Suchergebnisse

One of the great unanswered questions of the Commonwealth Constitution is whether the House of Representatives and Senate are equal or whether one ultimately has more power than the other. The Whitlam Labor government elected in 1972 faced a Senate elected in 1967 and 1970. Despite Senate obstruction, Whitlam proceeded with an ambitious legislative programme through 1973 and into 1974. By April 1974, six bills appeared to provide a "trigger" for the use of the Section 57 deadlock resolution procedure in the Constitution. Section 57 provides that if a bill has been twice passed by the House of Representatives and twice rejected by the Senate, the Governor‐General can dissolve both houses and an election is held. If the government is returned and wishes to proceed with the trigger bills, it can again pass them through the House and if they are again rejected by the Senate, the Governor‐General can convene a joint sitting of the two houses at which, if the bill is approved by an absolute majority, it is deemed to be passed. Major obstruction in the Senate, including a threat by the Opposition to block supply, led Whitlam to seek a double dissolution, hoping to gain a majority in both houses or, failing that, the opportunity to pass the trigger bills at a joint sitting. The ensuing election saw the return of the Whitlam government in the House but continuing to lack a majority in the Senate. This led to the only joint sitting in federal history, in which all six trigger bills were passed. But there was a constitutional sting in the tail when the Petroleum and Minerals Authority Act was subsequently found by the High Court not to have been validly passed. This case is argued to have made s57 potentially unworkable. The 1974 double dissolution stands in stark contrast to the 1975 double dissolution, which is argued here to be its "Evil Twin." There have been three further double dissolutions since 1975: 1983, 1987, and 2016, but no more joint sittings. In 1987, there was set to be a joint sitting on the proposal for an identity card, but this was thwarted on a technicality. So the 1974 double dissolution achieved the objective of breaking a deadlock but at the cost of revealing a way for a determined Senate to make s57 unworkable.

The Whitlam government of the 1970s introduced the principle of self-determination to Indigenous affairs. Since then it has been accepted as an important factor in attaining equality for Indigenous Australians. Self-determination can be broadly understood to mean the transference of political and economic power to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. In is understood in terms of Aboriginal people having control over the ultimate decision about a wide range of matters including political status, and economic, social and cultural development and having the resources and capacity to control the future of their own communities within the legal structure common to all Australians. Political representation is a vital aspect of Indigenous self-determination as it is the forum in which Indigenous people can express their views and opinions as well as influence policies concerning their lives and communities and interact with the government in order to achieve the best possible results for all involved. It can be argued that the present government's policies in the area of Indigenous affairs have marked a significant shift away from the policy of self-determination as evident in the dismantlement of representative structures such as ATSIC. The policies of self-determination and self-management led to what Will Sanders describes as two experiments in the creation of government-sponsored Aboriginal representative structures - the National Aboriginal Consultative Committee (NACC), and the National Aboriginal Conference (NAC). Both the NACC and the NAC were elected advisory bodies to the government that were both short-lived and were replaced with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC). ATSIC differed form its predecessors in that it combined two functions within one organization - representation and executive responsibilities. Upon its inception, ATSIC was described as a path breaking experiment in the field of Indigenous affairs internationally. ATSIC was an elected body with a strong regional focus with 60 (later 36) regional councils which formed the basis of ATSIC's representative structure. Each ATSIC region had a Regional Council. 8-12 people were elected to each Regional Council who then in turn elected a Regional Chairperson and a Deputy. These Regional councils are grouped into 16 ATSIC zones each of which elected a national Commissioner from among their regional councillors. In an attempt to balance representation of regions with very different populations, zones ranged from one to eight regional councils whilst there were 60 regions from 1990 to 1993. From late 1993, when there were 36 regions, zones ranged from one to four regional councils. The administrative arm was headed by a Chief Executive Officer and administrated ATSIC's various programs, including the implementation of decisions made by the elected arm about loan and grant applications and the direction of funding to particular service delivery organisations. A review of ATSIC in 2002-2003 resulted in a public discussion paper and a final report outlining problems with ATSIC's structure and operations and recommendations for reform. One of the main criticisms of ATSIC was the need to improve connections between regional representative structures and national policy formulations. Within six months of the report being published the government position did an abrupt about face - from strengthening ATSIC, which was considered a unique organisation to doing away with it. In April 2004, both the coalition government and the labour opposition announced intentions to abolish ATSIC. In May 2004, the government announced that ATSIC was to be abolished in two stages, with the national board to terminate in 2004 and the regional councils in 2005. The National Indigenous Council (NIC) was established to advise the government on Indigenous affairs and consists of appointed members and is not representative nor does it have the power to influence policy making in Indigenous affairs The abolition of the nationally elected representative Indigenous body ensures that the government will only have to deal with Indigenous peoples on its own terms and without any reference to the views and goals of Indigenous peoples. Increased Indigenous participation and control over decision making is essential to improving government service delivery. Ultimately, abolishing ATSIC will simply silence Indigenous people at the national level while the deeply entrenched crisis in Indigenous communities continues unabated. The removal of ATSIC and the lack of a replacement representative body for Indigenous Australians means that once again, Indigenous people have lost the power to influence the decisions that impact on their lives. International examples from Canada, the US and New Zealand show that there are various models for Indigenous representation which facilitate self-determination. It is vital that these models are considered as well as the models of past Australian representative structures when developing a representative body for Indigenous Australians. A representative body must be established for. Indigenous Australians so that once again, they influence policies which concern them, advocate on behalf of Indigenous Australians and negotiate with governments for positive outcomes to improve their lives.

