Academic literature on the topic 'Politicians – Australia – Interviews'

Recently politicians in Australia have raised concerns that some Muslims are not adopting Australian values to a sufficient extent. In this paper I explore the notion of Australian values with respect to immigrant youth. By analysing interviews with 32 Muslim students who are 15-18 years of age and of diverse backgrounds in two state schools in Sydney, I focus on the extent to which these young people seem to be adopting Australian values. I discuss the factors that hinder the adoption of Australian values, and whether such hindrance can lead to a possible jihadi threat. This paper relies on oral testimonies and secondary sources, including international literature.

Politicians are both a help and hindrance in the provision of information to the public before, during and after disasters. For example, in Australia, the Premier of the State of Queensland, Anna Bligh, was lauded for her leadership and public communication skills during major floods that occurred late in 2010 and in early 2011 (de Bussy, Martin and Paterson 2012). Similarly, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was praised for his leadership following 9/11. This is in contrast to the poor performance of political leaders during Hurricane Katrina (Cole and Fellows 2008, Olson and Gawronski 2010). Political actors’ lack of credibility and their poor situational awareness contributed to the problems. The involvement of political leaders in disaster communications is also problematic from the perspective of emergency agencies. For example, politicians who move their communication position from supportive to tactical can take over the role of providing official disaster information, such as evacuation warnings, without sufficient expertise, credibility or situational knowledge. This paper builds on the expanding body of research into the politics of disasters by exploring relationships with political actors from the perspective of emergency managers. Drawing on interviews with emergency agencies in Australia, Germany, Norway and the UK, we firstly examine when and what a politician should communicate during disasters and secondly, offer six principles toward a roadmap of involving political actors in the disaster communication process when life and property is at stake.

This article provides a fresh perspective on political leadership by demonstrating that government ministers take a deliberative approach to decision making. Getting behind the closed doors of government through 51 elite interviews in the UK, US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, the article demonstrates that modern political leadership is much more collaborative than we usually see from media and public critique. Politicians are commonly perceived to be power-hungry autocratic, elite figures who once they have won power seek to implement their vision. But as previous research has noted, not only is formal power circumscribed by the media, public opinion, and unpredictability of government, more collaborative approaches to leadership are needed given the rise of wicked problems and citizens increasingly demand more say in government decisions and policy making. This article shows that politicians are responding to their challenging environment by accepting they do not know everything and cannot do everything by themselves, and moving towards a leadership style that incorporates public input. It puts forward a new model of Deliberative Political Leadership, where politicians consider input from inside and outside government from a diverse range of sources, evaluate the relative quality of such input, and integrate it into their deliberations on the best way forward before making their final decision. This rare insight into politician’s perspectives provides a refreshing view of governmental leadership in practice and new model for future research.

We add new data to the long-standing debate about the interface between politics and administration, deploying theory and evidence indicating that it varies. It can be either a “purple zone” of interaction between the red of politics and the blue of administration, or a clear line. We use survey responses from 1,012 mostly senior public managers in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, along with semi-structured interviews with 42 of them, to examine the extent to which public managers perceive that they “cross” the line or go into a zone, and the ways in which they do so. Our inclusion of a zone as well as a line recasts how roles and relationships between politicians and administrators can be conceived. Moreover, it raises questions about how particular contingencies affect whether public managers perceive and work with a line or a zone.

PurposeThe purpose of the paper is to explore and analyse the history of the predominantly Malaysian Network of Overseas Students Collectives in Australia (NOSCA), that existed from 1985–1994.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on extensive archival research in the State Library of New South Wales, the National Library of Australia and the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Archives. It makes particular use of the UNSW student newspaper Tharunka and the NOSCA publications Truganini and Default. It also draws upon nine oral history interviews with former members of NOSCA.FindingsThe NOSCA was particularly prominent at the UNSW, building a base there and engaging substantially in the student union. Informed by anarchism, its activists were interested in an array of issues–especially opposition to student fees and in solidarity with struggles for democracy and national liberation in Southeast Asia, especially around East Timor. Moreover, the group would serve as a training ground for a layer of activists, dissidents and opposition politicians throughout Southeast Asia, with a milieu of ex-NOSCA figures sometimes disparagingly referred to as “the NOSCA Mafia.”Originality/valueWhile there has been much research on overseas students, there has been far less on overseas students as protestors and activists. This paper is the first case study to specifically hone in on NOSCA, one of the most substantial and left wing overseas student groups. Tracing the group's history helps us to reframe and rethink the landscape of student activism in Australia, as less white, less middle class and less privileged.

