{"id":17116,"date":"2014-04-11T13:04:53","date_gmt":"2014-04-11T03:04:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/?p=17116"},"modified":"2019-04-13T23:58:08","modified_gmt":"2019-04-13T13:58:08","slug":"silencing-the-ones-who-serve-you-a-public-servant-speaks-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/silencing-the-ones-who-serve-you-a-public-servant-speaks-out\/","title":{"rendered":"Silencing the ones who serve you: a public servant speaks out"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Inaugural<\/a>

Inaugural departmental heads of the Australian Commonwealth Public Service – 1901 (Source: Wikipedia).<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

As a public servant of some 20 years’ standing I don\u2019t expect much support from the general population these days, but it has been heartening this week to see some impassioned responses from a range of respected commentators on social media to the new \u2018dob in a colleague\u2019 policy formulated for its staff by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPM&C).<\/p>\n

The Community and Public Sector Union<\/a> and the Human Rights Commissioner Gillian Triggs<\/a>, have also roundly condemned the policy.<\/p>\n

There is no need to repeat here the arguments put so well by Greg Jericho<\/a> (@grogsgromit) on ABCs The Drum;<\/em>\u00a0or by Paula Matthewson (@dragonista) in The Hoopla<\/a><\/em>;\u00a0by Michael Burge (@burgewords) in No Fibs<\/a><\/em>, and Jennifer Wilson in No Place for Sheep<\/a><\/em>, but I want to add a few observations of my own.<\/p>\n

Following the 1996 election I remember clear directives from management that we were now to consider the government of the day and our Ministers as our key stakeholders, not the client.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Australian Public Service (APS) consists of over 100 agencies and approximately 165,000 staff. It provides services to the Australian community on behalf of the government of the day, which range from pension payments to the aged and to veterans, to agricultural and trade policy, education, the environment and science, women\u2019s rights, transport and defence. In other words, the responsibilities of the Australian public sector cross all aspects of social and civic life.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, most individual public servants work within quite discrete portfolio areas. The bulk of work done within the public sector, as others have observed, is processing payments, managing contracts, and routine administrative work. While I accept the argument that an employee of a company with a very specific function, such as Qantas or even News Corp, puts their employment at risk if they openly criticise their company or their boss, it is difficult to apply a similar set of standards to an Australian public servant. This would imply that a public servant working, say, on the counter at Centrelink, could not take a publicly critical view of the current government\u2019s policies on climate change, or on asylum seekers. That is an absurd proposition.<\/p>\n

In the past I think most public servants would have assumed that they have a right as private citizens to belong to a political party, to write to their local member of parliament on issues of policy, and to join other citizens in peaceful protests. Very few would see these activities as an impediment to fulfilling their daytime responsibilities of administering government policy and programs as required, in a professional and non-partisan way. Further, very few public servants are known outside of the work place as \u2018public servants\u2019. They generally don\u2019t wear uniforms, nor do they have other identifying marks: many never interact directly with clients, and most would never even meet their Minister, let alone advise him or her directly.<\/p>\n

I have worked for governments from Hawke to Abbott. While I have held personal views that have sometimes been critical of each successive governments, Labor and Coalition, I have been able to discharge my responsibilities as a public servant according to the Australian Public Service code of conduct. I have exercised my right to protest at rallies and I have expressed views based on the evidence about the adequacy or otherwise of government policies on a range of issues that are important to me. I have always considered that it is my right as a citizen to respectfully disagree. I have also on occasion expressed my agreement and support for a range of government policies and actions.<\/p>\n

The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) in its statement issued April 9, 2014, indicated that it would like to see a more reasoned discussion with the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) which would lead to the formulation and articulation of clearly understood policies in relation to the use of social media by APS staff. Currently for public servants, there is just confusion. We don\u2019t know, for example, whether the policies initiated within DPM&C might become policy across the sector. We are confused about where we might stand in relation to signing a public petition, being photographed at a rally, writing to a newspaper, adding a comment on Twitter, clicking the \u2018like\u2019 button on Facebook or joining a Facebook group which has a political agenda. Also, following the public hounding of a private citizen by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) it seems we could all (not just public servants) be held accountable for the comments others add to our posts.<\/p>\n

It is also hard to know how each agency interprets the notion of \u2018criticism\u2019. Who determines what is harsh, gratuitous or offensive? Is it acceptable, for example, to retweet a newspaper cartoon that caricatures the Prime Minister, or to circulate a published article critical of government policy?<\/p>\n

The CPSU advises its members in its circular on social media to:<\/p>\n