In an intriguing new political strategy, described as a ‘vengeful gimmick’, Nigel Farage has declared that should his Reform party win government they will not only deport illegal immigrants but while those immigrants await deportation they will be housed in ‘immigration removal centres’ in areas that voted for the Greens and open borders.

Vengeful? Certainly. Not to mention a political masterstroke. But a gimmick? Hardly. Political parties of both the left and the right have for many years surreptitiously sought to use the power of incumbency to reward electorates who favour them and punish those who don’t. Here in Australia, think back to the ‘sports rorts’ and ‘Ros Kelly’s whiteboard’ scandals of the past, where both sides of politics have been caught red-handed attempting to bribe electorates with lavish grants.

But then again, why shouldn’t they? Why all the subterfuge? Shouldn’t electorates that vote for idiotic policies be the ones to bear the lion’s share of the problems they cause? And shouldn’t electorates smart enough to vote into power politicians committed to sensible policies enjoy the fruits of those decisions?

For many years, there has been a long-running joke that the smug and wealthy electorate of Warringah wouldn’t have been quite so eager to oust Tony Abbott if the price of installing Teal and Climate 200-backed Zali Steggall had been gigantic windmills and vast solar farms installed the length and breadth of Sydney’s pristine and idyllic northern beaches.

Indeed, if our federation still worked the way it was originally intended to work, with states competing against each other for population, revenue, business and lifestyle, and with the ability to raise their own taxes, the idea of rewarding or punishing electorates (or states) for their decisions would be far more palatable. At the moment, Australia’s most irresponsible state, Victoria, with net debt forecast to hit a record $200 billion by 2030, should be nearing total collapse. Businesses and small business families should be fleeing the state for fear of being taxed to oblivion by a hopeless, socialist government. But since Federation, successive High Court and federal government decisions have seen the power of the states diluted in favour of power being dramatically centralised in Canberra. This process has picked up pace since 1942; with the states no longer permitted to impose personal income taxes; John Howard’s GST windfall being spread across the nation along quasi-communist lines (from each according to their ability, to each according to their need) and so on. Ridiculously, Canberra now funds things like schools and medicine but it is the states that run them under instructions. Thus, no direct accountability for mismanagement. Perhaps that was the idea all along.

Nowadays, gross financial mismanagement by a bad state government frequently goes unpunished.

Shouldn’t it be the other way round? Shouldn’t you get what you vote for?

Robert Gottliebson made the point this week that international ratings agencies let the states get away with financial blue murder because they assume Canberra will come to their rescue.

Perhaps the Coalition could look at ‘doing a Farage’ in the lead-up to the next federal election. How about promising that all future renewables projects will be strictly confined to electorates that vote Labor/Teals/ Greens at the next election? And all renewables subsidies will then come out of the GST allocations to those states? How about removing large chunks of red, green and black tape to stimulate business, but only in electorates that vote for the Coalition or One Nation? How about all names of cities, towns, train stations, schools and parks being changed to Aboriginal names in those electorates that voted in favour of the Voice, and strictly the traditional colonial names mandated within those electorates that voted No? How about a future Coalition government repealing Jim Chalmers’ proposed changes to the capital gains tax and negative gearing, except in electorates that voted for Labor, where they will be left in place?

All of which is probably unconstitutional, or unworkable, or impractical, or whatever. But it’s certainly lots of fun to imagine more direct accountability for political decision-making.

But to be serious, there is something dysfunctional about our current federal arrangements, whereby a hard-core left-wing government is able to operate with impunity despite barely one in three Australians having voted for it. Many of the bad decisions being made by this ideologically driven bunch of undergraduate socialists will be felt for years if not decades, and there will be little future governments can do about it.

Currently in the United States, citizens are eagerly moving from poorly managed states to superior states in droves (ie from Democrat-controlled states and cities to Republican ones). But in Australia, the lack of financial competition between states means not only that good decision-making tends to get watered-down, but that bad decision-making gets washed through the federal system.

The rest of Australia bailed out Victoria during Covid, and we will no doubt continue to do so for many years to come.