Beyond Federation Conference 9/10 July 2005
Address by
Charles S Mollison
Chairman, The Foundation for National Renewal
Introduction
The following notes were used to expand a Powerpoint presentation.
Martin Luther King said, “I have a dream!” And that dream has, to a large extent, come true.
Well I have a dream, too. It is a dream for Australia. My dream is for a better system of gov't. A system designed in the 21st Century. A system that will take us through this century and into the next.
It is my belief that the BEST way to abolish State Gov'ts or to make any other changes to our system of gov't; is to change the Constitution. It may not be the ONLY way; but it is the best way. And if we are going to change our Constitution, we should do the job properly and do a thorough review of the whole Constitution.
We have been advocating this change for ten years. But it is only recently that we see every man & his dog advocating change in one way or another.
Tony Abbott wants to change the health system.
Brendon Nelson wants to change the Education system.
Several people advocate change to the railways.
John Howard wants to change the Industrial Relations system: and
Peter Costello wants to change the fiscal arrangements with the States.
There is no doubt that all these things are broke.
It is unfortunate that there is still little recognition of the fact that piecemeal changes will not fix our problems and could make things worse.
Slide 1
The idea with this presentation is to give you the detail on one particular Model that could replace the current Federal system of gov't.
The Model Explained
This solution to our problem is referred to as the Mollison Model only because I am presenting it to you.
I have put this model together by gleaning the best ideas from a dozen forums such as this one.
My plan is to give you an overall look at the model first and then to examine each of the criteria in more detail.
Slide 2
The model envisages
Line 1.
A National Gov't & Approx 100 Regions each with its own Parliament.
The final number of regions will depend on practicalities that will only become apparent when we actually get around to delineating regions. It might end up being 80 or 120.
Line 2.
We envisage the Regions would have Populations of between 90,000 and 250,000 people.
Line 3.
The National Government would be responsible for all policy.
Line 4.
There would be only one set of laws instead of having different laws in each State as we currently endure.
Line 5.
The National Gov't would retain responsibility to implement such things as Defence, Foreign Affairs, Customs, Immigration, etc.
Line 6.
The Regional Gov'ts would become responsible for implementing everything else.
Slide 3.
Now lets talk about these 100 or so Regions
Line 1.
When delineating the Regions, one of the prime considerations will be to base them, wherever possible, on Water Catchment Areas.
Line 2.
The 100 Regional Gov'ts will be responsible for delivering all services except those we just talked about remaining with the National Gov't.
Regional governments would deliver all those services currently delivered by local and State Gov'ts including health, education, welfare.
Line 3.
Regional Governments would have, on average, 40 Members of Parliament
Average because Regions with a small population would have less MPs and those with a large population; more MPs.
Line 4.
And these Regional MPs would be elected from tiny, single member electorates of only 5000 voters.
Line 5.
Electors would have the power to recall their representative if they prove unsatisfactory or continually fail to vote as expected by their constituents.
This applies to both the National and the Regional Parliaments.
Slide 4:
Now lets have a look at the National Parliament.
The National Parliament; that is, the parliament that passes all the laws and lays down national policy, is not made up of any Joe blow who happens to win a seat in some obscure electorate and is gone again at the next election.
Line 1.
The National Parl't would have both a H of R & a Senate.
The Parliament, both the Senate & the H of R, would be made up of experienced and proven representatives elected by the Regional Parl'ts from the best of their members.
Line 2.
Line 3.
With one Senator & two Members of the H of Rs per Region, this would give 100 Senators and 200 H of R.
Line 4.
The electors (that is, the Regional Parl'ts) would have power to recall the regional representatives and hold another election.
Finish of overview.
Now let's have a closer look at these Regions.
Slide 5.
There are a number of advantages that would accrue from having 100 Regions instead of 6 States, 2 Territories and 670 local governments.
Line 1
This would mean that the Regions are small enough to allow Intimacy of government at the Regional Level. Compare a maximum population of a Region of 250,000 with the 6 million of NSW or even the 1.5 million pop of SA.
Line 2
But when compared to Local Gov't as we now have, these Regions would allow for a parliament large enough to handle a wide range of responsibilities.
Line 3
They would also be large enough to be viable, autonomous regions. And large enough to allow economy of scale in a wide range of activities.
Line 4
100 Regions would also give a big boost to decentralisation - 100 `Capitals' instead of Seven.
Line 5. And unlike the plight of current State & Local Gov't, these Regions would have a constitutionally guaranteed % of national revenue.
Now if we look at the idea of having Regions of varying sizes.
Slide 6.
Populations of 90,000 to 250,000
This range may have to be extended depending on practicalities when we get down to delineating Regions; particularly those in the outback. However, this model is designed to cope with that.
Line 1.
This flexibility in size of population would not only facilitate introduction of the new system; but also planning it in the first place.
Line 2.
Each Region would be delineated by grouping electorates of 5000 voters. That is, somewhere between 18 and 50 of these electorates would make up a region.
Line 3.
In this way, the principle of `One-vote-one-value' is retained.
Line 4.
