Efficiency and creativity the only way to fix Australia

As Australia continues to navigate the complexities of its growing public sector, the need for a more efficient, creative, and agile government has never been more urgent.

Australians adore the beach. What makes our country great—our laid-back, chilled lifestyle—is also the very thing that can hinder us. I have Australian friends overseas who felt compelled to leave the country in search of individuals who aspired to perfection. They reminisce about Australian workplaces and refer to them as the “80% nation”—as in, 80% effort is quite satisfactory, right?

The conversation surrounding public service reform is one that has sparked fierce debates – especially since Elon Musk’s DOGE started looking behind closed doors in Washington.

In Australia, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has vowed to slash “wasteful” government spending and reduce the size of the public service. But while cutting costs is important, it’s equally vital that efficiency is not pursued at the expense of creativity and long-term problem-solving. Australia’s future hinges on our ability to balance these priorities.

The idea of reducing the public service is not new. Over the past few decades, governments have made various attempts to streamline the bureaucracy, from Scott Morrison’s overhaul of government departments to Mathias Cormann’s calls for a more innovative and responsive Australian Public Service (APS). On paper, these ideas look attractive—especially when framed in terms of reducing administrative bloat and saving taxpayer money. However, the real question is: how do we ensure these cuts don’t stifle innovation?

Australian opposition leader Peter Dutton

Inflation and debt

Peter Dutton’s pledge to shrink the public service is grounded in his belief that it will drive productivity and help ease Australia’s economic challenges, including inflation and debt. His vision is to eliminate wasteful spending, a move that has garnered both support and backlash. Supporters argue that less bureaucracy means less inefficiency, while critics warn of the practical impacts—slower processing times for essential government services like pensions, healthcare, and other public support systems. Governments around the world world will be watching Elon Musk carefully to see how he manages to work through this.

Can technology help to create efficiency without losing the personal touch that many people require. After all, who in their right mind would touch base with the government unless they desperately needed to?

Dutton’s approach—focused on efficiency and cutting waste—can only go so far if it’s not balanced with an emphasis on creativity. Efficiency shouldn’t just mean reducing costs; it should also mean improving the ways we deliver services and fostering a culture of innovation within government. As seen in the private sector, cost-cutting initiatives must be paired with new ways of thinking—embracing technology, new workflows, and a willingness to challenge old assumptions.

I call it the take and give approach. If you take something away, you must replace it with something that’s better.

Jobs and funding

The pursuit of efficiency should not be confined to simply eliminating jobs or reducing funding for departments. Instead, we should be asking: How can the government operate more effectively while still maintaining a level of creativity that allows the government to respond to new challenges and opportunities?

Australia’s government could take inspiration from the success of creative industries, where disruption and the breaking of norms often lead to better products and outcomes. Why shouldn’t this same mentality be applied to public service? Creativity, when combined with efficiency, can transform the way we solve problems.

But creativity in government doesn’t just mean high-tech solutions. It also involves empowering public servants to think outside the box – and to attract people to the public service who think that way.. This requires a shift in culture: one that values not just speed and cost reduction, but also innovation and a commitment to long-term problem-solving.

The debate about public service reform is far from over. Peter Dutton’s call for reducing the public service size and cutting wasteful spending is a start—but it must be paired with a strategy for fostering creativity. As taxpayers, we must demand value for money, as we would if we were buying a new couch.

As we move forward, we must balance the need for efficiency with the need for bold, creative solutions to the challenges ahead. Only then can we ensure that Australia’s public service is not just lean, but also capable of adapting to a rapidly changing world.