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

Anthony Albanese didn’t mince words in responding to Donald Trump’s refusal to grant Australia an exemption from the United States’ tariff on aluminium and steel. “This is not a friendly act,” the prime minister declared bluntly.

It’s hard to think when an Australian government has used such strong language about the United States.

The not-unexpected decision is less important for itself – we only export $800 million-plus worth of aluminium and steel annually to the US – than for its wider implications and portends. These are economic and political, but how far reaching they’ll be is near-impossible to predict.

Australia could be hit by future tariffs Trump has in mind. More generally, if the American tariffs trigger an international trade war, that will have serious fallout for us.

An even more basic question is: will the realignment the Trump administration is bringing to the US’s international outlook lead to a weakening in the Australian-American relationship?

There are differing views on how Australia should handle Trump.

One approach suggests assuming (or hoping) the Australia-US relationship is so grounded in common interest, military ties and history that things will return to normal after a few disruptive years.

Another view says we must accept the US is becoming an unreliable partner and that, while its national interest might mean it would come to Australia’s aid if needed, we have less reason than before to assume it would do so. On this view, Australia has to put aside the old “great and powerful friends” mindset and understand it is likely to be much more on its own than it has previously thought.

Crossbencher Jacqui Lambie says, “America is no longer a reliable ally – hopefully that will change, but in the meantime we can’t keep assuming that America has our back, Trump clearly doesn’t have anyone’s back except his own”.

Similarly, there are varying opinions on how an Australian government should approach the Trump administration. Some argue, don’t poke the bear. Others say, stand up to a bully.

Albanese started by attempting an accommodating stance. He said he wouldn’t provide a running commentary on the president’s statements. He emphasised the positives from his February phone call with Trump, in which he argued the case for an Australian exemption and Trump said he would consider it.

The softly-softly line was not surprising when Australia was hoping for a carve out. But having found the special Australia-US relationship doesn’t make us “special”, now Albanese and his government are not pulling their punches, at least in their rhetoric. Albanese said the tariff rebuff was “against the spirit of our two nations’ enduring friendship”. Industry Minister Ed Husic went a lot further: “Let’s call a spade a spade. I think this is a dog act after over a century of friendship.”

Wisely, the government won’t retaliate with reciprocal tariffs, which it rightly says would only be self-defeating, hurting Australian consumers.

The government insists it will fight on for the exemption but success is surely unlikely (with the caveat nothing is certain with Trump).

In the difficult economic times looming, Australia will need where possible to team up with friends. Lowy Institute’s lead economist Roland Rajah points to potential opportunities to work with like-minded countries, including the Europeans, Japan and Canada for common interests. He notes Australia’s collaboration with other nations during Trump’s first term to push for a Trans-Pacific trade agreement after the US pulled out.

The Coalition immediately jumped on the US rebuff to argue it showed Albanese’s weakness, highlighted by the PM being unable to obtain another call with Trump.

“I want to make sure that we’re a government that can deal with our trading partners effectively and clearly the prime minister hasn’t been able to do this,” Peter Dutton said.

Dutton points to the Coalition’s success in getting an exemption under Trump Mark 1. It’s a more convenient than convincing argument. Joe Hockey, who was ambassador, reported how unhappy American officials were with that carve out. Given the universality of this tariff, there is no evidence there was any way of avoiding it.

Trade Minister Don Farrell is likely right in saying the administration probably decided from the start against exemptions.

When pressed on how the Coalition would have dealt with the issue, Dutton said: “We would have looked at a more comprehensive trade deal with the United States, I think in relation to the civil nuclear industry, in relation to rare earths and critical minerals. There is an enormous play for us in that space.”

Dutton is presumably putting this forward as what the Coalition, if elected in May, would pitch to the Americans.

The longer-term response from either side of politics to the Trump administration on key issues is not clear.

How would the Albanese government deal with US pressure to lift defence spending more or faster than the present plan of taking it from about 2% of GDP to around 2.4% by 2033-34?

Former Labor defence minister Kim Beazley told The Australian, “we do have to bear in mind what Trump’s saying and the others are saying. We have to up our spending to 3, 3.5%”.

We don’t know how high the Coalition would push defence spending. It is committed to an increase beyond Labor’s, but is yet to provide detail.

Malcolm Turnbull, in a frank character assessment of Trump this week, sent a megaphone message that Australia must stand up to him.

Turnbull spelled out a shocking truth about Trump. “It appears the more dependent you are on the United States, the closer you are to the United States, the more he feels he can extract value from you […] stand over you, extort you.”

International affairs expert James Curran, professor of modern history at the University of Sydney, was amazed at the strength of Albanese’s “not a friendly act” words. Curran describes it as a “gross overreaction”, given that so many countries will be subject to Trump’s tariffs. He says there are far bigger issues at stake in the relationship.

Curran doesn’t believe the Australian-American relationship will be seriously undermined by the Trump administration – although things will be “rattled and unsettled for a while” – because it is “so thick and deep”. But, he says, “forget the sentiment and talk of mateship, because they don’t count with the president”.

“With Trump, “you have to find a middle path, between poking him in the eye and getting down on your knees.”

Not an easy brief, for whomever forms the next government.

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. View from The Hill: tariff rebuff feeds into debate about how Australia handles Donald Trump – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-tariff-rebuff-feeds-into-debate-about-how-australia-handles-donald-trump-251624

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

The publication by the Newcastle Herald of a political advertisement by Clive Palmer’s Trumpet of Patriots party stating “there are only two genders – male and female” has provoked a backlash that has seen the advertisement removed from the paper’s online edition.

The publisher, Australian Community Media, has apologised for printing it in the first place, and a scheduled appearance of the ad in The Age has been cancelled.

This raises a question about freedom of speech, particularly political speech.

There are three reasons why this advertisement does not deserve the protection of the free-speech principle.

The first is that it is factually wrong. The second is that it attacks people for an attribute of birth, and the third is that it is unjustifiably harmful, being calculated to arouse prejudice for political gain.

It is factually wrong because there are people in the community who are trans or gender-diverse. The Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne has a Gender Service clinic to assist children and adolescents in this situation. It states on its website that being trans or gender-diverse is seen as part of the natural spectrum of human diversity.

The clinic’s website also draws attention to the risk of harm to these often vulnerable young people. It states that they experience considerably higher rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm and attempted suicide compared with their cisgender peers because of their experiences of stigma, discrimination, social exclusion, bullying and harassment.

More generally, the British philosopher A. C. Grayling has developed a scheme for assessing harm arising from prejudice against people on the grounds of certain attributes.

In his scheme, he identifies what he calls attributes of birth: race, nationality, skin colour, gender, sexual orientation and disability among them. This provides valuable guidance about the attributes that deserve the most robust protection.

It is not necessary for the editor of a newspaper to be familiar with any of this in order to see that an advertisement of the kind published in the Newcastle Herald was totally indefensible. All that had to be done was to substitute race or skin colour for gender and ask: would we publish such an advertisement?

On top of that, since 1984 Australia has had a Sex Discrimination Act, the latest iteration of which makes it an offence to discriminate against a person on the grounds of gender identity or intersex status, making it clear that these are protected attributes under the law.

Australian Community Media said it has checks in place for political advertising, “but on this occasion the process failed and the advertisement was not reviewed before publication”.

The obvious question is, why not? Even at face value the advertisement is factually wrong as a matter of general knowledge, which would be as good a starting point as any for making a decision about whether to publish it.

The ad goes on to say: “We must stop confusing children in schools. Give them a safe and normal environment to grow and develop in and let them decide who they are when they become adults.”

This is the purest humbug. It pretends to stand for the protection of all children from “confusion”, while exposing some children to the risk of serious harm.

Nor can the ad be defended as a statement of opinion. It is unambiguously purporting to be a statement of fact.

At The Age, journalists reportedly wrote a formal letter of complaint to management after discovering the same ad was booked for the front page of that paper on Wednesday March 12.

However, The Age and News Corp newspapers have published other Palmer ads that have aroused indignation. On March 7, the front page of the Age carried an ad that read: “We don’t need to be welcomed to our own country.” On March 11 the front page ad said: “Too much immigration destroys infrastructure.”

Race is clearly an undertone in both of these, but they are directed at practices and policies, not at people’s personal attributes. In this way, they are categorically different from the ad about gender.

In no civilised country is the right of free speech absolute, although political speech enjoys a high degree of protection.

The point at which, by convention as well as law, democracies draw the line at free speech is the point where the speech does harm to others.

These limitations are derived from the harm principle developed by that champion of free speech, John Stuart Mill, in On Liberty. It remains a relevant standard even in the coarsened political atmosphere in which we live.

