Top Banner
Addressing Internal Market Barriers and Integration: The Australian Experience Cliff Walsh School of Economics University of Adelaide South Australia Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010
30

Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

Jan 11, 2016

Download

Documents

lidia

Addressing Internal Market Barriers and Integration: The Australian Experience Cliff Walsh School of Economics University of Adelaide South Australia. Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010. AUSTRALIA. CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

Addressing Internal MarketBarriers and Integration:

The Australian Experience

Cliff WalshSchool of EconomicsUniversity of Adelaide

South Australia

Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

Page 2: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

AUSTRALIA

2

Page 3: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

1. CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT

2. WHY COOPERATIVE ECONOMIC REFORMS

3. WHAT REFORMS?

4. HOW ACHIEVED?

LESSONS FOR CANADA?

3

Page 4: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

CONSTITUTIONALCONTEXT

4

Page 5: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• COMMONWEALTH POWERS:FEW EXCLUSIVEMANY MORE CONCURRENT, WITH

FEDERAL PARAMOUNTCY

• STATES HAVE RESIDUAL POWERS COVER MOST ECON ACTIVITY

AND INFRA PROVISION

5

Page 6: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• “ECONOMIC UNION” PROVISIONS:

CUSTOMS UNION: EXCLUSIVE COMMONWEALTH POWER (s90) OVER CUSTOMS AND EXCISE DUTIES

COMMON MARKET: s92

“… TRADE, COMMERCE AND INTERCOURSE BETWEEN THE STATES … SHALL BE ABSOLUTELY FREE”

6

Page 7: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• s92 ONLY PRECLUDES

“DISCRIMINATORY BURDENS OF A PROTECTIONIST KIND”

• CONSTRAINS REGULATORY DIFFERENCES

BUT DOESN’T NECESSITATE HARMONISATION

7

Page 8: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• USE OF MOST CONCURRENT POWERS UNCONTENTIOUS BUT NB

EXTERNAL AFFAIRS POWER: CAN OVERIDE STATE LEGN

CORPORATIONS POWER: CAN EVEN REGULATE MATTERS INTERNAL TO CORPORATIONS

GRANTS (SPENDING) POWER:

REWARD STATE REFORM ACHIEVEMENTS

8

Page 9: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE UNLIKELY

• REFERRALS COOPERATIVE BUT PRACTICAL AND POLITICAL LIMITS

• OTHER MEANS RELIED ON: TEMPLATE LEGISLATION MIRROR LEGISLATION FRAMEWORK LAWS SIMPLY IGAs

9

Page 10: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

THE WHY, WHAT

AND HOW OF

AUSTRALIA’S COOPERATIVE

ECONOMIC REFORMS

10

Page 11: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

WHY?

•ECON CRISIS: UNILATERAL TARIFF REDUCTIONSINTENSE PRESSURE FOR DOMESTIC ECON REFORMSSTATES’ PARTICIPATION BECOMES ESSENTIAL

•ECON AND POLITICAL BENEFITS ALL-ROUND

•2+ DECADES & STILL GOING11

Page 12: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

WHAT?

•DETERMINED SOLELY BY WHETHER INCREASES COMPETITION ETC

PRESUMPTION IN FAVOUR OF COMPETITION BUT COULD BE REBUTTED

FOCUS CHANGES OVER TIME

12

Page 13: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

PHASE 1: 1990s

• STARTS MODESTLY EARLY 90s: INFLUENCED BY EU

MUTUAL RECOGNITION AGREEMENT ETC.

• BUT NB ALSO PERFORMANCE MONITORING OF GBEs

13

Page 14: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• 1995-2005 COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL COMPETITION POLICY (NCP). KEY ELEMENTS:

REFORMS TO PREVIOUSLY SHELTERED GBEs: ESPECIALLY ELECTRICITY, GAS, WATER

WIDE-RANGING LEGISLATION REVIEWS : TO REMOVE ANTI-COMPETITIVE LEGISLATION

14

Page 15: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• OTHER ELEMENTS INCLUDED:

WIDENED COVERAGE OF TRADE PRACTICES ACT

COMPETITIVE NEUTRALITYSEPARATION OF REGULATORY

FROM COMMERCIAL FUNCTIONSVERTICAL SEPARATIONTHIRD-PARTY ACCESS REGIMES

15

Page 16: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• SOME INTERNAL MARKET REFORMS BUT NOT HIGH PRIORITIES: E.G.

