I sort of missed the evolution over time of Right wing think tank increasing support for strict compliance with constitutional provisions and getting all aroused by the prospect of increased State responsibilities and less Commonwealth involvement. They're currently Hi 5-ing themselves over the High Court making Commonwealth funding to assist programs within States a trickier thing.
It seems its all to do with fairly fanciful ideas of competitive Federalism being obviously A Good Thing. Also, they'll run with any idea as long as it means government being smaller, somewhere.
While I don't doubt that States sometimes come up with novel and better ways of doing things which are then followed by other States, you can't dismiss the "race to the bottom" effect of such competition either. And certainly, for some workers (Defence Force in particular) the lack of certain standardised things between States (like school curriculum) had long made movement around the country a disruptive pain. Now the likes of Judith Sloan are all for differentiation between States' schools again, regardless of the effects on worker mobility which she presumably thinks is a good thing.
It's also far from obvious to me that IPA types get any increase in their much desired minimal government if the States get their responsibilities re-inflated. After all, look at things like anti outlay bikie legislation: what small government types probably consider the most illiberal laws in the country are from State parliaments.
I am of the view that you get more intelligent government the higher up the Federal chain you go; you may not think much of politicians at any level, but for the spectacularly ill qualified, eccentric and prone to corruption, look no further than your State governments. For this reason alone, I have been generally happy with the greater role of the Feds in matters over the decades, and yet again find the Right wing ideologues wanting worse outcomes for the public simply due to their ideology.
No comments:
Post a Comment