Former public service commissioner Lynelle Briggs has delivered a stinging critique of both Labor and Liberal governments, accusing them of engaging in ‘shameless’ acts of ‘nepotism’ and ‘patronage’ by appointing political allies to influential and lucrative public positions.

These harsh observations are detailed in a report that the Albanese government withheld for over two years—even as it continued to make similar controversial appointments. Such actions raise significant ethical concerns about the administration’s practices.

The government resisted releasing the report and has only begun to act on its recommendations after being pressured by the Senate. Even now, it has only partially implemented the suggested changes.

Briggs’ evaluation of public sector board appointments, initiated following Labor’s 2022 election win as a pledge toward improved governmental integrity, paints a troubling picture. The report describes the current appointment system as ‘not fit for purpose’ and suggests it has failed the Australian public.

Briggs’ review of public sector board appointments, commissioned after Labor’s 2022 victory as part of its pitch for greater integrity in government (how ironic!), is a quietly devastating document. 

It finds that the current system is ‘not fit for purpose’, warning it has ‘let down the Australian people’. 

It also details how ministers repeatedly bypass proper processes to parachute favoured candidates into positions of patronage.

In some ministerial portfolios, appointments have been made directly by ministers with almost no transparency whatsoever. 

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made a big deal about bringing integrity back to government in 2022 but now a scathing report has taken aim at the practice of ‘jobs for the boys’ on public boards

If you strip away the bureaucratic language the picture is all too familiar: lucrative taxpayer funded public sector roles treated as political confetti.

The Morrison government stacked the now abolished Administrative Appeals Tribunal with former Liberal MPs, staffers and fellow ideological travellers, including on the eve of elections.

It was so brazen that Labor took the extreme step of scrapping the entire body and starting again, pointing to how it had been politicised. 

But the uncomfortable truth for a government elected on a ‘better standard of politics’ mantra is that the culture hasn’t changed.

Labor, too, has been all too willing to dip into the same trough. 

When former Queensland premier Annastacia Palaszczuk was appointed to the Australia Post board, replacing former Liberal Party federal director Tony Nutt, both sides rushed to argue that the other was worse. 

A race to the bottom where the acceptable standard, apparently, is being slightly less offensive than the other mob.

Whichever party wins power, their people seem to end up on almost all the boards funded by taxpayers. 

Briggs is careful to say that not all appointees are political hacks, but she is blunt that ‘too often’ friends of the government have been rewarded, either for past loyalty or to ensure ideological alignment in organisations going forward. Merit is an afterthought.

Former Queensland Labor premier Annastacia Palaszczuk was appointed to the Australia Post board – replacing former Liberal party director Tony Nutt. That prompted both sides to argue the other was worse

Her proposed fixes are relatively modest, almost timid I would argue. Especially when considered against the anger voters have long felt towards jobs for the boys. 

Of course the government has already ruled out adopting all of her modest recommendations. What a surprise.

Briggs wants roles properly advertised, an independent process to identify genuinely qualified candidates, and caps on the number of paid boards one person can sit on. 

She recommends cooling off periods so ex-politicians and staffers can’t simply stroll straight from Parliament House into a taxpayer funded berth.

Can you believe the above is even controversial? The conflict of interest in the government rejecting many of her suggestions – given its team expects the same patronage when out of parliament – knocks you over.

Briggs suggests a cooling off period of at least six months for former MPs and advisers, 18 months for ex-ministers. 

And she wants a ban on ‘last minute bequests’ in the six months before an election, when outgoing governments have historically rushed to look after their mates.

Surprise, surprise, these recommendations are contested too.

Palaszczuk replaced former Liberal party director Tony Nutt on the board of Australia Post

Crucially, Briggs says these rules should be legislated, not left to goodwill which never seems to hold when snouts get shoved in the trough. That won’t be happening according to Labor.

After waiting for this report to be made public for two years, the government’s response has been carefully calibrated minimalism.

Public Service Minister Katy Gallagher has announced a new framework and a set of principles to apply from February next year. 

Let’s see how many dodgy appointments they make between now and then.

But ministers will still control appointments, not an independent commissioner. The changes are administrative, not legislative as Briggs recommended. And Cabinet has very deliberately stopped short of adopting all of her recommendations.

I can’t tell you how many politicians have over the years lamented the cutting of their generous superannuation entitlements, suggesting that part-time appointments to public boards and commissions, offering six-figure salaries, will be the substitute they’re keen to take advantage of. 

And it’s a gluttonous bipartisan feast.

The handling of this report tells its own story. Delivered back in 2023, it was initially buried under the label of ‘cabinet in confidence’ so that nobody could access it, including under freedom of information provisions. 

Former public service commissioner Lynelle Briggs AO was scathing in her report – which was kept from the public until now

The opposition certainly hasn’t been desperate to see it either.

It only saw the light of day after a Senate revolt, an extended question time that turned into a political spectacle, and sustained pressure from the crossbench.

Albo loves to talk about transparency, and to lecture his predecessor about integrity. But he doesn’t walk that talk.

And the sick culture Briggs has identified doesn’t just apply to public boards. It sits alongside the revolving door between Parliament and the lobbying industry, where former ministers and senior staff reappear as consultants in the very policy areas they once supervised.

In theory there are now cooling off rules for lobbying. In practice, however, they are weakly enforced and easily gamed. 

The message to the public is clear enough: politics may be a contest at election time, but once the votes are counted there is a club of insiders across both major parties who look after each other, especially their own.

When Australians see former politicians, staffers and party donors gliding into cushy positions that are never properly advertised, they draw the obvious conclusion: the system is rigged in favour of those already on the inside.