The so-called 'stolen generations' - Indigenous Australians who were deliberately removed as children from their families and communities by the church, government and law - White Austrailia's policy to deal with the 'aboriginal problem'.
INTRODUCTION The so-called 'stolen generations' - Indigenous Australians who were deliberately removed as children from their families and communities by the church, government and law over a time span of sixty years as part of white Australia's policy to deal with the 'Aboriginal problem'. Many affected by the removal claim to have suffered physical and emotional abuse at the hands of authorities and white families. Many claim to still be suffering from long term implications of loss of identity, culture and family ties. Should reparations be awarded to these Indigenous Australians? The debate about reparations for the 'stolen generations' hit the political and legal spotlight in 19971 following a national inquiry by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) into 'the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their families' and the ensuing report, Bringing them Home.2 The report identified the past and continuing negative and disabling effects of the forcible removal of Indigenous children from their families and communities and recommended reparation be made for the violations of human rights and harm caused by the racially discriminatory policies and laws. The Government response to the report was to deny that there ever was a 'Stolen Generation' and questioned HREOC's conclusions, dismissing the possibility of reparations
"Too little and too late": To what extend is this statement an accurate reflection on successive UK governments policy to the tobacco industry
"Too little and too late": To what extend is this statement an accurate reflection on successive UK governments policy to the tobacco industry Tobacco dates back to the 6000BC in the Americas and it was native only to them probably till 1950's when Sir John Hawkins, an English slave trader, brought it back to Britain. The first evidence of a link between lung cancer and smoking was published in the British Medical Journal1 in 1950 although reports warning people were published much earlier, for example, in 1847 two doctors wrote in the Edinburgh Gazette that smoking2 "produces gastric disorders, coughs and inflammatory infections of the larynx and pharynx, diseases of the heart and lowness of the spirit and in short, is very injurious to the respiratory, circulatory, alimentary and nervous systems." A book about tobacco was published in 1595 in the English language and the first factory opened in 1856 in Walworth3, two decades after the first Cuban seegars (as they were then known) arrived in London4. With them smoking jackets and hats were introduced for noble smokers especially after dinner with a glass of brandy. As the World War I broke out cigarette rations were introduced becoming a valuable good in the misery of the war. The first big blow to the tobacco industry came in 1965 as the English government banned cigarette adverts on television in the UK. Six years later
Compare in detail the British prime ministership with the headships of government of the UK, Italy a
Compare in detail the British prime ministership with the headships of government of the UK, Italy a The headships of the United Kingdom, Italy and the Netherlands all have an identifiable office which can be called Prime Minister. However, their function, resources and ability to enact changes within their various systems vary considerably. In this essay, I will compare some of the important aspects of the headships of Britain, Italy and Holland. I will compare how the office is gained, how it is lost, how long each leader stays there, the powers each office holds and the amount of independent influence over policy formation. I will show that because of these aspects, someone of an activist disposition would most want the British office, secondly the Dutch, and thirdly the Italian. The British Prime Minister is generally the leader of the largest party in the House of Commons, which usually has a majority (that is fifty percent plus one). therefore to become Prime Minister of Britain, it is necessary to be leader of one of the main parties and for that party to be the largest party in the House of Commons. The individual parties have different methods of selecting their leader and times when this can be done, the most significant difference being that the Conservative Members of Parliament elect their leader, whereas Labour leaders are elected by an electoral college of the
British European Security Essay. COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE DEFENCE REVIEWS OF THE MID-1960S, 1974 AND 1981
COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE DEFENCE REVIEWS OF THE MID-1960S, 1974 AND 1981 By Jeffrey Peter Bradford Since the beginning of the cold war, Britain has sought to cope with the responsibilities of international security as a Great power, whilst facing up to economic decline, towards status comparable to that of a middle ranking power. With this central premise in mind, it is my intention in this paper to examine the defence reviews of the mid-1960s, focusing primarily on the 1966 Defence white paper, 1974 and the 1981 paper ‘the way forward’ which was also known as the Nott review. In terms of methodology, each review shall be analysed in three parts, firstly by providing a succinct summary of the paper itself, looking specifically at the political emphasis placed on the commitments of the services world-wide, before looking at the changes made to the conventional forces, and finally the place of the strategic nuclear deterrent within the review. Secondly the paper will analyse the issues and arguments which shaped the paper, before lastly bringing in each case, the two parts together into the broader context of Britain's defence policy. After this in conclusion the paper will attempt to assess the significance of these reviews, and their relevance in understanding Britain's capabilities and commitments in the post cold war order. THE 1966 DEFENCE REVIEW The
To what extent did Thatcherism embrace a neo-liberal approach to citizenship?
To what extent did Thatcherism embrace a neo-liberal approach to citizenship? Thatcherism employed the new right perspective that developed following the post-war consensus, believing that paternalism had caused Britain to fall behind the rest of the developed world. Thatcher wanted to undo the makings of Keynesian style economics, roll back the state and free the market once again. This would create more 'haves' and 'have nots'. Consequently Thatcher's government would need to make good use of the state's police force to prevent the underclass from trying to unlawfully acquire the increasing wealth of the middle classes. This is in summary is the Thatcherism model of citizenship, which embraces the neo-liberal ethics of a free market and a strong state. Throughout the course of this essay I will argue that Thatcherism, did in fact embrace a neo-liberal approach to citizenship to an enormous extent. However, incorporated within Neo-liberalism is a compassion for traditional Conservative values. Neo-liberalism is however more ideological and radical; which explains why Thatcherism was driven more by Neo-liberalism than any other approach to citizenship. I will begin with an outline of Hayek's influence on Thatcherism and explain how his book the road to serfdom inspired Thatcher to employ strategies of a neo-liberal nature in her approach to citizenship. I will
One of the most difficult conceptual matters to resolve concerns the distinction between conventional military conflict and terrorism.
