Shergold sets his seal

John Howard’s appointments as departmental heads reflect a changing attitude to the public service, says Jack Waterford THE NATURAL focus of John Howard’s management changes is to remark that all four people he has put at the top are women, taking to seven (counting Sue Vardon) the number of women at the top of public-service trees. That’s true enough, but perhaps as interesting is what it says about a man, Peter Shergold, and the confidence in which John Howard obviously holds in him. The new Secretaries and the new head of the Public Service Commission are clearly those put forward by Dr Shergold - and each, if they have demonstrated capacity and loyalty to the Howard government, are classic public servants, not only likely to be equally acceptable to a Labor government, if there ever is one, but of the classic background of public-service development, expertise, independence and professionalism. All are tough and tenacious, but none are ‘characters’ in the sense of having eccentricities, personalities or predilections likely to get themselves, their departments or their ministers into trouble. Nor, probably, are they likely to represent any threat to Shergold’s impishness, pushiness on things that matter to him, or desire to have the public service responsive, even eager, to do the government’s bidding, but more visibly seen as being at one remove from hard politics. They may become their minister’s most important advisers; they will not become their best friends. Shergold does not deserve all the credit. Howard himself does, in the sense that he chose Shergold after Max Moore-Wilton decided, finally, to call it a day. Howard would say that Moore-Wilton was the man for his time and that he did a good job. Howard wanted to shake up the administration, which had had 13 years of Labor government. He wanted a more results-oriented service. He wanted to make it clear that the government had no time for some of the mainstream cultures with which Labor (and even some old Liberal figures) had been associated. And the government was impatient, and not going to wait around for the Public Service to adapt. If, in that sense, Moore-Wilton was a driver, brusque, ruthless and sometimes rude, focused on achieving what the Prime Minister wanted, and didn’t mind people knowing that he agreed with the PM in any event, then so much the better. He also had some contempt for some public-service personalities, conventions and concepts, was more interested in the big picture than the detail and was keen to infuse its top management with some can-doers from outside. Down the track, Moore-Wilton seemed either to have mellowed or to be happy enough with what he had achieved. His outsiders had not jelled that well: the most able public-service advisers to government proved to be ones the public service had grown themselves. And he had learned some of the values of distance from the minister, not least as he tried to play middle-man for a decision he plainly regarded as disastrous, sacking a Secretary of Defence. Even before Moore-Wilton had arrived, Howard had dispensed, more with shotgun than rifle-fire, with an array of Secretaries. Some of his early appointments reflected more hope than experience. By midway through the Moore-Wilton reign, however, appointments were becoming regular and predictable, and zeal for party as opposed to professionalism had nothing to do with it. Even people that Moore-Wilton did not like much, such as, say Helen Williams, Andrew Podger or Neil Johnston, did not suffer. And Howard himself seemed to be moving in the same direction. He has a highly politicised office, but manages quite well with public servants who are highly professional and highly correct. It is not surprising that he gets on well with Shergold - who has long shown an amazing capacity to get on with almost any type or personality of minister, Labor or Liberal. What is surprising is that he would have thought of him in the first place, since they are not at all the same sort of people. Yet not only did Howard put his trust in him, but it is clear that his respect and admiration has grown, even as the relationship has been formal. A part of that has been the way in which Shergold has improved the policy capacity of his department - now to be buttressed by two very senior and experienced advisers in Andrew Podger and Ken Matthews - and a part, no doubt, in being good at anticipating and heading off problems. The head of PM&C must be better than most at seeing through brick walls, as Robert Menzies would say. But Shergold is also using his power, as effective head of the public service, to talent spot, to move bright young people in and out of areas and to and from the centre, where they will gain knowledge and experience, and to follow through with programs with which he has long been associated, for bringing on the careers of the best and the brightest, not least (but not only) women. It is by now not so remarkable that a new Secretary is a woman, even if women are still under-represented. There have been programs in place for a long time and any number of women in the waiting room. Each of those appointed had had their name mentioned, in open company, for some years; indeed one, Joanna Hewitt, is regarded as long overdue. It is safe to predict that within five years, there will be three or four more female Secretaries. What the trend-spotter will also notice is that, by then, almost all the Secretaries will have been appointed by Howard, even if all will have had senior experience in Labor regimes. To those not mown down by the 1996 shotgun blasts, fate, and Howard, has been generally kind. But by then they will have moved on. All things being equal, it will be Shergold who is nominating their replacements. Jack Waterford is editor-in-chief of the Canberra Times, in which this article first appeared. Photo: Alexei Nabarro/ iStockphoto.co