- The Strategist - https://www.aspistrategist.org.au -
ASPI’s decades: The contest of contestability
Posted By Graeme Dobell on June 7, 2021 @ 06:00
The principles of contestability have been central to our Government’s philosophy and practice of public administration, but these principles have not yet been effectively implemented in relation to defence and strategic policy, despite the vital national interests and significant sums of money that are at stake ... ASPI will be charged with providing an alternative source of expertise on such issues.
For reasons that would be hard to pin down, and although relations between ministers, individual officers, and officials were professional, respectful, and even at times warm, it might be said that the Howard Government never established an easy relationship with the defence organisation. A few specific issues, especially on questions of defence material [sic] and acquisition, and most particularly the troubles of the Collins-class submarine, led ministers to be impatient and even suspicious of defence advice, and thus increasingly eager to find alternative ideas and arguments to test that advice against.
A number of stakeholders raised concerns regarding the quality of policy advice in Defence. Several former Ministers stated that policy advice was diffuse, inconsistent and fragmented with one former Minister stating that his lack of confidence in Defence’s policy advice led to engagement of third parties to ‘second guess’ it. It is crucial that the Secretary and the Chief of Defence Force, as the primary policy advisers to Government on Defence issues, are provided with high quality strategic policy advice from within Defence ...
Defence also requires a mechanism for providing internal contestability, at arm’s-length from owners and sponsors, up to the point of decision. This will ensure strategy, plans and resource allocations are tightly aligned and appropriately prioritised. It will also foster increased transparency and credibility with central agencies.
The challenge of contestability is compounded by the very nature of the intelligence community workforce. While aspiring analysts may enter the recruitment funnel from diverse backgrounds, offering a wide range of knowledge and experiences, the excruciatingly involved security vetting process sees many fall by the wayside, with a disturbingly like-minded cohort dripping from the tube’s end. Under such circumstances, groupthink becomes a very real issue.
Article printed from The Strategist: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au
URL to article: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/aspis-decades-the-contest-of-contestability/
[1] arguments about defence: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cabinets-gift-of-independence-to-aspi/
[2] on the creation of ASPI: https://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/SearchNRetrieve/NAAMedia/ShowImage.aspx?B=202981504&T=PDF
[3] ‘policy contestability’: http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/n1879/pdf/ch16.pdf
[4] lack of contestability: https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-aspi/import/Policy_Analysis54_Contestability.pdf?Ofc6go2ob1FGYxM84n9m1vteZcdIXQm8
[5] First principles review : https://www.defence.gov.au/publications/reviews/firstprinciples/Docs/FirstPrinciplesReviewB.pdf
[6] getting contestability: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/contestability-key-successful-intelligence-analysis/
[7] murder boards: https://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/11/magazine/on-language-murder-board-at-the-skunk-works.html?pagewanted=all