Abstract
Until recently, Australia's State Government-owned railways operated almost entirely within their home states. This has begun to change, in response to the new dynamics unleashed by economic and structural reforms which began in the 1990s. The economic regulatory system that governs third party access to track infrastructure is still a mix of State and Federal regulation, which has lead to calls for greater consistency. However, it is not clear how much centralisation is optimal. This paper examines railway governance from an historical and a functional perspective, and argues that the best approach is not technocratic, but institutional.
Highlights
Dean Bailey, a former professor at the University of Melbourne Law School suggested in a speech to his US colleagues that, “this matter of economic regulation constitutes the insoluble dilemma of federalism" whilst Justice Stone of Minnesota admitted that interstate commerce was a “nut did not know how to crack” (Ross, 1943, p888)
In Australia and Europe, rail has been called upon to improve competition in the transport sector. This is important for the economic governance of railways for it introduces two new elements to the railways not seen in Australia prior to the 1990s:
Most access occurs through State-based regimes. The exceptions to this are the Australian Rail Track Corporation’s (ARTC) interstate track, and the TarcoolaDarwin Railway, which is operated by Freightlink and which had its access regime certified by the National Competition Commission (NCC) in February 2000 as part of the public-private partnership under which the line was constructed
Summary
Dean Bailey, a former professor at the University of Melbourne Law School suggested in a speech to his US colleagues that, “this matter of economic regulation constitutes the insoluble dilemma of federalism" whilst Justice Stone of Minnesota admitted that interstate commerce was a “nut (he) did not know how to crack” (Ross, 1943, p888). There is much truth in both of these characterisations of economic regulation when viewed from the perspective of constitutional law, and the date of the quotations suggests the issue is not new. This paper seeks to contribute by examining both the history of railway governance and the haulage tasks it performs in Australia today. It finds that the art if not in finding the right balance between centralisation and fragmentation, but in developing an institutional framework within which the balance-point can evolve. Section Four examines Australian railways from the perspective of their haulage tasks to ascertain differences between the governance each type needs and how conflicts might be resolved.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
