Peter Dutton is a man just doing his job

Federal Minister for Home Affairs Peter Dutton.

The era of corruption commissions has had a profound effect on the political class.

When accompanied by 24/7 media coverage and the new world of social media, too many state and federal ministers are so afraid of allegations of bad behaviour that they never overrule ­departmental advice. This means we are increasingly governed by an unelected bureaucracy.

Many politicians are so risk averse that they give speeches written for them by people in their office but only after careful vetting by their departments. If a minister simply ticks every piece of departmental advice, the department must accept the blame and the gutless minister can skate free. This is a recipe for inept, out-of-touch government.

During my six years as a minister in the Hawke and Keating governments I would often write “rubbish” at the top of the first page (or a word more evocative) and demand something sensible be produced. I doubt this kind of independent judgment is made by many in the cabinet of modern governments.

Now Labor looks set to wrest power from the Coalition, a federal ICAC is a good bet to be up and running by the end of next year. This will further erode the courage of those who are supposed to govern us and give even more power to those unseen, unknown and unheard of people burrowing away in the labyrinths of the public service.

It is suspicious that the leaks of material suggesting Peter Dutton may have overruled his department on a number of visas being issued to au pairs came just days after his failed bid for the prime ministerial job. It looks and smells like political payback.

While I can easily understand why Labor’s Clare O’Neil would act with simulated outrage at a minister to whom the opposition has taken a serious dislike, it all seems a bit rich to me. It does not matter who is in power, front and backbenchers alike from both sides of the aisle will ask the minister for immigration for a favour or two. Inevitably that means asking the minister to overrule the Immigration Department. It is also true that while a minister might favour his or her side of politics, everyone expects to have the odd win. Dutton will have a pretty thick file with details of how many ALP members and senators asked the minister to do precisely what they now say is reprehensible.

As someone perceived as powerful as a minister, I received thousands of requests on visas every year. Usually my only role was to sign letters to the immigration minister prepared by a staffer in my electorate office who had become expert in this area. I rarely read the letters yet can recall having to return an extremely expensive watch a Chinese gentleman sent to me in appreciation of receiving permanent residency. All I had done was sign a letter. I had never laid eyes on him. During Stewart West’s time in this portfolio I was able to convince him to grant permanent residency to a British woman and her three children who had fled domestic violence. The department had applied strict rules and denied this woman’s request. The fact that I could speak directly to the minister delivered a just outcome.

Therefore, I will not be a hypocrite and join the chorus calling for Dutton’s head over this. I applaud Dutton and any other minister who has the courage to take a stand on behalf of those who make representations to them.