Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharha Sharha, PhD Candidate in Kamasutra Feminism, Cardiff Metropolitan University

For some people, the Kamasutra is little more than a name associated with condom brands, scented oils and chocolates shaped into erotic positions. In India, where sex remains a taboo subject, this ancient sex manual has often been reduced to merely a “dirty book”.

But beneath this narrow view lies a deeper message: the Kamasutra is a treatise on sexual autonomy, one that could be revolutionary for women.

In Indian society, women’s sexual pleasure is often invisible, buried beneath layers of cultural silence. Women are often taught to suppress their desires, their voices stifled by traditions that prioritise male needs. Yet, it was in this very country that the Kamasutra was written.

Composed in the ancient Sanskrit language in the 3rd century by the Indian philosopher Vatsyayana, the Kamasutra is more than a book about sexual positions. The word “kama” means love, sex, desire and pleasure, while “sutra” translates to a treatise. The text explores relationships, ethics and social norms. It offers a framework for mutual respect and understanding between partners.

In her 2016 book Redeeming the Kamasutra, scholar of Indian culture and society Wendy Doniger argues that Vatsyayana was an advocate of women’s pleasure as well as stressing their right to education and the freedom to express desire. Far from reinforcing male dominance, the Kamasutra originally emphasised the importance of mutual enjoyment and consent. It presents sex as a shared experience rather than a male conquest.

The perception of the Kamasutra as a male-centred sex manual can be traced back to its first English translation by Sir Richard Burton in 1883.

Burton, a British soldier and explorer, omitted or altered passages that highlighted women’s autonomy. It shifted their role from active participants to passive recipients of male pleasure.

In contrast, scholars such as Ganesh Saili have argued that the Kamasutra originally depicted women as equal partners in intimacy. According to the text, women communicated their needs through gestures, emotions and words, ensuring that their pleasure was just as valued as men’s. Importantly, conversation played a central role in intimacy, reinforcing the necessity of a woman’s consent before having sex.

Despite this rich history, Indian society continues to largely suppress discussions around female sexuality. Indian sex educator and journalist Leeza Mangaldas argues that women’s sexual pleasure remains a taboo topic, policed by cultural expectations that dictate women must remain silent, subservient and sexually inactive before marriage.

Social scientist, Deepa Narayan, argues that this suppression begins at home. Girls are often taught to deny their own bodies and prioritise male desires.

This control extends to patriarchal social norms that uphold virginity as a virtue for women while imposing no such expectation on men. Sex is framed as something women “give” rather than something they experience. Pleasure is seen as a right for males but merely an afterthought for females. Sex is for men but for women, it is only for producing babies.

Yet the Kamasutra itself tells a different story. In its original form, it described women as active participants in their pleasure and compared their sensuality to the delicacy of flowers – requiring care, attention and respect.

My own research explores “Kamasutra feminism”. This is the idea that this ancient text is not just about sex but about sexual autonomy. It challenges patriarchal norms by promoting women’s freedom to articulate their desires and take control of their pleasure. The Kamasutra rejects the notion that women’s sexuality should be regulated or repressed. Instead, it advocates for mutual satisfaction and consent.

Doniger describes the Kamasutra as a feminist text, citing its emphasis on women choosing their partners, expressing their desires freely and engaging in pleasurable sexual relationships. It recognises economic independence as a crucial factor in women’s sexual autonomy. Financial freedom is linked to the ability to make personal choices.

Patriarchy versus sexual liberty

Ultimately, the Kamasutra represents a clash between patriarchy – where women’s sexuality is controlled – and a vision of sexual liberty. It offers an alternative narrative, one where seduction is about mutual enjoyment rather than male domination. Its teachings encourage open discussions about intimacy, allowing women to reclaim their voices in relationships.

For more than a century, the Kamasutra has been misinterpreted, its radical message buried beneath layers of censorship and cultural shame. But if we look beyond its erotic reputation, we find a text that speaks to the importance of consent, equality and female agency.

Reclaiming the Kamasutra as a guide for sexual empowerment could help dismantle deeply ingrained taboos and reshape the conversation around women’s pleasure. In a world where female desire is still widely policed, this ancient manuscript reminds us that women’s pleasure is not a luxury, but a right.

Sharha Sharha does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Women’s sexual pleasure is still taboo – but the Kamasutra tells a different story – https://theconversation.com/womens-sexual-pleasure-is-still-taboo-but-the-kamasutra-tells-a-different-story-251987

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Desalegn Markos Shifti, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Child Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland

Australia is often called the allergy capital of the world. Allergic diseases – such as allergic asthma, hay fever, eczema and food allergies – affect almost one in five people. And this figure is expected to rise in the years to come.

An allergy happens when the body’s immune system mistakenly reacts to certain foods or other substances as if they were dangerous.

But do allergies affect all Australians equally?

In a recent study, we looked at emergency department (ED) presentations related to asthma and other allergic diseases in central Queensland. The region has a population of 228,246 according to the most recent Census data, and 7.2% of residents identify as First Nations.

We found First Nations Australians were almost twice as likely to present to hospital with asthma or other allergy-related illnesses compared to other Australians.

What we did and found

We analysed 813,112 ED presentations from 12 public hospitals in central Queensland from 2018 to 2023. The hospitals were spread across regional and remote areas.

Of the conditions we looked at, asthma was the most likely to bring patients to the ED. This was followed by unspecified allergies, atopic dermatitis (or eczema) and anaphylaxis (a severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction). First Nations people were more likely than other Australians to present with each of these conditions.

Overall, we found First Nations people were almost twice as likely to visit an ED for asthma or allergic diseases compared to other Australians. It should be noted that asthma is not always caused by allergies, and in this study we looked at all presentations for asthma, regardless of the cause.

Our study also found ED visits for allergic diseases among First Nations people increased over time. They were around 1.5 times more common in 2023 compared to 2018.

Further, we found a notable peak in asthma-related visits to the ED among First Nations people in 2019. This increase may have been partly due to Australia’s Black Summer bushfires during 2019–20.

Other research has shown ED visits and hospitalisations for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease increased during the Black Summer bushfires. Exposure to bushfire smoke significantly increases the risk of breathing problems and other health issues.

The increase in asthma-related ED visits could also be linked to the severe flu season in 2019, as flu is known to trigger asthma attacks.

Are these findings surprising?

National data shows asthma is one of the most commonly reported chronic illnesses for First Nations Australians. More than 16% of First Nations Australians reported they had asthma in 2022–23 compared to 10.8% of the general Australian population.

So it’s not entirely surprising that hospital presentations for asthma were higher among First Nations people.

However, we were surprised to find First Nations people visited the ED more often for other allergic diseases. Allergies have not necessarily been recognised as an important concern among First Nations people, particularly in remote areas.

That said, international studies have reported a higher burden of allergic and atopic diseases (eczema, hay fever and asthma) among the Indigenous peoples of Canada.

How about food allergies?

Interestingly, we didn’t find any food allergy cases in our data. But some of the “unspecified” allergies could be linked to food allergies, as could some of the cases of anaphylaxis.

Australian researchers have found differences in the prevalence of food allergies among different groups, but they lacked specific data on First Nations populations. We know little about how common food allergies are in First Nations Australians.

In a recent national survey, 12% of First Nations people self-reported an allergy to a food, drug, or other substance (compared to 14% in the overall population). But some cases might go unrecognised or unreported, and these data were not broken down into different types of allergies.

Some limitations

This is the first comprehensive study, to our knowledge, that looks at asthma and allergic disease-related ED visits among both First Nations people and other Australians in an under-researched part of Australia.

However, we only looked at asthma and allergic diseases treated in the ED, which doesn’t encompass all cases. For example, some people might visit other health services such as GPs when they’re having a less severe allergic episode.

Ultimately, we need more research to better understand how common allergies and allergic diseases are among First Nations Australians.

Why do these gaps exist?

We don’t know exactly why there are disparities in ED presentations for allergic diseases between First Nations people and other Australians.

One possibility is that asthma and allergic diseases might be more severe in First Nations people, leading to more hospital visits, even if they’re not more common.

Another reason could be limited access to specialists, especially in rural and remote First Nations communities. Long wait lists to see allergy doctors and their limited availability in some areas could lead to delays in care and make it harder to get the right treatment. This can worsen asthma and allergic disease symptoms, causing patients to seek ED care instead.

We want to learn more about how allergies affect First Nations people, especially in regional and remote areas, and whether people have unmet needs. In initial conversations with First Nations Australians living with a food allergy, we’ve heard allergies might not be well understood in rural areas. This could be because they’re rare or because traditional lifestyles offer some protection.

We’re interested in finding out more, especially whether allergies are a concern for First Nations people, and, if so, how we can support communities to develop targeted and culturally respectful strategies to address them.

Desalegn Markos Shifti is supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)-funded Centre for Food and Allergy Research (CFAR) Postdoctoral Funding.

Jennifer Koplin receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. She is a member of the Executive Committee for the National Allergy Centre of Excellence (NACE), which is supported by funding from the Australian government.

Renarta Whitcombe does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. First Nations Australians are more likely to present to hospital with asthma and allergies – new research – https://theconversation.com/first-nations-australians-are-more-likely-to-present-to-hospital-with-asthma-and-allergies-new-research-251720

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Cantrell, Senior Lecturer – Writing, Editing, and Publishing, University of Southern Queensland

Filmed in a one-take style, Jack Thorne and Stephen Graham’s new crime drama Adolescence is being hailed by critics as a technical masterpiece.

Out now on Netflix, the four-part series follows the fallout surrounding 13-year-old Jamie Miller (Owen Cooper) after he is arrested and later charged for the murder of his classmate, Katie. Co-creator Stephen Graham stars as Jamie’s father, Eddie.

Adolescence draws inspiration from the United Kingdom’s knife crime epidemic, the rise of incel culture and the brutality of online bullying. These malignant forces combine to create every parent’s worst nightmare.

However, unlike true crime, where there is often a resolution, there is no escape from the horror.

The show’s continuous filming style offers no reprieve, and the story itself provides no easy outs – refusing to provide a simple explanation for why an intelligent boy from an “ordinary” loving family would borrow a knife from a friend and, on a casual Sunday evening, stab another child to death.

While Jamie’s motives remain murky, the show makes one thing clear: today’s teens inhabit an online world that adults, however well-intentioned, are incapable of understanding if they do not listen.

Anxieties distorted by algorithms

At the centre of the show’s broken heart is a devastating truth: the most dangerous place in the world for a teenager is alone in their bedroom.

Trapped in the dark mirror of social media, Jamie – like a growing number of teenage boys – turns to the digital “manosphere” and the grim logic of online misogynists.

Read more:
The draw of the ‘manosphere’: understanding Andrew Tate’s appeal to lost men

He subscribes to the “red pills” of incel culture, so-called truth groups and the 80/20 rule (the theory that 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men, and that women only seek out men who are physically and socially desirable).

While Jamie is, for the most part, an outwardly “normal” and well-adjusted teen, his explosive rage and aggrieved entitlement is revealed in a climatic scene in episode three, when he intimidates and shouts down a female psychologist (Erin Doherty).

“You do not control what I do!” he yells. “Get that in that fucking little head of yours!”

Jamie is quick to apologise when a guard intervenes. “I shouted,” he says. “I’m sorry. Can I have another hot chocolate, please?”

In one particularly unnerving moment, Jamie recalls his decision to ask Katie out after receiving a topless photo of her on Snapchat.

“I thought she might be weak cause everyone was calling her a slag,” he says. “I just thought that when she was that weak, she might like me. It’s clever, don’t you think?”

While the sinister child-teen killer trope has been a mainstay of horror, from Child’s Play (1988) to The Exorcist (1973), Adolescence out-scares its predecessors in its unflinching portrayal of a radicalised misogynist-turned murderer.

