The Mandarin is now moving into its third year of publishing, and we're immensely proud to have you invest your time with us. However, government isn'
The purpose of the standards is to set out how the public sector employment principles, which are established in legislation, are to be applied in the
Government agencies around Australia are standing up to support the campaign to end violence against women today for White Ribbon Day.
ALL THINGS P: The federal government wants to know which open data would be most useful to business, researc
If policymakers are involved in commissioning and support research, how will they know they're getting bang for buck? What’s the best way to measure
We recently moved our readers to a new system. You may need to reset your password here to login.
Not a member ? Join here for free.
Forgot your password?
Home Features Michael Keating: the future of federalism
Text size :
TAGS Constitutional basis of taxation in Australia, federalism white paper, federation, Goods and Services Tax, Taxation in Australia, Tony Abbott
The federation white paper was announced to ‘create a more rational system of government for the nation that we have undoubtedly have become’. The question it must answer is whether to share responsibilities or will jurisdictions be masters of their own domain. Former top bureaucrat Michael Keating unpacks the options:
Six months ago Tony Abbott announced that through the federation white paper he wanted to “create a more rational system of government for the nation that we have undoubtedly have become”. A worth aspiration, but what does it mean in reality?
Fundamentally there are two contending doctrines regarding the future of federal-state relations in Australia. One view is that we should be working towards a clearer separation of the respective roles and responsibilities of each of the two levels of Government. The other view is that the two levels of government inevitably have to share responsibilities, and that the best way forward must be a system of cooperative federalism based on better arrangements for sharing joint responsibilities in the future.
This article will examine each of these two contending viewpoints, and their respective implications for the future of our federal system of governance. The conclusion is that each viewpoint has its merits, and in the best traditions of Australian public policy pragmatism, an amalgam of the two based on the nature of the different responsibilities for each of the different functions is probably the best outcome.
There is considerable intellectual attraction in the philosophical proposition that our system of government should be arranged so that:
Receive unlimited access, get all the latest public sector news and features, plus The Juice, our daily news update sent direct to your inbox.
The Mandarin is where Australia's public sector leaders discuss their work and the issues faced within modern bureaucracy. Join today to discover the latest in public administration thinking and news from our dedicated reporters, current and former agency heads and senior executives.
Michael Keating is a former top senior executive in the Australian Public Service, having been secretary of several federal departments including Prime Minister and Cabinet during the Paul Keating government, Finance, and Employment and Industrial Relations.
Read Related Content