It's really interesting the way we talk about the Public Service in this chamber. There are some quite different and diverging views. I want to put on the record, as we debate this bill, the high regard that we on this side of the chamber have for the Public Service, for the public servants whose job it is to look after so many aspects of people's lives in the way they relate to the operation of federal agencies and departments.

When I think of public servants, particularly of those who work in my electorate and live in my electorate, there's huge diversity. I think about the people in Centrelink offices, who, in Hawkesbury and the Blue Mountains, have been the ones to respond and try and help people through the processes when a bushfire hits, when a storm hits and wipes out their home and has it sliding down a hill, or when floods come. These Centrelink staff are among the first that I think of, because they have had a really challenging few years, particularly in our electorate. I also think of the team of people who administer and try and support people through the National Disability Insurance Scheme process.

Now, we know that the processes are not always as simple as they could be and the public servants who work on them face challenges but are working so hard to try to make it accessible. I see that particularly around the NDIS. I also think about it when there are Medicare or My Aged Care issues and people go seek help. All the people who are trying to help my constituents—in fact, many of them are my constituents working in these offices, working in their local community, serving their local community—are public servants. We also have a huge range of people who work in our Defence Forces—civilian workers around the Richmond RAAF base, around Glenbrook RAAF base and living scattered throughout the electorate of Macquarie. This is not to mention those who are being helped by workers at the Department of Veterans' Affairs.

I think about the tax office and the myriad public servants that we are privileged to have living in the electorate of Macquarie, and I take my hat off to the work they do. I also say to the union that supports them, the CPSU, that the work they do elevates the issues, brings to light the things that are not working and makes systems better for their workers and also for the wider community. That's why I am very pleased to be speaking in support of the Public Service Amendment Bill 2023, which will amend the Public Service Act 1999 to deliver enduring, transformational change and to ensure that the Australian Public Service is well placed to serve the Australian government, the parliament and, very importantly, the Australian public into the future.

To strengthen the Australian Public Service's core purpose and values, the bill will do a number of things, and I will talk about each of those. Actually, I am going to step back for one moment to think about why we've actually gone down this path, because many of the proposed amendments in here were recommendations of the 2019 independent review of the Australian Public Service—that's the Thodey review—or go to the intent of that review and haven't been acted on previously. There are other amendments that have been drawn from observations about public administration from governments at a state level or even overseas, and of course they've been informed by engagement within and beyond the APS. That includes with APS employees, the CPSU, agency heads, experts and interested parties, including input from the general public. I think it's important to know that this has been done based on a lot of information and a lot of feedback and engagement.

In terms of the areas that the bill will strengthen, the first is the APS value of stewardship. The proposed amendment will add a new APS value of stewardship alongside the existing APS Values, which public servants will be required to uphold at all times. There are currently five existing APS Values: being committed to service, ethical, respectful, accountable and impartial—all the things we would expect when engaging with those who work in the Public Service. The proposed amendment adds the following supporting statement to clarify the meaning of the new APS value of stewardship:

The APS builds its capability and institutional knowledge, and supports the public interest now and into the
future, by understanding the long-term impacts of what it does.

The APS Values are designed to provide a philosophical underpinning for the APS; to reflect public expectation
of the relationship between public servants and the government, the parliament and the community; and articulate the culture and operating ethos of the APS. Under the Public Service Act, secretaries, the APS Commissioner and the Secretaries Board are required to act as stewards of their department and in partnership of the APS. The Thodey review found that legislating stewardship would give it broader application to guide the enduring role of the Australian Public Service. Enshrining stewardship ensures that APS employees are able to see how their individual behaviours contribute to the stewardship of the APS. I know that this part of the bill is welcomed by the CPSU, which points out that, as a knowledge based institution, the Public Service's most valuable asset is its people, and it's right that that's a consideration for any government or agency heads going forward.

The second change that is being proposed in this bill is to require the secretaries to oversee the development
of a single unifying APS purpose statement and review it at once every five years. All agency heads will be
required to uphold and promote this purpose statement. The purpose statement helps to unify the service behind a common vision, representing and influenced by the contemporary, diverse and innovative APS and community. The requirement to review it every five years ensures that it stays contemporary, up to date and responsive to the changing views and expectations of government and community. This is another one of the sections of this bill that is highly supported by the CPSU, who particularly support the involvement of employees in the development of a purpose statement. The work on the first one is underway now. When you think about APS employees being the face of the public sector and having broad experience and expertise in providing services to the community, it is really beneficial that their voices, experience and contribution are recognised and heard through the purpose statement.

