Trick or treaty?: The Australian debate over the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

The secretive 2011 Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement – known in short by the catchy acronym ACTA – is a controversial trade pact designed to provide for stronger enforcement of intellectual property rights. The preamble to the treaty reads like pulp fiction – it raises moral panics about piracy, counterfeiting, organised crime, and border security. The agreement contains provisions on civil remedies and criminal offences; copyright law and trademark law; the regulation of the digital environment; and border measures. Memorably, Susan Sell called the international treaty a TRIPS Double-Plus Agreement, because its obligations far exceed those of the World Trade Organization's TRIPS Agreement 1994, and TRIPS-Plus Agreements, such as the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004. ACTA lacks the language of other international intellectual property agreements, which emphasise the need to balance the protection of intellectual property owners with the wider public interest in access to medicines, human development, and transfer of knowledge and technology. In Australia, there was much controversy both about the form and the substance of ACTA. While the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade was a partisan supporter of the agreement, a wide range of stakeholders were openly critical. After holding hearings and taking note of the position of the European Parliament and the controversy in the United States, the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties in the Australian Parliament recommended the deferral of ratification of ACTA. This was striking as representatives of all the main parties agreed on the recommendation. The committee was concerned about the lack of transparency, due process, public participation, and substantive analysis of the treaty. There were also reservations about the ambiguity of the treaty text, and its potential implications for the digital economy, innovation and competition, plain packaging of tobacco products, and access to essential medicines. The treaty has provoked much soul-searching as to whether the Trick or Treaty reforms on the international treaty-making process in Australia have been compromised or undermined. Although ACTA stalled in the Australian Parliament, the debate over it is yet to conclude. There have been concerns in Australia and elsewhere that ACTA will be revived as a ‘zombie agreement’. Indeed, in March 2013, the Canadian government introduced a bill to ensure compliance with ACTA. Will it be also resurrected in Australia? Has it already been revived? There are three possibilities. First, the Australian government passed enhanced remedies with respect to piracy, counterfeiting and border measures in a separate piece of legislation – the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (Cth). Second, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade remains supportive of ACTA. It is possible, after further analysis, that the next Australian Parliament – to be elected in September 2013 – will ratify the treaty. Third, Australia is involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. The government has argued that ACTA should be a template for the Intellectual Property Chapter in the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The United States Trade Representative would prefer a regime even stronger than ACTA. This chapter provides a portrait of the Australian debate over ACTA. It is the account of an interested participant in the policy proceedings. This chapter will first consider the deliberations and recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on ACTA. Second, there was a concern that ACTA had failed to provide appropriate safeguards with respect to civil liberties, human rights, consumer protection and privacy laws. Third, there was a concern about the lack of balance in the treaty’s copyright measures; the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations and remedies. Fourth, there was a worry that the provisions on trademark law, intermediary liability and counterfeiting could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy and innovation in the digital economy. Fifth, there was significant debate about the impact of ACTA on pharmaceutical drugs, access to essential medicines and health-care. Sixth, there was concern over the lobbying by tobacco industries for ACTA – particularly given Australia’s leadership on tobacco control and the plain packaging of tobacco products. Seventh, there were concerns about the operation of border measures in ACTA. Eighth, the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties was concerned about the jurisdiction of the ACTA Committee, and the treaty’s protean nature. Finally, the chapter raises fundamental issues about the relationship between the executive and the Australian Parliament with respect to treaty-making. There is a need to reconsider the efficacy of the Trick or Treaty reforms passed by the Australian Parliament in the 1990s.

Developing pictorial conceptual metaphors as a means of understanding and changing the Australian health system for Indigenous people

This paper describes the development of Pictorial Conceptual Metaphors, created out of a literature review on gendered Indigenous health and wellbeing that depicts the inherited effects of the ‘system’ past, present and future. The Pictorial Conceptual Metaphors are pictures that were created to tell the story of colonisation and its inherited and ongoing impacts on Indigenous people’s health and wellbeing. Aboriginal historical experiences, past, present and future are briefly overviewed in order to unpack and communicate to readers the significance and impact of these experiences on Aboriginal health, and ultimately, to bring about understanding to initiate change within the Australian health system. Systemic racism, embedded in the Australian health system, excludes and discriminates against Indigenous peoples through a lack of cultural consideration resulting in a cumulative and ongoing negative effect on Indigenous people’s health (Dudgeon et al. 2014; Fredericks 2008; Marmot 2011; Queensland Government 2012). Systemic action research identifies actions and processes in large systems such as health and education in order to bring about systemic change. Our intention to highlight the systemic changes needed in the Australian health system to improve Indigenous people’s health and wellbeing require us to understand the processes involved in bringing about systemic change. For this to occur, we needed to ‘see the system’ in order to identify the system dynamics in operation. The Pictorial Conceptual Metaphors are the first step in ‘seeing the system’; they illustrate the past and the present, and identify the preferred future for Indigenous health and wellbeing outcomes

An international benchmark for the Australian OHS Body of Knowledge (BoK)

