The biggest mistake in modern Australian politics is to think that state governments don't matter any more. With the Federal Government collecting most of the taxes, spending most of the money, and having responsibility for the issue of most concern to voters -- the economy -- it is easy to believe that there's only one level of government that counts.
We've become accustomed to the idea that state politics is parochial, narrow and overwhelmingly boring. It is in the interests of incumbent state governments to keep state politics boring because then there is less incentive for the electorate to care about who it votes for. Dull (and safe) are now the prerequisite characteristics to be premier. The leaders of our two largest states fit the bill perfectly.
Commentators dismiss the task of state governments as only being to "deliver services". Yet the services state governments deliver -- health and welfare, education, transport, policing and planning -- and how those services are delivered have an enormous impact on people's lives.
This week's Victorian budget demonstrates what happens when governments lose focus on how services are provided and forget any concern about value for money. It appears that Labor is trying to convince itself and the electorate that the only thing that counts is the size of the budget, not how it is spent. With the state (and the national) economy booming, there's no incentive for the Bracks Government to consider whether services can be delivered better, or in a cheaper way. Funds are now flowing to people and projects in a completely ad hoc way, without any principle or rationale.
$300 of taxpayers' money to parents of children starting prep or year 7, without any regard to the wealth of those parents makes a farce of Labor's commitment to a "fairer Victoria". There's nothing fair about hand-outs like this to millionaires. The purported justification for the program is that parents incur expenses when their children start primary or secondary school. That might be true, but the financial strain on wealthy parents is insignificant compared with that on parents living on unemployment benefits.
At least the Government could have attempted to ensure that the $300 was devoted to the education needs of children. That they haven't done so reveals the hand-out to be the election bribe that it is. And this explains why both the Premier and Treasurer had so much difficulty justifying it. For once, the teachers' union is right. The comment by the union's president that "if it had just been targeted to struggling families it would be something that would have been universally welcomed" is accurate. The pity is that Labor in this state is now following the lead of the Coalition at the national level in handing out middle-class welfare indiscriminately.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment