Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Centralism by stealth

By Kerry Corke - posted Wednesday, 18 June 2008


According to the Liberal Party platform, this is how Australian federalism should operate.

Alternatively, one can say that Australia is an integrated common market, with people and companies commonly undertaking activities across state borders.

Moreover, Australia exists in a globalised world, with the complication of different rules in different states a reason not to come to Australia.

Advertisement

In this case, there to be only one set of rules (usually encapsulated in legislation) made by one legislative body – in our case, the Australian Parliament.

The states would have the role of (effectively) an English county council, concentrating on service provision based on national standards.

A "seamless" national economy achieved in the manner anticipated by Tanner.

Now, the way the current system works is that when the "governor's club" that is COAG makes the decision to "harmonise" regulation, a working party of public servants broadly determine the contents of legislation.

Their recommendations are then forwarded to a COAG committee or working group, which then passes it to COAG itself, for final endorsement.

If it is constitutionally appropriate for the states to legislate so as to achieve harmonisation, one state will develop and pass model legislation through its parliament with the remaining states or territories subsequently passing legislation that picks up the model legislation.
 
Whilst nominally capable to amend legislation, state parliaments – including those chambers without ALP majorities - have typically accepted the national legislation without batting an eyelid, on the grounds that "COAG decided".

Advertisement

This system can give rise to what can be called a "democracy deficit".

When harmonising up to nine separate systems into one, some laws in force in some states will either be changed or abandoned.

As well, larger players with both ample resources and the knowledge of how the less than transparent COAG process operates can influence the system so that legislative outcomes reflect their interests.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Kerry Corke is principal of K.M. Corke and Associates, a Canberra based public law consultancy.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Kerry Corke

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Kerry Corke
Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy