POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
POLITICAL PARTIES & POLICY
ASSIGNMENT 2: RESEARCH ESSAY
Ryan Lim (S/N: 42646561)
Lecturer: Diana Perche
Research Question
What role do political parties continue to play in public policy?
Introduction: Political Parties & Public Policy
In democratic theory, there has been extended discussion over political parties and their role
in public policy, which despite their centrality to modern democracy and intimate involvement
in the process of representation, is complex and facing growing questions (Katz, 2006). It is
argued that political parties play a critical role in democratic systems, playing a central role as
an intermediary structure bridging governments and the societies they govern (Sartori, 1976).
Jaensch (1989) echoes this view, arguing that political parties are an integral component of
Australian polity, dominating the political system and legislatures. However, it is argued that in
the present day, a crisis has emerged amid growing dissatisfaction with the dominance and
role of parties in the political process (Sauer, Abjorensen & Larkin, 2009). Using immigration
policy as a case study, this paper will discuss the role that political parties continue to play in
public policy, which is increasingly ambiguous and continuously changing.
Australia has seen fierce debate over immigration policy in recent years, amid concerns over
the sustainability of overseas migration rates and continued population growth (Masanauskas,
2011). The policies surrounding immigration that were taken to 2010 federal election by the
two major parties, namely, the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal/National Coalition, as
well as the Australian Greens, an emerging third force in Australian politics at the time, and
currently holding the balance of power in the Senate as a result of the election (Horne, 2010),
will be closely examined. This will include discussion of how the policies were developed and
promoted by the parties, the constituencies they were designed to attract, the impact of the
electoral cycle, and the extent of policy convergence by the parties. Immigration policy was a
major issue in the election, taking up a significant amount of time in the leaders’ election
debate, during which both Labor Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Liberal Opposition Leader
Tony Abbott made clear their intentions to reduce Australia’s migration intake (Coorey, 2010).
This commitment showed a contrast with prior political trends, with the previous Howard
Liberal (Carlisle, 2006) and Rudd Labor (Iggulden, 2008) administrations supporting high
immigration. The election saw a strong performance by the Opposition, leading to the
incumbent Labor Government losing its parliamentary majority and forced into minority
government with an Australian Greens MP and three Independents (Horne, 2010).
1
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Australian Labor Party
Following 11 years in Opposition, Kevin Rudd led the Labor Party to victory in the 2007
election (Koutsoukis, 2007). High immigration enjoyed bipartisan support in Australia at the
time, with significant increases in student visas and working holiday visas granted under the
previous Howard Government, and with pathways in place for these temporary residents to
eventually get permanent visas (Evans, 2010). Support for high immigration was maintained
by the Rudd Government, with Prime Minister Rudd endorsing a vision of a “Big Australia”
(O’Brien, 2010). In 2008, the Rudd Government increased the annual immigration intake to
300,000, the highest level in over 60 years (Iggulden, 2008). This is in line with bipartisan
support in Australia for high immigration, and shifts in the direction of immigration policy
following the global financial crisis were also bipartisan, with both the major parties pledging
to reduce the immigration intake. Shortly after Julia Gillard took the party leadership – and
hence the Prime Ministership – from Rudd in June 2010, she rejected Rudd’s vision of a “big
Australia”, instead declaring her commitment to a “sustainable Australia”, expressing concern
with the ability of resources, infrastructure and services to sustain the nation’s burgeoning
population growth (Gordon, 2010). The annual immigration intake had already been reduced
to 175,000 during that year, and Gillard promised further reductions in the lead-up to the 2010
Federal election (Coorey, 2010; Strange, 2010).
It may be argued that the policy originated as a spontaneous idea by Gillard shortly after she
became Prime Minister, playing to the mood of the electorate and particularly targeting
marginal voters in outer suburban constituencies (Gordon, 2010). At the same time, it is also
clear that Gillard was asserting herself as distinct from her predecessor by making the first
significant policy break from the Rudd era. This is characteristic of recent political trends in
modern parliamentary democracies, which demonstrate growing dominance of party leaders,
whether in policy or otherwise (Senior & Van Onselen, 2008). This is also in line with modern
structural characteristics of political parties, especially for a major party like the ALP, with
power and control over strategic direction increasingly concentrated on the leadership (Katz &
Mair, 2002). Population growth and record immigration rates were becoming increasingly
politically sensitive at the time, with the impacts felt most in outer suburban and regional
areas (Jupp, 2012). The Labor Party clearly sought to play to the mood of voters from these
areas, with Gillard referring particularly to Western Sydney in her remarks (Gordon, 2010).
Characterised by traffic congestion, poor services and declining manufacturing, it was a
widely-held view among Western Sydney voters that continued overseas immigration and
consequent population growth would exacerbate these issues (Jupp, 2012). This sentiment
was also fuelled by community opposition to multiculturalism and non-European settlement,
due to increasing presence of Muslims, Middle Eastern people and Asians in what were
originally ‘white’ working class suburbs.
