De-Separation of Political Elites in Australia

One of the defining features of Westminster parliamentary systems was that there were once two distinct career paths for political elites. Elected politicians drawn from various previous private and public sectors careers acted as legislators and ministers. They were supported by career public servants who were appointed on merit through a competitive system. The former had relatively short political careers, were motivated by ideology or political preferences. The latter had longer “full-life” careers and could not afford to be myopic when it came to policy. Dowding and Taflaga (2020; 2022) argue that in Westminster systems there has been a de-separation of these careers. Politicians have become professionalized increasing drawn from political-facilitating and instrumental backgrounds. At the same time senior public service has become politicised with governments changing senior servants on arrival and bringing in people from the private sectors. Secondly, they increasing advised by political staffers or special advisors, often young people who intend to become elected politicians (Snagovsky, Taflaga, & Kerby, 2022). Dowding and Taflaga argue this leads to poorer legislation. This paper examines the first part of the claim using a comprehensive data set of Australian political elites to track the changing career paths of political elites. Dowding, Keith, and Marija Taflaga. 2020. “Career De-Separation in Westminster Democracies.” Political Quarterly 91 (1): 116–24. ———. 2022. “Procedural Rationality in Westminster Systems: How De-Separation Affects the Decision Premise.” Public Administration Review 82 (5): 920–30 Snagovsky, Feodor, Taflaga, Maria, & Kerby, Matthew. 2022. “Responsive to whom? Political advising and elected careers in institutionalized democracies.” Party Politics, online