Australian Federalism in 2015 - Essay Example

AUSTRALIAN FEDERALISM The Name of the Class (Course) Professor (Tutor) The Name of the School (University) The City and State where it is located The Date “Australian Federalism in 2015 is doubtless under pressure. The institutional framework is overly complex, bureaucratic and expensive and critical pillars of the system are not anchored in the Commonwealth Constitution but rely for their support on customary practiceand the whim of the governments of the day. It is, however, an enduring and stable model of governance and major reform is neither desirable nor realistic.” The above statement clearly delineates the current status of the Australian federal system of government. It identifies the challenges and obstacles that have undermined the effectiveness of Australia’s federal system of government that comprises the Commonwealth and State governments and territories. It also alludes to the fact that the federal system of government is necessary and desirable due to its enduring nature since its inception. The quote further contends that the stability that has been experienced under the federal system of government is an indication of its effectiveness and hence no major reforms are needed. This paper presents a discussion of the issues identified in the above quote. An attempt is made to critically analyze the history of the Australian federal system of government with an aim of identifying key benefits that have been realized as a result of its existence. In addition, any challenges, obstacles and weaknesses that are inherent in the Australian federal system of government are identified. The objective of identifying the challenges and weakness of the Australian federal system of government is to ascertain whether the assertion that major reforms are undesirable and unrealistic is correct or counteractive. The essay contends that the statement is correct and precise. Nonetheless, the essay argues that the minor reforms that are necessary for enhancing the efficiency of Australia’s federal system of government should be expedited. This will ensure that the inherent challenges and weaknesses of Australia’s federalism are addressed promptly to avoid unnecessary inefficiencies and flaws in public service delivery. Australia’s Federalism Federalism is embedded within the Australian Constitution and played an integral part in its drafting and consequent passing. The Australian federation came into existence in the year 1901 when the six Australia colonies agreed through a series of public debates, constitutional conventions that resulted in a referendum on how the new Australian nation was to be constituted. 1The federation is crafted along the United States federal system of government that comprises both the federal and state governments.2Federal systems of government are characterized by maintenance of territorial sovereignty within a central system of government.3Each level of government has its roles and responsibilities spelt out although there have been numerous cases where such roles are not well defined. Australian federalism has previously been characterized by a trend where it shifted away from competitive and co-operative federalism towards opportunistic federalism. The latter system of federalism includes the commonwealth government taking advantage of its superiority in legislative and financial management to intervene even in areas that fall under the authority of state governments. However, such a trend is again shifting back to cooperative federalism with State governments taking the initiative in enhancing beneficial partnerships with the Commonwealth government to enhance service delivery to the public.4 Over the years, consecutive Commonwealth governments have extended their authority and powers into areas that were conventionally regarded as falling under individual state government.5 Cooperation between State and Commonwealth Governments Cooperation between the State and Commonwealth governments occurs through both vertical and horizontal mechanisms. In horizontal cooperation, States and Territories have instituted various institutions and policy measures to achieve the benefits of federalism. This is because of the realization that avoiding blame-shifting and unnecessary rivalry with the Commonwealth government is beneficial rather than counterproductive. One outcome of horizontal state cooperation was the formation of the National Emissions Trading Taskforce back in 2004.6 In 2006, the states established the Council for the Australian Federation (CAF) that comprised State and Territory prime ministers and their chief ministers.7CAF’s objectives include boosting constructive engagements among State governments and parliaments on issues that are of national interest. CAF has been the front runner in streamlining and harmonizing rules and regulations in a number of sectors that do not necessitate the involvement of the Commonwealth government. One of the outcomes of the establishment of CAF was the formulation of a unified framework of ensuring product safety across all States.8Other areas where state governments’ cooperative efforts have borne fruit include the harmonization of Australia’s national school curriculum away from the previous situation where individual states had their state school curriculum. In addition, unification in the regulation of businesses as well as harmonization of regulations within the labour and health sectors has also been realized. Moreover, there have been reforms in the Commonwealth- State financial relations the notable one being the rationalization of specific purpose payments by the Commonwealth government to the State governments. CAF has also been instrumental in the establishment of the COAG Business, Competition and Regulation Working Group. The working group’s primary objectives include harmonization of labour sector regulations related to workers’ compensation, occupational health and safety.9 COAG stands out as a key institution that is involved in the coordination of Commonwealth and State government relations to enhance federalism.10Australian States have also established a number of institutions to foresee mutual collaboration between the Commonwealth government and the individual State governments. Such institutions are set up to expedite efforts at minimizing inefficiencies that have become apparent in the day to day dealings between state governments and the Commonwealth government as well as among the state governments.11Such cooperation was necessary where it was apparent that the Commonwealth government’s involvement was vital for enhancing service delivery.12One of these institutions is the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) established in 1992. Among the outcomes