A nightmare with no end

The show’s most stunning achievement is without a doubt its one-take style. Each hour-long episode is filmed in a single take which, as director Philip Barantini explains, “basically means that we press record on the camera, and we don’t stop until the very end of the hour”.

Tapping into today’s true crime zeitgeist, the series renders Jamie’s story more real than it actually is by imitating the cinéma vérité style of documentary filmmaking.

Each episode creates an immersive fly-on-the wall experience that is deeply compelling and uncomfortable. The lack of breaks forces viewers to feel as trapped as the characters, in an unfathomable spiral through confusion, guilt and shame.

This unease is heightened when the action is shot in claustrophobic spaces, such as inside the family van or a police interrogation room.

The soundtrack adds another layer of gritty true crime trauma, with random sirens, slamming doors and thumping discordant notes designed to mirror the inner turmoil of the characters.

As the story unfolds, it charts the devastating impact of Jamie’s crime on those around him. While Katie’s school friends struggle to process their unfathomable grief, Jamie’s parents must also confront their son’s capacity for cruelty.

“We made him,” despairs Jamie’s mother (Manda Miller).

The unbroken style, in this regard, is important for understanding how broken this family is. Because there are no cuts, there is no escape from the nightmare.

Indeed, Jamie seems to have fallen through the cracks of the social institutions we relied on in the pre-internet age: the schooling system, the judiciary and the family itself.

The generational chasm

The show’s true sympathy lies not with its cast of troubled teens but with the baffled adults around them. Like Jamie’s parents, viewers must surrender to the sorrow and disbelief of never truly understanding what went wrong.

Adolescence is a convincing portrayal of the widening chasm between parents and their teenage children in a savage, unregulated digital age.

It is also a social commentary on how little we know about how to communicate with teens effectively.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Adolescence is a technical masterpiece that exposes the darkest corners of incel culture and male rage – https://theconversation.com/adolescence-is-a-technical-masterpiece-that-exposes-the-darkest-corners-of-incel-culture-and-male-rage-252390

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yucong Wang, Lecturer, School of Law and Justice, University of Newcastle

In the first few months of 2025, there’s been a flurry of private venture space missions. Some have been successful, such as American company Firefly Aerospace landing its spacecraft Blue Ghost Mission 1 on the Moon. This was the first successful lunar landing of a privately owned spacecraft.

But there have also been several recent failures. None have been more spectacular than the repeated explosions of tech billionaire Elon Musk’s SpaceX Starship rockets in January and March.

In theory, there are a range of international laws governing these activities. However, most were established roughly half a century ago, before space was within reach of private companies eager to explore it and exploit its untapped resources.

With this development, there is an urgent need to update laws governing what happens in space, in order to prevent it becoming a kind of “wild west” where tech billionaires and the companies they own can do as they please with little to no accountability, consequence or regard for the public good.

Laws as old as the Cold War

Space activities are mainly governed by United Nations treaties. These include the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, the 1972 Liability Convention, and the 1979 Moon Agreement.

But these agreements were created during the Cold War, when space exploration was shaped by military sensitivities and mainly conducted by nation states.

Yet private companies are now major players in space. They can bring the allure of space to the masses, for a pretty penny. For example, most of the roughly 11,000 active satellites orbiting Earth are privately owned.

NASA now relies on partnerships with companies to combine expertise and save costs. The European Space Agency does the same, as do many of the 77 countries with space programs

Elon Musk has expertly tapped into this trend, securing US$22.6 billion in United States government funding for SpaceX.

Private spacecraft journeys may combine commercial and national goals. For example, the Blue Ghost Mission 1 was contracted by NASA through its Commercial Lunar Payloads initiative. It carried a suite of NASA science and technology instruments.

Just days later, another company put a spacecraft on the Moon. Yet the Intuitive Machines Athena spacecraft landed awkwardly. It toppled over and was soon declared dead. It too was carrying expensive NASA cargo.

National space agencies will continue to rely on company partners in more ambitious ventures. But what happens when things go wrong? How can private companies be held accountable if they damage the property of others, or cause environmental harm on celestial bodies?

Space traffic

There is an increasing risk of collisions among satellites, spacecrafts and space debris. And while there are some mechanisms for collision warnings, there is no global approach to assess the risk of collisions.

The 1972 Liability Convention provides guidance about addressing liability after satellite collisions. However, it only directly applies to states, not private companies.

If a private company’s spacecraft causes damage, the affected party can only initiate a claim via diplomatic channels against the launching state, not the company itself. The claims pathway can be complex, slow and subject to diplomatic negotiations.

Also, some satellite operators purchase insurance to cover damage from collisions, wisely bypassing the convention. Insurance creates an efficient private mechanism to address damages, avoiding the need to involve states or navigate the diplomatic processes required under the Convention.

But space insurance is incredibly expensive, so most satellites are not insured.

The Outer Space Treaty says countries must avoid contamination of space. But it does not specifically address the problem of accumulated space debris.

The long-term sustainablity of space activities, including the build up of debris, was not the pressing issue for the treaty’s drafters. Moreover, the treaty’s language is vague, requiring states to act with “due regard” for others’ interests and conduct “appropriate” consultation before undertaking potentially harmful activities. However, it does not define what these terms mean.

Who owns the resources in space?

The prospect that humans will be able to collect and sell mineral resources from astronomical objects is edging closer to reality. Initial focus is on the Moon. But who owns the resources on the Moon?

There is no internationally agreed-upon property rights regime beyond Earth. The US is trying to achieve private ownership of space resources through its 2020 “Artemis Accords”.

This effort is a big boost to the privatisation of space. But it contrasts with the “common heritage of mankind” concept – the cornerstone of the 1979 Moon Agreement.

So far 53 countries have signed the Artemis Accords. But only 17 countries are parties to the Moon Agreement. Without clear rules applicable to all space players, lunar exploration and mining by private entities may run into trouble.

There are many worrying scenarios. A private spacecraft might crash into a country’s lunar accommodation facility due to a lack of “rules of the road” on the Moon. Lunar traffic and mining might cause damage to the Moon’s surface.

Can private entities be held accountable for this damage? The current space law regime does not address such hypothetical problems that may become real in coming years.

Safe and sustainable space exploration

Space law must evolve to ensure safe and sustainable commercial space travel and lunar exploration. This can only be achieved by building international consensus on new rules for space missions.

This requires many challenging discussions.

What types of damage to the Moon should be remediated, and by who? What is the most suitable avenue for affected entities to apply for compensation? What rules should be in place to manage the increased traffic volume in outer space? How can countries be incentivised to strengthen their oversight of their private entity partners in joint missions?

Perhaps the easiest issue to solve is which side of future lunar highways to drive on. With the US and China leading the way at the moment, it would be on the right side.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Laws governing space are 50 years old. New ones are needed to prevent it becoming a ‘wild west’ – https://theconversation.com/laws-governing-space-are-50-years-old-new-ones-are-needed-to-prevent-it-becoming-a-wild-west-252014

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grant Duncan, Teaching Fellow in Politics and International Relations, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

We’re roughly half way through this parliamentary term, and it looks as though the 2026 election could deliver “Christopher vs Chris: the sequel”.

Neither leader is currently riding high, though. National’s Christopher Luxon and Labour’s Chris Hipkins are both scoring in the low 20s in the most recent preferred prime minister polls.

Most voters, it seems, are ambivalent or unimpressed with them. And Luxon has been the subject of media speculation about a possible leadership change.

But it pays to be cautious, especially this far from an election. Leadership is a complex mix of individual ability, career stage and political context.

We can think of political leaders having a “stock” of leadership “capital” that fluctuates over time. They build up credit or authority, but they have to spend it. Former supporters can become bored, disappointed or disillusioned.

Any assessment of a leader will involve some subjective judgements. But the Leadership Capital Index (LCI) was developed by three British and European political scientists as a framework for scoring leadership on a range of sliding measures.

As this example using former British prime minister Tony Blair shows, the LCI accounts for a leader’s skills, support and reputation based on their performance, polling and prospects over time.

I applied the LCI to Hipkins and Luxon. Ideally, this would be conducted by a panel, and more than once over a career. But readers are welcome to examine and comment below on my assessments – a virtual panel, if you like. You can see more detail about my reasoning here.

The LCI’s ten factors are a mixture of the objective and subjective, adding up to an overall ranking of a leader’s political capital on a five-point scale:

• depleted – “lame duck”

• low – “politically weakened”

• medium – “muddling through”

• high – “momentum”

• exceptional – “political weather maker”.

Neither Luxon nor Hipkins performed very well: Luxon came out on the low-capital range looking “politically weakened”, while Hipkins was “muddling through” on medium capital.

Leadership capital changes over time, and the LCI takes account of that. This assessment relates to mid-March 2025.

The Leadership Capital Index

1. Political/policy vision: (1. Completely absent. 2. Unclear/inconsistent. 3. Moderately clear/consistent. 4. Clear/consistent. 5. Very clear/consistent.)

I’ve given both leaders 4 out of 5 here. Both have presented clear and consistent political and policy visions. Readers who disagree will see I take some relevant issues into account in the items below.

2. Communication performance: (1. Very poor. 2. Poor. 3. Average. 4. Good. 5. Very good.)

Luxon has been struggling here. His failure to give broadcaster Mike Hosking a straight answer about a cabinet sacking didn’t help, and he has been criticised for his corporate speaking style. Hipkins has performed better as a communicator (regardless of your views on his values). I’ve given Luxon 2/5 and Hipkins 4/5.

3. Personal poll rating relative to the most recent election: (1. Very low (–15% or less), 2. Low (–5 to –15%), 3. Moderate (–5% to 5%), 4. High (5-15%), 5. Very High (15% or more).)

This is an objective numerical measure based on preferred prime minister polls just before the 2023 election compared with the most recent ones. Both Luxon and Hipkins score 3/5.

4. Longevity (time in office as prime minister): (1. less than 1 year. 2. 1-2 years. 3. 2-3 years. 4. 3-4 years. 5. More than 4.)

At March 2025, Luxon gets 2/5 and Hipkins gets 1/5. If we included time in office as party leaders, the numbers would be higher.

5. Selection margin for party leadership: (1. Very small (less than 1%). 2. Small (1-5%). 3. Moderate (5-10%). 4. Large (10-15%). 5. Very large (more than 15%).)

Both leaders were elected as party leader by their respective caucuses. These votes are private, but it’s known Hipkins’ selection was unanimous. I believe Luxon also won by a large margin (greater than 15%). So they both get 5/5.

6. Party polling relative to most recent election result: (1. –10% or lower. 2. –10% to –2.5%. 3. –2.5% to +2.5%. 4. +2.5% to 10%. 5. More than 10%.)

In early March, Labour was polling in the low 30s, up from an election result of 26.9%. So Hipkins gets 4/5. National was also polling in the low 30s, down from 38.1%. So Luxon gets 2/5.

7. Levels of public trust: (1. 0-20%. 2. 20-40%. 3. 40-60%. 4. 60-80%. 5. 80-100%.)

Going back to a “trust” poll in early 2023 and a similar one in May that year, Luxon scored a lower trust level (37%) than Hipkins (53%). So Luxon gets 2/5 and Hipkins gets 3/5.

8. Likelihood of credible leadership challenge within next 6 months: (1. Very high. 2. High. 3. Moderate. 4. Low. 5. Very low.)

This relies on predictions, but Luxon is in greater danger than Hipkins. National’s polling is down, with some predicting a leadership change (although others acknowledge this could carry more costs than benefits). Hipkins lost the 2023 election but seems secure as Labour leader. Luxon gets 3/5 (moderate risk) and Hipkins gets 4/5 (low risk).

