From deep North to global governance exemplar : Fitzgerald's impact on the International Anti-corruption Movement

In pre-Fitzgerald Queensland, the existence of corruption was widely known but its extent and modes of operation were not fully evident. The Fitzgerald Report identified the need for reform of the structure, procedures and efficiency in public administration in Queensland. What was most striking in the Queensland reform process was that a new model for combating corruption had been developed. Rather than rely upon a single law and a single institution, existing institutions were strengthened and new institutions were instituted to create a set of mutually supporting and mutually checking institutions, agencies and laws that jointly sought to improve governmental standards and combat corruption. Some of the reforms were either unique to Queensland or very rare. One of the strengths of this approach was that it avoided creating a single overarching institution to fight corruption. There are many powerful opponents of reform. Influential institutions and individuals resist any interference with their privileges. In order to cause a mass exodus from an entrenched corruption system, a seminal event or defining process is needed to alter expectations and incentives that are sufficient to encourage significant numbers of individuals to desert the corruption system and assist the integrity system in exposing and destroying it. The Fitzgerald Inquiry was such an event. The article also briefly addresses methods for destroying national corruption system where they emerge and exist.

Adam Smith's dinner

In 1961, the East German government erected what they claimed was an anti-capitalist barricade. In 1989, this barricade was dismantled by those whom it was supposed to keep apart: the forces it was intended to contain had overwhelmed it. In the aftermath, the victims of Stalinist oppression and the planned economy opted for radical change. Some might have hoped that they would intellectually march resolutely westwards towards the forms of social democracy that had proven so successful in their nearest neighbours – Scandinavia, Germany and Austria – and stop when they had reached a point on the political spectrum with which they felt comfortable, and which worked for them. Unfortunately, they went to the opposite end of political economy. That choice was celebrated by those theorists who wanted our own countries to move in the same direction. Eastern Europe suffered a decline of 50% in its GDP. Much earlier in 1653, Peter Stuyvesant had erected an earth and wooden wall to protect the westernmost settlement of a great commercial nation from those they imagined to be barbarians. In 1699 Stuyvesant’s barrier was dismantled by the British, who replaced it with a street named after the wall. So it came to be that one of the most inconsequential walls in history became one of history’s most famous streets. I am not sure if the Dutch had left some tulip bulbs on either side of the wall, perhaps as a reminder of capitalism’s first bubble, and an inspiration to later bubbles. However, many of the victims of the latest burst bubble are pretty keen to tear down that Wall.1 As in 1989, they want to take action against the guardians of the system that failed them. And the more they suffer, the more likely it is that they will demand radical change, and the more likely that the resulting change will go too far – as seems to have been the case in Eastern Europe after the terminal crisis of communism, and in the majority of democracies that fell in the dozen years following the Great Crash. The current reaction is so strong that some are even wondering what role there will be for markets. I was invited to address a conference in the EU Parliament last November on the topic ‘Capitalism: Quo Vadis?’, where I apologized to the international audience that the topic was posed in a dead European language because the answer to this question is not going to be determined by the west alone. The problems we have been addressing emerged in the west and have affected the rest. However, the answers will not come, solely from the west, and may even come primarily from the south and the east.

Induction of anti-chlamydial mucosal immunity by transcutaneous immunization is enhanced by topical application of GM-CSF

Transcutaneous immunization (TCI) involves the direct application of antigen plus adjuvant to skin, taking advantage of the large numbers of Langerhans cells and other resident skin dendritic cells, that process antigen then migrate to draining lymph nodes where immune responses are initiated. We have used this form of immunization to protect mice against genital tract and respiratory tract chlamydial infection. Protection was associated with local antibody responses in the vagina, uterus and lung as well as strong Th1 responses in the lymph nodes draining the reproductive tract and lungs respectively. In this study we show that topical application of GM-CSF to skin enhances the numbers and activation status of epidermal dendritic cells. Topical application of GM-CSF also increased the immune responses elicited by TCI. GM-CSF supplementation greatly increased cytokine (IFNgamma and IL-4) gene expression in lymph node and splenic cells compared to cells from animals immunized without GM-CSF. IgG responses in serum, uterine lavage and bronchoalveolar lavage and IgA responses in vaginal lavage were also increased by topical application of GM-CSF. The studies show that TCI induces protection against genital and respiratory tract chlamydial infections and that topical application of cytokines such as GM-CSF can enhance TCI-induced antibody and cell-mediated immunity.

Challenging the distal-to-proximal cannulation technique for administration of anti-cancer therapies : a prospective cohort study

Background: Distal-to-proximal technique has been recommended for anti-cancer therapy administration. There is no evidence to suggest that a 24-hour delay of treatment is necessary for patients with a previous uncomplicated venous puncture proximal to the administration site. Objectives: This study aims to identify if the practice of 24-hour delay between a venous puncture and subsequent cannulation for anti-cancer therapies at a distal site is necessary for preventing extravasation. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted with 72 outpatients receiving anti-cancer therapy via an administration site distal to at least one previous uncomplicated venous puncture on the same arm in a tertiary cancer centre in Australia. Participants were interviewed and assessed at baseline data before treatment and on day 7 for incidence of extravasation/phlebitis. Results: Of 72 participants with 99 occasions of treatment, there was one incident of infiltration (possible extravasation) at the venous puncture site proximal to the administration site and two incidents of phlebitis at the administration site. Conclusions: A 24 hour delay is unnecessary if an alternative vein can be accessed for anti-cancer therapy after a proximal venous puncture. Implications for practice: Extravasation can occur at a venous puncture site proximal to an administration site in the same vein. However, the nurse can administer anti-cancer therapy at a distal site if the nurse can confidently determine the vein of choice is not in any way connected to the previous puncture site through visual inspection and palpation.