The centralisation of power in Australia has long been criticised as an inefficient approach that overlooks regional diversity and local expertise. While centralisation is often pursued for uniformity and cost-saving, it can alienate communities and lead to policy decisions that are out of touch with local needs. Australia's vast geographic spread means that a one-size-fits-all approach, dictated from Australia's capital centres at the state level and Canberra at the federal level.
Australia is a federation but its geography is one where many communities, in rural and regional areas.
For instance, the push towards centralising health services has led to the erosion of local medical care in many communities, forcing patients to travel long distances for treatment. The Grattan Institute highlighted how centralised hospital systems, while efficient in urban centres, often fail to deliver the same outcomes in regional areas . Similarly, centralisation in education policy has led to a "metro-centric" bias, where regional schools are disadvantaged by standardised curriculums that don’t account for local context .
Economist Henry Ergas has argued that decentralisation fosters innovation by encouraging competition between states and territories, allowing for tailored approaches to local challenges . In this light, the pursuit of centralisation risks stifling regional potential and diminishing Australia's economic resilience.