Suchergebnisse

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.

The United Nations Maritime Conference, convened by the Economic and Social Council in Geneva from February 19 to March 6, 1948, drew up the Constitution of an Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization. The Constitution was to enter into force when ratified by 21 nations, seven of which were to have a total tonnage of not less than 1,000,000 gross tons of shipping. A preparatory committee was created by the conference, to make preliminary arrangements for the first session of the Assembly of the organization, and a draft agreement designed to bring IMCO within the framework of the United Nations as a specialized agency was also formulated.

The Convention and Regulations adopted at the International Conference on Safety-of-Life at Sea, held in London in April 1948, established responsibility I in that field for the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization. The Conference, called by the United Kingdom, revised the International Convention for Safety-of-Life at Sea which had been drawn up in 1929. IMCO was recognized as the central bureau for the handling of maritime safety measures. It was also to receive from contracting governments copies of relevant documents = and reports as to marine casualties, suspensions of the convention, exemptions, I equivalents and interventions by governments arising from the control provij sions. Except in specified circumstances, the organization would be the agency for the study, circulation and development of amendments to the Convention and Regulations, and for recommending such amendments to governments.

The Ministers of Economic Affairs of the four Maghreb states, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, met for the first time in October 1964 at Tunis to examine all questions relating to economic co-operation in the Maghreb. They agreed, on this occasion, on the aim of a unified economy for all the Maghreb states, and on the need to work out a special system for economic co-operation and commercial relations.

Meeting to examine the progress of the Colombo Plan, the ministers of Australia, Burma, Cambodia, Canada, Ceylon, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, United Kingdom, United States and Vietnam, convened the Consultative Committee at Karachi on March 24, 1952. The committee was to discuss any alterations in the six-year programs in the light of changed circumstances, and detailed programs for the first two years. Press reports indicated that major importance was placed on the questions of the admission of Japan and possible United States financial aid.