9. Perceived ability to shape party’s policy platform: (1. Very low. 2. Low. 3. Moderate. 4. High. 5. Very high.)

This is subjective but not about liking or disliking the policies. Both leaders perform moderately well here on 3/5. Luxon has put his own managerial style on policymaking, notably with quarterly targets. When Jacinda Ardern resigned as prime minister, Hipkins lit a “policy bonfire” to begin afresh. But he is taking time to announce new ones. We’d expect to see improvements for both leaders closer to the election.

10. Perceived parliamentary effectiveness: (1. Very low. 2. Low. 3. Moderate. 4. High. 5. Very high.)

Hipkins has an advantage, given his greater parliamentary experience. Luxon hasn’t dealt decisively with two attention-grabbing coalition partners, especially over ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill. Hipkins gets 4/5, Luxon 2/5.

Final scores – now have your say

The results add up to a ranking on the leadership capital index. Out of a possible 50, Luxon scores 28 and Hipkins 35. Neither is a great score; both careers look stalled.

On the index, this defines Luxon as “politically weakened”. This could improve through better communication, sounder leadership of an ambitious team, and greater control over coalition dynamics.

But Luxon’s leadership capital has never been particularly high. He didn’t enjoy a post-election “honeymoon” and may have peaked early – and low. More low polls may see National remove him, but there is also still time for his policies to pay off.

The index has Hipkins “muddling through”. He needs to connect with voters, boost his reputation as a future leader (rather than election loser) and sharpen Labour’s policy platform.

Hipkins’ leadership capital might have peaked in early 2023 when he became prime minister. Labour party polls are up a bit since the election, but his own preferred prime minister polling has stayed relatively low.

Finally, neither leader has performed well compared with their predecessors John Key and Jacinda Ardern at their heights. But political fortunes can be unpredictable, and crises can even boost them, so the future remains unwritten.

Is this assessment fair or unfair? Readers are welcome to critique my analysis and offer alternative ratings in the (moderated) comments section below.

Grant Duncan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘Politically weakened’ or ‘muddling through’ – Luxon and Hipkins ranked on their mid-term prospects – https://theconversation.com/politically-weakened-or-muddling-through-luxon-and-hipkins-ranked-on-their-mid-term-prospects-252483

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marika Sosnowski, Postdoctoral research fellow, The University of Melbourne

When a ceasefire in the war between Hamas and Israel finally came into effect on January 19, the world breathed a collective sigh of relief.

However, that ceasefire agreement, and its associated negotiations, have now been cast aside by new Israeli attacks on Gaza.

A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the strikes came after Hamas’ “repeated refusals” to “release our hostages”, and the group’s rejection of all proposals presented by US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.

Even before Israel cut off all humanitarian aid and electricity to Gaza in the past two weeks, Hamas claimed it had not met the levels of humanitarian aid, shelter and fuel it agreed to provide in the terms of the ceasefire. However, this is a distraction from a larger issue.

This ceasefire was always more like a strangle contract than a negotiated agreement between equal parties. Israel, as the party with far greater military and political power, has always had the upper hand.

And while the first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days, saw the successful release of 33 hostages held by Hamas in exchange for nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners, the ceasefire also enabled Israel to use it for its own political and military ends.

Buying time

The most common conventional concern about ceasefires is that the parties to a conflict will use them for their own ends.

Typically, the worry is that non-state armed groups, such as Hamas, will use the halt in violence to buy time to regroup, rearm and rebuild their strength to continue fighting.

But states such as Israel have this ability, too. Even though they have standing armies that might not need to regroup and rearm in the same way, states can use this time to manoeuvre in the international arena – a space largely denied to non-state actors.

Trump’s rise to power in the US has seemingly given the Israeli government carte blanche to proceed in ways that were arguably off limits to previous US presidents who were also largely supportive of Israel’s actions.

This includes the plan of forcing Gaza’s population out of the strip. This plan was raised earlier in the war by Trump advisor Jared Kushner and Israeli officials as a supposed humanitarian initiative.

Trump has now repeated the call to relocate Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan – or possibly other parts of Africa – and for the US to take “ownership” of the coastal strip and turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.

On the face of it, this plan would be a war crime. But even if it is never fully implemented, the fact it is being promoted by Trump after many years of domestic Israeli and international opprobrium shows how political ideas once thought unacceptable can take on a life of their own.

Political and military maneouvering

Israel has also used the ceasefire to pursue larger political and military goals in Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon and Syria.

Even though the ceasefire did reduce overall levels of violence in Gaza, Israel has continued to carry out attacks on targets in the strip.

It has also escalated the construction of settlements and carried out increasingly violent operations in the West Bank. In addition, there have been egregious attacks on Palestinian residents in Israel.

And though nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners were released during the ceasefire, Israel was holding more than 9,600 Palestinians in detention on “security grounds” at the end of 2024. Thousands more Palestinians are being held by Israel in administrative detention, which means without trial or charge.

During the ceasefire, Israel also accelerated efforts to evict the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, from its headquarters in East Jerusalem. And the Israeli government has also proposed increasingly draconian laws aimed at restraining the work of Israeli human rights organisations.

On the military front, the ceasefire arguably alleviated some pressure on Israel, giving it time to consolidate its territorial and security gains against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and in Syria.

In the past two months, two deadlines for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon passed. Israel has instead proposed establishing a buffer zone on Lebanese territory and has begun destroying villages, uprooting olive trees and building semi-permanent outposts along the border.

In a speech in February, Netanyahu also demanded the “complete demilitarisation of southern Syria” following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. And Defence Minister Israel Katz said this month Israel would keep its troops in southern Syria to “protect” residents from any threats from the new Syrian regime.

Be careful what you wish for

While Palestinians are known for their sumud – usually translated as steadfastness or tenacity – there is a limit to what humans can endure. The war, and subsequent ceasefires, have created a situation in which Gazans may have to put the survival and wellbeing of themselves and their families above their desire to stay in Palestine.

There is a general assumption that ceasefires are positive and humanitarian in nature. But ceasefires are not panaceas. In reality, they are a least-worst option for stopping the violence of war for often just a brief period.

A ceasefire was never going to be the solution to the decades-old conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, it has turned out to be part of the problem.

Marika Sosnowski does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The Israel-Hamas ceasefire failed to resolve many deep-seated issues. Now, it appears to be shattered – https://theconversation.com/the-israel-hamas-ceasefire-failed-to-resolve-many-deep-seated-issues-now-it-appears-to-be-shattered-249944

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Next week’s budget will have cost-of-living assistance that will be meaningful and substantial but “responsible”, Treasurer Jim Chalmers has said.

In a Tuesday speech framing the budget Chalmers said, “it will be a responsible budget which helps with the cost of living, builds our future, and makes our economy more resilient in the new world of global uncertainty”.

He said the budget would have five major priorities:

• helping the recovery and rebuild following Cyclone Alfred, for which it will provide $1.2 billion

• helping with the cost of living and finishing the fight against inflation

• strengthening Medicare and funding more urgent care clinics

• putting money into every stage of education

• making the economy more competitive and productive.

In the question-and-answer part of his appearance at the Queensland Media Club Chalmers refused to be drawn on whether the cost-of-living relief would include more help on power bills, as is widely expected.

He was also put on the spot about his future leadership ambitions, initially being asked whether, given federal Labor’s poor showing in Queensland, it would do better with a leader from that state.

After diverting the question with a joke and a vigorous defence of Anthony Albanese’s “practical pragmatism” and his appreciation of Queensland, he was asked directly, “So you don’t have aspirations to become leader one day yourself?” “No”, he replied.

Chalmers is lowering expectations of extensive new initiatives being announced next Tuesday, because big spending measures in health, education and infrastructure have been announced.

The budget will project deficits throughout the forward estimates. But Chalmers said Treasury did not expect the bottom line this year or the coming years to be substantially changed from the mid year update.

In the mid-year update release in December, Treasury said it expected the deficit this financial year to be $26.9 billion. The deficit was forecast to increase further next year to $46.9 billion, compared with $42.8 billion forecast in last year’s budget.

Chalmers sought to scotch incorrect predictions he said had been made.

“For example, some commentators have made wild and wide-of-the-mark predictions about big surges in revenue.

“Some wrongly predict the tax-to-GDP ratio will go up this year, when Treasury expects it to be stable or even a bit down.

“Revenue upgrades have actually come off very significantly since the highs of October 2022.”

Chalmers argued the Australian economy “has turned a corner” but acknowledged “a new world of uncertainty” in which it was operating.

“The global economy is volatile and unpredictable.

“There’s a new US administration disrupting trade, a slowdown in China, war in eastern Europe and a fragile ceasefire in the Middle East, division and dissatisfaction around the world.

“Overnight, the OECD downgraded its growth expectations for next year and the year after.”

The OECD cut its forecasts for GDP growth to just 1.8% in 2026, down from an earlier forecast of 2.5%.

“Treasury forecasts in the Budget will have Chinese and American growth slowing to around 4.5 and 2 per cent next year, respectively.

“The forecasts for the US are the same as the mid-year update but the downside risks are weighing more heavily now.

“Unemployment is rising overseas from higher interest rates, and in the UK inflation is going up again.

“This is the global backdrop for the Budget.”

Chalmers repeated the government’s criticism of the US failure to grant an exemption from the steel and aluminium tariffs.

He said Treasury had modelled the impact of tariffs on our economy, both before the US election, and after the inauguration.

“Treasury estimates the direct hit to GDP from steel and aluminium tariffs would be less than 0.02 per cent by 2030. So the direct overall impacts on Australia should be manageable.

“But when you add in the indirect effects, the hit to GDP could be more like 0.1 per cent by 2030.

“In fact, over a range of scenarios, Treasury found the indirect GDP impacts of a trade war could be up to four times larger than the direct effects of tariffs on our economy.

“In a world of retaliation and escalation, the impacts of tariffs are amplified, they linger for longer, resulting in a bigger reduction in GDP and a bigger increase in prices.”

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Treasurer Chalmers promises ‘meaningful and substantial’ cost of living help in Tuesday’s budget – https://theconversation.com/treasurer-chalmers-promises-meaningful-and-substantial-cost-of-living-help-in-tuesdays-budget-252173

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

The Greens have heaped a lot of pressure on the government during this term, from issues of the environment, housing, and Medicare, to the war in the Middle East.

With the polls close to a dead heat and minority government appearing a real possibility, would the Greens push a minority Labor government even harder in pursuit of their agenda?

To talk about the Greens’ policies and prospects, we’re joined by South Australian Greens senator Barbara Pocock, who is the party’s spokeswoman on employment, the public sector and finance.

After their efforts in this term, Pocock says the Greens would be just as tough in pushing a possible Labor minority government next term:

People can judge us on our record in the last few years. People saw us really fight hard on housing – we wanted to see something meaningful. It is the most significant post-war crisis in housing that is affecting millions of Australians’ lives and certainly an intergenerational crisis.

So we held out for a long time to try and push Labor to improve its offering on public housing [and] on housing spending and we achieved some real wins there. We will fight hard for the things that matter.

We will push very hard on those core issues of a better health system, putting dental into Medicare. We pushed very hard on that in the last time there was a minority government and won it for kids. We want to see everyone be able to get to the dentist, and we really want to see reductions in student debt.

However, Pocock stresses that keeping Peter Dutton out of government remains a key focus:

We are very focused on preventing a Dutton Coalition government, because everything we hear from that stable sends a shiver down my spine.

Pocock did a lot of work during the Senate inquiry investigating consulting services and she warns Dutton’s policy to cut 36,000 public servants would lead to a return to consultants:

In that last year of the Morrison government, we saw a spend of $20 billion on consulting and labour hire and a hollowing out in the public sector. We are still seeing a slow regrowth of the capability of the federal public sector following the scandals relating to the consulting industry and the way it worked with government.