Sir Arthur Tange was perhaps the most powerful Secretary of the Australian Defence Department and one of the most powerful of the great 'mandarins' who dominated the Commonwealth Public Service between the 1940s and the 1970s. His strong, and often decisive, influence on both administration and policy was exerted by virtue of his intellectual capacity, his administrative ability and the sheer force of his personality. Controversies from his time in Defence, including those associated with 'the Tange report' and 'the Tange reforms', echo to this day, and it is still easy to identify both staunch admirers and vitriolic critics in defence and public service circles. Tange wrote this account in his last years. It is a memoir – based largely on memory supplemented by limited reference to documentary material – that focuses upon his career after he came to Defence in 1970. It records his own account of his part in those administrative reforms and policy shifts, as well as his involvement-or non-involvement or alleged involvement-in several of the political crises of the 1970s, including the downfall of John Gorton as Prime Minister and the dismissal of the Whitlam Government.

In the 1970s the Australian Commonwealth Government and three States, Victoria (1974), New South Wales (1977) and South Australia (1978), passed legislation to protect the built heritage within their jurisdictions. The legislation was primarily a response to two factors: a large number of public protests against the demolition of historic buildings in all Australian states by the 1970s and the influence of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, which the Whitlam Government (1972-75) embraced enthusiastically. The other states, with governments that were more influenced by development interests, were slow to follow the federal lead. In this study, Sharon Mosler examines heritage issues and conflicts in Adelaide from enactment of the first South Australian Heritage Act in 1978 to its successor in 1993, and also analyses issues leading from that period into the twenty-first century. State legislation introduced by the Labor government of Premier Mike Rann (2002 – present) has affected the built environment significantly since this book began. The Rann government has given the built heritage a low priority in its strategic plan compared to population growth, while the Adelaide City Council has become more balanced in the past decade, although the council too has focussed on increasing Adelaide's population. The result has been more high-rise buildings at the expense of heritage conservation and historic precincts

In the 1970s the Australian Commonwealth Government and three States, Victoria (1974), New South Wales (1977) and South Australia (1978), passed legislation to protect the built heritage within their jurisdictions. The legislation was primarily a response to two factors: a large number of public protests against the demolition of historic buildings in all Australian states by the 1970s and the influence of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, which the Whitlam Government (1972-75) embraced enthusiastically. The other states, with governments that were more influenced by development interests, were slow to follow the federal lead. In this study, Sharon Mosler examines heritage issues and conflicts in Adelaide from enactment of the first South Australian Heritage Act in 1978 to its successor in 1993, and also analyses issues leading from that period into the twenty-first century. State legislation introduced by the Labor government of Premier Mike Rann (2002 – present) has affected the built environment significantly since this book began. The Rann government has given the built heritage a low priority in its strategic plan compared to population growth, while the Adelaide City Council has become more balanced in the past decade, although the council too has focussed on increasing Adelaide's population. The result has been more high-rise buildings at the expense of heritage conservation and historic precincts.