of deliberations championed by COAG involving the State and Commonwealth governments was the formulation of the Intergovernmental Agreement on Federal Financial Relations as well as the National Competition Policy in 2008 and 2006 respectively.13 This financial relations framework has the objective of enhancing financial accountability and standardization of public reporting guidelines as well as clarification of each government’s roles and responsibilities.14Although the underlying objectives of COAG have not been fully realized, its establishment has resulted in enhanced standardization and uniformity in cross-border regulations, efficiency in service delivery and greater cooperation between the Commonwealth and State governments. Such benefits suggest that Australia’s federal system of governance can be ameliorated without engaging in major reforms. Key Strengths of Australia’s Federal System of Government The popularity of Federalism across the world as a system of government is underpinned by a number of economic, social and political benefits that are inherent in its adoption. For instance, federal systems of governments are most often associated with unity in diversity, a highly flexible and responsive system of governance that is stays in touch with the citizenry.15 Furthermore, federalist systems of government enhance economic competitiveness since uniform pieces of legislations create a level playing field for all businesses and other economic actors.16As a result, Australia’s federalism has been associated with the country’s superior economic performance compared to unitary system of governments in other countries. Moreover, it enhances democracy political participation as well as puts in place adequate checks and balances in the exercise of power among all governments agents.17 This is so because with more than one level of government, exercise of power becomes increasingly contestable resulting in moderation of the use of power.18 For example, the electorate has an opportunity vet different political aspirants depending on their perceived abilities to address either national or state issues.19 Furthermore, Australia’s federal system of government is primarily responsible for the apparent decentralization of power away from the Commonwealth government.20 It has enhanced efficiency in service delivery as well as productivity in resource utilization across all Australian States. This is because multiple systems of government foster healthy competition that results in development of innovative mechanisms of service delivery as each tier of government strives to outperform the other so as to win over the electorate.21 Notable Weaknesses and Challenges within Australia’s Federal System of Government It is incontestable that federal systems of government have inherent complexities and challenges just like any system of government can have.22 Many proponents of federalism believed that the adoption of a federal system of government would eliminate various inefficiencies of self- governing states. Such a belief has been challenged by the presence of a number of weaknesses within a unitary system of government. A federal system of government undertakes to reap the benefits of a unitary government without undermining the benefits that are associated with state autonomy and national diversity. Individual State governments are required to provide public services that are in line with the unique needs of the local communities while the federal government is tasked with provision of services that are nationally integrated.23 However, blurriness in roles of either government has most often resulted in conflicts between the federal and state governments. These conflicts have undermined public accountability as it is not clear who is to be held responsible for poor service delivery. Moreover, some issues that were once considered to fall under the authority and responsibility of State governments have assumed an increasingly national outlook necessitating the Commonwealth government take over their management. Such issues include the management of natural resources, particularly water catchment areas that span across more than one state jurisdiction, as well as transport infrastructure projects.24 This has resulted in conflicts between State and Commonwealth governments although these conflicts are on the decline. This is because State governments are increasingly adopting mutual collaboration policies and frameworks with the Commonwealth government for the benefits of their citizenry.25 Consequently, there have been situations where it has been possible for both the federal and the state governments to exercise their powers and authority concurrently an in a mutual manner thereby enhancing public service delivery. According to Twomey and Glenn, federalism is perceived to be uncompetitive in the contemporary world. This is because it compromises many levels of government that is most often associated with duplication of government roles and responsibilities. The many levels of government result in inordinate administrative costs as well as weaknesses and inefficiencies in public service delivery. A federal system of government has also been associated with a situation where there are more than one regulatory and legal arrangement which result in unnecessary confusion and consequent inefficiencies in both private and public service delivery. In addition, the Australian federal parliament has lacked comprehensive regulatory powers affecting key sectors of the economy over the years since its inception in 1901. Nevertheless, this situation is changing as both the state and federal government institute various nations to address the issue. Another reason as to why Federalism is increasingly coming under attack from various quarters is because of the fact that the Commonwealth government is increasingly usurping the legislative, regulatory and financial powers of state governments.26An example is its expanded powers and authority to include direct control of all national water resources, management of key transport infrastructure that are perceived to be vital in promoting cross-border trade as well as the public health sector.27For example, the New South Wales and Queensland governments recently agreed with the Commonwealth government to allow the latter to regulate water rights within the Murray-Darling Basin.28 Similarly, the Commonwealth government is currently offering the country’s public medical insurance across all the states. In addition, it has the has the regulatory powers over private health insurance as well as aged and nursing care service providers.29 The implication is that Australia’s federalism is turning towards centralization of power on the Commonwealth government rather than diffusing it