I am very worried about the Coalition’s proposals for a 36,000 cut in the public sector. That’s one in five public sector workers gone and that means services like Centrelink, Veterans Affairs, services that Australians depend on cannot deliver on what they suggest. And we also need to remember that a very significant number – something like two-thirds of our public service, federal public service – actually live outside Canberra.

All they would be doing is taking that money, which pays for public servants, doing a whole range of many different things and taking it across to, in many cases, their supporters and buddies and donors in the consulting and labour hire industry and it’s a very bad value-for-money proposition for the Australian voter.

As spokeswoman on employment, Pocock is a strong advocate for the Greens policies on a four-day work week:

If we go right back to 1856 when Australia led the world on reducing working hours, and the eight-hour day, now we were the first to adopt that internationally for stonemasons in Melbourne. And in the last 40 years, [we] have not seen any reduction in average working time. It’s been 38 hours now since 1983. In that 40 years, we’ve seen massive changes in technology. We have seen increases in productivity. And in the last 10 years, we’ve seen private profit increase by 97% while wages have gone up by 50%. And what we’re saying is, let’s look at the length of the average full-time working week and let’s see how we can move the dial on that.

We’d certainly like to see a wide range of pilots, diverse experimentation, real change, working with those who are ready for it, who are up for it, but making sure we collect the evidence and then move over time towards a national test case, which is the way in which over decades we have slowly ratcheted back the length of the working week.

On the attack from the opposition and others that the Greens are anti-Semitic, Pocock defends the Greens as an anti-racist party.

I think there are diverse views out there in the community and certainly, and we can see it every day, but I think that there are also many people, including many Jewish people, who understand that you can have a critique of a war that’s had such a terrible consequence for civilian women and children in Gaza, and you can still take a very strong position in relation to the kinds of attacks we’ve seen on the Jewish community, for example.

We are an anti-racist party. We want to call out behaviour which is wrong wherever it happens and we have certainly been critical of the behaviour of the Israeli state, their military, and the way they continue to conduct a war against the civilians in Gaza.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Barbara Pocock on the Greens’ policy priorities – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-barbara-pocock-on-the-greens-policy-priorities-252502

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabrielle Meagher, Professor Emerita, School of Society, Communication and Culture, Macquarie University

On Monday, an ABC’s Four Corners investigation reported shocking cases of abuse and neglect in Australian childcare centres. This included examples of children being sexually abused, restrained for hours in high chairs, and fed nutritionally substandard meals such as pasta with ketchup.

While acknowledging there are high-quality services operating in the community, the program also showed how centre-based childcare is big business, dominated by for-profit providers, who may not be meeting regulatory standards.

What is going wrong with childcare in Australia?

Differing levels of quality

Data from Australia’s childcare regulator consistently shows for-profit childcare services are, on average, rated as lower quality than not-for-profit services.

Of those rated by regulators, 11% of for-profit long daycare centres are not meeting national minimum quality standards (they are just “working towards”). This compares with 7% of not-for-profit centres not meeting minimum standards.

There are 13% of for-profit centres exceeding the standards, compared to 28% of not-for-profits.

Inquiries suggest this divergence is due to staffing levels, qualifications and pay. In 2023, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) found large for-profit providers spend significantly less on staffing than not-for-profit providers.

Large for-profit providers have a higher proportion of part-time and casual staff than not-for-profits. They also employ less experienced early childhood teachers. On top of this, they are more likely to use award rates of pay, which are typically lower than enterprise agreement rates.

Lower pay and less job security is related to higher turnover of staff, which makes it difficult for educators to establish and maintain the trusting relationships with children and families that underpin high quality.

Despite this, the federal government continues to support for-profit services through childcare subsidies.

These subsidies are designed to help families with the costs of childcare. But they do not stop some providers increasing their fees. The ACCC found a consistent pattern of increased government subsidies leading to higher out-of-pocket expenses for families, due to subsequent fee increases.

It hasn’t always been like this

Childcare subsidies haven’t always worked in this way. “Operational subsidies” were introduced in 1972 through the historic Child Care Act, which set the precedent for Australian governments to fund childcare.

This aimed to support women’s workforce participation through an expanded, high-quality childcare sector. Subsidies at the time were only available to not-for-profit services and required the employment of qualified staff, including teachers. In these ways, Commonwealth funding positioned childcare as a public good, like school education.

Then, in 1991, federal government subsidies were extended to for-profit providers. This prompted dramatic changes in the childcare landscape, leading to a dominance of for-profit centres.

Today, more than 70% of all long day-care centres are operated by private providers. Between 2013 and 2023, the number of for-profit long daycare services jumped by 60%, while not-for-profits only grew by 4%.

Quality concerns

There are 25 large long daycare providers in Australia and of these, 21 are run for profit. Large for-profit providers impact sector quality in several ways.

Many have disproportionately high numbers of staffing waivers, granted by regulators, permitting them to operate centres without the required number of qualified staff.

According to unpublished research by Gabrielle Meagher, as of October 2024, 11 large for-profit providers held waivers for a quarter or more of their services and five held waivers for more than a third. This compares to 15% of the sector overall.

Large for-profit providers also serve investors as well as families. So there are extra incentives to cut costs and maximise profits.

The dominance of for-profit providers also makes them powerful players in policy-making circles, as governments depend on them to provide an essential service.

Why isn’t the system working?

Given Australia has a regulatory and quality assurance system for childcare services, why do we have these quality issues?

As the Productivity Commission found, regulators are under-resourced, and inspections are infrequent. Services that repeatedly fail to meet the minimum standards are still allowed to operate, sometimes for more than a decade.

Services are notified about upcoming inspections, potentially giving them time to give a false impression of their quality and safety standards.

As Four Corners highlighted, poor-quality services, with bad pay and working conditions are driving good educators away from the sector.

What next?

The Albanese government recently passed legislation to “guarantee” eligible families three days of subsidised childcare per week from January 2026.

But families need more than access. They also require a guarantee this childcare will be high-quality and keep children safe.

Even without the extra spending on the three-day guarantee, government spending on childcare subsidies is due to reach nearly A$15 billion by 2026–27. Thus there is also a corresponding duty to taxpayers to ensure these funds are going to high-quality providers.

In the wake of the Four Corners report, the Greens are calling for a royal commission into childcare. But we do not need this level of inquiry to tell us the current system needs fundamental change.

Stronger regulatory powers, while important, will not be enough on their own. High-quality services need well-educated and well-supported staff. They also need governance and leadership that value educators’ expertise and enable consistently high standards.

Gabrielle was interviewed as part of the 4 Corners program mentioned in the article.

Marianne Fenech receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Amid claims of abuse, neglect and poor standards, what is going wrong with childcare in Australia? – https://theconversation.com/amid-claims-of-abuse-neglect-and-poor-standards-what-is-going-wrong-with-childcare-in-australia-252493

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Felicity Deane, Professor of Trade Law, Taxation and Climate Change, Queensland University of Technology

On April 2 the United States is set to implement a new wave of tariffs under its Fair and Reciprocal Trade Plan. Details of the plan that will impact all US trading partners are not yet known, but the US administration has suggested these tariffs will target any rules it considers “unfair”.

This means the April 2 tariffs may take aim at a range of Australian domestic policies, such as biosecurity rules that govern food imports, and the government’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS).

The size of the hit is uncertain. One report indicates a relatively modest tariff between 2% and 8% is being considered, below the 25% rate imposed on steel and aluminium on March 12. But it will apply to a much larger set of exports.

Read more:
With Australian steel and aluminium set to incur US tariffs, global uncertainty will be our next challenge

Australia and the US have been allies for over a century. The two nations celebrated a “century of mateship” in 2018. More formally, the two countries have a current free trade agreement, Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA).

The agreement was negotiated in good faith, and entered into force on January 1, 2005. It called for the elimination of tariffs between the two nations over time, and until now both parties have upheld their respective bargains. The so-called “reciprocal” tariff plan would breach that agreement.

What sectors are likely to be targeted?

The Trump reference to non-tariff barriers raises two main concerns for Australian products: meat and pharmaceuticals.

These exports to the US are worth about A$3.3 billion and $1.6 billion a year respectively. That’s about five times the total value of our steel and aluminium exports to the US.

In Australia, domestic beef products are subject to strict traceability rules. Similarly, imported beef has rigid biosecurity requirements as it is classified as a high-risk food.

This is because of the potential risk of mad cow disease (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy). This disease was detected in the US in 2002 and triggered an Australian ban on US beef products.

The ban was partially lifted in 2018, but some restrictions remain, which the US says are a barrier to trade. This was also raised by the Biden administration in a 2024 report on trade barriers.

The US cannot force Australia to change its laws on the basis of tariffs – but they can make products coming from Australian suppliers more expensive and therefore restrict market access to the US, which many Australian producers rely on.

A tariff on Australian-sourced beef products would also push up prices for American consumers. Trade Minister Don Farrell has warned the price of a McDonald’s burger may increase.

Medicines are also in the line of fire

Turning to pharmaceuticals, the Australian PBS has been a sticking point between US and Australian trade negotiators for the past 20 years.  

The PBS, which has been in place since 1948, ensures Australians have affordable access to essential medicines. It formed part of discussions during the free-trade negotiations and has been raised as a potential barrier to trade.

The US argues innovation and unfettered market access for American drug companies should be prioritised over Australia’s reference pricing arrangements. Reference pricing means medicines with similar outcomes should have similar pricing.

The reason the US has a problem with this scheme is because some of their companies are not able to charge higher prices for medicines.

Although these are the categories of most concern, there is no assurance the “Fair and Reciprocal Plan” will be limited to beef and pharmaceuticals.

For instance, there are no barriers imposed on the import of wine into Australia. But there has been some concern tariffs could be introduced regardless.

Wine is often the target of trade wars and President Donald Trump has threatened the European Union with a 200% tariff on all wine and spirits entering the US. As Australian wine makers have only recently recovered from Chinese and Canadian tariffs, any US tariffs would deal a harsh blow to the industry.

An old clip of the former Republican President Ronald Reagan went viral this week, highlighting his quite different view:

Is there any avenue for appeal?

There is one thing that is clear about these tariffs. Their imposition will be in violation of both the WTO rules and the free-trade agreement.

Both have provisions to settle disputes and Australia does have options for filing complaints. However, the rule of law and existing norms of the international order do not appear to be persuasive to the Trump administration.

Despite this, it is important to note the US cannot force Australia to change its longstanding laws that protect consumers and ensure accessibility to medicines. This remains the choice of the Australian government.

If the tariffs are introduced in the range of 2% to 8%, there may not be a significant direct economic impact. But they will have other consequences. Trade negotiations, and international agreements, are largely based on goodwill. These acts of the US will erode much of what has been built up over the past century.

The downturn we are seeing in financial markets has so far been dismissed by the Trump administration as necessary. But if the correction turns into a crash, it may give President Trump pause. Given his lack of interest in negotiating, this may be the only thing that could change his mind.

Felicity Deane does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The next round in the US trade war has the potential to be more damaging for Australia – https://theconversation.com/the-next-round-in-the-us-trade-war-has-the-potential-to-be-more-damaging-for-australia-252377

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kamil Zuber, Senior Industry Research Fellow, Future Industries Institute, University of South Australia

It’s annoying to open your dishwasher after the cycle is finished only to find half of the dishes still wet. Instead of being able to stack them away, you end up with a full drying rack.

And you’ve probably noticed it’s always plastic items that end up the most wet. What’s going on?

The answer is a bit convoluted and requires some materials and physics knowledge, but bear with me.

Plastics have very different properties to ceramics and metals – the stuff your plates and cutlery are most likely made out of. Two key things play a role: one is how the materials store heat, and the other is what happens on their surfaces.

How dishes store heat

If you take your dishes out of the dishwasher promptly after the cycle ends, you’ve likely noticed that plates, glasses and ceramic mugs are still hot, while plastic containers don’t feel warm at all.

