Wednesday, 30 July 2025

Public sector review

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (10:28): I move:

That this house:

(1) notes that:

(a) the Silver review has been handed to the Treasurer and the government more generally advising on public service staffing and savings measures;

(b) several versions of the review have been provided to the government, including a final version provided in late June 2025, and presumably at least one earlier version was provided to the government in the lead-up to the 2025–26 budget process;

(c) there may have been informal briefings, including verbal briefings, provided to the government, in particular to the Treasurer and the Premier;

(2) in accordance with standing order 10.01, requires the Leader of the Government to table in the Council, within three weeks of the house agreeing to this resolution:

(a) all copies and versions of the Silver review provided to the government at any point;

(b) all related briefings and/or related notes associated with the Silver review; and

(3) further requires that when the due date is reached, if the government claims that it is unable to provide these documents within the timeframe, that a list of all documents that have been located to that date must be provided in the interim, including details of their creation dates and when they were provided to the government.

This is a short-form documents motion that seeks assistance in getting the release of the Silver review and earlier iterations of it, if there are earlier iterations, and briefings, whether they be formal or informal, to the Treasurer and Premier and seeks copies of those to be provided to the house within three weeks. It also further requires that when the due date is reached, if the government claims it is unable to provide these documents within the timeframe, then a list of all the documents that have been located to that date must be provided in the interim, including details of their creation dates and when they were provided to the government. So if the government want to say after three weeks that they cannot provide it because of time, they can provide a list of the documents that they have located in that interim period. That is a new addition to a documents motion but I think an important one to insist that the government actually starts complying with these in a more timely and direct way.

It is clear that the Silver review is an important one. Many of us know Helen Silver; we have high regard for her as a person or a bureaucrat.

Members interjecting.

David DAVIS: As you have heard me say, Treasurer, in the past, I do have high regard for her.

Notwithstanding that, she is making seminal recommendations which will have a big impact on the state’s finances, the state’s public service and the lives of individuals. I believe Victorian communities are entitled to see what those recommendations are and to see them forthwith.

Jaclyn Symes: I’ve already said I’m going to release it. Why are you wasting the Parliament’s time?

David DAVIS: We want it now. The time is drifting on. People wanted it earlier. We first thought we would see it at the end of June, and it has now drifted on.

Ryan Batchelor: Who said that? When?

David DAVIS: When I asked the minister earlier.

Ryan Batchelor: Have you actually read the Hansard?

David DAVIS: I have.

Ryan Batchelor: And what did it say?

David DAVIS: I will tell you what: it left the whole world with the view that we would get to see it at an early point. We are not actually seeing it at an early point. I think it has been used to frame the budget. It should have been provided to the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee for PAEC to see what was put in front of government and what informed government on some of its decisions made in the budget. At the same time, we are where we are now, and the government has the chance to rectify these matters and to actually bring forward all of the iterations of the Silver review and to do so promptly.

Jaclyn Symes: I asked her to do a review. She gave me a final report.

David DAVIS: Yes, but you actually were briefed by her before the final report.

Jaclyn Symes: I have a conversation with her every week.

David DAVIS: Well, there you are. That is what exactly what we are seeking, the details of those conversations, the briefing documents and what has gone on there – precisely. Let the record record that there are weekly briefings of the Treasurer by Helen Silver. That is entirely appropriate, but it is also entirely appropriate for the Parliament to ask to see those briefings and to understand what the basis of those briefings is and to understand whether the Treasurer has implemented the work that has been done, whether she has not and whether she has rejected some parts of it.

Jaclyn Symes: I’m working on that now.

David DAVIS: Well, indeed. But you have actually brought down a budget that has been informed by what Ms Silver said.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): Order! Mr Davis, through the Chair, please. Much as I am enjoying this conversation, Mr Davis, through the Chair.

David DAVIS: I think the government is very tardy and coy on this matter, and they are coy for a reason. I think the community is very nervous about the government’s response here and where they are heading. We understand the budgetary problems that the government has got itself and the state into. There is no question of the scale of the budgetary problems. Let me be clear: this is a very straightforward motion. The Treasurer can provide these documents. She can provide them quickly. She can provide them quite reasonably and quickly.

Jaclyn Symes: There’s nothing called the Silver review that exists as a document.

David DAVIS: You will no doubt tell us that. You have been provided with briefings, and we ask about those.

Jaclyn Symes: I have not received any briefings.

