Jack Waterford Editor-at-large, The Canberra Times
April 3, 2013
Illustration: Pat Campbell
In the Labor Party, they have been called tree people. The Liberals once did not have them, as such, but now also maintains a veritable forest.
Tree people are those who descend whenever there's a new regime. They are, or claim to be, politically aligned with the party. They are looking for job or income, whether as minders, advisers, or people in a special position to take advantage of changes the new regime will be making. Some will mysteriously get into the federal public service, if not, ostensibly, on the basis of their political pedigree but because of their supposed expertise in some policy the new regime happens to be flogging. Others will join the lobbying industry, if not so much as people who can help their clients assemble a case that will persuade decision-makers but because they have access, contacts, and, they will claim, privileged entree at the highest levels. Some will be former ministers.
When John Howard took power in 1996, the number of Liberal Party tree people was comparatively small - if only because the Coalition had been out of power for a long time.
The Liberals were anyway at a bit of a disadvantage in the traditional marketplace for political staffers. Traditionally, for example, most press secretaries came from the press gallery - in some cases in the past, a change of regime had meant that press secretaries for one side filled the vacancies created by the departure of the new press secretaries. But Howard lacked much of a gallery following. In the past, ministerial private secretary posts and some advisory positions were filled with bright young public servants, who understood how the cabinet, ministerial and bureaucratic system worked. But at first Howard, and Howard ministers, looked askance at public servants, wondering whether they had been corrupted through the long dark years of Hawke and Keating. If they were really ''on our side,'' how come they had survived so well?
Howard was deliberate in finding a mix of people whose defining virtue was that their knees had never been deep in the Canberra water. They were keen, enthusiastic, intensely political, and they had backgrounds in law, in business, in the party, and in industry bodies, but they were not suspected of having their own agendas - or too much, anyway - or suffering from the arrogance of believing their knowledge and ideas better than the minister's, or the prime minister's. If they lacked a close understanding of the pulse and process of politics and administration, this was something they could pick up.
The prime minister anyway meant to change the culture of how government worked. Having minions who were not jaded might make that easier.
Howard also adopted an idea started by Hawke, of having a small committee of people he trusted vetting each and every appointment to each ministerial office. They dispatched embarrassing ministerial friends and relations and scandals in waiting - but also helped make it clear to staff just where their loyalties should be. There had been too many scandals or brawls over the years, and on both sides of politics, where ministers, and their staffers, or both, had put their own interests ahead of the government of the day.
Senior people, such as Peter Costello, had a lot more freedom of action. The junior ministers took, in effect, what they were given, and understood that, at a crunch, their adviser might be reporting back to the PMO. That did not necessarily mean a climate of mistrust - particularly at the beginning - because an incoming government is thrilled to be there, believes or hopes that everyone is rowing in the same direction, and understands that there is a need for a guiding hand.
But those contemplating the advent of Tony Abbott are focused on some other problems.
First, there is no longer a shortage of Liberal tree people. The Coalition has been out of government for only six years, and there are many politicians, and staffers, who know what to do. The fact of Coalition governments in the states increases rather than dilutes the supply, because power is for the minder class like rain for the kangaroo population.
But interchange with state minders - and the somewhat more ''responsive'' state bureaucracies - can also widen the pool of ideas, or ways of making things work. (This is why Kevin Rudd, once a formidable Queensland bureaucrat, brought to Canberra people from state bureaucracies he had previously worked with. For most, however, the transition proved very difficult, because Canberra does have higher standards.)
The short interval of being out of power will probably also diminish that instinctive distrust of the bureaucracy that has marred the early days of so many administrations, including Howard's. Most of the senior ministers-to-be, and most of the senior minders, are quite experienced in government and know the senior bureaucrats well. There may well be one or two difficult relationships - Treasury is regularly pointed out, whether for alleged past sins (Ken Henry) or because of Martin Parkinson's brief association with Climate Change - but the government understands that they will get good service from an administration in generally fairly good shape.
On the lower decks, there will no doubt be leaks, particularly if there is any big push for significant reduction in APS numbers, going beyond the attrition that has been blandly promised. But a part of the revolution in administration, and of the new layer of minder Dom imposed on it, is that information is now more tightly held and controlled, and mere expressions of pain and discontent from down below will probably help the cause of a Coalition government more than it will hurt it. It may not be the fault of the APS, but there is, at the moment, a bigger than usual constituency for some trimming of the public sector. Among that constituency will be scores of new MPs, in a position, from the backbench, to be discontent and cause mischief if they are not kept amused. Abbott's biggest transition problem will not be the naiveté, arrogance or triumphalism of his tree people. It will be the sharks his advent will be letting into the moat. They will not be looking for jobs, other than prestige ones, but influence. Most are ex-politicians, the remainder are ex-minders. Whichever, they do not have the interests of Abbott or the Abbott government at heart anything like as much as they have a big sense of entitlement, and belief that they have a right to profit from their insider knowledge of, or history with, the Liberal Party. Or that they have a right to have their pet ideas re-embraced, regardless of the political consequences. Shame, or the fact of living on generous public pensions, does not come into it.
An Abbott who is essentially too timid to do anything much in industrial relations will find himself under pressure from old colleagues, such as Costello or Peter Reith, to ''man up'' and restore Work Choices, or something even tougher. Likewise, they and others will be hard at him to achieve what they never could - a public sector much reduced in size. It's their virtue sliding on his skin.
At the same time, they and other former politicians will be opening up offices where they will be offering their advice, expertise and, most of all, insider access on sale to the highest bidder - in an intensely hypercritical repudiation of their supposed beliefs about open markets. Public disgust at open feeding at the trough will mount by the day - indeed, given how some are so obviously anticipating events, even before the swill is thrown in.
Right now, there is a high risk of Abbott's government falling victim to large-scale influence peddling of the sort being portrayed by the new Independent Commission Against Corruption inquiry, or as history in waiting by the O'Farrell government. The Commonwealth does not have an ICAC, and none of the tame checks and balances we do have are capable (whether by existing powers or the instincts of the office holder) of substituting. Indeed, the blatant circling of the sharks around a party still six months from sitting on ministerial chairs should make observers fear the worst. Experience has repeatedly shown that codes of conduct are not worth a cracker. Even less, I should think, with an Abbott in charge. This is not because of low personal ethics so much as a developed capacity to forgive any atrocity by his own side. He has yet to learn the sharks are not really his friends.
Jack Waterford is Editor-at-Large.
