Australian Politics and Policy - Senior, 2019a

Australian Politics and Policy
Cabinet makes up the most senior ministers that are responsible for executing
government decisions. As the size of the state has expanded, so too has Cabinet.
In Australia, both citizens’ increasing expectations of the services that the state
ought to provide and the accrual of powers from state governments to the federal
government has seen the expansion of the size of the federal Cabinet. We can
observe this by considering the nine Cabinet portfolios from 1901, compared to the
legal maximum of 30 (currently 23 in Cabinet, seven in the outer ministry) today
(see Table 1).
To encourage strong internal debate, but also to shield members of the Cabinet
whodisagree,allCabinetdeliberationsareheldinsecret.Itisforthisreasonthat
Cabinet leaks are considered so serious – they signal disloyal dissent from the heart
of government. It is not the dissent that is disloyal, but the act of exposing private
conversations, undermining the secrecy that keeps Cabinet debates robust. Indeed,
members of the Cabinet that feel they cannot publically support the Cabinet’s
collective decision must resign. 14
Like several other aspects of Westminster executives, what happens in Cabinet
is largely governed by convention. Prime ministers chair Cabinet and decide how
it will function. Issues are placed on the agenda and submissions supporting or
opposing a policy idea, spending proposal or line of political attack are circulated
beforehand. Smaller subcommittees of Cabinet may also meet to deliberate on
specific policy domains. Some of these smaller committees, such as the Expenditure
Review Committee, make recommendations on spending in the budget and are
consequently very powerful. Exactly how many and who sits on these smaller
subcommittees is determined by prime ministerial discretion. 15
Precisely how submission processes work and how the debate is conducted is
subject to prime ministerial preference. It may seem trivial, but how easy it is to
raise issues, how those conversations are controlled and how welcome discussion is
has important implications for how decisions are made and their overall quality.
Australia has seen many Cabinet configurations and styles, which reflect the
political principles of parties and the personalities of prime ministers. At the
extremes, we have the Whitlam government’s (1972–75) inclusive but unruly 27-
strong Cabinet. This oversized Cabinet was the product of Labor’s long years in
opposition and reflected the party’s democratic ethos. But having so many people in
the room added to the chaotic nature of that government’s administration. Another
extreme relates to workload – Malcolm Fraser’s (1975–83) Cabinet undertook
an exhaustive workload, considering a large number of matters without formal
submissions. One of the reasons Fraser’s Cabinet spent so much time in debate
was that ministers brought more matters to Cabinet for collective decision making,
rather than making decisions themselves. By contrast, the Hawke Cabinet
14 Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet 2018.
15 Weller 2007.
60