Search results

Examines policy reviews and government white papers; East Asian economic crisis, APEC, relations with Indonesia, Malaysia, China, and Japan, regional and international security, and environmental diplomacy.

Community development; Employment; Government policy; Aboriginal australians; Australia

Social constructions of education historically have impacted adversely on marginalised Indigenous Australian students whose mobile lifestyles and cultural positioning challenge teachers' social inclusion practices. This paper examines the
preparation and capacity of pre-service teachers to engage with mobile Indigenous students and their communities. Evidence is drawn from practicing teachers who reflected on their experiences in working with Indigenous students and
their communities since graduation and how their experiences, both pre- and post-graduation, impacted on their beliefs and practices. Individual interviews were conducted with four teachers who also participated in the first stage of the study as a group of 24 second year primary pre-service teachers at a regional Australian university. It was found that pre-service teachers representing a range of world views benefit from positive, scaffolded experiences that provide
opportunities to develop practices that foster social justice and inclusion. The findings of this study have implications for providing pre-service teachers with opportunities to understand how historical factors impact on Indigenous student
mobility in contemporary Australian educational settings and the development of socially inclusive pedagogical practices. Further longitudinal research to expand the evidence base around developing culturally-appropriate pedagogical
practices in pre-service teachers is needed to support their transition into teaching. (author's abstract)

Recent allegations of genocide and military repression in the Indonesian province of Papua have intensified pressure on the Australian Government to defend the human rights of Indigenous Papuans and their right to self-determination. The issue of Papuan self-determination is however a delicate one. Indonesian sovereignty is recognised under international law, but there is increasing debate as to its legitimacy. Papua is of also vital importance to Indonesian's economy and nationalist pride. Jakarta has thus made it clear it will not tolerate separatist movements, and will not risk losing Papua as it did East Timer. Military presence has thus been justified to protect Indonesia against Papuan insurgents. However the Indonesian military is responsible for grave human rights abuse and intimidation to the point where allegations of genocide are arising. Jakarta's attempts to undermine Special Autonomy laws are fuelling separatist movements, and violent riots continue. The international community is being called upon by the Papuans to intervene. As Papua's closest Western neighbour, Australia has been a focus for Papua's humanitarian appeals. The recent arrival of 43 Papuan asylum seekers to our shores has posed Canberra with a profound diplomatic challenge: Papuans human rights concerns must be addressed in a manner that will not adversely impact on bilateral relations with Indonesia. Long-standing pressure to maintain regional stability pervade Australia's current policy on Papua, particularly in the context of the war on terrorism. The Australian Government's reluctance to intervene in Papua is based on legitimate concerns to protect Australia's national interest in good relations with Indonesia. Cooperation with Indonesia is integral to Australia's counter-terrorism strategy and regional security, and Australia has an interest in maintaining the Indonesia's assistance in combating illegal fishing and people smuggling. Although AusAid delivers aid development assistance to Papua, the unchanging situation in Papua uggests greater pressure on Indonesia is needed if peace in Papua is to be achieved.Australia has humanitarian obligations to help its neighbours and on top regional security could greatly increase. In the long term, protection for human rights will improve regional stability and could decrease terrorist infiltration in conflict stricken areas of South East Asia. Policy advisers should not overlook the potential for Papuan conflict to escalate into civil war. Better organised and internationally supported separatist movements could pose real problems for Jakarta, and any real threat of separatism could trigger mass murder and destruction by the TNI. At this point, Australia's reputation as a peacekeeper in the region will leave little choice but to intervene into Indonesia's sovereign affairs again, particularly if under pressure from the domestic constituents. Preventative diplomacy is a much cheaper and less dangerous option, both in terms of Australia's national interest and the survival of Indigenous Papuans. Accordingly, Australia needs to balance its interests in Indonesia with human rights considerations and long term goals. There is no need to choose between pure pragmatic policy and support for independence if strong action is taken now to push for better living conditions of the Papuans within Indonesian sovereignty. Australia should consider creative and practical policies to implement a fair autonomy package for Indigenous Papuans to ensure they can live peacefully without independence. Papuans problems derive from a complex set of interlinked issues interlinked, and Australia needs to be comprehensive in its engagement. It is important to work cooperatively with Indonesia in Papua and our capacity to help Papua is directly dependant on the level of trust from Jakarta. Strong diplomatic dialogue is needed to combat Indonesian suspicions, as is a public awareness campaign domestically, to raise confidence in Australia's policies. Second, Australia must declare support for Special Autonomy will not continue unless progress is made by Jakarta to this end. Practical and realistic initiatives should be developed to improve living conditions in Papua, as well as a sustained, long term program to promote further democratic transition and demilitarisation in Indonesia as a whole. Regional engagement would give greater legitimacy to our goals, and would promote greater unity, security, and inter-reliance in our region.