2
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
According to Jupp, the Labor Government had no long-term policy pertaining to immigration
at the time of the 2010 Federal election, with their Sustainable Population Strategy (Australian
Government, 2011) released only nine months later. However, a series of announcements
and commitments were made during the election campaign, in response to issues raised by
the Liberal Opposition, with the Labor Party website displaying numerous articles pertaining to
overseas migration, containing repeated commitments from then Immigration Minister Chris
Evans and Sustainable Population Minister Tony Burke (Burke, 2010a; Evans & Burke, 2010;
Burke, 2010b; Evans, 2010). These articles attacked the Opposition for alleged
miscommunication and miscalculation, as well as accused them of playing politics, while
stating that the Labor Government’s was the currently working on a national sustainable
population strategy and reiterating commitments to reduce net overseas migration. They also
highlighted the achievements of the Labor Government to date, including reduction of the
immigration intake and closing alleged loopholes in the skilled migration program. Evans
(2010) also asserted the part played by the Labor Government in driving down migration
numbers and mentioned reforms to the temporary migration program and to prioritise
processing of skilled migrants based on the needs of nation. It is interesting to note, however,
that Burke (2010b), in an interview with Radio National, criticised the Opposition’s policy and
the immigration settings put in place by the former Howard Coalition Government, which led
to an upward trajectory of the annual immigration intake, which in turn was continued under
the Rudd Government, signalling policy convergence by the major parties and thus
diminishing the role of political parties in public policy in this instance.
Liberal/National Coalition
For purposes of this paper, the Liberal and National Parties will be jointly evaluated, due to
the unusual, institutionalised and permanent nature of the Coalition (Costar, 1994), and more
importantly, the way policies taken to the election were developed and presented by the
Coalition collectively rather than separately. The Coalition came to the 2010 election after just
one term in opposition, preceding which was a long period of 11 years in government under
John Howard (Holmes & Fernandes, 2012). As mentioned above, the Howard Government
saw significant increases to net overseas immigration, particularly by former overseas
students who had competed tertiary qualifications in Australia applying for skilled permanent
residence visas; this opportunity presented to recently-graduated overseas students in turn
gave rise to rapid expansion in the international education industry (Birrell & Perry, 2009).
However, during the intervening period following Howard’s defeat in the 2007 election, the
Coalition policy changed dramatically, in line with bipartisan shifts in policy toward reducing
overseas immigration (Strange, 2010).
The policy taken by the Liberal/National Coalition to the 2010 Federal election bore similarity
to Labor’s commitments to reduce immigration, however, some key differences may be
observed (Rodgers, 2010a). While Labor had appointed Tony Burke as Sustainable
3
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Population Minister, to undertake a study into future population targets, the Coalition went
further in committing to a population cap, set at 170,000 new migrants annually. The
Coalition’s Policy for Population and Immigration (Loughnane, 2010) stressed the need to
address impacts to Australians’ quality of life due to strain placed on services, infrastructure
and the environment as a result of immigration and population growth. The Policy argued that
current immigration levels are unsustainable, warning of implications to the Australian
economy, national finances, environmental sustainability, food production, infrastructure,
service needs, housing and overall quality of life, which it says are at stake. While the Policy
specified long-term solutions in investment of the aforementioned to improve capacity for
growth, and better dispersal of the population to meet the needs of underpopulated areas that
could benefit from higher levels of growth, it clearly stated that easing population growth to
more sustainable levels is the first step towards solving these problems.
To these ends, the Policy (Loughnane, 2010) listed a four-point action plan, which included:
(1) consulting the Productivity Commission, which would be renamed the Productivity and
Sustainability Commission under their plan, for advice on an optimal band of population
growth; (2) reducing annual population growth to their historical long-run average of 1.4%,
which would involve almost halving the annual rate of net overseas migration from 2008
levels (under Rudd); (3) making skilled migration the bulk of the permanent migration
program, giving higher priority to migrants with occupations and skills in demand, as well as
encouraging settlement in regional and rural areas, and; (4) producing a White Paper on
immigration that will set the stage for major structural changes to the immigration program
aimed at addressing the policy challenges of sustainable population growth. The Policy also
criticised the Labor Government for increasing concern and distrust among the electorate
over the national immigration program, particularly the change of rhetoric that accompanied
the change of leadership. The Policy also argued that the immigration program was more
widely supported under the Howard Government, signalling a change in public opinion within
a single electoral cycle, which both parties made a clear attempt to pander to.
