This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by McDonald, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Legitimating private interests

Hegemonic control over `the public interest' in National Competition Policy

University of Ballarat, j.mcdonald{at}ballarat.edu.au

National Competition Policy (NCP), legislated in Australia in 1995, has arguably been the single most consequential economic policy over the past decade. Yet it has largely escaped sociological analysis. This article investigates how the concept of the public interest in NCP has actually had the effect of legitimizing neo-liberal ideologies concerning private, individual, economic interests. Using critical policy analysis, this article examines how this legitimization has occurred through: (1) the policy language of the public interest, and how this discourse has shifted over time; (2) the implementation of NCP, particularly the application of the public interest test; and (3) evidence proffered by dominant institutions about the social and economic distributional outcomes of NCP. This analysis demonstrates that the policy language and public discourse of the public interest has been used to secure hegemonic control to legitimate the interests of dominant groups.

Key Words: critical policy analysis • hegemony • National Competition Policy • neo-liberal • public interest

References

• Bessant, J. (2002) `The Politics of Official Talk about Welfare Reform in Australia', Just Policy 28: 12—22.
• Business Council of Australia (2005) Locking In or Losing Prosperity: Australia's Choice. Melbourne: Business Council of Australia.
• Cahill, D. (2004a) `The Radical Neo-liberal Movement and Its Impact upon Australian Politics', paper presented to the Australasian Political Studies Association Conference, University of Adelaide, 29 September—1 October.
• Cahill, D. (2004b) `Ideas and Interests: The Radical Neo-liberal Movement and the Neo-liberal Counter-revolution in Australia', paper presented to the Social Change in the 21st Century Conference, Centre for Social Change Research, Queensland University of Technology, 29 October.
• Centre for International Economics (1999) Guidelines for NCP Legislation Reviews. Prepared for the National Competition Council. Canberra: Centre for International Economics.
• Conley, T. (2004) `Globalisation and the Politics of Persuasion and Coercion', Australian Journal of Social Issues 39(2): 183—200.[Web of Science]
• Consumer Law Centre Victoria and the Centre for the Study of Privatisation and Public Accountability (2006) Electricity Reform in Victoria: Outcomes for Consumers. Victoria: Consumer Law Centre Victoria & Monash University: Centre for the Study of Privatisation and Public Accountability.
• Council of Australian Governments (2006) CoAG Background Paper: CoAG National Competition Policy Review. URL (consulted 12 November 2006): www.coag.gov.au/meetings/100206/national_competition_policy_report.rtf
• Engels, B. (2006) `Old Problem, New Label: Reconstructing the Problem of Welfare Dependency in Australian Social Policy Discourse', Just Policy 41: 5—14.
• Fairclough, N. (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
• Fairclough, N. (2001) Language and Power, rev. edn. London: Longman.
• Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
• Flathman, R. (1966) The Public Interest: An Essay Concerning the Normative Discourse of Politics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• George, S. (1999) `A Short History of Neo-liberalism: Twenty Years of Elite Economic and Opportunities for Structural Change', paper presented to the Conference on Economic Sovereignty in a Globalising World, Bangkok, 24—6 March. URL (consulted 27 March 2007): http://www.swp.ie/resources/Ideas%20Workshop/2005/A_Short_of_Neo.doc
• Goldfinch, S. (2002) `The Old Boys' Network? Social Ties and Policy Consensus amongst Australian and New Zealand Economic Policy Elites', Policy and Society 21(2): 1—25.
• Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from The Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Edited and translated by Q. Hoare and G. Smith. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
• Hall, S. (1988) `The Toad in the Garden: Thatcherism among the Theorists', pp. 35—74 in C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. London: Macmillan.
• Hallebone, E., M. Townsend and M. Mahoney (2000) `Globalising Policy Changes: Social Impacts in Two Australian Rural Towns', Journal of Family Studies 6(2): 214—30.
• Hawke, R.J. (1991) Building a Competitive Australia: Ministerial Statement. House Hansard. Parliament of Australia. ParlInfo Web. URL (consulted 29 November 2006): http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au
• Hilmer, F. (1993) Independent Committee of Inquiry into Competition Policy in Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
• Hilmer, F. (1994) The Bases and Impact of Competition Policy. Australian Graduate School of Management, University of New South Wales. URL (consulted 1 December 2006): parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/repository1/library/miscitem/qt6460.pdf
• Jamrozik, A. (2001) Social Policy in the Post-Welfare State: Australia on the Threshold of the 21st Century. Sydney: Pearson Education.
• Jamrozik, A. (2003) `Social Policy and Social Welfare', pp. 666—77 in I. McAllister, S. Dowrick and R. Hassan (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of the Social Sciences in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Jones, A. and P. Smyth (1999) `Social Exclusion: A New Framework for Policy Analysis?', Just Policy 17: 11—20.
• King, S. (2003) `Competition Policy and Regulation', pp. 31—44 in I. McAllister, S. Dowrick and R. Hassan (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of the Social Sciences in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Larner, W. (2000) `Neo-liberalism: Policy, Ideology, Governmentality ', Studies in Political Economy 63: 5—25.
• McDonald, J. (2005) `Neoliberalism and the Pathologising of Public Issues: The Displacement of Feminist Service Models in Domestic Violence Support Services', Australian Social Work 58(3): 275—84.[CrossRef]
• Margetts, D. (2001) `Competition Policy, State Agreement Acts and the Public Interest', unpublished Master of Philosophy thesis. Western Australia: Murdoch University.
• Marston, G. (2000) `Metaphor, Morality and Myth: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Public Housing Policy in Queensland', Critical Social Policy 20(3): 349—73.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Mulgan, R. (2000) `Perspectives on "the Public Interest"', Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration 95: 5—12.
• National Competition Council (1996) Considering the Public Interest under the National Competition Policy. Canberra: National Competition Council, Commonwealth of Australia.
• National Competition Council (1998) Compendium of National Competition Policy Agreements, 2nd edn. Canberra: National Competition Council, Commonwealth of Australia.
• National Competition Council (1999) National Competition Policy: Some Impacts on Society and the Economy. Canberra: AusInfo.
• National Competition Council (2004) NCC Occasional Series: Microeconomic Reform in Australia — Comparison to other OECD Countries. Canberra: AusInfo.
• Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia ( 1999) Competition Policy: Friend or Foe. Economic Surplus, Social Deficit? An Interim Report of the Senate Select Committee on the Socio-economic Consequences of the National Competition Policy. Canberra: Parliament House.
• Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia ( 2000) Riding the Waves of Change: A Report of the Senate Select Committee on the Socio-economic Consequences of the National Competition Policy. Canberra: Parliament House.
• Productivity Commission (1999) Impact of Competition Policy Reforms on Rural and Regional Australia. Inquiry Report no. 8. Canberra: AusInfo.
• Productivity Commission (2005) Review of National Competition Policy Reforms. Report no. 33. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
• Pusey, M. (1991) Economic Rationalism in Canberra: A Nation-building State Changes Its Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Samuel, G. (2001) `National Competition Policy: The Public Interest ', presentation to the Economic Society of Australia, Canberra Branch, National Competition Council, Canberra, 15 May.
• Tito, F. (2001) `National Competition Policy: The Public Interest Test and Social Welfare', Impact October: 10—12.
• Valentine, B. (1999) `National Competition Policy: Legitimating Economic Rationalism', Australian Social Work 52(1): 26—31.
• Wragg, C. (2005) `What's the Public Interest in Electricity and Gas?', Just Policy 36: 44—6.

Journal of Sociology, Vol. 43, No. 4, 349-366 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1440783307083230


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by McDonald, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?