The debate surrounding the role of career government officials and the so-called “deep state” has been gaining momentum in the United States. There have been proposals to undermine the expertise of these officials and make them more politically accountable. This issue emerged during the Trump administration when political appointees accused career officials of sabotaging presidential policies.
Additionally, conservative Republicans have planned to reintroduce Schedule F, allowing political appointees to replace many federal employees in policy-influencing positions. However, as the US contemplates these changes, it is essential to examine Australia’s experience with a similar situation and understand the implications of such actions.
The Robodebt crisis: A cautionary tale
In 2016, the Australian government implemented a radical plan known as “Robodebt” to reduce overpayment of government benefits. This program employed algorithms to identify overpayments and send bills to individuals. The government claimed success in catching recipients who had benefited from system errors, but the reality was far more troubling.
Robodebt generated incorrect and false repayment notices, leading to significant distress among recipients. Many had to make substantial payments quickly, forcing some of the country’s most vulnerable residents to sell assets, take out loans, or deplete their savings. Tragically, at least three people committed suicide due to the program’s impact.
In this case, the government disregarded the advice of these experts, leading to monumental errors with severe consequences.
The role of career experts in government policy
Australia has a long tradition of receiving frank and fearless advice from career government experts to political ministers. However, during the Robodebt crisis, the ministers prioritised speedy implementation over expert analysis and advice. There was excessive responsiveness from career experts to ministers but little appetite for ministers to listen to their advice.
The result was a breakdown of trust in the Australian government and a crisis that exposed the necessity of bureaucratic expertise and collaboration between career experts and political appointees in shaping and implementing policies. Elected officials are responsible for pursuing their promises, but ignoring the input of career experts can lead to disastrous outcomes, as demonstrated by the Robodebt case.
As the United States considers similar proposals to undermine the independence of career government officials, it should reflect on Australia’s experience with the Robodebt crisis. While there may be debates about the role of career experts in shaping policies, sidelining their expertise can have severe consequences on government performance and public trust.
Instead of pushing experts aside, the US should consider the value of collaboration between political officials and career civil servants. Recognising and utilising the expertise of career government officials can lead to better policy formulation and implementation, especially in navigating the complex challenges of 21st-century government.
Australia’s “Down Under parable” serves as a warning to the US, emphasising the need to balance political responsiveness and expert administration. The willingness to listen to career experts and work together in shaping policies can help avoid potential governance crises and foster public trust in the government.