Tasmania (Essay Sample)

Tasmania is essential to the prosperity of federal and the state governments in Australia. The northern area of Tasmania, close where the pulp mill site is proposed, holds most marginal electorates at both federal and state levels. The political significance of Tasmania and issues coming from it are discussed in this part and specifically the importance of party politics and the necessity to influence fluctuating voters when confronted with two marginal electorates. The fine line the line political parties had to tread throughout the last three decades in Tasmania has mostly related to issues that have produced tension between social, economic and environmental influences on voters in the Tasmanian and federal electorate (Mallin 2009, p. 158).
At a federal level, there are two major parties which are the LNC (Liberal/National Coalition) and the ALP. In the 2007 federal election, the ALP won after a decade of LNC control. There was no hesitation that the Gunns pulp mill issue influenced greatly on the fortunes of both political parties. The LNC via the environment minister, Malcom Turnbull, the construction of the pulp mill was allowed just prior to the election. The ALP whilst giving the issue as a low profile as possible also shown that they would support the pulp mill if elected.
The Gunns is playing as a main pressure group on the neo-pluralist field. According to Truman, many interest groups are politicized. That is either from the beginning or from time to time in the course of their improvements they make their requests through or upon the institutions of government. The institutions of government focus of interest-based power and their relations with interest groups may be overt or latent. In order to make claims, political interest groups will attempt to find access to the key points of decision within these institutions (Dahl 2003, 364).
In case of Gunns, it is strongly favoured in the power spectrum as stated by neo-pluralists. Gunns Limited’s influence comes in part from its absolute size and significance to the Tasmanian business community and to government. It is largest private sector business in Tasmania. Until lately, Gunns owned 185,000 ha of freehold estates, worked numerous woodchip and saw wood mills, employed approximately 1700 people and so on. Gunns woodchip business benefited other forestry businesses too. Moreover, it has deep relations with the political arms and forestry of the Tasmanian government. Also has a co-dependent relationship with the leading public institution Forestry Tasmania, which is responsible for handling the state’s production forests. Its business model mainly relies on Gunns Limited. In 2007, Forestry Tasmania settled a twenty-year wood supply contract to supply Gunns with 1.5 million tonnes of woodchips (Gale 2009, p. 280). Further, it is also applicable to Lindblom’s point. In his work ‘Politics and Markets’, Lindblom stated that, as the main investor and largest employer in society, business is obliged to exercise significant influence over any government, whatever ideological propensities or manifesto commitments (Heywood 2013, p. 63).
Truman agrees that business has a favoured position in the conventional myth pattern. In other words, pluralists accept that business does exercise substantial influence over the economy and the political system, and to that extent, they would occur to acknowledge a relation between economic and political power (Smith 1990, p. 304). Similarly, it is essential to deny the view that pluralists see the state as neutral. Truman viewed that as the president has to be reachable to all interests, he keeps a certain independence. Nonetheless, groups which give the president support, and which he is a member, will have benefits. At pluralist thought, it does not gold the ring, but reflects the pressures on it (Smith 1990, p. 304). These pressures do not come from only groups, but also, the bureaucracy, the electorate and the party.
However, as the economically powerful groups wield influence on the state, they make the state as their tool. And if a situation like neo-pluralism where the state comes to shape its own interest. In this kind of unequal and market sort of society, where the power is taken through competition. The developing winning group not only maintains power, but attempts to recall it. So, power in the hands of the pressure group dominating the society, fades the pluralist own vision of dispersion of power and hence, makes the whole politics, oligarchical (Arora & Awasthy 2007, p. 112). This is the criticism of inequality in pluralism. Although, pluralism itself quite clear that economic inequality often undermines political inequality, it still lacks a clear theory or principle for assessing just and unjust allocations of wealth, property and income (Dahl 2003, p. 385). In this way, Gunns limited can be seen as over dominated and functioning solely without any competition.
As stated above, neo-realists’ claim that the state can act as one of the competing groups and have its own interest. In Gunn’s case, the state government resisted the community pressure and used the power of the parliament to pass legislation aimed at avoiding public opposition and community challenge. The Tasmanian government under former Premier Paul Lennon and the Minister for Economic Development Lara Giddings created the Pulp Mill Task Force led by Bob Gordon, who was the head of Forestry Tasmania. The Task Force was initiated to indorse Gunns pulp mill and effectively push pro-pulp mill advertising around Tasmania by means newspaper advertisements, a road show, websites and media interviews (The wilderness Society 2012). In neo-pluralist thought, they may say the government allowed the pressure group to operate at a lower level of social and environmental responsibility for its own interest. The natural resource mining or extraction usually located on public lands and seas, there is therefore obviously part of the state in determining the rental and royalty business must pay for accessing resources and the management exercise that are permitted (Gale 2012, p. 288).
To sum up, pluralism is a theoretical orientation, emphasizing the casual power of a plurality of interest groups, as well as elements of the institutions, acts of governance and democratic governance especially. Views of classical and neo-pluralists view disagreed on the division of power in democratic society. Simply, classic model claims that no single group should dominate the power. On the other hand, neo-pluralism argues that some groups are preferred more than others in the power field, especially businesses. Neo-pluralism does not view government as a neutral arbiter among interest groups, but has shifted itself into its own protecting its own interest. However, while general pluralism is clear about the economic inequality which undermines political inequality, it lacks a clear principle of equality.
The exclusivity of the Gunns case is that Tasmania is a wealthy, though small, state is one of the wealthiest and most developed countries in the world. Whilst Gunns company is very significant in respect of the economic well-being of Tasmania, the fact of ...