Informed Consent: Autonomy and Self-Ownership

Using the example of an unconsented mouth swab I criticise the view that an action of this kind taken in itself is wrongful in respect of its being a violation of autonomy. This is so much inasmuch as autonomy merits respect only with regard to ‘critical life choices’. I consider the view that such an action is nevertheless harmful or risks serious harm. I also respond to two possible suggestions: that the action is of a kind that violates autonomy; and, that the class of such actions violates autonomy. I suggest that the action is wrongful in as much as it is a bodily trespass. I consider, and criticise, two ways of understanding how morally I stand to my own body: as owner and as sovereign. In respect of the latter I consider Arthur Ripstein’s recent defence of a sovereignty principle. Finally I criticise an attempt by Joel Feinberg to explain bodily trespass in terms of personal autonomy.

We Never Give Up II

Ten years after the production of the initial 'We Never Give Up' film, this documentary filmis a follow-up film about the experiences of ten survivors of South Africa apartheid and their struggle for reparations. Produced by the Human Rights Media Centre, Cape Town, the film was directed and filmed by Cahal McLaughlin in a collaborative relationship with Khulumani Support Group Western Cape.

Further Information:

This documentary film, produced with the Human Rights Media Centre, Cape Town, and in collaboration with Khulumani Support Group Western Cape, is the ten-year follow up to We Never Give Up (2002), which addressed the issues of reparations as dealt with by the South African government and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. We Never Give Up II (2012) returns to these themes and to the same participants, asking how life has changed in the interim. The process of collaborative practices acknowledges the importance of sharing ownership/authorship in the storytelling processes as well as in validating traumatic experiences by those who survived major and sustained political violence. Made over a two-year period, involving close consultation with participants, the film offers insights, by those most directly affected, to what might constitute legal, financial, social and psychological reparations. The film has been screened in Cape Town, Bloemfontain, Zanzibar Film Festival, Belfast (Belfast Film Festival), Brighton, Guildford, Galway and London, always accompanied by discussion of the issues raised in Q&As. To emphasise the importance of the film for debates on policy around reparations, a 25 minute edited version was selected to be screened on SABC on ‘Special Assignment’ by SABC on April 29th, 2013 (South Africa’s ‘Freedom Day’), followed by a debate with Department of Justice spokesperson, Dr Khotso De Wee. The chapter 'Maureen Never Gave Up' in Daniels, McLaughlin and Pearce (eds.) 'Truth, Dare or Promise' (2013) Cambridge Scholars Press (ISBN: 1-4438-4959-6, ISBN 13: 978-1-4438-4959-3, Release Date: 2013-09-01), which analyses the production of this film, is offered as part of the portfolio.

Joined-up government in Ireland:From un-strategic choices to patriotic imperatives

Over the last decade, joined-up government has assumed a prominent place in the study and practice of public management. In this article, drawing on the Irish case we adopt an institutionalist approach to the issue of joining-up government and bureaucratic reform. We explore how the period of sustained and rapid economic growth in Ireland during the 1990s was also characterised by a fragmentation of the public service and proliferation of agencies. Subsequently, as a consequence of the sharp contraction in public spending brought about by the global financial crisis, we find an accelerated process of public sector recentralisation, retrenchment and de-agencification. Much of this is occurring in an unplanned manner but under the generic banner of 'joining up' government. We identify the drivers behind these dynamics and how they have manifested themselves, as well as the changes to politicaladministrative relationships brought about by new initiatives, the power imbalances they expose, and ultimately their consequences on public service delivery. © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Government Aid and Film Legislation : 'An elastoplast to stop a haemorrhage'

This chapter explores the relationship between the British film industry and the government throughout the 1970s and evaluates the levels of support offered to the industry in an uncertain political deade.

Governing Ireland:From Cabinet Government to Delegated Governance

The structures of Irish government were once considered reliably stable, professional and efficient. The economic crash of 2008 swept away all such sureties. How did we fail to foresee the challenges and avert a crisis that has undermined the state in every respect? Initial explanations have focused on the absence of robust mechanisms to challenge policy, a lack of imagination and expertise in policy design, and inadequacies in policy implementation and evaluation. Others still have pointed to the inability of traditional structures of decision-making and oversight to manage the multidimensional nature of modern policy problems, as well as an increasingly complex administrative system.

