‘Fat cat’ lawyers and ‘illegal’ migrants: the impact of intersecting hostilities and toxic narratives on access to justice

ABSTRACT

This article examines how three spheres of hostility intersect to prevent effective access to justice for those living with insecure immigration status. The neoliberal governance model, the barren justice landscape and the hostile environment are supported by the cynical construction of the ‘fat cat’ lawyer and the toxic ‘folk devil’ narrative of the ‘bogus’ asylum seeker. To the extent that the judiciary have frustrated the more obvious, ideologically driven, attempts to restrict access to justice for migrants, the austerity predicated measures pursuant to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) have completely altered the legal landscape. The analysis is informed by the findings of the ‘Legal advice and support for persons with insecure status’ project (hereafter LAPIS) in Nottingham which explores the challenges faced by service providers and the lived experiences of those with insecurity of status. It is clear that access to justice is a passport to the realisation of other rights, yet participants struggled to access a remedy because legal advice is too often out of reach.     

The play of approved method and authorized value in the administration of public issues

The goal of this piece is to construct a model for policy analysis that provides analysts with conceptual tools for studying policy as a discursive practice. Policy formulation is viewed as a generative process, as social relations set in the play of larger social formations. Fiction and non-fiction examples are used to develop a mode of analysis using Bourdieu's notion of discursive economies. These include The Milagro Beanjield War and an illustrative case study of the administration of CDBG's in a mid-sized city. The argument is made that this approach leads to a highly politicized view of the administration of public issues as the play between approved method and authorized value. Finally, the approach is connected to current policy-making tactics at the federal level.     

The Politics of Foreign Direct Investment into Developing Countries: Increasing FDI through International Trade Agreements?

The flow of foreign direct investment into developing countries varies greatly across countries and over time. The political factors that affect these flows are not well understood. Focusing on the relationship between trade and investment, we argue that international trade agreements—GATT/WTO and preferential trade agreements (PTAs)—provide mechanisms for making commitments to foreign investors about the treatment of their assets, thus reassuring investors and increasing investment. These international commitments are more credible than domestic policy choices, because reneging on them is more costly. Statistical analyses for 122 developing countries from 1970 to 2000 support this argument. Developing countries that belong to the WTO and participate in more PTAs experience greater FDI inflows than otherwise, controlling for many factors including domestic policy preferences and taking into account possible endogeneity. Joining international trade agreements allows developing countries to attract more FDI and thus increase economic growth.     

Gender and Feminism in the Social Sciences

Abstract

Feminist scholarship has been central to the success and prominence of the Australian social sciences. The impact and significance of the work of sociologists such as Raewyn Connell and Rosemary Pringle, historians Barbara Caine and Marilyn Lake, philosophers Genevieve Lloyd and Moira Gatens and political scientists Carol Bacchi and Louise Chappell are recognised internationally. But how effective has feminist critique been in reshaping what counts as authoritative knowledge and research excellence in the disciplines? And what is the relationship between the disciplines' varying incorporation of feminist perspectives and their progress towards organisational gender equity goals?     

Accountability in Public Service Quasi‐markets: The Case of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme

Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) represents the latest in a worldwide shift towards individualised funding models for the delivery of care services. However, market‐based models for care deliveries bring new considerations and dilemmas for accountability. Drawing on previous work by Dickinson et al. (2014), we examine a range of accountability dilemmas developing within the early implementation of the NDIS. These relate to accountability for the following: care outcomes, the spending of public money, care workers, and advocacy and market function. Examining these accountability dilemmas reveals differences in underpinning assumptions within the design and on‐going implementation of the NDIS, suggesting a plurality of logics within the scheme, which are in tension with one another. The contribution of this paper is to set out the accountability dilemmas, analyse them according to their underpinning logics, and present the NDIS as having potential to be a hybrid institution (Skelcher and Smith 2015). How these dilemmas will be settled is crucial to the implementation and ultimate operation of the scheme.