Review of Australian Federalism - Essay Example

Australian Federalism By (Name) The Name of the Class (Course) Professor (Tutor) The Name of the School (University) The City and State where it is Located The Date The Australian federal system is composed of six states and several territories; formally known as Commonwealth of Australia. Australia achieved the federal state since 1901 as founded by the Commonwealth constitution. This country was initially made up of six British colonies with full self-government; that subsequently led to the United Native. Perhaps, enormous moves have been intensified towards centralization of power from the Federation. However, the decentralization has never been successfully eliminated because this political aspect has been practically inefficient. In this regard, Australian Federalism can be perceived as wanting. The institutional framework is far much complex as characterized by a constitutional crisis, overlapping leadership positions, and inability to adapt to the pressures presented by the modern political environment. Most of the matters covered by the Constitution do not allow for efficient running of the state, and thus the federal legislature and competence of the federal government would need to change. Therefore, this paper intends to explore on Australian Federalism; the positive aspects and the weaknesses of such system. The challenges presented by the proposed abolishment will also be identified. Ultimately, the most efficient way of enhancing a highly effective system of governance will be proposed. Review of Australian Federalism Australian Federalism can be dated back to the British settlements made in section XVIII and the first half of the s. XIX. During this historic time; between 1850 and 1891, a system of six self-governing colonies was set in the regions of ​​very low population density. The constitutional convention of 1891 and 1897-98 eventually led to the new constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia (1901) as approved by referendum in each colony. This system of government combined the British parliamentary system with the federal structure of the American type. The Federation comprise of six states; the New South Wales, Western Australia, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania. The Federation also includes two other self-governing regions; the Federal Capital with the Northern Territory, and Canberra (Commonwealth of Australia 2014, pp. 17). Residual powers belong to the states. The basic scheme is that of a dual federalism that affects the executive, legislative, judicial and fiscal powers, although shared competences between the two levels of government have tended to increase, including taxation and foreign affairs. The importance of financial transfers has increased, calculated by a formula that includes the respective capacities and expenditure needs. However, tax law cannot discriminate between States. The states are also governed by a parliamentary system, with the exception of the Queensland, which has a bicameral parliament. However, the second chambers do not exercise much power as the US Senate. Intergovernmental relations are intense and are exercised through a complex system of committees that seeks to ensure coordination of legislation and policies. Disputes between government and parties are usually resolved through political means rather than through the courts. As Fenna, (2014) illustrates the importance acquired by such relationships questions on the consistency of the parliamentary form of government. In 1999 the referendum attempt to turn Australia into a republic failed. Nonetheless, Australian contrary to federalism was shown during much of the twentieth century and favored the abolition of States, by concentrating all legislative power in the hands of the central government unit. However, the country failed successfully to implement her plan to centralize competencies because some of the politicians defended federalism. The impact of globalization and multiculturalism has affected the Australian federal practice as seen in the recent years. As such, the Federation has intervened in areas such as human rights or the internal market environment, after consultation with the States (Council of Intergovernmental Agreements). It has also been legislated and has exercised against racial discrimination and for Aboriginal people policies. The latter are of the difficulties of access to the Northern Territory to the category of the federal state (Fenna, 2004). Reasons for the Adoption of a Decentralized Political System Perhaps, it was likely for Australia to adopt a decentralized political system since its foundation as a state. As based on the federal constitution, a carefully negotiated agreement between the six existing autonomous colonies, the states would not give up too much power in favor of a new central government. In this respect, decentralization of power was an ideal agreement that would preserve the colonies in the context of the six initial states. Australian colonies considered forming a federation as propelled by several reasons, which include; the desire to have one voice on issues such as defense, immigration, unionization, economic growth and hope. Substantial feelings about developing national union