The fact that certain views may arouse indignation or even anger in others is not on its own a ground for suppressing them. Where unjustifiable harm is done, however, the law and ethics step in.

Denis Muller 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. Newspapers cannot justify running Clive Palmer’s Trumpet of Patriots ads as freedom of speech – https://theconversation.com/newspapers-cannot-justify-running-clive-palmers-trumpet-of-patriots-ads-as-freedom-of-speech-252024

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

The 2022 election catapulted a new movement into Australian federal politics, with the election of six “teals”. The teals are part of a broader wave of “community independents” who are challenging the major parties, especially the Liberals and appealing to voters who want politics done differently.

As the 2025 election draws close, the Community Independents Project, which was founded in 2021 to support the grass root independents, will not only seek to retain the gains made but to increase the representation in the lower house.

We are joined on the podcast by the executive director of the Community Independents Project, Tina Jackson, who was a key figure behind Zali Steggall’s successful campaign against Tony Abbott in Warringah. Steggall was a forerunner of the teals.

On what makes a “community candidate” different from other Independents like Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Tasmania) or Dai Le, (Fowler, NSW) Jackson explains,

What distinguishes a community independent is that they’re selected by their communities through a grassroots process. It’s […] ground-up and not top-down. So communities decide they want better representation.

They listen to their communities. For example, they hold kitchen table conversations to find out what matters to them, their values and their issues, and then they search for a candidate that represents those issues and values. They run selection processes, then select and campaign for their chosen candidate. So every community has their own tweaks on this community-before-candidate theme, but at its heart, this bottom-up approach is what defines a community independent.

On the kind of issues these independents might be campaigning on now that the “Morrison” factor is gone, Jackson says each campaign will decide what issues to tackle, and a lot of the issues from the 2022 campaign aren’t going away,

The issues are not always the same. The need for climate action hasn’t gone away nor has the issue of integrity in politics nor equality. […] The community independents are already pursuing action on these in parliament. Concerns around cost of living obviously have grown [and] is going to be a much bigger issue this election.

In regional areas, they will be driven by their particular issues – might be education, might be health, local infrastructure and so on, and all of the community independents will be reflecting those issues and values that they’re told about by their communities. The other thing to say is there might not be the Morrison factor, but there is concern about Trumpian politics coming to Australia and there is a real sense that democracy is fragile and that we need to do everything to protect it. I think that is another layer this time around.

Jackson nominates three candidates she is most hopeful about and how they are challenging the notions of safe seats,

There are a lot of really exciting campaigns, but there are three in particular that I think [are] worth keeping an eye on. So one is Caz Heise in Cowper, and that’s in the mid-north coast of New South Wales around Port Macquarie and Coffs Harbour. The second one is Alex Dyson in Wannon in rural southwest Victoria. And [there is] Nicolette Boele in Bradfield in Sydney’s north.

These three, I think, are three in particular to watch. But if I could also add, no matter how many community independents win, communities have already won by being engaged in the political process, they’re making their seats marginal and there’s now no such thing as a safe seat.

While funding from Climate 200 remains a strong asset for the group, Jackson says it’s the “people power” that helps the most,

Well, it’s important to clarify […] that Climate 200 is a crowdfunding platform, and they have around 35,000 donors, and [Simon Holmes à Court’s] contribution is relatively small. So it’s Climate 200, not Simon, that helps fund campaigns. But Climate 200 is only one source of funding, and [in] reality, the campaigns need to raise a huge amount themselves, and they raise that directly.

There are also other funding sources like the Regional Voices Fund for regional campaigns. Cash is important because there are hard costs like signs and tee-shirts and flyers and so on. But what really drives the movement is the volunteers. It’s their time and their talent, not the cash. The value of the human capital behind the movement, it really is immense. So I’m not trying to underestimate the funding, because funding is, of course, important, but the real driving force behind the movement are the tens of thousands of volunteers. So without this people power, campaigns simply would not get off the ground, let alone succeed.

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: Tina Jackson on the independents to watch this election – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-tina-jackson-on-the-independents-to-watch-this-election-252022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Toohey, Professor of Law, UNSW Sydney

“Unjustified” and “not the way that friends and allies should be treated”. That’s how Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong have described the latest shot in United States President Trump’s trade war.

Effective today, there is a 25% tariff on all imports of steel and aluminium into the US – including on Australian products.

Australia’s direct economic hit will be relatively small – less than A$1 billion of steel and aluminium was exported to the US in 2023, according to data from UN Comtrade.

But the tariffs pose a more fundamental challenge to Australia’s trade strategy and how we manage key alliances in an era of resurgent protectionism.

No longer a hypothetical

Trump’s plan was announced in February, but Australia was hoping to negotiate an exemption, as in the previous Trump administration. They have not been successful.

This development shifts analysis from hypothetical to immediate. Steel and aluminium exports to the US represent just a tiny fraction – 0.2% – of Australia’s total exports, so experts expect the impact will not be widely felt.

Australia’s few ageing aluminium smelters pose no threat to the US’ aluminium producers, contrary to claims from US trade adviser Peter Navarro.

Steel is slightly different. Bluescope Steel will experience the biggest direct hit. It exports around 300,000 tonnes of semi-processed steel annually to the US. It will now be subject to tariffs.

While BlueScope is Australia’s largest single exporter of steel to the US, it also has a plant in Ohio that employs 4,000 workers and will see some initial short-term benefits from the tariffs that will hike up the price of Canadian steel imports.

In the long term, however, tariffs are an “own goal” in the trade game. Data from tariffs in the last Trump presidency have demonstrated their limited impact on generating jobs and negative effects on domestic industries that rely on these inputs.

Ripple effects

The next challenge for Australian steel and aluminium exporters, as well as their upstream and downstream counterparts, is how to navigate the uncertainty in global markets, as global supply chains adjust.

China may increase exports of cheaper steel and aluminium to Australia, putting further pressure on local producers, and potentially sparking further anti-dumping investigations.

The 12,000 Australian companies that export to the US will be asking “what will be the next target?”

More than 40% of Australia’s high-tech engines, 50% of aircraft and space parts and almost 60% of machine tools are sent to the US. These industries are at significant risk.

It’s also a worry for services suppliers, who export $6.2 billion worth of professional and other services each year. Australia’s largest exports to the US are financial services, gold, meat, transportation services and vaccines.

Many more exporters are watching anxiously in case these tariffs spark a global trade war and Australia is caught in the crossfire. The overnight tariff skirmish between Canada and the US shows the dangers of escalation.

Read more:
What’s a trade war?

We’re not going tit-for-tat

The absence of Australian steel and aluminium from the US Trade Representative’s 2024 report on trade barriers highlights the arbitrary nature of this decision. Australian steel and aluminium have never been viewed as a threat to the US until now. They are inconsistent with the agreed tariffs between the two countries.

The Australian government might consider whether to bring a dispute to the World Trade Organisation (WTO), but due to the dismantling of its appeal body (also at the hands of the US), the WTO is currently something of a toothless tiger.

Australia’s commitment to (mostly) free trade means the government will refrain from imposing reciprocal tariffs on the US. This rationale makes sense: even reasonable retaliatory measures would be unlikely to protect Australian interests and instead merely escalate tensions.

While it’s cold comfort to affected Australian businesses, experts agree that Trump’s tariffs will become an “own goal” for the US, with prices certain to rise, causing additional pain for consumers and producers alike. Financial markets are already showing stress.

Damaging to the alliance

The failure to secure an exemption despite Australia’s strategic alliance with the US sends a concerning signal about how the US values its Australian relationship. Public support for the US alliance weakens in the face of apparent bullying and flouting of international rules.

What emerges is a trust deficit that extends beyond government relations to public sentiment. Many Australians may begin questioning whether the “special relationship” with the US delivers tangible benefits during times of economic tension.

Under the latest Trump administration, Australia has suffered a serious decline in trust that the US would act responsibly in the world, according to polls from the Lowy Institute.

In 2024, the same poll showed that an astounding 92% of Australians view political instability in the US as an “important” or “critical” threat to Australia’s vital interests.

Rethinking relations

Trump’s tariffs test Australia’s ability to balance different facets of its relationship with the US – security, cultural and economic interests.

It also raises questions about how Australia can best navigate an increasingly unpredictable global trade environment where traditional alliances provide less economic loyalty than they once did.

These tariffs are more than just a tax on specific materials. They are a timely reminder to Australian businesses of the importance of market diversification. But it also shows that the current US administration has thrown out the rule book. For at least the next four years, it is nothing like business as usual.

Lisa Toohey receives funding from the Australian Government for a research project on Weaponised Trade, funded under the Defence Strategic Research Grants Program.

