There are few things sadder in public administration than a public servant who thinks they’re a political player — a bureaucrat convinced they should be participating in the power games of elected officials, and that they have some political nous to bring to the table.
Mike Pezzullo now stands revealed as one of those pathetic figures, a man who thought not merely that it was appropriate to be exchanging a large volume of political texts with a Liberal powerbroker, but that he brought some political insight and smarts to the conversation.
Pezzullo should have resigned last night, when the story — a fantastic get by Nine’s Nick McKenzie, Michael Bachelard and Amelia Ballinger — of his exchanges with Liberal identity Scott Briggs emerged. But as his responses to critical auditor-general reports have often shown, Pezzullo has never been big on accepting responsibility — including when caught out by the media, whom Pezzullo describes as “bottom feeders“.
His minister, Clare O’Neill, has referred him to the Australian Public Service Commission. So we’ll have to wait to see if Commissioner Gordon de Brouwer thinks sending free character assessments of senior ministers, lobbying for appointments to his own portfolio and engaging in partisan commentary — not to mention lobbying for the destruction of media freedom — constitute a breach of the APS values and the APS code of conduct.
At least now we know what Pezzullo was doing while his department was the single most incompetently run agency in the Commonwealth. On Pezzullo’s watch, the Department of Immigration, and then Home Affairs as it became, has delivered:
- the Paladin contract scandal, which was exposed in 2019;
- a major review concluding our migration system was no longer fit for purpose;
- the Cape Class patrol boat debacle;
- appalling processing of citizenship applications;
- losing control of Australia’s borders to an organised illegal migrant scheme under Peter Dutton;
- over 100 people unlawfully detained by Home Affairs;
- a scathing secret review revealing major weaknesses in Home Affairs’ visa systems being exploited by criminals;
- a breach of caretaker conventions by the department;
- major bribery allegations in relation to payments made to Pacific politicians.
It’s become clear since the establishment of Home Affairs under Pezzullo in late 2017 — Pezzullo long championed the creation of the super-department — that as an entity it is simply not fit for purpose. Under Pezzullo, its senior management has been in constant churn — nearly 50 senior executive service (SES) positions in the department’s monumental org chart are currently listed as “acting” — a problem that has characterised Home Affairs since its inception. And this is the streamlined version: one of Labor’s first acts was to move the AFP, the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and AUSTRAC out of Home Affairs and back to the Attorney-General’s Department.
While such a huge department might be beyond any one person to effectively manage, Pezzullo has devoted his precious time to penning bizarre letters to his SES, hyping the threat of war (despite that issue being entirely outside his portfolio), and warning of the end of the world. Only now do we learn that he was also devoting his time to playing political games with a Liberal powerbroker and offering his own advice on ministerial appointments.
What’s all the more ironic is that the Morrison prime ministership (which these texts pre-date) was characterised, in public service terms, by a philosophy that public servants were to be seen and not heard, that politicians decided what would happen and the only task of public servants was to implement it as quickly and effectively as possible. It turns out that Morrison was quite happy to have, as one of his most powerful bureaucrats, a man whose philosophy of the public service was to be heard very loudly, on both policy and political matters, including who should be sent to his portfolio.
Neither, it turns out, were displaying good judgment.
Since publication, Prime Minister Albanese’s office has produced the following statement:
This morning, the Home Affairs minister asked the secretary of her department, Michael Pezzullo, to stand aside while an Australian Public Service Commission investigation is undertaken into the allegations reported overnight.
Mr Pezzullo has agreed to step aside pending the independent review.
Former Australian Public Service commissioner Lynelle Briggs will be conducting the inquiry.
Stephanie Foster will act as the secretary of the Department of Home Affairs.
This bloke has been a blight on the nation for a decade. He has wasted a fortune and completely failed to do his job. There are plenty of reasons to remove him before all this. He cannot remain now surely?
My brother used to bang on about this bloke just like you. Couldn’t tolerate him to the point of meltdowns on the phone. Now I see what you both mean.
From the SMH of 18 July 2017: Peter Dutton the big winner as Malcolm Turnbull creates Home Affairs office.
Dutton was always ambitious – far and away beyond any extent his talent deserved. But Turnbull was the PM who acceded to his self-aggrandising plans and who created this ne’er-do-well mega department. And it didn’t end well since Dutton was the de-stabiliser who saw the defeat of Turnbull in August 2018.
Not sure why Turnbull always escapes any criticism. He might have ended Abbott’s PM-ship but he was, and remains, a huge disappointment. Remember his first response to the Uluru Statement/
Giving him the Home Affairs gig was Turnbull’s attempt to buy off Dutton……………
…………eventually all that did was allow the appalling Morrison to come from behind.