David DAVIS: You have received verbal briefings. Does Helen Silver have any notes on that?

Jaclyn Symes: I’ll table myself, shall I?

David DAVIS: I am happy to hear those. I am very interested to know that the Treasurer is not receiving written briefings but is given verbal briefings alone. Presumably they are noted by somebody, and presumably Helen Silver has her own notes on these matters.

Jaclyn Symes: Well, maybe you should ask her.

David DAVIS: We are asking for what was provided. We are asking for exactly these sorts of matters. There may have been informal briefings, including verbal briefings, provided to government, in particular the Treasurer and Premier. It was actually directed precisely at this point and written precisely that way, because I suspect that is precisely how you may be operating. If Helen Silver’s notes for those briefings are available, they should be provided. They would fall clearly within these matters. As I said, this is a very significant review that has occurred. We want to see exactly what the government is doing here. I think the community is entitled to know and to see them at an early point, not dragged off and kicked into the far distance by – (Time expired)

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (10:34): This documents motion just goes to show that the opposition is a complete shambles, personified by the contribution that we have had from Mr Davis, who is taking the Parliament’s time seeking access to a document that the Treasurer in this place has committed to publicly releasing.

David Davis interjected.

Ryan BATCHELOR: If Mr Davis had spent any time actually listening to what people had to say rather than talking over them all of the time, which is his pattern of behaviour not just on this issue but on all issues – he talks over everyone and never listens to a word they say – he might have understood what was actually being said. The Treasurer has said in this chamber that this review would be released, and she has said repeatedly outside this chamber that the review will be released along with the government response. I think that is a perfectly reasonable position for the government to have. The review will be released with the government’s response.

David Davis: When?

Ryan BATCHELOR: That, Mr Davis, is a question you should put to the Treasurer.

David Davis: We have.

Ryan BATCHELOR: No, you haven’t. The other thing that I think is quite remarkable about this particular documents motion is that Mr Davis is seeking access to documents that he theorises might exist. He says he wants iterations of a review that came in one singular final form. I am not sure of the basis on which Mr Davis has worded his motion today. I do not know what reality he is existing in where he thinks that multiple iterations of a report exist when there is a final report.

What he actually said by way of his substantive contribution and by interjection just now is that he wants to know what happened during the conversations that occurred between the review, led by Helen Silver, and the Treasurer. I am not sure what Mr Davis thinks common and accepted practice is by senior members of the government and people who are engaged to work with them in meetings such as this, but in most places in the professional world colleagues do not record their conversations with each other. The only place that seems to happen in conversations between professionals where colleagues are recorded is in the Liberal Party.

David Davis: On a point of order, Acting President, this is a narrow motion about a particular set of documents around the Silver review. It has got nothing to do with a political party – any political party for that matter. It is to do with administration of government and the Treasurer and the Premier’s engagement with Ms Silver.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): I do believe there was discussion about verbal briefings, which I believe this is in response to, which is in the motion. I believe it is relevant to the motion.

Ryan BATCHELOR: Perhaps Mr Davis could clarify for us, given it is his motion, how he expects verbal briefings to be produced to the chamber other than by way of recording, because it seems that Mr Davis believes that meetings between colleagues need to be recorded on a routine basis and provided under some sort of a production process, a discovery process. Maybe that is because Mr Davis thinks that all of the meetings he is involved in are being recorded, because we know that there is a pattern of behaviour by senior members of the Liberal Party where they like to record their conversations. Well, that is not what real people do in the real world who take real things seriously, like we do in the government.

The government thinks that the issues it asked Helen Silver to lead a review of, about the way our public service operates, are exceptionally important. The review team has undertaken significant work at the request of the Treasurer; it provided a very significant piece of work to the Treasurer a few short weeks ago. The Treasurer has said in this chamber that it will be released. This documents motion is seeking something that the government has already agreed to.

Aiv PUGLIELLI (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:40): I rise to make a brief contribution on this production of documents motion brought forward by the opposition in relation to the Silver review. This is obviously an independent review, announced not that long ago, into the Victorian public service, to be headed by Helen Silver, who I understand was a banking executive and former head of the Department of Premier and Cabinet under John Brumby and Ted Baillieu. As put in the terms of reference for this review, it is providing recommendations to government about reducing the Victoria public sector back towards its prepandemic share of employment.