MORE UNIFORM APPROACH TO REGULATING TRUCKS

NATIONAL INTEGRATION OF INFRA PROVISION

16

Page 17: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

PHASE 2: AGREED 2006

•NATIONAL REFORM AGENDA (NRA)

•REGULATORY REFORM STREAM

“TO DELIVER A SEAMLESS NATIONAL ECONOMY”

REDUCE FRAGMENTATIONIMPROVE REGN-MAKING & REVIEW

17

Page 18: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• INITIALLY 10 PRIORITY AREAS

PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION: INCREASE GDP BY 1.33%?

• SOME ISSUES IN CANADA NOT IN AUSTRALIA

• NOW 27: IN SUMMARY:-

GREATER INTEGRATION OF LABOUR MARKETS: PROMOTE MOBILITY & SKILLS ACQUISITION

18

Page 19: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

REGULATION OF SAFETY & OTHER STANDARDS

CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PROTECTION

STREAMLINE GOVT APPROVAL AND COMMUNICATIONS PROCESSES FOR BUSINESSES

19

Page 20: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• BENEFITS > THAN +1.33% GDP

• REFORMS TO REGULATION-MAKING AND REVIEW IMPORTANT

FOR MOST BUSINESSES, EXCESSIVE REGULATIONS

• OTHER NRA REFORMS INCLUDE WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION & PRODUCTIVITY

20

Page 21: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

HOW? & LESSONS FOR CANADA?

1.VITAL: SEPARATE INTERGOVTL FORUM – COAG

2.ALSO: DRIVEN & MONITORED BY FIRST MINISTERS

3.REFORMS ARTICULATED AS ABOUT COMPETITION PRODUCTIVITY LIVING STANDARDS

21

Page 22: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

4. BROAD-BASED PACKAGES

MUTUALLY REINFORCING ITEMS

REDUCING INTERNAL BARRIERS ONLY IF HIGH BENEFITS

TAILOR-MADE IGAs FOR EACH PACKAGE & COMPONENT

22

Page 23: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

5. STATE PREMIERS: SEEN AS NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT

LITTLE OR NO FINGER-POINTING AT PAST “PAROCHIALISM”

6. SENIOR OFFICIALS GROUP STABILISED PROCESSES WHEN POLITICAL TENSIONS

23

Page 24: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

7. REFORM PRIORITIES ESPECIALLY INFLUENCED BY

BUSINESS COMMUNITY (BCA)

PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION

8. WHERE POSSIBLE, SET OUT OBJECTIVES AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES

STATES LEFT TO IMPLEMENT TO SUIT LOCAL PREFERENCES

24

Page 25: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

9. COMMITMENT OF STATES SUSTAINED BY REWARD PAYMENTS

PROGRESS ASSESSED BY INDEPENDENT AGENCY

RESULTS DISPROPORTIONATE TO REWARD $s AVAILABLE

25

Page 26: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

10. TRANSPARENCY

COMMUNIQUÉS FOLLOW ALL COAG MEETINGS

BACKGROUND PAPERS RELEASED

ASSESSMENTS OF PROGRESS MADE PUBLIC

PC PUBLIC INQUIRIES

26

Page 27: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

OUTCOMES ACHIEVED

27

Page 28: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• PC REVIEW OF NCP (2005)ESTIMATED +2.5% GDP FROM INFRA

REFORMS ALONE

• ALSO CONTRIBUTED TOPRODUCTIVITY GROWTH SURGE:

OECD GDP PER CAPITA RANK BACK TO 8TH (18TH LATE 1980s!)

TRADE/GDP RATIO TO OVER 45% (20% EARLY 1980s)

28

Page 29: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• CURRENT REFORMS PROJECTED TO INCREASE GDP BY

1.33% REGULATORY REFORMS AFTER 10 YRS (ONLY 10 OF 27)

6% INCREASED WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION. 3% INCREASED WORKFORCE PRODUCTIVITY

− BUT N.B. AFTER 25+ YEARS, AND POSSIBLY LARGE IMPLEMENTATION COSTS

29

Page 30: Forum of Federations and CD Howe Institute Conference, Toronto, 1 February 2010

• SHOULDN’T OVERSTATE

RAISED PRODUCTIVITY RELATIVE TO U.S.A.’s

HOWEVER, ONLY TO 76% AND STILL BELOW 1950 LEVEL

• MUCH YET TO BE DONE!

30