Mr. Rob Wright:

I think there was a strong public service ethos. People were not seen as the executive assistant to the Minister. They had a capacity to do more and they did more. I know that on the day when I was engaged I was impressed by the commitment of the then Secretary General to public service and to renewal. I have been impressed by a number of the senior players who had frustrations within that system and wanted to improve it, but when it came to giving the Minister advice, I thought that relationship was professional. What I have recommended are ways to make it more rigorous in ways that are more important and would lead the Department to be capable.

I know we have all got the knock on the noggin. I do not think senior officials in the Department of Finance will be comfortable giving casual advice. I think they have embraced this notion of increased formality of the written record and the discipline associated with that. How to regulate a risk is learned from it. The question of how to sustain it is something that is worthy of being part of the review. In Canada, advice to the Minister is clearly restricted. Under the former Freedom of Information Act, which is an Australian model, there is no blanket exemption. I did take the time to talk to a few Australians about whether that restrained them from giving advice when it had to be blunt. Australian reaction to that question was typically Australian: I was left in no doubt that the advice would be delivered in a bloody clear fashion.

There are areas to get the job done in that framework. In the current framework, I would want to be reassured that if there is a red button that has to be pushed in no uncertain terms, there are enough exemptions for that type of national financial market advice to go uncensored through the system to the Minister. I think that is a vital aspect. There is scope in the current system but I think the committee should be mindful of that.