How is government held accountable for the exercise of its power?
Analyse the mechanisms that promote accountable and responsible government in Australia and evaluate their effectiveness
A direct answer to the WACE Year 12 Politics and Law dot point on governance and accountability. Covers responsible government, separation of powers, the courts, the media and external scrutiny bodies.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
What this dot point is asking
SCSA wants you to explain how the exercise of political and legal power is checked and controlled, and to evaluate how effective those checks are. Accountability means government can be called to explain and justify its actions and can be removed or corrected if it acts improperly.
Responsible government
Under the convention of responsible government, the executive (the ministry) is drawn from and answerable to the parliament. Ministers are individually responsible for their portfolios and collectively responsible for cabinet decisions. The government must retain the confidence of the lower house; if it loses a vote of no confidence, it must resign or call an election. Question Time, parliamentary debate and committees allow the parliament, especially the opposition, to scrutinise ministers.
The main limitation is that when a government holds a strong majority and party discipline is tight, the lower house rarely defeats the executive, so responsible government can become weak in practice.
The separation of powers and judicial review
The Constitution separates legislative, executive and judicial power across Chapters I, II and III. The clearest separation is the independence of the judiciary. Through judicial review, the High Court can declare legislation or executive action invalid if it exceeds constitutional power or breaches the Constitution. Administrative law also allows courts and tribunals to review government decisions for legality, ensuring decision-makers act within their powers and afford procedural fairness.
Elections and the federal structure
Regular elections (at least every three years for the House) are the ultimate accountability mechanism, letting voters dismiss a government. The federal division of powers and the bicameral parliament also distribute power, with the Senate acting as a house of review that can scrutinise, amend or block government legislation, especially when the government lacks a Senate majority.
External scrutiny bodies
A range of independent bodies provide accountability outside parliament. The Auditor-General audits government spending and reports to parliament. The Commonwealth Ombudsman investigates complaints about government administration. Anti-corruption commissions, including the National Anti-Corruption Commission established in 2023, investigate serious or systemic corruption. Freedom of information laws allow citizens to access government documents.
The media and civil society
A free press is sometimes called the "fourth estate". Journalists expose maladministration and inform voters, while interest groups and an active civil society pressure governments between elections. Limitations include media concentration, the influence of government communications, and restrictions such as defamation law and secrecy provisions.
Evaluating effectiveness
Australia has a robust, multi-layered accountability system, with independent courts, a powerful upper house, and growing integrity bodies. However, effectiveness is uneven: strong party discipline weakens parliamentary scrutiny, executive dominance can blunt accountability, and watchdog bodies depend on adequate funding and powers. Overall the system is strong but works best when several mechanisms operate together.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of SCSA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
WACE 202118 marksAnalyse the mechanisms that promote accountable and responsible government in Australia and evaluate their effectiveness.Show worked answer →
An 18 mark response needs the main mechanisms explained and a judgement on how well they work.
Internal political. Responsible government (ministerial responsibility, confidence of the House, question time) and the Senate as a house of review.
Legal. The separation of judicial power and judicial review of legislation and administrative action for legality and procedural fairness.
Electoral and federal. Regular elections as the ultimate check, plus the federal division of powers and bicameralism distributing power.
External. The Auditor-General, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the National Anti-Corruption Commission (2023), freedom of information, and a free media as the fourth estate.
Evaluation. Conclude that the system is robust and multi-layered but uneven: tight party discipline weakens parliamentary scrutiny, executive dominance can blunt accountability, and watchdogs depend on funding and powers. It works best when several mechanisms operate together. Markers reward range plus a balanced judgement.
WACE 20236 marksExplain the role of two external scrutiny bodies in holding government accountable in Australia.Show worked answer →
A 6 mark response needs two bodies with their function explained.
Auditor-General. An independent officer who audits Commonwealth spending and performance and reports findings to Parliament, exposing waste or mismanagement.
Commonwealth Ombudsman. Investigates complaints about the administrative actions of government departments and agencies and can recommend remedies, providing redress outside the courts.
A strong answer could instead use the National Anti-Corruption Commission (2023), which investigates serious or systemic corruption. Markers reward two accurate bodies and their distinct accountability roles.