This matter is important. It is about giving certainty to people who work within the public sector, their families and those who they support through their income in those roles. It is important to provide certainty to the community about potential programs that may be cut, effectively, as a result of changes that are recommended in this review process. While the government may see fit to bring forward this information otherwise at a time of its own choosing, many I think here would argue that the workers in the sector want to see relevant information brought forward as soon as possible so that they understand what the implications are going to be for them, for the programs that they work within and for the services that Victorians rely upon.

Actually, in response to the Silver review, we have seen a really strong push from members within the CPSU, public servants, who have pushed back against the government’s proposed job cuts under this review process with their own plan, which would provide efficiencies and cost savings to government, which they have called the Gold review, calling instead for reductions, for example, in executive bloat, halving consultant spending and reducing office space, just to name a few examples. That is an approach that members of the CPSU have decided to bring forward and push for in opposition to what the government has proposed through the Silver review process.

In any case, in the interest of certainty, in the interest of making sure that workers and their families can prepare and understand what these changes are going to mean for them, it is important that we have this information provided as soon as possible. So the Greens absolutely will be supporting this documents motion today, although noting the convention is typically we will support documents motions and documents being provided to the house. To the government: really, you can show us your cuts, show us the documents. We need this information. This is about certainty for workers and making sure that we have fully funded public services that Victorians rely upon.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (10:43): Today I rise to speak on the motion from Mr Davis, and it is fair to say that it is a thinly veiled attempt to take cheap shots at this government, because the Allan Labor government has commissioned an independent review of the Victoria public sector to ensure it is firmly focused on the needs of Victorian families. To ensure that the public service is appropriately focused on delivering essential services, the government established an independent review to make recommendations on how to rightsize program expenditure and return the VPS to its prepandemic share of employment, ensuring spending is aligned with the government’s cost-of-living relief and key service priorities.

The Treasurer has asked Helen Silver to undertake this review to zero in on waste and inefficiency and ensure Victoria’s public sector is firmly focused on what matters most to Victorians – good schools, good hospitals and safe communities. The review was tasked to identify overlaps, inefficiencies, functions and programs that can be streamlined or eliminated, including consolidation of entities; provide recommendations to increase operational efficiency and to deliver process improvements across all VPS departments and programs; and provide recommendations on how to return to a prepandemic share of employment, including an examination of the appropriate levels of executives, by reducing spend on waste and inefficiency in areas that are not a priority for Victorians in a cost-of-living crisis. We can keep investing where it matters most, and that is indeed the front line.

Labor governments also understand that Victorians rely on frontline services like health every day, especially when times are tough. This is why, unlike those opposite, we will never cut our nurses, our teachers, our police officers or our child protection workers. That is why frontline workers are not included in the scope of the Silver review.

Ms Silver has presented the report to the Treasurer, and the government will now consider its recommendations, as has been said multiple times. Most recently the Treasurer herself has said in the chamber during this short-docs motion debate that the report will be published alongside the government’s response. That commitment has been made by the Treasurer, as the Treasurer has continually noted, and I am sure that many in this place are aware of that, particularly those in the chamber now.

In a cost-of-living crisis families are having to carefully consider every dollar, and they expect that governments do the same, which is why the budget focused on the priorities that matter most for Victorians. That is cost-of-living relief, and that is frontline services like health, education and communities. The 2025–26 budget sees Victoria return to surplus, and it does this while also delivering much-needed cost-of-living support and funding for critical frontline services. It also includes a range of savings and efficiency measures identified by departments, which are consistent with the objectives of the Silver review. This was made possible by our responsible financial management – and can I take a moment to acknowledge the work of the Treasurer, current and former, in this, including taking carefully targeted savings and efficiency measures. This includes corporate savings from non-frontline functions across government. This will ensure that we have a sustainable budget practice and are not spending on duplicated processes across the VPS. It does not include cuts to frontline services, because while those opposite would like to make funding cuts to our health and education system, we are out there: we are building hospitals and they are opening; we are opening schools and will continue to do so for many years to come. Today we have seen the benefit of that with the announcement of the NAPLAN results, so can I take a moment to thank and honour all the teachers involved in helping deliver this historic result for Victoria, Victorian schools and Victorian students. It is standard for government agencies to constantly evolve how they deliver services in order to provide the services that matter most for Victorians.

This government will always keep public services strong and is ready to deliver and protect them from the damage that those opposite will do. And can I thank, in the last minute that I have, all the public servants right across our state for each and every day that they get up to deliver for Victoria and Victoria’s people: thank you so very much.

Motion agreed to.