Lot's Wife Edition 5 2015

More documents

Recommendations

Info

14 POLITICS BY KIRSTI WEISZ The nanny state: a burden or a benefit? A year-long inquiry into the ‘nanny state’ has recently passed unopposed in the Senate. Libertarian and independent senator David Leyonjhelm proposed the parliamentary inquiry, opining that a bundle of laws are ‘overreaching’ and restrict personal choice. The broad-ranging inquiry will inspect measures introduced to restrict personal choices ‘for the individual’s own good’, examining laws such as having to wear a bicycle helmet, violent video games, seatbelt laws and lockouts for pubs and clubs. It will also consider the sale and use of alcohol, tobacco and pornography. Leyonjhelm, who defends "the right to make bad choices", hopes to "shine a light into the crevices of this growing nanny state," as he told 3AW. But where should the line between government interference and personal autonomy be drawn? The term ‘nanny state’ was used by journalist Dorothy Thompson in 1952 and evolved from the 19th century term ‘grandmotherly government’, according to Australia’s Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson. Government paternalism has been in the spotlight of public debate for many years. The justification for government intervention is based on community protection and public health but this can clash with our society’s value of personal autonomy. The libertarian approach strongly opposed to such interventions is often founded on John Stuart Mills’ harm principle, which illustrates that government intervention into personal freedom is only permitted if a person’s actions may inflict harm on another. Mills’ principle advocates that interference with our choices is oppressive, even if it’s for our own good. However, in recent years, laws have been passed to prevent people from making ‘bad choices.’ Leyonjhelm says making bike helmets compulsory is a good example of these types of laws. Nobody is hurt if you fall off [a bike]. If you don’t wear a bicycle helmet, your head’s not going to crack into somebody else and damage them," he told the ABC. It’s all about you and your safety, and yet the Government has decided that it’s an offence to ride a bicycle without a helmet." Primary reasons for mandatory bike helmets - which is only enforced in two countries: Australia and New Zealand - are that it protects riders and saves lives. But research has often shown that the result is ineffective. Australian researcher Dr Dorothy Robinson’s study, ‘Do enforced bicycle helmet laws improve public health?’ found that the laws "discourage cycling but produce no obvious response in percentage of head injuries." There are even arguments that bicycle helmets distract from safe riding skills because individuals see wearing a helmet as a panacea. It is argued that one of the reasons for nanny state laws is that the population is willing to accept trivial intervention and that we expect government to care for our wellbeing. Strong proponents of the laws are public health advocates who say these infringements are for our own good. Sydney University public health professor Simon Chapman says nanny state laws protect us and he questions the necessity of the freedoms that the nanny state seems to erode. And just what are these heinous erosions of freedom that ‘nanny’ has destroyed? The freedom to not wear a seat belt? The freedom to have your cocktail of carcinogens packed in attractive boxes?" he wrote in The Sydney Morning Herald. The inquiry will also bring the sale of tobacco and plain packaging cigarettes under scrutiny once again. While evidence exists that smoking is highly dangerous, there are many people who still choose to continue smoking. Public Health Association of Australia chief executive Michael Moore told The Australian that tobacco advertising restrictions are necessary to ensure freedom of choice by preventing consumers from being dominated by industryinfluence. While Moore alluded to the influence industry has on the behaviour of citizens, opponents of plain packaged cigarettes argue that this is the nanny state at its worst. They argue that Labor’s rules drive consumption of cheaper or black market cigarettes. In an article on The Conversation University of Melbourne global health professor Rob Moodie wrote "governments have a responsibility to create environments where healthy choices become the easiest and the most preferred." There is an inevitable trade-off between promoting citizen wellbeing and personal autonomy, according to Julian Le Grand and Bill New’s book Government Paternalism: Nanny State or Helpful Friend. Finding justifications for alleged nanny state legislation may urge politicians to re-consider why these laws exist and what they are achieving. The real question behind this debate is when does this intervention cross the line and encroach on the boundary of personal freedom? Submissions for the economics committee inquiry close on 24 August <strong>2015</strong>.
15 15 PoLITICS Student Affairs ILLUSTRATION BY SARAH FERN — notafern.com ARTICLES BY Mali Rea Sophie Vassallo Elspeth Kernebone Rubee Dano Georgia Cox Julia Pillai
Page 1 and 2: Lot’s Wife MoNASH UNIVERSITY SToo
Page 3 and 4: 15P-0650 Cover artwork by Julia Cha
Page 5 and 6: EDIToRIAL 3 Editorial London, Edinb
Page 7 and 8: OB REPORTS 5 Environment and Social
Page 9 and 10: 7 7 PoLITICS Politics 22 ILLUSTRATI
Page 11 and 12: POLITICS 9 "However, does the Labor
Page 13 and 14: POLITICS 11 Politics of Climate Cha
Page 15: POLITICS 13 This month’s issue: G
Page 19 and 20: STUDENT AFFAIRS 17 "Bluestocking we
Page 21 and 22: STUDENT AFFAIRS 19 The Monash vs. M
Page 23 and 24: STUDENT AFFAIRS 21 No Porn in the L
Page 25 and 26: STUDENT AFFAIRS 23 What Would Happe
Page 27 and 28: STUDENT AFFAIRS 25 Month Week Date
Page 29 and 30: 27 27 PoLITICS Science & Engineerin
Page 31 and 32: SCIENCE & ENGINEERING 29 BY CAROLYN
Page 33 and 34: SCIENCE & ENGINEERING 31 What’s U
Page 35 and 36: SCIENCE & ENGINEERING 33 Prosthetic
Page 37 and 38: SCIENCE & ENGINEERING 35 Hand Sanit
Page 39 and 40: 37 37 PoLITICS Arts & Culture ILLUS
Page 41 and 42: ARTS & CULTURE 39 "Within our high-
Page 43 and 44: ARTS & CULTURE 41 exception to this
Page 45 and 46: ARTS & CULTURE 43 Post-Postmodern P
Page 47 and 48: ARTS & CULTURE 45 By CARINA FLOREA
Page 49 and 50: ARTS & CULTURE 47 Gig Guide Want to
Page 51 and 52: ART SHOWCASE 49

Lot's Wife Edition 5 2015

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?