Campbell Newman Argumentative Analysis

For issue 1.4 the discussion explored the question of whether or not sexual problems should be treated pharmaceutically. Connie Newman advocated for pharmaceutical treatment while Anita Hoffer argued against. Connie Newman presented her argument with various research, referring to the DSM to support her argument that sexual problems were not only a psychological but also physiological problem. She also laid out a comprehensive timeline demonstrating how the sexual problems have been viewed and treated over the years, progressing from purely a psychological based treatment to VIAGRA being an accepted method of treatment for male patients with erectile dysfunction (McKee, 2013, p. 51). However she did recognize that treatments for women had not

Australia 's Federal System is dynamic and the division of lawmaking power between the Commonwealth and State since 1901 has changed dramatically; Critically discuss, focussing on the major reasons for those changes.

Where there are problems, they are often with the way the Australian federal system operates, rather than with federalism itself. Rather than criticising our federal system, we should be working to make better use of its advantages
in order to improve our prosperity. In particular, the reform of the allocation of powers and responsibilities between the Commonwealth and the States, and reform of fiscal federalism, are desperately needed. (Twomey and Withers, 2007)

The Labor Government have had a major impact on the Australian Economy, which has made it quite difficult for the Coalition to inherit. Joe Hockey stated that “Sixteen years of deficits without a recession, without any significant

Gough Whitlam is regarded as one the most controversial Prime ministers in Australia’s history. He is highly recognised for the great change and impact he had on Australia and the lasting legacy of the Whitlam years. Through the many changes and introduction of policies within Government and internal events, the Whitlam Government experienced many successes and failures. These successes and failures contributed to the image of the Whitlam government and how the public perceived the stability and trust in the government. The successes showcased how the Whitlam government was quite dynamic and influential in change, but on the other hand, failures displayed how the Whitlam government was ill disciplined and inexperienced. Successes included education,

Attorney-General George Brandis’ extended self-defence of his role in the Bell group legislation scandal yesterday doesn’t get us particularly far in clarifying questions about the Western Australian government’s attempt to dud taxpayers, and the government’s role in encouraging them. Two major public interest questions remain, along with a serious political question.

For over a hundred years, Australia has had it’s very fair share of great prime ministers who have helped mould our country and it’s renowned culture into what we know today. As most know, there are a few pathetic exceptions whose actions- or lack of them caused them to not make the cut by a long run.

Australia’s government has helped to intervene within the market when issues have arisen. The more efficient allocation of resources and income is an initiative designed to assist the society. Unfortunately, it can also cause costs to the community and market which can be seen from side effects of their policies. The tight and loose monetary policies that are used can cause unemployment and inflation which are both a cost for the economy. The government also imposes tariffs which causes unfairness for consumers.

A great deal of these problems are structural: that Australia is over-governed; that the roles and responsibilities of Commonwealth and State governments are not clearly delineated and that the 19th Century constitutional division of powers is not capable of meeting the challenges presented by increasing globalisation, international economic competition and rapid advances in technology and communication. From a different perspective the problem lies in the manner of federalism’s practical operation in the failure of existing intergovernmental institutions to facilitate effective cooperation between governments such that in some areas there is too much centralisation and in other areas not enough; in unnecessary overlapping, duplicative and inconsistent regulation in a federation characterised by rancour, disagreement, blame shifting and a lack of accountability and finally a significant vertical fiscal imbalance and an increased centralisation of

The major issues in the high court review 2006: Australian Federalism – implications of the work choices decision is that it seems unlikely that voters would have supported the characterisation of the corporation power that was adopted by the court. This might be viewed as a problem. This is argued that the majority’s disregard of failed referendums constitutes usurpation of the people’s privilege to change constitution as certain. Callinan J stated that the view of the people was appropriate arbiters on the vital constitutional changes. The people had the majority for their lack of faith in the intelligence and common sense of voters. Michael Coper (1994) had suggested that the referendum proposal may fail for a few complex reasons. The failure may not guide to the decades later as a similar matter appears before the high court for its settlement. The federal government will need to use legislative authority in the policies available to them. In order to do this it will be heavy in some areas, such as public hospitals this could mean a poisoned chalice.

This case study illuminates that government policy; funding and program implementation is a form of regulated control. It is as if the government cannot justify the expense to the public unless they understand the problem by the unjust or prejudicial treatment of people to resolve the issues (Campbell, Wunungmurra & Nyomba 2005). This confused state of affairs smacks of racism or cultural ignorance or both. Further, the projects the government funds to reduce the health, education, income and employment gap between the wealthy and marginalised people of Australia would work if all they provided was “culturally relevant encouragement, funding and technical support” (Campbell, Wunungmurra & Nyomba 2005, p.164) and followed the community development

The control that the government has on the citizens of this country has pushed its boundaries and should not be able to dictate out choices. This opinion article 'Limiting our freedoms' published on the citizensforcivilliberties.com written by Oliver Clements talks of not the benefits or negatives of the new reform but of the limitations put on the citizens of Australia, the roles that the government has taken to control us while making us believe that it is for our own benefit. It talks of the restraints that citizens are put under because of the select few that cannot control themselves. Clements does not agree with the new reform but not because he will lose money or that he wants to be able to bet more but because the liberations of the

The crisis began in the senate after the 1972 December elections, where the Labor party formed government for the fist time in 23 years. Labor’s win came at a time of growing disillusionment from the Vietnam War, concern over "quality of life” issues such as healthcare, and uncertainty on Australia’s place in the changing world.

The states role in this article is an executive role and is state delegated. The executive key decision maker in this article is the Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. Executive role are separated between federal level, state and territory. The reason this is a state delegated matter is because the states retains control over the issue. In this article the prime minster has the control of the issue whether or not to cut plenty rates. The main reason an executive role is a happing here is because they are able implement policy relating to employment relations, in this article cutting penalty rates from Sunday to Saturday is regarded as a big employment relations issue.

It has been documented that certain committee members felt extensions were not priority when it came to fixing economic issues and recipients were taking advantage of the program. Some members say that other issues surpassed the issue to extend them. Even some have accused unemployed workers of being unproductive and using the program. Mitch McConnell, who is the senator of Kentucky touches on the urgency for there to be more jobs created. He felt as though that would have been more beneficial to unemployed workers versus adding another extension. “It is time to get away from “temporary government programs” and give the American people the tools they need to drive an economy that truly works for them and their families.” (McConnell 17) McConnell