Human tissue legislation in the United Kingdom 1952- 2006: a history and comparative analysis of policy development

PhDThis is a study of the genesis of the Corneal (Grafting) Act 1952, the Human Tissue Act 1961, the Human Tissue Act 2004, and the Human Tissue (Scotland) Act 2006. The aim has been to understand why so much had apparently changed between 1952-61 and 2004-06, both in society and in medical practice, as an explanation of why the earlier Acts were essentially ‘enabling/permissive’, whereas the later Acts were ‘regulatory/restraining’. A comparison between the Human Tissue Act 2004 and the separate Human Tissue (Scotland) Act 2006 (both Acts concerned with ‘human tissue’ and with origins in ‘retention of organs without consent’, but with significant differences in their respective provisions), has allowed a finer dissection and comparative analysis of the possible factors involved. The Thesis focuses on the ‘inspiration’, ‘deliberation/ formulation’ and ‘legitimation’ phases of the legislative process (using the terminology of Drewry)-that is, the genesis of the various Acts- and has not sought to study the later (Drewry) phases of ‘implementation’ of the law nor subsequent ‘feedback’. The methodology has been to ‘interrogate the sources’ through in depth study of archived records, using publicly available documents, certain confidential papers made available by the Royal College of Pathologists and the Royal College of Physicians (London), papers released under Freedom of Information Acts, and analysis of the scholarly literature. The findings suggest that a complexity of factors contributed to shaping the 2004 and 2006 legislation, in addition to the proximate ‘organ scandals’. The study may contribute specifically to any wish of Government and the medical/scientific professions to review their processes of consultation and negotiation prior to developing new legislation with an impact on research; and more generally to the case for more regular use of pre-legislative scrutiny of Bills

RETHINKING CANADA’S DUTY TO CONSULT DOCTRINE: ACCOMMODATING ABORIGINAL RIGHTS IN THE DEPLOYMENT OF SMALL MODULAR REACTORS (SMRs)

In its foundational case law, the Supreme Court of Canada linked the duty to consult and accommodate to the purpose of reconciliation. However, the Canadian legal rules on the duty to consult, as presently structured and developed by case law, do not adequately fulfill that purpose. The Court has also consistently stated that the duty to consult and accommodate does not include an obligation to reach an agreement. This judicial pronouncement appears to provide the government an opportunity to approach consultation processes in a manner that merely seeks to reach the minimal requirements, without requiring an effective and meaningful dialogue. A minimum-requirement approach to consultation and accommodation would leave the protective and reconciliation purpose of section 35 significantly unsatisfied. Aboriginal engagement for future development should embrace a collaborative approach such that the Crown’s decisions affecting Aboriginal and treaty rights do not amount to a unilateral exercise of power, but rather, promote the goal of reconciliation with Aboriginal peoples. Although the jurisprudence in Haida Nation creates a useful path for achieving the protective and reconciliation purpose of section 35, it remains the case that without extending the Supreme Court’s articulation of the duty to consult process, the fundamental goal of section 35 may actually remain unachieved. This thesis makes this argument using the particular example of the possible development and placement of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) within the traditional territory of Aboriginal communities. This perspective involves a novel technology as an example of future development, where there is a new opportunity to engage in consultation in better ways than may have occurred with legacy technologies. Building on the Supreme Court of Canada’s cases and academic scholarship, this thesis argues that implementing a standard for consultation that aims at consent would better respect the underlying law on the duty to consult and thereby improve Crown-Aboriginal relations. The thesis makes several recommendations: judicial interpretation that develops factors to assess if consultation has aimed at consent; government co-development of consultation policies and practices with Aboriginal peoples; and improved practices in securing Aboriginal approval through agreements negotiated by project proponents

The Need for An Australian Regulatory Code for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Military Application