Histories of the colonisation of Australia have recognised distinct periods or eras in the colonial relationship: 'protection' and 'assimilation'. It is widely understood that, in 1973, the Whitlam Government initiated a new policy era: 'self-determination'. Yet, the defining features of this era, as well as how, why and when it ended, are far from clear. In this collection we ask: how shall we write the history of self-determination? How should we bring together, in the one narrative, innovations in public policy and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander initiatives? How (dis)continuous has 'self-determination' been with 'assimilation' or with what came after? Among the contributions to this book there are different views about whether Australia is still practising 'self-determination' and even whether it ever did or could. This book covers domains of government policy and Indigenous agency including local government, education, land rights, the outstation movement, international law, foreign policy, capital programs, health, public administration, mission policies and the policing of identity. Each of the contributors is a specialist in his/her topic. Few of the contributors would call themselves 'historians', but each has met the challenge to consider Australia's recent past as an era animated by ideas and practices of Indigenous self-determination.

The study of embassy architecture has predominately focused on the United States and to a lesser extent the United Kingdom. In particular this research has been conducted by Jane Loeffler as captured in her book The Architecture of Diplomacy: Building America's Embassies (2011) and by Ron Robin in Enclaves of America: The Rhetoric of American Political Architecture Abroad, 1900-1965 (1992). Both studies establish that embassy buildings can be utilised as historical references to establish a viewpoint into a nation's political and cultural history. This is no different in Australia, where Australian embassy buildings allow us insight into the directions taken in government policy, international relations, architecture and society. In order to begin to comprehend the complex nature of this building typology, archival research must initially be conducted into the government departments that were responsible for driving embassy design since the opening of Australia House in London in 1918. By correlating this research with domestic and foreign policies that were implemented as a response to changing world events, it becomes clear that a number of bureaucratic forces are behind the development of Australia's embassy buildings. This paper will focus on the influence these forces had on embassy design during the 1970's, when the Overseas Property Bureau was created and Australia developed several high profile embassies under the Whitlam Government.

What are the ideational, strategic, and political foundations of current Australian policy towards China? Although the strategic and security implication of a rising China in the region is frequently seen as a modern issue, the challenge of how to deal with a 'China growing strong' has preoccupied Australia since the 1950s; while modern approaches date from the 1960s. This paper traces the evolution of Australian security policy, attitudes, strategies, and assumptions behind both Liberal and Labor responses to the 'China security question' as well as the politics driving theme from Prime Minister Robert Menzies through to current Prime Minister John Howard. How have attitudes and responses to the 'China security question' evolved and changed, why did they do so, and how is this relevant to understanding current and future Australian responses to meeting the challenge of China's continued rise today? This paper explores these questions in chronological order, which coincides with the thematic development of the 'China security question' beginning with the Liberal Governments up to 1972, then to the Whitlam Government and the period leading to the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, and finally from the post-Tiananmen period to the present one culminating in Prime Minister John Howard's attempt at 'synthesis' of both Liberal and Labor approaches to the question.

