Delegatus non potest delegare: Defining the role of ministerial advisors

This report was commisioned by tb

Leadership in the Liberal Party: Bolte, Askin and the Post-War Ascendancy

The formation of the Liberal Party of Australia in the mid-1940s heralded a new effort to stem the tide of government regulation that had grown with Labor Party rule in the latter years of World War II and immediately after. It was not until 1949 that the party gained office at Federal level, beginning what was to be a record unbroken term of 23 years, but its efforts faltered at State level in Victoria, where the party was divided, and in New South Wales, where Labor was seemingly entrenched. The fortunes were reversed with the rise to leadership of men who bore a different stamp to their predecessors, and were in many ways atypical Liberals: Henry Bolte in Victoria and Robin Askin in New South Wales. Bolte, a farmer, and Askin, a bank officer, had served as non-commissioned officers in World War II and rose to lead parties whose members who had served in the war were predominantly of the officer class. In each case, their man management skills put an end to division and destabilisation in their parties, and they went on to serve record terms as Liberal leaders in their respective States, Bolte 1955-72 and Askin 1965-75. Neither was ever challenged in their leadership and each chose the time and nature of his departure from politics, a rarity among Australian political leaders. Their careers are traced here in the context of the Liberal revival and the heightened expectations of the post-war years when the Liberal Party reached an ascendancy, governing for a brief time in 1969-70 in all Australian States as well as the Commonwealth. Their leadership is also examined in the broader context of leadership in the Liberal Party, and also in the ways in which the new party sought to engage with and appeal to a wider range of voters than had traditionally been attracted to the non-Labor parties

[Book Review] Public Opinion, Campaign Politics and Media Audiences: New Australian Perspectives

Public Opinion, Campaign Politics and Media Audiences: New Australian Perspectives. Edited by Bridget Griffin-Foley and Sean Scalmer (Carlton: Melbourne University Press, 2017), pp. vi + 256 AU$79.99 (cloth); AU$59.99 (pb); AU$16.99 (eBook)

A rewarding experiment in SA

By bringing two non-Labor parliamentarians into cabinet, Mike Rann has broadened his government\u27s support, writes Norman Abjorensen AUSTRALIA’S political culture is intensely adversarial. Historically, a winner-takes-all approach is the dominant characteristic usually displayed by parties that win elections. But that’s changing - in at least one jurisdiction in Australia, where a remarkable experiment in democracy is taking place and, along with it, a significant rewriting of the Westminster system of cabinet government. I am talking of South Australia - the state that was regarded as a social laboratory under the Dunstan government three decades ago and now, under another Labor Premier, Mike Rann, is becoming something of a political lab. Rann has done the unthinkable for a Labor premier, having appointed two non-Labor members to his cabinet. The imperative for these unusual and highly unorthodox appointments in the wake of the inconclusive 2002 election had nothing to do with high-mindedness and everything to do with political survival for a minority government dependent on the support of an increasingly erratic former Liberal, who became Speaker. The Rann government quietly explored other ways of shoring up its numbers, opening talks with the independents. In December 2002, Rann announced that he had offered a portfolio which had been accepted by the independent member for Mount Gambier, Rory McEwen, a former member of the Liberal Party. Just over eighteen months later, Rann again moved with unexpected boldness by appointing to cabinet the lone National in the parliament, Karlene Maywald, member for Chaffey, in a new portfolio of the Murray River. To clinch the deal with the two non-Labor ministers, premier Rann had them sign agreements that, unlike ministers anywhere else in the Westminster system, enabled them to opt out of the principle of collective responsibility and cabinet solidarity on certain issues, and not be required always to vote with the government. Their privileged positions were further distinguished by his promise that should Labor retain office in 2006 (which it did), they would be guaranteed places in the cabinet, no matter if Labor had a majority or not (which it has now). The agreements signed represent some of the most significant departures from the Westminster convention yet enacted anywhere, and are contained in a remarkable document drawn up by the late Bradley Selway, then South Australia’s Solicitor-General, later a Federal Court judge. Clause E, for example, states: “The Premier and the Minister agree that the Minister will have a special position in Cabinet in that, by reason of his/her non-affiliation with the Labor Party, there is a class of issues in respect of which it will not always be possible for the Minister to be bound by a Cabinet decision...” For political junkies, the experiment is as fascinating as it is unique, but for ordinary South Australians it scarcely figures on the radar. As Karlene Maywald puts it, people are more interested in seeing a good job done in government than caring very much about which badge it wears; issues take precedence over ideology. Both ministers have exercised their right of dissent on a number of issues, most notably over industrial relations; both say this had not affected their positions in any way and that the agreements have been honoured in the spirit as well as the letter. The unusual appointments in the usually tribal Labor Party not only brought breathing space for Labor in the previous parliament, but they have given the Rann government a broader community base than it would otherwise have, with senior Labor figures conceding that Maywald and McEwen often contribute a different perspective to cabinet discussion. The political payoff for Rann in his second term is immense, and opinion polls consistently rank him as Australia’s most popular leader. Not only has he been able to blunt criticism from the opposition of his already conservative government, he has managed to take the edge off that public disillusionment about politicians always squabbling among themselves over petty issues and seeking to score points at the other side’s expense. However, it’s an experiment unlikely to be repeated elsewhere in the foreseeable future, owing its genesis almost entirely to the peculiarities of South Australian politics and a premier prepared to think laterally. • Norman Abjorensen is a member of the Democratic Audit of Australia at the Australian National University. Photo: Premier Mike Rann. AAP Image/Alan Porrit

Australia’s tenacious pay gap

Forty-one years after the declaration of the principle of equal pay, we’re still not there, writes Norman Abjorensen in Inside Story • WOMEN have had the vote in Australia for more than a century, and discrimination on the grounds of sex or marital status has long been illegal in defined areas such as employment, education and the provision of goods and services. And yet, despite all these apparent gains in the pursuit of equality, women continue to earn less on average than men… Read the full article Photo: Andrew Jeffre

The Liberal Party’s faction problem

It’s not just Labor that suffers from the inordinate influence of its NSW right wing One of the enduring myths of Australian politics is that only the Labor Party has factions, and the unhealthy tribalism that often goes with them. Wrong: the Liberal Party is just as factional, albeit in a looser sense, and just as tribal, if not more so. Labor’s best-known faction, the NSW Right, has passed into folklore as a ruthless (yet sometimes dazzlingly inept) political machine – a cross between Tammany Hall and the Mafia. But the same state’s Liberal right wing (itself made up of sub-factions) flies under the radar, except when its excesses occasionally hit the headlines. It is a formidable, if occasionally unpredictable, influence on the Abbott government, anchoring it firmly to the right… Read the full articl

Rudd's decisive defeat

By challenging – and decisively losing – Kevin Rudd has at least done Julia Gillard a favour or two, writes Norman Abjorensen in Inside Story • KEVIN Rudd – the man with a great future behind him – is likely to leave an ambiguous legacy now that his immediate ambitions to seize back the prime ministership have been thwarted, apparently decisively. While he will always be acknowledged within the Labor Party for his feat of winning government from John Howard in 2007, he can now be listed among Labor’s great wreckers in the company of Billy Hughes, Jack Lang and Vince Gair… Read the full article &nbsp