The next section of the bill I want to talk about is around ministerial directions on APS employment matters. The amendment that we're proposing here omits the previous wording, 'An agency head is not subject to direction by any minister', and it substitutes for it, 'A minister must not direct an agency head.' Under the proposed amendment to section 19, the clause is being redrafted from the passive voice to the active voice. I've spent a lot of my life as a journalist and then, in my own business, thinking about language and the power that it has, and people like me will appreciate that shift from passive to active says a lot. I can see my colleague across the way, the member for Fisher, has his head stuck in a book, thinking about these very issues.

What that move does is strengthen the language so it's clear that the onus is on ministers
not to direct and that ministers have that responsibility. What this does is reaffirm the apolitical and impartial role of the APS. Currently, under the Public Service Act, it's stated that agency heads are 'not subject to' directions by ministers in regard to section 15 and various other parts of the act. By strengthening the language, the bill clarifies the duty is on the minister, creates clear limits on inappropriate involvement by ministers in APS employment matters and supports the integrity of the Public Service.

There's also an amendment that looks at introducing a requirement on agency heads to implement measures
that create a work environment that allows for decisions to be made at the lowest appropriate classification. I
know that there'll be work that happens in implementing this, but, under the bill, agency heads have discretion to consider what constitutes the lowest appropriate classification, taking into consideration the work level standards for classifications. The sense of this is that it seeks to ensure that decision-making is not unnecessarily raised to a higher level, so that we get improved decision-making processes and reduce duplication of work. We look forward to working through this in a practical sense with the workers within the APS.

Another amendment that's coming through with this detailed piece of legislation is around capability reviews. The proposed amendments would make regular, independent and transparent capability reviews a five-yearly requirement for each department of state, Services Australia, the Taxation Office and the Australian Public Service Commission and would also require the resulting reports and action plans to be published on the relevant agency's website.

The Thodey review noted concerns that the capability of the APS had been eroded over time. We've certainly
described it as being run down by a decade of a different sense of purpose from a different government. We
want to see the integrity, the strength and the capability of the APS built up. To be future fit, the APS needs to continually build its capability to create a skilled and confident workforce that can deliver modern policy and service solutions for decades to come. The proposed amendments seek to ensure the APS maintains a culture of continuous improvement to deliver for the government and the Australian community.

There's also an amendment that relates to long-term insight reports. This is about requiring the Secretaries Board to have regular, evidence based and public engagement to drive long-term insight reports, developed through a process of public consultation. The Thodey review called for the APS to strike a better balance between short-term responsiveness and investing in the deep expertise required to grapple with long-term strategy policy challenges. We've seen a lot of things outsourced to other parties over the last decade or so, and we want to see capability developed within the APS. These proposed amendments address the concerns that there might not have been genuine consultation with the Australian community, which is, in our mind, absolutely crucial for there to be good long-term planning and decision-making.

There'll also be an expanded 'outside' definition to exclude ADF members. I want to touch on this one.
The amendment is going to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy by removing the requirement to seek the APS
commissioner's approval to delegate powers and functions to Australian Defence Force members. At the moment ADF members are considered an outsider in the Public Service Act, and this needs to be updated to reflect the new Public Service Regulations 2023. This has practical implications, particularly in an electorate like mine where we have a big defence presence.

The last point I will go to is the amendments to the APS census results. The bill amends the Public Service
Act to establish a requirement for agencies to publish APS Employee Census results, along with an action plan responding to those results. Why would we be introducing this amendment? The annual survey is used to collect information about the attitudes and opinions of APS employees. It's an opportunity for employees to share their experiences. Many agencies already publish their results but the proposed amendment aims to continue to foster a culture of transparency and accountability for that continuous improvement with agencies by making it a requirement for them to publish their aggregate census results.

Our view is these are necessary amendments to ensure we have, going forward, a strong, capable and highly
respected public service.