– ref. With Australian steel and aluminium set to incur US tariffs, global uncertainty will be our next challenge – https://theconversation.com/with-australian-steel-and-aluminium-set-to-incur-us-tariffs-global-uncertainty-will-be-our-next-challenge-252021

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Whiteford, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Over the past two years, there has been some progress in improving the JobSeeker payment. But payment levels remain below the poverty line.

That’s according to Australia’s Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee’s 2025 report, released this week a fortnight ahead of the federal budget on March 25. This committee advises the Federal Government on ways to enhance economic inclusion and reduce disadvantage.

The committee is chaired by former Labor minister Jenny Macklin. It comprises experts in social security and economics, as well as leaders from the community sector, advocacy organisations, unions, business, and philanthropy. I am one of its members.

This year’s report focuses on the adequacy of supports, including JobSeeker payments, Commonwealth Rent Assistance and Remote Area Allowance. It also looks at how systems could be reformed.

The report makes ten recommendations. Of these, the highest priority is for the government to substantially increase the base rates of JobSeeker and related working age payments.

Doing so could deliver big economic and social benefits. Research shows a possible return to society of $1.24 for every dollar invested in increasing the JobSeeker rate.

A wide range of voices

In forming its ten recommendations for 2025, the committee consulted with a wide range of people with lived experience of economic exclusion and the social security system.

This spanned groups across a wide variety of backgrounds and circumstances, including people experiencing homelessness or unemployment, those living with a chronic condition or disability, and women who have experienced domestic violence.

We also commissioned research on some important questions. These included the benefits of increasing income support payments, how much money it costs to support healthy living, how to address family and domestic violence, and other impacts and costs of poverty in Australia.

An investment in society

For this year’s report, the committee commissioned research from economics consulting firm Mandala to put a dollar figure on the possible social and economic returns from increasing the JobSeeker payment.

This research was the first of its type produced for Australia, and found society could earn a return of $1.24 for every dollar invested in increasing the JobSeeker rate.

This is because increasing the adequacy of JobSeeker payment would boost our national economic output through improved mental health, higher productivity and longer working lives.

It would also lead to decreased use of the healthcare system, and reduce levels of contact with the criminal justice system.

The cost of living

Further research by the University of New South Wales assessed levels of income support payments against “budget standards”.

These budget standards reflect the amount of money a family needs to purchase the goods and services required to enjoy an acceptable and healthy standard of living.

Researchers found single private renters in capital cities would need an increase of nearly 45% in total payments to cover their costs.

Single public renters in Fitzroy Crossing, a very remote town in Western Australia, would need an increase in support of nearly 67% to cover the extra costs of food and transport.

Other impacts of poverty

Other research examined the impact and costs of poverty to Australia. Some disturbing facts were uncovered.

Department of Social Services data show that despite two increases in Commonwealth Rent Assistance (CRA) since 2023, more than 200,000 of the 1.35 million recipients of CRA in December 2024 were paying more than half their income in rent.

People receiving JobSeeker are 14 times more likely to lack a substantial meal at least once a day.

And analysis by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare shows that people receiving JobSeeker are significantly more likely to die by suicide than the general Australian population.

International comparison

Despite recent increases, Australia remains near the bottom of OECD advanced economic nations when it comes to the adequacy of out-of-work payments for the short-term unemployed.

We rank better for the long-term unemployed. But as a percentage of median household disposable income (adjusted for household size), our benefits have fallen by more than any other of 24 high-income OECD countries.

The JobSeeker payment, and related income supports, have mainly been indexed in line with the consumer price index (CPI).

This has caused their relative base rates to fall significantly below existing benchmarks like the Age Pension, creating severe hardship for our neediest citizens.

Increasing JobSeeker and other payments would improve the lives of Australians in poverty. There would also be big benefits for health and productivity, with flow-on effects for our national economy.

Addressing family and domestic violence

Family and domestic violence is a major health, economic, and welfare issue in Australia.

The committee commissioned research by Social Ventures Australia and Professor Roslyn Russell on the effect government payments have on a victim-survivor’s decision to leave a violent relationship.

The research found 45% of wage earners permanently leave a violent partner the first time they try to leave. But among those receiving income support, this figure falls to 26%.

Many victim-survivors do not access government emergency financial support payments when leaving a violent relationship.

The research shows how elements of the system’s current design and delivery create barriers for victim-survivors to access and maintain an income at a time of crisis.

The committee found making it easier for survivors of family and domestic violence to interact with the social security payments system should be a priority.

Peter Whiteford receives funding from the Australian Research Council, and has received funding from the Department of Social Services. He is a member of the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee. The Hon. Jenny Macklin AC is the Chair of the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee and an Honorary Enterprise Professor of Social and Political Science at the University of Melbourne. She was Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (2007–2013) and Minister for Disability Reform (2011–2013).

– ref. Despite recent increases, JobSeeker still leaves people below the poverty line. Here’s why that affects us all – https://theconversation.com/despite-recent-increases-jobseeker-still-leaves-people-below-the-poverty-line-heres-why-that-affects-us-all-251915

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hunter Bennett, Lecturer in Exercise Science, University of South Australia

Ice baths have become increasingly popular over the past few years. Fitness enthusiasts and casual exercisers around the world are embracing this trend that was once reserved for elite athletes.

Ice baths (also known as “cold water immersion”) are exactly what they sound like. They involve immersing your body in cold water for a set amount of time.

Ice bath temperatures typically range from 10–15°C, though many people opt for water that’s literally icy.

Social media is filled with videos of people plunging into freezing water, claiming this helps with everything from recovery after exercise to mental health.

But do ice baths live up to the hype? Here’s what the evidence says.

Ice baths for recovery after exercise

One of the main reasons people use ice baths is to reduce muscle soreness and improve recovery after exercise. Athletes, including endurance runners, weightlifters and football players, commonly use ice baths.

And there’s plenty of evidence to suggest ice baths can improve recovery after exercise.

Research shows having an ice bath immediately after a bout of intense exercise can reduce muscle soreness in the following hours and days. Ice baths have also been shown to help with recovery in areas including muscle strength, power and flexibility.

Ice baths do this by reducing post-exercise inflammation, muscle swelling, and muscle damage, while improving the clearance of metabolites, such as lactate.

So, if you are someone who needs to perform bouts of intense exercise on back-to-back days, ice baths could be a good option.

But they shouldn’t be used all the time, even if you are an athlete.

As mentioned above, one of the ways ice baths work is by reducing inflammation in the muscle tissue that occurs after exercise. While this helps muscle recovery, this inflammation also acts as a signal that tells the body to adapt and become stronger.

For this reason, using ice baths too often (that is, after most training sessions) may blunt training-related increases in strength, endurance and power, as well as muscle growth.

Notably, ice baths don’t seem to harm aerobic fitness. This means you might be OK to use them as often as you want after aerobic training sessions.

Ice baths and general health

More recently, ice baths have gained traction in the broader fitness and wellness communities. Proponents suggest they can enhance mental health, immune function, and overall wellbeing.

But the research in this space is sparse.

We recently did a systematic review examining all the published research looking at ice baths and health outcomes in the general population (rather than athletes).

We found only 11 studies, some of which used cold showers instead of ice baths. The evidence suggested regular cold water immersion might lead to small reductions in stress, small improvements in sleep quality and self-reported quality of life, and might reduce how often people get sick (such as with a cold or the flu).

However, many of these findings came from single studies, so they should be interpreted with caution until more research is conducted. Also, we didn’t explore how ice baths (and cold showers) may have caused these effects, so we don’t know exactly how they work.

Are there any risks?

While there isn’t any research examining the dangers of ice baths at a population level, there are some possible risks.

In rare instances cold water immersion has been shown to lead to cold shock. This condition is caused by a rapid fall in skin temperature and can lead to gasping, hyperventilation, high blood pressure, and, infrequently, cardiac arrhythmia (irregular heartbeat), which can be fatal if not treated quickly.

There’s also some evidence to suggest staying in an ice bath too long (more than 30 minutes) can increase the risk of hypothermia, which is when body temperature falls dangerously low.

5 tips if you’re thinking of trying an ice bath

If you’re considering trying ice baths, there are a few things worth keeping in mind.

1. Don’t go too cold: Even though the word “ice” is in the name, most research has shown that 10–15°C is cold enough to optimise their effectiveness.

2. Don’t stay in too long: Ice bath durations vary quite broadly in the research, with some lasting as little as three minutes, and others as long as 30.

However, the most common range is 10–20 minutes, which seems to be more than enough to get any health and post-exercise benefits. So if you’re new to ice baths, starting with around 10 minutes total, broken up into 3–5-minute bouts, is a good place to start.

