Analyzing an article - Heel Lancing in Newborns Essay

Analyzing an article - Heel Lancing in Newborns - Essay Example (Morrow, 2010) The results of this research could help significantly for the nursing profession as it gives an idea for the nurses on when to perform the heel lancing procedures. The total number of infants employed in the study was 42. The setting was such that the infants were selected if they satisfied two conditions. First, they should have greater than 37 weeks of gesticulation period and secondly, they should have successfully undergone the total serum bilirubin (TSB) procedure. (Morrow, 2010) The entire research was conducted in a successful and popular tertiary hospital. The dependent variables used for the measurement included the behavioral response of each child. The independent variables included the squeeze level of the nurse, the position of holding the new born and the condition of whether it swaddled or not. The independent variables were determined by the nurses who were holding on to the baby. The dependent variables were measured using Neonatal Inventory Pain Scale (NIPS) which uses a scoring instrument that scores the behavioral responses in the range between 0 and 1 and based on the total score, the pain is measured. (Morrow, 2010) The hypothesis is that the time for which the neonate’s heel is squeezed would be greatly reduced if the neonate is held in upright position combined with it being swaddled up. Such a reduction of time would greatly help in minimizing the sufferings of the neonates during heal lancing procedures. The strength of the study is that it was performed in real time situations and hence strengthens the validity of the results. Also, there is not much deviation of the results when compared with those of the theoretical approach. The weakness of the study is that it did not provide information about alternate findings on the same subject. Also, infants of mothers affected with certain diseases and troubles like diabetes were not considered for testing, which questions

Poverty Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Poverty - Essay Example e has been an on-going debate as to the actual poverty numbers in the past with many experts claiming there as many as one billion people who fall and live below the poverty line. Most of these poor are in developing countries of the world. Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest numbers of persons living below the poverty line. According to the World Bank, studies by Bhalla (2002) and Sala-i-Martin (2002) claim that the â€Å"number of people living in extreme poverty has fallen more sharply than as indicated by World Bank estimates†. The duo suggests that first World Bank’s Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of halving the poverty rate by 2015 had in fact reached in 2000. In contrast other studies have stated that there has been no such decline as claimed by the World Bank. Reddy and Pogge (2002) and Wade (2002), in their assessment states that â€Å"the rate of decline in poverty is overstated by World Bank estimates.† These varying views are based on the various definitions or just understanding of what global poverty really is. The methods of measuring and assessing poverty data around the world also contributes to this differing school of thoughts. According to the World Bank (2008a) the world’s population living under extreme poverty dropped from 28 percent to 21 percent from 1990 to 2001 in developing countries around the world. The regions of East and South Asia witnessed most of the decline. In East Asia, the rate of poverty is said to have only dropped from 69 percent to 27 percent from 1990 to 2006. The same report suggests that the situation in Sub-Saharan Africa got worse as the number of people living under extreme poverty jumped from 231 million people in 1981 to 318 million in 2001, a 5 percent increase over 10 year period. Other regions of the world have not had dramatic changes in their poverty statistics. The economies of Eastern Europe and Central Asia which experienced a sharp drop in income in the early 1990’s have seen poverty rates

Communication In The Hospitality And Tourism Industry Communications Essay

Communication In The Hospitality And Tourism Industry Communications Essay Communication is the most important and the most used of all skills in the hospitality and tourism industry. Managers spend the largest portion of their time in verbal or written communications with their employees or outside parties. Other staff member communicate among themselves , as well as their managers, frontline employees suppliers, and so on, to give and receive the information they need to perform their jobs. Communication has been recognized as the means by which both and people and the organization survive. When human beings lack the ability to cope with life, the source of the problem is often a lack of appropriate information. Incomplete and unorganized information place a heavy strain on the ability of people to make sense out of their existence. Their performance of a job depends on having necessary information, having the skills to do a job depends on the quality of communication during the skills acquisition period. Applying the definition of communication to this process, the role of the transmitter is to impart information, ideas, or feeling to another person. Encoding is the process by which information is organized into symbols, such as word, picture or gestures that can be conveyed to receiver. The transmitter subsequently uses a selected form of communication such as writing, speaking, faxing, gesturing, painting or advertising to impart the ancoded message too receiver. The receiver is the person or group of person to whom the message is being sent by the trasmitter. In the communication process, it is the responsibility of the receiver receive and decode the message. Decoding is the reverse of encoding. It is the process by which the symbols that the transmitter has conveyed to the receiver are interpreted and translated into meaninfullinformation. It is only after decoding that the receiver can respond to