New approaches to governance that have evolved in parallel to the expansion of the community sector offer the promise of meaningful coproduction of public policy. However, surveys of workers in community organisations highlight their frustration at what they perceive to be their increased marginalisation from policy-making domains, in particular greater constraints on their capacity to engage in advocacy. This paper examines the impact of the current regimes of government contracting and funding on the Australian community sector by exploring the dimensions of these perceived constraints on advocacy. This involves tracking the evolution of governance models applied to the community sector over the last three decades and then focusing on the government response to advocacy under the current funding regime. The paper argues that in the current environment, government ' community relations will require both sectors to make concessions and adjustments. Governments must accept that the use of contracting monopolies to stifle advocacy and dissent will only serve to weaken their capacity to deliver and sponsor services that respond to community needs, while community organisations must accept that new governance regimes require new advocacy strategies.
|Title of host publication||Australian Political Studies Association, Refereed Papers|
|Editors||John Casey, Bronwen Dalton|
|Place of Publication||Sydney, Australia|
|Publisher||University of Technology|
|Number of pages||26|
|Publication status||Published - 2004|
|Event||Australian Political Studies Association - Adelaide, Australia|
Duration: 29 Sep 2004 → 01 Oct 2004
|Conference||Australian Political Studies Association|
|Period||29/09/04 → 01/10/04|
Casey, J., & Dalton, B. (2004). Ties That Bind? The Impact of Contracting and Project-Based Funding Regimes on Advocacy. In J. Casey, & B. Dalton (Eds.), Australian Political Studies Association, Refereed Papers (pp. 1-26). University of Technology.