3. Enter slowly: Your stress response peaks in the first 30 seconds of cold water immersion, before fading away. To minimise your chance of getting severe cold shock, wait for this response to disappear before immersing your upper chest and face in the water (or even better, keep your face out of the water at all times).

4. Monitor how you’re feeling: Pay attention to how you’re feeling in the ice bath. While shivering is normal, dizziness or numbness might be a sign you should hop out.

5. Use them strategically: If you’re training to improve muscle strength, power, or size, consider using ice baths sparingly, rather than as a daily routine.

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. Ice baths are popular for exercise recovery and general wellness. But what does the science say? – https://theconversation.com/ice-baths-are-popular-for-exercise-recovery-and-general-wellness-but-what-does-the-science-say-250649

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Austin, Senior Lecturer in Theatre, The University of Melbourne

Set in 2042, new play The Robot Dog revolves around Janelle (Kristie Nguy), of Cantonese heritage, and her partner Harry (Ari Maza Long), a First Nations man.

Janelle’s mother, Wing Lam (Jing-Xuan Chan as a ghostly apparition), has recently passed. Janelle and Harry have temporarily moved back to Wing Lam’s home to finalise her belongings and reckon with her tragic death.

Part and parcel of the home is a robot dog called Dog (depicted by a real robot dog trundling around the stage), a therapy bot designed to be of service to humans, and an artificial intelligence (AI) smart house interface called Hus. Hus knows an alarming amount of information about the residents and is resolute at attempting to keep them on track with their daily tasks and responsibilities.

These two technological beings are in tension throughout. Hus works to maintain timelines and productivity (and offers inane daily motivational quotes); Dog seeks to understand the complexities humans experience in the face of grief and loss, despite his programming.

Part of the outstanding Asia TOPA Festival, which has transformed Melbourne’s cultural landscape into a vibrant and eclectic stage of storytelling and celebration, Melbourne Theatre Company’s education show The Robot Dog is co-written by Hong Kong born interdisciplinary artist Roshelle Yee Pui Fong and Luritja writer and technologist Matthew Ngamurarri Heffernan.

Through the vehicle of a family drama, the play emphasises the value of embodied knowledge and how this can never be replaced by artificial intelligence and technology.

Measuring values

The notion of robotic pets as a strategy for providing company and care for those who live alone or are elderly is not just a future imagining. It is a contemporary reality designed to battle an epidemic of isolation and loneliness.

Dog represents the best of AI with his aim to help the humans in his life. He appears to listen and learn from humans, evolving his emotional repertoire. Hus, on the other hand, represents the idea of AI as an omniscient and omnipresent being, wielding knowledge as power.

Both Hus and Dog are voiced by Chan in a masterclass performance of embodied knowledge, showcasing how nuanced vocal characterisation can create great emotion and context.

In the wake of her mother’s death, Janelle is struggling with complex emotions of anger, grief and disconnection. Her sense of cultural alienation seems compounded by the remnants of her mother’s life around her.

She finds herself frustrated at not being able to read the ingredients on a bag of salty Cantonese pork floss. She is again frustrated when the true value of her mother’s red Cheongsam cannot be calculated by the AI technology: Hus describes it as a mixture of polyester and mould, instead of understanding the garment as an invaluable material representation of her mother and her story.

To counter this feeling of disconnection, Hus encourages Janelle to use the “language augment” microchip that gives you instant fluency in your chosen language.

Eventually, in her frustration, she does. She becomes immediately able to read and speak the Cantonese language. But, of course, this approach has shortcomings. Some forms of knowledge cannot be passed down through the soulless automation of AI. They exist as spiritual, tactile and embodied understandings of equal and significant value.

Likewise, Harry ignores many calls from his mother because she speaks so fast in Language. He feels shame that he cannot keep up.

He experiences racial profiling in his workplace and uses the language augment to support his application for promotion, framing the idea of language acquisition as an economic benefit – rather than a personal reclamation of culture and belonging.

Intersecting cultures

The story moves through complex territory navigating cultural disorientation, systemic racism, dystopian AI futures and the ghosts and ancestors of our pasts.

At the centre of many narrative threads and ideas is a blending of two distinct cultures we don’t often see interwoven in this way. This intersection of Cantonese and First Nations Australians comes sharply and hilariously into focus in a debate about whose culture lays claim to the blue, red and white checkered plastic “Hong Kong/Blakfulla” bags that all Janelle’s mothers earthly belongings have been packed away in.

Reflecting the many intersecting complexities in the play, the bags function as a symbol of cultural tension and of grief, most notably when Harry attempts to “clean up” with little regard for what may be important to Janelle.

The Robot Dog is a frank look at a possible future relationship between humans and AI, suggesting we are unlikely candidates for easy programming and will resist subordination to the pulse and rhythm of technological apparatus.

At the core of the play is a proverb, a key line of text from the show, “to forget one’s ancestors is to be a brook without a source, a tree without roots”.

Perhaps this suggests we may respond and adapt to new technological possibilities in our environment, but we remain anchored to ancient wisdom which exists in places that technology may never be able to reach.

The Robot Dog is at the Melbourne Theatre Company’s Southbank Theatre until March 21, before touring to Ballarat and Mildura.

Sarah Austin works for the University of Melbourne, and the Melbourne Theatre Company is a department of the University.

– ref. New play The Robot Dog reminds us there are some knowledges we hold that AI will never have – https://theconversation.com/new-play-the-robot-dog-reminds-us-there-are-some-knowledges-we-hold-that-ai-will-never-have-251714

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Davies, Adjunct Professor of Disaster Risk and Resilience, University of Canterbury

The 2019 volcanic explosion on Whakaari/White Island, which killed 22 people touring the crater and severely injured 25, is one of New Zealand’s worst disasters.

But an even more devastating catastrophe could happen at one of New Zealand’s most iconic tourism destinations, Piopiotahi/Milford Sound. And it is unclear how this disaster can be prevented.

The outcome of the Whakaari tragedy was that tourism on the island ceased immediately. The risk of tourism-related deaths there was considered too high to be acceptable to New Zealand society.

This is also clear from the inquiry and prosecutions that followed the tragedy and the civil law suits initiated on behalf of those killed or injured.

Our new analysis backs this up. We estimate the risk to life on Whakaari in 2019 was more than a hundred times greater than international risk acceptability criteria used to calculate tolerable risk levels from natural hazards.

Our research also estimates the statistical risk of tourism-related fatalities at Milford Sound to be about 50 times higher than at Whakaari.

This is because an earthquake-generated landslide can fall into the sound and turn it into a violent, long-lasting maelstrom of waves up to 17 metres high. This would devastate the shoreline and any vessels present, including cruise ships.

Our hazard estimate is based on the 16 landslide deposits of more than a million cubic metres that lie on the bed of Milford Sound. All of these must have fallen since the sound became ice-free about 17,000 years ago.

The number of visitors (more than a million per year) and employees exposed to this hazard means that, on average, such an event could kill about 750 people every 1,000 years (based on visitor numbers at 2019 levels). Obviously, this would be catastrophic.

The consequences of this catastrophe would be much more severe and far-reaching than the Whakaari tragedy because of the large number of likely fatalities. Also, any cruise ships, with thousands on board, would be severely affected, perhaps even sunk.

An unpredictable, unpreventable disaster

Currently New Zealand has no specific regulations governing the degree of risk to which tourists may legitimately be exposed. But there is widespread international agreement that the maximum level of societally acceptable risk to life from natural hazards at a site is about one death per 10,000 years.

The occurrence of an earthquake-triggered landslide tsunami at Milford Sound cannot be predicted in advance. Nor can preventive measures ameliorate it.

The only warning would be the earthquake itself, giving people, at most, about seven minutes before the tsunami waves arrived. Because the wave run-up onto the shore would be about 100 metres high, escape would be impossible.

The only way to mitigate this catastrophe is to reduce the number of people exposed to the risk to about 1,000 per year, which in effect means closing Milford Sound to mass tourism.

This would, however, be an extremely contentious measure because of the international status of Milford Sound as part of a UNESCO world heritage area under New Zealand government auspices, and because the catastrophe might not occur for many centuries.

Stopping tourism has been the chosen solution at Whakaari. But the much smaller scale of the tourist operations there, and the correspondingly lower national impact of closure, contrast starkly with the Milford situation.

The alternative strategy at Milford would be for New Zealand society to collectively decide to accept the risk that, at any time in the future, hundreds of tourists could be killed. Beyond that, there would be the corresponding impacts on tourism and New Zealand’s reputation.

However, if we know a landslide-triggered tsunami at Milford Sound has the potential to kill hundreds of people and cause severe damage, the risk to life ought to be grossly unacceptable and only manageable by abandoning mass tourism at the site. These are the choices we face.

