There are changes Mike Baird could make to the organisation of his cabinet this month or next that would be both substantial in their effect and consistent with the traditions of conservative government. He should consider them.
Foremost among the areas the Premier should target for reorganisation in a looming cabinet reshuffle are the responsibilities and reporting lines in the law and justice portfolios.
![NSW Attorney-General Gabrielle Upton.](/web/20170108062853im_/http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/i/9/g/8/z/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gtm6g6.png/1483618140101.jpg)
The position of Attorney-General should not be, nor should it be seen to be, subservient to other ministries. But that is the situation in NSW. Police Minister Troy Grant is also Justice Minister. This means Mr Grant has partial responsibility for the Department of Justice, a responsibility he shares with Attorney-General Gabrielle Upton. As a joint statement by NSW Bar Association president Noel Hutley, SC, and Law Society of NSW president Gary Ulman said recently, this situation "has either allowed or created the perception of police interests setting the priorities for criminal justice policy in this state".
Police have a huge stake in the settings of justice policy. But the interests of police have always had to be, and will continue to have to be, balanced against civil liberty requirements, and the exigencies of the law as it has developed historically and as it works in practice. That balancing has traditionally occurred through maintaining independent police ministers and attorneys-general. Reverting to such an organisation, as Mr Baird should do, would not be a radical or radically civil libertarian manoeuvre. The current situation is the radical departure from the status quo in how it downgrades the position of attorney-general, the state's first law officer.
"It is unacceptable that an attorney-general would be subservient to the police minister in any way, either in reality or in perception," the statement by Mr Hutley and Mr Ulman says. "The status of the attorney-general and her department depends upon a clear public perception of independence, which in the view of the NSW Law Society and the NSW Bar Association depends on the administrative autonomy of both." This position has both history and pragmatic tradition on its side. A true conservative government would respect both.
But if Mr Baird should consider splitting portfolio responsibilities in one policy area, he might consider combining them in another. There is increasingly no reason that the transport and roads ministries should remain separate. Merging them in to one portfolio would help ensure a greater coherence to transport policy during a period in which NSW, due to Mr Baird's government, is experiencing historic levels of investment.
Combining the ministries of Roads Minister Duncan Gay and Transport and Infrastructure Minister Andrew Constance in one portfolio, probably to be held by Mr Constance, would raise obvious questions of workload. But the Department of Roads and Maritime Services has been progressively denuded of its policy-making capability; it is largely a service department. The primary benefit in combining the portfolios would be in fundamentally integrating road builders and transport policymakers. Patently, the two should work in concert. But that does not always happen.
Apart from periods under Labor ministers Carl Scully and David Campbell, the transport and roads portfolios in NSW have tended to be held separately. But aligning the prerogatives of the two would be in keeping with the better traditions of transport in this state. There is no greater example here than Sydney's Harbour Bridge, built to accommodate six modes of transport: the car, the bus, heavy rail, light rail, walking and cycling. Even the most worthy of recent transport projects do not come close to the level of foresight embodied within the Bridge in this respect. Combining the roads and transport portfolios would help to institutionalise the type of cohesive thinking that gave Sydney and NSW such a marvel.
Mr Baird will, of course, have many other needs to consider in any reshuffle. Health Minister Jillian Skinner has come under fire after a number of controversies in her portfolio, but her experience would indicate she still has something to offer. It would be a travesty if Education Minister Adrian Piccoli lost his portfolio, in which he has served admirably, due to machinations within the Nationals. There is, however, some need for generational refreshment.
But the reshuffle offers the potential for the Premier to do more than merely move names around. Within the justice portfolio, Mr Baird should put an end to an experiment that has failed. In transport and roads, he could look to Sydney's greatest achievements of the past to help cement his own legacy for the future.
0 comments
New User? Sign up