Local planners — global constraints

A number of reports have been published over the past few years documenting the evidence of decline in the northeastern U.S.A. and the simultaneous migration of industry to the U.S. Sunbelt. (Academy for Contemporary Problems, 1977; Sale, 1975; Sternlieb and Hughes, 1975). In developing appropriate recommendations to planners, such studies invariably urge that localities or regions facing industrial out-migration arrest this activity by making themselves more suitable and attractive (Council for Northeast Economic Action [CNEA], 1977a) within the framework of a number of characteristic strategies. We propose to examine critically some of the traditional strategies recommended by these reports.     

Charles Taylor, Marx and Marxism

Charles Taylor's engagement with Marx and the Marxist tradition has been relatively neglected in the literature on his work. This is a strange omission, because he was not only a pivotal figure in the development of the New Left, but also wrote many pieces which critically engaged with the main principles of Marx and Marxism. This paper re-examines Taylor's engagement with Marxism and thereby exposes a neglected element in his political philosophy. The following themes emerge: the self; Taylor's conception of the affirmation of ordinary life; democracy; ecology; and religion. In one area at least, the affirmation of ordinary life, a crucial element of Marxism is retained and positively endorsed by Taylor. In relation to the other themes, while he raises important issues for Marxist theory, he is, at times, far too quick to dismiss Marx's arguments and also misses similarities between those arguments and his own work.     

Reforming the Conventions Regarding Parliamentary Scrutiny of Ministerial Actions

Parliamentary scrutiny of government ministers is limited by the convention that one house of parliament cannot compel a member of the other house to appear before it. This convention limits the Senate's capacity to examine ministers who are members of the House of Representatives. It has its origins in UK parliamentary practice, and is given alleged legal force in Australia by virtue of section 49 of Australia's constitution. That section effectively says that Australia's current parliamentary powers, privileges and immunities are those of the UK House of Commons in 1901.
However analysis of UK practice prior to the twentieth century reveals a surprising picture. Far from protecting members of one house from the other house's inquiries, it would seem that invitations issued by one chamber to a member of the other were never refused, an element of 'custom and practice' now conveniently overlooked. Furthermore, the purpose of the powers had nothing to do with protecting ministers. On the contrary, their origins He in a desire to ensure the strength of parliamentary accountability. If modern Australian practice is to be true to historical House of Commons practice, consideration should be given to ensuring that each chamber does have guaranteed access to ministers of the other house.