This relates to their heat capacity, sometimes also referred to as the “thermal mass” of these materials. Ceramics, glass and metals can store more heat, and it takes longer for them to give it away to their surroundings than it does for plastics. In other words, ceramics and metals cool down more slowly.

Since evaporating water takes energy and cools the surface – which is also how your body cools down on a hot day as you sweat – plastics cool down faster, leaving much of the water on the surface.

How water behaves on different surfaces

The other part of the problem is in surface energy, which tells us how water wets different surfaces.

You’ve probably seen water droplets bead up on things like high-end rain jackets or non-stick frying pans. These surfaces are called hydrophobic, meaning they “fear” water. This is also the case for most plastics, although not always to such a dramatic effect.

On the other end of the spectrum, surfaces like many ceramics and metals are coated with water easily. That’s because they are more hydrophilic or “water-loving”.

But there’s another factor here – and it has to do with dishwashers, in particular. Dishwasher detergent contains a mixture of chemicals, mainly surfactants – substances that lower the surface tension of water.

Surface tension is the property of the material’s interface (for example, between solid and liquid, or liquid and gas) that tells us how much energy it takes to create a larger surface. By adding detergent to water, we reduce its surface tension. This makes it easier for the water to spread over surfaces it encounters (even over these hydrophobic plastics), in turn making it easier to wash your dishes.

More importantly, the surfactants in detergent are molecules that have both hydrophobic and hydrophilic chemical groups. This makes them a kind of link between water and fats. Since oil and water don’t like to mix, a surfactant helps to “blend” the latter and have it float in water, helping remove any oily residues from your dishes.

This happens in the main washing cycle. After rinsing, the chemicals get removed and your dishes are sprayed with clean water so you don’t have to taste the detergent in your tea.

So, at the end, water beads up on your hydrophobic plastic dishes and spreads all over your more hydrophilic ceramic plates, cups and metal pots. A large bead of water evaporates more slowly than when the same amount of water is spread more thinly over your plates and pots.

On top of that, ceramic dishes retain more heat, which makes them dry more quickly – the water that’s already spread more thinly just evaporates faster.

Is there anything I can do to make plastics dry faster?

You’ve probably heard about rinse aids that are added to the rinse cycle. Their key ingredients are different types of low-foaming surfactants and chemicals that make water softer. Some “all in one” dishwasher tablets may already contain a small amount of rinse aid and the makers provide instructions on how to use them in a safe and efficient way.

Rinse aids also lower the surface tension of water, making it easier for water to wet and run off the surfaces, preventing it from beading up and reducing streaks.

This also works on plastic dishes, leaving much less water behind. Some dishwasher manufacturers recommend using rinse aids because in addition to drying dishes faster, they can prevent corrosion of dishwasher parts from detergent residues.

Is there anything else you can do to dry the dishes faster?

There is one thing that is really simple: just crack the door open as soon as the cycle is finished and it’s safe to do so, so that water vapour can escape. If hot air and moisture instead remain trapped in the dishwasher, the water vapour will condense on all surfaces, like dew before dawn.

At the end, you have a way to make most of your dishes drier after the cycle, although you may still end up with a first-world problem in the form of some wet plasticware. There will be less water on it if you use a rinse aid according to instructions, and open the dishwasher when safe, after the cycle is completed.

Kamil Zuber does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why do plastic containers always come out wet from the dishwasher? Science has the answer – https://theconversation.com/why-do-plastic-containers-always-come-out-wet-from-the-dishwasher-science-has-the-answer-250656

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ilan Noy, Chair in the Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Following the Trump administration’s abrupt cuts to USAID funding last month, the online international disaster database EM-DAT (normally funded by USAID) went dark for a week.

EM-DAT collates data on the occurrence and impacts of thousands of mass disasters worldwide and records both human and economic losses in a publicly available dataset. It relies on various sources, including United Nations agencies and non-governmental organisations, but also news reports.

The vulnerability of this database to the Trump administration’s cuts highlights the need for New Zealand to take charge of its own data on the damage caused by extreme events.

Currently, New Zealand has no dedicated disaster loss database. This means we don’t know how much extreme weather events and other types of disasters are costing us.

But as such events are becoming more frequent and more intense with worsening climate change, this lack of data is increasingly detrimental to our long-term prosperity.

Two events in 2023 – Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland floods – illustrate this problem. They were by far the costliest weather disasters in New Zealand’s modern history and we know they were exceptionally damaging.

But we don’t know the aggregate financial losses they caused, and the different sources shown in the table below provide conflicting numbers, none of them comprehensive.

Without understanding the magnitude of the problem, our ability to prevent damage or recover from extreme weather is diminished. It is indeed difficult to manage what we don’t measure.

In the face of these unknowns, most other countries, including Australia, are investing in the collection, collation and analysis of their own data to make informed decisions about disaster risk management. It is high time New Zealand did the same.

The limits of New Zealand’s data on loss and damage

Currently, data on extreme weather costs have come primarily from the Insurance Council of New Zealand (ICNZ) or from EM-DAT, whose data sometimes come from less reliable sources. New Zealand’s reliance on a private source and an international organisation leaves us with data that could charitably be described as fragmented, incomplete and unreliable.

ICNZ figures showing insurance payouts for disasters are commonly used by the government and media as a proxy for total cost. But private insurance accounts for only a small share of the losses resulting from some extreme weather. Roads, bridges and many other parts of public infrastructure are not insured; many private assets are not insured either.

Furthermore, wealthier communities tend to be better insured and hence receive higher payouts. The ICNZ data imply they experience more damages than poorer, less insured communities, even when that is not the case.

Globally, insurance tends to retreat when the risks become too high to be covered affordably. We expect that in the future a higher number of homes and businesses will be under-insured. Relying solely on data on insured damages will hence provide us with an increasingly partial picture of damages caused by extreme weather.

The second main source of disaster loss data is EM-DAT. In principle, it aims to include all damage costs (not just insured ones), but the approach does not necessarily result in more accurate numbers.

As the graph below shows, ICNZ can be counted on to provide reliable data for all large events, but there are frequent gaps in EM-DAT’s data for New Zealand. It is also clear that the difference between ICNZ private insurance payouts and total cost estimates from EM-DAT is too small to accurately reflect uninsured losses.

In previous research (co-authored with Rebecca Newman) we identified other gaps in the EM-DAT international estimates of extreme-weather costs, most notably for wildfires, droughts and heatwaves.

Damages from these events are largely uninsured and so are not included in the ICNZ data either. Yet their likelihood is increasing because of dramatic changes in our climate.

We only have a partial picture, and a potentially very misleading one at that – both in terms of the size of the problem and how the problem is changing.
Nevertheless, the data from the ICNZ and EM-DAT are still the best we have for understanding what is happening.

When EM-DAT temporarily went offline last month following the termination of its funding from USAID, we received a crude reminder of how critical this resource is in the global context. How can we talk about disaster risk management and risk reduction when we have no idea what is going on?

Effective policy relies on accurate data

There are myriad ways in which a disaster-loss database for New Zealand could be used effectively by central and local government, insurance and banking companies, weather-exposed industries such as agriculture, community organisations and by individuals.

Policies about flood protection, planned relocation (managed retreat), climate adaptation, insurance pricing, banking regulation, home loans and infrastructure maintenance should all be informed by knowledge of the risks from extreme-weather events and other hazards.

A concrete example of how useful this data would be is for planned relocations. We need a clear perspective of the history of flood events in different communities and comprehensive assessments of past damages in order to quantify the future costs of relocations. Without these data, how can we decide which financial arrangements for relocation are fiscally sound?

A comprehensive New Zealand disaster-loss database is possible. As a nation we have the datasets we need, but these are held within different government agencies and other organisations, with no centralised collection or reporting.

Hidden there is everything we need to understand the current situation and plan better for the future. We just have to make the decision to invest in collecting and curating this data.

Stats NZ would be the data’s logical host, given the agency’s extensive experience in collecting and posting data to help us organise our society. Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland floods should have convinced us we need this. Maybe EM-DAT going dark, and thus obscuring a worldwide risk, should convince us even more.

I am grateful for the contribution of Jo-Anne Hazel (writing) and Tom Uher (data collection).

Ilan Noy is a member of the scientific committee of EM-DAT (pro bono).

– ref. NZ has no dedicated database to track losses from weather disasters – without it, we’re planning in the dark – https://theconversation.com/nz-has-no-dedicated-database-to-track-losses-from-weather-disasters-without-it-were-planning-in-the-dark-251224

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denise Varney, Professor of Theatre Studies, The University of Melbourne

The Removalists was first performed in 1971 at La Mama Theatre, Carlton, by the Australian Performing Group, an ensemble of young graduates, artists and friends.

A beacon of the New Wave of Australian drama, David Williamson was part of a new generation of theatre artists who were interested in reflecting Australia back to its audiences. Now one of Australia’s most prolific playwrights, Williamson’s early plays are part of the repertoire of modern Australian classics.

The Removalists was just his fourth play. A brutal commentary on Australian masculinity, it was a dark turn for the young artist.

A crooked cop, an easily corruptible young constable, a boozy husband and father who beats his wife and demands his dinner, and a removalist who sees no evil, does no evil. A new production by the Melbourne Theatre Company, directed by Anne-Louise Sarks, celebrates the enduring appeal of the play.

A suburban police station

We begin in a police station. Young constable Neville Ross (William McKenna) is being inducted into the force by a bitter, manipulative, rule-bending sergeant, Dan Simmons (played with menace by the moustachioed Steve Mouzakis).

When middle class sisters Kate (Jessica Clarke) and Fiona (Eloise Mignon) enter to report domestic violence, Simmonds asks invasive questions about Fiona’s relationship to her beer-swilling loudmouth husband Kenny (Michael Whalley).

Fiona initially expressed uncertainty about making the complaint. Kate insisted on going to the police. The action that follows exposes the humiliation that accompanies reports of domestic violence.

In an excruciating moment, Kate stands by watching while Simmonds asks Fiona to show him the bruises on her back and upper thigh. Fiona is unsure as she turns her back to the auditorium, slowly pulls up her jumper and exposes the bruises on her bare back.

Under Sarks’ direction, it is a moment filled with empathy.

Enter the removalist

The action shifts in act two to Fiona’s place. Expecting Kenny to be out drinking, Simmonds – who is expecting sexual favours from Kate – and Ross arrive to help Fiona move into her new flat. But Kenny is home, and sprays a string of obscenities at the policemen. Simmonds cuffs him – and lands a few quiet punches.

The removalist (Martin Blum) interrupts the action, while turning a blind eye to the mayhem. The entrances and exits of the removalist and Ross and the moving of furniture, punctuate the drama with comic effect, injecting a light touch in the midst of the play’s violence.

When the sisters and the removalist leave, the cops beat Kenny in an orgy of violence that is so relentless and brutal, it descends into farce.

The bloody ending has something of the Grand Guignol to it – the 19th century theatre of revenge that descends into comic horror but also raises serious questions about violence in the contemporary real life world.

Critiquing white Australia

Clever balancing of humour and social commentary is the key to Williamson’s critique of the law in relation to violence against women.

In an era of diverse casting, Sarks has cast The Removalists with an all white cast, laying the violence of the play at the feet of white Australian culture.

Matilda Woodroofe’s costumes contribute to the play’s critique of Australian culture. Kenny wears a pair of footy shorts and a t-shirt, Blundstone boots and short black socks, evoking the unoffical uniform of the ocker male Australian.

In a novel touch, Dale Ferguson’s set adds rows of onstage seating for those who would like a much closer view of the action. Not only do they get a stronger sense of the onstage actors’ energy and presence, they experience the play as the original audience did in the tiny La Mama theatre.