the perceived message. It is important to note that there are certain times during the communication cation process at which communication failures can readily occur. First, if the transmitter is not carefull during the encoding process, he may incorrectly encode the information, ideas, or feelings he intends to transmit. This would result in his transmitting an inaccurate message. The thing which usually happens are such as the message received by the last person in line differs markedly from the orginal phase. The primary reason for this discrepancy is that the massage has gone through many transmulations as it has been encoded and by each person in the line. Communication failure can also accur if a message does not reach the receive. It may reach no one or the actual receiver of the message may not be the person for whom the message was intended. However with this form of communication, there is no way to ensure this is the case. As stated earlier, how best to reach the intended receiver is an important consideration in selecting a form of communication for a particular message. Another potential source of trouble in the communication process is noise. Noise refers to any sort of distraction or interference that prevents the accurate transmitter and reception and reception of message. Three distinct types of noise have been identified such as external noise, physiological noise and psychological noise. External noise is any distraction or interference whose source is outside of the receiver. Physiological noise is interference caused by a biological factor such as loss of sight or hearing. Psychological noise refers to forces that eithe r cause a tranmitter to improperly encode a message or receiver to incorrectly decode a message. The frontline employees as the most important link between a company and its customer is a crucial first step in developing and implementing effective communication systems. The frontline employees have to ensure that they are fully aware of company policies and priorities insofar as they affect the job the employees are doing, they also have to know where and how to obtain information if required. The employees also have to react positively to the unexpected. They also have be confidence that management will support their reasonable action. They should know that reasonable suggestions will be acted upon. The staff also should be fully trained to carry out all of their job responsibilities. While communication with customers can be winning business strategy in the service sector. Repeating business can only ensure his customer keep coming back. Example of the communication process are (Transmitter Message Receiver). Conclusion Effective communication system are crucial to the success of organization in the hospitality and tourism industry. Without feedback from the customer and employees, it is imposible to assess the needs of consumers Question 2 Motivation is the key to keeping performing continuosly at the is highest standards. How organization motivate their employees to excel at their jobs. Introduction a vital managerial function in any organization is to motivate employees. This is because motivation is inextricably linked to employees satisfaction and ensures employees consistently excel at their jobs. Motivation is especially important in the hospitality and tourism industry, where employees satisfaction and competence are key determinants of service quality. Answer 2 For a company to succeed, it is necessary for employees to be competent, for the company to be organized in efficient ways, for the firm to provide the employees with necessary materials and resource to do the job, and for employees to have a desire to do their best. Motivation plays a major role in achieving high performance in the workplace, which is an important goal of management. However, just because an employees is motivated does not guarantee she will perform satisfactorily. Form the individuals perspective the desire to do well in ones work is primarily linked to ones desire to meet an internalized personal need. In other words, by engaging in certain behaviors the employee expects to meet some internal need. From an organizational perspective, an effective firm is a productive firm when it stimulates all its employees to behave in the manner desired by the organization, directs their behavior to accomplish the goals of the organization and develops programs to maintain the desired levels of performance. Example: (Ability + Direction + Motivation + Support = Effective Performance) A person might be motivated to work because she needs to earn money to buy food or shelter. Process theories, in contrast, describe how the individuals become motivated in the first time. A number of strategies for motivating employees are also discussed. At the group level, the Hawthorne effect is explained and at the organizational level, job enrichment and design and the Scanlon plan are reviewed. Individuals have a variety of needs they seek to satisfy. Several theories of motivation address the role needs play in stimulating behavior. Though motivational theories may stress different factors, they reveal a case regardless of whether the rewards is intrinsic. However a persons physical safety was suddenly threatened an angry customer threatened a hotel clerk with physical violence. This process would reoccur as event and conditions in the individuals life changed. A common error of manager is to attempt to motivate employees by addressing an unmet need that is a projection of the managers rather than the employees need. This is illustrated in the following examples. A manager of a travel agency had an employees who was not able to sell the companys service in a proficient manner. Employees need to developed and thus motivation are acquired, as people interact with their environment. Examples: (Achievement, Power, Affiliation) People with a high need for achiement tend to take personal responsibility for solving problems, be a goal oriented, set moderate, realistic, attainable goals, seek challenges, excellence, and individuality and take calculated, moderated risk. Some people with high need for achiement think about ways to do a better job. People need high power for to control the situation, want to influence or control over others, enjoy competition in which they can win, be willing to confront others. People with high need for affiliation seek close relationship with others, want to be liked by others, enjoy lots of social activities. As a part of a team some people desire satisfaction from other people, whom they work rather than from the task itself. Some gives allots of praise and recognition, delegate responsibility for orienting and training new employees to them. Motivation and individuals performance, is to improve towards work that can contribute significantly to improved performance. This implies that managers should be sensitive to individual different because what motivates one individual may not motivate another. Motivation and the work group establishing effective and productive work groups. It has been well established that employees behavior is affected by individuals needs. Organization need motivated employees to carry out the business of the firm and to ensure that organizational goals are achieved. Because of the crucial role motivation plays in individual and group performance, organizations must establish systems or programs to motivate their employees. Job enrichment which refers to the vertical expansion of jobs, raise motivation by making work more interesting and challenging for employees. Worker controls the planning, execution, and evaluation of his or her job. Complete activity, increases the employees freedom and independence, increases responsibility, and provides feedback. Job redesign is essentially the of doing it better by doing it differently. Experts can use time and motion to determine the way they should be done. Managers, who supervise the job, can suggest improvement based observed shortcoming in current job procedures. Knowledgeable about their jobs, can devise new and better ways to carry out their work. Conclusion Motivation refers to employees, which willing to exert high levels of effort toward organizational goal in the expectation that doing so will enable them to satisfy some individual need. Motivation is a necessary, but by itself not a sufficient, condition of effective performance. Manager should ensure that the reward system is perceived by employees as being fair. Bibliography -Human resource management in the hospitality industry. John Wiley sons, inc Hospitality industry OR Management. publisher- DAnnunzio-Green, Norma Table of content Question 1 Introduction Answer 1 Conclusion Question 2 Answer 2 Conclusion

Dissociative Identity Disorder Essay -- essays research papers

Dissociative Identity Disorder, as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV-TR), is â€Å"characterized by the presence of two or more distinct identities or personality states that recurrently take control of the individual’s behavior accompanied by an inability to recall important personal information that is too extensive to be explained by ordinary forgetfulness. It is a disorder characterized by identity fragmentation rather than a proliferation of separate personalities.† To qualify as dissociative identity disorder, also known as D.I.D., at least two personalities must routinely take alternate control of the individual's behavior, and there must be a loss of memory that goes beyond normal forgetfulness. This memory loss is often referred to as "losing time". These symptoms must occur independently of substance abuse or a general medical condition. â€Å"Dissociative identity disorder is a rare diagnosis, although people currently with a diagnosis of psychosis may in fact be experiencing what is associated with the disorder. Because of the rarity of the diagnosis, there is much misunderstanding and ignorance among people and mental health professionals. Special attention is given to the reality of coping with the difficulties that dissociative identity disorder creates.† D.I.D. has been mistaken quite frequently for schizophrenia (also called dementia praecox). Other misdiagnoses include borderline personality disorder, somatization disorder, and panic disorder, and can take 6-7 years, on average, from the first sign to the diagnosis. D.I.D. patients are often frightened by their dissociative experiences and may go to emergency rooms or clinics because they fear they are ... ... an adjunct to psychotherapy and/or medication. These include hydrotherapy, herbal medicine, therapeutic massage, and yoga. Meditation is usually discouraged until the patient's personality has been reintegrated. Treatment of D.I.D. is complex. Patients are often treated under a variety of other psychiatric diagnoses for a long time before being re-diagnosed with D.I.D. Many patients are misdiagnosed as depressed because their primary personality is subdued and withdrawn. The outlook for people with D.I.D. is usually very good, if they stick with the therapy that works for them. Some therapists believe that the prognosis for recovery is excellent for children and good for most adults. Although treatment takes years, it is often ultimately effective. As a general rule, the earlier the patient is diagnosed and properly treated, the better the chances for improvement.

The Geography of the Olympics

