The bias and assumptions in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan

This presentation argues that “genuine” engagement and consultation is required where Indigenous voice is included within the policy development process for “true” progress to be achieved. With the ever increasing engagement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the decision making processes of Indigenous education, it is anticipated that there will be provision of opportunities for better outcomes and a greater acceptance of the policy within community (Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2014). This presentation is derived from a larger project where the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011) was critically analysed using Fairclough’s (2001) Critical Discourse Analysis framework and Rigney’s (1999) Indigenist Research Principles. Within this study, the underlying assumptions and bias identified within the policy and how it positions Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were articulated. The major findings that emerged from the data included: - a) the homogenous grouping of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; - b) the maintenance of the prevalent dominant ideology within policy, and finally; - c) the expectation by the power elite of increased engagement and connections by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples without consideration of the detrimental effects of past policies and reforms.

A critical analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan

This study involves the analysis of one of the most recent Indigenous Education policies, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 (MCEECDYA, 2011). It examines how the language used within policy positions Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Articulating Rigney's (1999) Indigenist Research Principles with Fairclough's (2001) Critical Discourse Analysis provides a platform for critical dialogues about policy decision-making. In doing so, this articulation enables and emphasises the need for potential policy revision to contribute to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander struggle for self-determination.

(Ap)pointing the canon Rousseau's Émile, visions of the state, and education

Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Émile, ou de I’Education (Émile, or on Education) has been described by Rousseau scholars in latter twentieth century English-language philosophy as an educational classic. In 1995 Robert Wokler argued that together with Montesquieu, Hume, Smith, and Kant among his contemporaries, Rousseau had exerted the most profound influence on modern European intellectual history, “perhaps even surpassing anyone else of his day." For Wokler Émile is “the most significant work on education after Plato’s Republic.” Earlier in 1977, Allan Bloom questioned why Émile had not been the subject of analysis in philosophy relative to the rest of Rousseau‘s work, for “Émile is truly a great book, one that lays out for the first time and with the greatest clarity and vitality the modern way of posing the problems of psychology.” Bloom also saw Émile as “one of those rare total or synoptic books... a book comparable to Plato’s Republic, which it is meant to rival or supersede” and argued that Rousseau himself was at the source of a new tradition: “Whatever else Rousseau may have accomplished, he presented alternatives available to man more comprehensively and profoundly and articulated them in the form which has dominated discussion since his time." Even Peter Gay’s earlier commentary on John Locke and education in 1964 could not escape this central positioning of the text. The significance of Locke’s Some Thoughts on Education is weighed in relation to its impact on Rousseau‘s Émile. For Gay, the latter is “probably the most influential revolutionary tract on education that we have.”

Hypnotic inductions: On the persistence of the subject

The article presents the author's response to the article "On Being Agnostic" by James Marshall. She clarifies that her article "Normalizing Foucault? A Rhizomatic Approach to Plateaus in Anglophone Educational Research" focuses on the implication of French philosopher Michel Foucult's ideas for anglophone literature. She mentions propensities discussed in her article including scientize and template theoretical frameworks.

The Context-integrity of the global carbon regime: The relevance and impact of the World Trade Organization

In the study of the integrity of the global carbon regime there are a number of institutions that must be considered for their impacts on this system. In particular, the subject matter of this chapter is concerned with the main international institution for trade, the World Trade Organization (the WTO). Otherwise stated, this chapter is concerned with how the institutional integrity of the global carbon regime aligns with the values and policy objectives of the WTO. This is done with a view to consider whether the global carbon regime aligns with these values and objectives in a way demonstrative of context-integrity. This alignment is not a single-sided undertaking and, therefore, it is essential that the underlying values of the WTO themselves align with the global carbon regime. I suggest this is particularly crucial given the importance of the objectives of the climate change regime, and the scientific predictions of the current climate projections.

Comparing family functionality perception between non-Aymara and indigenous Aymara families in northern Chile

We compared perception of family functioning in a sample (N = 1,496) of Aymara and non-Aymara parents and children living in Arica, Chile. The children were aged from 9 to 15 years and were recruited from the 5th to 8th grades of 9 elementary schools (4 public, 5 government-subsidized private schools) serving lower socioeconomic areas. Participants completed the Family Functioning Test (FF-SIL), which consists of 14 events or characteristics that may occur in a family. The results showed that parents and children from the Aymara group recorded lower scores for their perception of family functioning than did the non-Aymara group. Addressing this issue may be important in the prevention of psychological problems in these families.

