This Master’s Thesis compares the dynamics of intergovernmental relations (IGR) in Canada and Australia. In particular, the study explores how two such similar countries have developed such distinct sets of intergovernmental institutions. In Australia, the Commonwealth has increasingly dominated IGR since the 1930s, a process which culminated with the creation of the Council of Australian Government, a “vertical” (Commonwealth-state) institution. In Canada, federal-provincial-territorial relations have been far less institutionalized. Instead, “horizontal” (provincial-territorial) relations have evolved slowly into the Council of the Federation, the most regularized forum for IGR in Canadian history. By examining the historical development of federalism more generally and IGR specifically, this study uncovers a mutually-reinforcing relationship between centralization and the verticality of IGR in Australia, and a corresponding bond between decentralization and horizontality in Canada. Based on original interviews with key intergovernmental officials in each country, the study attributes these relationships to a number of factors, including the presence of multi-nationalism, the strength of intrastate federalism, the nature of judicial interpretation, the structure of fiscal federalism, and the personal style of political figures. The thesis concludes that verticality in Canada and horizontality in Australia are functions of the same factors which made one decentralized and the other centralized, and that institutions of IGR are both cause and effect of the prevailing dynamic in either federation.

This Master’s Thesis compares the dynamics of intergovernmental relations (IGR) in Canada and Australia. In particular, the study explores how two such similar countries have developed such distinct sets of intergovernmental institutions. In Australia, the Commonwealth has increasingly dominated IGR since the 1930s, a process which culminated with the creation of the Council of Australian Government, a “vertical” (Commonwealth-state) institution. In Canada, federal-provincial-territorial relations have been far less institutionalized. Instead, “horizontal” (provincial-territorial) relations have evolved slowly into the Council of the Federation, the most regularized forum for IGR in Canadian history. By examining the historical development of federalism more generally and IGR specifically, this study uncovers a mutually-reinforcing relationship between centralization and the verticality of IGR in Australia, and a corresponding bond between decentralization and horizontality in Canada. Based on original interviews with key intergovernmental officials in each country, the study attributes these relationships to a number of factors, including the presence of multi-nationalism, the strength of intrastate federalism, the nature of judicial interpretation, the structure of fiscal federalism, and the personal style of political figures. The thesis concludes that verticality in Canada and horizontality in Australia are functions of the same factors which made one decentralized and the other centralized, and that institutions of IGR are both cause and effect of the prevailing dynamic in either federation.

The thesis examines the role that Australian graphic satirists play in the theatre of public life. The main focus of the thesis is on newspaper cartoonists but for the purposes of comparative analysis, there is a discussion of a representative selection of satiric texts across different media (essentially, television and radio) since the mid-1960s, and also an historical survey of the development of graphic satire from its origins during the Protestant Reformation in Europe. Apart from a small number of references, this study does not venture into the vast field of on-line satire, a topic more properly addressed in a separate scholarly investigation. Graphic satire in the medium of the newspaper is of particular interest because of its consistent production and wide circulation, its relative freedom from censorship and libel laws, and the ability of the cartoon image to condense and concentrate issues which would be too complex or defamatory in print or on television. Political cartooning as it is understood today emerged during the early nineteenth century, at about the same time as the modern newspaper and the profession of journalism, but graphic satire also has links with a venerable tradition of the artist as social critic and has historically been associated with movements for social justice and democracy. It is in the context of these latter associations that I consider political cartoonists as belonging to the sphere of the public intellectual. The discussion of cartoonists as public intellectuals is framed against a discourse of decline that has been circulating for more than a decade, acquiring an urgency in this country during the later years of the Howard administration. This declinist narrative covers a number of areas of cultural and political life and is not confined to the Australian context; as British writer Helen Small points out, it is “an increasingly transnational conversation” (02:1). Briefly outlined, there is a perception that the terms of public debate have narrowed; that citizens have become disengaged from the democratic process; that between the ‘celebrity intellectual’ and the tenured academic, the life of the mind is not what it used to be, and even political satire itself has been seen by some commentators as being in terminal decline. The different arguments about cultural and social decline can be placed under the more encompassing subject heading of an ongoing debate about democracy and in particular, whether it is functioning as well as it should. With the adoption of neo-liberalism as an overarching political ideology by most western governments in the early 1980s, anxieties about whether the principles of democracy were gradually being usurped or even eroded by the primacy of market values have gathered momentum during the past two decades. The volume of these concerns has been amplified in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent ‘war on terror’, with the state’s increased emphasis on security and control of its citizens being interpreted as threats to some of the basic tenets of the democratic system, such as free speech and the rule of law. In contrast to the various narratives of decline, my thesis proposes that democracy is still very well served by the kind of vigorous and long-standing practice of dissent that the public intellectual represents, and more specifically, the embodiment of this tradition in contemporary newspaper cartoonists. By definition, graphic satire questions and challenges the status quo and at least since Hogarth in the eighteenth century, it has always been a public art-form. Hogarth’s personal involvement in many of the social issues and philanthropic schemes of his day (such as anti-gin legislation and state care for orphans) also exemplifies an important aspect of the extra-professional work of graphic satirists which further links them to the public intellectual. A commitment to social activism and making use of the different platforms available (for example, public speaking and donating work to charities) in order to support, publicise or promote issues of social justice began with Hogarth and continues with contemporary Australian cartoonists.