Analyse der australischen Rentenpolitik, die durch das duale System der Einheitsrente und der beruflichen Pensionierung mit Steuerkonzessionen gekennzeichnet ist. Der Autor weist auf die Notwendigkeit einer besseren Integration dieser beiden Systeme hin. (DÜI-Mül)

Disseminating national health and alcohol policies to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia has been a challenging task for governments and public servants. This has been for a number of reasons, including the enduring (negative) legacy of past "Aboriginal affairs" policies, the fact that Indigenous health programmes and alcohol programmes have been treated separately since the 1970s, and a more recent context in which the recognition of cultural difference was privileged. Confronted with the politics of difference, health departments were slow to examine avenues through which best practice advice emanating from WHO, and alcohol policies such as harm minimisation and early identification and treatment in primary health care, could be communicated in culturally recognisable ways to independent Indigenous services. In addition, there was hostility towards harm minimisation policies from Indigenous service providers, and Indigenous treatment programmes remained largely committed to abstinence‐oriented modalities and the disease model of alcoholism, despite moves away from these approaches in the mainstream. However, genuinely innovative acute interventions and environmental controls over alcohol have been developed by Indigenous community‐based organisations, approaches that are reinforced by international policy research evidence.

When the British government passed the Western Australian constitution in 1890, granting responsible government to its sixth and last Australian colony, it sought to keep control over Aboriginal policy to itself. In doing so, it adopted an approach more like that to Natal, in southern Africa, than to the other Australian colonies that had all gained responsible government several decades earlier. Yet British attempts to retain control over Aboriginal policy within the context of responsible government were a failure in both Western Australia and Natal. As Arthur Berriedale Keith - the eminent Scottish jurist, scholar and expert on constitutional questions within the British Empire - wrote towards the end of his life, in 1937, responsible government was 'wholly incompatible with executive safeguards'. Attempts to impose the latter in order to ensure that Britain rather than the self-governing settlers controlled the governance of Indigenous people had 'failed utterly'.

AbstractThe debate on the recognition of Indigenous Australians in the Australian Constitution is more about how, than whether, this should occur. The two main proposals involve the use of a preamble. One proposes symbolic recognition in a new constitutional preamble with a clause prohibiting use of the preamble in constitutional interpretation. The other would give Parliament power to make laws with respect to Indigenous Australians, but qualify it in a preamble so that it could only be exercised for their 'advancement'. This article draws on comparative experience of the use of preambles in other common law countries to challenge the assumptions underlying each proposal.

This book explains everything that Australians need to know about the proposal to recognise Aboriginal peoples in the Constitution. It details how our Constitution was drafted, and shows how Aboriginal peoples came to be excluded from the new political settlement. It explains what the 1967 referendum - in which over 90% of Australians voted to delete discriminatory references to Aboriginal people from the Constitution - achieved and why discriminatory racial references remain. With clarity and authority the book shows the symbolic and legal power of such a change and how we might get there. Co

Despite some positive developments, Indigenous Australians continue to face significant economic disadvantage. Indigenous Australians are still less likely to finish school, have a job, own a home or run a business than non-Indigenous Australians. The Australian Government is committed to overcoming this situation. The Indigenous Economic Development Strategy 2011–2018 sets out a long-term agenda for Indigenous economic participation that will guide government decision-making and program development through to 2018. The Strategy also details a program of specific initiatives and reforms that translate the Australian Government's priorities into action. These actions will be assessed and updated every three years to ensure that the Strategy responds to changing circumstances and continues to drive real and sustainable progress. The Australian Government recognises that tangible and lasting improvements in the economic situation of Indigenous Australians cannot be achieved by government alone. This Strategy supports Indigenous Australians to take responsibility for their own economic wellbeing and to lead independent and productive working lives. The Strategy also emphasises the vital roles that partnerships play in this endeavour, across the private sector, the not-for-profit sector, all levels of government and the community. The five priorities of the Strategy are to: 1. strengthen foundations to create an environment that supports economic development 2. invest in education 3. encourage participation and improve access to skills development and jobs 4. support the growth of Indigenous business and entrepreneurship 5. assist individuals and communities to achieve financial security and independence by increasing their ability to identify, build and make the most of economic assets.