Just as playwright Williamson targeted a conservative macho ocker culture in the early 1970s, this revival can be understood as its contemporary counterpart. Sarks highlights the particular kinds of violence that is systemic within Australian culture that continues today.

Sarks accords the female characters more dignity and independence than earlier versions. They deliver the same lines, but with confidence that speaks of their self-assurance. Kate uses her gaze to put Simmonds, the disgusting older cop, in his place. After her humiliation at the police station, Fiona rejects Kenny’s appeals.

These subtle and not so subtle changes in the delivery of the women’s lines show how directing an historical play can resist the ideologies that determined more passive roles for women in the past.

The Removalists is at Melbourne Theatre Company until April 17.

Denise Varney received funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery Project Scheme.

– ref. The Removalists remains a brutal commentary on Australian masculinity. This new production treats women with empathy – https://theconversation.com/the-removalists-remains-a-brutal-commentary-on-australian-masculinity-this-new-production-treats-women-with-empathy-252040

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Randall Wayth, SKA-Low Senior Commissioning Scientist and Adjunct Associate Professor, Curtin Institute of Radio Astronomy, Curtin University

Part of the world’s biggest mega-science facility – the SKA Observatory – is being built in outback Western Australia.

After decades of planning, countless hours of work, and more than a few setbacks, an early working version of the telescope has captured its first glimpse of the sky.

Using 1,024 of what will eventually be 131,072 radio antennas, the first SKA-Low image shows a tiny sliver of sky dotted with ancient galaxies billions of light-years from Earth.

This first snapshot shows the system works, and will improve dramatically in the coming months and years – and starts a new chapter in our exploration of the universe.

A glimpse of the universe

The SKA-Low telescope is currently under construction on Wajarri Yamaji Country in Western Australia, around 600 kilometres north of Perth. Together with the SKA-Mid telescope (under construction in South Africa), the two telescopes will make up the world’s largest and most sensitive radio observatory.

SKA-Low will consist of thousands of antennas spread across a vast area. It is designed to detect low-frequency radio signals from some of the most distant and ancient objects in the universe.

The first image, made using just 1,024 of the planned 131,000 antennas, is remarkably clear, confirming that the complex systems for transmitting and processing data from the antennas are working properly. Now we can move on to more detailed observations to analyse and verify the telescope’s scientific output.

Bright galaxies, billions of years old

The image shows a patch of the sky, approximately 25 square degrees in area, as seen in radio waves.

Twenty-five square degrees is an area of sky that would fit 100 full Moons. For comparison, it would be about the area of sky that a small apple would cover if you held it at arm’s length.

The dots in the image look like stars, but are actually some of the brightest galaxies in the universe. These galaxies are billions of light-years away, so the galaxies we are seeing now were emitting this light when the universe was half its current age.

They are so bright because each of these distant galaxies contains a supermassive black hole. Gas orbiting around black holes is very hot and moves very quickly, emitting energy in X-rays and radio waves. SKA-Low can detect these radio waves that have travelled billions of light years across the universe to reach Earth.

The world’s largest radio telescope

SKA-Low and SKA-Mid are both being built by the SKAO, a global project to build cutting-edge telescopes that will revolutionise our understanding of the universe and deliver benefits to society. (SKA stands for “square kilometre array”, describing the initial estimated collecting area of all the antennas and radio dishes put together.)

My own involvement in the project began in 2014. Since then I, along with many local and international colleagues, have deployed and verified several prototype systems on the path to SKA-Low. To now be part of the team that is making the first images with the rapidly growing telescope is extremely satisfying.

A complex system with no moving parts

SKA-Low will be made up of 512 aperture arrays (or stations), each comprised of 256 antennas.

Unlike traditional telescopes, aperture arrays have no moving parts, which makes them easier to maintain. The individual antennas receive signals from all directions at once and – to produce images – we use complex mathematics to combine the signals from each individual antenna and “steer” the telescope.

The advantages and flexibility of aperture arrays come at the cost of complex signal processing and software systems. Any errors in signal timing, calibration or processing can distort the final image or introduce noise.

For this reason, the successful production of the first image is a key validation – it can only happen if the entire system is working.

The shape of the universe and beyond

Once completed, SKA-Low promises to transform our understanding of the early universe.

The antennas of the full telescope will be spread across an area approximately 70 kilometres in diameter, making it the most sensitive low-frequency radio array ever built.

This unprecedented sensitivity to low-frequency radio signals will allow scientists to detect the faint signals from the first stars and galaxies that formed after the Big Bang – the so-called “cosmic dawn”. SKA-Low will be the first radio telescope capable of imaging this very early period of our universe.

It will also help map the large-scale structure of the universe. We expect the telescope will also provide new insights into cosmic magnetism, the behaviour of interstellar gas, and the mysterious nature of dark matter and dark energy.

The sensitivity and resolution of SKA-Low gives it a huge discovery potential. Seven out of the top 10 discoveries from the Hubble Space Telescope were not part of the original science motivation. Like the HST, SKA-Low promises to be a transformative telescope. Who knows what new discoveries await?

What’s next

SKA-Low’s commissioning process will ramp up over the course of the year, as more antenna arrays are installed and brought online. With each additional station, the sensitivity and resolution of the telescope will increase. This growth will also bring greater technical challenges in handling the growing complexity and data rates.

By the end of 2025, SKA-Low is expected to have 16 working stations. The increased volume of output data at this stage will be the next major test for the telescope’s software systems.

By the end of 2026, the array is planned to expand to 68 working stations at which point it will be the the most sensitive low-frequency radio telescope on Earth.

This phase will be the next big test of the end-to-end telescope system. When we get to this stage, the same field you see in the image above will be able to comprehensively map and detect up to 600,000 galaxies. I’m personally looking forward to helping bring it together.

Randall Wayth does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Less than 1% of the world’s biggest radio telescope is complete – but its first image reveals a sky dotted with ancient galaxies – https://theconversation.com/less-than-1-of-the-worlds-biggest-radio-telescope-is-complete-but-its-first-image-reveals-a-sky-dotted-with-ancient-galaxies-252382

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nham Tran, Associate Professor, School of Biomedical Engineering, University of Technology Sydney

German anaesthesiologist Joachim Boldt has an unfortunate claim to fame. According to Retraction Watch, a public database of research retractions, he is the most retracted scientist of all time. To date, 220 of his roughly 400 published research papers have been retracted by academic journals.

Boldt may be a world leader, but he has plenty of competition. In 2023, more than 10,000 research papers were retracted globally – more than any previous year on record. According to a recent investigation by Nature, a disproportionate number of retracted papers over the past ten years have been written by authors affiliated with several hospitals, universities and research institutes in Asia.

Academic journals retract papers when they are concerned that the published data is faked, altered, or not “reproducible” (meaning it would yield the same results if analysed again).

Some errors are honest mistakes. However, the majority of retractions are associated with scientific misconduct.

But what exactly is scientific misconduct? And what can be done about it?

From fabrication to plagiarism

The National Health and Medical Research Council is Australia’s primary government agency for medical funding. It defines misconduct as breaches of the Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.

In Australia, there are broadly eight recognised types of breaches. Research misconduct is the most severe.

These breaches may include failure to obtain ethics approval, plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification and misrepresentation.

This is what was behind many of Boldt’s retractions. He made up data for a large number of studies, which ultimately led to his dismissal from the Klinikum Ludwigshafen, a teaching hospital in Germany, in 2010.

In another case, China’s He Jiankui was sentenced to three years in prison in 2019 for creating the world’s first genetically edited babies using the gene-editing technology known as CRISPR. His crime was that he falsified documents to recruit couples for his research.

The “publish or perish” culture within academia fuels scientific misconduct. It puts pressure on academics to meet publication quotas. It also rewards them for greater research output, in the form of promotions, funding and recognition. And this can mean research quality is sacrificed for quantity.

Honest mistakes

But not all research misconduct is premeditated. Some is the result of honest mistakes made by scientists.

For example, Sergio Gonzalez, a young scientist at the Institute for Neurosciences of Montpellier in France, mistakenly uploaded several wrong images to an academic paper and its supplementary material. This didn’t have any effect on the findings of the paper, which were based on the correct images.

But it still represented a case of image duplication and misrepresentation of data. This lead to the journal retracting the paper and launching an investigation. The investigation concluded the breach was unintentional and resulted from the pressures of academic research.

Fewer than 20% of all retractions are due to honest mistakes. Researchers usually contact the publisher to correct errors when they are detected, with no major consequences.

The need for a national oversight body

In many countries, an independent national body oversees research integrity.

In the United Kingdom, this body is known as the Committee on Research Integrity. It is responsible for improving research integrity and addressing misconduct cases. Similarly, in the United States, the Office of Research Integrity handles allegations of research misconduct.

In contrast, Australia lacks an independent body directly tasked with investigating research misconduct. There is a body known as the Australian Research Integrity Committee. But it only reviews the institutional procedures and governance of investigations to ensure they are conducted fairly and transparently – and with limited effectiveness. For example, last year it received 13 complaints, only five of which were investigated.

Instead Australia relies on a self-regulation model. This means each university and research institute aligns its own policy with the Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. Although this code originated in medical research, its principles apply across all disciplines.

For example, in archaeology, falsifying an image or deliberately reporting inaccurate carbon dating results constitutes data fabrication. Another common breach is plagiarism, which can also be applied to all fields.

But self-governance on integrity matters is fraught with problems.

Investigations often lack transparency and are carried out internally, creating a conflict of interest. Often the investigative teams are under immense pressure to safeguard their institution’s reputation rather than uphold accountability.

A 2023 report by the Australia Institute called for the urgent establishment of an independent, government-funded research integrity watchdog.

The report recommended the watchdog have direct investigatory powers and that academic institutions be bound by its findings.

The report also recommended the watchdog should release its findings publicly, create whistleblower protections, establish a proper appeals process and allow people to directly raise complaints with it.

Research credibility is on the line

The consequences of inadequate oversight are already evident.

One of the biggest research integrity scandals in Australian history involved Ali Nazari, an engineer from Swinburne University. In 2022 an anonymous whistleblower alleged Nazari was part of an international research fraud cartel involving multiple teams.

Investigations cast doubt on the validity of the 287 papers Nazari and the other researchers had collectively published. The investigations uncovered numerous violations, including 71 instances of falsified results, plagiarism and duplication, and 208 instances of self-plagiarism.

Similarly, Mark Smyth, formerly of the Queensland Institute of Medical Research, fabricated research data to support grant applications and clinical trials. An independent inquiry concluded he used his reputation, status and authority to bully and intimidate junior colleagues.

If Australia had a independent research integrity body, there would be a clear governance structure and an established and transparent pathway for reporting breaches at a much earlier stage.

Timely intervention would help reduce further breaches through swift investigation and corrective action. Importantly, consistent governance across Australian institutions would help ensure fairness. It would also reduce bias and uphold the same standards across all misconduct cases.

The call for an independent research integrity watchdog is long overdue.

Only through impartial oversight can we uphold the values of scientific excellence, protect public trust, and foster a culture of accountability that strengthens the integrity of research for all Australians.

Nham Tran has received funding from Australian Research Council.

– ref. Scientific misconduct is on the rise. But what exactly is it? – https://theconversation.com/scientific-misconduct-is-on-the-rise-but-what-exactly-is-it-247352

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Galyna Piskorska, Associate Professor, Faculty of Journalism, Borys Grinchenko Kyiv University (Ukraine) and Honorary Principal Fellow at the Advanced Centre for Journalism, The University of Melbourne

Three years into Russia’s full-scale war in Ukraine, Ukrainian journalists are facing enormously difficult challenges to continue their work.

Since Russia’s invasion in 2022, 40% of Ukrainian media outlets have been forced to close down, mostly due to the Russian occupation or financial difficulties caused by the war. Many of these are in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian journalists and media outlets have also become targets. More than 100 media workers have been killed since the full-scale war began.