The thesis examines the role that Australian graphic satirists play in the theatre of public life. The main focus of the thesis is on newspaper cartoonists but for the purposes of comparative analysis, there is a discussion of a representative selection of satiric texts across different media (essentially, television and radio) since the mid-1960s, and also an historical survey of the development of graphic satire from its origins during the Protestant Reformation in Europe. Apart from a small number of references, this study does not venture into the vast field of on-line satire, a topic more properly addressed in a separate scholarly investigation. Graphic satire in the medium of the newspaper is of particular interest because of its consistent production and wide circulation, its relative freedom from censorship and libel laws, and the ability of the cartoon image to condense and concentrate issues which would be too complex or defamatory in print or on television. Political cartooning as it is understood today emerged during the early nineteenth century, at about the same time as the modern newspaper and the profession of journalism, but graphic satire also has links with a venerable tradition of the artist as social critic and has historically been associated with movements for social justice and democracy. It is in the context of these latter associations that I consider political cartoonists as belonging to the sphere of the public intellectual. The discussion of cartoonists as public intellectuals is framed against a discourse of decline that has been circulating for more than a decade, acquiring an urgency in this country during the later years of the Howard administration. This declinist narrative covers a number of areas of cultural and political life and is not confined to the Australian context; as British writer Helen Small points out, it is “an increasingly transnational conversation” (02:1). Briefly outlined, there is a perception that the terms of public debate have narrowed; that citizens have become disengaged from the democratic process; that between the ‘celebrity intellectual’ and the tenured academic, the life of the mind is not what it used to be, and even political satire itself has been seen by some commentators as being in terminal decline. The different arguments about cultural and social decline can be placed under the more encompassing subject heading of an ongoing debate about democracy and in particular, whether it is functioning as well as it should. With the adoption of neo-liberalism as an overarching political ideology by most western governments in the early 1980s, anxieties about whether the principles of democracy were gradually being usurped or even eroded by the primacy of market values have gathered momentum during the past two decades. The volume of these concerns has been amplified in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent ‘war on terror’, with the state’s increased emphasis on security and control of its citizens being interpreted as threats to some of the basic tenets of the democratic system, such as free speech and the rule of law. In contrast to the various narratives of decline, my thesis proposes that democracy is still very well served by the kind of vigorous and long-standing practice of dissent that the public intellectual represents, and more specifically, the embodiment of this tradition in contemporary newspaper cartoonists. By definition, graphic satire questions and challenges the status quo and at least since Hogarth in the eighteenth century, it has always been a public art-form. Hogarth’s personal involvement in many of the social issues and philanthropic schemes of his day (such as anti-gin legislation and state care for orphans) also exemplifies an important aspect of the extra-professional work of graphic satirists which further links them to the public intellectual. A commitment to social activism and making use of the different platforms available (for example, public speaking and donating work to charities) in order to support, publicise or promote issues of social justice began with Hogarth and continues with contemporary Australian cartoonists.

