1 / 14

Models of governance in a hybrid system

Models of governance in a hybrid system. John Halligan ACT Centenary Workshop ANZSOG Institute for Governance 20 August 2013. Models. City - state model Combination of local and state government Westminster model

raiden
Download Presentation

Models of governance in a hybrid system

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Models of governance in a hybrid system John Halligan ACT Centenary Workshop ANZSOG Institute for Governance 20 August 2013

  2. Models • City-state model • Combination of local and state government • Westminster model • Division of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branchesand associated the institutions associated with them eg cabinet government • Capital city model • A contrivance for the Australian nation, which addresses the attributes of the capital & entails shared responsibilities with the Commonwealth

  3. Other variations • No head of state (eg administrator) • Jurisdictional status • ACT retains the status of a territory rather than a state within the federation, lacking its level of independence • Commonwealth retains right to disallow legislation • Use of Hare-Clark for elections • Modified Westminster

  4. Two questions 1. Institutionaldesign? • Conflicted models: ACT embraces, to an unusual extent different, even contradictory principles. This fusion of elements makes for tensions between principles of governance 2. Governability? • The overall capacity for governance of a system • Questions about the quality of governance, and of governing and being governed Implications for • Deliberative governance • Executive governance • Local governance

  5. Formal institutional changes

  6. Institutionalisation in first quarter • Stability of Leg Assembly membership • Committee systems of Assemblies • Stability of executive (lower turnover) • ACT public service

  7. Legislature • Responsible for provision of a government (under Westminster) & other standard roles • Operating on a small scale with 17 members • Set of seven standing committees, plus select committees (8th Assembly) • Currently committees of 4 MLAs; previously odd numbers (3 in 7th Assembly) • Loss of ability to initiate inquiries • Modified Westminster displayed through legislative behaviour enabled by minority government including success rate of private members bills & committee innovations

  8. Executive • Chief minister plus four ministers • Responsibilities of individual ministers • Multiple portfolio responsibilities • COAG • Chief minister also performs roles in lieu of a governor or administrator • Span of control overall • Open government

  9. Administration • Public service has a record of modernisation in its short history • Renewal program post-Hawke review • Municipalising administration • Integration and joined up • Big city administration, but… • Unitary system • Whole of government approach • Enabled to handle vertical & horizontal questions • Sense of coherence: One APS–One ACT

  10. Local government in the city state • Recognises municipal functions, but narrow, traditional Australian conception • Dedicated minister and directorate within ACT administration (TAMS) • Lack of local governance • No strong sense of areal representation • Community councils (7) • ‘not Local Government bodies’ (Canberra Connect) • Development/progress associations? • Comparisons with historic city-states and how they have handled the two

  11. Governability & design deficits • Executive government – Complexities and demands of small executive – Pool of candidates for ministerial office 2. Administration – Capacity to handle the demands of a state (and local government): resources shortfall 3. Legislature – Small legislature and representation – Use of legislative model while a municipality and state 4. Recognition of local/community dimension • Westminster superimposed on a municipality

  12. Summation

  13. Conclusions& continuing tensions • Capacity to innovate is also the source of constraint • Fit for purpose? (cf Hawke) • City state – not realised? • Capacity to change and be innovative • Both a source of creativity and a constraint on action • A mix of opportunities &challenges including capacity questions that derive from both the scale and the organisation of government

  14. Selective sources • ACTPS Review Governing the City State: One ACT Government – One ACT Public Service, Canberra, 2011. • Berry MLA, Wayne, ‘Rating the ACT. Legislative Assembly: Is “A Minus” good enough?’ The Parliamentarian Issue 4, 2008: 305-13. • Halligan, J. and R. Wettenhall (2000) ‘Ten Years of Self-government’, in J. Halligan and R. Wettenhall (eds) A Decade of Self-government in the Australian Capital Territory, Centre for Research in Public Sector Management, University of Canberra. • Halligan, J. (2011) An Assessment of the Performance of the Three Branches of Government in ACT Against Latimer House Principles, report to the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure of the ACT Legislative Assembly, Canberra. • Pettit, P. (2000) ‘Three Problems with ACT Governance’, in ‘The ACT Model: An Analysis’, in J. Halligan and R. Wettenhall (eds) A Decade of Self-government in the Australian Capital Territory, Centre for Research in Public Sector Management, University of Canberra.

More Related