The London 2012 Olympics has had a massive effect on the world, in particular the UK. Geographically speaking the Olympic park is located in Stratford, East London. The Olympics is obviously a huge financial outlay, but it is not just for the 2 weeks of the games. Urban regeneration: The Stratford area was previously a under developed and unpleasant area of London. Due to the Olympics the ?4 billion urban regeneration of the 73 hectares of land within the M25 has been started, with Stratford at its heart. The new facilities will include over 100 shops, leisure facilities, hotels and schools. One area of Stratford is currently being developed to be the most significant business district since Canary Wharf, this is planned to provide space for up to 30’000 workers. Stratford’s residents have also benefitted from the athlete’s village, the poor standard of the previous housing has led to their demolition and residents will now be able to access the former athlete’s village as part of an affordable/social housing scheme. The inclusion of 11’000 new homes in the Olympic park area will provide what Boris Johnson dubbed â€Å"the most important urban regeneration project in the next 25 years. It was perhaps most needed in this area of London as it had one of the lowest GDP’s in Britain with unemployment peaking at 20% after the demise of what were once the world’s largest docks. The area was very undesirable and often dubbed stinky Stratford because of the slaughterhouses and noxious industries that operated there. A consequence of all this was the housing, before the Olympics it consisted of post-world war prefabs. (Sources: Gaurdian. co. uk/Live discussion- regeneration/ July 2012 & London2012. com/ Regeneration games/November 2011) Transport: With 204 countries competing in the 2012 and over 11 million tickets on sale, people from all around the globe will be travelling to see Olympic events. This influx of people needs significant public transport and a superb infrastructure in order to run smoothly. International arrivals/departures by plane relied on the continuous operation of major airports around the world and the transport links directly to major areas of London in particular, Stratford. This was facilitated by regular trains and buses running between the locations. Since the London 2012 games, Stratford train station has become the third largest station in the UK for the number of trains stopping there. The People: As well as including thousands of people from around the world the Olympics also managed to attract all age groups from young children to pensioners. This sets the Olympics apart from other events; the ability to include such a vast age range is incredibly hard it is event such as the Olympics that enable such a large demographic to come together. For the first time in Olympic history there was a female team member from each of the competing countries, this was a particular change for Saudi Arabia who let two women into the team this year in contrast to none in its Olympic history. The Finances: In the background of the photo it is clear to see the large steel structure. This was donated by Lakshmi Mittal, the owner of ArcelorMittal which is the world's leading integrated steel and mining company. The tower is named the ‘Orbit’ and is located in Orbit Circus to the East of the Olympic Stadium. Mr Mittal has long been a supporter of the Olympics, setting up a trust for aspiring Indian athletes after Indian won only one medal in the 2000 Olympics. Despite being of Indian origin he decided to fund the project in the UK, this clearly demonstrates a sense of globalisation as financial support came from philanthropists all over the world. The economic effects of the Olympics have also been demonstrated by many large corporations, such as Whitbread, the group including Premier Inn, 4 restaurant chains and Costa Coffee. They revealed that sales had pushed Whitbread to the top of the FTSE 100 risers, up 106p to ?22. 05. An average increase of around 5% across the group. Furthermore the construction of the Olympic sites has created 46’000 jobs, much of the workforce sourced locally to retain the financial benefits within the local area. Moreover the active encouragement of a healthy lifestyle generated by the Olympics has a significant impact upon the attitudes viewers have about sport and their health. Theoretically the long term effects of the Olympics could mean the government saves money in areas such as health care treatments associated with obesity and unhealthy living. This in turn would enable a higher proportion of taxes to be spent on further urban regeneration or other public interests. (Sources: Gaurdian. co. uk/Live discussion- regeneration/ July 2012 & Whitbread PLC/ Trading Update/ September 2012) The Economic benefits of the Olympics were hyped up to an un-believable level by some sources, figures circulated at around ?3. Billion from respected organizations such as Visa. This would have meant a 3. 5% rise in the UK’s overall economic output annually. It was also expected that between 2013-2015, all the UK regions would benefit financially totaling 2. 74 Billion in extra money spent by visitors. When broken down into sectors, the High street retailers were expected to gain the most totaling ?705 million, surprisingly the transport sector faired as the lowest e arner totaling just ?81 million. Therefore Visa came to the conclusion that the total ‘economic legacy’ would be ?5. 3 Billion by 2015. However, now the main Olympic Games have come to an end analysts, are broadcasting a contrasting opinions based on the financial figures from the games. The more realistic increase in the nation’s output for 2012 is likely to be around 1%, less than a third of the original predictions for the Olympics alone. This 1% would also include the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee which was estimated to have increase output by 0. 4% along with the 0. 1% of growth gained from ticket sales (doesn’t count as the Olympic effect) to a total of 0. %. So, even without the Olympic effect, output should increase by 0. 5% between the second and third quarters. For the economy to register even zero growth in 2012 as a whole output needs to rise by 1% this quarter and remain at that level in the final quarter. Several major think-tank’s and The Bank of England have cut the ir UK growth predictions to between 0% and -0. 7% after disappointing Olympic revenue. (Source: Visa Europe/Economic impact report/ July 2011 & Guardian. co. uk/Olympics-why the British economy isn’t a winner/August 2012)

Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians Essay

