Democratic constraint and embrace: Implications for progressive non-government advocacy organisations in Australia1

Abstract

The advocacy work of non-government organisations can be either constrained or embraced by government attitudes and practices. Although it is widely accepted that NGOs are an essential component of a healthy and robust democracy, serving as essential intermediaries between community and government, and providing a voice for marginalised groups to make claims on governments between elections, the current dominance of the public choice paradigm in public administration has seen the legitimacy of NGOs come under attack. Questions have been raised about the representativeness of NGOs and the legitimacy of their standing as policy advocates. As a result of this shift many disadvantaged groups that had taken years to organise themselves sufficiently to have a voice have found themselves increasingly constrained and excluded from the policy-making process. The threats that many NGOs are now facing have the effect of reducing government accountability, sustaining existing inequities and, ultimately, diminishing the quality of Australian democracy. 1This article is developed from the discussion paper Silencing Dissent: non-government organisations and Australian democracy, by Maddison, S., R. Denniss, and C. Hamilton, published by The Australia Institute in June 2004. The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers at the Australian Journal of Political Science for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.