Local government

In terms of its land mass, Australia is the sixth largest country on earth. The distances between the state capitals are enormous and travelling between places within the states by means other than air transport can take many hours. Given these spatial characteristics, perhaps the most surprising feature of Australia’s political culture is what could be called ‘the Canberra reflex’. No problem is too local, no issue too miniscule that one could not find a pundit to argue that they would best be handled by the national government.

Local governments could provide better services, like schools and fast development approvals if they received a higher proportion of tax revenue and a formal definition in the Constitution. There is a need for a strong and proactive local government that has more control over its purse strings and is more connected to the people it serves.

A country the size of Australia could be better served if it tried to delegate more tasks to lower tiers of government. Federalism is one way of achieving this, and many have cogently argued that it should be strengthened. Yet the very same arguments in favour of federalism also apply to local government.

For Australia’s mayors and shire presidents, Christmas came a bit earlier this year—on 18 November, to be precise. But Santa Claus did not come to town. Instead, the towns went to Santa, played by no other than the prime minister himself. Kevin Rudd clearly enjoyed his new role, handing out a total of $300 million in pre-Christmas giveaways at the inaugural meeting of the Australian Council of Local Government in Canberra.

Die Stadtregion London versucht kommunale Demokratie mit den Erfordernissen des Managements einer global vernetzten Metropole zu verbinden. Die gegenwärtige Lösung vermag nicht zu befriedigen.