The Labour government is under fire for its response to a major independent review aimed at tackling so-called 'jobs for mates' practices within the public sector. Despite commissioning the report, the government has chosen not to implement several of its central recommendations, a decision that has sparked criticism from opposition parties and transparency advocates.
Key Recommendations Left on the Shelf
The review, led by former New South Wales anti-corruption commissioner, the Honourable Anthony Whealy KC, delivered its final report in late 2025. It contained a suite of proposals designed to bolster integrity and transparency in how individuals are appointed to public boards and agencies.
Among the most significant recommendations the government has declined to adopt is the proposal to establish a powerful new Public Appointments Commissioner. This independent watchdog was envisioned to oversee and enforce merit-based selection processes across the public sector, acting as a bulwark against patronage.
Furthermore, the government has rejected the suggestion to impose legislated quotas that would require a minimum proportion of appointments to be made from a pool of candidates identified through transparent, competitive processes. This measure was seen as a direct mechanism to reduce the scope for ministerial discretion leading to cronyism.
Government's Justification and Political Backlash
In defending its position, a government spokesperson stated that while they are committed to implementing the 'spirit' of the review, they believe the proposed commissioner role would add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. Ministers argue that existing mechanisms, coupled with a renewed commitment to guidelines, are sufficient to ensure appointments are made on merit.
This defence has done little to quell the opposition. The Coalition and the Greens have seized on the decision, accusing the government of hypocrisy and a lack of genuine commitment to cleaning up public sector appointments. They argue that by rejecting the core structural reforms, Labour is leaving the door open to the very practices it pledged to end.
Shadow Minister for the Public Service, Jane Hume, labelled the response a 'whitewash', suggesting the government was more interested in the appearance of reform than its substance. Transparency International Australia also expressed disappointment, noting that the rejected recommendations were critical for creating a truly robust and independent system.
What Changes Are Being Made?
While rejecting the headline proposals, the government has accepted a number of other recommendations from the Whealy review. These are largely focused on strengthening existing protocols rather than overhauling the system.
Accepted measures include plans to publish more detailed information about appointment processes and the qualifications of candidates. There will also be enhanced training for those involved in selection panels and a renewed emphasis on diversity in appointments. The government has stated it will update the 'Guide on Ministerial Appointments to Public Bodies' to reflect these new standards.
However, critics contend that without the independent oversight of a commissioner and enforceable quotas, these changes remain vulnerable to being ignored or bypassed by future governments or determined ministers.
The debate places the spotlight firmly on the integrity of public administration. The government's decision, made in December 2025, sets the stage for an ongoing political conflict over accountability and trust in how key public roles are filled, with opposition parties vowing to keep the issue alive in parliament.