Tim Davies received funding from MBIE via GNS Science as part of the Resilience to Nature’s Challenges research programmes from 2014 to 2024.

– ref. Devastating landslides have hit Milford Sound in the past – if it happened today, the impact would dwarf Whakaari/White Island – https://theconversation.com/devastating-landslides-have-hit-milford-sound-in-the-past-if-it-happened-today-the-impact-would-dwarf-whakaari-white-island-251700

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan Hicks, Lecturer Active Communities & Social Impact / PhD Sports Biomechanics, Flinders University

For decades, sport coaching has been built on the idea that there is one correct way to perform a skill.

This has often been referred to as a gold standard technique that every athlete should replicate.

Whether it is basketball players trying to shoot like Steph Curry or Caitlin Clark or a runner attempting to sprint like Noah Lyles, aspiring athletes have generally been encouraged to copy the techniques of their heroes.

But research in biomechanics and motor learning suggests this approach may be misguided.

Is there an ‘optimal’ technique?

Traditional coaching has lent on the work of sports biomechanists to discover the “optimal” technique for skills in various sport disciplines.

These techniques, usually developed based on “averages” of what elite level athletes do, are used by sport coaches as the template against which all other athletes are measured.

That is, if we can replicate the technique of a higher-performing athlete, success will follow.

However, this approach ignores a crucial reality: no two athletes are built the same.

Every athlete has unique physical characteristics. Whether it is hand size, limb length, physical strength, running gait or neuromuscular coordination, they all contribute to how an athlete expresses their individual “movement signature”.

Forcing athletes to copy the technical features of the best athlete in the world may be unachievable.

The quick release, high arc shooting style of Curry has turned him into the leading three-point shooter in NBA history. But it is his unique expression of movement and his individual technique that allows him to knock them down from the logo (near half-way).

Yet, other long-range sharpshooters such as Luka Dončić (LA Lakers) and Kevin Durant (Phoenix Suns) have their own variation of shooting technique, which achieves the same thing: putting the ball in the basket.

If we forced them both to shoot like Curry, this variation would likely detract from their techniques and their shooting performance would almost certainly decline.

Variability is important

It is the “variability” in technique at the elite level of sport where the myth of a single optimal technique begins to unravel.

Many coaches have traditionally viewed deviations from what is considered optimal technique as an error, but researchers suggest movement variability – a concept that explains the natural changes in technique – is a normal part of skilled performance.

So, if elite athletes display a natural variation performing the same skill, even after years of training, why do we encourage our aspiring athletes to eliminate it?

And this variability is not exclusive to basketball.

For example, in sprinting, the top speed technique of Lyles, the Olympic 100m champion, is built on a powerful piston action of the legs and aggressive arm drive, which differs to that of rising Australian sprint star Gout Gout, whose technique relies on a more fluid stride pattern where he almost appears to be bouncing down the track.

The variation in Gout’s technique compared to that of Lyles’ is not a flaw, but a unique solution to the same movement challenge: maximising speed.

Read more:
‘Pressure makes diamonds’: how Australian sprint sensation Gout Gout can get even faster

Interestingly, a recent systematic review suggests movement variability is essential for athletes who need to adapt their existing technique to different environments or physiological conditions such as fatigue.

Consider a recent “buzzer-beater” by Curry, where he wrapped the ball behind his back before swishing a fade-away basket.

This is not a technique which has been engineered by focusing on what’s deemed optimal. It is exploiting the variability which lies within the athlete’s possible solutions.

If there is only one optimal technique in this situation, the highlight reel never emerges.

Lessons for coaches and athletes

So, what is the way forward for sport coaches?

Encourage athletes to explore a variety of techniques and discover what works best for them, based on their unique characteristics.

But it also relies on the coach placing the athlete in situations where they can be creative and expand their movement bandwidth.

This is not to say coaches should let athletes perform a series of random movements and expect good technique to just happen.

There remain key performance indicators for all skills which adhere to biomechanical principles of efficient and effective movement.

But these indicators sit on a continuum – they are not fixed.

Elite sport simply offers insight into the techniques of top performers, not a defining set of movement criteria essential to specific sport skills.

For sport coaches, the goal is not to develop athletes based on a rigid technical model of one size fits all, but rather for athletes to develop a technique that aligns with their own strengths and physical characteristics.

So the next time someone says “just shoot it like Steph or Catilin”, reconsider it and find a way to shoot it how it feels best.

This is where true mastery begins.

Dylan Hicks 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. ‘Shoot it like Steph’: why young athletes shouldn’t try to copy the world’s best – https://theconversation.com/shoot-it-like-steph-why-young-athletes-shouldnt-try-to-copy-the-worlds-best-250619

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Raquel Peel, Research Supervisor, University of Technology Sydney, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, University of Southern Queensland and Senior Lecturer, University of Notre Dame Australia

Some friendships outlast romantic connections and can prove to be more meaningful. Friends help us get through day-to-day challenges and make the tough stuff more bearable. For older people, a close circle of friends is associated with living longer.

But having close friends can also involve conflict and even break-ups. Breaking up with a friend can be as devastating as breaking up with an intimate partner.

For most of us, friendship is the first close relationship we will form outside of the home environment. Learning to communicate and manage conflict with friends starts in childhood, and shapes our personal and social development, as well as our self-esteem.

So how can deal with conflict in adult friendships in a healthy way? And how do you know if it’s time to call quits on the friendship?

How is conflict different in friendships?

Relationships with friends are often seen as needing less work to maintain than other kinds of relationships. They might be less structured than work relationships and less involved than romantic relationships. The dynamic of our friendships is often very different to how we relate to work colleagues and romantic partners.

Some of the characteristics we display with friends might be also very different to how we behave with others. Male friendships, for example, often involve using insults to show a close bond. For some people, it can be difficult to transition to a relationship where you can be yourself, be vulnerable and have difficult conversations.

Having these deeper conversations with friends means conveying concern, empathy and solidarity. Again, this might look different than in other relationships, especially among men, who often opt for a direct approach when communicating with friends. A direct approach is a way of showing concern, but might sound like an interrogation.

It’s also important to be able to regulate our emotions. This means being able to recognise, manage and respond to your own emotions (such as anger or envy), allowing you to de-escalate situations and avoid conflicts getting out of hand. Research has shown people with better emotional regulation tend to be more popular, have more friends and are more successful maintaining long-term friendships.

Are you ready to forgive?

If you’ve been fighting with a friend and want to repair the relationship, you will need to be open to forgiveness. This will help restore connection, security, happiness and meaning in your relationship.

But people’s willingness to forgive differs across gender and personality types, with some being more willing to forgive than others.

Our willingness to forgive will also depend on how we perceive the issue. Active transgressions (such as physical altercations, insults, lies and gossip) are often perceived as more severe and harder to forgive than passive transgressions (such as failing to act by not apologising).

However, if an interaction with a friend has left you feeling mistreated (physically or emotionally), consider what you are willing to stand for or let go. Weighing-up if the value of the friendship warrants the work to maintain it can be very difficult.

In some cases, conflict might be a result of you outgrowing the friendship. Letting the connection go might be better for your mental health.

I want to repair my relationship with my friend. But how?

Before you repair a relationship, you first need to acknowledge your own feelings, your friend’s experience, and how the interaction has affected the relationship.

When bringing up your grievances with a friend, initiate a conversation about the issue with honesty, discuss the issue in context and find a way forward together, using these core tenets:

Connection

Intimacy in friendships means having honest conversations and spending quality time together. Ask your friends real questions and give them honest advice. With a foundation of open communication, you can solve disagreements and differences when they arise.

Communication

Forming authentic friendships involves taking risks and feeling vulnerable.

Express your own feelings and views using “I feel like” statements rather than blaming the other person with “you do this” or “think that” statements. Instead, show empathy and acknowledge your friend’s perspective.

Forgiveness

When you’re ready, asking for and granting forgiveness can be a powerful way to reconnect. You can do this verbally or non-verbally, such as with a hug.

But try not to negotiate conditions (“I will forgive you when…”). This might be a sign you’re not ready yet.

Boundaries

If a friendship is hurting you, affecting your wellbeing and functioning, it may be beyond repair. Feeling physically unsafe or being subject to verbal abuse or manipulation are signs of victimisation, not healthy conflict. Consider creating distance and seeking support elsewhere from people you can trust.

Raquel Peel 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. Does conflict with friends make you squirm? Doing it right might make the relationship stronger – https://theconversation.com/does-conflict-with-friends-make-you-squirm-doing-it-right-might-make-the-relationship-stronger-248884

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

Australia has failed to win an exemption from Donald Trump’s 25% tariffs on aluminium and steel, but the government has vowed to fight on for a carve out.