Intro -- How Labour Built Neoliberalism: Australia's Accord, the Labour Movementand the Neoliberal Project -- Copyright -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- List of Illustrations -- List of Abbreviations -- 1 Introduction -- 1 The ALP & ACTU Accord -- 2 The Social Contract's Gala Dinner -- 3 Neoliberalism's Corporatist Origins -- 4 A Hegemonic Political Project -- 5 Corporatist 'involucro' -- 6 A Note on Method -- 7 Structure of the Book -- 2 Theorising the State-Civil Society Relationship -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 Some Preliminary Comments -- 2 Marx's Critique of Hegel -- 3 From Critique of Politics to Critique of Political Economy -- 4 From Marx to Gramsci -- 4.1 Lo stato integrale -- 5 Gramsci contra Marx? The Limits of Integration -- 6 Conclusion -- 3 Corporatism in Australia -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Understanding Corporatism -- 3 Panitch's Approach -- 4 Corporatism and the Accord -- 5 The Context of Arbitration -- 6 Conclusion -- 4 Destabilising the Dominant Narrative -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 Conceptual Diversity -- 2 The Dominant Narrative -- 2.1 Harvey: A Brief History of Neoliberalism -- 2.2 Klein: The Shock Doctrine -- 2.3 Peck, Theodore, Tickell and Brenner: 'Neoliberalisation' -- 2.4 Destabilising the Dominant Narrative -- 3 A Class Approach to Neoliberalism -- 3.1 Harvey: 'The Restoration of Class Power' -- 3.2 Davidson: 'An Entirely New Political Regime' -- 3.3 A Hegemonic Political Project -- 4 Conclusion -- 5 Periodising Neoliberalism -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Periodising Neoliberalism in Australia -- 3 Proto-neoliberal stage: 1973-1983 -- 3.1 The Economic Crisis -- 3.2 The Whitlam Government -- 3.3 The Fraser Government -- 4 Vanguard Neoliberal Stage: 1983-1993 -- 4.1 The Impasse of the 1970s -- 4.2 Developing the Accord -- 5 Piecemeal Neoliberalisation Stage: 1993-2008 -- 5.1 Howard's Piecemeal Neoliberalism

'The Ayes Have It' is a fascinating account of the Queensland Parliament during three decades of high-drama politics. It examines in detail the Queensland Parliament from the days of the 'Labor split' in the 1950s, through the conservative governments of Frank Nicklin, John Bjelke- Petersen and Mike Ahern, to the fall of the Nationals government led briefly by Russell Cooper in December 1989. The volume traces the rough and tumble of parliamentary politics in the frontier state. The authors focus on parliament as a political forum, on the representatives and personalities that made up the institution over this period, on the priorities and political agendas that were pursued, and the increasingly contentious practices used to control parliamentary proceedings. Throughout the entire history are woven other controversies that repeatedly recur – controversies over state economic development, the provision of government services, industrial disputation and government reactions, electoral zoning and disputes over malapportionment, the impost of taxation in the 'low tax state', encroachments on civil liberties and political protests, the perennial topic of censorship, as well as the emerging issues of integrity, concerns about conflicts of interest and the slide towards corruption. There are fights with the federal government – especially with the Whitlam government – and internal fights within the governing coalition which eventually leads to its collapse in 1983, after which the Nationals manage to govern alone for two very tumultuous terms. On the non-government side, the bitterness of the 1950s split was reflected in the early parliaments of this period, and while the Australian Labor Party eventually saw off its rivalrous off-shoot (the QLP-DLP) it then began to implode through waves of internal factional discord.

'The Ayes Have It' is a fascinating account of the Queensland Parliament during three decades of high-drama politics. It examines in detail the Queensland Parliament from the days of the 'Labor split' in the 1950s, through the conservative governments of Frank Nicklin, John Bjelke- Petersen and Mike Ahern, to the fall of the Nationals government led briefly by Russell Cooper in December 1989. The volume traces the rough and tumble of parliamentary politics in the frontier state. The authors focus on parliament as a political forum, on the representatives and personalities that made up the institution over this period, on the priorities and political agendas that were pursued, and the increasingly contentious practices used to control parliamentary proceedings. Throughout the entire history are woven other controversies that repeatedly recur – controversies over state economic development, the provision of government services, industrial disputation and government reactions, electoral zoning and disputes over malapportionment, the impost of taxation in the 'low tax state', encroachments on civil liberties and political protests, the perennial topic of censorship, as well as the emerging issues of integrity, concerns about conflicts of interest and the slide towards corruption. There are fights with the federal government – especially with the Whitlam government – and internal fights within the governing coalition which eventually leads to its collapse in 1983, after which the Nationals manage to govern alone for two very tumultuous terms. On the non-government side, the bitterness of the 1950s split was reflected in the early parliaments of this period, and while the Australian Labor Party eventually saw off its rivalrous off-shoot (the QLP-DLP) it then began to implode through waves of internal factional discord.

