This week we have been marking the 10th anniversary of self-government for the ACT.
I say marking, rather than celebrating, because there has been the usual bout of outcry along the lines: “”We voted against self-government in a referendum and the past 10 years have been hell.”
But we were in for hell anyway.
Not many people took notice of what the Federal Minister for Finance, Peter Walsh, said about ACT financing on February 28, 1988, a year before self-government:
“”Funding will continue at present level for two years, then be cut back progressively for the next two years until it has same funding arrangements as the states.”
He gets more brutal: “”I don’t particularly care about self-government or not for the ACT, but I think we all have a duty to disabuse people of the noting that by rejecting self-government they could escape from having the same financial regime applied in the ACT as that applied to the states.
“”That is the fact – that the financial arrangements for the ACT will be the same as the financial arrangements for the states, with or without self-government.”
In other words, the grandiose funding of the Menzies and Whitlam years were over.
The ACT got self-government precisely at the time the feds were going to stick the knife in anyway. The knife was stuck in. Everyone squealed. But the wrongly blamed the fact of self-government.
Let’s look at it another way. Suppose we did not get self-government. It would have been worse. Remember Federal Governments since the time of the creation of this territory have used it as a social laboratory for any crackpot folly that comes into the mind of the controlling federal minister. It began with King O’Malley banning booze. Michael Hodgman banned Nazi symbols and women’s marches. Gough Whitlam wanted an island of socialised medicine and built a hospital for salaried doctors. He and Kep Enderby spread the message of urban planning in Canberra.
The trend would have continued after 1988. And what have been the biggest federal fads since then: downsizing, outsourcing, privatisation and slashing of public infrastructure. Sure, we have had a fair whack of that, but self-government has tempered it. We have had a seat at the Council of Australian Governments. We have seats at ministerial councils. We have politicians who have mates in their own parties on the Hill. Without them, the ACT would have had just one minister in Cabinet facing Canberra-bashers like Peter Walsh, John Howard and many others.
Since self-government blame for every reduction in government services has been blamed on the fact of self-government: uncut grass; squiggles in the road; school and hospital closures and so on.
And people wrongly put blame the cost of self-government. They imagine the self-government structure costs so much that there is no money left for education and health. The figures tell the story. The Budget two weeks ago ear-marks $7.6 million for the Assembly and $2.9 million for the ACT Executive (ministers’ staff and support). That totals $10.5 million in a total Budget spending of $1787 million, or 0.59 per cent. Zilch. And you would have to spend almost that much on governance without an Assembly or Ministers. Before self-government there were inquiries of various sorts and public consultation in the same way our Assembly has committees.
It is not perfect, but whose fault is that. Half the population has opted out. The public-sector workforce has been removed from active participation because it might be career-jeopardising. And then there are many people in the Washington-style elite of federal public servants, national associations, the diplomatic set and the universities who almost take pride in looking down their noses at anything to do with local governance. (Though to be fair the universities have improved.)
And the media isn’t brilliant. We have concentrated on fluoride, safe-injecting rooms, the mad first election with its metre-long ballot paper, no-self-government MLAs joining governments, getting bitten by monkeys and living in the Assembly building and so on.
But in a time of huge fiscal cut-backs we have had a deal of good cost-effective governance here that would not have otherwise happened, from best practice garbage collection to best-in-Australia eduction. That education has enabled us to bounce back to the highest employment participation rate and lowest unemployment after our main industry (public administration) was savaged. No other place in Australia whose main industry was savaged has bounced back so well.
Moreover, the opportunity is there to make it better – an opportunity not available if we are governed from a federal minister’s office.
Sure, attack instances of poor administration and government, but surely we can get past the nonsense that it is the fault of self-government.