The organization that is called Language Australia is also known by its longer name of The National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia. The organization was founded in 1989, by the Australian Research Council, under Australia's first explicit and comprehensive language policy, The National Policy on Languages (Lo Bianco 1987), whose principles and approach are the base of much language policy action in Australia. Language Australia is based in Canberra, with a branch office in Melbourne. It established and coordinated the research and policy advising efforts of 32 specialist centers across Australia, and now conducts high level specialist policy advising, publishing and consultancy. The centers specialize in fields as diverse as sign language, interpretation and translation, English as a second language, literacy in English and bilingual literacy, adult literacy and adult English as a second language, as well as a community (heritage) languages involving socio-linguistic research and advising, materials production.
In relation to language and literacy planning Australia and the United States are alike in some important respects. Both are English-speaking nations with vast multilingual populations. This multi-lingualism is a consequence of both immigration, new and old, and of remarkably diverse indigenous language traditions. Both countries share a tradition of neglect of their multi-lingual heritage but both nations have also come to a realization that properly cultivated language diversity can constitute a capability resource of vast importance for the cultural vitality, economic interests, and national geo-political, strategic and security needs.
Australian foreign policy needs a ..
The transition from the liberal foreign policy approach of the Chifley Labor government to the more strident anti-communism of the conservative Menzies government after 1949 is a significant event in 20th-century Australian history. During the period 1950–1966 the Menzies government faced a range of challenges such as relations with the USA, responses to the USSR and China and the question of Indonesia and decolonisation in post-war South East Asia. In response the Menzies Government developed new foreign policies, encouraged a particular style of diplomacy and helped to establish a new Cold War attitude towards Australian international affairs.
This period saw growing interest from politicians, diplomats and academics for developing new types of foreign policy analysis about communism in South East Asia, or the Cold War in general. While some networks between politics, bureaucracy and academia linked to foreign policy analysis had existed in the 1930s and 1940s, from the 1950s new and more powerful relationships were being established. Various academics, many from the Australian Institute of International Affairs (AIIA) and the Australian National University (ANU) forged close and ongoing contacts with the DEA. The relationships between small groups of key individuals and institutions ultimately wielded significant influence on issues such as the Cold War and Australian foreign policy debates.
But it's also a source of deep anxiety for our foreign policy ..
In 1984 the Senate of the Parliament of Australia concluded a 2-year investigation into whether it was in the national interest to develop a nationally coordinated approach to language policy. Its primary recommendation was in favor of national language planning, and especially the developing and promulgating of comprehensive (addressing all of Australia's language and literacy needs) and collaborative (engaging all jurisdictions as well as community level non-government structures and agencies) policy. In response, a policy investigation was commissioned in late 1986 and, after extensive national consultations, was issued publicly and formally adopted by Cabinet as The National Policy on Languages (NPL) on 4 June 1987.
State and Territory governments adopted the guiding principles and argumentation of the NPL and evolved state level policies, structures and programs in keeping with the national framework. The result was a coherent national system of planning.