The Coalition’s Policy for Population and Immigration (Loughnane, 2010) was developed
within and according to the public mood, which, counter to the majority support for the
immigration program under the previous Howard administration, had shifted in view of
growing strain on resources and services, congested cities and increasingly unaffordable
costs of living; these factors contributed to a clear change in community attitudes towards
population growth, which is largely fuelled by overseas immigration (Masanauskas, 2011). A
social cohesion study undertaken by Monash University showed a drastic drop in support for
immigration in Victoria, with 52% of Victorians believing the migrant intake is too high,
compared to 30% in 2007. The Coalition Policy (Loughnane, 2010) makes a clear attempt at
inclusiveness, stating a desire to win the confidence of “all Australians”. The Coalition has
promoted the policy by playing to the politically sensitive nature of issues surrounding
immigration, and it is obvious that the Policy seeks to attract the vote of everyday Australians.
4
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
The Policy has gathered its momentum in the electoral cycle from the change of public mood
and attitude towards immigration since the last election, and uses it to its advantage.
The Australian Greens
While the policies of both the major parties show a substantial degree of convergence, the
Australian Greens present a different alternative, which may have played a part in its strong
showing in the 2010 election. This election saw the Greens win their first Federal House of
Representatives seat, and with the hung Parliament produced at this election, the first at
federal level since the 1940s, Greens MP Adam Bandt is one of the key crossbenchers
supporting the Labor minority government on confidence and supply (Horne, 2010).
Previously during the 1980s, the major economic reforms under the Hawke-Keating Labor
Government saw a departure from traditional Labor policies under Chifley and Whitlam, with
rejection of Keynesian approaches to governance in favour of free market economics, which
now enjoys bipartisan political support in Australia (Tingle, 2012). This convergence between
the major parties is a key contributing factor to the emergence of the Australian Greens as a
third force in Australian politics; in addition to the House of Representatives seat, the Greens
also hold the balance of power in the Senate in their own right (Horne, 2010).
The Greens’ immigration policy taken to the 2010 election demonstrate a clear and strong
focus on more humane approaches toward asylum seekers, including abolition of mandatory
detention, instead allowing them to live in the community while their claims for asylum are
being assessed, however that is beyond the scope of this paper (Rodgers, 2010a). In regards
to migration, the Greens argue for population policy to be based on environmentally
sustainable levels, rather than economic drivers, and also call for preparations to be made for
an influx of ‘climate refugees’, that is, people displaced by climate change-related factors
such as rising sea levels. Unlike the bipartisan shifts in policy direction of the major parties,
from support for high immigration to concern over unchecked population growth and impacts
on infrastructure, services and resources, the Greens express continued support for high
immigration. According to the policies 2010 election policies on an archive of the party’s
website (Hanson-Young, 2010), the Greens stated a firm belief in favour of multiculturalism,
high immigration and non-discrimination. As such, they included in their stated goals support
for increases to the migration intake, as well as increased social services for new migrants.
Besides increasing the immigration intake, the Greens policy also emphasised inclusiveness
in the selection of migrants and adequate funding for migrant-specific services in public and
community sector agencies, as well as support for families; to this end they advocated
immigration programs to be predominantly based on family reunions.
The Greens immigration policy is, unlike the major parties, more ideologically-based rather
than pragmatic (Heywood, 2003). Developed with the Greens’ ethos of social justice firmly
entrenched, the Greens policies are designed to attract the majority of the electorate by
5
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
playing to sensitive humanistic ideals. This is evident in the way the policies were promoted,
by presenting the Greens as a clear alternative to the major parties and their increasing policy
convergence (Marsh, 2006), and playing on these humanistic ideals of social justice,
compassion and equity, which the Greens portray and promote themselves as being better
able to serve (Hanson-Young, 2010). However, although the ideals of social justice and equity
should not be underestimated, the Greens’ policy positions are increasingly viewed among
the electorate as too idealistic (McIntyre, 2011), which is apparent in poor showings by the
Greens in subsequent State, Territory and Local Government elections, the most recent being
the Australian Capital Territory general election in October 2012 (Towell & Cox, 2012). This
demonstrates drastic change in public opinion within the electoral cycle, driven in no small
part by the controversy over the carbon tax, which the Greens required in exchange for their
support in minority government (Rodgers, 2010b), and despite the Labor Government’s
pledge not to introduce one prior to the election. The Liberal Opposition has largely fuelled
this change of public mood, with its ongoing campaign against the carbon tax that it
continuously attacks the Labor Government for, and has vowed to repeal if it wins the next
election (Grattan, 2011). Despite its ethos of inclusiveness and equity for all Australians, the
Greens have been criticised among conservative circles for their socially liberal ideals and
policies, particularly for supporting gay marriage, drug use and multiculturalism and opposing
war (Blenkin, 2004). McIntyre (2011) in particular attacks the Greens for their idealistic view of
democracy and rights, arguing their policies are not practical and if implemented, would lead
to significant and disastrous consequences.
