Public servants say they are too afraid to campaign around the upcoming Indigenous Voice to Parliament outside of work, despite Public Service Commission guidelines saying they are allowed to engage publicly in the referendum.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Several staff across government departments, who spoke to The Canberra Times on the condition of anonymity, said they were worried campaigning around the referendum could breach strict impartiality requirements and jeopardise their careers.
One current APS employee said she didn't feel comfortable campaigning "despite the fact that I support the voice and I am looking forward to voting 'yes' ... for fear that I might accidentally breach [the APS] code of conduct".
![Public servants say they are afraid campaigning around the upcoming Indigenous Voice to Parliament could jeopardise their careers. Picture by Sitthixay Ditthavong Public servants say they are afraid campaigning around the upcoming Indigenous Voice to Parliament could jeopardise their careers. Picture by Sitthixay Ditthavong](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/212131485/f28b5ac8-f8f1-49f8-8805-5c7ad62ed7a4.jpg/r0_678_5754_3913_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
The APS code of conduct, contained within the Public Service Act 1999, requires staff to uphold APS values, which include being "impartial" and "apolitical". Consequences for breaching the code are significant: employees can lose their jobs, be demoted or reprimanded, or have their salary docked.
"I think it's hard to campaign for something that is inherently political and to do that apolitically," the staff member said, referring to the referendum.
While she wanted to be more vocal on issues that: "Impact me directly ... I wouldn't want to be seen as breaching the code of conduct and then lose my job because, you know, who wants to lose their job?"
The APS employee said she felt comfortable liking posts from her personal Instagram account supporting the Voice, but another staff member told The Canberra Times she was afraid that "something as simple as liking a post online could be screenshotted and result in a code of conduct violation".
Another employee at the Department of Social Services said conversations with colleagues and senior staff dissuaded her from showing public support for the Voice, adding she was concerned campaigning could impact her ability to deal with stakeholders given her work "broadly intersects with First Nations policy" and, in Canberra, "networks can be quite small".
Coalition turned Voice into 'a political statement'
Wiradjuri man Geoff Scott, a long-serving former public servant and key figure in the Uluru Dialogue process, said pressure to appear unbiased had "been the bane of the public service for so many decades". Pressure, he says, that had intensified around the Voice referendum since the "Coalition made it a political statement".
"I understand many public servants are under pressure to not be seen to be supporting a 'yes' or 'no' [vote]," he said.
Mr Scott said the public service needed to be seen as "non-partisan", but said campaigning around the Voice wouldn't be an issue if the Coalition weren't "using Indigenous people as a political football to try and get back into power".
"Sadly, [the Voice referendum] has become partisan and that's where the pressure will come from. I think [public servants] are probably right to have a feeling that if they do step out and say something, they'll be attacked," he said.
READ MORE:
Staff accuse APSC guidance of being 'vague'
Staff concerns come despite guidance from the Australian Public Service Commission stating employees can engage publicly in the referendum, "provided that [they] do so in a way that is consistent with [their] obligation to maintain public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the APS".
The guide does warn employees their "personal engagement in the referendum could potentially breach the code of conduct" and outlines a number of risk factors for staff to consider, including their level of seniority, whether their work is connected to the Voice, and how "extreme" their behaviour is.
An APSC spokesperson said the guide encouraged employees to work through any issues with their manager, or contact the Ethics Advisory Service. The spokesperson said the commission had no current plans to provide further messaging to staff on the matter.
But one APS employee criticised the guidelines, saying they were about "using our best judgement, which is vague and not really helpful to us to make clear where the lines are".
"Most people I've talked to about it just feel like it's safer not to say anything or campaign at all, even outside of work, just in case," she told The Canberra Times, adding she was concerned any campaigning could constitute a "former breach or jeopardise career opportunities if it were viewed as 'partial' by senior management".
"That concern is higher if your work relates to First Nations people," she said.
This doesn't mean all APS staff feel afraid to join the 'yes' or 'no' campaigns outside of work. Melissa Donnelly, CPSU national secretary, said "members across the APS were campaigning in a variety of ways for a 'yes' vote and the APSC has been supportive of this".
An APSC spokesperson also said the commission "has not received similar concerns from APS employees on the issue of employees' participation in referendum campaign activities".
Calls to reform APS code of conduct continue
The code recently came under scrutiny in light of the robodebt royal commission's findings and disgraced former top bureaucrat Kathryn Campbell's resignation, which prompted calls to alter the Public Service Act to allow disciplinary action to be taken against former public servants.
But concerns around campaigning for the Voice have raised new questions around whether the code of conduct - with its strict emphasis on impartiality - is outdated.
"I personally think that there should be room for people to have a nuanced conversation without feeling like they might be risking their livelihood, and especially for things that are not directly linked with their work," one APS staff member said.
"I think the systems have been in place for a long time and there's a bit of a, 'If it's not broken, let's not fix it' mentality. And I wonder perhaps if it's not quite, 'Not broken', that it's not quite fit for purpose in 2023?"