to the State governments. Furthermore, individual states are growingly relying on Commonwealth government for financial resources. Notwithstanding the fact that the Commonwealth government delivers slightly more than half of public services, it controls more than 80 per cent of all national revenue.30 Moreover, the Commonwealth government has lately commanded greater authority in the regulation of how the funds it provides to state governments should be utilized.31 With the currentsituation where there is an extensive centralization of both legislative and financial control by the Commonwealth government, its superiority over State governments is increasing by the day. Additionally, the current state of Australian Federalism has been criticized due to a number of inherent weaknesses arising out of policy conflicts. For instance, policy conflicts are responsible for the high levels of overlap between expected service delivery from the commonwealth and individual state governments. Such overlapping roles and responsibilities have resulted in widespread confusion between the two levels of government. Australia’s federal system of government has been blamed to loss of public accountability since there is substantial overlap between the roles and responsibilities of state and the Commonwealth governments. This has resulted in blame-shifting at the expense of accountability.32 Finally, the Commonwealth government has continuously misused its superiority in matters of legislative and revenue control thereby undermining the benefits that accrue out of federalism. Furthermore, such attendance has led to the exacerbation of challenges facing federalism such as duplication of government responsibilities. Obstacles of Australian federalism The above weaknesses of Australian federalism can be linked to the presence of a number of obstacles and impediments. These obstacles relate to political, legal and social factors in different measures. For instance, the Australian electorate has continuously rejected any proposal aimed at increasing the commonwealth government’s powers and authority through a constitutional amendment. This is because there is a perception that even with the current powers and authority, the Commonwealth government has tended to monopolize access to Australia’s primary sources of revenue. Moreover, even the High court in a number of its rulings has expressed its objection to the Commonwealth government’s undertaking to enhance its authority over individual state jurisdictions even in cases where such an extension would be a matter of national interest. Another obstacle to federalism in Australia is that the constitution has a number of constraints on the Commonwealth government’s legislative authority.33 For instance, the Australian constitution requires the Commonwealth government to seek state governments’ consent in areas such as industrial relations.34 In some situations, some State governments have demonstrated some level of resistance to collaborating with the Commonwealth government where they think that their objectives are in conflict with those of the Commonwealth government.In addition, the Commonwealth government lacks adequate capacity to institute policy formulations that are capable of meeting individual needs of each state. This lack of capacity undermines effective service delivery as per regional and local needs. Coupled with divergent and opposing political agenda, the effectiveness of Australia’s federalism has largely been undermined. This is particularly evident with political party pressures influencing the form of federal governance of the day.35 The Need for Modest Reforms to Australian Federalism In order to addresses the various obstacles and challenges that have characterized Australia’s federal system of government, there is an urgent necessity for minor to modest reforms to enhance efficiency. This is because it is incontestable that there is an urgent need for harmonization and standardization of the Australian regulatory framework if the benefits of federalism are to be realized in totality. In addition, there is a compelling necessity for the clarification of all levels of governments’ roles and responsibilities to avoid conflicts and unnecessary contests in public service deliver by either level of government. This should be anchored within the Commonwealth Constitution in order to enhance Failure to institute these reforms will result in Australia’s federal system of government becoming a barrier to Australia’s prosperity in all spheres of life. Specifically, it has become apparent that with more than one level of government, there have been widespread cases of the duplication of government roles and responsibilities. Consequently, there is a need to ensure each tier of government’s roles and responsibilities are distinctly spelt out to avoid any form of confusion. This can be further enhanced by improving various mechanisms instituted to step up inter-governmental cooperation. Moreover, there is a need for both tiers of government to consider referral of their powers and responsibilities where it is clear that not doing so will result in duplication of services and diminished efficiency. For instance, the Commonwealth government should refrain from engaging in the delivery of services which state and local governments are well placed to offer. Likewise, State governments should allow and support the Commonwealth government’s service delivery within their jurisdictions, where it is best suited to do so. Conclusion Australia’s federal system of government entails sharing of powers and authority across the different tiers of governments. Each has its own set of responsibilities although there are cases where such roles overlap between the Commonwealth and the State governments resulting in confusion. However, there are clear benefits and advantages of embracing the federal system of Government in Australia. Nonetheless, such benefits can further be enhanced through instituting minor reforms of the current system rather than radical reforms. The fact that there is lack of clarity on the specific roles and responsibilities of the Commonwealth and State governments is largely to blame for the increasing criticism of Australia’s federal system of government. This is presenting a major impediment to Australia’s prosperity in terms of political economic and social aspects. For instance, the lack of clear lines of responsibilities has undermined public accountability as it is not clear which form of government should be put to task for substandard service delivery. As a result, there is an urgent need for minor to modest reforms of Australia’s federal system of government by focusing on enhanced collaboration between State and the Commonwealth government. Read More