Agenda

In a period marked by geopolitical volatility, economic realignment and accelerating technological competition, we will unpack the external forces shaping Australia’s policy choices, fiscal settings and institutional legitimacy.

The emphasis is on strategic stewardship: how leaders scan for weak signals, test assumptions, and make long-horizon trade-offs that protect public value-while being able to clearly explain the rationale for direction and investment in a contested environment.

The discussion will focus on what this means for public sector governance: setting an appropriate strategic risk appetite, protecting decision integrity under pressure, and preparing organisations for second-order impacts (supply chains, energy, migration, misinformation and social cohesion).

This panel focuses on the governance mechanics behind digital trust. What needs to be in place to assure AI use, cyber resilience and privacy compliance-roles and decision rights, controls and assurance, and how accountability is demonstrated when something goes wrong. With privacy reforms expanding regulatory powers and obligations, the implantation of national AI assurance approaches, and critical-infrastructure expectations tightening under the SOCI/cyber reform environment, public sector leaders need an operating model that is both practical and defensible.

Participants will take away practical insights for governing emerging technology responsibly: ethics-by-design expectations, transparent risk and control reporting, uplift pathways for legacy environments, and targeted stewardship of capability and funding so assurance keeps pace with innovation.

• How to apply an assurance mindset to AI use
• What “stronger powers / stronger obligations” means for governance, accountability and operating models
• Aligning leadership oversight to national cyber direction and maturing uplift expectations
• What tightening directions/risk-management expectations mean for agencies and government-adjacent entities
• Practical steps leaders can take to strengthen confidence while managing real-world constraints (budget, workforce, legacy tech)

This session is about “delivery” governance and how to prioritise when everything is urgent, converting policy intent into executable roadmaps, and building feedback loops that show whether investments are actually improving outcomes (not just activity). It tackles the practical question of “what do we stop doing?” and how leaders make those calls in ways that are fair, evidence-based and sustainable.

We’ll explore portfolio and program practices that strengthen accountability for delivery: clear outcomes and measures, realistic sequencing, fit-for-purpose governance forums, and transparent reporting that enables early course-correction-before cost, workforce and service risks become failures.

• Turning government agendas into a prioritised delivery portfolio with clear outcomes, measures and owners
• Workforce and capability choices that make delivery sustainable (capacity planning, critical roles, fatigue and retention)
• Governing partnerships, shared services and vendors with clear service expectations, controls and escalation paths
• Making evidence based trade offs and tracking benefits so the ‘why’ and ‘what changed’ are always clear
• Legacy practices, risk appetites, accountability structures and integrity safeguards that no longer serve effective delivery.

This panel focuses on board effectiveness in the public sector – how boards earn confidence through appointment quality, role clarity and conduct. In 2026, scrutiny is increasing on the proper constitution of boards, whether they challenge appropriately, and whether decisions reflect the public purpose of the entity.

• Integrity, transparency and merit in board appointment processes and why process matters as much as outcome
• Clarifying the respective responsibilities of ministers, departments and boards in appointments, performance and renewal
• Balancing continuity and refreshment, independence and institutional knowledge
• Expectations around culture, constructive challenge, collective responsibility and ethical decision‑making
• How public sector boards demonstrate effectiveness in an environment of heightened public scrutiny.

• Maintaining public trust in complex environments
• Transparency and governance expectations
• Lessons from recent public sector challenges.

This session provides a practical examination of accountability under scrutiny, exploring what public inquiries, reviews and investigations test in real world settings, including how decisions were made and documented, the quality of evidence, governance pathways, and whether risks and issues were escalated and addressed in a timely way.

Participants will work through a structured simulation of what occurs when an agency’s actions are examined in detail: who knew what and when, what was documented, how decisions were explained, and how integrity safeguards operated in practice. The session focuses on building decision making and documentation habits that can withstand close scrutiny.

This panel examines the governance challenges unique to local government: visible decision-making close to the community, statutory obligations with limited levers, and long-term stewardship of place-based assets (roads, waste, planning, community facilities) under sustained fiscal and workforce pressure.

We’ll explore how councils maintain integrity and fairness around high-temperature issues (planning, rates, infrastructure choices), how they communicate constraints openly, and how they partner with state, federal and private actors while remaining accountable locally. The session also considers resilience as a governance discipline-continuity planning, climate and infrastructure risk, and managing community polarisation.

• Why BAU no longer exists for local government
• Managing ageing infrastructure, cost shifting and workforce shortages while maintaining core services
• Engaging communities honestly where councils cannot meet every demand
• Balancing elected member leadership, executive capability and organisational resilience
• Navigating state, federal and private partnerships without losing local voice or accountability
• Responding to community stress, polarisation and vulnerability as part of the local government mandate.