Temporary partisans, tagged officers or impartial professionals: Moving between ministerial offices and departments
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12290 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Author | Maria Maley |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
SYMPOSIUM ARTICLE
Temporary partisans, tagged officers or impartial
professionals: Moving between ministerial offices
and departments
Maria Maley
School of Politics and International Relations,
Australian National University, Canberra,
Australia
Correspondence
Maria Maley, School of Politics and
International Relations, Australian National
University, Canberra, Australia
Email: Maria.Maley@anu.edu.au
There are increasing concerns that the line between political and
public service roles is becoming blurred, and that political advisers
may be politicizing the work of public servants. Underlying this is
the fundamental value conflict between responsiveness and impar-
tiality and the challenge of balancing neutral competence and
responsive competence in government. In Australia and Canada
the norm of impartiality is challenged by the movement of staff
between partisan ministers’offices and the public service. This is a
case study comparison of how the risks posed by these transitions
are managed through institutional rules and practices. This study
of rule-building by two countries with similar political institutions
and shared traditions demonstrates the critical role played by rules
which regulate activity between two organizations with opposed
values. It finds differences of approach and attention in Canada
and Australia and provides a lens through which to explore the
contested boundaries of impartiality.
1|INTRODUCTION
The relationship between the political and administrative elements of government is a central issue in modern
governance. In countries where the public service is traditionally neutral, there are concerns that the line between
political and public service roles is becoming blurred, and that political advisers –new actors in many political sys-
tems –may be politicizing the work of public servants (Aucoin 2012). Underlying these concerns is the fundamen-
tal value conflict between responsiveness and impartiality and the challenge of balancing or blending neutral
competence and responsive competence in government (Aberbach and Rockman 1994). In Westminster systems
the value conflict between responsiveness and impartiality is seen in the requirement that public servants must
loyally serve the government of the day but they must not serve the party in government. This has been described
as the ‘loyalty paradox’: public servants must be non-partisan, ‘while remaining loyal to a legal entity whose
powers are exercised by a political body’(PSCC 2008, p. 19). Mulgan suggests that the challenge is to understand
the necessary curbs on partisanship: ‘Too much obvious partisanship can undermine confidence in their capacity
DOI 10.1111/padm.12290
Public Administration. 2017;95:407–420.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/padm© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd407
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations