Isn't there an economic conflict of interest with Labor constantly expanding the public service, with public servants more likely to vote Labor?

stats show that the APS gov't employment numbers went from around 141,000 employees in June 2022 to 198,500 in June 2025 (source - https://www.apsc.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/workforce-information/research-analysis-and-publications/state-service/state-service-report-2024-25/aps-workforce/aps-workforce-size-and-location)

we know that public sector workers, union members, and government-adjacent employees skew heavily toward voting Labor (not a secret, is reflected in polling and demographics etc.)

If your voter base is skewed towards people whose livelihoods are directly funded by the state, doesn't that create a perverse incentive to continually expand the size of the public service? Saying this is a conflict of interest doesn't require tinfoil any hat conspiracy or corruption tbh

Politicians respond to constituencies that benefit from their policies and if one side of politics generally favours a larger public sector and the other generally favours a smaller one, then expanding the public sector naturally creates more people who have a material interest in the former position... and who rely on that party staying on power for their income.

When job creation in Australia leans more heavily on the public sector rather than private, you essentially end up using taxpayer money to cultivate & grow your own electorate. How this is economically sustainable and/or will lead to innovation or a more diversified economy is pretty suspect IMO

If a government can effectively grow the number of people whose pay cheques depend on them winning the next election, how is that not a potentially large conflict of interest?