Hollow avowals of human rights protection-time for an Australian federal bill of rights?

Unlike the constitutions of many nations, such as the United States of America and the Republic of South Africa, the constitutions of the Australian States and Territories and the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1901 (UK) contain no bill of rights. Australia is the only western democracy without a federal bill of rights. The debate regarding the need for a bill of rights necessitates an understanding of what human rights the people of Australia already enjoy. If sufficient protection can be found in existing sources, does Australia really need a federal bill of rights? Opponents of a bill of rights state that we have sufficient protection from arbitrary government intervention in our personal affairs and thus a bill of rights is unnecessary. There are a number of potential sources of human rights in Australia that might provide the suggested existing protection, including the common law, specific domestic legislation, international law and constitutional law. Each of these sources of human rights has, however, important limitations. The focus of this article is on the inadequacy of the Australian constitutions as a source of purported protection. This in turn suggests that an alternative source of rights is needed - a federal bill of rights? In the course of this analysis the author makes suggestions for reform; specifically how a federal bill of rights may address the paucity of constitutional protection.

Expanding the Australian empire?: the Australian Council for the World Council of Churches, the Menzies Government and the New Hebrides in the late 1950s

In the late 1950s the Australian Council for the World Council of Churches (AC-WCC) inspired primarily by the Presbyterian Church, undertook a concerted campaign to pressure the Australian government to assume a greater role in the affairs of the New Hebrides. The AC-WCC wanted the Australian government to take over the United Kingdom's role in the administration of the Anglo-French Condominium. It was motivated to undertake this campaign by the dismal social and economic conditions in the islands, the neglect of the British and French colonial authorities, and their failure to offer the indigenous people a way forward to self-government. The high point of the campaign was a meeting between Robert Menzies, the Australian prime minister and a delegation from the AC-WCC in early 1958. As a result of this meeting Australian ministers and officials, for the final time, gave extended consideration to expanding Australia's empire in the South Pacific to include the New Hebrides. This article examines the AC-WCC's campaign, explores the Australian government's response, and analyses the outcome of this important episode in Australia's involvement in the colonial territories of the South Pacific.

The Body of Christ : blasphemy, eroticism and transgression in Martin Scorses's The Last Temptation of Christ

Martin Scorsese’s film The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) has polarised critics and audiences for almost two decades. The film is most often remembered for offending the religious sensibilities of fundamentalist Christians, who objected to Scorsese’s representation of Christ as a neurotic figure who struggles to reconcile his divinity with his sexual impulses.

Even critics who reject the fundamentalist accusations of blasphemy are divided about the film’s value. For example, Rolando Caputo praises the film as an unrecognised masterpiece, which confirms Scorsese’s status as an auteur. Conversely, Leonard W. Levy, dismiss the film as having little artistic merit. This paper re-evaluates the film as a serious theological text by re-examining the film in the light of Michel Foucault’s essay ‘A Preface to Transgression,’ arguing that the film can be read as a sophisticated attempt to examine the connections between corporeality, divinity and human subjectivity.

The evolution of freedom of association in Australia's federal industrial relations law: from trade union security to workplace rights

The early provisions protecting freedom of association in Australian federal industrial relations law supported trade union security. The interests of individuals were seen as adequately protected by collective groups. This principle dominated the industrial relations laws from 1904 to the mid-1970s. However, from the late 1970s, the laws were incrementally altered to promote freedom of choice and the rights of individuals not to be part of trade unions. The reframing of the laws also reflected changes in the wider Australian community, manifested particularly in the decline of union density rates. These changes were also part of an international trend, favouring the ideology of neoliberalism which contributed to an unsympathetic environment for trade unions. The current Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) has signalled a return to collectivism, although freedom of choice is at the heart of the laws rather than the promotion of collective groups. In the absence of legislative support promoting the viability of collective groups, this freedom to choose is threatened, leaving many workers with little choice but to disassociate.