Some, like 28-year-old journalist Viktoriya Roshchyna, were captured by Russian forces and died in brutal conditions in captivity. More than 30 media workers are still in Russian captivity.

Others were killed by Russian missile and drone attacks, like Tetiana Kulyk, who died alongside her husband, a surgeon, after her home was hit by a drone in late February.

For those journalists that remain, fatigue is a major issue. Many are emotionally exhausted. Some cannot cope and leave their jobs. The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU) helps with seminars and psychological support.

Despite the dangers, local media remains in high demand near the front lines of the war. These outlets have lost so much – advertising, subscribers and staff – but their journalists still have the passion and determination to continue their work documenting history.

The role of local media on the front lines

According to researchers who interviewed 43 independent local media outlets last year, the key challenges for newsrooms have not changed since the start of the war:

• a shortage of employees (22% of respondents said this was a challenge in 2023, compared to 16% in 2022);

• psychological stress (18% in 2023, 16% in 2022)

• lack of funds (16% in both years).

Often, journalists must perform different roles in their work, including being a driver, mail carrier and even a psychotherapist.

Without working telephones or internet in areas near the front lines, print newspapers remain the only source of trusted information for many people. This includes up-to-date information on evacuation plans and humanitarian aid, as well as content not related to the war, such as public transport schedules and how to access medicines and necessary items for home repairs.

Tetiana Velika, editor in chief of the Voice of Huliaipillia in southeastern Ukraine, was one of about 120 journalists who took part in a recent online conference organised by the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine to discuss the state of Ukraine’s media.

She said media have remained connected with readers through both openness and authenticity. This includes having active social media networks, publishing journalists’ mobile phone numbers and allowing people to reach out anytime.

Vasyl Myroshnyk, the editor in chief of Zorya, a newspaper in eastern Ukraine, described how he travelled 400 kilometres each week to deliver copies of his newspaper to even the most dangerous places.

Svitlana Ovcharenko, editor of the newspaper Vpered in the city of Bakhmut, which was destroyed by Russian forces in the opening weeks of the war, said the paper has remained a lifeline for a displaced population.

We have a unique situation — we don’t have a city. It’s virtual, it’s only on the map, it doesn’t physically exist. Not only is it destroyed, but it’s also been bombed with phosphorus bombs, and no one lives there.

Ovcharenko, who now lives in the city of Odesa, said her newspaper’s readers are scattered all over the world. (There are 6,000 printed copies distributed each week across Ukraine.) The coverage focuses on how former Bakhmut residents have restarted their lives elsewhere, while also paying homage to the city’s past.

Independent media is now at stake

Funding remains a formidable challenge. Advertising revenue has dried up for many outlets, leaving international donors as the primary journalism funding source.

Now, the Trump administration in the United States is gutting much of this funding through its dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID). According to one estimate, 80% of Ukrainian media outlets received funding through USAID. As Oksana Romaniuk, director of the Institute of Mass Information, said:

The problem is that almost everyone had grants. The question is that for some, these grants amounted to 100% of their income and they could only survive thanks to grants. These grants amounted to 40–60% for some, less for others.

According to media researchers, without donor aid or state budget support in 2025, newspapers and magazines may decrease by a further 20% in Ukraine, while subscription circulation could drop by 25–30%.

The heavy reliance on such funding has already led to the closure of some outlets, while others have been forced to launch public fundraising campaigns.

Donor funding has also given Ukrainian outlets a measure of independence, allowing them to report on corruption within the Ukrainian government, for example. Many independent outlets are now vulnerable to being taken over by commercial or political entities. When these groups gain control, they can influence media coverage to benefit their own interests. This is known as “media capture”.

Research shows how this has occurred in other post-conflict and developing countries where independent media outlets have been transformed into business entities more focused on profits and maintaining good relations with authorities than on producing quality journalism.

This is a critical time for the future of Ukrainian media, to ensure it remains financially self-sufficient and free from the influence of both Russian propaganda and Ukrainian oligarchs. Without this funding, the preservation of Ukraine’s independent media and democracy remain under dire threat.

Galyna Piskorska does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Local newspapers are a lifeline in Ukraine, but USAID cuts may force many to close or become biased mouthpieces – https://theconversation.com/local-newspapers-are-a-lifeline-in-ukraine-but-usaid-cuts-may-force-many-to-close-or-become-biased-mouthpieces-250917

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katie Ekberg, Senior Lecturer, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University

One in six Australians have hearing loss and, for most adults, hearing starts to decline from middle age onwards.

Many of us, however, hesitate to seek help or testing for our hearing. Perhaps you’re afraid you’ll be told to wear hearing aids, and envision the large and bulky hearing aids you might have seen on your grandparents decades ago.

In fact, hearing aids have changed a lot since then. They’re often now very small; some are barely noticeable. And hearing aids aren’t the only option available for people experiencing hearing loss.

Why you shouldn’t ignore hearing loss

Acquired hearing loss can have a serious impact on our life. It is associated with or can contribute to:

• social isolation
• loneliness
• not being able to work as much, or at all
• memory problems
• trouble thinking clearly
• conditions such as dementia.

Hearing loss has also been associated with depression, anxiety and stress. A systematic review and meta-analysis found adults with hearing loss are 1.5 times more likely to experience depression than those without hearing loss.

A large population study in the US found self-reported hearing loss was associated with:

• higher levels of psychological distress
• increased use of antidepressant and anti-anxiety medications, and
• greater utilisation of mental health services.

The good news is that doing something about your hearing loss can help you live a happier and longer life.

So why don’t people get their hearing checked?

Research has found adults with hearing loss typically wait ten years to seek help for their hearing.

Less than a quarter of those who need hearing aids actually go ahead with them.

Hearing declines slowly, so people may perceive their hearing difficulties aren’t concerning. They may feel they’re now used to not being able to hear properly, without fully appreciating the impact it’s having on their life.

Some people harbour negative attitudes to hearing aids or don’t think they’ll actually help.

Others may have overheard their partner, family or friends say negative things or make jokes about hearing aids, which can put people off getting their hearing checked.

Stigma can play a big part.

People often associate hearing loss with negative stereotypes such as ageing, weakness and “being different”.

Our recent research found that around one in four people never tell anyone about their hearing loss because of experiences of stigma.

Adults with hearing loss who experience stigma and choose not to disclose their hearing loss were also likely not to go ahead with hearing aids, we found.

What are my options for helping my hearing?

The first step in helping your hearing is to have a hearing check with a hearing care professional such as an an audiologist. You can also speak to your GP.

If you’ve got hearing loss, hearing aids aren’t the only option.

Others include:

• other assistive listening devices (such as amplified phones, personal amplifiers and TV headphones)
• doing a short course or program (such as the Active Communication Education program developed via University of Queensland researchers) aimed at giving you strategies to manage your hearing, for instance, in noisy environments
• monitoring your hearing with regular checkups
• strategies for protecting your hearing in future (such as wearing earplugs or earmuffs in loud environments, and not having headphone speakers too loud)
• a cochlear implant (if hearing loss is severe)

Hearing care professionals should take a holistic approach to hearing rehabilitation.

That means coming up with individualised solutions based on your preferences and circumstances.

What are modern hearing aids like?

If you do need hearing aids, it’s worth knowing there are several different types. All modern hearing aids are extremely small and discrete.

Some sit behind your ear, while others sit within your ear. Some look the same as air pods.

Some are even completely invisible. These hearing aids are custom fitted to sit deep within your ear canal and contain no external tubes and wires.

Some types of hearing aids are more expensive than others, but even the basic styles are discrete.

In Australia, children and many adults are eligible for free or subsidised hearing services and many health funds offer hearing aid rebates as part of their extras cover.

Despite being small, modern hearing aids have advanced technology including the ability to:

• reduce background noise
• direct microphones to where sound is coming from (directional microphones)
• use Bluetooth so you can hear audio from your phone, TV and other devices directly in your hearing aids.

When used with a smartphone, some hearing aids can even track your health, detect if you have fallen, and translate languages in real time.

What should I do next?

If you think you might be having hearing difficulties or are curious about the status of your hearing, then it’s a good idea to get a hearing check.

The earlier you do something about your hearing, the greater the likelihood that you can prevent further hearing decline and reduce other health risks.

And rest assured, there’s a suitable option for everyone.

Katie Ekberg has previously received funding from the Hearing Industry Research Consortium, which funded research into stigma associated with hearing loss and hearing aids.

Barbra Timmer is a part-time employee of Sonova AG, a global hearing care company. She was a Chief Investigator on a Hearing Industry Research Consortium grant that investigated the experiences of stigma for adults with hearing loss. She is the president of Audiology Australia.

– ref. I’m avoiding a hearing test because I don’t want chunky hearing aids. What are my options? – https://theconversation.com/im-avoiding-a-hearing-test-because-i-dont-want-chunky-hearing-aids-what-are-my-options-250925

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Weber, Research Officer for School of Engineering, Australian National University

Australia’s energy policy would take a sharp turn if the Coalition wins the upcoming federal election. A Dutton government would seek to build seven nuclear power plants at the sites of old coal-fired power stations.

The Coalition says its plan makes smart use of the existing transmission network and other infrastructure. But solar and wind power would need to be curtailed to make room in the grid for nuclear energy. This means polluting coal and gas power stations would remain active for longer, releasing an extra 1 billion to 2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide.

So is there another option? Yes: pumped hydro storage plants. This technology is quicker and cheaper to develop than nuclear power, and can store solar and wind rather than curtail it. It’s better suited to Australia’s electricity grid and would ultimately lead to fewer emissions. Drawing on our recent global analysis, we found the technology could be deployed near all but one of the seven sites the Coalition has earmarked for nuclear power.

The Coalition is likely to spend anywhere from A$116 billion to $600 billion of taxpayers’ money to deliver up to 14 gigawatts of nuclear energy. Experts say the plan will not lower power prices and will take too long to build. Our findings suggest cheap storage of solar and wind, in the form of pumped hydro, is a better way forward.

This way, we can continue to build renewable energy capacity while stabilising the grid. More than 45GW of solar and wind is already up and running, with a further 23GW being supported by the Capacity Investment Scheme until 2027. Only a handful of the pumped hydro sites we found would be needed to decarbonise the energy system, reaching the 1,046 gigawatt-hours of storage CSIRO estimates Australia needs.

Building pumped hydro storage systems near old coal-fired power generators has some advantages, such as access to transmission lines – although more will be needed as electricity demand increases. But plenty of other suitable sites exist, too.

Filling the gaps

Pumped hydro is a cheap, mature technology that currently provides more than 90% of the world’s electrical energy storage.

It involves pumping water uphill from one reservoir to another at a higher elevation for storage. Then, when power is needed, water is released to flow downhill through turbines, generating electricity on its way to the lower reservoir.

Together with battery storage, pumped hydro solves the very real problem of keeping the grid stable and reliable when it is dominated by solar and wind power.

By 2030, 82% of Australia’s electricity supply is expected to come from renewables, up from about 40% today.

But solar panels only work during the day and don’t produce as much power when it’s cloudy. And wind turbines don’t generate power when it’s calm. That’s where storage systems come in. They can charge up when electricity is plentiful and then release electricity when it’s needed.

Grid-connected batteries can fill short-term gaps (from seconds to a few hours). Pumped hydro can store electricity overnight, and longer still. These two technologies can be used together to supply electricity through winter, and other periods of calm or cloudy weather.

Finding pumped hydro near the Coalitions’s proposed nuclear sites

Australia has three operating pumped hydro systems: Tumut 3 in the Snowy Mountains, Wivenhoe in Queensland, and Shoalhaven in the Kangaroo Valley of New South Wales.

