The Kuhse-Singer euthanasia survey: why it fails to undermine the slippery slope argument - comparing apples and apples

A survey published in the Medical Journal of Australia in 1997 showed that the incidence of non-voluntary euthanasia in Australia was higher than in the Netherlands. Euthanasia is illegal in Australia, while it is openly practiced in the Netherlands. It has been suggested that the results of the survey undermine the slippery slope argument against legalising euthanasia. This is wrong. Although at the time of the survey, euthanasia was formally prohibited by the law in Australia, the medical and legal culture was such that doctors could practice euthanasia with impunity — in certain circumstances euthanasia by doctors was effectively condoned. This is in fact supported by the findings of the survey. The survey suggests that there were approximately 6,700 cases of euthanasia in Australia in the year from July 1994 to June 1995 — not one of which was prosecuted, let alone resulted in a conviction. Ultimately the survey merely shows that in a climate where voluntary euthanasia is tolerated, wide scale abuses (in the form of nonvoluntary euthanasia) occur. Paradoxically the results of the survey give further support to the slippery slope argument.

Environmental initiatives: towards triple-bottom line reporting

The objective of this study was to investigate the quantity and quality of voluntary environmental disclosures in the annual reports of firms listed by market capitalisation on the Australian Stock Exchange. The periods examined were those immediately prior and subsequent to the release of the Exposure Draft Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economics (CERES) Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) issued in March 1999. Using content analysis to focus on the environmental aspects, the study compared 425 annual reports over a two-year period and 60 environmental reports, in order to explore reporting practices in the periods surrounding this intervention. The results suggest a trend to triple-bottom reporting, and a significant change in the quality and quantity of environmental information, albeit in specific categories.

Retirement income policy and the taxation of superannuation in Australia

Superannuation is a form of savings for retirement. The savings are invested and earn income, but the proceeds are generally not available until the beneficiary reaches retirement age} The federal government's retirement income policy has three components, two of which relate to superannuation: the age pension, which provides income support to men aged 65 and over and to women aged 62 and over.2 The pension is means tested and does not depend on previous labour force participation or individual contributions; a compulsory superannuation scheme (under the Superannuation Guarantee Charge (Administration) Act 1992 (SGA Act)), which requires contributions to be made by employers on behalf of all employees, whether full-time, part-time or casual;3 and encouragement, through the taxation system, of voluntary contributions to approved superannuation funds.4 In May 2002, the government released a report, the "Intergenerational Report", 5 which identifies issues associated with Australia's ageing population and considers the fiscal implications of those changes. The Report noted that a steadily ageing population is likely to place significant pressure on government finances. It also noted that one of the key priorities for ensuring fiscal sustainability should be "maintaining a retirement income policy that encourages private saving for retirement and reduces the future demand for the Age Pension". 6 The main way the government has sought to encourage that private saving is through the tax system, primarily by the use of tax concessions. Over the past 20 years, however, the taxation of superannuation has grown in an extremely ad hoc manner and is now inequitable, inefficient and overly complex. This article suggests that the taxation of superannuation in Australia is in urgent need of a complete review. The article further asserts that, if an appropriate framework can be devised, changes could be introduced as budgetary pressures allow.

Constructions of volunteerism in third sector organisations: some comparisons

This paper is concerned with notions of volunteerism in third sector organisations. It argues that volunteerism takes different forms and involves different practices according to the contexts in which it is constructed. It draws on a comparative study of the contributions of third sector organisations to civil society, particularly a collaborative research project, Voluntary Associations and Active Citizenship-Welfare, Democracy and the Market in Australia, Russia and Sweden which involved the author as a member of the research team. The paper elaborates four operating frameworks in third sector organisations and discusses the ways in which these frameworks facilitate, co-opt or impede volunteer practices in different settings.