This article examines the strategies used by some third sector organizations in Australia to advocate.

This paper examines the effect of funding contracts on the capacity of third-sector organizations to effectively advocate. The relationship is not simple or obvious, with some organizations reporting 'mature relationships' with particular (state) departments, and others reporting difficulty with state or federal government jurisdictions. The paper spells out the negative effects of conflating service funding and advocacy. The paper concludes by exploring alternative institutional arrangements for the resourcing of advocacy including the establishment of a Public Interest Fund administered independently of any government department, one not requiring specific service contracts but rather evidence that it is advocating for the broader public good.

A small internal investigation by the University of Queensland (UQ) Union Disability Collective resulted in a student-led project supported by academics across three Australian universities. The project seeks to gain new insights into the experience of students with disabilities studying at Australian universities. Universities conduct disability surveys from time to time, but these tend to be forgotten as time passes and priorities change. This project involved the co-design and development of a survey, using qualitative and quantitative questions, to investigate students’ experiences, including of barriers to education and participation in the Australian tertiary (or post-secondary) sector. This is planned to be the first of several research projects to transparently and accountably track issues faced by disabled tertiary students, and what is working to improve education outcomes and reduce discrimination. The survey has been piloted with UQ students with a view to roll it out to other universities. This paper focuses on the survey instrument and describes the project’s formation and development. It also identifies challenges that have arisen in the process and future directions.

This article examines the strategies used by a democratic state to suppress dissent by criminalizing social protest activities. We compile and tabulate new legislation in Australia affecting protest rights from 2010 to 2020. Using data collected from the Facebook pages of 728 environmental groups and climate-related arrests reported in media articles, we then examine connections between climate change protest and protest criminalization in Australia between 2010 and 2019. Australian governments are shown to have criminalized climate protest via large-scale arrests by introducing laws curtailing protest freedoms and expanding police and corporate discretionary power in the application of those laws. State, corporate, and media actors are shown to engage in the rhetorical criminalization of climate protest, portraying protesters as threats to economic and political interests and to national security. However, the ongoing growth of climate change activism indicates that these criminalization strategies seeking to prevent climate protest may have been largely ineffective.

No abstract