Regulating for Sustainability : Property Issues

All Australian governments recognize the need to ensure that land and natural resources are used sustainably. In this context, ‘resources’ includes natural resources found on land such as trees and other vegetation, fauna, soil and minerals, and cultural resources found on land such as archaeological sites and artefacts. Regulators use a wide range of techniques to promote sustainability. To achieve their objectives, they may, for example, create economic incentives through bounties, grants and subsidies, encourage the development of self-regulatory codes, or enter into agreements with landowners specifying how the land is to be managed. A common way of regulating is by making administrative orders, determinations or decisions under powers given to regulators by Acts of Parliament (statutes) or by regulations (delegated legislation). Generally the legislation provides for specified rights or duties, and authorises a regulator to make an order or decision to apply the legislative provisions to particular land or cases. For example, legislation might empower a regulator to make an order that requires the owner of a contaminated site to remediate it. When the regulator exercises the power by making an order in relation to particular land, the owner is placed under a statutory duty to remediate. When regulators exercise their statutory powers to manage the use of private land or natural or cultural resources on private land, property law issues can arise. The owner of land has a private property right that the law will enforce against anybody else who interferes with the enjoyment of the right, without legal authority to do so. The law dealing with the enforcement of private property rights forms part of private law. This report focuses on the relationship between the law of private property and the regulation of land and resources by legislation and by administrative decisions made under powers given by legislation (statutory powers).

Queering Paradigms II : Interrogating Agendas

This book offers a fundamental challenge to a variety of theoretical, social, and political paradigms, ranging from law and justice studies to popular culture, linguistics to political activism. Developing the intellectual project initiated in Queering Paradigms, this volume extends queer theorizing in challenging new directions and uses queer insights to explore, trouble, and interrogate the social, political, and intellectual agendas that pervade (and are often taken for granted within) public discourses and academic disciplines. The contributing authors include queer theorists, socio-linguists, sociologists, political activists, educators, social workers and criminologists. Together, they contribute not only to the ongoing process of theorizing queerly, but also to the critique and reformulation of their respective disciplines.

‘It’s not like we’re going to jump them’: how transgressing heteronormativity shapes police interactions with LGBT young people

This paper explores how visibly transgressing heteronormativity shapes police interactions with LGBT young people. While research evidences how sexually and gender diverse bodies can be abused in schools, policing is overlooked. Interviews with 35 LGBT young people demonstrate how bodies transgressing heteronormativity (that is, non-heteronormative bodies) mediate their policing experiences in Queensland, Australia. Drawing on Foucault, Butler, and others, the paper suggests police interactions and use of discretion with LGBT young people was informed by non-heteronormative bodies discursively performing queerness in ways read by police. The paper concludes noting tensions produced for youthful LGBT bodies in public spaces.

Duty of care for mental harm suffered by rescuers

In Wicks v State Rail Authority NSW; Sheehan v State Rail Authority NSW [2010] HCA 22 (16 June 2010) the duty of care owed to rescuers, who were police officers, at a train derailment, was considered in conjunction with the interpretation of the Civil Liability Act (NSW) 2002.

Adam Smith's Dinner

The Future of Financial Regulation is an edited collection of papers presented at a major conference at the University of Glasgow in Spring 2009. It draws together a variety of different perspectives on the international financial crisis which began in August 2007 and later turned into a more widespread economic crisis following the collapse of Lehman Brothers in the Autumn of 2008. Spring 2009 was in many respects the nadir since valuations in financial markets had reached their low point and crisis management rather than regulatory reform was the main focus of attention. The conference and book were deliberately framed as an attempt to re-focus attention from the former to the latter. The first part of the book focuses on the context of the crisis, discussing the general characteristics of financial crises and the specific influences that were at work during this time. The second part focuses more specifically on regulatory techniques and practices implicated in the crisis, noting in particular an over-reliance on the capacity of regulators and financial institutions to manage risk and on the capacity of markets to self-correct. The third part focuses on the role of governance and ethics in the crisis and in particular the need for a common ethical framework to underpin governance practices and to provide greater clarity in the design of accountability mechanisms. The final part focuses on the trajectory of regulatory reform, noting the considerable potential for change as a result of the role of the state in the rescue and recuperation of the financial system and stressing the need for fundamental re-appraisal of business and regulatory models. This informative book will be of interest to financial regulators and theorists, commercial and financial law practitioners, and academics involved in the law and economics of regulation.

