The end of the public sector debate

In the first of the special essays, John Quiggin revisits the debate over the appropriate size of the public sector and canvasses the issues associated with the distribution of government responsibilities within the Australian federation, with a sweeping perspective and surprising conclusions.

Scientists as policy-makers: Towards a new partnership

There is an urgent need to link social science research with policy making to address many key issues confronting countries across the globe. Policy makers need the benefit of social science research which is relevant, timely, transdisciplinary, methodologically capable of capturing global and local trends, swift to respond to fundamental issues, and offering findings which are clearly articulated, effectively disseminated, and oriented to outcomes. For this a new partnership is needed between social scientists and policy makers. We can gain a clearer picture of the nature of this desired partnership by probing the dichotomy between the world of science and the world of policy making. The experience of UNESCO and its programme Management of Social Transformations provides some valuable lessons.

Parties, governments and pollsters: A new form of patronage?

In its first term, the Howard government hired Australasian Research Strategies (ARS), headed by pollster Mark Textor, to conduct market research for several Commonwealth departments and agencies. This was, the Labor Opposition claimed, a case of the Liberals handing jobs to their 'mates'. Textor played a key role in the Liberals' 1996 and 1998 federal election campaigns. However, Labor's attack rings hollow since in the 1980s the Hawke government similarly contracted Rod Cameron's ANOP to conduct opinion research for Commonwealth departments and agencies. At the time Cameron was Labor's strategic pollster and centrally involved in planning Labor election campaigns. On both sides of Australian politics, governments have begun to channel patronage towards their party's pollsters. In this research note, we suggest that this development cannot be explained as 'jobs for the boys'. Instead, this new form of patronage has its roots in the vital role that pollsters now play in guiding election campaigns, and in the commercial reality that Australian politics provides too little work to sustain specialist political pollsters. Parties in government now appear to utilise incumbency to sustain an ongoing relationship with the commercial polling organisations like ANOP and ARS to whom they will entrust much of the planning of their campaign for re-election.

Intellectual origins of welfare dependency

'Welfare dependency' has become a key term in policy debate in the United States and, more recently, Australia. In this article I explore the intellectual origins of the term, looking specifically at the writings of George Gilder and Charles Murray, two commentators whose (often polemically presented) ideas were influential within the Reagan Administration and have been at the forefront of a conservative renewal in welfare debate generally. Although others have subsequently refined some of their arguments and proposals, the authors' central claim that welfare causes dependency and thus unemployment and poverty - and that welfare reform therefore needs to focus on changing the behaviour of welfare recipients rather than providing employment opportunities - has had a lasting political impact, in Australia as much as in the US.