Discussion
The case study of policies surrounding immigration taken to the 2010 election by the
respective parties demonstrates a substantial yet ambiguous role played by political parties in
public policy. This may be attributed to two key trends, namely, the growing dominance of
parliamentary parties, especially the party leadership, and increasing policy convergence,
especially between the major parties, leading to a representation gap in the Australian
political landscape that minor parties have attempted to fill. In addition, as shown above, the
electoral cycle has also been shown to have a major impact, due to drastic changes in public
opinion and mood that may occur within the space of one cycle.
Party structure and organization since the mid to late 20th Century demonstrate a growing
dominance of parliamentary parties, that is, sitting members of Parliament that represent their
respective parties, with power and control over the party and its strategic direction, including
the policies it develops, increasingly concentrated on the parliamentary party leadership (Katz
& Mair, 2002; Jaensch, Brent & Bowden, 2005). This is evident in the ways policies are
developed, especially from the way Prime Minister Gillard apparently came up with the idea to
reduce net overseas migration spontaneously, in line with changing public attitudes and to
assert distinction from her predecessor at the same time (Gordon, 2010). The major parties of
6
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Australia have in recent decades seen increasing strategic control by the parliamentary
leaders, accompanied by diminishing of the role for ordinary members, and consequently
dramatic declines in party membership. Despite this, political parties continue to be the key
institutions around which the democratic process is organised, which means that parties
remain the main drivers in public policy (Sauer, Abjorensen & Larkin, 2009). However, it may
be argued that the structural nature and organization of parties have changed dramatically
from their origins, and thus parliamentary leaders are the main drivers of policy, with ordinary
rank and file members in the present day holding almost no role (Jaensch, Brent & Bowden,
2005). This has been identified as a cartelization of parties and the way they are run, with
State funding, large staff, control by leaders and factions, professionalized electioneering and
a minimal role for members, leading to an increasingly elitist party and growing
disengagement with the constituency.
Despite growing calls among the wider community for more active citizen engagement and
public participation (Holmes, 2011), the reality of governance – which is carried out by parties
– is that it is done behind closed doors (Weller, 2009). It may be argued from this perspective
that party leaders rather than parties as a whole play the key roles in public policy. Within
parties themselves, there is little internal discussion or debate in the present day, owing to the
growing dominance of the leadership and factional control. Cavalier (2012) argues that the
Labor Conference, once a centre for lively debate, has now become an “empty vessel”, and
Smith (2012) contends that in the Liberal Party factions also exist and fight for dominance,
which gave rise to the leadership instability that saw five different leaders in Peter Collins,
Kerry Chikarovski, John Brogden, Peter Debnam and Barry O’Farrell, which in turn
contributed to Labor’s long 16-year period in State Government before finally losing office in
March 2011. This overt control by leaders and factions diminishes the role of parties in public
policy, instead concentrating policy development on the party leadership; at the same time,
parties still play a significant role in public policy due to their dominance of the polity and
parliamentary representation, aided in no small part by the nature of the Australian electoral
system, which favours the dominance of the two major parties (Marsh, 1995).
A second phenomenon that is increasingly apparent in the Australian context is the
increasingly convergent nature of party policy, especially by the major parties (Marsh, 2006).
While the origins of parties may be largely attributed to ideological foundations, with
ideologies historically providing the basis for organised political action (Heywood, 2003), the
late 20th Century saw increasing rejection of ideology in policy-making, particularly evident in
the election of Tony Blair in the United Kingdom in 1997, following a long period of
Conservative rule under Margaret Thatcher and John Major (Nutley, Walter & Davies, 2009).
Blair instead championed a more pragmatic approach to public policy, promoting evidencebased policy as a more targeted, efficient, effective and inclusive approach, which he argued
would lead to better quality decisions and improved confidence in government.
7
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Subsequently, there has been growing policy convergence between the two major parties,
which are increasingly vote-driven rather than policy-driven, displaying characteristics of
catch-all parties (Hale-Williams, 2009). These characteristics include downplaying of ideology
in order to win votes, by developing policies that seek to attract and pander to as much of the
electorate as possible. The downside of this is an increasingly presidential nature of parties,
with a stronger focus on the parliamentary leader and thus diminishing the importance and
role of members, as well as alienation of traditional constituencies of the party. This has led to
growing voter frustration over a crucial representation gap in the political landscape as a
result of policy convergence between the major parties (Marsh, 2006). There has been strong
criticism over the irony of a Labor Government, led by Bob Hawke and Paul Keating,
introducing the major macroeconomic structural reforms of the 1980s (Tingle, 2012). More
recently, the election of the Rudd-Gillard Labor Government in 2007 has been criticised as
producing little change of direction in Australian political discourse, with little attention paid to
the left-wing ideals that Labor was founded on (Sheehan, 2007).