That’s Scomo’s signature move.
Dutton… Morrison. To revise the ad – Bad. Different!
The 2 party system is a disaster. The liberal party could be like a European Christian Democrat party if it didn’t have to harbour such far right loonies and just plain bad faith actors. They would fine homes in the far right parties. Then the Libs could behave like grown up serious and people. Not just the “Say No” to everything, wrecking party.
Yes. This country has plummeted ever since Meg Lees sold herself, and ultimately, Don Chipp out.
Meg Lees also sold her party out, by endorsing the GST that the Oz Democrats opposed at the 1998 election. Natasha Stott Despoya inherited the worst poison chalice of a party in modern history. Little wonder it plummeted to obscurity.
Turnbull of course will protest his innocence. The Fizzer.
It was essential to create Home Affairs as Barnaby Joyce was already taking charge of … other affairs.
Just looking after his families.
Only the boys. He has ignored his daughters.
Well it’s their husband’s job to look after them, right ?
Dutton and Pezzullo seem to share a penchant for black uniforms, the paramilitarization of government services, and all manner of right-wingery.
Agree, much in common with 1930s Germany and USSR, this was missed in the article, but to be fair no one in media understood its significance:
ABC 28 Aug 2015: ‘Border Force to check people’s visas on Melbourne’s streets this weekend’ ….Officers will be positioned at various locations around the city and will speak “with any individual we cross paths with”, ABF regional commander for Victoria and Tasmania Don Smith said in a statement’
Merited almost a non reaction from MSM that this PR stunt for QLD (?) would require all citizens, foreign residents and visitors to carry ID and trust the the AFP, were not intending to profile?
And Malcolm Too Smart by Half let all the nutters back into the Senate, with his double dissolution disaster. Thanks for that. We now have to put up with that women again and all the other nasties thanks to him.
You can thank not just the coalition but the Greens who, together with the coalition, voted to end group voting preferencing in the Senate.
Pezzullo – above and beyond the LAW..
Judge Patricia Bergin’s Commission of Inquiry into Crown Casino found that then Minister Dutton and Secretary Pezzullo expedited visas for junket tour operators to bring known criminals and money-launderers to Australia. The trips were quickly signed off by the department under a special agreement with Crown Casino. This criminal act has not been persued by federal police or any other relevant authority.
Another IBACC Investigation !!!
I’m enjoying his downfall. I worked for Home Affairs during his tenure until I retired and can honestly say he was a dreadful public servant. His brother was arrested and jailed for corruption so he decided to introduce drug and alcohol testing of all public servants in his department – even though there was zero evidence this was an issue APART from in Border Force staff at the airport, where corruption had infected the ranks. The program cost an absolute fortune and caught one or two people a year. Meanwhile we didn’t have enough money to buy essentials! And by essentials I mean laptops etc..He wrote ridiculously long emails about Anzac Day even though our department has nothing to do with Anzac Day. He just seemed to have no idea how to run the department. Contracts were signed in Nauru and Manus that should never have been signed. I’m thrilled he’s going to get the boot.
Enjoy. Allow me to send you some popcorn. And 2 Choc-Tops. Pity all scumbags don’t get what they should.
Indeed his ridiculously long staff emails and other speeches were quite bizarre. Most staff had no idea what he was on about. He came into the department to impose or introduce a higher level of integrity and as it now turns out, we see that he and his colleague Roman Quaedvlieg (ex AFP and first Commissioner of the ABF)) had the least amount of integrity in the entire organisation. He was an aggressive bully to most, except perhaps to his many mates he promoted into the department from Defence at the expense of the loss of hundreds of competent customs and immigration officers with thousands of years of corporate knowledge.
Me too. He wrote a lot about Anzac Day but had no connection himself or family wise with Australia’s military service. I was an employee too and wondered why we didn’t receive any awards or commemorative medals for the Centenary of Anzac in 2015. We did for the Sydney 2000 Olympics, also something the ABF and Custos before them has nothing to do with – elite sport, except tangentially. All the enterprise agreements stripped the Anzac Day weekend Public Holiday from us – no Monday off if Anzac Day fell on a Saturday or Sunday (thank you Fatty O’Barrell) which didn’t occur for Immigration staff who still got paid public holiday money if they were rostered on to work that Monday. All he did was screw us over in negotiations and employ delaying tactics or scab labour. As for essentials, we were always short of them.
Pezzullo loves to lecture others about the apolitical role of the APS — that it is there to serve the government of the day. Yet here he is exposed as a hypocrite. How he retained the Home Affairs portfolio after the ALP came to power was a mystery to me. I doubt he will resign. Pezzullo thinks he is untouchable.
