Premium
THE “NEW ADMINISTRATIVE LAW”: SOME ASSUMPTIONS AND QUESTIONS
Author(s) -
Jinks Brian
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
australian journal of public administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.524
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-8500
pISSN - 0313-6647
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-8500.1982.tb00920.x
Subject(s) - redress , administrative law , parliament , legislation , government (linguistics) , politics , administration (probate law) , political science , public administration , law , law and economics , intrusion , economics , linguistics , philosophy , geochemistry , geology
Sweeping changes in administrative review legislation and procedures have occurred in Australian Federal government very quickly and with little debate. There have been several assumptions underlying the proposals for administrative law reform, including the notions that government has expanded greatly, that it has intruded into citizens' lives, that it is scarcely restrained by parliament, and that the specialist administrative tribunals established at various times are only partly effective. While these assumptions are all correct in certain respects, they do not necessarily support the demands for administrative law reform in the manner and to the extent that has generally been proposed. Closer examination of these assumptions suggests that comprehensive administrative review might itself lead to further expansion of government; that political decisions will have to be made about degrees of intrusion by government; that political avenues for redress of grievances should not be ignored, and could possibly be developed further; and that the need to prevent administrative errors is at least as great as the need to correct them after they have occurred. There is a good case for comprehensive administration review, but it needs to be examined more closely so that future problems can be anticipated and avoided.