board good advice.

That's OK.

Life has a way of teaching you.

It seems that the

Australian Public Service and the Commonwealth Public Sector Union

might just have a life lesson for Kevin Rudd.

~~~~
When you can do nothing else: bear witness.

Postscript: The Australian Public Service, working with us...?

Miss Eagle is indebted to people who know so much more than she does. Take the other day when ELP left a comment on the blog here. Miss Eagle would rarely, if ever, make a comment on defence procurement but ELP's insights were valued. And, while Miss Eagle, did not reply - daring not to show complete ignorance - she is grateful that this blog's good friend - Denis from The Nature of Robertson - replied. Call again, gentlemen, any time.

And, following this morning's post, about the Australian Public Service, Denis has come to the rescue with the following email:

Here is the Canberra Times report on new Senior officers of the APS.
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/boxall-demoted-in-ps-shuffle/1097789.html
Nobody in the Media knows the public service better than the Canberra Times.

Boxall has been a senior Federal Deptl head for many years. He came from South Australia, but he might have started out in Canberra. Lisa Paul is someone I do not know, but she sounds like someone who is "in favour". She has the critical Department (Julia's).

The full Administrative Arrangements Order is available here:
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/Features.asp?feature_id=646

It tells you every Department - full title - and every Act administered by each one. It is the key document which shows how real powers have or have not been shuffled around between Depts.

It is mind-glazingly dull, (but absolutely critical to Government's day-to-day operations).
There are little gems hidden away in there.

For example:
Attorney-Generals administers Native Title Act 1993, except to the extent administered by the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.
That title of the Dept tells you lots about how Aboriginal Affairs has sort of been sidelined, but partly it fulfils Rudds promise to not treat Aboriginal issues any differently from other people. THAT IS A TWO-EDGED SWORD IN MY MIND. The Hansonites argued for that position, don't forget.

If you read at his blog what Denis has been doing in the preparation of policy documents for the Save Water Alliance fighting for local control of water in the Southern Highlands, you will understand the sound insights that Denis brings to public administration - and the appreciation expressed by his colleagues.

Thank you, Denis. Good to have the record straight.

The Australian Public Service; working with us...?

To-day is Day One of the brand, spanking, shiny new Rudd Labor Government. From here the work begins. Now we know who the ministers and parliamentary secretaries are as well as those with any form of leadership responsibility. We know who are the political drivers, movers and shakers that we, Australian voters, elected.

But there is a layer of decision-making and moving and shaking below them whom we do not elect. These are the senior executives of the Australian Public Service.

The motto of the Australian Public Service Commission is working with you - but do they? Do they always? They are responsible to their political masters - but not to us. They know nothing of having to go out into the electorate and face the music. They are insulated from that.

By the time a senior executive in the Australian Public Service has reached his/her exalted position quite a few skills and defensive mechanisms have been learned. They have learned how to snow ministers, defend their positions, dodge blame, pass bucks, and cleverly word documents and legislation.

One of the reasons why the British TV comedy, Yes Minister, was such a success is because it reflects - and not necessarily with exaggeration - reality: the reality of parliaments and the public and civil service within the Westminster system of government.

In Miss Eagle's experience, governments come to power with a slateful of promises to implement. These promises, in the best of all possible worlds, have been developed by community consultation and lobbying from their own constituencies such as party branches, business or worker organisations. But, if a government has any measure of longevity, these commitments are exhausted within one three year term at least; and, if not, by half way through the second term.

One of the lessons from the Hawke period of government is that branches and party forums were sat upon. There could be no public voice let alone dissent. The solemn and hard facts were that input from party branches and forums dried up. Policy input from the bottom up virtually disappeared. This is likely to be repeated under Rudd.

What then happens is this. The reforming government gets its slateful of promises put to bed and dealt with. Government then turns around to see what is next to keep the policy ball rolling and the body politic interested and paying attention.

There is no difficulty finding what is next: there is the agenda of the non-elected senior executives of the Australian Public Service. They have a full to over-flowing slate of policy suggestions, dear Minister!

Australians learned for themselves what a difference a head of department makes when Whitlam took the reins of government in 1972 but still had a public service with a history of and symbiosis with 23 years of Liberal Party government. Adjustments then began over time in the public service which has lead to its clear (rather than obscured) politicisation.

Part of this has been the move to short term contracts which, to some of us, has meant that the senior executive service can not always pride itself on giving impartial advice to government without fear or favour.

Miss E has not the time or space to give instance after instance within the tenure of the Howard Government but Miss E suggests a detailed examination of Immigration, Defence and Attorney-General's would keep you busy for quite a long year, dear Reader.

Rudd has come out of the Australian Public Service. He held the most senior position in the Queensland Public Service under the Goss Government. He certainly has not made the mistakes of the incoming Whitlam government. He gives no public appearance of rushing to judgment on senior executive appointments although detailed scrutiny finds some ripples on the water.

Peter Shergold is still in place as Head of the Dept of Prime Minister and Cabinet. He has made it clear he wishes to leave the APS and his history makes it clear that he would not be a boon companion to the incoming government. However, Shergold is a public service professional and there is little doubt he will provide sound transitional service to the Rudd/Gillard team. Ken Henry in Treasury seems, at this stage, in little danger. He, too, is professional and has, at times, dissented from his political master, Peter Costello. It will be interesting to see how Wayne Swan manages Henry's advice.

But the departments that Miss E will watch with interest are:

1. Gillard's superportfolio of education, industrial relations and workforce participation which she sees as, virtually, a department of productivity
2. Immigration - can the culture really be changed?
3. Defence - will the senior executive service throw up talent appropriate to the extraordinary political leadership now in place
4. Attorney-General - it would be good to see true Labor traditions shining through the A-G portfolio in a manner comparable at Federal level with the manner in which Rob Hulls in Victoria has managed that state's A-G portfolio. It is necessary to counteract the stealth and development of pro-terrorism responses coming from the ghostly Philip Ruddock.

And Miss Eagle is also waiting to see the colour of the Rudd government's money on social inclusion. What will it mean in practice?

In fact, what will public service appointments within the senior executive service mean for the Rudd government and what will be measure of its service to the Australian people?