Two more are under construction, including Snowy 2.0. Even after all the cost blowouts, Snowy 2.0 comes at a modest construction cost of A$34 per kilowatt-hour of energy storage, which is ten times cheaper than the cost CSIRO estimates for large, new batteries.

We previously developed a “global atlas” to identify potential locations for pumped hydro facilities around the world.

More recently, we created a publicly available tool to filter results based on construction cost, system size, distance from transmission lines or roads, and away from environmentally sensitive locations.

In this new analysis, we used the tool to find pumped hydro options near the sites the Coalition has chosen for nuclear power plants.

Mapping 300 potential pumped hydro sites

The proposed nuclear sites are:

• Liddell Power Station, New South Wales
• Mount Piper Power Station, New South Wales
• Loy Yang Power Stations, Victoria
• Tarong Power Station, Queensland
• Callide Power Station, Queensland
• Northern Power Station, South Australia (small modular reactor only)
• Muja Power Station, Western Australia (small modular reactor only).

We used our tool to identify which of these seven sites would instead be suitable for a pumped hydro project, using the following criteria:

• low construction cost (for a pumped hydro project)

• located within 85km of the proposed nuclear sites.

We included various reservoir types in our search:

• new reservoirs on undeveloped land (“greenfield” sites)

• repurposing existing reservoirs (“bluefield” sites)

• repurposing existing mining pits (“brownfield” sites).

Exactly 300 sites matched our search criteria. No options emerged near the proposed nuclear site in Western Australia, but suitable sites lie further north in the mining region of the Pilbara.

One option east of Melbourne, depicted in the image below, has a storage capacity of 500 gigawatt-hours. Compared with Snowy 2.0, this option has a much shorter tunnel, larger energy capacity, and larger height difference between the two reservoirs (increasing the potential energy stored in the water). And unlike Snowy 2.0, it is not located in a national park.

Of course, shortlisted sites would require detailed assessment to confirm the local geology is suitable for pumped hydro, and to evaluate potential environmental and social impacts.

More where that came from

We restricted our search to sites near the Coalition’s proposed nuclear plants. But there are hundreds of potential pumped hydro sites along Australia’s east coast.

Developers can use our free tool to identify the best sites.

So far, the Australian electricity transition has mainly been driven by private investment in solar and wind power. With all this renewable energy entering the grid, there’s money to be made in storage, too.

Large, centralised, baseload electricity generators, such as coal and nuclear plants, are becoming a thing of the past. A smarter energy policy would balance solar and wind with technologies such as pumped hydro, to secure a reliable electricity supply.

Timothy Weber receives funding from the Australian government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics.

Andrew Blakers receives funding from the Australian government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and other organisations.

– ref. Why build nuclear power in place of old coal, when you could have pumped hydropower instead? – https://theconversation.com/why-build-nuclear-power-in-place-of-old-coal-when-you-could-have-pumped-hydropower-instead-252017

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeannie Marie Paterson, Professor of Law (consumer protections and credit law), The University of Melbourne

Late last week, corporate watchdog the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) issued a warning to lenders that provide high-fee small-amount loans – known as payday lenders – that they may be breaching consumer-lending laws.

Trying to provide effective protections to borrowers of these small loans is fiendishly difficult. People in financial hardship turn to payday loans, even though they are expensive. Lenders can charge high fees for such loans but may change products to avoid regulation.

If access to payday loans dries up, borrowers in need are likely to turn to other products. And so the cycle begins again.

The regulator’s report might be a prompt to government to think about other strategies.

What is payday lending and why is it a concern?

Payday lending is the name commonly given to loans of small amounts (under A$2,000) for short periods of time (16 days to one year) that promise quick credit checks and don’t require collateral.

They are called payday loans because the original idea was borrowers would pay them back when they got their next pay cheque. But often that is not how it works, and borrowers struggle to repay.

ASIC said the total value of small and medium loans provided to consumers in 2023–24 was $1.3 billion. An earlier study by Consumer Action Law Centre found 4.7 million individual payday loans were written over three years to July 2019.

Why do borrowers use (expensive) payday loans?

Small, short-term loans like payday loans have been around for a long time – and in part, they respond to a reality that, for many people, their income is not sufficient to give them buffers.

Payday loans can be used by borrowers who don’t have savings or credit cards to pay for one-off unexpected bills – a broken fridge, an emergency medical appointment or even utilities bills. But they can also be used to meet daily living expenses.

There are limited other practical options – for some types of bills, there are hardship schemes, but these are not always well-known. For one-off expenses, there are low and no-interest loan schemes but they can be quite restrictive. Free financial counselling may also help, but knowledge and access can be an issue.

Why were new laws dealing with payday loans introduced?

Payday lenders have typically charged very high fees. In 2013, concerns about the high cost of payday loans led to specific provisions to limit the fees that could be charged.

Nonetheless, regulators and consumer advocates remain concerned these kinds of loans lock borrowers into debt spirals because they keep accumulating and that lenders manage to avoid many of the restrictions.

Further reforms in 2022 introduced a presumption a loan is unsuitable if the borrower has already taken out two payday loans in the preceding 90 days. The reforms also prohibit payday lenders from offering loans where the repayments would exceed a prescribed proportion of a borrower’s income.

What did ASIC say?

ASIC said it found a trend of payday lenders moving borrowers who previously might have borrowed relatively small amounts ($700 to $2,000) to medium-sized loans ($2,000 to $5,000), which are not subject to the same consumer protections.

The regulator said small loan credit contracts fell from 80% of loans in the December quarter of 2022 to less than 60% of loans by the August 2023 quarter.

It said it was concerned by this approach and reminded lenders they were still subject to the reasonable lending regime. This effectively means not lending amounts that would be unsuitable for borrowers.

Why are payday lenders moving consumers to larger loans?

It’s a concern that lenders change products to avoid restrictive rules. But it is not altogether surprising.

One response from increasing restrictions on one form of credit might be that lenders decide to focus on other, less restricted, products like medium-sized loans – this is what ASIC seems to have found.

This is problematic if those larger loans are not meeting consumers’ needs and objectives (for instance, if they only needed a smaller amount), or complying with the loan would cause substantial hardship. It’s important to remind lenders that the responsible lending obligations apply to medium size loans, and for ASIC to take enforcement action where appropriate.

What might be a better approach?

The ASIC report highlights the increasing complexity of the National Consumer Credit Act regime – with the standard obligations complemented by specific and unique rules for a range of credit products. These include small amount credit, standard home loans, credit cards, reverse mortgages, and Buy Now Pay Later.

It’s worth thinking about whether a better strategy might be to go back to a simpler approach, where one set of rules applied to all consumer credit products. Regulatory exceptions and qualifications are minimised.

If access to payday loans becomes more restrictive, borrowers are likely to turn to other products. This means ASIC should also be looking at other products that are used to provide short-term small loans. These are likely to include buy now pay later schemes and pawn broking.

Buy now pay later products are subject to their own regulations, including responsible lending obligations. But
pawn brokers aren’t covered by the Consumer Credit laws and are subject to little regulatory scrutiny. This is also something that should change.

We also need to consider whether there are financial inclusion options not dependent on lenders out to make a profit from borrowers struggling with the cost of living.

Jeannie Marie Paterson receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a project on Treating Consumers Fairly.

Nicola Howell receives funding from funding from the Australian Research Council for a project on Treating Consumers Fairly. She is affiliated with the Consumers’ Federation of Australia, as a member of the CFA Executive.

– ref. ASIC puts payday lenders on notice they may be breaching the law – https://theconversation.com/asic-puts-payday-lenders-on-notice-they-may-be-breaching-the-law-252375

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marc C-Scott, Associate Professor of Screen Media | Deputy Associate Dean of Learning & Teaching, Victoria University

This month marks a decade since Netflix – the world’s most influential and widely subscribed streaming service – launched in Australia.

Since then the media landscape has undergone significant transformation, particularly in terms of how we consume content. According to a 2024 Deloitte report, Australians aged 16–38 spent twice as much time watching subscription streaming services as free-to-air TV (both live and on-demand).

Part of the success of streaming services lies in their ability to provide content that feels handpicked. And this is made possible through the use of sophisticated recommender systems fuelled by vast amounts of user data.

As streaming viewership continues to rise, so too do the risks associated with how these platforms collect and handle user data.

Changing methods of data collection

Subscription streaming platforms aren’t the first to collect user data. They just do it differently.

Broadcasters have always been invested in collecting viewers’ information (via TV ratings) to inform promotional schedules and attract potential advertisers. These data are publicly available.

In Australia, TV data are collected anonymously via the OzTam TV ratings system, based on the viewing habits of more than 12,000 individuals.

Each television in a recruited household is connected to a metering box. Members of the household select a letter that corresponds to them, after which the box records their viewing data, including the program, channel and viewing time. But this system doesn’t include broadcasters’ video-on-demand services, which have been around since the late 2000s (with ABC iView being the first).

In 2016 a new system was launched to measure broadcast video-on-demand data separately from OzTam ratings.

However, it collected data in a rolling seven-day report, in the form of total minutes a particular program had been watched online (rather than the number of individuals watching, as was the measurement for TV). This meant the two data sources couldn’t be combined.

In 2018, OzTAM and Nielsen announced the Virtual Australia (VoZ) database which would integrate both broadcast TV and video-on-demand data. It took six years following the announcement for the VoZ system to become the industry’s official trading currency.

Streamers’ approach

Streaming platforms such as Netflix have a markedly different approach to acquiring data, as they can source it directly from users. These data are therefore much more granular, larger in volume, and far less publicly accessible due to commercial confidence.

In recent years, Netflix has shared some of its viewing data through a half-yearly report titled What We Watched. It offers macro-level details such as total hours watched that year, as well as information about specific content, including how many times a particular show was viewed.

Netflix also supplies information to its shareholders, although much of this focuses on subscriber numbers rather than specific user details.

The best publicly accessible Netflix data we have is presented on its Tudum website, which includes global Top 10 lists that can be filtered by country.

The main data Netflix doesn’t share are related to viewer demographics: who is watching what programs.

Why does it matter?

Ratings and user data offer valuable insights to both broadcasters and streaming services, and can influence decisions regarding what content is produced.

User data would presumably have been a significant factor in Netflix‘s decision to move into live content such as stand-up comedy, the US National Football League (NFL) and an exclusive US$5 billion deal with World Wrestling Entertainment.

Streaming companies also use personal data to provide users with targeted viewing suggestions, with an aim to reduce the time users spend browsing catalogues.

Netflix has an entire research department dedicated to enhancing user experience. According to Justin Basilico, Netflix’s Director of Machine Learning and Recommender Systems, more than 80% of what Netflix users watch is driven by its recommender system.

As noted in its privacy statement, Netflix draws on a range of information to provide recommendations, including:

• the user’s interactions with the service, such as their viewing history and title ratings
• other users with similar tastes and preferences
• information about the titles, such as genre, categories, actors and release year
• the time of day the user is watching
• the language/s the user prefers
• the device/s they are watching on
• how long they watch a particular Netflix title.

If a user isn’t happy with their recommendations, they can try to change them by editing their viewing and ratings history.

Personalised or predetermined?

The rise of streaming hasn’t only transformed how we watch TV, but also how our viewing habits are tracked and how this information informs future decisions.

While traditional broadcasters have long relied on sample anonymised data to measure engagement, streaming platforms operate in a landscape in which detailed user data can be used to shape content, recommendations and business decisions.

While personalisation makes streaming more appealing, it also raises important questions about privacy, transparency and control. How much do streaming platforms really know about us? And are they catering to our preferences – or shaping them?

Marc C-Scott does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Streaming, surveillance and the power of suggestion: the hidden cost of 10 years of Netflix – https://theconversation.com/streaming-surveillance-and-the-power-of-suggestion-the-hidden-cost-of-10-years-of-netflix-244921