Similarly, it has also been argued that the modern Liberal Party has lost its progressive roots
espoused by long-serving Prime Minister Robert Menzies. Former Liberal Prime Minister
Malcolm Fraser argues that the current Liberals have radically departed from Menzies’ vision,
swinging further away to the conservative side of politics (Osborne, 2012). Fraser contends
that Menzies and his vision for the party was forward-looking and progressive, and that
Menzies would be insulted if called “conservative”. In addition, Fraser criticised the
immigration policy of the current Labor Government as “harsher” than even the policy under
the former Liberal Government under John Howard. Increasing policy convergence among
the major parties is a growing problem, and it is widely argued that this has all but eliminated
the ideological differences between the major parties (Goot, 2004; Marsh 2006). Defeated
New South Wales Labor Premier Kristina Keneally argues that policy convergence is a
problem that has given rise to growing disengagement of the parliamentary party with the
electorate and its traditional support base; she laments that few people today seem to know
what the modern Labor Party stands for (Keneally & Keneally, 2011).
This convergence in policy has left an important representation gap in Australian politics,
which has been left open to minor parties, particularly the Australian Greens, to capture what
were originally Labor votes (Marsh, 2006). Bramston (2011) argues that there is an urgent
need for the Labor to recapture its philosophical underpinnings of social liberalism, social
democracy and labourism, in order to distinctively brand itself as a progressive political force
from the centre-left. However, despite attempts to fill this representation gap by minor parties,
the electoral system is unsuited to this, especially where proportional representation systems
are not used (Jaensch, 1989; Marsh, 1995). Instead, the mechanics employed in electing
members to the House of Representatives favour the dominance of the two major parties,
making it difficult for minor parties to win a seat and thus reducing the impact that they can
make (Bennett & Lundy, 2007).
8
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
In sum, the case study examined in this paper reflects the nature of this ambiguous and
changing role of political parties in public policy. The differences in immigration policy taken to
the 2010 election by the major parties were very slight, and convergence was clearly evident;
the policies were developed in line with the changing public attitudes towards immigration,
amid growing public concern over continued population growth and impact on resources,
infrastructure and services, with both parties committing to reduce the annual intake (Rodgers,
2010a). This was clearly designed to attract as much of the electorate as possible,
demonstrating clear pragmatism and less ideological underpinning, and was promoted as
such. The electoral cycle had a substantial impact from the way public opinion towards
immigration changed within a single cycle, and both major parties used this to their advantage
by pandering to the growing public concern over immigration and population growth (Gordon,
2010; Coorey, 2010; Strange, 2010; Jupp, 2012); this was clearly evident during the election
campaign (Burke, 2010b; Evans, 2010; Evans & Burke, 2010; Loughnane, 2010). The
convergence between the major parties led to the emergence of the Greens as a third force,
which presented clear alternative policies, both in terms of immigration policy and otherwise,
resulting in a strong showing, delivering the Greens their first House of Representatives seat
and the balance of power in the Senate (Horne, 2010).
Conclusion
This essay discussed the role that political parties continue to play in public policy, using
immigration policy taken to the 2010 federal election as a case study. Immigration is an
important issue that has seen much debate in recent years, and the case study demonstrates
the integral yet ambiguous and somewhat diminished role that parties play. On the one hand,
parties are central and integral to the Australian polity, given their dominance of the
legislature and the political system. On the other, there is growing dissatisfaction over an
increasingly cartel and catch-all nature of parties, with the major parties demonstrating
increasing policy convergence and dominance of parliamentary parties, particularly party
leaders, thus diminishing the role of parties in public policy, turning attention to the people
running the parties rather than the policies they develop. Policy convergence between the
major parties also opens up a representation gap which minor parties attempt to fill, however
the structural nature of the electoral system favours the major parties’ dominance, limiting the
impact that minor parties can actually make. Over and above, this means that the role of
parties in public policy has dramatically changed, making it ambiguous and arguably
diminished, despite which the basic entrenchment of the centrality of parties in the polity
ensures a continued role for political parties in public policy.
(4350 words)
9
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
References
Australian Government (2011). Sustainable Australia – Sustainable Communities: A Sustainable Population Strategy
for Australia. Canberra: Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.
[Online] Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sustainability/population/publications/pubs/population-strategy.pdf [23 Oct
2012].
Bennett, S. & Lundy, R. (2007). ‘Australian Electoral Systems’. Research Paper No. 5, 2007-08, Department of the
Parliamentary Library. [Online] Available from: http://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/rp/2007-08/08rp05.pdf [25 Oct
2012].
Birrell, R. J. & Perry, B. (2009). ‘Immigration policy change and the international student industry’. People and Place,
vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 64-80. Monash University: Centre for Population and Urban Research.
Blenkin, M. (2004). ‘Anderson sees red over “watermelon” Greens’. The Age, 7 Sep. [Online] Available from:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/06/1094322715096.html [24 Oct 2012].
Bramston, T. (2011). Ch. 4, ‘Identity Crisis’. In Looking for the Light on the Hill: Modern Labor’s Challenges.
