The Secretary of the ACTU (Mr Lawrence) said ‘the draft legislation was unacceptable and safety standards needed to be ''improved, not reduced in any shape or form''’.
The AMA is equally unhappy with the proposed legislation proposing to introduce a national registration scheme for health professionals, which in its view ‘fails the public interest test’.
These reforms form part of the ‘seamless economy’ agenda, which generally collapses eight laws developed at state or territory level into one law operating throughout Australia.
As we have said earlier:
As a general proposition, the ‘applied model’ of legislation – where one jurisdiction will develop and pass model legislation through its parliament with the remaining states or territories subsequently passing legislation that picks up the model legislation is the favoured way of introducing harmonisedThe COAG executive federalism model of public administration, in which state parliaments passively pass laws decided by either COAG as a body (or a ministerial council within the COAG structure) is now at an interesting stage of its operation.
legislation when regulating areas previously the province of states and territories.Whilst nominally capable to amend legislation, state parliaments – including those chambers without government majorities - have typically accepted the national legislation without batting an eyelid, on the grounds that ‘COAG decided’.
This is because the legislation designed to implement the ‘seamless economy’ is now being rolled out - stakeholders are now challenging the merit of the contents of the finalised legislation.
This beggars the question: to which democratically elected body can these stakeholders appeal?
It can hardly be to those legislative chambers where the governments who form COAG have majorities.
So, the interesting thing will be whether the AMA and the ACTUs of the world actively lobby state parliaments for amendments to COAG approved harmonised legislation.
If so, it will be fascinating to see whether those parliamentary chambers where there are government minorities – the Legislative Assemblies of the ACT and the NT, the upper houses of NSW, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia and both houses of the Western Australian Parliament (if the National Party can be persuaded to side with the ALP on a particular issue) – have the chutzpah to amend COAG legislation – particularly as it could cost their state money.
It will be finally interesting to see what the Liberal Party chooses to do in this situation. In most legislatures, it will be the vote of the Liberals that will determine whether an amendment will pass.
It would therefore be desirable for the Liberal view on the role of COAG and (more generally) the role of state parliaments as standard setters to be clarified. This will be discussed more in the next article.
No comments:
Post a Comment