Introduction During the 2010 Federal election, both major political parties campaigned on indigenous affairs. Following the ALP’s victory, Prime Minister Gillard established an independent Expert Panel to â€Å"to investigate how to give effect to constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. † Two schools of thought have dominated the national conversation of how this should be achieved. One view is that an amendment to the preamble of the constitution will provide safe and symbolic recognition. The alternative view is that more substantive reform is required to secure equality before the law. On January 16 2012, the Panel presented the Prime Minister their report and proposed five amendments to the Commonwealth Constitution. This paper will evaluate the five proposals and the reasons offered by the Panel. Each amendment will be analysed on its symbolic significance and potential legal ramifications. Finally this paper will conclude on how to best give Indigenous Australians recognition within the constitution. Constitutional Recognition For the panel, constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians means removing provisions in the Constitution that contemplate racial discrimination. Whether intended or not, the five proposals address the broader issues of racial discrimination and equality before the law within the Commonwealth Constitution. Repealing section 25 In its report, the Panel indicates that 97. 5% of all submissions approve of repealing section 25. Section 25 reads: For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted. On face value, section 25 appears racist as it contemplates States excluding voters on the grounds of race. This interpretation has been affirmed by Chief Justice Gibbs in McKinlays’s case (1975). Section 25 must be read with section 24 to ascertain the real intention of the framers. Section 24 specifies that the number of lower house representatives is determined by dividing the total number of people of the Commonwealth by twice the number of senators and then dividing the population of each state by that quota. Therefore, by racially excluding voters the numerical input of the State’s population is reduced; the State’s federal representation decreases and discriminatory states forgo greater federal representation. Although section 25 was intended to penalise racially discriminatory states, a State was able to enact discriminatory legislation by drafting laws that did not disenfranchise ‘all’ members of a racial group. For instance, New South Wales denied certain classes of indigenous people the right to vote. The panel states that this proposal is ‘technically and legally sound’. Many constitutional commentators agree but there is a small minority who have identified possible legal consequences. In 1980, Justice Dean included section 25 as a provision guaranteeing the right to vote. The right to vote is not constitutionally entrenched. Parliament has authority to determine the electoral process pursuant to section 30. It is unclear whether the High Court would find legislation that disqualified people of certain races from voting invalid because of the section 7 words ‘directly chosen by the people’ and section 24. Theoretically, it may be argued that section 25 should not be removed until the right to vote is constitutionally entrenched. However, this view is highly unorthodox and section 25 should be repealed. Repealing section 51 (XXIV) Section 51(xxvi) authorises the Commonwealth to make laws with respect to â€Å"the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws†. The Panel recommends removing section 51(xxvi) as it contemplates discrimination against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen, the Aboriginal Land Fund Commission was denied purchasing Pastoral property from the Crown. The Queensland Minister for Lands reasoned that ‘the government did not view favourable proposals to acquire large areas of land for development by Aborigines in isolation’. Koowarta argued that the Minister was in breach of sections 9 and 12 of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth). Joh Bjelke-Petersen challenged the constitutional validity of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth). The Premier argued that s51(xxvi) ‘does not confer power to make laws which apply to all races’. A majority of the High Court found that sections 9 and 12 of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 were invalid pursuant to s 51 (xxvi). The Hindmarsh Island Bridge case illustrates parliament’s ability to enact adversely discriminatory laws in relation to race. The case concerned whether the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Act 1997 (Cth) could remove rights which the plaintiffs enjoyed under the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1986 (Cth). The Ngarrindjeri women argued that the races power only allowed parliament to pass laws that are for the benefit of a particular race. The Commonwealth argued that there were no limits to the power. The High Court found that as the Heritage Protection Act was validly enacted under s 51(xxvi), the same head of power could support a whole or partial repeal. The High Court was divided on whether S 51(xxvi) could only be used for the advancement or benefit of a racial group. In his judgement, Justice Kirby found that section 51 (xxvi) ‘does not extend to the enactment of laws detrimental to or discriminatory against, the people of any race (including the Aboriginal race) by reference to their race’. Justices Gummow and Hayne said that there was no basis for reading s51(xxvi) as not permitting adverse discrimination. In summary, Kartinyeri v The Commonwealth did not confirm that laws enacted under section 51 (xxvi) must be beneficial. Since then, it has generally been accepted that s 51 (xxvi) gives the Commonwealth power to discriminate either in favour or against members of a particular race. The removal of S51 (xxvi) would be a significant symbolic gesture to Indigenous Australians as they are the only group to whom section 51(xxvi) laws have been enacted. Not all laws passed under s 51 (xxvi) have been adversely discriminatory. In Commonwealth v Tasmania (The Tasmanian Dam Case), sections 8 and 11 of The World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Cth) were held to be constitutionally valid pursuant to s 51 (xxvi). As a result, the Franklin River Hydroelectric Dam could not be constructed in a place considered