Are Government lawyers also guardians of integrity?

One way to understand the distinction between law and ethics is through a sporting analogy. The law is the rulebook; it sets the minimum standard of acceptable behaviour. Ethics is the spirit of the game; it reflects the fairness, integrity, and judgment that allow institutions to earn and keep public trust. If following the law is compliance, applying ethics is best practice.

The trusted adviser, not just technical experts

As the operating environment grows more complex, clients rarely come to government lawyers seeking a simple legal or technical answer. Agencies are navigating competing priorities, political realities, operational constraints and public expectations.  They need someone to help them make decisions and navigate that complexity in context.

That doesn’t mean lawyers should become policymakers or decision-makers. Those responsibilities properly remain with delegates and agency leaders. But lawyers are uniquely placed to identify where legal risk intersects with ethical, reputational, and public confidence risks. They can ask the uncomfortable questions others may overlook.

Sometimes the most valuable advice isn’t the answer itself, but the question that prompts a client to reflect, or to provide better instructions.

The danger of speaking only in the language of risk

It is widely accepted that government lawyers assess and communicate the risks of policies and proposals. But when advisors use vague, ambiguous, or heavily hedged language, it can obscure the real issue, giving both the client and the lawyer wiggle room to later evade responsibility for poor choices.

There is a significant difference between saying a proposal carries legal risk and saying it is unlawful. There is an equally important difference between identifying a legal pathway and flagging that a decision, while legally available, may not withstand public scrutiny. A risk that isn’t legal today may not remain so; what starts as a reputational or ethical failure can end up as a legal one.

Legal advice should provide clarity and comfort, but never at the expense of candour. A lawyer’s job is not to soften an uncomfortable truth to make it more palatable, but to deliver it clearly, so the client can act on it with full knowledge of the risk. Where there isn’t a black-and-white answer, good advice educates the client on the risk: what could go wrong, why, and what can be done about it.

Speaking truth to power

Few events have reshaped government legal practice as profoundly as the robodebt royal commission. One of its many lessons was the need for a culture, processes and leadership that enable people to challenge assumptions and the status quo.

Across the APS, agencies are strengthening escalation pathways, formalising compliance frameworks and embedding more rigorous governance arrangements. Critically, many organisations have become more willing to ask difficult questions before problems become crises.

As already noted, government lawyers are uniquely placed to identify and advise on where risks intersect. Yet many, particularly those working in-house, may find themselves in the unusual (and at times uncomfortable) position of advising the very people responsible for their careers. That reality can make difficult conversations harder still, especially for junior practitioners.

Creating environments where lawyers can offer frank or unpopular advice, and raise ethical concerns without fear, requires systems and workplace cultures that genuinely reward professional judgment.

Integrity is everyone’s responsibility

While government lawyers play a vital role in shaping conversations around ethics and best practice, integrity remains a collective responsibility. Lawyers cannot and should not substitute for the judgment of those responsible for public decision-making. Accountability must rest with the appropriate delegate or leader. The lawyer’s role is and should remain advisory: to identify the broader risks and implications of a policy or a decision, not to make it.

Public trust depends on confidence that government exercises power fairly, transparently, and in the public interest. Achieving this goes beyond mere compliance with the law; it relies on sound judgment, ethical consideration and a willingness to move beyond legal minimums in pursuit of best practice.

Government lawyers need to ask difficult questions, challenge assumptions, and help their clients navigate not only what is lawful but also what is right.

Published on themandarin.com.au in August 2026

About SPA Australia

SPA Australia (Systems Planning & Analysis, Australia) is a leading provider of integrated legal, commercial, consulting and analytics services to government.      

Our multidisciplinary approach, trusted advice and leading-edge technology and analysis help clients deliver measurable outcomes.    

In 2025, SPA Australia acquired Proximity, a highly regarded professional services firm specialising in government legal, consulting, and commercial advisory services.    

Our parent company, SPA, has more than 3,000 employees in 30 locations within the US, UK and Australia. In Australia, more than 130 employees are based across Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide, where our local teams deliver sovereign capability backed by global expertise.