Australian Public Management: Kennett and Howard Government Reforms

This report provides an in-depth analysis of public management in the Australian public sector, focusing on the reforms implemented by the Kennett government in Victoria and the Howard government at the federal level. It examines the factors that influenced these reforms, including public choice ideology, state budget concerns, and microeconomic reforms. The report details the approaches taken by both governments, such as the Kennett government's high-handed approach to local government restructuring and the Howard government's changes to workplace relations. It also explores the outcomes of these reforms, including cost savings, efficiency improvements, and changes in the role of trade unions. The report offers a comparative perspective, highlighting the differing strategies and impacts of these significant public sector reforms in Australia, covering areas like council amalgamations, financial savings, and electoral changes.

Running head: PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
Public Management in Public Sector Services
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
First Assignment
Introduction:
The article focuses on public management in public sector service of Australia. The
article commences with Kennett government reforms in the Victoria Public Service and then
goes on to describe the reforms put forward by the Howard Government in the Australian Public
service. Australia has a wider public sector controlled by larger number of government
organizations outside core public service for performing different functions along with providing
varied services to the community. Organizations of such stature include the public utilities that
provide electricity, transport and services related to water supply. Other organizations of the
public sector include the organizations that undertook operating outside the framework of public
service including the non-commercial public broadcasting organizations, research institutions
and the education supported by government. The article shows how the Kennett government
undertook reforms to ensure that the Australian people were able to cut back on the social
spending ensure privatization of the public assets and prevent attacks on the worker wages and
conditions. Between the year 1992 and 1999, the Victorian State Government guided by Jeff
Kennett led to implementation of a widespread public service restructuring program observed by
Australia, a portion of it is engaged with the major changes taking place in the organization and
the operations of the local government. The article also draws an insight into reforms of public
sector reforms proposed by the Howard Government that led to the improvement of the
workplace relations thereby ensuring a rise in productivity and the living standards of the
Australian people.
Discussion:

2PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
Factors Influencing the Public Sector Reform by Kennett Government
Three factors led to influence the public sector reform agenda put forward by Kennett
government. These involved the support for the ideas of public choice, concerns for the state
budget and the initiatives for micro economic reform at the national level (Aulich, 1999).
The key factor that underpinned the reform agenda of the public sector by the Kennett
government remained in the acceptance of the public choice ideology under the successive party
led governments throughout 1980s. During this time, government in the highly developed
industrial countries slowed down the public sector growth and hence reduced the fiscal deficit
through the applications of the public theory that assumed that with the procedure of decision-
making, it is necessary for the individuals in maximizing their utility through behaving in self-
interested and rational manner. However, for attaining the outcomes there were funding cuts in
the public sector, expansion in the management approaches of the private sector, privatisation of
the various public instrumentalities, application of mechanisms of the pseudo market for
delivering public goods (O'Flynn, 2007).
The second key force acting as the motivating factor for the public sector reform agenda
undertaken by Kennett government was the financial circumstances faced by the public sector
finance of Victoria during the period that led up to the elections(Guthrie, 1998). The Kennett
government initiated investigation into the finances of the public sector through the appointment
of the Victorian Commission of Audit (VCA). The Kennett government mentioned that the audit
would ensure the Victorian public with a comprehensive and accurate statement of the state of
finances of the state. The VCA published its final report in the year May 1993 and had two
volumes (English, 2003). The first volume comprised of the financial matters while the second

3PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
volume showed the means by which the government ran. The Victorian economy also faced two
additional problems. The first resulted from a higher number people moving towards the other
states that rose from 5,799 in the year 1985 to about 30,081 in the year 1993 (English & Guthrie,
2001). The financial debts were the second problem that resulted due to the failure of Victorian
Economic Development Corporation along with collapse of Tricontinental. Such economic
conditions became quite notable in the brokerage market of the world. The state government
ratings downgraded to AA from the AAA mark. To restore the finances of the state, the VCA put
forward various recommendations to Kennett government. The primary amongst them included
the reduction of the debt of the state sector through privatizations and sales, reduction of the
spending levels and the increase of taxation.
The third factor that influenced the Kennett government for undertaking the reforms in
the public sector remained in the prevailing political and public discourse on the microeconomic
reforms (Jones & Kettl, 2006). The Kennett government came to power during the time when
there persisted a need for micro-economic reforms especially in public sector by State and the
Federal governments throughout the Australia
The Approach of the Kennett Government
The Kennett government put forward a highhanded approach where the government
asserted its right of reforming the sector of the local government and demanded it to be followed
by the local council (Smith, 2004). However, the Kennett government also thought on line that
acceptance by the local council was difficult unless compelled. As the Kennett government had
large majorities in both houses of State Parliament, the policies implemented had a smooth
passage in becoming a law. There was subsequent reduction for any kind of debate or

4PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
consultation. The Kennett government also led to the removal of the right of individual councils
in appealing the proposals for restructuring via Supreme Court. This prevented costly and
unnecessary litigation. Under the Kennett government, the policy measures passed in the
Parliament at quite a rapid rate. This led to the reduction of the opportunities for scrutiny or
consultation from the stakeholders. In a matter of simply 15 months, the Kennett government
restructured and dismissed the local councils into the larger units headed by the newly appointed
chief executive officer (Van Gramberg & Teicher, 2000). Another striking feature of the policies
for reform was the implementation of single frame for the local government. Further, the
Kennett government ignored diversity between the local councils primarily in terms of physical
size and population, nature of the provided services, the council’s financial situation and use of
the tendering practices that were competitive.
The Kennett Government Reform Policies between 1992 and 1999
The reform initiated by the Kennett government kept few areas of the local government
untouched. There were changes in five main policies between the year 1992 and 1999. This
involved the amalgamations of the council, financial savings, management of the local council,
compulsory competitive tendering and electoral changes (Goldfinch & Roberts, 2013). There
have been attempts of reforming failed policies but it failed either due to lack of the government
control or due to the existence of little interest in reforming the authorities of the public sector.
The Kennett government did not lack any kind of apprehension or power and restructured the
local government in a dramatic manner. The Kennett government led to the promotion of
amalgamation as an instance for the decisiveness of the government in trading with the financial
issues of state.

5PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
During the first year of the operation of the Kennett government, it was expected of the
councils for reduction of combined total revenue collected by the preceding local councils by
close to twenty percent. During the year, 1995 and 1997, the Kennett government also reduced
the expenditures of the local council by around ten per cent. The Kennett government also
granted additional powers to ministers for the local government through implementation of the
Local Government Act of 1996 for controlling the level of the general council rate (Connell,
2013). This also focused on limiting the spending of the local council. The control of the Kennett
government over actions of the local government is extended in managing the new
municipalities.
The commissioners also had the instructions for ensuring that the newly formed council
helped in preparing the business plans for achieving the imposed targets for savings,
development of a system of rating for the new council, negotiation and implementation of the
bargaining agreements of the staff with the enterprise and in preparing for re-election of the
councilors (Aulich, 1999). The new council under the Kennett government also introduced the
fixed-term and the employment contracts for the senior officers based on their performance.
The Kennett government implemented three primary changes in the electoral basis of the
local councils (English, 2003). Firstly, there was reduction in the number of elected
representatives for each council that has had a reduction from 21 to 12 through the Local
Government Act of 1997. Secondly, the government also ensured standardization of elected
council members for three-year term in contrast to the earlier arrangement that implicated a
portion of council membership facing the reelection on twelve-monthly basis. The Kennett
government also introduced postal voting that replaced the earlier system of maintaining the
attendance of the voters at the polling booths. This form of voting focused at increasing the

6PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
interest and the participation in the elections of the local governments. Under the Kennett
government, the local councils remained obligated in following a competitive process of
tendering for the activities that accounted for about 20 percent of the total expenditure for
operation.
The Outcome
The Kennett government aimed at increasing the efficiency and decreasing the cost of the
public sector along with the reduction of its size and scope and reduction of power and pressure
of the trade unions belonging to public sector. The reform of the Kennett government expected to
help in cost savings and improvements of the efficiencies. The Kennett government also put
forward that reforms were necessary as the local councils ran inefficiently and he insisted on
overhauling the entire system of the local government so that cost savings trickles down to
community.
Reforms were also necessary as the Kennett government fundamentally rearranged and
redefined the working of public sector thereby leading to a reduction of their role as nonstop
provider of the services and goods of the public. Through the reforms, the Kennett government
also initiated reducing influence and position of trade unions on local government.
Factors Influencing the Public Sector Reform by Howard Government
During the first three terms of the office, John Howard resisted the pressures in
radicalizing the reform agenda since there was no fixed economic rationale for shifting the gear,
as the public were not in a position to be fully receptive for the bigger leap in reform along with
the fact that he lacked control of the Senate (Byrnes, 2013).

7PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
However, by the end of the year 2005, the scenario changed. Firstly, there was a wider
awareness of the public in the prospect of the ageing population that coupled with the evidence
of the comparatively lower participation rates of the workforce in Australia within the age group
of 25 to 54. This acted as a strong economic and fiscal rationale for the governments in
addressing the problem of hidden unemployment in Australia. Secondly, by the end of the year
2005, the community values became less friendly to the egalitarian policies of workplace. This
reflected changes such as fracturing the solidarity of the worker, the growth of the culture for
equity investment, the effects of globalization cumulative in encouraging the competitive
individualism and increasing the hostility of the community and the handouts of the
government for the able bodied people in the state of buoyant economic conditions. Thirdly, in
the year 2004, the coalition gained the control of Senate that paved the way for radicalising the
reforms.
However, in the new cultural and political environment, the Howard government was
able to provide a freer rein to the ideological propensities related to the dislikes of the trade
unionism and the regulation for worker protection.
The Approach of the Howard Government
The Howard Government in the year 2005 made changes in the laws of the federal
industrial relation known as the Work Choices (MacDermott, 2013). This government put
forward amendments to Workplace Relations Act of 1996 by replacing it with Workplace
Relation Amendment Act of 2005 that became effective from 27 March 2006.
The Work Changes came into operation on April 2006. This involved a transition from
the collective bargaining and regulated award towards the individual contracts. This also

8PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
involved strengthening the power of the management over the remuneration and the deployment
of the staff. This included the working time, penalty rates, firing, hiring, and the access to the
foreign guest workers.
Moreover, all at a once, the Howard Government has made the welfare aspect lesser
accessible and much more conditional with imposition of tougher penalties for the compliance of
the failures (Legreid, 2017). Such a reform of the government helped in extending the newer
rules to the not only the sole parents but also the people with disability who is them forced for
looking into the part time and the lower skilled jobs. The Howard government has made welfare
more conditional and less accessible with tougher penalties for the compliance failures and an
extension of new rule to the sole parents and disabled people for looking into part time and lower
skilled work. There also existed the fear of losing the eligibility for the welfare benefits that will
make it further difficult for the employed workers in exiting from the unsatisfactory jobs or lead
to the rejection of the jobs that is lower paid just in case one is retrenched. Therefore, the
ultimate impact of changes in welfare system implies further increment of the probable market
authority of the employers in comparison to the vulnerable employees.
The Howard Government Reform Policies between 1996 and 2007
The Howard Government implemented welfare to work agenda that took care of the
unfair dismissals that provided the managers greater flexibility in the management of the human
resources that might have a positive impact on the productivity (Butcher, 2013).
According to the impact, relating to the distribution of the market power, the Work
Choice and welfare to work agenda has been a fundamental break from the past. Therefore, the
reforms undertaken by the Howard government includes:

9PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
 Clawing back of the collective reform
 Ensuring the increase of the managerial autonomy
 Transformation of an indirect power into the labor laws with the help of
independent arbitrator into direct power that will be under the control of the
executive.
 Complete disempowering of many of the workers by essentially redefining the
right for welfare.
The outcome
The reforms undertaken by Howard Government had direct impact on the employment
and productivity as it worked towards providing better flexibility in the management of the
human resources thereby leading to positive impact on productivity. The reforms also had an
impact on the distribution and the aggregate utility as it will provide a fundamental break from
the past and help in reducing joblessness.
Conclusion:
The essay ends by providing an insight into the reform policies of the Kennett
government and the Howard government undertaken for the public sector of Australian
economy. The Victorian government underwent extreme reform during the 1990 that coincides
with the election of coalition government led by Kennett. Thus, the reforms undertaken by the
Howard and the Kennett government also brought in certain policies that provided an impetus for
change and improvement within the public service of Australia. Presently, quality people want to
work in an ambience of innovation, best practice and excitement. The modern Australian Public

10PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
Service is that where people know that their achievements will be able to make real difference in
the lives of the people.
References:
Aulich, C. (1999). From convergence to divergence: reforming Australian local
government. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 58(3), 12-23.
Butcher, J. (2013). The national compact: civilizing the relationship between government and the
notforprofitsector in Australia. Government-nonprofit relations in times of recession.
Byrnes, J. (2013). A short institutional and regulatory history of the Australian urban water
sector. Utilities Policy, 24, 11-19.
Connell, R. (2013). The neoliberal cascade and education: An essay on the market agenda and its
consequences. Critical studies in education, 54(2), 99-112.
English, L. (2003). Emasculating public accountability in the name of competition:
transformation of state audit in Victoria. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 14(1-2), 51-76.
English, L., & Guthrie, J. (2001). Public sector management in the State of Victoria 1992–1999:
genesis of the transformation. In Learning from International Public Management Reform: Part
A (pp. 45-59). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Goldfinch, S., & Roberts, V. (2013). New public management and public sector reform in
Victoria and New Zealand: Policy transfer, elite networks and legislative copying. Australian
Journal of Politics & History, 59(1), 80-96.
Guthrie, J. (1998). Application of accrual accounting in the Australian public sector–rhetoric or
reality. Financial accountability & management, 14(1), 1-19.

11PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES
Jones, L. R., & Kettl, D. F. (2006). Assessing public management reform strategy in an
international context. In Comparative Public Administration (pp. 883-904). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.
LÊgreid, P. (2017). Transcending new public management: the transformation of public sector
reforms. Routledge.
MacDermott, K. (2013). Whatever Happened to Frank and Fearless?: The impact of new public
management on the Australian Public Service. ANU Press.
O'Flynn, J. (2007). From new public management to public value: Paradigmatic change and
managerial implications. Australian journal of public administration, 66(3), 353-366.
Smith, R. F. I. (2004). Focusing on public value: Something new and something old. Australian
Journal of Public Administration, 63(4), 68-79.
Van Gramberg, B., & Teicher, J. (2000). Managerialism in local government–Victoria,
Australia. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13(5), 476-492.