The thesis examines the role that Australian graphic satirists play in the theatre of public life. The main focus of the thesis is on newspaper cartoonists but for the purposes of comparative analysis, there is a discussion of a representative selection of satiric texts across different media (essentially, television and radio) since the mid-1960s, and also an historical survey of the development of graphic satire from its origins during the Protestant Reformation in Europe. Apart from a small number of references, this study does not venture into the vast field of on-line satire, a topic more properly addressed in a separate scholarly investigation. Graphic satire in the medium of the newspaper is of particular interest because of its consistent production and wide circulation, its relative freedom from censorship and libel laws, and the ability of the cartoon image to condense and concentrate issues which would be too complex or defamatory in print or on television. Political cartooning as it is understood today emerged during the early nineteenth century, at about the same time as the modern newspaper and the profession of journalism, but graphic satire also has links with a venerable tradition of the artist as social critic and has historically been associated with movements for social justice and democracy. It is in the context of these latter associations that I consider political cartoonists as belonging to the sphere of the public intellectual. The discussion of cartoonists as public intellectuals is framed against a discourse of decline that has been circulating for more than a decade, acquiring an urgency in this country during the later years of the Howard administration. This declinist narrative covers a number of areas of cultural and political life and is not confined to the Australian context; as British writer Helen Small points out, it is “an increasingly transnational conversation” (02:1). Briefly outlined, there is a perception that the terms of public debate have narrowed; that citizens have become disengaged from the democratic process; that between the ‘celebrity intellectual’ and the tenured academic, the life of the mind is not what it used to be, and even political satire itself has been seen by some commentators as being in terminal decline. The different arguments about cultural and social decline can be placed under the more encompassing subject heading of an ongoing debate about democracy and in particular, whether it is functioning as well as it should. With the adoption of neo-liberalism as an overarching political ideology by most western governments in the early 1980s, anxieties about whether the principles of democracy were gradually being usurped or even eroded by the primacy of market values have gathered momentum during the past two decades. The volume of these concerns has been amplified in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent ‘war on terror’, with the state’s increased emphasis on security and control of its citizens being interpreted as threats to some of the basic tenets of the democratic system, such as free speech and the rule of law. In contrast to the various narratives of decline, my thesis proposes that democracy is still very well served by the kind of vigorous and long-standing practice of dissent that the public intellectual represents, and more specifically, the embodiment of this tradition in contemporary newspaper cartoonists. By definition, graphic satire questions and challenges the status quo and at least since Hogarth in the eighteenth century, it has always been a public art-form. Hogarth’s personal involvement in many of the social issues and philanthropic schemes of his day (such as anti-gin legislation and state care for orphans) also exemplifies an important aspect of the extra-professional work of graphic satirists which further links them to the public intellectual. A commitment to social activism and making use of the different platforms available (for example, public speaking and donating work to charities) in order to support, publicise or promote issues of social justice began with Hogarth and continues with contemporary Australian cartoonists.

No description available.

Since 2001, Australia’s increasingly securitised and exclusionary asylum policy has been legitimated through a damaging discourse surrounding people who seek asylum. This discourse, reinforced by successive Australian Prime Ministers, has been instrumental in shaping policies which have a devastating human impact. While political elites across the West are distancing themselves from a discourse of inclusive multiculturalism, Australia continues to celebrate its multicultural success despite the ongoing tension between a rhetoric of inclusion and one justifying exclusion. Since discourse is both productive and reflective of the social world, shaping discourse can be understood as a means to shape reality. This thesis explores how discourse is constructed and reproduced through framing; a discursive practice that influences how certain issues are understood. The texts analysed are those in which Australian Prime Ministers and senior political figures defend policies of exclusion against people who seek asylum by boat as part of a broader policy vision for a Safe, Secure & Free Australia. In order to contrast the frames, narratives and discourses associated with exclusion, communications promoting the policy vision of an inclusive Multicultural Australia have also been analysed. The frames identified in the material reproduce particular narratives which help to maintain the hegemonic position of discourses which present Australia as a humanitarian, welcoming and inclusive multicultural society and situate people who seek asylum by boat as illegal, seeking an unfair advantage, and as a threat to national security. By identifying frames that consistently appear in the messaging of Australian political elites, we can understand how certain narratives have come to be accepted as truth.

