University Essay: Political Goals and Planning Law and Policy

This essay delves into the intricate relationship between political goals and the direction of planning law and policy. It examines how politics, as a framework with objectives for society, utilizes law and policy planning as a means to achieve these objectives. The paper explores whether policy planning is inherently political, arguing that while political goals heavily influence planning, it is not fully political unless politically sanctioned. The discussion covers the functions of law in relation to politics, including their roles as means, objectives, or obstacles, and analyzes how political influence manifests in the planning process. The essay emphasizes the importance of intermediary systems in shaping policy outcomes and highlights the impact of political actors and their knowledge in the planning process. It further discusses the influence of political goals on the implementation of policies, and the interplay of law and politics as two dimensions of the same entity, ultimately asserting that political goals often prevail over the law. The essay concludes by exploring how political strategies can be expressed through legal structures and the progressive functions of political goals and policy implementation.

1
DO POLITICAL GOALS DICTATE THE DIRECTION OF PLANNING LAW AND POLICY?
Student’s Name
Course
Professor’s Name
University
Date

2
Introduction
As in politics, we clearly see in policy planning an intrinsic confusion of means and
ends. As a philosophical based framework, politics often has an objective for the society but
comprises of the means of accomplishing these objectives. Planning of law and policies is a
fundamental method of accomplishing political objectives, which of course determines the
overall direction of a country, adherent to the set practices. As such, planning of policies and
laws is clearly the means of politics. However, does this make policy planning politics?
Although it is usually said that policy planning dictates the directions of political goals, it is
hard to accept these goals as politics unless they are politically sanctioned. And even if such
in law and policy planning is avoided, this might surely be considered as a defect in policy
planning instead of a formative framework. Based on this conventional argument this paper
takes a position that planning of law and policies is overwhelmingly dictated by political
goals, and thus it should be understood as part politics. This paper would further examine the
association between the planning of law, policies and politics.
Discussion
The functions of the law are relative to politics in three fundamental aspects: a
means, an objective or an obstacle. First, politics can be used to delineate certain legal values
as their goal. In this case, political understanding of such values becomes totally same to an
accurate legal consideration of the same values or associations. Second politics can consider a
certain law as an obstacle on its path towards the realisation of particular goals. In such
circumstances either politics or the law prevail over each other. 1In the first case, politics
often effectuates its resolutions at the expense of the law, while in the subsequent instance
independence of the law process is preserved through the decisions of the high court or any
1 Frank Baumgartner, and Bryan Jones. Agendas and instability in American politics. ( University of Chicago
Press, 2010).134-139

3
other actions taken by legal experts, intellects, organisations and the public at large. This is
done as an effort to stop any illegal acts by key political actors. That being said, politics and
the process of implementing laws often produces their actual picture of reality. In some cases,
such picture differs and in some other, they overlap.2
Most important, it can be argued that the main reason that conventional wisdom has
discussed in the past decade, is because of inherent theoretical issues in planning itself.
Especially when it comes to defining the means and ends with regard to politics.3 In contrast
to focusing on the planning process that has been prevalent for quite a long period , the best
way is to focus on the product of policy planning such as legal frameworks , value standards ,
policy documentation and its association with politics .4 Therefore, it is not least when it
comes to identifying the means, but in extension also the end.
Of great importance is that politics can never directly intervene in the policy planning
process as it aims to structure and shape the final outcome , but it applies multiple transitional
systems , such as institutional and spatial systems , discursive frameworks , resulting in a
system that eliminates any obstacle the might hinder achieving political goals. Such systems
are changed with time, but still represent the tangible political frameworks, which in some
cases might show remarkable durability. Instead of dismissing the intermediary systems as
grander goals of politics itself, they should be considered as serious systems and maybe even
be accepted as the end of planning and implementing laws and policies. This would indeed
prove that there is a great political influence in the planning and implementation of laws and
policies.5 However, only a more definite delimitation that would leave political goals within
2 Kirk v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (2010) 239 CLR 531
3 David Lewis . (The politics of presidential appointments: Political control and bureaucratic performance.
Princeton University Press, 2010).57-58
4 See eg, Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, Report of the World
Summit on Sustainable Development, Annex, 4 September 2002, UN Doc A/CONF.199/20; D Zaelke, D Kaniaru,
and E Kruzikova (eds), Making Law Work: Environmental Compliance & Sustainable Development (vol 1, 2005).
5 Franck Düvell. "Paths into irregularity: The legal and political construction of irregular migration." (European
Journal of migration and Law 13, no. 3 2011): 275-295.