IntroductionThe development and implementation of multisectoral policy to improve health and reduce health inequities has been slow and uneven. Evidence is largely focused on the facts of health inequities rather than understanding the political and policy processes. This 5-year funded programme of research investigates how these processes could function more effectively to improve equitable population health.Methods and analysisThe programme of work is organised in four work packages using four themes (macroeconomics and infrastructure, land use and urban environments, health systems and racism) related to the structural drivers shaping the distribution of power, money and resources and daily living conditions. Policy case studies will use publicly available documents (policy documents, published evaluations, media coverage) and interviews with informants (policy-makers, former politicians, civil society, private sector) (~25 per case). NVIVO software will be used to analyse the documents to see how ‘social and health equity’ is included and conceptualised. The interview data will include qualitative descriptive and theory-driven critical discourse analysis. Our quantitative methodological work assessing the impact of public policy on health equity is experimental that is in its infancy but promises to provide the type of evidence demanded by policy-makers.Ethics and disseminationOur programme is recognising the inherently political nature of the uptake, formulation and implementation of policy. The early stages of our work indicate its feasibility. Our work is aided by a Critical Policy Reference Group. Multiple ethics approvals have been obtained with the foundation approval from the Social and Behavioural Ethics Committee, Flinders University (Project No: 6786).The theoretical, methodological and policy engagement processes established will provide improved evidence for policy-makers who wish to reduce health inequities and inform a new generation of policy savvy knowledge on social determinants.

Purpose This paper aims to assess using a historical approach the challenges facing Somaliland and analyze how the Somalilanders are in the twenty-first century using the globalized financial architecture and system of wealth chains to finance their nascent state and move the debate forward on the calls for self-determination. Design/methodology/approach Research on this paper included not just a desk review but two research trips to Somaliland and over 20 interviews of politicians, government officials and the private sector and academia. Findings Today the global wealth chains flowing in and out of Somaliland include some complex ones which include the interactions with other members of the Somali diaspora whether they are in the USA or in Australia where money moves in and out of bank accounts in different countries finally ending up in either Dubai or Djibouti where it is finally transferred through the money transfer agencies into Hargeisa and finally withdrawn by the relative of a diaspora member. The similar wealth chains are those going between traders such as those that already maintain companies in Djibouti because of the war period and continue to live and trade there but have branches in Somaliland. There are simple direct transfers that are easily understood. Research limitations/implications Translators had to be used, as some parliamentarians only spoke Kisomali. Originality/value No papers have been written on the global banking and finance system with specific reference to Somaliland.

Objective The aim of the present study was to describe how policy makers (bureaucrats and politicians) in Australia and Ontario (Canada) perceive evidence provided by doctors to substantiate applications for disability income support (DIS) by their patients with mental illnesses. Because many mental illnesses (e.g. depression) lack diagnostic tests, their existence and effects are more difficult to demonstrate than most somatic illnesses. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 45 informants, all influential in the design of the assessment of DIS programs. The informants were subcategorised into advocates, legal representatives, doctors (general practitioners (GPs) and specialists (e.g. psychiatrists)), policy insiders and researchers. Informants were found through snowball sampling. Following the principles of grounded theory, data collection and analysis occurred in tandem. Results Informants expressed some scepticism about doctors’ evidence. Informants perceived that doctors could, due to lack of diagnostic certainty, ‘write these things [evidence] however [they] want to’. Psychiatrists, perceived as having more time and skills, were considered as providing more trustworthy evidence than GPs. Conclusion Doctors, providing evidence to support applications, play an important role in determining disability. However, policy makers perceive doctors’ evidence about mental illnesses as less trustworthy than evidence about somatic illnesses. This affects decisions by government adjudicators. What is known about the topic? Doctors (GPs and psychiatrists) are often asked to provide evidence to substantiate a DIS application for those with mental illnesses. We know little about the perception of this evidence by the policy makers who consider these applications. What does this paper add? Policy makers distrust doctors’ evidence in relation to mental illnesses. This is partly because many mental illnesses lack diagnostic proof, in contrast with evidence for somatic conditions, where the disability is often visible and proven through diagnostic tests. Furthermore, GPs’ evidence is considered less trustworthy than that of psychiatrists. What are the implications for practitioners? Although doctors’ evidence is often required, the utility of their evidence is limited by policy makers’ perceptions.

