Australia’s parliamentary democracy is based on the British Westminster system of responsible government: a political model underpinned by an impartial public service that supports the government of the day.

Under this system, public servants advise successive administrations on how to design and implement policies efficiently, legally and accountably.

While the Westminster tradition has served Australia well for generations, ANU research suggests 40 years of New Public Management (NPM) reforms have weakened its foundations.

By forcing private-sector logic onto public institutions, NPM practices have dismantled traditional line hierarchies and outsourced core services in pursuit of higher efficiency and productivity.

Such reforms have missed their mark, contributing to the politicisation of the public service and, at their worst, to policy disasters such as Robodebt.

The politicisation of the APS is corroding the foundations of good governance

NPM reforms of bureaucratic structures have stripped away the restraints on political power, shifting administrative control from senior public servants to ministers.

This has allowed prime ministers to purge experienced public servants they consider too closely associated with the policies of their rivals in favour of private-sector recruits and political loyalists.

In particular, the numerical increase and greater role of external political advisers have led to several problems:

• Agency rent: Political elites prioritising career, party or political interests over efficient governance. This distorts the values and incentives guiding their work, shifting from providing frank advice to satisfying ministerial demands.

• Adverse selection: Qualified experts being sidelined for less experienced political staff.

• Moral hazard: An accountability deficit where advisers face few personal risks for providing flawed, politically convenient advice.

Ultimately, this politicisation, which starts at the top, cascades down through the entire system, corroding the efficiency of the bureaucracy and making non-elected officials less permanent and less diverse.

Careerism among politicians is changing the character of ministers

Historically, there have been two different career paths within Westminster-style governance, separating public servants from elected politicians.

Politicians typically entered public life after careers in the private or public sector – rarely as senior public servants.

Over the past 50 years, however, a phenomenon known as “careerism” of politics has seen a rise in the number of senior politicians entering politics via policy advice networks either in parliament or the party, rather than through distinguished careers outside politics.

These individuals often progress rapidly through patronage, owing their success to political sponsors rather than demonstrable competence.

Research from the UK suggests career-oriented politicians are more likely to vote strategically to prioritise personal votes over party obligations.

This enfeebles the quality of ministers, who are transferring from the non-elected side of government to elected positions – making two distinct pathways narrow into one.

Careerism erodes confidence in government, as voters perceive politicians as being motivated by personal interest rather than public service.

Reinstituting aspects of the Westminster model is essential to end poor governance

Re-establishing critical aspects of the Westminster model could help mitigate bad governance in Australia.

The Australian Government should look to four key areas for reform to end distrust in the public service and bring an end to bad governance:

1) Returning to merit appointments and promotion for public servants: Appointments based on competitive examinations and merit promotion were dropped after legislative changes to the APS Act during 2013-2014. Reinstating them to reward specific skills, competence and previous experience can serve as an important shield against politicisation.

2) Reintroducing tenure for senior public servants: Security of tenure for the Senior Executive Service (SES) was removed through NPM reforms. Contract-based employment discourages frank and fearless advice, jeopardising public servant’s careers. A return to tenure would avoid this chilling effect and help ensure advice remains unbiased.

3) Prioritising descriptive representation: Research from ANU shows the APS remains a distinctly Anglo-Celtic organisation. Substantive representation for minority groups across racial, ethnicity, gender and social class through all level of the APS can enhance outcomes in the implementation of policy.

4) Centralising and restricting the roles and powers of political staff: A code of conduct is required to define the roles and responsibilities of political staff and to distinguish them from those of public servants. Appointments should be centralised and based on fair selection criteria, rather than being minister-led. Additionally, political staff should never be allowed to direct public servants. Further reforms could also restrict the types of employment political advisers may undertake after serving a minister.