Benchmarking was used to compare the Australian SIA’s (Safety Institute of Australia) OHS BoK with three different approaches to systemize the knowledge that should be taught by universities. The Australian Health and Safety Professionals Alliance (HaSPA) Core Body of Knowledge for Generalist OHS Professionals was benchmarked against three other international bodies of knowledge, the German Ergonomic Society’s Body of Knowledge Ergonomics – Core Definition, Object Catalogue and Research Domains, the IEEE Computer Society Software Engineering Body of Knowledge and the American ‘Association of Schools of Public Health’ Master’s Degree in Public Health Core Competency Model. It was found that quality, structure and content of the OHS BoK ranked lowest when compared with the other benchmarked documents. The HaSPA body of knowledge was ranked poorly when compared to the German Ergonomic Society’s Body of Knowledge for Ergonomics, IEEE Computer Society Software Engineering Body of Knowledge and the American Association of Schools of Public Health Core Competency Model. Analysis and discussion of the HaSPA BoK is important given its use as an audit tool for tertiary education in Australia. Furthermore the International Network of Safety & Health Practitioner Organisations (INSHPO) is apparently promoting the Australian SIA’s OHS BoK as the basis of an international standard.

Measuring impact: Positioning evaluation in the Australian arts and culture landscape

Arts culture organisations and funding authorities increasingly need to evaluate the impact of festivals, events and performances. Economic impacts are often privileged over 'soft data' about community experience and engagement. This new book offers a timely and scholarly demonstration of how cultural value and impact can be evaluated. It offers an innovative approach whereby the relationship developed between the researchers/evaluator and the commissioning arts and cultural producer provides an opportunity to rethink the traditional process of reporting back on value and impact through the singular entity of funds acquittal. Using three commissioned evaluations undertaken at an Australian university as an extended case study, the book investigates the two positions most often adopted by researchers/evaluators - embedded and collaborative, or external and distanced - and argues the merits and deficiencies of the two approaches. Offering an examination of how arts evaluation 'works' in theory and practice and more importantly, why it is needed now and in the future to demonstrate the reach and cultural gains from arts and cultural projects, this will be essential reading for students in arts management, professionals working in arts and cultural organisations, scholars working in association with creative industries and cultural development.

The Australian litigation landscape - Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and general dentistry (oral surgery procedures): An analysis of litigation cases

Background: There are persistent concerns about litigation in the dental and medical professions. These concerns arise in a setting where general dentists are more frequently undertaking a wider range of oral surgery procedures, potentially increasing legal risk. Methods: Judicial cases dealing with medical negligence in the fields of general dentistry (oral surgery procedure) and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery were located using the three main legal databases. Relevant cases were analysed to determine the procedures involved, the patients’ claims of injury, findings of negligence, and damages awarded. A thematic analysis of the cases was undertaken to determine trends. Results: Fifteen cases over a twenty-year period were located across almost all Australian jurisdictions (eight cases involved general dentists; seven cases involved Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons). Eleven of the fifteen cases involved determinations of whether or not the practitioner had failed in their duty of care; negligence was found in six cases. Eleven of the fifteen cases related to molar extractions (eight specifically to third molar). Conclusions: Dental and medical practitioners wanting to manage legal risk should have regard to circumstances arising in judicial cases. Adequate warning of risks is critical, as is offering referral in appropriate cases. Pre-operative radiographs, good medical records, and processes to ensure appropriate follow-up are also important.

Transdisciplinary synthesis for ecosystem science, policy and management: The Australian experience

Mitigating the environmental effects of global population growth, climatic change and increasing socio-ecological complexity is a daunting challenge. To tackle this requires synthesis: the integration of disparate information to generate novel insights from heterogeneous, complex situations where there are diverse perspectives. Since 1995, a structured approach to inter-, multi- and trans-disciplinary1 collaboration around big science questions has been supported through synthesis centres around the world. These centres are finding an expanding role due to ever-accumulating data and the need for more and better opportunities to develop transdisciplinary and holistic approaches to solve real-world problems. The Australian Centre for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (ACEAS ) has been the pioneering ecosystem science synthesis centre in the Southern Hemisphere. Such centres provide analysis and synthesis opportunities for time-pressed scientists, policy-makers and managers. They provide the scientific and organisational environs for virtual and face-to-face engagement, impetus for integration, data and methodological support, and innovative ways to deliver synthesis products. We detail the contribution, role and value of synthesis using ACEAS to exemplify the capacity for synthesis centres to facilitate trans-organisational, transdisciplinary synthesis. We compare ACEAS to other international synthesis centres, and describe how it facilitated project teams and its objective of linking natural resource science to policy to management. Scientists and managers were brought together to actively collaborate in multi-institutional, cross-sectoral and transdisciplinary research on contemporary ecological problems. The teams analysed, integrated and synthesised existing data to co-develop solution-oriented publications and management recommendations that might otherwise not have been produced. We identify key outcomes of some ACEAS working groups which used synthesis to tackle important ecosystem challenges. We also examine the barriers and enablers to synthesis, so that risks can be minimised and successful outcomes maximised. We argue that synthesis centres have a crucial role in developing, communicating and using synthetic transdisciplinary research.