|
The
Origin and Spread of the 'Queensland effect'
The 'Queensland
effect' is an expression that has been applied to a government's unexpected
defeat at an election through a protest vote - and is based on the
debacle experienced by the Goss Government in 1995.
This
expression has apparently entered the language as something politicians
elsewhere fear. For example, this phenomenon was
reportedly of real concern to the Blair government in the UK (eg see Walker
J. 'Blair pitch project: a sequel shapes up', The Australian, 24-25/3/00,
and Taylor L. 'Blair just bubbles along', Financial Review of
4/6/01).
It can also be noted that the Blair Government (which had
apparently been influenced by the 'success' of Goss Government reforms in
Queensland) was portrayed by
the conservatives in the recent UK election as a 'bubble' which could
be pricked (Taylor op cit). And there seems to be general consensus
that
the 'bubble' label is factually justified
(ie that the Blair Government has
been insubstantial)
Consider for
example:
- articles which point out across-the-board problems such
as Bagwell S. 'Cruel Britannia', The Bulletin, 15/5/01, and
Quiggin J. 'Blair's third way is dead', Financial Review, 7/6/01;
- concerns about administrative failures resulting from the
breakdown of the technical competence of the UK Public Service that were
recently highlighted by the architect of the ALP's recent Knowledge Nation
proposal - see Jones B. 'Can we make Australia a Knowledge Nation?',
Address at Macquarie University, 27/4/01);
- there has apparently been a general view of that administration as
'more spin than substance' [1]
And despite rhetoric to the contrary
by those responsible for the problem, the original 'Queensland
effect' was simply the result of
a 'bubble' (ie of illusions that
were created about reform and progressive policies that were
actually quite insubstantial). This situation is documented in some detail in
Toward
Good Government in Queensland (1995)
- and in other related
documents.
In
brief Toward
Good Government in Queensland is
an analysis of how a poorly conceived and incompetently
managed process of public service 'reform'
eroded the professional capabilities needed to implement the Goss
Government's widely supported policy agenda. It explained
the problem in terms of: the effect of Wilenski’s mis-understanding
of the causes of the Whitlam Government’s reform problems; the
effect of the ‘Yes Minister’ school of populist public administration
theory; managerialism; the adoption of a 'commercial' focus in
public administration which undermined government's ability to really
'govern'; and the
inability of starry-eyed and inexperienced ‘reformers’ to understand that reality is
more complex than their political rhetoric - and that, without the tacit
knowledge that experience brings, ‘reform’ could not lead to practical
outcomes. However other factors involved included: the bi-partisan support
for Public Service politicisation that emerged in Queensland during the
1990s; and influence of the 'rorting' culture of the ALP's AWU faction
that dominated under the Goss Government (see Section 5 of Detailed
Discussion of Queensland's Challenge).
The nature of real Public Service professionalism; (which
includes experience and practical competence as well as theory) - and why
politicisation is likely to erode essential (tacit) capabilities - is
further considered in Note 3 on the detailed version of a proposal for
Renewal
of Queensland's Public Service
on a professional basis.
The loss of practical administrative and
policy competence resulting from mismanagement
of reform led to the numerous failures (eg in health, education and
infrastructure) that were associated with the Goss regime. However
most significantly, in the face of a major requirement for economic
change, the emerging competencies required to successfully manage that
change were largely eliminated. The result was: economic under-performance
- especially in marginal rural, coastal and metropolitan regions; the
growth of social symptoms; and the political instability that was
ultimately given expression through the One
Nation phenomenon. An attempt
to explain what went wrong with Queensland's (Australia's) attempt
to deal with economic change is presented in Defects
in Economic Tactics, Strategy and Outcomes. In
simple terms what Defects
argues is that (a) Queensland
(Australia) has to move to a knowledge economy and (b) industrial era
methods for economic management which were continued in the 1990s,
because the Public Service's skill base had been damaged by
politicisation, were no longer adequate.
A perception of political arrogance has often accompanied sudden
electoral reversals - and this probably arose from the fact that elected
leaders, having surrounded themselves with cronies and 'yes men', had made
it hard to recognize the need to communicate with segments of the community
who did not share their assumptions.
A Recurrence of the
'Queensland Effect'?
There is an
increasing chance that the
'Queensland effect' could strike Queensland again - because the Beattie
Government has also been limited to giving an 'illusion' of progress
because of deficiencies in the
Public Service .
Evidence that
Queensland was not being effectively governed in 2001 is
presented in the detailed / evidence version of Queensland's
Challenge (see Note 1
and Sections 6 and 7 in particular), as well as in its Continuation.
Indications of
the loss of professionalism
that has
increasingly plagued Queensland's (and other) Public Services
is also available in summary form.
Queensland’s Challenge addresses severe current problems in:
society generally; economic competitiveness and strategy; the political
system; the Public Service; and public finance. In
particular this refers to steps which Queensland's administration
has recently taken to boost innovation
(part of the Smart State initiative) and to plan Strategic
Infrastructure for Queensland's Growth, which are
both critically important functions
that are being addressed through 'illusory' programs.
And Queensland's Premier appeared to expect a recurrence of the
'Queensland Effect'.
Mr Beattie, has indicated a fear
'that despite holding 68 of the 89 seats in the Queensland Parliament, ...
his political opponents would urge people to cast a protest vote in 2004 -
the same phenomenon which nearly cost Labor government in 1995. 'It could
happen again', he said, 'we can lose the next election'. " (Franklin
M. 'Beattie fears ghost of election future', Courier Mail, 24/12/01)
Furthermore symptoms of a possible re-occurrence were seen to be emerging
in July 2003 [1]
14 July 2001 (and modified later)
|