Skip to main content

Work Choices, Oz Finances and Federalism

The High Court is presently hearing a case brought before it by the Union movement and the various States challenging the new IR laws.

The nub of the case is that the Commonwealth has exceeded its Constitutional powers in introducing the new Work Choices legislation. In the final analysis the case will not turn on whether the legislation is fair or reasonable. Either the Commonwealth had the power to make the IR laws or it did not.

Underlying all of this is a more critical question - Federalism and how the country ticks. There are all the constant arguments and carping about lack of funds in the States to run hospitals and schools, etc. etc. Of course the Commonwealth reaps the benefit of all that GST it collects - and then doles out to the States.

As Professor George Williams says in his piece on Perspective on ABC Radio National last night:

"A battle has been running all year between the State and federal governments over the distribution of GST revenue worth 39 billion dollars. The latest salvos have included hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on TV and newspaper ads by the federal and NSW governments.

While this debate has great financial consequences, it masks the larger problem. It is just one symptom of our dysfunctional federal system."

As Williams also says:

"We need to fix our federal problems. In doing so we need to ask ourselves what should be the role of the States more than a century after we brought about our Federation."

Read the entire thought-provoking and relevant piece [you can also download it from the ABC on line if you want] here.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more