were also on the list. (Wanna, 2009). The Competency of the Australian Federal System The next millennium following Australian colonization saw the establishment of vast colonies across Australia (Business Council of Australia, 2006). The Federation was first raised in 1850; however, formal negotiations and design of a possible federal Constitution did not begin until the early 1890s. Constitution was designed for two constitutional conventions in 1891 and 1897 through to 1898. The second convention agreed on a constitutional text as approved through a referendum. The colonial government successfully passed the creation of each of the six colonies. (Wanna, 2009). In terms of stages, the Government was relatively decentralized during the first 10-20 years but since then, the federation has been progressively centralized. Perhaps, it could be argued that the Australian Federation has proved steady and thriving during the first millennium of its formation. The country’s Federal system is formulated on a special mix of governmental features, the British model, and a powerful Senate. In this respect, Australian federalism is quite close to that given by the US Constitution. However, Australian constitution addresses the federal system exclusively through, the manner of governance and delinks from addressing some essential issues, for instance, issues of freedoms and human rights. The country’s Constitution is also based on and exercised on the universal rights. This constitution is also comparatively short and carries minimal text. The brief nature of this Constitution frees the central Parliament on vast issues that ordinarily should be highly detailed in a constitution. For instance, the constitution is vague on matters of the electoral system and voting requirements. According to Fenna (2008), the Australian Constitution gives the Commonwealth (Federation) and the States individual executive institutions. As such, these levels of governments have their individual legislative systems. However, the constitution and judiciary dictate on the distribution of power across the two systems of government. The constitution institute a multifaceted federal parliament characterized with a large lower house. As such, the size of the lower house usually doubles senatorial representation. The seats of the two houses are; however, proportional to the represented population. Each of the six states is also represented equally and regardless of the population by individual voters and preferential vote and the Senate. Members who are representing the government also represent the parliament together with those affiliated with the government. The Governor General is a choice of the Prime Minister and represents the Queen and acts largely as the head of state. However, the Governor does not executive powers and thus acts as the advisor. The Supreme Courts The Federal Constitution divides the judiciary into the Federation and the States. The resulting divisions include various jurisdictional powers that are joined at the top by the Supreme Court (Fenna, 2008). In this respect, the Supreme Court retains the initial jurisdiction of resolving disputes pertaining to the Constitution and any matter concerning the state governments. The Supreme Court also extends its functions to areas whereby the Federation is a member. This federal system is characterized by an in-exclusive separation of powers. The system of governance is also not elaborated in the Constitution, but implicitly interpreted by the Supreme Court. As a result, the executive leaders and the legislature experience the reasonably fragile distinction. However, the judiciary is distinct from other institutions of the government. Nonetheless, the bodies of the federal are identical to the Federation. The Queensland State is run by the central parliament. On the other hand, the Governor General acts as a representative of the Queen in each State. The Governor is also appointed in practice and operates under the direction of the respective state governments. Several Territories and Complex structuring of Communities Australia has six Native States, dual self-ruling territories, and a number of external territories. The individual States takes an equal legal rank. Therefore, irrespective of the vast variation in the population size, all the states eventually achieve a balanced representation of the state Natives. As given in section 51 (ii) and 99, the Federation Constitution prohibits discrimination in the States as based on the tax laws, industry or trade laws (Business Council of Australia, 2006, pp. 47). The two major territories that exist in the Federation are the Australian Capital and the Northen Territory. The Northern Territory; a former component of the Australia State emerged when this region was surrendered to the Commonwealth. Australian Capital Territory, on the other hand, was separated from the New South Wales; the capital of the government federal. Nonetheless, the Northern Territory and Territory Australian Capital are self-governing territories and thus have own institutions. Even though these territories are virtually “weak,” their unique constitutional status acts as a significant pillar. Opposed to states, that formulate their rules and constitution, territories are a party to the