Melbourne: Scribe Publications.
Burke, T. (Federal Minister for Sustainable Population) (2010a). ‘Liberal Party backflip on population policy’, News,
23 July. Barton, ACT: Australian Labor Party. [Online] Available from: http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22093/201008230245/www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/Liberal-Party-backflip-on-population-policy/index-2.html [23 Aug 2010].
Burke, T. (Federal Minister for Sustainable Population) (2010b). ‘Transcript: Radio National interview’, News, 27 July.
Barton, ACT: Australian Labor Party. [Online] Available from: http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22093/201008230245/www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/Transcript--Radio-National-interview-%281%29/index-2.html [23 Aug 2010].
Carlisle, W. (2006). ‘Workers of the World’. ABC Radio National, 18 June. [Online] Available from:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/workers-of-the-world/3328176#transcript [22 Oct 2012].
Cavalier, R. (2012). Ch. 1, ‘The Labor Party’. In D. Clune & R. Smith (eds.) From Carr to Keneally: Labor in Office in
NSW 1995-2011. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Coorey, P. (2010). ‘A real run for her money’. Sydney Morning Herald, 26 Jul. [Online] Available from:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/the-leaders/a-real-run-for-her-money-20100725-10qoa.html [22 Oct 2012].
Costar, B. J. (ed.) (1994). For Better or For Worse: The Federal Coalition. Carlton, VIC: Melbourne University Press.
Evans, C. (Federal Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) (2010). ‘Federal Labor Policies Drive Down Migration
Numbers’, News, 5 Aug. Barton, ACT: Australian Labor Party. [Online] Available from:
http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22093/20100823-0245/www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/federal-labor-policies-drive-down-migrationnumber/index.html [23 Aug 2010].
Evans, C. (Federal Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) & Burke, T. (Federal Minister for Sustainable Population)
(2010). ‘Coalition’s spin on population does not add up’, News, 26 July. Barton, ACT: Australian Labor
Party. [Online] Available from: http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22093/20100823-0245/www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/Coalitions-spin-on-population-does-not-add-up/index-2.html [23 Aug 2010].
Goot, M. (2004). ‘Party Convergence Reconsidered’. Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 49-73.
Gordon, J. (2010). ‘Gillard rejects “big Australia”’. The Age, 27 June. [Online] Available from:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/gillard-rejects-big-australia-20100626-zb1g.html [23 Oct 2012].
Grattan, M. (2011). ‘Abbott Vows to Repeal Carbon Tax’. Sydney Morning Herald, 1 Mar. [Online] Available from:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbott-carbon-coats-next-election-campaign-20110228-1bbrg.html [24 Oct 2012].
Hale-Williams, M. (2009). ‘Catch-All in the Twenty-First Century? Revisiting Kirchheimer’s Thesis 40 Years Later: An
Introduction’. Party Politics, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 539-541.
Hanson-Young, S. (Greens Senator) (2010). ‘Immigration and Refugees’, Policies. Canberra, ACT: Australian Greens.
[Online] Available from: http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22488/20100804-0023/greens.org.au/policies/care-for-people/immigration-andrefugees.html [4 Aug 2010].
Heywood, A. (2003). Political Ideologies: An Introduction (3rd ed.). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Holmes, B. (2011). ‘Citizens’ engagement in policymaking and the design of public services’. Research Paper No. 1,
2011-12, Department of the Parliamentary Library. [Online] Available from: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/201112/12rp01.pdf [25 Oct 2012].
Holmes, B. & Fernandes, S. (2012). ‘2010 Federal Election: A Brief History’. Research Paper No. 8, 2011-12,
Department of the Parliamentary Library. [Online] Available from:
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1112/12rp08 [24 Oct 2012].
Horne, N. (2010). ‘Hung parliaments and minority governments’. Background Note, Department of the Parliamentary
Library, 23 Dec. [Online] Available from: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/BN/pol/HungParliaments.pdf [22 Oct 2012].
Iggulden, T. (2008). ‘Immigration intake to rise to 300,000’. ABC LateLine, 11 June. [Online] Available from:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2007/s2272014.htm [22 Oct 2012].
10
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Jaensch, D. H. (1989). Power Politics: Australia’s Party System. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Jaensch, D. H., Brent, P. & Boweden, B. (2005). ‘How Are Parties Run?’. In Australian Political Parties in the
Spotlight, Report No. 4, Democratic Audit of Australia, Australian National University.
Jupp, J. (2012). Ch. 22, ‘Immigration Issues in the 2010 Federal Election’. In M. Simms & J. Wanna (eds.) Julia 2010:
The Caretaker Election. Canberra, ACT: Australian National University E-Press. [Online] Available from:
http://epress.anu.edu.au/apps/bookworm/view/JULIA+2010%3A+The+caretaker+election/8291/Text/ch22.html [24 Oct 2012].
