We wrote an article for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute on the repeated failure of Australian governments to fully draw upon the knowledge outside the federal bureaucracy. We wrote a short essay to accompany the article. You can read our essay below:
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has published an article that we wrote on the repeated failure of Australian governments to fully draw upon the knowledge outside the federal bureaucracy. We wrote from the perspective of national defence and security, but our criticism could equally apply in other areas of public policy and decision-making in our nation.
That we have a national anti-intellectual tradition presents a formidable obstacle. We tend to be a nation of doers, not thinkers, which has its obvious limitations. The inwardness of our universities, which I wrote critically about this week, is another reason leaving us without societies serving the national intellect. And the industrial attitude and wrongdoing, now notorious, of some of the consulting houses is a reason and an excuse for the government to ersatz its own consulting services.
But the main reason for why government does not draw upon ‘the outside’ is likely the bureaucratic mindset – certain of its own abilities, and with the instinct to centralise and control information. The overall effect is the loss of contest, debate, and rigorous public policy decisions. And so decision-makers have succumbed to what we termed the ‘tyranny of short strategy’.
In the article, for that purpose, we described this as politicians and senior bureaucrats responding to the immediate issues without making serious attempts to widely test their thinking or to understand the relationships between means and ends. Government action is now about intervening in a problem, rather than concerted efforts to solve those problems. The acts of tinkers, not thinkers.
Our opinion piece intended to raise the situation for public debate. We believe in the great history of our nation. We see the extraordinary, yet dormant, abilities of our people. And we know our nation is imperilled. Like others, we seek to secure the national cause. We believe that ‘total war’ is not the only grave threat our nation faces. We believe that a revival in civic duty and a restatement of national values are necessary to preserve the national disposition.
We believe that we must democratise the fight to protect our nation. This ranges from reinstituting national service, or at least civil defence, through to more participatory democracy. For our part, we approach the situation from the perspective of intellectual warfare, so we think about how ideals and ideas can reshape and strengthen our nation. A companion article that is between our minds is whether there should be an office of national research.
We wrote in this article that knowledge does not thrive when it is centralised or confined. But we also wrote that government must draw upon the dispersed knowledge and thinking salted in our nation. Can an office of national research avoid the bureaucratic tendencies, to foster intellectualism and apply the best knowledge to keep us one nation – independent, secure, and prosperous?