spiritually significant by Aboriginal people. A repeal of section 51 (xxvi) might not invalidate the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act. Other powers, specifically the external affairs power in s51 (xxix), would support this legislation under the principle of dual characterisation. Other beneficial legislation may not be supported under the same principle. In Western Australia v The Commonwealth, the court found The Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) constitutionally valid pursuant to section 51 (xxvi). The court did not find it necessary to consider any other heads of power. Australia’s endorsement of the UN Deceleration on the Rights of Indigenous People may provide scope to support the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) under the external affairs power. However, it seems reckless to gamble with legislation that establishes a framework for the protection and recognition of native title. Repealing section 51 (xxvi) will also limit the Commonwealth’s ability to pass new laws for the advancement of Indigenous Australians. For these reasons, the Panel proposes that the repeal of section 51 (xxvi) must be accompanied by a new head of power with respect to Indigenous Australians. Inserting section 51A The preamble to S51A is the first recommendation which actually addresses the important contributions of Indigenous Australians. Section 51A also allows the Commonwealth to makes laws with respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. Similar to section 51(xxvi), the power contained within section 51A is not subject to any conditions. This is somewhat of a double edged sword. All laws currently passed under section 51 (xxvi) have only been enacted with respect to Indigenous Australians. As the power is not subject to any restriction, all legislation pursuant to section 51 (xxvi) would most likely be supported by section 51A. Alternatively, section 51A could be used to enact legislation that is adversely discriminatory. The Panel states that the preamble which acknowledges ‘the need to secure the advancement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ will mitigate this risk. However, a preamble is only used to resolve an ambiguity within a text. The power to make laws with respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is not particularly ambiguous. The Panel’s predicts laws passed pursuant to s 51A would be assessed on whether they broadly benefit the group concerned. The actual word used is ‘advancement’ which would be interpreted differently to ‘benefit’. Furthermore, the High Court is not always ready to embrace a value judgement such as one based ‘benefit’. Credit should be given to the Panel for this proposal. The preamble to Section 51A constitutionally recognises the history, culture and contributions of Indigenous Australians. The new head of power will likely ensure that current legislation pursuant to section 51 (xxvi) will continue to operate. Section 51A also removes parliament’s power to enact laws with regards to a person’s race. This proposal addresses the apartheid nature of our constitution. However, Section 51A is not the white knight which was hoped for. It will be the courts who decide whether this new power is ambiguous. If Section 51A is found to be ambiguous, the courts will have significant discretion in interpreting the meaning of â€Å"advancement†. To overcome these issues, the panel has recommended that a racial non-discrimination provision (S116A) be added to the constitution. Inserting section 116A There are both policy and legal issues concerning section 116A. Firstly, Australia has a history of avoiding constitutional entrenchments of rights. The proposed anti-discrimination provision only protects racial groups. Section 116A may be viewed as privileging anti-racial discrimination over anti-sex discrimination or anti-homophobic discrimination. The first legal consideration is which groups will be protected by section 116A. Jewish people are recognized as an ethnic group but Muslims are not. It is uncertain whether Muslims would receive the same protection as Jews. Furthermore, would a person who converted to Judaism receive identical protection as a person who was born Jewish? The second legal issue is how Section 116A will affect existing state and commonwealth anti-discrimination legislation. For example, Anti-discrimination state law authorise discrimination in the employment of actors for reasons of ‘authenticity’. In addition, sections 12 and 15 of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) permits people to discriminate when they are searching for someone to share or work with in their home. Once again, it will be for the court to decide if these provisions are constitutionally invalid. The panel has affirmed that S116A (2) will support laws enacted under s 51 (xxvi) and section 51A. Like section 51A, section 116A could be interpreted by the courts in ways that were not intended. The courts will have significant discretion in determining what â€Å"is for the purpose of overcoming disadvantage†. An important issue for the Indigenous community is the Northern Territory Intervention. In Wurridjal v Commonwealth, the high court upheld the government’s partial repeal of the Racial Discrimination Act under the race powers. The court also upheld the Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act pursuant to section 51 (xxix). Due to the principle of dual characterisation, it is unlikely that S116A will provide an avenue for Indigenous people to contest the intervention. S116A is probably the most controversial recommendation as it concerns equality before the law. This issue is probably better dealt with by an expert panel assessing a Bill of Rights. To achieve a similar result, the panel could propose that section 51A has an accompanying provision similar to 116A(2). Insert section 127A. Section 127A is a provision which recognises Indigenous languages as the original language of Australia. A separate language provision is necessary to capture the importance of traditional languages within Indigenous culture. Section 127A also acknowledges