4
the realms of politics. Notably, politics points to the fundamental directions in planning
through the association between intermediary systems used in the planning process and the
key issues addressed by political goals or put directly as intermediary products.
The concept of national institutionalism provides that a true embracement of
institutional systems such as intermediaries that are open for the development of research and
public understanding of policies and support the planning process does not quite appear to be
there in most political frameworks that seek to influence the policy planning process.6 In most
cases, it appears to only stop at a mere argument for institutions as per se. This is often much
less if political goals follow a discursive system, so fundamental for successful
implementation of governance. Not even in designing policies , dealing with the most
concrete realities of designing laws is a belief in theoretical understanding in a particular
medium or forms to be found. A great reason for this may be the clarity in what it means by
theory in planning discourse , but to make the state of affairs satisfactory is by truly
abandoning policy planning as anything else than politics by other means. The reason why
the idea has been abandoned in the past years has to do with the reluctance to consider
intermediary systems as the end of policy planning , instead of allowing the planning process
converge with political goals .
The ability to make out the difference could be the very definition of professionality.
If political views define intermediary systems as the end of planning for laws and policies,
instead of politics themselves this would also redefine the means in planning. Baumgartner et
al., indicates that the preference of seeing political ends as the motivation of planning, it
accentuates the importance of the political process for planning on how various political
6 The NIA and JSCOT processes were introduced by the Howard government early in its incumbency, fulfilling
an electoral promise. See: D Williams, ‘Australia’s Treaty Making Processes: The Coalitions Reform Proposals’
in P Alston and M Chiam (eds), Treaty-making and Australia: globalization versus sovereignty? (1995) 185-95.

5
decisions are made and how the implementation is made.7 While intermediary is
tremendously important for the policy planning process , it can also run the risk of concealing
a more immediate process for planning that might be in a more direct sense is true means of
planning itself.
The first point when politics influence law and policy planning is when laws are
originally being defined. In such instances, both political and executive actors are directly
involved in setting goals. In most of the developing countries, the direction given by political
actors might be important since there might be little agreement among the members of the
political community based on values, goals and the fundamental beliefs of the society itself.8
If such cues are absent among political actors, the normal condition might be conflict and
confusion over the goals pursued through political activities. In the lack of such cues from
political actors, the normal condition may be a substantial amount of conflict and
misperception over the ends pursued in public activities.
Political actors are always urged to possess the necessary skills that would help deal
with the complex nature of policy development and balance their political interest through the
necessary resolutions. However, most of the contemporary theories have not focused on these
issues. A vertical continuum indicates the range of political influence in policy development
and implementation lies between organisational political focus and a community political
focus .The political spectrum emphasizes more on individual and organisational influencers
as the priority when planning certain laws and policies. In order to succeed in turbulent
political environments, political actors are forced to adapt to the dynamics of such an
environment. The community political focus, identifies the pressures often put on
7 Baumgartner, Frank R., Jeffrey M. Berry, Marie Hojnacki, Beth L. Leech, and David C. Kimball. Lobbying and
policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why. ( University of Chicago Press, 2009.435-439)
8 New South Wales v Commonwealth (Seas and Submerged Lands Act Case) (1975) 135 CLR 337

6
organisations by stakeholders and the public at large, as policy issues cannot be solved
through hierarchical government.
It is generally acknowledged that the planning process can be defined as the process
where various forms of knowledge are applied and can play a fundamental role in elucidating
the meaning of different instances in the planning discourse. In order to understand the
planning process, it is important to understand the generative theory. This is a theory that
supports political actors in understanding the broader social and cultural context of a certain
policy. The fundamental question always remains, how well informed are the political actors
when it comes to different knowledge forms, which possibly will differ in different fields of
policy planning. 9
It is important to note that, the lack of theory on the knowledge process in policy
planning is capable of identifying the role of various political actors and their forms of
knowledge in the planning process often clutters the understanding of the planning process .
Moreover m it creates a reoccurring unproductive conflict between various knowledge
traditions and the contribution of political actors to the planning process. Haltom, William,
and Michael McCann argue that political influence in the implementation of policies has to
some extent weakened the planning discipline, particularly when it comes to the creation of
discernible means and end which are fundamental when it comes to planning as a support for
the implementation of political goals.10
Starting point perspectives on politics and law
9 Yearbook of International Environmental Law (1996-2006). Australian reports therein have been variously
contributed by Donald R Rothwell, Stephen Bowhuis, Maureen Grant-Thomson, Mark Driver, and officers of
the Australian Office of International Law at the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department.
10 William Haltom, and Michael McCann. Distorting the law: Politics, media, and the litigation crisis. (University
of Chicago Press, 2009).69-135