Katz, R. S. (2006). ‘Party in Democratic Theory’. In R. S. Katz & W. Crotty (eds.) Handbook of Party Politics. London,
UK: Sage Publications.
Katz, R. S. & Mair, P. (2002). ‘The Ascendancy of the Party in Public Office: Party Organizational Change in
Twentieth-Century Democracies’. In R. Gunther, J. Ramon-Montero & J. J. Linz (eds.) Political Parties: Old
Concepts and New Challenges. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Keneally, B. & Keneally, K. (2011). ‘ALP needs to reignite the light on the hill’. The Australian, 18 June. [Online]
Available from: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/alp-needs-to-reignite-the-light-on-the-hill/story-fn59niix-1226076715504 [25
Oct 2012].
Koutsoukis, J. (2007). ‘Rudd romps to historic win’. The Age, 25 Nov. [Online] Available from:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/11/24/1195753376406.html [23 Oct 2012].
Loughnane, B. (Federal Director of the Liberal Party of Australia) (2010). The Coalition’s Policy for Population and
Immigration. Barton, ACT: Liberal Party of Australia. [Online] Available from:
http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22107/20100820-0218/www.liberal.org.au/_/media/Files/Policies%20and%20Media/
National%20Security/0725x30LPAPopulationandImmigrationPolicy.pdf [20 Aug 2010].
Marsh, I. (1995). ‘The Formation, Structure and Impact of the Two-Party Regime’. In Beyond the Two Party System:
Political Representation, Economic Competitiveness and Australian Politics. Port Melbourne, VIC:
Cambridge University Press.
Marsh, I. (2006). ‘Policy Convergence between the Major Parties and the Representation Gap in Australian Politics’.
In I. Marsh (ed.) Political Parties in Transition? Annandale, NSW: Federation Press.
Masanauskas, J. (2011). ‘Immigration support plummets in Victoria Mapping Social Cohesion study finds’. Herald
Sun, 21 Mar. [Online] Available from: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/immigration-support-plummets-in-victoria-mapping-socialcohesion-study-finds/story-e6frf7jo-1226025263495 [22 Oct 2012].
McIntyre, A. (ed.) (2011). The Greens: Policies, Reality and Consequences. Ballan, VIC: Connor Court Publishing.
Nutley, S., Walter, I. & Davies, H. (2009). ‘Past, Present and Possible Futures for Evidence-Based Policy’. In G.
Argyrous (ed.) Evidence for Policy and Decision-Making: A Practical Guide. Sydney: UNSW Press.
O’Brien, K. (2010). ‘Rudd on a “big Australia”’. ABC News, 28 Jan. [Online] Available from:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2804229.htm [23 Oct 2012].
Osborne, P. (2012). ‘Fraser says Libs have lost Menzies’ vision’. Sydney Morning Herald, 7 Sept. [Online] Available
from: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/fraser-says-libs-have-lost-menzies-vision-20120907-25irx.html [25 Oct 2012].
Rodgers, E. (2010a). ‘Policies In Brief – Immigration’. ABC Elections: Australia Votes 2010, 16 Aug. [Online]
Available from: http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/policies/ [24 Oct 2012].
Rodgers, E. (2010b). ‘Greens, Labor seal deal’. ABC News, 1 Sep. [Online] Available from: http://www.abc.net.au/news/201009-01/greens-labor-seal-deal/ [24 Oct 2012].
Sartori, G. (1976). Parties and Party Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sauer, M., Abjorensen, N. & Larkin, P. (2009). ‘Democratic Role of Political Parties’. In Australia: The State of
Democracy. Annandale, NSW: Federation Press.
Senior, P. & Van Onselen, P. (2008). ‘Re-examining Leader Effects: Have Leader Effects Grown in Australian
Federal Elections 1990-2004?’. Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 225-242.
Sheehan, P. (2007). ‘A Contest of Ideas, not Ideology’. Sydney Morning Herald, 26 Nov.
Smith, R. (2012). Ch. 2, ‘The Liberal Party’. In D. Clune & R. Smith (eds.) From Carr to Keneally: Labor in Office in
NSW 1995-2011. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Strange, R. (2010). ‘Immigration on top of federal election debate agenda’. PerthNow, 25 July. [Online] Available
from: http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/election2010/immigration-on-top-of-federal-election-debate-agenda/story-fn616huc-1225896746402 [23
Oct 2012].
Tingle, L. (2012). ‘Great Expectations: Government, Entitlement and an Angry Nation’, Quarterly Essay, no. 46 (June),
pp. 1-65.
Towell, N. & Cox, L. (2012). ‘Greens brace for campaign's black Saturday’. Canberra Times, 23 Oct. [Online]
Available from: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/greens-brace-for-campaigns-black-saturday-20121022-281v9.html [24 Oct
2012].
