11 December 2024
5 min read
#Australian Government, #Government
Published by:
This year has been a time of reflection and change for Australian Government lawyers. As it moves to a close, we consider what lies ahead for 2025.
Building on trends from 2022, 2023 and 2024, the coming year’s focus includes the federal election, collaboration among in-house teams, the increasing velocity of knowledge, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the evolving role of government lawyers.
The election cycle inevitably impacts government legal practice and the last date for a joint Senate and House of Representatives election in Australia is 17 May 2025.
In the lead-up to the election, the focus will be on finalising projects and supporting the passage of legislation within Parliamentary timetables. The shift to the caretaker period brings a different rhythm as agencies are required to adhere to the applicable conventions. Following the election, regardless of the overall outcome, there will generally be some shifts in portfolios, and the need to assist with briefing and advice on new programs following election commitments. Teams should be prepared for the different issues these phases present and associated resourcing requirements.
A recent survey of Australian Government in-house lawyers identified collaboration as the most important attribute for achieving a high-performing team. Interestingly, Harvard Law School’s Heidi Gardner also singles out collaboration as the key to success for both in-house lawyers and professional firms.
As legal projects and advice grow larger and more complex, drawing upon relevant expertise and assembling effective teams enables a more efficient, high quality legal response. Working collaboratively with internal and external stakeholders adds another dimension which has been shown to substantially improve legal strategy and outcomes for clients.
Consistent with this approach, the Centralised Code of Conduct Inquiry Taskforce Final Report (Report) identified “breaking down inter and intra agency siloes” as one of 10 insights derived from its work. The Report notes the issues for risk assessment when information is unduly compartmentalised between technical, policy and legal experts or when information is withheld from other departments or agencies with joint accountabilities. Entities should be aware that obligations for significant issues reporting under paragraph three of the Legal Services Directions 2017 arise in relation to issues with whole-of-government implications or those which affect more than one Commonwealth entity, requiring a significant level of coordination or high-level consultation between Commonwealth entities.
Futurist Jim Carroll has identified ‘knowledge velocity’ as one of the defining trends of our age. He states: “It used to be about what you know. Now it’s not only about what you know, but how fast you need to know it!” Acceleration of knowledge has been tracked in the ‘Knowledge Doubling Curve’ suggesting that in 1900, human knowledge doubled approximately every 100 years, by 1945, this was down to 25 years and by 1982, it was at 13 months. Current estimations are every 12 hours.
The implications for in-house teams are that lawyers are increasing expected to advise on new areas of law arising from the regulation of technological advances. Many areas of law have emerged in recent decades, such as regulation of drones, the internet of things, data centres, augmented and virtual reality, doxxing and AI. The new cybersecurity legislative package and the Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill are examples of ongoing reforms in emerging areas of law.
While AI is an example of an emerging area of regulation, it also provides a potential means to assist in managing the potential overwhelm from knowledge velocity.
Use of AI in the Australian Government, including by in-house teams, has been an area of focus. In his speech on Law reform in the age of AI, the Assistant Minister to the Attorney-General, the Hon Patrick Gorman MP, spoke of the optimism of lawyers for significant innovation in the sector and the use of AI tools to assist lawyers with document review, legal research and more.
The Digital Transformation Agency has released and updated its Policy for Responsible use of AI in government and the evaluation of its Whole-of-government trail of Microsoft 365 Copilot. The Department of Industry, Science and Resources has also released its Voluntary AI Safety Standard.
The role of government lawyers has been the subject of ongoing commentary, with the Centralised Code of Conduct Inquiry Taskforce looking at the interaction between professional responsibilities. The Report notes that public servants bring a range of professional skills to their work, including through membership in professional organisations such as state and territory law societies. It also refers to some respondents having an ‘incorrect perception’ that their professional obligations were inconsistent with the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct, and that those obligations overrode their responsibilities under the Code.
Notably, the Taskforce stated that they “did not identify circumstances where professional obligations were inconsistent with the Code. At the core of all professional practice standards is an expectation that the employee will deliver a service to the client that is of a high quality and will, at all times, behave with honesty, integrity and consistent with the law.” For further guidance, see our discussion on ethics for Australian Government in-house lawyers.
If you have any questions or thoughts on these trends, please get in touch with our team below.
Disclaimer
The information in this article is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this article is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future.
Published by:
