Peter Martin linked to the the Pincus Report [pdf] on federalism. The report fails it as it assumes that federalism is chosen as an organisational system to provide government services. This is a common misperception of Australian political academics and commentators.
Federalism is to enforce limit government. It is to minimise the power of a central government, to stop absolute power in the executive, to halt arbitrary government and to protect against tyranny.
Liberty is a word that is missing from the Australian political lexicon. (reply)
Christian Kerr comments on the recent COAG meeting:
But if the premiers want movement on these issues, why do they need to wait for the Commonwealth? Why don't the states take a lead?He is absolutely correct. Even with the fiscal imbalance there is nothing budgetary wise stopping the States ignoring the national government and making/implementing policy. (more)
Rudd stated:
"What I'm signalling firmly, strongly today is it's time for the buck-passing to end and it's time for the real work, with sleeves rolled up, to begin," Mr Rudd said yesterday. "These are huge challenges for the nation," Mr Rudd said. "The time for buck passing has come and gone. I think the Australian people are tired, just sick and tired of all the excuses which their politicians have served up for so long as to why progress can't be realised in these critical areas of public policy need."The only reason buck passing is possible is because the national government has delved so deeply into the states' revenue stream and responsibilities. We have a broken federal system which has been smashed through successive anti-federalist Governments and High Courts. A government is only supposed to raise enough revenue from taxes to support itself and no more. This is not the case in Australia as the national government does 85% of all taxation in the country. Half of the state budgets are dependent on nationally raised taxation revenue such as the GST and Grants. The quickest way to fix federalism in Australia is dump the GST and Grant system. States would become responsible for meeting their own budgetary needs. This would force them to revisit their agreement allowing the national government to tax income exclusively, curbing the national government's fiscal power by eroding their monopoly on income taxation. (more)
Federations are defined by having a national character and a federal character. For instance the House of Representatives in Australia's parliament is organised with a national character while the Senate has a federal character. The House has equal sized electorates and single members, while the Senate has the states as its electoral boundaries and each state has an equal number of members. So the Senate represents the states, which are the federal components of the Federation, while the House represents the Australian people, which is the national character of the government.
One of the innovations of American constitutional design was to put the national and federal characters into tension so that the national government would not grow to consume the states, yet have enough national character that the states would not assert themselves over the national government. This vertical balance of powers in the federation was designed to protect liberty and cemented through constitutional limited government.
One of the blind spots in Australian politics is that federalism is ignored as a technology to ensure liberty and natural rights. Too often people assume the role of government is service delivery, not limited government, and seek to order the political structures accordingly. (more)
Ken Parish has an article on federalism, or the lack thereof in the case of the Northern Territory and how that has led the National Government to remove property rights on an arbitrary basis. Constitutionalism and vertical separation of powers through a federalist political structure is important in maintaining liberty and basic rights. (reply)
There is no valid reason of governance or constitutional allowance for the federal government to put a plebiscite on the Queensland council redistricting during the federal election. It is outside the national governments jurisdiction and further "the mergers will be law when any ballots are held".
I fully agree with the argument that the councils should have home rule and the legislative ability to construct their own charters rather than have the state government do it, but this is nothing to do with the national government. (more)
Robert McCloskey writes on the Marshall Supreme Court: "It is hardly surprising that the Supreme Court, an intrinsically national institution, should be drawn to the doctrine of nationalism."
Andrew Ingliss-Clark used the American experience of federalism by mixing the national and federal character together in the Australian Constitution to place checks and balances such that pure nationalism and absolutist state rights could not dominate the other. However, like the US system, the High Court in Australia is a purely national institution. It has no federal character. (more)
Power politics dominates the international scene and the US as the most powerful nation on the planet plays power politics hard. Power politics is also how the vertical power balance in a federal system is conducted. For instance in the US California tends to be very independent of the US national government. This is due to a mix of size, economic power and ability to raise revenue to support independent policy. So much so that Californian policy ends up influencing federal policies.
Australia has a far more centralised federal system which despite NSW's dominance of GDP at 33% has not translated into independent policy and political power since WWII. The main imbalance is tax, but a nationalist high court has helped as has a national government selective in its fights. (more)
With the national government digging its selective anti-federalist paws into the Tasmanian Health System it might be a good time to look at the nationalist (as opposed to federalist) structure of government. This usually takes the form of state abolition; where the states are seen as the unnecessary and duplicative level of government. This view has become increasing popular with all the federal parties in the Australian system and numerous advocacy groups. (more)
Via Westminster Wisdom, Vino discusses assymetrical devolution of the British political system.
Australia uses the technology of federalism and a written constitution to separate the political responsibilities between the national government and the states.
The British constitution is a mix of practice, convention and statutes over time but until recently there has not been a growing layer of government outside the national parliament in London and the local councils.
The devolution and establishment of Scottish parliament, the Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland parliament, without the clear cut separations of federalism or confederacy have raised some issues. (more)