Is it a mystery tho?
Remember how that Robodebt woman – what’s her name again? – was promoted by the new government into an important and much better paid job? Despite being clearly implicated in the pile of proverbial Robodebt was. If it wasn’t for the findings and the verdict of the commission she’d still have that job.
I’m not sure why we still expect better from Labor – they clearly are not/do not. They’re not the Coalition. Great. Beyond that… just promises – only some of which are worth sticking to apparently – and pretence of doing something significant while doing hardly anything at all. AUKUS seems the only thing they’re genuinely committed to, even tho it most likely will amount to nothing more than a gigantic waste of money.
I believe she was “promoted” totally out of the way.
When Howard came to power in 1996 the “night of the long knives” did lasting damage to the APS and fully politicised the public service.
Labor promised to not unilaterally sack senior public servants. This is important, we should have a public service that is “frank and fearless”.
HOWEVER they didn’t promise to not use due process to weed out the ones that shouldn’t be there.
Long Live the APSC and the NACC.
It is long past time to shine some light onto the happenings.
Labor says “You can be an incompetent corrupt prick” as long as you do it under the LNP.
Nope. The ALP Govt says “you can be an incompetent corrupt P”. We know you are but we are not going to sack you and continue Howard’s politicisation of the Public Service. We will move you to a long term project with no dept’l responsibility and watch your Robodebt RC referral proceed through our NACC ( Katherine Campbell)
OR refer you to investigation by the Public Service Commissioner / equivalent.
We expect both processes to expel/ penalise greatly / destroy your career, all through an independent umpire, not us.Job done, with no political blame attached to us.
Well AUKUS and huge tax breaks for the wealthy, paid for by the poor and working Australians
Katherine Campbell. And don’t you forget it!
No, the purpose of the APS is to serve the PUBLIC, not the government of the day, and to provide frank and fearless advice to government on that behalf. This man is clearly ideological and far from invested in serving the public interest: he has talked about wanting to destroy freedom of speech in this country.
Sadly, Howard changed the Public Service Act in 1998 to compel the APS to serve “the government of the day”, not the public. He wanted a totally compliant public service. Anybody in the APS who questions “the government of the day” is likely to get fired. Howard politicised the APS.
And the likes of Howard “Children Overboard” lapdog Jane “Firewall” Halton have never looked back.
Crean labelled her “Halton’s Heroes”
Strange how it is the nobodies that destroy democracy.
You’re right. Ministers becamse the #1 “customer” of their respective departments under Howard’s “reforms”. And Morrison made it explicit in 2018, telling APS employees their job was to deliver the policy that the Minister decreed.
A recipe for disaster, if you ask me.
Like Who Cares says, the APS is explicitly required not to serve the public, it is required to serve the ministers it reports to. Howard’s doctrine is that the public and the national interest are embodied in the ministers and therefore all public servants have the sole duty of doing what ministers tell them.
The UK Civil Service underwent the same transformation in the 1990s under PM John Major, when that government decided it would put a stop once and for all to any UK civil servant attempting to argue that it was necessary to defy a minister in order to serve the public good. The Tories set off down this road because of examples like Clive Ponting, a civil servant on the Minisrty of Defence. He saw ministers in Thatcher’s government lying to Parliament about the sinking of the Argentine Navy ship Belgrano. When he could get nothing done internally to correct this, Ponting leaked classified documents to expose the lies. He was prosecuted. Ponting tried to argue he had a duty to act as he did in the national interest but the judge ordered the jury to convict on the grounds that defence was inadmissable to a charge under the Official Secrets Act. The jury defied the judge and cleared Ponting of all charges. The government was absolutely furious.
Largely agree but it has always been the role of the public service to carry out and help realise the policies of the elected government. That’s as it should be. However they used to also have a larger public service role to (a) not break the law or allow the government to break the law (b) not tell lies or mislead the public, parliament or officers of the law and government (c) provide the best advice to government, based on evidence of what the likely outcomes or actual outcomes of policy were. All of these have been eroded as the top ranks have been conjoined into the larger purpose of maintaining the government in power and those lower down are blocked from providing inconvenient information or analysis and lectured to “just do as you are told”. Despite this there are great many dedicated PS workers disgusted by what they see happening and if not whistleblowing are at least determined not to tolerate this rot in their areas of responsibility. Many no doubt wish their emails would be FOI’d.
Just as, I understand, lawyers have a duty to the court, as well as to their clients.
What apolitical role of the AFP? It has been a division of the liberal party for a very long time.