Introduction According to the readings, one of the most difficult conceptual matters to resolve concerns the distinction between conventional military conflict and terrorism. The issue that seems to be in question at the present time is what constitutes terrorist behavior and tactics, as pertains to behaviors taken by the Canadian government, police and military forces against factions of the FLQ (Front de Liberation Quebecois). Is the behavior of the Canadian government indicative of political violence or terrorism? For example, for four years in the mid-1980s, while Spain's transition from dictatorship to the rule of law was being touted as a model for others, Spanish Interior Ministry and police officials were secretly directing a campaign of kidnapping, torture and murder of persons suspected of association with the Basque terrorist organization, ETA, a Basque terrorist organization. According to Korn (1996), who reported on the testimony by those implicated, these actions of state-sponsored crime were approved by Prime Minister Felipe Gonzalez and directed by the interior minister. Similar to Spain, Canada has engaged in similar behaviors, campaigns and actions against the FLQ. But can these behaviors be considered terrorism or military (and thus government) conflict? As noted in the available literature, terrorism, in its most basic definition, is an
Compare the role of the Cabinet Minister in Great Britain, France and Japan.
Compare the role of the Cabinet Minister in Great Britain, France and Japan. The role of the cabinet minister in Great Britain, France and Japan all vary in different ways. In this essay I will compare the cabinet ministers according to a common set of criteria. I will firstly examine how each minister gains the position, I will then show how it is lost. I shall then discuss how long each minister can expect to be in one position and how this affects their ability to govern. I will then compare the different levels of authority each minister has compared to the head of government in their system. I shall then finally discuss which minister has the greatest opportunity to make changes within their system. Cabinet government is a popular system throughout democracies. Essentially it means that the executive of the system is invested in a group of ministers who individually have responsibilities to specific policy areas but collectively are responsible for all government policy. They generally are separate from the other parts of the system although they may still hold their positions in the legislature. They consist of a chief spokesman (prime minister) who may do as little as chair meetings or may lead the cabinet to decisions: and usually between 15 and 25 Cabinet ministers whose responsibilities and abilities differ in each system. The first criteria is how a cabinet
Scottish Devolution
Politics B: The United Kingdom and Scotland. Outcome 2 Report. Contents Page Contents Page Number . The process of establishing devolution in Scotland 3 2. The Scottish Parliament and Executive 4 3. Impact of Devolution in Scotland 6 4. The Scottish parliamentary electoral system 7 5. Concepts relating to Scotland’s constitutional position 9 6.Appendixes; 6.1 Table of Scottish Parliament Election Results 7. References and Bibliography 10 . The process of establishing devolution in Scotland P.3 There has been more change in the devolved decision making of Scotland since the mid 1990s than at any time since Scotland united with England in1707. Pressure for devolved power grew in the years after the Second World War. Before this there was little demand for ‘Scottish’, rather than ‘British’ solutions to challenges. For example the Scottish National Party only formed in 1936. Changes
public sector
Task 1 The development And Structure of the Public sector By Vicky Herbert 30/1/07 Introduction The aim of this report is to discuss the development and structure of the government in this report I have discussed how we have certain public services and how they were developed, I have also discussed the beverage report, and Thatcherism, the structure of the government has also been included I have gone on to say about the expenditure of the government and the staffing levels. The development of the public sector The British government over the years has seen several dramatic changes, the way our government is run and the way we live, public services today have dramatically changed, after studying the time line I have listed events that explain our public service. Robert peel It wasn't until 1829 did we see the introduction of the metropolitan police before this time the policing was not organised and was a matter for public concern. Robert Peel became Home Secretary in 1822, As Home Secretary he first tackled the organisation of London's weak police-force (known as Bow Street Runners). These men were also know as the thief-takers, and helped with the duties of night watchmen who were made up of old men and were of no deterrence to aggressive criminals. Peel put his new force of young men into a dark uniform, and they soon became known as 'Peelers' or
Why was Ireland partitioned in the 1920's?
Why was Ireland partitioned in the 1920's? Tom Bartlett asserts that the French Revolution of 1789 proved to radical Protestants that '...Catholics had the vital capaces libertatis which republicans had long doubted.' 1 A century later the Protestant Unionist perception of Catholics had regressed in the view of Michael Laffan to their being '...members of a worldwide conspiracy against the beliefs, customs and liberties of Ulster protestants.' 2 Throughout the nineteenth century Ulster protestantism experienced a series of internal and external pressures that eventually metamorphosed a politically and doctrinally heterogenuous grouping into a pan-protestant political front during the crisis precipitated by the third Home Rule Bill in the period 1911-1913. This anti-home rule caucus through dint of its geographical concentration and numerical superiority in the North-east lodged a counter claim to that of the nationalists for self-determination as a distinct people in their own right. They were prepared to resort to armed struggle in order to protect this claim and their position in the union with Britain. This belligerent response was engendered by the quest of the nationalist Irish Parliamentary Party (I.P.P.) to dissolve the Act of Union with Britain. The Act was lumbered with the bulk of the responsibility for Ireland's socio-economic malaise by nationalist politicians