This article attempts to bring a new set of voices into public debates about censorship in Australia — those of consumers of pornography. Forty-six consumers — chosen to provide the most diverse range of voices across gender, age, sexuality, income, place of residence and state/territory — were interviewed in detail. Interviewees consistently distinguished between beneficial and harmful pornography. The main issue was consent, with child pornography, bestiality and violent pornography being singled out for condemnation. The interviewees noted that public debates about pornography in Australia tend to favour conservative religious positions. All interviewees agreed that censorship was necessary; they particularly focused on the need to keep sexually explicit materials away from children. They evinced a strong distrust of politicians and bureaucrats, and mostly presented a classical liberal line. Several of the consumers had children of their own: all of these interviewees argued that their children should not see sexually explicit material and had strategies in place to ensure that their own did not.

Traditionally politicians have been dependent on political news media to get their message across to the public. The rise of social media means that politicians can bypass the Press Gallery and publish directly to their target audiences via Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms. This article argues that Prime Minister John Howard’s (1996–2007) use of talk back radio and early forays on YouTube were pivotal in the trend towards ‘disintermediation’ in Australian politics. It draws on two studies. One involving interviews with 87 key media actors from the Howard era including journalists, broadcasters, politicians and media advisers; and a second, which includes fresh interviews with contemporary press secretaries. This article examines the shift from a ‘mass media logic’ to a ‘hybrid logic’, considered from a mediatization theoretical position. We also ask important questions about the press gallery’s ongoing relevance in the digital era, when politicians preside over their own social media empires.

Given that the basic functions of parliamentary Question Time are to provide information and to hold the Government accountable for its actions, the possibility of evasion occurring in such a context is of crucial importance. Evasion (equivocation) has been identified as a matter of concern in political interviews, but no systematic study has been undertaken in the context of parliamentary discourse, notably Question Time, anywhere in the world. This study applies and adapts Harris's (1991) coding framework on various types of responses, Bull and Mayer's (1993) typology of non-replies and Clayman's (2001) work on how politicians 'resist' answering questions, all of which are based on political news interviews, to the study of evasion in Australia's House of Representatives' Question Time. A comprehensive, unified framework for the analysis of evasion is described, a decision flow-chart for the framework is provided, and an illustrative example of the applied framework is given based on Australia's Federal House of Representatives' Question Time. Put simply, the study was undertaken to determine if evasion occurred, how frequently it occurred and how it occurred. It involved the classification of responses as 'answers' (direct or indirect), 'intermediate responses' (such as pointing out incorrect information in the question), and 'evasions' based on specific criteria. Responses which were considered evasions were further analysed to determine the levels of evasion, whether they were covert or overt in nature and the types of 'agenda shifts' that occurred, if any. The thesis also involved a discourse-analytical study of other factors that appear to facilitate Ministerial evasion in Australia's House of Representatives, including the Speaker's performance and the use of 'Dorothy Dixers'. The research data was sourced from Question Time transcripts from the House of Representatives Hansard for the months of February and March 2003, dealing only with questions and responses on the topic of Iraq. In those months there were 87 questions on the topic of Iraq, representing more than two thirds of all questions on Iraq for the whole of 2003. Of these 87 questions, the majority (48) came from the Opposition party, through its leader. The balance (39) was asked by Government MPs. Analysis of the question/answer discourse for all 87 questions revealed that every question asked by Government members was answered compared to only 8 of the 48 Opposition questions. Of the 40 remaining Opposition questions, 21 were given intermediate responses and 19 were evaded outright. The fact that the overwhelming majority (83%) of Opposition questions were not answered together with other findings such as instances of partiality on the part of the Speaker; the use of 'friendly', prearranged questions by Government MPs; and the 'hostile' nature of questions asked by Opposition MPs casts serious doubt on the effectiveness of Question Time as a means of ensuring the Government is held accountable for its actions. The study provides empirical evidence that evasion does occur in Australia's House of Representatives' Question Time.

Ove Hoegh-Guldberg is the inaugural director of the Global Change Institute and a professor of marine science at the University of Queensland, Australia. He has held academic positions at the University of California, Los Angeles, Stanford University, and the University of Sydney, and is a member of the Australian Climate Group and the Royal Society (London) Marine Advisory Network. In 1999, he was awarded the Eureka Prize for his scientific research. I interviewed Hoegh-Guldberg twice: once at the early stage of my fieldwork (February 25, 2015) and again more than two years later (May 22, 2017). I also met him in Waikiki, Hawai’i, on June 23, 2016. The following text is an edited compilation of our conversations. Hoegh-Guldberg has been cautioning about the impacts of climate change on coral reefs since the 1990s and has lobbied politicians on this front for many years. I couldn’t envision writing a chapter on global bleaching without foregrounding his narrative....