Avoiding a ‘Catch 22’: Major Lessons From a Meta-Analysis of Reports of the Parliament of Western Australia on Threats to Sovereignty by National Uniform Legislation

National uniform legislation has served as an instrument to
attune federalism to new realities. The enactment of national
uniform legislation is not a panacea. However, it is critical that
when harmonisation is necessary, it is efficient and effective,
results in long-lasting uniformity and does not encroach on the
sovereignty of the State and Territory Parliaments. The problem
is that national uniform legislation is often called to address
complex legal issues, respond to a multifaceted debate and meet
the demands of actors from divergent ideological backgrounds.
This testing backdrop results in politically charged arguments
that often is presented as a false dilemma between sovereignty
and national uniform legislation, ‘catch 22’. To date, there has
been lack of systematic objective analysis on what would be an
example of this encroachment on sovereignty before the
allegation of encroachment arise in the State or Territory
Parliaments. This article seeks to address this gap through
empirical methods. To ensure objectivity, a meta-analysis of 173
reports was undertaken. Contrary to political statements, the
empirical findings suggest the cases of encroachment were rare
and were isolated to specific practices. Legislative drafters,
policymakers and law reformers must refrain from these
practices if they wish to avoid the ‘catch 22’ of choosing
between uniformity and sovereignty