Symposium: Recent Developments in Regulation and Implications for Social Inclusion

Abstract

In the face of the international financial crisis, there is mounting disillusionment with the neoliberal ideology which has underpinned public policy over the last few decades. This has been reflected by the recent change of government in Australia and the result of the American Presidential election in November. In both cases, the public's disillusionment and dissatisfaction with the regulatory and social welfare policies of the previous governments were key reasons for change. The increasing withdrawal of the state from traditional economic roles in most Western countries, including Australia, left the space open to markets and market relations. This is despite the vital role played by the state in economic development. As Chester shows, this was particularly the case in Australia from the time of European settlement. This reinforces the appropriateness of this symposium which examines a number of issues related to developments in regulation and implications for social inclusion. Chester's paper serves as an apt introduction to the symposium. Using French regulation theory, it documents the changing nature of the Australian state with an increased reliance--most marked since the 1980s--on the virtues of the market and on reducing the size of the government sector. However, Chester argues that this entailed a change in the form of regulation to 'regulation-for-competition', rather than a decline in the degree of regulation. Indeed, 'regulation-for-competition' is intrusive and involves significant direct control of the market and its participants. The six papers that follow can be divided into two distinct groups. The first three address specific issues associated with the new 'regulation-for-competition', while the final three highlight the implications of regulatory change for social inclusion and exclusion. One example of 'regulation-for-competition' is the recent WorkChoices legislation which implemented significant changes to labour market regulation under the guise of achieving structural competitiveness. Nevile and Kriesler consider the basis of these changes in the light of reforms proposed by the Rudd government. A major feature of the WorkChoices legislation was the attack on collective bargaining, and the intentional reduction in unions' power to negotiate on behalf of workers. Theoretical economics provides no clear winners in the debate over the effects of 'more or less' regulation of wages, although the role unions can play in achieving social inclusion through greater income equality is highlighted. Nevile and Kriesler note that, in direct contrast to the removal of collective bargaining rights of employees, the Trade Practices Legislation Amendment Act 2006 allows small businesses to bargain collectively with big business. However, as Isaac points out, this can present serious problems if, for example, the small business is a provider of services, and is therefore 'effectively involved in the sale of labour'--the province of industrial relations regulation. …