This new book offers a fresh and sustained scrutiny of the Irish system of national government. It examines the cabinet, the departments of Finance and the Taoiseach, ministerial relationships with civil servants, the growth and decline of agencies, the executive's relationship with Dáil Éireann and other monitoring agencies, the impact of the European Union, the courts, the media and social partnership. Distinguished academics are brought together in this volume to reassess Irish governance structures in the context of much greater diversity in policy processes and delegation in government. The book is essential reading for anyone interested in how the Irish state is governed, including practitioners and students of Irish politics.

Policy difference and policy ownership under UK devolution: social housing policy in Northern Ireland

This paper assesses the impact of UK devolution on social housing policy in Northern Ireland from 1999 until 2011, with a particular focus on the administration from May 2007 until April 2011, the first in which the elected elements of the process functioned for the entire period. Housing is one of the responsibilities of the Minister for Social Development. Northern Ireland has had a political commitment to the provision of good quality social housing for many years, both before and after the 1998 Good Friday/ Belfast Agreement and the establishment of the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive in 1999.
The paper begins with an analysis of factors contributing to policy difference within the United Kingdom under the 1999 devolution settlement, noting that these factors may contribute either to policy convergence or divergence between the four UK jurisdictions. There follow reflections on the concept of ‘policy ownership’ in multi-level states and the benefits of this analytical approach for consideration of housing policy under UK devolution. A review of social housing policy since 1999 is followed by discussion of three key issues from the 2007-11 administration: the governance of social housing; the procurement of new social housing; and improving access to shared space and a shared future. The paper concludes that, in Northern Ireland, the 2007-11 administration marked a transition between a technocratic past and the future policy ownership of the social housing policy field by locally elected politicians. Reflections on wider implications for UK social policy, for UK devolution, and for the complex governance structures of devolved and federal states are also included.

Government Laws, Regulations and Policies: Small Fish in a Big Pond

Global development has, in recent years, been shaped by the rise of transnational capital. This has implications for the quality and effectiveness of those national laws, regulations and policies in place to monitor transnational capital, ensure that multi national organisations assume responsibility and hold them accountable should they fail to do so. In balancing these objectives, contrasting issues come to the fore, such as the fear of capital flight; an issue especially profound in small open economies where the balance may tip in the favour of retaining, as opposed to regulating, foreign capital.
This paper can be considered in three parts. First, the paper addresses the shift in global leadership from national governments to multinational corporations (with particular reference to the rise of the Transnational Capitalist Class). This shift will incorporate the connotations of the Third Way. In considering this ideology, it will propose the Third Way as a transition phase to a stage when government is more the “third wheel” than an equal partner in governance structures. Second, the implications of the changing nature of governance on the capacity of nation states to develop effective laws, regulations and policies is discussed which leads on to the third aspect of the paper which identifies the challenges for governments, business and society in reimagining the governance structure pertaining to law, regulation and policy and the need to reconsider existing structures in light of global shifts in power structures.
A new leadership structure, both within the national and international governance system has far reaching implications. Boundary constraints no longer an issue, the potential for equality and global democracy is huge. Instead, a post recessionary world faces new governance challenges in the shape of; legitimacy; accountability and responsibility. Capitalism has invaded government and the primary challenge will be in avoiding the same issues that have dogged our financial markets for the last number of years. The challenge then to laws, regulations and public policy is huge, especially considering that the governments regulating are smaller than those dictating agenda on a global level

'All Good Things Must Come to an End': Terminating Co-Ownership Under the 'Old' Partition and Sale Rules

Despite its benefits, co-ownership of land creates problems where relations between the parties
have soured, or one person simply wants to extricate themselves from this arrangement. The
remedies of compulsory partition and sale allow one joint tenant or tenant in common to terminate
co-ownership against the wishes of the others, by seeking a court order to this effect. Throughout
parts of the common law world, this has be en based on nineteenth century English legislation namely
the Partition Act 1868, the key elements of which remain in force in Western Australia,
South Australia, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. This article provides an up-to-date
analysis of the law on compulsory partition and sale as derived from the 1868 Act and analogous
provisions, drawing not only on Australian cases, but on frequently overlooked decisions from
courts in both parts of Ireland and in parts of Canada, as well as ‘old’ English judgments on the
1868 Act.