Regions with larger populations could have more problems. This Model gives them more MPs to handle that.
Line 5.
Allowing more sparsely populated areas to have Regions with smaller populations means land areas can be of manageable sizes.
Line 6.
Populations of this size are large enough to allow a sense of identity. We could well have Region of Origin matches to rival State of Origin.
Now let's have a look at how we would delineate these Regions.
Slide 7.
The prime criteria would be that they be based on water catchment areas wherever possible
Line 1. This would provide logical, natural boundaries.
Line 2. It would give Regions enormous control over the environment of their Region.
Line 3. It would also give Regions control over water supply and facilitate the management of effluent.
Line 4. And it would facilitate communications. The Regional Gov't would not have to co-ordinate and haggle with a neighbouring government about where bridges should go or who should pay for them. Because the Regional Government owns both sides of the river, they would be able to just get on with it.
However, in some cases (particularly in the outback) it could well be impractical to base Regional boundaries on catchment areas. In that case, boundaries would be delineated using
Line 5. Social and/or Economic factors as the criteria for deciding boundaries.
Slide 8. Regional Parliaments
You will recall I mentioned the Regions would be allocated a fixed % of gross revenue. Using current budget figures we calculate that expenditure on those activities we plan for the national Gov't would gobble up about 20% of national revenue.
That would leave 80% of Nat Revenue to be distributed to Regions. Currently, local government expenditure represents only about 6% of public sector spending.
Line 1
This means Regional Parliaments are very powerful. They are not jumped up Local Government bodies.
Line 2
However, because Regions only average 200,000 people, the organisations delivering government services are `Close to the People'.
Line 3
And because the MPs are elected from tiny electorates, we get very intimate representation.
Line 4
And yet, the parliaments will be large enough to handle a wide range of responsibilities thus overcoming a deficiency of the ACT government that does not have enough members - each ACT Minister has a number of portfolios.
Line 5
Because we are talking about a relatively small area, with Representatives elected by tiny electorates, these Regional Parliaments would be more representative and accountable than anything we have seen in the past.
Line 6
At the same time, these Parliaments (about 40 MPs) will be small enough to allow effective debate.
Let's look at how these Regional MPs are elected.
Slide 9. 5000 Voter Electorates
These small electorates are an essential element of this Model. (Currently, a Federal House of Reps electorate is about 80,000 voters.)
Line 1
Small enough to allow effective campaigning. Even a very poor independent candidate could knock on every door in such an electorate.
Line 2
Eliminates taxpayer funded electoral allowances (This involves $millions.)
Line 3
Undermines power of political parties.
Line 4
Each Member of a Regional parliament will represent only 5,000 voters. This is very intimate representation.
Line 5
And will give us representation of communities rather than representation of Political Parties.
Slide 10. Regional delivery of all other services
These Regional Parliaments would be responsible for the delivery of all government services except those we spoke about before.
Line 1
And because these Regions are so much smaller than our current States, this delivery would develop a very “close to the People” relationship.
Line 2
And the smallness will also enhance accountability.
Line 3
What is more, each Region will be able to design a delivery structure to suit their Region.
Line 4
It will also be possible for a close relationship to be forged between politicians and bureaucrats.
Line 5
And this can only lead to a more efficient bureaucracy.
Slide 11. Guaranteed % of Revenue to Regions
This Model envisages that the Constitution will guarantee a set % of revenue to the Regions. On current calculations that % would be in the vicinity of 80%.
Line 1.
Such guaranteed revenue would establish and maintain Regional Autonomy.
Line 2.
This ironclad guarantee would facilitate planning.
Line 3.
It would eliminate political manipulation and pork barrelling.
Line 4.
It would prevent centralisation.
Line 5.
And it would promote accountability.
Are you starting to get a feel for these regions?
They have a population averaging 200,000 people.
Each Region has a single-house parliament of approx 40 MPs and each of these MPs are elected from tiny electorates of only 5000 voters.
And these Regional Governments would be responsible for the delivery of all government services except things such as Defence and Foreign Affairs that are obviously better done at a national level.
Slide 12. Now let us go back to the National Parliament
Line 1. This National Government would be responsible for all policy.
Line 2. And, as it would be the only law-making parliament, we would have only one set of laws nationwide.
Line 3. Common policy and common laws nation-wide would greatly facilitate mobility of the population.
Line 4. It would simplify business compliance. Currently, more than 90% of business in Australia is conducted within a State. A major reason for this is the need to conform to half a dozen different requirements.
Line 5. This simplicity and mobility will in turn facilitate employment.
Line 6. And, need I say it; all this will reduce the need for thousands of bureaucrats.
Slide 13.
Line 1. Each Region would have one Senator & two Representatives in the National Parliament.
Although this could mean a bigger National Parliament than we have now, there would be less politicians overall. (4,300 instead of 7,300 now)
Line 2. Why retain the Senate? If you look at most other civilisations past & present, you will find the elders exercising governance.
Line 3. There is also strong argument for a house of review; particularly to identify unforseen outcomes.