The White House spokeswoman, Karoline Leavitt, told Australian media in Washington “there will be no exemptions” from the tariffs, which come into effect imminently. Pressed on why, she said “America First steel”.

She said, “If they want to be exempted, they should consider moving steel manufacturing here”.

Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said the government would continue to lobby for an exemption. He pointed out it had taken the Coalition government many months to win a carve out from tariffs under the first Trump administration.

“Tariffs don’t make any sense, it’s an act of kind of economic self harm. We’ll be able to find other markets for our steel and our aluminium and we have been diversifying those markets. But we’re obviously really disappointed with this.

“I would say, though, we’ll keep advocating to the United States on this issue. Last time around it was nine months before we got an exemption in relation to steel and aluminium out of the Trump administration in its first term. So, we’ll keep pressing the case, we’ll keep diversifying our own trade. But look, there’s no hiding this, we’re really disappointed with this decision.”

Opposition deputy leader Sussan Ley said the government “just hasn’t done enough”.

“All of the other leaders of the Quad and AUKUS, Japan, India, the UK, travelled to the US, and they had face-to-face meetings, and they did what they needed to do. They advocated fiercely in their country’s interests, but this prime minister has been nowhere to be seen.”

But given no exemptions are being provided, a personal trip by the Albanese would likely have had little effect. The PM made the case for an exemption to the president in a call some weeks ago. In that conversation Trump indicated he would consider Australia’s case, but the government quickly became pessimistic about the administration giving it a special deal.

BlueScope, while expressing disappointment, saw one silver lining. “BlueScope produces more than 3 million tonnes of steel per annum at its NorthStar BlueScope plant in Delta, Ohio. As the US tariffs come into effect the company expects to see the positive impact from an improvement in steel prices.”

Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull this week predicted Trump would shy away from exemptions this time around. While some observers said Turnbull’s broad attack on Trump, whom he called a bully, could work against Australia’s lobbying, it almost certainly was irrelevant, given all representations were rejected.

The Australian concern is less the direct impact of the tariffs – our exports of steel and aluminium to the US are limited – but the fallout from an international trade war that could be sparked by Trump’s policies.

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. Australia – like everyone else – fails to win exemption from Trump’s tariffs on aluminium and steel – https://theconversation.com/australia-like-everyone-else-fails-to-win-exemption-from-trumps-tariffs-on-aluminium-and-steel-251623

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Tookey, Professor of Construction Management, Auckland University of Technology

New Zealand is struggling to stay ahead of its vital infrastructure needs, and the numbers show it.

The New Zealand Infrastructure Commission recently identified NZ$204 billion of required infrastructural spend, most of which is currently unfunded. At the same time, the nation’s debt-to-GDP ratio hit an all-time high of 44.4% in September 2024.

That’s not as eye-wateringly high as the United States (124%), the UK (101%) or Japan (216.3%) – but it’s bad enough at a time when crucial infrastructure spending is overdue.

The government wants to reduce that debt ratio to within the 20-40% range. Simultaneously, however, the coalition government is committed to income and possibly corporate tax cuts.

Some might label this a form of cognitive dissonance: high investment and growth, with low taxes and spending. But in the meantime, New Zealanders can look forward to possible solutions being presented at this week’s Infrastructure Investment Summit, a central plank in the government’s “going for growth” plan.

The aspiration is to attract crucial infrastructure investment from overseas wealth funds to leverage local economic and employment growth. The mostly Asia-Pacific investors attending manage funds collectively worth trillions – although convincing them to spend will be harder than inviting them to the summit.

Public-private partnerships revisited

Central to the desired outcomes will be public-private partnerships (PPPs). These generally consist of consortia of funders, builders, designers and managers which construct and operate public infrastructure.

For investing in asset construction and operation, funders receive guaranteed revenue from user payments, such as road and bridge tolls or school and hospital fees. The infrastructure can then operate on rolling service contracts, or transfer to public ownership after a fixed term (commonly 25 years).

In theory, infrastructure is built, government borrowing is minimised and public services improve. In reality, PPPs try to offset capital expenditure (borrowings) against operational expenditure, thus lowering the initial debt burden but extending the terms. In effect, a hire-purchase agreement for infrastructure.

These schemes have been popular for infrastructure investment across much of the developed world since the 1990s. But increasing reliance on PPPs has also been linked to disruption in the construction sector and serious questions about value for taxpayer money.

For all that, and given the parlous state of its infrastructure, New Zealand must find ways to fund major improvements to roads, rail, sanitation, drainage and housing.

The country will also need to combat a looming deficit of skilled professionals. As Engineering New Zealand noted in February, the current construction slowdown has led to a serious decline in qualified engineers.

What investors want

With the effects of climate change already being felt in the 21st century, much basic infrastructure still reflects its 19th century origins. Indeed, New Zealand has long suffered from lags between aspiration and investment.

For example, the Public Health Acts of 1848 and 1875 instigated substantial investment in mains water and sewerage infrastructure. Yet “night soil” removal remained commonplace into the 20th century – right up to the 1960s in Auckland.

Even now, Auckland’s rapid growth has seen new housing developments outpace the delivery of basic mains sewerage systems. Given the city’s population is likely to grow by 700,000 in the next 25 years, it’s arguable the country is still going backwards.

However, as political commentator Matthew Hooton rightly noted last week, “investors don’t put money into countries but into projects”. To secure the kind of investment needed, that means projects that can demonstrate minimal risk and high revenues.

The government will open registrations of interest for the first stage of the Northland Expressway at this week’s summit. But other projects in the mix – defence force camps, prisons, court buildings – seem unlikely to meet the minimum size requirements for funders.

PPP investors are in the risk management business. Negotiations can be time-consuming, sometimes lasting years. Risks are costed into concept proposals and preliminary design.

The process, from negotiation to actual construction, can easily outlive a term of government. And there is always the temptation for subsequent governments to renegotiate the scope of a project and its costs.

But once performance requirements are set and signed off, nothing changes without additional and usually high cost increases. The recent fiasco around the Interislander ferry replacements demonstrates the challenges inherent in government procurement.

Projects that outlive governments

The prime minister will no doubt point enthusiastically to his government’s PPP framework having qualified Labour Party support. But investors will still see a three-year electoral cycle and its risks: a 25-year PPP could outlast five or more governments – what impact will this have?

Similarly, New Zealand’s earthquake-prone geology will affect calculations. How does a PPP in an earthquake zone factor in 25-plus years of seismic risk?

There has also been a tendency to focus on the acquisition costs of major infrastructure projects, but not the ongoing maintenance and depreciation costs. And relying on PPP funding has seen public institutions such as Britain’s National Health Service lumbered with massive interest charges from private contractors.

Looking ahead to this week’s summit, New Zealand will need to offer projects with serious scale to attract serious investment: flood defences, major public housing, water and drainage assets, another Auckland harbour crossing, significant road improvement and replacement.

Such proposals are on the table, in theory at least. The real question is whether New Zealanders are comfortable with the dynamics of long-term contracts with substantial service charges that will last decades.

Because today’s politicians will be writing contracts our grandchildren will still be bound by.

John Tookey 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. Hey big spenders: what foreign investors will really want from the infrastructure summit – https://theconversation.com/hey-big-spenders-what-foreign-investors-will-really-want-from-the-infrastructure-summit-251798

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Naomi Smith, Lecturer in Sociology, University of the Sunshine Coast

Last Monday, March 3, the Bureau of Meteorology warned residents of Queensland and New South Wales that Tropical Cyclone Alfred was coming their way. The storm was expected to hit the coast on Thursday or Friday.

By Wednesday, landfall was expected on Thursday night, and residents braced for impact. And then the waiting began.

The storm stalled, dithered and eventually weakened before reaching land early on Saturday morning. But alongside punishing winds, rain and flooding, another kind of damage spread during the long wait: conspiracy theories and misinformation were rife on social media.

They were part of a growing worldwide trend. As climate change ramps up, extreme weather proliferates and trust in authorities declines. Every large natural disaster triggers a wave of conspiracy theorising.

Suspicions of ‘weather modification’

The most persistent theme among the conspiracy theorists is the idea that Cyclone Alfred was “geoengineered” – the result of human efforts to control weather or climate. “Weather modification is real,” one member of a Facebook community group ominously posted, linking to a site listing patents for geoengineering.

The post argued that the position of the cyclone as far south as Brisbane was due to deliberate human intervention.

Of course, tropical cyclones have crossed the coast of southeast Queensland before – and as recently as 2019 one came very close.

However, it is true that human activity may have played an indirect role in Cyclone Alfred’s behaviour. As the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience has noted, human-driven global warming means cyclones are likely to move farther south more often.

