The ‘Dog That Didn't Bark’—The Royal Commissions That Do Not Get Appointed

Just as in the Sherlock Holmes story, ‘Silver Blaze’, when the clue to the theft of the prize horse was that the dog did not bark, then the overlooked issue about royal commissions is why governments do not appoint them. This is just as important as it is to study why they do. This highlights the theory of ‘non‐decision making’—‘a deliberate decision not to act’ when governments seek to keep issues off the agenda and in the case of royal commissions, to avoid appointing them. As no government can respond to all the many calls for royal commissions, then how they avoid appointing them is worthy of study. This paper, through an historical overview of the role of royal commissions and several federal case studies, analyses how governments employ ‘non‐decision making’ techniques to avoid appointing royal commissions. That no national royal commission was appointed to review Australia's response of the pandemic has been seen as one example of ‘non‐decision making’. It is in contrast with countries like Sweden, United Kingdom and New Zealand where major commissions to review the pandemic have been appointed

Commission · Government (linguistics) · Pandemic · Royal Commission · Royal family · Commonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism · Policy Transfer and Learning · Public Policy and Administration Research