Another great article and a timely reminder that the public service needs to be overhauled so that the decisions taken as our economic system crumbles aren't based entirely on political dogma, let alone the neo-con mantra of the political party we voted out of office.

It will, of course, be interesting to see if Rudd does have the courage to instigate change from within. I'm not holding my breath. After the latest admission that the acquisition of the Super Hornet is to go ahead I have my doubts. It is more than apparent that Australia's Defense acquisition program has more to do with shoring up the US economy than it has to do with protecting Australia.

The Public Service has developed a bunker culture mentality. No doubt they are reeling from the threats imposed by the previous Government and the Haneef and Rowe affairs illustrate how they are hamstrung - too frightened to say something than is political incorrect.

Dismantling the past will take some effort and courage. The Liberals in opposition are still coming to terms with that legacy while the ex-PM is off around the world telling anyone stupid enough to listen that the Australian electorate was so dumb that they actually voted him out. Howard is a loose canon and has the potential to cause more damage to Australia than any economic meltdown.

Rudd, I accept, is looking ahead - well he might. As a result he may let the wreckage of the past lie where it has fallen and compiled it to the dustbin of history as time and circumstance permit. The senior public servants have probably signed 5 - 10 years agreemants with lots of penalty clauses should they be 'released' earlier which means an overhaul of the PS will be excruciatingly slow. Another legacy of Howard.

Still - there is a fresh team at the helm and they have something to prove, not only to themselves, but to the electorate.

One point about a specific paragraph:

Indeed, just what ARE all these new military accessories going to be used for? Are we planning to go to war more often than we have in the past 20 years (excluding the current 'adventures' in the Middle East)?

As an ex-public servant, I can assure you that it is the public service which runs things, irrespective of the political party in power.

People who thought they were going to achieve something by complaining to a Minister didn't know that somebody in the relevant department drafted a letter for the Minister, which he signed. End of story.

On 'billie's' comments re our "crumbling economy", who are we to blame for that? The economy was not an issue at election time, so why would it be an issue now? Rudd proclaimed himself and economic rationalist, which is what Howard was supposed to be, and the economy over the decade or so of the Howard Government was the best it has ever been

I do worry that Howard-inspired Hoovering (in both senses of the word) of information from the most intimate origins will accumulate in the hands of some unaccountable individual or entity. What un-democratic leverage can be, undetected, exerted from that!! John Winston Howard has speeded us along that direction – has Rudd the guts to get us off it?
Leigh says “the economy over the decade or so of the Howard Government was the best it has ever been”. If that critera is based upon the rate of consuming natural and social resources, it is true. Those who yearn to own their first home, and have concerns regarding depleted future prospects, might prefer a different basis for judgment.
Independent advice, and compliant implementation is desirable, and probably reached its peak in Nugget Coombs. But it was not always embedded in past administrations. A member of the staff of Black Jack McEwan commented to me about her unhappiness at being instructed to prepare election material for his individual benefit. And later, only on the individual's retirement did we find that Treasuary advice was coming from someone yearning for Joh Bjelke Petersen to run the country – a sobering thought for the more rational. At least, from the evidence to date, we are warned and have a fair idea that the Commonwealth Government bureaucrats presently at the helm would not be there if they, generally, had not been prepared to provide the Government at the time of their appointment with assessment results it wanted rather than the impartial information it needed. But that leaves a tough suspicion on those who have done their damndest to serve as thorough professionals.

Lots of questions in this article but not one solid answer provided. Why was the public service so ineffectual?