act of the Federal Parliament. In this respect, the Parliament can repeal laws of the territories, even in matters of responsibility or events of a similar nature. Moreover, territories are never assured of senatorial representation. However, an individual territory is mandated dual senatorial seats as given by art.122 pertaining to the Parliament (Business Council of Australia, 2006). Even so, the territories do not benefit from the Constitution safeguards enjoyed by the States. Perhaps, the Constitution offers the opportunity of transforming a territory into a state; even so, the fundamentals of the Federation do not encourage the creation of new states. For instance, in the late 90s, the citizens of Northern Territory voted to become a state, but the proposal was unsuccessful (Fenna, 2014). However, with an extensive push for a reformation, creation of a state from a territory would revive someday and might then succeed, especially in the Northern Territory where such moves have been highly sensitized. Nonetheless, Australian territories and her states are considerably homogeneous. Across the country, ethnicity is least observed because Anglo-Celtic is the main culture, English being the common language while Christianity is the leading religion. Aboriginal and indigenous groups from the Torres Strait Islands, which resulted from migration, are the considerable ethnic diversity. As such, federalism fails to carry its meaning because there are no strong regional diversities of languages or cultures to appease or represent. Justification of the Australian federal system is merely based on the sheer size of Australia. Tasmania and the Western Australia states have been observed to be highly isolated geographically. The central power state and the East Coast state are highly delineated from the two states. In this respect, the need for a decentralized government cannot be overemphasized. However, the observed geographic isolation was a result of the past political events. Western Australia was reluctant to participate in the Federal membership from the beginning and also threaten recession in 1930. During that time, Western Australia citizens voted to leave the commonwealth but the changes in the federal funding system prevented this move. Of course, I high level of symmetry exists between a state and resources or material wealth. In this respect, failure to meet adequate resources may hinder the functionality of a state and thus the need to depend on the central government. Complex Constitutional Laws or Regulations As approved by the majority citizens, Australian written constitution was enacted in 1901. However, irrespective of this long period of reign, this constitution has undergone minimal changes. The original draft of the constitution came into being following a referendum conducted across all Australian colonies and subsequently passed through the Parliament. However, the process of amending the bills in this legislative document is far demanding (Grifth, 2009). Article 128 of the 1901 draft details an elaborate procedure through, which Australian Constitution can be amended. In the light of this, it is seemingly impossible to amend the Constitution because its amendment calls for majority votes from states and voters, among other aspects, which are difficult to attain. In agreement with art.128, a draft constitutional amendment must be approved by both chambers of the Parliament twice with an interval of three months. The referendum can then be conducted following a successful submission of the draft form. The Constitution states “if in a majority of states most voters approve the proposed law, and if a majority of all voters also approved the proposed law, then the reform will be approved.” In this respect, there are special provisions for amending the Australian Constitution. A change in the minimum representation of States in either of the two Houses of Parliament will make it difficult to alter the boundaries of a State. According to Grifth (2009), forty-four constitutional amendments have been submitted to a referendum since the beginning of the Federation, and only eight have been approved. Moreover, most of the reforms of the Constitution that have been successful have been minor reforms. However, a referendum reform of the 1967 led to enormous legal complexities characterized by the revoke of article 127; an article, which seemed unfair to the Aboriginal people in terms of the "population count” of the Federation and the States. Nonetheless, the constitutional reform can work well for the allocation of representatives according to the population size and the reform of article51 (xxvi). In so doing, ethnic competencies, which will cover to cover the needs of the minority, for instance, the Aboriginal population, will be achieved. The constitutional amendments that failed in this federation also included proposals, which were meant to grant extra-governmental powers to the Federals, forecasts relating to the state government, and a plan for formulation of a Republic, which would replace the anarchical system. Undeniably, amending the Australian Constitution as a means of doing away with federalism is far much challenging. For this reason, effective reforms measures would be necessary so as to avoid failure of critical reforms. Enhancing Reversed Powers As given by Commonwealth of Australia (2014), the most significant principles are those dictating the use of executive authority. The Queen accumulates power through the Prime Minister thus sending the Governor General powerless, and yet should be the leader of the state. In practice, the Governor-General is required to act in almost all cases under council elected government. However, the constitution does not provide a platform for addressing this situation of reserved powers. The Governor General would have confidence of the house as such an ideal system of governance is one that allows the Governor-General exercise powers in dismissing inefficient members of the house, dissolving the house, and approve major financial legislations. Enhancing State Powers The Federal Constitution is far complex from submitting to reforms; however, important changes might be determined by the population (Fenna, 2014). Nonetheless, Australian Constitution ought to be amended to a form that yields to constructive changes. However, a relative ease to change state constitutions may lead to undue amendments. In this regard, the legislative approach should be one that does not list all matters as exclusive to the federal government but promote an effective system of governance in the states. Autonomy of the State The federal constitution dictates the creation of the institutions of the state government. As such, the federal constitutional do not establish an absolute autonomy for the state to act autonomously. As a result, an obvious framework for the excise of the state powers lacks, leading to a scenario whereby the central government dominates nearly all the state’s aspects. Perhaps, all the major appointments are conducted by the central government. For instance, the appointment of the State governors lies with the Queen, as advised by the Prime Minister (Fenna, 2014). The Dormant Governor General The appointment of the Governor-General is a function of the central government as identified by the Prime Minister. In this respect, the governor’s position as the head of the state seems to carry minimal meaning because of the overshadowing by the central government (Fenna, 2008). As a result, the Governor General plays a “figurative” role rather than active role of administration of the state. On the other hand, the Prime Minister extends his role as a central leader to influencing the state activities. Perhaps, the states do not take any active role in the appointment procedure and thus even if the governor is to play any role in the state, such work would be attributed to the direct control of the central government. As such, the Governor General should play an active role in the state and thus eliminating the need for the prime minister or the Queen. Synchronizing the Overlapping Roles of the Senate and the House of Representatives Generally, Senators should vote according to party loyalties from the Federation. In so doing, senators will avoid voting in the state line or with a vision of state affairs. However, this observation does not point out the irrelevance of the Senate is irrelevant. Ultimately, Senate plays an essential role in the Federal system by enhancing the quorum of the Commonwealth Parliament (Business Council of Australia, 2006). As a result, small states will also have a considerable influence in selecting the prime minister and in the establishment of the parliamentary committee. Ultimately, the Supreme Court has been highly aligned toward the interests of that federal state government. The decisions of the Court on particular issues, for instance, the wide analysis of some titles of the federal legislature, have been aligned towards centralizing the operation of the federation. Therefore, the courts should be remodeled so as to prevent successfully or resolve conflicts of jurisdiction and enhance competence in litigation. Eventually, there will be a significant balance between the state and federal government in respect of the ability to legislation. Perhaps, the Court had been observed to be highly protective to the states; a move that led to an appealing competition towards states in around 1920. Therefore, such moves can be revived through effective campaigns. Reference List Business Council of Australia. 2006. Reshaping Australia’s Federation: A New Contract for Federal-State Relations. BCA Annual Review. Commonwealth of Australia. 2014. Reform of the Federation White Paper: A Federation for our Future Issue Paper 1. Fenna, A. 2008. ‘Commonwealth Fiscal Power and Australian Federalism,’ UNSW Law Journal, 3(2), pp. 79(2), pp. 509-529. Fenna, A. 2014. GST Reform a Golden Opportunity, soon to be missed by the States. Available at: https://theconversation.com/gst-reform-a-golden-opportunity-soon-to-be-missed-by-the-states-26748 [ Accessed 10 April 2015]. Fenna, A. 2014. Taxation, the States, and Redrawing our Fiscal Constitution. Available at: https://theconversation.com/taxation-the-states-and-redrawing-our-fiscal-constitution-31361 [ Accessed 10 April 2015]. Grifth, G. 2009. Managerial Federalism- COAG and the States. Briefing Paper No 10/09. Wanna, J. 2009. Common Cause: Strengthening Australia’s Cooperative Federalism. Final report to the Counsel for the Australian Federation. Read More