Scholars and Radicals: Writing and Re-thinking Class Structure in Australian History

We wrote Class Structure in Australian History in a period of heightened social struggle. It grew out of collaborative research projects at Sydney's Free U in the late 1960s. The book was distinctive in both emphasising the socialist tradition of class analysis and trying to find new paths for it. Its first edition was ignored by mass media, and often mis-interpreted in professional journals. Nevertheless it circulated widely and has continued to be a point of reference for progressive scholarship. Its method tried to carry forward the Free U project of democratic knowledge making, linking documents with analysis and inviting shared interpretation. Its theory emphasised the reality of classes as historical formations, and the importance of understanding class structure as a whole, on both points reacting against influential frameworks of the time. Looking back, CSAH appears uncertain in its approach to race and gender, and inadequate in its handling of coloniality; it was written in isolation from similar projects in other parts of the postcolonial world. Yet its approach still has value in understanding the changing dynamics of class on a world scale, the class relations of the neoliberal era in Australia, and the current configuration of power in Australia.     

Driving Priorities in Risk‐based Regulation: What's the Problem?

Both risk‐based and problem‐centred regulatory techniques emphasize giving priority to matters that are serious and important. In the case of both risks and problems, however, issues of identification, selection, and prioritization involve inescapably normative and political choices. It is important, therefore, to understand why regulators target the risks and problems that they do; which factors drive such choices; and how regulation is affected when these factors pull in similar or opposite directions. Such an understanding provides a fresh framework for thinking about the challenges of both risk‐based and problem‐centred regulation. The analysis presented here does not oppose either risk‐based or problem‐centred regulation, but it illustrates why neither is as straightforward as simple calls for ‘better regulation’ may suggest, and it proposes ways in which key aspects of those challenges may be addressed.     

Tax increment financing as a municipal revenue: helping the legislature get it right

Tax increment financing raises revenue for public infrastructure in a redevelopment district by capturing increased property tax revenue stimulated by the redevelopment. TIF has left a long trail of intergovernmental controversy. Cities in Washington State, which approved TIF in 1982, have yet to complete a project. After two failed constitutional amendment campaigns, a test case was initiated to validate TIF before the state supreme court. The cities lost. This article examines the technique, this case, and lessons for making tax increment financing available as a revenue source in Washington.