'The Ayes Have It' is a fascinating account of the Queensland Parliament during three decades of high-drama politics. It examines in detail the Queensland Parliament from the days of the 'Labor split' in the 1950s, through the conservative governments of Frank Nicklin, John Bjelke- Petersen and Mike Ahern, to the fall of the Nationals government led briefly by Russell Cooper in December 1989. The volume traces the rough and tumble of parliamentary politics in the frontier state. The authors focus on parliament as a political forum, on the representatives and personalities that made up the institution over this period, on the priorities and political agendas that were pursued, and the increasingly contentious practices used to control parliamentary proceedings. Throughout the entire history are woven other controversies that repeatedly recur – controversies over state economic development, the provision of government services, industrial disputation and government reactions, electoral zoning and disputes over malapportionment, the impost of taxation in the 'low tax state', encroachments on civil liberties and political protests, the perennial topic of censorship, as well as the emerging issues of integrity, concerns about conflicts of interest and the slide towards corruption. There are fights with the federal government – especially with the Whitlam government – and internal fights within the governing coalition which eventually leads to its collapse in 1983, after which the Nationals manage to govern alone for two very tumultuous terms. On the non-government side, the bitterness of the 1950s split was reflected in the early parliaments of this period, and while the Australian Labor Party eventually saw off its rivalrous off-shoot (the QLP-DLP) it then began to implode through waves of internal factional discord.

BESTSELLING BIOGRAPHY NOW BACK IN PRINTBlanche d'Alpuget's classic 1982 biography of Robert J. Hawke remains one of the finest examples of political biography in Australian literature. Robert James Lee Hawke is one of the great men of Australian public life and his story makes compelling reading. Blanche d'Alpuget's sensitivity and psychological insight into Hawke's early years reveal how the son of devout Christian parents was reared to public duty and to the ambition of political leadership. Known throughout his life as a tireless campaigner for workers' rights and a man of wild personal habits, Hawke was a Rhodes Scholar, educated in three universities, before rejecting an academic career to commit himself to the trade union movement. As President of the ACTU from 1970 to 1980 he was a master negotiator and peacemaker in industrial life. He agitated for social and economic reforms, becoming a folk hero and the most popular Australian of his time. While he was President of the Australian Labor Party he sought to heal its wounds after the sacking of the Whitlam government; as the leader of Australia's unions he held back potentially violent industrial action over this most divisive issue. To unionists he was a giant killer; to some employers, a crypto-Communist bent upon their destruction. Hawke: The Early Years is an intimate portrait of a man of extraordinary achievements who struggles to overcome his drinking and philandering in order to rise to the highest office in Australia.

Recent responses to Asian immigration in Australia can be assessed in relation to Australia's search for a national identity. Australian nationalism has always had its racist elements, reflected in the maintenance of the White Australia Policy until it was abolished by the Whitlam government in 1973. Asian immigration has built up considerably since them, though no one source country has been dominant. Since the late 1970s, generally one third or more of settler arrivals have been from Asian countries. Migrants to Australia from Asian countries have been, on average, more highly educated and have achieved higher income levels than the rest of the population. However, some groups have had below average education levels, notably refugees from the Indo-chines region. The polls indicate majority opposition to Asian immigration, as to immigration in general, though multiple issue opinion polling does not show immigration to be an issue of major concern. Since the maiden speech in parliament by the independent member for Oxley, Pauline Hanson, in September 1996, a "race controversy" has erupted which has reflected not only the persistence of racist attitudes among a section of the Australian population, but also that there is a class and education element: anti-Asian sentiment is more prevalent among the Anglo-Australian working class than among the better educated and those of immigrant background. Avoidance of further widening of these fault lines in Australian society will require statesmanship of a high order from Australia's political leaders.