7
Law and politics as social phenomena are two dimensions of the same entity; a
monistic system. There separate existence of politics and law is only a consequence of a
human dualistic perspective of the world. However, there is something the law ought not to
include in its sphere; the differentiation of adversaries based on pure political grounds. This
would lead to a separation between the public needs and the interest of the key actors. When
such a case occur, political goals inevitably prevails over the law.
If we attempt to analyze the law through a political dimension, it is evident that
through an institutional perspective that law implementation is expressed through two major
factors: establishing intermediary systems legitimised through specific legal structure or a
non-states where the attorney ship belongs. From planning –related perspective, the law
appears through procedures such as legislative council where legal resolutions are established
through the function of the political system.
The relation between political goals and the planning of policies has in some cases
progressive functions. Political goals and policy implementation often strongly encourage or
suppress the development of societal relations, while both work together to bring order and
justice. The essence of these separate but connected concepts is that they assists in setting
each other's borders. Such borderline often prevents political goals surpass the rule of law and
policy planning. In actuality, all legal systems are a partial reflection of individual or
collective political strategies at a certain time and environment, which have taken the legal
form and nature11. This is important instance systems where most of the rule framers are
extremely politically legitimised bodies.
Banks indicates that the outcome of various policies and laws , as well as the changes
that occur thereof , are often as a result of power contests between political factions made up
11 Maarten Wolsink . "Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-political acceptance of renewable
energy, water, and waste facilities." (Environmental Impact Assessment Review 30, no. 5 2010): 302-311.

8
of different actors united by common beliefs and interests.12 Whether a certain policy gets
implemented, can thus be considered as a result of the constant dominance of the political
faction that championed certain policy initiatives within a relatively small group of people,
who have the interest to be politically active on a certain issue. Identifying the fundamental
issues for successful planning and implementation of a particular policy requires recognising
the competing goals, attributes and parameters of the competing ideologies and lastly the
contested space itself. These factors are likely to have significant differences, and thus they
can only be analysed on a case by case basis in order to determine what might help push the
political goals of the champions of a particular law or policy.13
Nussbaum’s ambiguity-conflict model offers a simple way of categorising policy
implementation and the necessary strategies required for successful application. Applying his
game construction concept, policy implementation can be classified into two factions: high
and low ambiguity, or high and low levels of conflict.14Ambiguity, in this context, is
described as to how easy political objectives and the methods of achieving them are
understood by all the concerned parties. Conflict, on the other hand, refers to the level of
agreement or opposition to a policy planning process due to political goals. All these factors
require diverse factors for a successful implementation. In uncontroversial, and well thought-
out political drivers, the only necessary thing is sufficient resources and public support to see
the implementation of the policy.15 However , in a case where policy planning is well less
understood by the public , there are possibly many opportunities for political actors and
12 Gary Banks, "Evidence-based policy making: What is it? How do we get it?." How Do We Get It (2009).
13 Cristina Temenos, and Eugene McCann. "The local politics of policy mobility: learning, persuasion, and the
production of a municipal sustainability fix." Environment and Planning A 44, no. 6 (2012): 1389-1406.
14 Martha Nussbaum . Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. (Harvard University
Press, 2009) .79-120
15 Fred Block, Revising state theory: Essays in politics and postindustrialism. (Temple University Press, 2010).76-
98

