The 2002 US Farm Bill: what's in it for CAP reform?

The 2002 U.S. Farm Bill (the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act or FSRIA) provides considerably more government subsidies for U.S. agriculture than Congress envisaged when it passed the preceding 1996–2002 FAIR Act. We review the FAIR record, showing how government subsidies increased greatly beyond those originally scheduled. For FSRIA, we outline key commodity, trade, and conservation and environmental provisions. We expect that the commodity programmes will: (a) encourage production when the market calls for less; (b) significantly increase subsidies over FAIR baseline subsidies; (c) press against current WTO and possible Doha Round support limits; and (d) aggravate trading partners. Finally, we suggest two lessons from the U.S. policy experience that might benefit those working on CAP and WTO reform. First, past research shows that farm programmes have little to do with the economic health of rural communities. Second, programme transparency, and especially public disclosure of the level of payments going to individual farmers, by name, influences the farm policy debate. Personalized data show what economists have long maintained—that the bulk of programme benefits go to a relatively few, large, producers—but do so in a way that captures the public and policy-makers' attention

Taking parliamentary sovereignty seriously within a Bill of Rights framework

The Victorian Government has made a commitment to consult with the community on how best to protect and promote human rights in Victoria. To this end, it has established a Human Rights Consultation Committee to undertake this consultation and to report on the desirability or otherwise of enacting a Bill of Rights. The government has, however, indicated its preference for a statutory Bill of Rights and one that preserves the 'sovereignty of Parliament'. This article takes those two government preferences as its baseline and then explores what might follow if the preservation of parliamentary sovereignty is taken seriously within a Victorian rights framework.

Sexing little penguins eudyptula minor using bill measurements

In Little Penguins Eudyptula minor there are no reliable plumage or body size differences that can be used visually to distinguish the sex of individuals. However, sexual dimorphism of morphometric measures has been noted, with males always being a little larger than females. In this study, differences between E. minor sexes at eight colonies in south-eastern Australia were determined statistically via discriminant function analysis (DFA) and through the utilization of DNA-based techniques developed for non-ratite birds. The DFA correctly determined gender in 91.1% of cases and molecular methods were 100% accurate. Our DFA success rate of classification is similar to that previously published for Little Penguins in Victoria. In this study statistically significant differences in mean bill depths and lengths were found between Little Penguin colonies at St Kilda, Phillip Island and Gabo Island, compared to colonies at Kangaroo Island, Granite Island, Middle Island and London Bridge. As birds in eastern populations (St Kilda, Phillip Island, Gabo Island) exhibit statistically significantly smaller beaks (bill depth and bill length), separate discriminant functions were investigated for each phenotypically distinct geo-spatial cohort. Interestingly, cluster analysis for bill length identified three groups: western (Kangaroo Island and Granite Island), eastern (St Kilda, Phillip Island and Middle Island) and the London Bridge Little Penguin colony, which constituted a separate group. We conclude that while there is a slight increase in DF power for colonies west of Cape Otway and for some specific colonies, colony-specific DFA is not required to identify the sex of Little Penguins in south-eastern Australia.