More discussion of federalism – Griffith Uni academics David Peetz and Mark Mourell have a pithy op/ed in the Courier-Mail today on the Commonwealth’s plan to centralise Industrial Relations laws:
But perhaps most importantly, the Commonwealth’s proposal reduces the capacity of the system to check abuses of power. By giving a much greater proportion of industrial relations power to the Commonwealth, the likelihood of extremist policies favouring, or disadvantaging, one side or the other in the employment relationship is increased substantially.
This is especially so when a Commonwealth government has control of both houses of parliament. The system of checks and balances in the federal system of government is designed in part to protect against abuse of power by the central government.
The unilateral assumption of all power concerning industrial relations in corporations would represent a serious concentration of power that would no doubt have been seen by the framers of the Constitution as dangerous.
In short, federal use of the corporations power to seek to directly control industrial relations fails when tested against the criteria of fairness and in particular the protection of ordinary citizens from potential abuses of power. It would be substantially inferior to the present system.
Mark, I haven’t visited LP for a little while, normally reading you via my RSS reader, but today I dropped by from work. All I can say is YE GODS! Did your Mum like Mauve? Seriously, I’m glad I’d finished eating by the time I opened the blog. Methinks I’ll stick to the RSS reader
Mark, I haven’t visited LP for a little while, normally reading you via my RSS reader, but today I dropped by from work. All I can say is YE GODS! Did your Mum like Mauve? Seriously, I’m glad I’d finished eating by the time I opened the blog. Methinks I’ll stick to the RSS reader
I think purple suits you, Mark.
Different levels of government don’t do so much to check government power, I don’t think, as do the involvement of trade unions in the process of IR legislation and arbitration. The scary thing isn’t that the Libs want to change the level of industrial relations, it’s that they want to remove unions and arbitration altogether. Once they’re gone, no amount of separate governance is going to help the kids frying their acne at Maccas, stitching their fingers in clothing manufacturers, or falling off bad scaffolding for five bucks an hour.
I think purple suits you, Mark.
Different levels of government don’t do so much to check government power, I don’t think, as do the involvement of trade unions in the process of IR legislation and arbitration. The scary thing isn’t that the Libs want to change the level of industrial relations, it’s that they want to remove unions and arbitration altogether. Once they’re gone, no amount of separate governance is going to help the kids frying their acne at Maccas, stitching their fingers in clothing manufacturers, or falling off bad scaffolding for five bucks an hour.
Liam, David was my honours supervisor and I’ve no doubt he’d agree with you. The problem at the moment is that unions get a fair go under the State systems.
Liam, David was my honours supervisor and I’ve no doubt he’d agree with you. The problem at the moment is that unions get a fair go under the State systems.
I blame the conclave. Mark sees himself assuming the purple.
I blame the conclave. Mark sees himself assuming the purple.