that English is the national language of Australia. The Panel rejected a submission suggesting ‘all Australian citizens shall have the freedom to speak, maintain and transmit the language of their choice’. The Panel did not want to give rise to legal challenges regarding the right to deal with government in languages other than English. It is unclear what practical consequence would flow from s127A. Section 127A could be used to secure funding for Indigenous languages on the grounds of ‘national heritage’. Nonetheless, the Panel does not intend for this provision to give rise to new legal rights. S127A is symbolically important and is an appropriate way of constitutionally recognising Indigenous Australians. Summary of analysis This analysis concludes that the five proposals put forward by the panel appropriately balance substantive reform and symbolic significance. As a result, the Panel should be congratulated. If the Panel’s goal was to remove overtly racist tones within the Australian Constitution then they have succeeded. If the panels objective was to definitively correct the wrongs of Kartinyeri v Commonwealth and the Northern Territory Intervention then they have failed. The amendments proposed do not sufficiently address racial discriminatory acts passed under other heads of power. Section 116A(2) has been perceived as a tasteful reformulation of the races power. Furthermore, the proposals provides the courts substantial discretion in interpreting terms such as â€Å"overcoming disadvantage†, â€Å"advancement† and â€Å"group†. In essence, the most important issue does not concern symbolic change or substantive reform. It is simply a question of which proposals will gain bipartisan support. Conclusion The panel’s proposals could succeed at referendum. Firstly, Australians are more likely to support something substantive than purely symbolic. Secondly, this is not an issue which would be perceived as a ‘politicians’ proposal. Australians are hesitant to support proposals perceived as self-serving. Thirdly, the Panel indicates that its proposals are capable of being supported by an overwhelming majority of Australians. Nonetheless, to succeed at referendum, the support from the Federal opposition government and all State governments is essential. It is very easy, and sometimes attractive, for the federal Opposition to oppose a referendum. It can be a useful way of generating a negative public reaction to the government and its agenda. Since 2010, the Coalition has fought the government on nearly every political issue. Even when the parties agree in principle, they have different ways of solving the issue. For example, both parties are for off-shore processing of illegal immigrants but disagree on where and how it should be done. Both parties are committed to recognising Indigenous Australians within the constitution. So far, the LNP has said it will consider substantive reform but has only committed to preambular recognition. The Panel not only recommends substantive reform but also addresses racial equality before the law. It is very uncertain whether the LNP will support a policy so different to their 2010 election promise. The next federal election is only 18 months away. If the referendum and election are held concurrently, there is more incentive for the Coalition to oppose the Panel’s recommendation. It would be disastrous for the nation if the referendum fails. The ‘gap’ will swell and the international community will view Australia as a nation of racists. It could be argued that the Government should have appointed a bipartisan panel rather than an independent panel. A bipartisan panel may not have produced ‘better’ recommendations to those of the Panel. They would, however, have generated proposals that both parties would stand behind. Bibliography * ABC Television, ‘Asylum seeker stand-off intensifies’, The Midday Report, 20 December 2011. < http://www.abc. net. au/news/2011-12-20/bowen-seeks-bipartisan-meeting-on-offshore-processing/3739984> at 29 April 2012. * Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, ‘Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Australian Human Rights Commission’, . * Kerr, Christian, ‘Libs baulk on referendum support’, The Australian, 30 January 2012 < http://www. theaustralian. com. au/national-affairs/indigenous/libs-baulk-on-referendum-support/story-fn9hm1pm-1226256684571>. * Keyzer, Patrick, Principles of Australian Constitutional Law (LexisNexis Butterworths, Australia: 3rd ed, 2010). * Kildea, Paul, ‘More than mere symbolism’, Australian Financial Review, 10 February 2012. * Kirby, Michael, Constitutional Law and Indigenous Australians: Challenge for a Parched Continent, Law Council of Australia, Old Parliament House, Canberra, Friday 22 July 2011 Discussion Forum ‘Constitutional Change: Recognition or Substantive Rights? ’. * Law Council of Australia, Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians Discussion Paper, 19 March 2011. * LexisNexis AU, Halsbury’s Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’90 Constitutional Law’ [90. 1620]. * McHugh, Michael, Australian Constitutional Landmarks (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003). * McQuire, Amy, ‘Constitutional reform report sparks mixed reviews’, Tracker, 19 January 2012. * Morris, Shireen, ‘Agreement-making: the need for democratic principles, individual rights and equal opportunities in Indigenous Australia’ (2011) 36 Alternative Law Journal 3. * Morris, Shireen, ‘Indigenous constitutional recognition, non-discrimination and equality before the law: why reform is necessary’ (2011) 7 Indigenous Law Bulletin 26. * Morse, Bradford, â€Å"Indigenous Provisions in Constitutions Around the World† 2011 Paper located at . * Pengelley, Nicholas, ‘Hindmarsh Island Bridge Act – Must Laws Based on the Race Power be for the Benefit of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders- and What has Bridge Building got to do with the Race Power Anyway’ (1998) 20 Sydney Law Review 144. * Prior, Flip, ‘Recognition poll unlikely, days Dodson’, The West Australian, 11 April 2012. * Rintoul, Stuart, ‘Race power opens Pandora’s box’, The Australian, 22 December 2011 * Rowse, Tim, ‘The practice and symbolism of the ‘race power’: rethinking the 1967 referendum’ (2008) 19 Australian Journal of Anthropology 1. * Sawer, G, ‘The Australian Constitution and the Australian Aborigine’ (1966) 2 FL Rev 17. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 1 Constitutional Status’ [1. 1. 280]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 1 Constitutional Status’ [1. 1. 300]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 1 Constitutional Status’ [1. 1. 430]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 1 Constitutional Status’ [1. 1. 450]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 1 Constitutional Status’ [1. 1. 460]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 1 Constitutional Status’ [1. 1. 480]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 6 Civil Justice Issues’ [1. 6. 190]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 6 Civil Justice Issues’ [1. 6. 240]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’1. 7 International Law’ [1. 7. 180]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’19. 1 Constitutional Law’ [19. 1. 230]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’19. 5 Federal constitutional system’ [19. 5. 157. 1]. * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’21. 10 Equality and the Rule of Law’ [21. 10. 160] * Thomson Reuters, The Laws of Australia, (at April 2012), ’21. 10 Equality and the Rule of Law’ [21. 10. 350]. * Twomey, Ann, Indigenous Constitutional Recognition Explained (University of Sydney Law School Constitutional Reform Unit, 26 January 2012). * Ward, Alexander, ‘At the Risk of Rights: Does true recognition require substantive reform? ’ (2011) 7 Indigenous Law Review 25. * Watson, Nicole, ‘The Northern Territory Emergency Response – Has It Really Improved the Lives of Aboriginal Women and Children? ’ (2011) 35 Australian Feminist Law Journal 147. * Williams, George, ‘Recognising Indigenous peoples in the Australian Constitution: what the Constitution should say and how the referendum can be won’ (2011) 5 Land, Rights, Laws: Issues of Native Title 1. * Winckel, Anne, ‘Recognising Indigenous Peoples in the Preamble: Implications, Issues and Interpretation’ (2011) 7 Indigenous Law Bulletin 22. Case List * Attorney-General (Cth); Ex Rel Mckinlay v Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 1 * Commonwealth v Tasmania (Tasmanian Dams Case) (1983) 158 CLR 1 * Jones v Toben [2002] FCA 1150 [69]. * Kartinyeri v Commonwealth (1988) 195 CLR 337 * Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen (1982) 153 CLR 168 * Kruger v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 1 * Leak v Commonwealth (1997) 187 CLR 579. * Miller v Wertheim [2002] FCAFC 156 [14]; * Western Australia v Commonwealth (Native Title Act Case) (1995) 183 CLR 373 * Wurridjal v The Cth (2009) 237 CLR 309 Legislation List. * Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1986 (Cth) * Australian Constitution Act 1975 (Cth) * Constitution Act 1867 (Qld) * Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Cth) * Hindmarsh Island Bridge Act 1997 (Cth) * Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) * Native Title (Queensland) Act 1993 (Qld) * Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act 2007 (Cth) * Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) * Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (Nsw) ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Law Council of Australia, Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians: Discussion Paper March 2011 part 1. 1 at 23 April 2012. [ 2 ]. Australia, Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution page 1 at 23 April 2012. [ 3 ]. Alexander Ward, ‘At the Risk of Rights: Does True Recognition Require Substantive Reform’ (2011) 7 Indigenous Law Bulletin 3, 3. [ 4 ]. Ibid. [ 5 ]. Ibid. [ 6 ]. Australia, Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution page 1 at 23 April 2012. [ 7 ]. Ibid [4]. [ 8 ]. Ibid [5. 3]. [ 9 ]. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Cth) s 25. [ 10 ]. B Costa, ‘Odious and Outmoded’? Race and Section 25 of the Constitution (2011) The Swinburne Institute for Social Research page 1 at 25 April 2012. [ 11 ]. Attorney-General (Cth); Ex Rel Mckinlay v Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 1, [36], [44]. [ 12 ]. B Costa, ‘Odious and Outmoded’? Race and Section 25 of the Constitution (2011) The Swinburne Institute for Social Research page 1 at 25 April 2012. [ 13 ]. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Cth) s 24. [ 14 ]. Ibid. [ 15 ]. Convention Debates, Melbourne, 1898, pages 665-714. [ 16 ]. B Costa, ‘Odious and Outmoded’? Race and Section 25 of the Constitution (2011) The Swinburne Institute for Social Research page 4 at 25 April 2012. [ 17 ]. Australia, Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution page 5. 3 at 23 April 2012. [ 18 ]. B Costa, ‘Odious and Outmoded’? Race and Section 25 of the Constitution (2011) The Swinburne Institute for Social Research page 6 at 25 April 2012. [ 19 ]. Ibid [5]. [ 20 ]. Ibid [6]. [ 21 ]. Ibid [5]. [ 22 ]. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Cth) s 51 (xxvi). [ 23 ]. Australia, Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution page 5. 4 at 23 April 2012. [ 24 ]. Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen (1982) 153 CLR 168. [ 25 ]. Ibid [169-170]. [ 26 ]. Ibid. [ 27 ]. Ibid. [ 28 ]. Ibid [174]. [ 29 ]. Kartinyeri v Commonwealth (the Hindmarsh Island Bridge case) (1998) 195 CLR 337. [ 30 ]. Hindmarsh Island Bridge Act 1997 (Cth). [ 31 ]. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1986 (Cth). [ 32 ]. Ibid. [ 33 ]. Ibid [416-7]. [ 34 ]. Ibid [379-381]. [ 35 ]. Thomson Reuters Legal Online, Halsbury’s Laws of Australia (at 15 January 1998) 19 Government, ’19. 5 Federal Constitutional System’ [19. 5 – 157. 1] [ 36 ]. Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Cth). [ 37 ]. (1983) 158 CLR 1. [ 38 ]. Ibid. [ 39 ]. Ibid [5 – 8]. [ 40 ]. Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) [ 41 ]. Western Australia v The Commonwealth (1995) 183 CLR 373. [ 42 ]. Ibid.