“We don’t tell people what to do”: Ethical practice and Indigenous health promotion

Health promotion aspires to work in empowering, participatory ways, with the goal of supporting people to increase control over their health. However, buried in this goal is an ethical tension: while increasing people’s autonomy, health promotion also imposes a particular, health promotion-sanctioned version of what is good. This tension positions practitioners precariously, where the ethos of empowerment risks increasing health promotion’s paternalistic control over people, rather than people’s control over their own health. Here in we argue that this ethical tension is amplified in Indigenous Australia, where colonial processes of control over Indigenous lands, lives and cultures are indistinguishable from contemporary health promotion ‘interventions’. Moreover, the potential stigmatisation produced in any paternalistic acts ‘done for their own good’ cannot be assumed to have evaporated within the self-proclaimed ‘empowering’ narratives of health promotion. This issue’s guest editor’s call for health promotion to engage ‘with politics and with philosophical ideas about the state and the citizen’ is particularly relevant in an Indigenous Australian context. Indigenous Australians continue to experience health promotion as a moral project of control through intervention, which contradicts health promotion’s central goal of empowerment. Therefore, Indigenous health promotion is an invaluable site for discussion and analysis of health promotion’s broader ethical tensions. Given the persistent and alarming Indigenous health inequalities, this paper calls for systematic ethical reflection in order to redress health promotion’s general failure to reduce health inequalities experienced by Indigenous Australians.

Path+Ways. Towards best practice bridging and Indigenous participation through regional dual-sector universities

Regional and remote Indigenous students are underrepresented in both higher education and vocational education and training. Enabling education courses are important in lifting participation rates and potentially in encouraging mobility between the sectors, yet there is a clear lack of evidence underpinning their development. This report provides an overview of the data collection and analysis activities undertaken via a research project funded by the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. The project purpose was to explore current practices dealing with Indigenous enabling courses, particularly in the context of regional, dual-sector universities. In particular, the project examined how these programs vary by institution (and region) in terms of structure, mode and ethos of offering; and direct and indirect impacts of these initiatives on Indigenous student participation and attainment; with a view to designing a best practice framework and implementation statement. Through its focus on students accessing Indigenous and mainstream enabling education, the project focussed on range of equity groups including those of low socio-economic status (both school leaver and mature-age categories), regional and/or remote students, Indigenous students and students with disability.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

Healthy start: Closing the gap on Indigenous childhood obesity

We’ve recently seen some encouraging improvements in closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage: better educational outcomes, higher child immunisation rates, more health checks, and a 35% drop in the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous child deaths. But Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people continue to suffer a much greater burden of ill-health than other Australians. The gap in Indigenous life expectancy at birth remains unacceptably high at 10.6 years for men and 9.5 years for women. Three-quarters of Indigenous deaths are from potentially avoidable causes. These include preventable conditions such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and some cancers. A major contributor to these preventable conditions is excess body weight.

The impact of Indigenous Community sports programs: The case of surfing

The objective of this research project was to consider the social impact of sport and physical activity on the lives of Indigenous Australians and their communities. There has been strong research interest in the links between sport and recreation programs and various health and social outcomes and a well-established body of literature exists on the use of sport to address social issues in mainstream society (A Thomson, Darcy and Pearce 2010). The consensus is that physical activity is an important contributor to health for all people (Nelson, Abbott and Macdonald 2010). While there is strong research interest, what remains unclear is the value and impact of sport and physical activity on Indigenous communities (Cairnduff 2001). Nelson (2009) drawing on the work of Jonas and Langton (1994) indicates that an ‘Aboriginal person is a descendant of an Indigenous inhabitant of Australia, identifi es as an Aboriginal, and is recognised as Aboriginal by members of the community in which he or she lives’ (p. 97). Even this defi nition has the potential to be politically charged. At a general level, the collective terms ‘Indigenous’ (capitalised) and ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander’ people (title capitalised) appear to be broadly acceptable terms. Indigenous groups cannot be considered to be homogenous as there is much diversity between and within groups (Nelson et al. 2010; Parker et al. 2006). It is therefore important this report is not viewed as taking an essentialist view of who Indigenous people are and how they develop. Rather, this paper attempts to describe and discuss the experiences of some individuals and their communities in site-specifi c surfi ng programs.