Historians have largely ignored the importance of relationships in war, particularly at a grass roots level. Examining the past from a relational point of view provides a new perspective on war not accessible through other forms of analysis. A relational approach to a study of the campaigns in Greece and Crete helps to explain, amongst other issues, why so many Australian lives were saved. Australians entered Greece with little background knowledge of the country and the people they were required to defend. There was no serious consultation with the Australian government apart from the cursory briefing of its Prime Minister. Although Britain had numerous intelligence officers operating on the ground in Greece prior and during the campaign, little information about the true political situation in the country had filtered through to the Australian high command. This placed the troops in a very vulnerable position on the Greek frontier and, later, on Crete. Military interaction with the Greeks proved difficult, as key officers from the Greek General Staff and senior government ministers did not intend to fight the Germans. As a result, little coordination took place between the Australian and Greek forces hindering the development of a successful working relationship. Conversely, relations with the Greek people were very amicable with many Greeks risking their lives to help Australian troops. The altruism of the Greeks was one of the most striking features of the Greek and Crete campaigns. Unlike Egypt, where the Australians felt alienated by the values and customs of the Egyptian people, in Greece they warmed to the behaviour of the Greeks. Although they did not speak the same language nor share a similar culture, they had many characteristics in common with the Greeks whose strong sense of loyalty to their allies really impressed the Australians. On their part, the Australians displayed respect for the values and customs of the Greek people. Through their interaction during the war, the Greeks came to regard the Australians, not only as friends, but also as brothers, forging an intimate relationship that has been incorporated in the social memory of both countries.

Between 1983 and 1996, the environment emerged to become a major political issue in Australia to which a series of national public policy decisions was directed. In examining these policies, this thesis argues that the association of environmentalism with the politics of policy-making reflected the primary role played by the Australian Labor Party as the major political party in Government at that time. It reflected the Labor Government’s primary role in determining the nature and direction of the debate between 1983 and 1996. Of particular importance was a period in which the Labor Government sought to undertake institutional innovation in order to contain the environmental debate within the institutionalised policy-making process - a period described here as the ‘Accordist’; phase of Labor’s management of the environmental debate. The thesis challenges theoretical approaches that argue that relations between social democratic trade union based parties and the environmental movement have the potential to tend toward mutual antagonism. It also challenges the argument that environmentalism, as a manifestation of the ‘new politics’, necessarily involves a qualitative transformation of politics associated with new social movements. Rather, the thesis argues that the debate in Australia went beyond simply addressing controversial specific issues when they arose, to instead become an examination of the capacity for agencies and departments to incorporate environmental values into their decision-making, and about ways in which competing interest group demands could be reconciled through newly created government-led forums. (For complete abstract open document)

When the Great White Fleet visited Australia in 1908 it became the focal point of an on-going test of wills between Britain and Australia. Relations between the two countries had become increasingly strained since Britain’s decision in the mid-nineteenth century to establish a new kind of relationship with its colonies. For the Australian colonies this meant moving towards independence within the Empire framework and assuming more responsibility for their own defence. This change had serious repercussions for the Australian colonies and British-Australian relations. Politically and psychologically the Australian colonies had developed an image of themselves as the inferior daughters of the superior and protective Mother Country. By changing the nature of the British-Australian colonial relationship, Britain not only challenged this Australian colonial self-image, it also heightened existing divisions among the Australian colonists. Anglo- Australian loyalists, enamoured of things British, clung to the established colonial image and remained subservient to Imperial wishes. Australian nationalists, on the other hand, tried to establish a new relationship with Britain, one in which Australian colonial concerns would have a greater voice. (For complete abstract open document)