9
bureaucrats change the planning process , to a negotiated process , and lastly ways that are
greatly different from the design intended for the public .
When the ambiguity is low and public opposition is high , it is often hard for political
actors to influence policy plans and implementation , and the success against such a move can
only be determined by whether the championing actors will corporate power and implement
their plans. Crotty adds that when a policy change is both ambiguous and highly
controversial, political actors use symbolic policy strategies, leaving any legislated policy
changes to continuous competition between the competing political actors over how to
influence the implementations.16 This implies that political actors deliberately chose to
advocate for the implementation of certain law or policy planning only in broader
perspective, leaving the real ideas still to be discussed during the implementation by persons
who might be more concerned with the laws at hand.17 For instance, In the Australia, the
climate change policy to regulate coal mining and greenhouse emissions might be a great
example of a policy, highly influenced by political actors, as is immigration policy.18
Conclusion
16 William Crotty, "Policy and politics: The Bush administration and the 2008 presidential election." (Polity 41,
no. 3 2009): 282-311.
17 Nuno Quental, Julia Lourenco, and Fernando Nunes Da Silva. "Sustainable development policy: goals, targets
and political cycles." (Sustainable Development 19, no. 1 2011): 15-29.
18 Wilderness Society v Turnbull (2007) 166 FCR 154 at 175-176 [81] Branson and Finn JJ. Several of these
matters, in turn, relate to the implementation by Australia of its international obligations including the
provisions relating to world heritage properties, Ramsar wetlands, threatened species and ecological
communities, and migratory species: Div 1, Part 3, Chapter 2, EPBC Act.

10
Politics dictates all the levels of policy planning and implementation. Many active
lobbies and political action systems in various countries work to influence policies every day.
The work of politicians is challenging because the valued brought to them by competing
groups usually differ widely. Politics might understand the law basically as a means for the
achievement of certain political goals. However, it is important that politics realise its
political goals in accordance with legal principles and equality. Moreover, politics might
understand the law as an obstacle to achieving certain political goals. In such cases, it is
either politics that prevails over the law or vice versa. That being said, it can be concluded
that politics often effectuates its resolutions at the expense of the law. Policymakers should
follow several lines of thinking in order to arrive at policies or laws that might be
controversial or overlapping. This would ensure that there is something for everyone once the
policy is implemented .When politics prevail over the law, the policymakers or any other
individual who reasons in the same conceptual way causes serious damage to the
independence of the rule of law. This, in turn, destroys the democratic society and should be
therefore avoided to the highest possible degree.

11
Bibliography
A) ARTICLES/BOOKS
Crotty, William. "Policy and politics: The Bush administration and the 2008 presidential
election." (Polity 41, no. 3 2009)
Baumgartner, Frank et al., Lobbying and policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why.
University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Banks, Gary. "Evidence-based policy making: What is it? How do we get it?." How Do We
Get It (Harvard University Press,2009)
Block, Fred. Revising state theory: Essays in politics and postindustrialism. (Temple
University Press, 2010).
Baumgartner Frank, and Bryan Jones. Agendas and instability in American politics.
(University of Chicago Press, 2010).
Haltom, William, and Michael McCann. Distorting the law: Politics, media, and the
litigation crisis.( University of Chicago Press, 2009).
Düvell, Franck. "Paths into irregularity: The legal and political construction of irregular
migration." (european Journal of migration and Law 13, no. 3 2011).
Lewis, David . The politics of presidential appointments: Political control and bureaucratic
performance.( Princeton University Press, 2010).
Nussbaum, Martha . Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership.
(Harvard University Press, 2009).

12
Temenos, Cristina, and Eugene McCann. "The local politics of policy mobility: learning,
persuasion, and the production of a municipal sustainability fix." (Environment and Planning
A 44, no. 6 2012).
Quental, Nuno, Julia M. Lourenco, and Fernando Nunes Da Silva. "Sustainable development
policy: goals, targets and political cycles." (Sustainable Development 19, no. 1 2011).
Wolsink, Maarten. "Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-political acceptance
of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities." (Environmental Impact Assessment
Review 30, no. 5 2010).
B) Acts
New South Wales v Commonwealth (Seas and Submerged Lands Act Case) (1975) 135 CLR
337
Wilderness Society v Turnbull (2007) 166 FCR 154 at 175-176 [81] Branson and Finn JJ.
Several of these matters, in turn, relate to the implementation by Australia of its international
obligations including the provisions relating to world heritage properties, Ramsar wetlands,
threatened species and ecological communities, and migratory species: Div 1, Part 3, Chapter
2, EPBC Act.
Kirk v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (2010) 239 CLR 531
C) Treaties
The NIA and JSCOT processes were introduced by the Howard government early in its
incumbency, fulfilling an electoral promise. See: D Williams, ‘Australia’s Treaty Making
Processes: The Coalitions Reform Proposals’ in P Alston and M Chiam (eds), Treaty-making
and Australia: globalization versus sovereignty? (1995) 185-95.
D) Others