The spectre of geoengineering

What is geoengineering exactly? Among climate experts, the word is often used to describe proposed actions to mitigate climate change, such as adding tiny particles to the upper atmosphere to reflect away sunlight or attempting to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

However, in conspiracy theories, geoengineering is more likely to refer to supposed secretive attempts to directly control weather. Like many conspiracy theories, these ideas often contain elements of the real and the fantastical.

A common element of the Cyclone Alfred theory (and others like it) is that the storm was created by the High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP). This project, originally created by the United States military and now at the University of Alaska, studies auroras by transmitting radio waves into a layer of Earth’s atmosphere called the ionosphere.

Though HAARP is real, there is no evidence that radio waves can create a weather event. Weather forms much closer to the ground, in a layer of the atmosphere called the troposphere.

Another theory claimed that Cyclone Alfred was the result of cloud seeding. This is the practice of “seeding” the atmosphere with tiny particles that trigger the formation of rain clouds under the right conditions. Cloud seeding has really been attempted, but the jury is out on how effective it is.

However, triggering some rain is quite different to creating a cyclone or changing the path of one. Experts say these are impossible, mainly due to the amount of energy it would take to produce and then control a cyclone’s path.

Despite the lack of scientific support for these theories, the seemingly endless wait between preparation and impact gave plenty of time for people to spread misinformation and conspiracy theories on social media.

This led some to declare the cyclone a “media beat-up”, or a fever dream based on media lies. It was, they claimed, “just like covid” – the government and media were conspiring to induce people to give up their freedoms.

A growing problem

Misinformation around natural disasters and climate change is a growing problem.

Last October in the US, Hurricane Milton hit Florida and caused catastrophic flooding in Georgia and South Carolina. Online conspiracy theories suggested Milton too was “seeded” or engineered. Social media was flooded with AI-generated clips and out-of-date media.

In January, the Los Angeles wildfires also saw disinformation, conspiracy theories and faked images run wild.

Unmoderated content

The problem of climate-related misinformation is getting worse. Last year, when the United Nations recommended urgent action to combat misinformation and disinformation, climate change was one key area of focus.

As online misinformation and conspiracy theories rise, social media companies such as Meta (owner of Facebook, Instagram and Threads) and X (formerly Twitter) are withdrawing from active content moderation strategies. Instead, they are shifting the burden onto users through community-driven fact checking.

The problem of misinformation is particularly pronounced in community groups on Facebook. These groups may have thousands of members and often only loose moderation.

In times of disaster, people flock to social media. Community groups and pages are important sources of help, information and reassurance.

However, they are increasingly becoming sources of misinformation and conspiracy theories intermingled with genuine information and sound advice.

Why conspiracy theories?

Why are we so compelled by misinformation and conspiracy theories?

Climate change is unpredictable, and is creating more intense weather events than before. In the face of such uncertainty it may be easier to retreat to the clear narratives offered by conspiracy theories.

If a cyclone was created by the government, it has a clear cause. Those affected have a clear place to direct their fear, frustration and anxiety.

What can be done?

There is plenty governments and social media platforms can do to combat the spread of misinformation, if they have the desire to do so. But the everyday user should be cautious.

In times of disaster, seek out trusted sources of information. Remember that nature is unpredictable and advice can and will change. Community groups can be excellent places for practical support, but they are not filled with experts.

Latching on to a conspiracy theory may feel good. It can create a clean-cut world of heroes and villains.

However, spreading these theories online does demonstrable harm. It limits our capacity to prepare for and respond to disaster events. What’s more, it erodes our trust in governments, and sometimes each other.

Naomi Smith 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 conspiracy theories and misinformation spread in the long wait for Cyclone Alfred – https://theconversation.com/why-conspiracy-theories-and-misinformation-spread-in-the-long-wait-for-cyclone-alfred-251899

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

Shortly after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, the new government led by rebel leader Ahmed al-Sharaa pledged to unite Syrians and establish a “civil peace” in the country.

In recent days, this fragile peace has been tested. Late last week, clashes broke out between government security forces and the remnants of pro-Assad militias in the former president’s stronghold of Latakia province on the northwestern coast. More than 1,000 people were killed, mostly civilians.

In a positive sign, a major deal was struck on Monday between the government and another armed faction, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region in northeastern Syria. The SDF has agreed to integrate all of its forces and institutions with the central government in Damascus.

Yet, the threat of more violence in the fractured country remains. This raises serious doubts about whether al-Sharaa’s vision can become a reality.

What caused the recent violence?

The unrest in Latakia was sparked by an ambush attack by pro-Assad gunmen against government security forces (composed primarily of former rebel fighters) last Thursday. This reignited old wounds from Syria’s 13-year civil war, triggering the deadliest violence since the fall of al-Assad in December.

According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, at least 1,068 civilians were killed in the violence – mostly members of the Alawite minority (a sect of Shiite Islam), as well as some Christians.

The United Nations said it had received “extremely disturbing” reports of entire families being killed, including children.

Many members of Assad’s family and his former regime’s high-ranking officials belong to the Alawite minority. Tensions have persisted between these Assad loyalists and the new government, which is dominated by Sunni factions with a history of jihadist and anti-Shiite leanings.

The government said its operations against the pro-Assad forces had ended by Monday. Al-Sharaa also acknowledged that human rights violations had occurred and announced an investigation to identify those responsible.

However, he placed primary blame on the pro-Assad groups for instigating the violence. While defending the crackdown overall, he stressed that security forces should not “exaggerate in their response”.

Following the violence, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio expressed solidarity with Syria’s religious and ethnic minorities, calling on the interim government to hold the perpetrators accountable.

The European Union, which recently eased some restrictions on Syria to support an “inclusive political transition”, also condemned the violence.

Transitional justice is key

In a diverse and deeply divided country like Syria, the decades of dictatorship eroded national identity and fueled sectarian conflict. This is why a comprehensive process of transitional justice is essential.

Such a process would help bridge the divisions between different ethnic and religious communities. This would foster national unity, while respecting the unique identities of individual groups.

Although the new administration has emphasised the importance of social cohesion, its forces are accused of acting counter to this pledge and carrying out extrajudicial killings. Sectarian rhetoric from some pro-government figures has only further inflamed tensions.

Additionally, Alawites have faced increasing marginalisation, including dismissals from public employment, salary cuts and targeted persecutions.

These developments underscore Syria’s urgent need for an independent transitional justice committee. Without a structured approach to hold those accountable for crimes committed under the Assad regime and national reconciliation, the country risks replacing one cycle of repression with another. This will only deepen grievances, not heal them.

A well-designed justice process is crucial to help Syrians move beyond the trauma of the previous regime and build a stable, inclusive future.

Challenges to a united Syria

Amid the ongoing turmoil, the recent agreement signed between the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and al-Sharaa’s government has raised hopes the country may still have a chance to maintain its unity and avoid fragmentation.

However, the details of how the SDF forces will be integrated remain unclear. Will the Kurds finally achieve their long-held demand for semi-autonomy within a federal state? Or will this integration mark the end of their aspirations?

The situation is equally complex for the Alawites and Druze communities in the western and southern regions of Syria, given they have two powerful regional forces backing them.

Israel has made significant inroads in the Druze areas of southern Syria, offering to defend the Druze if necessary. Similarly, Iran continues to support the Alawites, with its leadership predicting an uprising against the new Syrian regime.

These dynamics present serious obstacles to Syria’s unity. In such a polarised environment, a federal system may be the last viable option to preserve the country’s cohesion. However, if the new regime continues to reject this idea, the country risks fragmentation and undoubtedly more violence.

Ali Mamouri 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. After mass killings in Syria, can a fragmented country stay united? – https://theconversation.com/after-mass-killings-in-syria-can-a-fragmented-country-stay-united-251903

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Keiran Hardy, Associate Professor, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University

The recent discovery of a caravan full of explosives in Dural, in Sydney’s northwest, caused significant fear about the possibility of a mass casualty attack.

On Monday, the Australian Federal Police declared it and 14 antisemitic attacks a “con job” by organised criminals who were trying to distract police or use it as a bargaining chip to influence prosecutions.

Following dawn raids, more than 140 charges have been laid, including for arson, possessing prohibited weapons, and destroying property – but not terrorism.

On radio, New South Wales Premier Chris Minns said the acts had “unleashed terror” that was very real for the Jewish community, despite revelations about the true motive.

Minns did not say the explosives and attacks would qualify legally as terrorism, but his comments raise an important question: can “fake” terrorism still be terrorism, especially if it causes significant fear?

Terrorism requires a political, religious or ideological cause

Australia’s legal definition of terrorism is found in the federal Criminal Code. It triggers many offences and it targets both conduct and threats – but these must all be done for the purpose of advancing a “political, religious or ideological cause”.

