“Canberra bashing is an easy point-scoring exercise anywhere outside of the ACT. For members of the Liberal National Party, it is particularly attractive… but they might wonder then why they do not do so well at election time in the ACT,” writes political columnist MICHAEL MOORE.

“The streets of Canberra are paved with gold, the public servants all have personal coffee machines, and these ‘fatcats’ only work a few hours a day”. These sorts of statements from politicians were common when we lived in rural SA. 

The sentiment remains with just a slight change in the way language is used. Canberra bashing works well in marginal electorates – especially around election time.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton is using a modified Trump playbook. Marginalising South American migrants as scapegoats, does not work so well in Australia, and so his alternative is to hit out at Canberra’s public servants (the migration card is in the hip pocket).

Prime Minister John Howard cut 10,000 federal public servant jobs in each of the three years after being elected in 1996. These cuts had a serious impact on Canberra’s economy.

However, the financial advantage to government was short-lived as consultants were brought in to cover up the loss of public servants and ensure the work was done.

Firing 36,000 public servants, as Peter Dutton has announced, will not only have an impact on Canberra. There are regional centres, such as Geelong, that are also supported by a federal public service presence. However, the biggest impact will be in Canberra.

The far-flung electorates love it. Of course! Blaming Canberra for the ills of their own electorates makes good sense. It hurts when told that the taxes they are paying are just used to support the “good life” of Canberrans. And they believe it!

Firing public servants is not enough. Dutton is the man to force ”lazy” public servants to work harder. No more working from home. Dutton should understand the lessons learnt from the pandemic about increased productivity with a work-from-home option. However, it is not in line with his narrative of being tough on public servants. Being tough on Canberrans.

Shadow public service minister Senator Jane Hume launched into Canberra public servants at a speech to the conservative think tank Menzies Research Institute. 

She argued: “If you accept a job with the Australian public service, I think the taxpayer that is funding that job, would expect you to do that job from the office”.

The work-from-home option is simply implying that Canberra’s public servants use this approach to rort the system. It’s just alternative language to the old description of being a “shiny bum”.

Second hand information and cherry-picking evidence were the hallmarks of her speech. She had been “told stories” of people working from home full-time but caravanning around Australia with their family. No doubt it was from someone who knew someone who had spoken to another who saw a family in a caravan!

Senator Hume was cherry-picking evidence from a Stanford University report that found (in one instance) a drop in productivity of 20 per cent resulting from a work-at-home policy. However, as reported by the ABC, the researchers also stated: “Studies of hybrid working arrangements often find productivity gains (relative to traditional arrangements) or no discernible effect”.

In an even stronger statement the researchers concluded: “These studies suggest that working from home one or two days a week improves productivity and leads to happier employees”. Happier employees! This seems an anathema to the Coalition when it comes to public servants.

In a “It’s Not a Race 2025” post, independent MP Zali Steggall is quoted as pointing out that Dutton has attended just 42 per cent of the divisions in the federal parliament. Sussan Ley has attended 58 per cent. These people are elected to participate in decision making but do not turn up to vote. 

It is the hypocrisy regarding their own productivity and sense of political responsibility that needs to be questioned.

Canberra bashing is an easy point-scoring exercise anywhere outside of the ACT. For members of the Liberal National Party, it is particularly attractive. They no longer have Canberra-based elected representatives from their party in the federal parliament. 

This approach is not new. As an MLA a couple of decades ago, I recall exposing then Finance Minister John Fahey, who had made disparaging comments about Canberra in the local Wingecarribee paper about our city.

With the Coalition continuing such Canberra-bashing tactics, they might wonder then why they do not do so well at election time in the ACT.

Michael Moore is a former member of the ACT Legislative Assembly and an independent minister for health. He has been a political columnist with “CityNews” since 2006.