Self-defence against terrorism in the post 9/11 world

In 1986 the then United States Secretary of State George Shultz asserted that: It is absurd to argue that international law prohibits us from capturing terrorists in international waters or airspace; from attacking them on the soil of other nations, even for the purpose of rescuing hostages; or from using force against states that support, train and harbor terrorists or guerrillas. At that time the United States’ claim of a right to use military force in self-defence against terrorism2 received little support from other states.3 The predominant view then was that terrorist attacks committed by private or non-state actors were a form of criminal activity to be combated through domestic and international criminal justice mechanisms. The notion that such terrorist acts should be treated as ‘armed attacks’ triggering a victim state’s right of self-defence was not accepted by the majority of states. To suggest, as Shultz had done, that a state not directly responsible for terrorist acts could have its territorial integrity violated by military action targeting terrorists located within that state, was a controversial proposition in 1986. However, some fifteen years later, when the United States and a coalition of allies launched a military campaign in Afghanistan following the 11 September 2001 (hereafter ‘9/11’) terrorist attacks, there was virtually unanimous international support for the use of force.

Locating child protection in preservice teacher education

A recent report delivered by the Australian Centre for Child Protection has highlighted the need for empirical evidence of effective pedagogies for supporting teaching and learning of child protection content in Australian teacher education programs (Arnold & Maio-Taddeo, 2007). This paper advances this call by presenting case study accounts of different approaches to teaching child protection content in University-based teacher education programs across three Australian States. These different cases provide a basis for understanding existing strategies as an important precursor to improving practice. Although preschool, primary and secondary schools have been involved in efforts to protect children from abuse and neglect since the 1970s, teacher education programs, including preservice and inservice programs, have been slow to align their work with child protection agendas. This paper opens a long-overdue discussion about the extent and nature of child protection content in teacher education and proposes strategies for translating research into practice.

Queensland College of Teachers annual lecture 2010 : child protection

Teachers have a crucial role as “sentinels” for children who have been abused or neglected. This professional development session will provide a framework for understanding the types, incidence and causes of child abuse and neglect, and teachers’ role in reporting suspected cases. The session will provide participants with knowledge and skills to enable them to identify warning signs and indicators of child abuse and neglect, know the basis of their duties to report suspected cases of abuse and neglect, and respond to the needs of abused and neglected children at school. The presentation will focus on: • the reasons why child abuse and neglect can occur; • the different types of child abuse and neglect and their effects on children; • the warning signs and indicators of physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse and neglect; • applying knowledge of indicators to make judgements about risk of harm; • responding to indications of risk of harm, including complying with legislative and policy-based duties to report suspected child abuse and neglect.

Re-conceiving the good life : the key to sustainable globalisation

Resource-intensive, high-carbon, Western lifestyles are frequently criticised as unsustainable and deeply unsatisfying. However, these lifestyles are still attractive to the majority of Westerners and to a high proportion of the developing world’s middle classes. This paper argues that the imminent threat of catastrophic climate change constitutes an immediate political, economic and ethical challenge for citizens of the developed world that cannot be tackled by appeals to asceticism or restraint. There can be no solution to climate change until sustainable conceptions of the good life are developed that those in the west want to live and which others might want to live. While the ultimate solution to climate change is the development of low carbon lifestyles, it is important that government initiatives, governance arrangements and economic incentives support rather than undermine that search. Like the global financial crisis, the climate change crisis also demonstrates what happens when weaknesses in national, corporate and professional governance are exacerbated by weaknesses in global governance. In tackling the latter, it is critical the mistakes now evidenced in the former are avoided – including a rethinking of carbon market and carbon tax alternatives. It is also critical that individuals must take responsibility for their actions as consumers, voters and investors.

From Deep North to international 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 combatting corruption had been developed. Rather than rely upon a single law and a single institution, existing institutions were strengthened and new institutions were introduced 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 over-arching 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. This article also briefly addresses methods for destroying national corruption systems where they emerge and exist.

Making coups history

International support is capable of making the difference between the successful defense of democracy and its ignominious defeat. Indeed, the perceived probability of both support for democratically chosen leaders and opposition to their attackers can fundamentally shift the balance in the domestic struggle between them. Nevertheless, although changes to international law and international relations justify a greater international role in preventing and deterring coups and erosions, not all responsibility for protecting democracy should be assigned to the international community. Indeed, the first line of defense should be a democracy’s own domestic initiatives, with the main role of the international community being to support a domestic response to threats to democracy.

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.