The Mandate and Responsible Government

Emy, Hugh V.

doi:10.1080/10361149751002

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since former Prime Minister John Howard introduced the terms "core" and "non-core" promises in 1996, 84 this slippery rhetorical distinction has been employed in political discourse to explain why some promises are kept and some are broken. Some contemporary politicians and commentators adopt the Burkean perspective that a representative should use their own judgment rather than precisely follow the opinions of the electorate.…”

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since former Prime Minister John Howard introduced the terms "core" and "non-core" promises in 1996, 84 this slippery rhetorical distinction has been employed in political discourse to explain why some promises are kept and some are broken. Emy, 87 and others such as Robert Manne, 88 pointed out the growing distrust with politicians who habitually conceal their real intentions prior to an election and make promises they have no intention of keeping. 85 Immediately after the 1996 election, Howard spoke of the "importance of reasserting the supremacy of parliament over the executive […] It is part of our system of government that the executive is controlled by the Parliament and the Parliament is controlled by law and customs and conventions of our society".…”

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some contemporary politicians and commentators adopt the Burkean perspective that a representative should use their own judgment rather than precisely follow the opinions of the electorate. Since former Prime Minister John Howard introduced the terms "core" and "non-core" promises in 1996, 84 this slippery rhetorical distinction has been employed in political discourse to explain why some promises are kept and some are broken. While issue-based mandates may at first appear straightforward, there are numerous reasons why people vote the way they do, not least among them is voting against an incumbent government rather than for an opposition's specific policies.…”

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While Howard claimed an executive mandate, there was later qualification: in the lead-up to the Budget, and in an attempt to reduce the budget deficit more quickly, the government discarded many of its "non-core" election promises. Emy, 87 and others such as Robert Manne, 88 pointed out the growing distrust with politicians who habitually conceal their real intentions prior to an election and make promises they have no intention of keeping.…”

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Rhetoric of “The Mandate” in Contemporary Australian Context

Strating

Harkness

2018

Aus J of Politics History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The “electoral mandate” serves a useful function as a political weapon in competitive party democracies, notwithstanding the ambiguities, multi‐layered complexities and uncertainty of many of the issues which the concept involves. The diverse uses of “mandate” indicate competing ideas in Australian politics about the responsibilities of parties to pursue commitments made during campaigns and the extent of rights to govern. This article portrays mandate not as a “theory” or “doctrine”, but as a rhetorical device that needs to be examined in the context of “contested word use” in political speech. The renewed interest in the study of rhetoric reflects the usefulness of examining multiple and layered meanings that exist under what ostensibly may appear as “empty rhetoric”, and to understand how rhetoric is used to persuade an audience of the validity of a particular action or viewpoint. While mandate often comes under attack as “meaningless”, it is a useful persuasive tool employed by politicians to consolidate their legitimacy and justify their rights to implement a political agenda and, as such, it contributes to public discourses relating to the nature of political representation.

show abstract

“…Since former Prime Minister John Howard introduced the terms "core" and "non-core" promises in 1996, 84 this slippery rhetorical distinction has been employed in political discourse to explain why some promises are kept and some are broken. Some contemporary politicians and commentators adopt the Burkean perspective that a representative should use their own judgment rather than precisely follow the opinions of the electorate.…”

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since former Prime Minister John Howard introduced the terms "core" and "non-core" promises in 1996, 84 this slippery rhetorical distinction has been employed in political discourse to explain why some promises are kept and some are broken. Emy, 87 and others such as Robert Manne, 88 pointed out the growing distrust with politicians who habitually conceal their real intentions prior to an election and make promises they have no intention of keeping. 85 Immediately after the 1996 election, Howard spoke of the "importance of reasserting the supremacy of parliament over the executive […] It is part of our system of government that the executive is controlled by the Parliament and the Parliament is controlled by law and customs and conventions of our society".…”

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Right To Implement Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Rhetoric of “The Mandate” in Contemporary Australian Context

Strating

Harkness

2018

Aus J of Politics History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In comparison, the state-legitimacy frame is based on the view that the public should give endorsement and consent, generally at elections, for the state to govern (Emy 1997).…”

Section: State-centric Frames Of Public Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Responsive governance and complex urban settings: Responding to change in an urban policy arena - Brisbane (QLD) Australia and Portland (OR) USA

Schmidt¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite remarkable progress in planning and management, the development of adaptive governance for urban settings is incomplete; particularly in the context of global change and uncertainty (Birkmann et al. 2010, Wilkinson 2012. Urban settings are characterised by complex institutions and power relations that tend to resist rather than adjust to change. Established interests are often prioritised; emergent 'non-core' interests can remain marginal, and can lose capacity during critical change (Jänicke 1997). Given this situation, how does the governance of a 'non-core' policy arena adjust to change over time? The research concludes that rather than seeing resilient policy arenas as requiring the 'governance of adaptation' through particular normative forums, structures or principles, it is more useful to focus on and potentially steer the supporting factors that underpin diverse inter-actor responses to change across a policy arena. This iii 'governance and adaptation' view recognises that in urban settings, actors and their agency are embedded within multiple structures. Many of these structures cannot be adapted, but critically, some realign as an adjustment to change and this potentially supports adaptation. Metagovernance is found to be critical, although in general it is partially decentred amongst a set of key actors. A 'governance and adaptation' framework builds a policy arena-wide explanation from empirical settings. The findings have significant implications for efforts to enhance responsive governance in urban settings and to better strengthen its resilience to future uncertainties.iv

show abstract

Europa, wie es den Bürgern gefällt? Positionen von Wählern, Parteien und ihren Europa-Abgeordneten im Vergleich

Faas¹

2003

Europäische Integration in Der Öffentlichen Meinung

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Mandate and Responsible Government

Cited by 8 publications

References 7 publications

The Rhetoric of “The Mandate” in Contemporary Australian Context

The Rhetoric of “The Mandate” in Contemporary Australian Context

Responsive governance and complex urban settings: Responding to change in an urban policy arena - Brisbane (QLD) Australia and Portland (OR) USA

Europa, wie es den Bürgern gefällt? Positionen von Wählern, Parteien und ihren Europa-Abgeordneten im Vergleich

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About