Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

The Australian community has been truly shocked by the brazenness of the sports rorts saga, and I'd like to make a few brief comments today about the role of the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in his approach to handling his involvement in this. The answers given today by members of the government really show the unapologetic arrogance of this crew, of the government of the day. The role of the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet is unique in our system. That department is the head of the Australian Public Service. It's responsible for setting the tone and driving the work of our entire apparatus of government. We've been very fortunate in this country to have a number of very serious, accomplished secretaries of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. This has been of benefit not only to the Australian people but also to our prime ministers, who have had unvarnished, expert advice on every aspect of public policy independent of politics.

When Mr Gaetjens was first appointed as Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, we in Labor were willing to give him an opportunity to prove that he was willing to uphold this principle of independence and to put proper process ahead of political influence from some in this place. Along with many in the Public Service, we had our doubts. Since the election of the Howard government in the 1990s, Mr Gaetjens has spent very little time as a Commonwealth public servant. The majority of his time has been spent as a Liberal staffer, including three years as Mr Morrison's chief of staff. We were concerned when Mr Gaetjens said publicly that he and Mr Morrison were in a 'mind meld'. Mr Gaetjens said at the time:

I can tell the rest of the public service what's in the Prime Minister's mind.

This was not a good early sign of his approach to the job, but, as I said, we gave him the benefit of the doubt.

Then came the sports rorts scandal. A few weeks ago the Auditor-General released what can only be described as a scathing report, claiming:

Funding decisions for each of the three rounds were not informed by clear advice and were not consistent with the program guidelines.

Instead the report found decisions to award funding were focused on electorates the coalition was targeting at the 2019 election. This approach hurt some of the most deserving sports clubs. One club missed out despite being rated 98 out of 100 on merit by Sport Australia. Instead of sacking the minister then and there, what did the Prime Minister do? He asked Mr Gaetjens to provide another report into whether there had been a breach of ministerial standards. This second and unnecessary report was an opportunity for Mr Gaetjens to uphold his office independently and to produce a report consistent with evidence provided by the independent Auditor-General. But, instead, the secretary dished up a report that gave the Prime Minister exactly what he was after: political cover for himself while also providing a basis to sack the minister. According to the Prime Minister, Mr Gaetjens 'did not find evidence that this process was unduly influenced by reference to marginal or targeted electorates'. How can our nation's most senior public servant have a completely opposite view to the independent Auditor-General?

There are only two possible conclusions from this series of events. The first is that the Prime Minister has misled the Australian people about the advice given by the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, in which case Mr Gaetjens should correct the record. The second possibility is that Mr Gaetjens tried to protect the Prime Minister from political scrutiny by delivering advice engineered for political expediency. On this second possibility, given Mr Gaetjens's stated mind-reading abilities, Mr Morrison didn't even need to tell Mr Gaetjens that he wanted an inquiry that was a complete whitewash.

He didn't need to tell Mr Gaetjens to make his inquiry a political fix, because Mr Gaetjens has told us that he knows what's in the Prime Minister's mind.

So where do we go to from here? The only way for the Prime Minister to reassure us of Mr Gaetjens's suitability for his current role is to release the Gaetjens report immediately. Otherwise, this question will follow Mr Gaetjens throughout his tenure. Is he the head of the Australian Public Service or is he Mr Morrison's chief servant? Is Mr Gaetjens responsible for ensuring the Australian government gets the advice it needs to make decisions in the interests of the Australian people? Or is he Mr Morrison's head butler, serving up cooked-up political fixes when the bell rings? Mr Morrison's credibility, Mr Gaetjens's credibility and the credibility of the Australian Public Service hangs on the answer.