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is enabling rapid technological innovation and is ever more pervasive, in a global technological eco-system lacking suitable governance and absence of regulation over AI-enabled technologies. Australia is committed to being a global leader in trusted secure and responsible AI and has escalated the development of its own sovereign AI capabilities. Military and Defence organisations have similarly embraced AI, harnessing advantages for applications supporting battlefield autonomy, intelligence analysis, capability planning, operations, training, and autonomous weapons systems. While no regulation exists covering AI-enabled military systems and autonomous weapons, these platforms must comply with International Humanitarian Law, the Law of Armed Conflict, and the Use of Force. This paper examines comparative international regulatory approaches across major allied nations in the US, UK, and Europe and suggests future direction for Australian regulation of AI in lethal application

The Language of the Rebuffed: A Critical Appraisal of how Policy Advisers Communicate

After official policy advice to governments is publicly released, governments are often accused of ignoring or rejecting their experts. Commonly represented as politicisation, this depiction is superficial. Digging deeper, is there something about the official advice itself that makes it easy to ignore? The relevant academic literature has not yet grappled with this. Public policy and administration studies tend to conflate policy and political communication, making it difficult to discern the influence of official advisers, while science and technology studies focus largely on science advisers outside government. This thesis is situated at the interface between the two. Instead of lamenting a demise of expertise, it asks: does the expert advice of policy officials feature characteristics that invite its government audience to overlook or misread it? To answer this question, I critically examine official policy advice and find the language of the rebuffed: expert advisers reluctant to disclose what they know so as to accommodate political circumstances. I argue that this language evades stable meaning and diminishes the democratic right of citizens to scrutinise the work of government. To test that argument and examine how the language of the rebuffed works, this thesis analyses three Australian policy case studies: the taxation of investment properties, the role of renewables in the national energy mix, and the Iraq war. A gap in methods with which to dissect the phenomenon of rebuffed language led me to construct a new framework informed by rhetorical, organisational and comparative analyses. I uncovered three different language typologies that: fixated on one strand of enquiry but sidestepped wider context; expunged complexity, thereby imparting an appearance of certainty and solid evidence; and routinely raised the presence of uncertainty, leaving advice unusable as evidence. When publicly released, the advice accompanying each proved problematic as means with which to account for political decisions. This thesis concludes that, when public institutions furnish governments with such advice, interested publics are effectively excluded from gaining accurate impressions of how decisions are made on their behalf. Only in being able to judge and assess policy rationales can they assemble a picture of what is in their interest. Yet, far from helping assemble that picture, the language of the rebuffed seems designed to break it up

Carbon Budget—the agenda for mitigation. Australia, Canada, the European Union and Japan

human development, climate change

The Future of the Christchurch Call to Action: How to Build Multistakeholder Initiatives to Address Content Moderation Challenges

This article explores the challenges the New Zealand Government faced after the events in Christchurch on 15 March 2019, where a violent gunman killed 51 people and live-streamed his attack on social media. The video was viewed millions of times in the days following, even as the tech companies took extraordinary efforts to reduce its virality. To find a long-term solution that ended the proliferation of this violent content while protecting human rights, the New Zealand Government decided to take a non-regulatory approach that worked alongside tech companies and civil society. The result was the creation of the Christchurch Call to Action, a multistakeholder initiative where governments and online platforms, working with civil society, committed to 25 goals to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content while protecting a free, open, and secure internet. This article argues that the creation of an multistakeholder initiative was not only the right option for the New Zealand Government in the aftermath of Christchurch shooting, but that multistakeholderism is the best approach for addressing all issues related to the governance of user-generated content online. The problems related to the proliferation of harmful content online cannot be solved through government regulation, and tech companies cannot, and should not, set the rules alone. Therefore, to find a solution, governments and companies must work with like-minded actors who uphold human rights principles, and meaningfully engage with civil society, technical experts, academia, and users. These solutions should be consensus-based and build in accountability mechanisms for both governments and companies. This article argues that solutions proposed addressing terrorist content could serve as a guide for other types of user-generated content where definitions remain contentious