Weller, P. (2009). ‘Cabinet Government: Australian Style’. In J. Wanna (ed.) Critical Reflections on Australian Public
Policy: Selected Essays. Canberra, ACT: Australian National University E-Press.
11
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Shirtless Beach Boys
12
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Shirtless Suburban Teenagers
13
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
Class Lists
SL Class 1
Clarke, Ben
5 Dec 1996
15
United Kingdom
London
Connell, Nick
1 Feb 1997
14
Australia
Frankston
Doherty, Brian
13 Jan 1996
15
Australia
Bendigo
Fitzpatrick, Tomas
23 Apr 1997
14
Australia
Cobram
Gregory, Jake
31 Dec 1996
15
Australia
Numurkah
Ross Lynch
29 Dec 1995
16
United States
McAuliffe, Callan
24 Jan 1995
16
Australia
McNamara, Aidan
21 May 1996
15
Australia
Millard, Daniel
4 July 1996
15
United Kingdom
Shackleton, Callum
17 Sep 1997
14
Australia
Tait, Richard
6 June 1996
15
United Kingdom
Townley, Greg
18 Aug 1996
15
United Kingdom
14
Melbourne
Melbourne
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
SL Class 2
Bullock, Aiden
17 June 1995
16
United States
Puyallup
Chance, Greyson
16 Aug 1997
14
United States
Oklahoma
Chandler, Luke
15 Oct 1996
15
Australia
Bendigo
Cox, Mitchell
3 Aug 1997
14
Australia
Mt Colah
Hatton, Jakob
13 Oct 1997
14
Australia
Darwin
Hatton, Kyle
13 Oct 1997
14
Australia
Darwin
Herrod, Blake
16 Sep 1996
15
Australia
Frankston
Mahone, Austin
4 Apr 1996
15
United States
Texas
Mansfield, Ethan
23 Dec 1996
15
Australia
Frankston
Neal, Joshua
28 June 1997
14
Australia
Mt Druitt
Tuyt, Olfe
13 Dec 1996
15
Netherlands
Amersfoort
Williamson, Jackson
20 Aug 1995
16
Australia
Altona
Aplin, Niels
3 July 1996
15
Singapore
Chia, Eugene
19 Aug 1996
15
Singapore
Dunn, Will
26 May 1996
15
United Kingdom
Farrugia, Beau
5 Nov 1997
14
Australia
Gilbert, Bertie
1 May 1997
14
United Kingdom
Kelly-Kobes, Sean
6 Apr 1996
15
Australia
Lim, Sean
21 Oct 1997
14
Singapore
Mann, Darren
28 Oct 1997
14
Australia
Sydney
Peterson, Lorne
13 Aug 1997
14
Australia
Frankston
Simpson, Cody
11 Jan 1997
14
Australia
Gold Coast
Smith, Darcy
18 Aug 1995
16
Australia
Melbourne
White, Matt
24 June 1996
15
Australia
Melbourne
SL Class 3
15
Sunbury
Camberwell
POL 831 Political Parties & Policy | Assignment 2
Convenor: Diana Perche | Student ID: 42646561
FST Class 1
Bennett, Oscar
28 Nov 2000
11
Australia
Melbourne
Brown, Joe
1998
13
Australia
Frankston
Doherty, Casey
23 Dec 1998
13
Australia
Bendigo
Duus, Loki
1 Feb 2000
11
Australia
Tongala
Gamble, Nathan
12 Jan 1998
13
United States
Huels, Justin
15 Apr 1998
13
Australia
Vermont
Jansen, Jordan
12 Mar 1998
13
Australia
Gold Coast
Madigan, Mathew
30 Jan 1998
13
Australia
Melbourne
Rayeroux, Bailey
13 Sep 1998
13
Australia
Langwarrin
Simmons, Andrew
20 Aug 1998
13
Australia
Blacktown
Warren, Lachlan
12 Feb 1999
12
Australia
Morwell
Wright, Paul
22 Oct 1997
14
Australia
Mirboo Nth
Alexander, Darcy
19 Aug 1998
13
Australia
Ararat
Borger, Aidan
21 May 1998
13
Australia
Echuca
Bowen, Arthur
14 Apr 1998
13
United Kingdom
Brooks, James
9 Dec 1998
13
Australia
Melbourne
Brooks, Lachlan
18 Dec 2000
11
Australia
Melbourne
Clare, Laaland
1998
13
Australia
Tyabb
Coates, Patrick
16 July 1998
13
Australia
Frankston
Crispe, Madison
16 Sep 1998
13
Australia
Ararat
Hall, Kingston
7 June 1999
12
New Zealand
Jonas, Frankie
28 Sep 2000
11
United States
Norton, Brandon
14 Sep 1999
12
Australia
Sydney
Wilson, James
9 May 1998
13
Australia
Sydney
FST Class 2
16