Premium
POLITICS, POLICY MAKING AND PRESSURE GROUPS: SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORM OF THE AUSTRALIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM
Author(s) -
Marsh Ian
Publication year - 1983
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.1467-8500.1983.tb00982.x
Subject(s) - polity , public administration , politics , political science , government (linguistics) , state (computer science) , public relations , sociology , political economy , law , philosophy , linguistics , algorithm , computer science
In Australia, current policy making is characterized by immobilism, drift and “pluralistic stagnation”. The problem is not lack of technical expertise, but the mobilization of political consent in a polity in which pressure groups have proliferated. In the post‐war period, the welfare state/managed economy has transformed the role of government and the potential power of pressure groups. New networks of interdependency have developed. Some of the principal groups are beneficiaries of redistributive programs, producer groups, state and local government agencies and professionals in government. Their potential power has been made actual by a new participative ethic. The post‐materialist values of which this is part also result in the growth of groups focusing on quality of life and moral issues. In this context the political parties are losing their central place in the polity and the centralized organs of executive government appear over‐secretive and aloof. Reforms are needed to realign institutions with the new cultural and structural realities. Broader interest group involvement is needed. Parliament, through a committee system, could play a major role and its historical function as custodian of the public interest should be revived. Departments must find new ways to involve more groups in policy formulation and implementation. Information must be shared more widely and policy analysts and advisors should work more closely with groups in defining issues, negotiating alternatives and encouraging the development of supportive coalitions. New “intelligence” and “outreach” functions within the public service are required, and the existing approaches of policy units and research bureaux should be remodelled.