Line 4. And there is also value in Senate Committees.
Line 5. However, this model envisages that laws would only be initiated in the Lower House.
Slide 14. National Parliament elected by and from Regional Parliaments
What does this mean? It means that National politicians are elected by Regional Parliaments from among their members. Why do it this way?
Line 1
It means we have only experienced representatives in the National Parliament.
Line 2
Retains the best of representatives in government. There is much support for the view that politicians should be restricted in the number of terms they can serve. This system allows for that policy and at the same time provides an avenue for the best of the bunch to be retained in government.
Line 3
This model envisages National Parliament MPs being required to sit in their Regional Parliament for 3 or 4 days each month. Such a requirement will really facilitate accountability.
Line 4
It would also enhance effective representation. The Regional Parliamentarians would be able to ensure that Regional concerns are aired in the National Parliament instead of individual citizens trying to keep track.
Line 5
Retains voter value without increasing the number of politicians and it greatly facilitates recall of unsatisfactory politicians.
Line 6
Last but not least, this system reduces the number of Elections.
Slide 15. National Government Responsibilities
We envisage the National Parliament being responsible for establishing national policy on most aspects of governance and being the sole law-making Parliament in the country.
Line 1
This is a logical division of responsibilities.
In addition, the National Parliament would retain responsibility for
Line 2. Defence
Line 3. FA
Line 4. Customs
Line 5. Immigration
Line 5. Quarantine
Line 6. International trade and commerce.
XX
This represents no additions but the Regions would take on responsibility for Health, Education, Welfare, etc currently State and Federal responsibilities.
Slide 16.
The advantages of this Model are considered to be:
Line 1. We will save about $30 billion every year. However, even if it didn't save one red cent, it would be a much better system of government in that:
Line 2. It would bring government closer to the People and that, in turn:
Line 3. Will enhance our democracy.
Line 4. It would streamline business compliance and this has to be a big plus for the economy.
Line 5. It would stop the buck-passing and that has to be a big plus for accountability.
Line 6. It would help save the environment by having Regions based on water catchment areas and smaller areas of responsibility.
Line 7. The idea of having one policy for the whole nation and one set of laws nation-wide needs no embellishment.
And last but not least;
Line 8. It will restore sovereignty to the People.
Conclusion
Ladies & Gentlemen
Slide 17
This regional model:
Retains a type of federal structure whereas the Nat/Local model falls more in the category of a unitary system. Professor Geoffrey de Q Walker, who has given this subject a great deal of study, has concluded that a unitary system gobbles up a greater proportion of GDP than does a federal system.
I believe this system will
Line 1
Eliminate many of the current ills of government and society. No more “buck-passing”, “pork-barrelling”, remoteness or lack of accountability.
Line 2
It allows an appropriate allocation of responsibilities to both national and sub-national governments.
Line 3
It will reduce the Number of politicians across the country and will reduce the size of the bureaucracy in Canberra
Line 4
It is simple in structure, easily understood and is achievable without major disruption.
Line 5
It will cope with social and technological change and provide huge scope for innovation and diversity.
Line 6
It will save waste in government spending, and
Line 7
Last but not least, it will empower the People and thereby enhance democracy.
Special Notes
Power of recall
This would apply to both levels of government. I don't envisage it being used all that often, but
Line 1
It would certainly enhance accountability.
Line 2
And symbolically it is important because it retains power in the hands of the People
Line 3
It would provide a means of eliminating `rogue' representatives
Line 4
But more importantly, it would encourage consultation with constituents
Line 5
All these things empower the People and I think that an empowered people will take more interest in public policy. Who knows? We might see the end of the Great Australian Apathy.
Deficiencies of the National/Local Model
100 sub-national gov'ts is manageable. 700 sub-national gov'ts would not be easily managed.
The Regional Model achieves “close to the People” delivery of services.
It might be argued that “Local Governments” could give “even closer to the people” delivery of services.
However, if we have 700 sub-national gov'ts, each of those must necessarily be small. Otherwise we have an enormous increase in the number of politicians. These small councils would not be capable of delivering the wide range of services expected of gov'ts these days.
Therefore, many gov't services would have to be delivered by the National Gov't. This would necessitate an increase in the size of the Canberra bureaucracy. And we all know that huge bureaucracies are inherently inefficient.
This model REDUCES the number of politicians
This model also reduces the bureaucracy in Canberra
There would of course be bureaucracies in each of the 100 Regions. However, these would absorb those currently employed by the 700 councils and those currently employed by State Governments. And, being relatively small, they would not suffer the inefficiencies inherent in huge bureaucracies.
Conversely, we have government services being delivered by organisations close to the people. The People can talk direct to the responsible bureaucrat and/or politician and he will have the authority to make a decision.
This allocation of responsibilities to the national and the sub-national governments, avoids duplication and overlap that would be inevitable if we retain 700 local gov'ts
.
In the system I have outlined to you in this model, liaison and feedback between the two levels of government is enhanced. It is facilitated by having National Senators and MPs elected from Regional Parliaments and reporting back to those regional parliaments every month.
10
12