TOPIC 4.10: Policy advice and instruments

Basic policy instruments such as advocacy, money, action and the law provide a framework for considering policy driven behaviour change. Mechanisms such as incentives, subsidies, grants and rules may have unintended consequences.

Policy instruments

Althaus et al (2012)^[1] introduce policy instruments. They set out a number of possible instruments:

• Advocacy
• Money
• Government Action, and
• The Law.

Advocacy

Advocacy occurs when the government advocates for a particular outcome; this is persuasive rather than coercive. There are four types of advocacy:

First, the government could fund public education on the issue. Public education campaigns usually take the form of advertising in the media. Ideally, such a campaign would only include factual information and not become de facto promotion of the party in power. They should be designed to inform the public of new services they can avail themselves of or warn them of new laws or restrictions that impact on their lives. As the Fitzgerald Inquiry Report noted: “Although most Government-generated publicity will unavoidably and necessarily be politically advantageous, there is no legitimate justification for taxpayers’ money to be spent on politically motivated propaganda.” (Fitzgerald, 1989, p142)^[2].

In Queensland in the 1970s and 1980s, the government used to pay for a five-minute segment on Channel 9 every Sunday just before the 6 pm news. This segment was promoted as essential information on what the government was achieving but focused heavily on images of government ministers and provided very biased commentary. In effect, it was political advertising. Most jurisdictions now have very clear rules as to when advertising is acceptable and the nature of content so that it does not cross the line into becoming a party political advertisement instead of a public information campaign.

Second, they can rely on simple policy announcements, which usually do not need an advertising campaign. The government can rely on a press release from the minister and let the media do the rest. The spread of the policy depends on the number of people interested in the issue. This method does not guarantee that all stakeholders will be informed.

Third, the government can use consultative bodies, which are established under legislation or simply by ministerial decision. Their purpose is to bring together experts and community/industry representatives who can both advise the government on the issue in question AND advocate on behalf of the government to the people. These bodies are instruments in the sense that they help solve policy issues through good advice and by bringing the community on board with the new policy. They can be successful, but it depends on the nature of the issue and the legitimacy of the members of the board.

Finally, ministers can take on the responsibility of selling a policy directly to the public. Ministers carry on the same role as consultative bodies when they participate in ‘meet and greets’ with the public. They visit community organisations, government offices, private corporations and almost every other type of body. They use each occasion to both receive public feedback and sell the government’s policies.

The advantages of this method are that the ministers deal directly with the stakeholders, which can not only provide better quality and unfiltered feedback but is a more effective means of communicating that relying on other bodies to act on their behalf. However, meet and greets are extremely time consuming and cannot be the sole method of promoting a policy outcome. There is no reason, should sufficient time and resources be available, that a government could not use each of these methods in the same policy campaign.

Money

Money is a much more influential instrument than advocacy in bringing about change in a community and can be used as both a coercive and persuasive instrument. There are five methods of using money to influence behaviour.

First, governments have fiscal power, taxation and government spending, which can be used to shape macro-economic, that is nation-wide, outcomes. These powers relate to restraining extreme economic outcomes like unemployment and, most particularly, inflation.

Taxing powers are usually coercive when tax is imposed but can also be persuasive if tax concessions are provided. If the government wants to dissuade people from participating in an otherwise legal activity, they can tax it. The additional cost associated with the activity will reduce the number of people who think the activity is affordable. Taxes can also be used to offset the cost of dealing with the outcome of the activity.

Incentive payments are made to induce people to do something. They can take the form of direct payments, reductions of costs or tax exemptions/rebates. The government wanted a forestry industry to replace the logging of old growth forests, so they provided a hefty tax deduction for investment in tree plantations. The government wants Australians to have more children, so it reduces the cost of going to hospital, raising children through direct family benefits and subsidises childcare.

Grants are non-coercive direct payments. Grants are made to non-government bodies to carry out positive activities. They are made to every part of society from community, sporting, education, cultural, artistic, welfare, education and almost every other type of organisation. Grants provide the funds to make a project proceed that would otherwise have not been afforded.

Infrastructure spending. Many of the social and business activities that occur could not happen were it not for infrastructure. Infrastructure includes roads, buildings, telecommunications networks, dams, etc. Higher education could not occur if we did not have university buildings. Policing could not occur without police stations, a radio network, jails, courts, etc.

Governments can also take administrative action.

The most basic of these is a Cabinet Decision. These are policy making decisions by the Cabinet, but of themselves, have no legal power. Decisions have to be given effect through other means. This can take place through two methods, which are effectively the use of the law. First, the Cabinet decision could be to introduce a bill to parliament. Second, the cabinet decision could be the exercise of subordinate legislation; the power to make a legal decision given to a minister or Cabinet via an existing piece of legislation. Any other decisions not based in legislation are simply administrative decisions and do not have the authority of a law. They are pure policy.

Governments can also create new institutions bodies to work on behalf of the government to carry out a particular function. The most common are government departments, but they can also include other bodies from small committees through to government owned corporations.

The role of these bodies is to specialise in the delivery of services relating to a particular issue. For example, the portfolio of primary industries has a plethora of agencies monitoring different aspects of commodities and pests.

Governments can also set up public service programs. These internal arrangements give directions to government agencies to address an issue in a particular way. These decisions can arise from resource needs, demands of legislation, issues of justice, or simply better management.

Governments can also pass Parliamentary resolutions in the House. These have no power and are not intended to have such power. They are merely public relations; a statement of policy. It is neither a law nor a decision of the executive thus is not policy. This is very similar to the powers of the United Nations General Assembly

Finally, the government can use laws as coercive instruments.

The clearest version of this instrument is to pass new laws in parliament. Laws are enforceable through the justice system and are also enforceable against the government. As well as formal legislation, governments have access to subordinate legislation. This is ministerial made law, that is, power given to ministers by the Parliament. Subordinate legislation is designed to allow ministers to deal with matters that have a short deadline, are of minor importance or that require technical expertise. In effect, the minister’s department investigates or monitors the issue and advises the minister on the alternatives to address the issue. A good example of the need for subordinate legislation is the declaration of pests. When Fire Ants were discovered in Australia a declaration and eradication response was urgent. There would not have been time to take the matter to Parliament.