This motive requirement is the main element that distinguishes terrorism from crimes such as murder, assault and property damage.

It is the major barrier to prosecuting these acts as terrorism. The apparent motive was to benefit organised crime interests. It cannot be terrorism if it was not intended to advance a political, religious or ideological cause.

There is another requirement that terrorism be designed to intimidate part of the community (or a government), but this is additional to the motive requirement, and both need to be proven. If any single element in a prosecution fails, the defendant will be found not guilty.

This does not lessen the significant impacts on the Jewish community. It just explains why terrorism charges have not been laid.

What about hoax terrorism?

In addition to the main terrorism offences, there are offences for hoax terrorist acts. These were created in 2002 as part of Australia’s first legal responses to terrorism.

They were prompted by anthrax attacks and scares in the United States after the September 11 2001 attacks.

These do not rely on the definition of the terrorist act, so the motive requirement explained above need not be proven. However, they apply only in very specific cases, similar to copycat anthrax attacks, in which someone uses the postal service to induce a false belief that an article contains an explosive or dangerous substance (for example, if someone sends a letter containing harmless white powder with a threatening note).

A similar offence applies where someone uses a carriage service to make a hoax threat. This could apply if an organised criminal group phoned in a fake bomb threat.

This sounds quite similar to recent events, but the offence relates to the use of a carriage service to make a fake threat – not the discovery of real explosives.

This might seem a ridiculous conclusion: that the threat was actually not fake enough. If an organised criminal group phoned in a “genuinely fake” threat, they could have been prosecuted under federal terrorism laws, but not if they planted real explosives.

This is a product of trigger-response lawmaking in terrorism. The postal hoax laws were drafted in direct response to events in the US after 9/11, and the legacy remains.

In any case, the hoax offences do not attract any higher penalties than the ones being charged. In NSW, destroying or damaging property with fire attracts the same maximum penalty of ten years’ imprisonment.

Political and community needs

It is important to remember that police and prosecutors will make decisions to pursue specific charges based on the evidence available and the likelihood of a successful conviction for the highest penalty.

This will be based on their previous experience. If they believe they can secure a conviction for arson or property damage, but a case for terrorism or hoax terrorism might fail, they will prefer the charges with the higher chance of success.

As members of the wider community, we may wish to see different or additional charges laid, but we will not know all the evidence behind a decision to allege one crime or another.

Police and prosecutors are not infallible, but we can trust they will aim to secure the highest available penalty.

It is understandable that governments, the opposition and the wider community want clear statements and answers about whether a crime is terrorism or not. Unfortunately, this level of clarity is not always available.

In the midst of a crisis, such as the Sydney Lindt Cafe siege or Wieambilla ambush, it can be difficult to know all the circumstances that gave rise to the event, and an offender’s motivations.

In the aftermath, it can take months – even years, through major inquests and inquiries – for consensus to arise. Even then, views on whether a given act was terrorism may still differ.

The most definitive answer comes when a jury of 12 community members finds an offender guilty of terrorism beyond reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, this sort of clarity is not always possible, because the evidence available means a terrorism charge was not pursued, or an offender was killed in the attack.

It is rarely an urgent question for governments and communities to know whether organised crime activities will be prosecuted under one law or another, but terrorism provokes a special, understandable concern – especially in the current environment. It reflects valid community needs to denounce antisemitism as terrorism and achieve justice for victims.

But justice can be achieved regardless of the specific charges that police and prosecutors pursue. Better that they secure convictions, even for “lesser” crimes in the community’s eyes, than they seek terrorism charges and fail.

Keiran Hardy receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a Discovery Project on conspiracy extremism.

– ref. Is ‘fake’ terrorism still terrorism? Here’s what the Sydney caravan incident tells us – https://theconversation.com/is-fake-terrorism-still-terrorism-heres-what-the-sydney-caravan-incident-tells-us-251908

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roger Jones, Professorial Research Fellow, Victoria University

Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred is the latest in a succession of extreme rainfall events to wreak havoc on coastal communities in New South Wales and Queensland.

Over 500 kilometres of coastline has been affected, with extreme rainfall and flooding reaching inland to Lockyer Valley and the northern rivers of NSW.

This is a massive area, affecting hundreds of thousands of households, with tens of thousands of people stranded. Similar numbers of properties are likely to be damaged.

It’s only been three years since the same general region was affected by major flooding. Many people are still recovering. So, how exactly do we think about and measure the cost of such catastrophes? What lessons have been learnt, and how well are they being practised?

Read more:
More households than ever are under-insured. Here’s what needs to be done

The costs of catastrophes

It’s too early to make a comprehensive estimate of the costs of Alfred, as some impacts are continuing to unfold. But previous natural disasters offer us a framework for thinking about them.

The costs of natural disasters can be accounted for in different ways. Impact costs include social, financial, economic, environmental and cultural values.

These can be broken down further into direct, indirect and intangible costs. Intangible costs are things with value that do not contribute directly to the market economy.

An assessment of the 2022 Queensland floods, produced by Deloitte Access Economics for the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, estimated the total cost of impacts to be A$7.7 billion.

Tangible economic costs were estimated at $3.1 billion, and intangibles at $4.5 billion. Intangible losses included mortalities, injuries and long-term changes in health and welfare caused by the event.

Some costs are hard to measure

Not so long ago, economic estimates were restricted to direct losses on property and infrastructure, and lost income for individuals and businesses, so we’ve come a long way.

Even though estimates are becoming more sophisticated, they generally cover social, financial and economic impacts. Environmental and cultural losses are often less of a focus, unless they are closely linked to income.

If you ask people why they love living in a particular place, they’ll often say its because a location is special to them. That might be because of the relationships they have with neighbours or community activities they take part in.

These things aren’t featured in measures of economic activity, but they are a feature of people’s lives.

This raises the issue of marginal costs. When we only look at the dollar cost of damage, we can lose sight of how disproportionately it can impact the more vulnerable groups in society.

This includes those who rent, those with limited incomes, the elderly, those with limited mobility or long-term medical conditions (mental and physical), recent immigrants and marginalised groups in society, including traditional owners.

Lasting damage from a natural disaster can include things like loss of identity, a place to live, treasured possessions, loss of a loved animal or family breakdown.

Insurance only goes so far

Another way to assess the cost of a catastrophe is through an insurance lens – losses that are recoverable through insurance and those that are not covered.

The Insurance Council of Australia has become much more proactive in recent years, recognising that preparedness and prevention can minimise these losses.

But insuring against major catastrophes relies on reinsurance, policies purchased by insurance companies themselves to cover peak losses.

The federal government has also established its own Cyclone Reinsurance Pool with the aim of pushing down premiums for consumers.

Well-targeted relief can bring benefits. One study examining the response to the 2010–11 Queensland floods found the government’s post-disaster relief payments were effective in aiding economic recovery.

A new reality

The governance arrangements surrounding disasters in Australia – national plans for how to prepare, respond and recover – are rapidly evolving. This has been largely driven by the disasters themselves.

Disasters in Australia have historically been bad, but infrequent. Now they are occurring on an almost annual basis.

Some locations are more exposed than others, including northeast NSW and southeast Queensland. The economic cost of the 2010-11 Queensland floods was estimated to be equivalent to 5.2% of the state’s gross domestic product (GDP) in that year.

Losses will continue to mount as such events become more frequent and severe.

That means we need to look at the full economic picture of the catastrophe life cycle. For climate events, this means looking not only at what we spend on insurance, preparation, prevention and recovery, but also the money invested in fossil fuels and subsidies.

The Climate Council has projected that parts of Australia might become uninsurable by 2030. A recent report by Climate Valuation looks at high-end flood risk down to suburb and address level.

Such projections are almost certainly underestimated because the models that are used do not adequately predict how fast extreme events are changing.

People need relief now, but we cannot continue to finance our own destruction over the longer term.

Roger Jones 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. In the wake of Alfred, how do we think about and measure the cost of catastrophes? – https://theconversation.com/in-the-wake-of-alfred-how-do-we-think-about-and-measure-the-cost-of-catastrophes-251704

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tania King, Associate Professor in Social Epidemiology, The University of Melbourne

A freeze on aid entering the Gaza Strip, imposed by Israel last week, means once again tons of urgent medical supplies and medicines are stuck at the border, with delivery uncertain.

But supplies are only one part of the picture, and their usefulness is limited without trained health-care workers who know how to treat and care for patients.

Health-care workers are the most critical component of any health system. Despite being protected under international law, they have been killed and injured at alarming rates in Gaza since October 7 2023.

There is also growing evidence of inhumane treatment and abuse of health-care workers in Israeli detention. This has serious implications for the health of Palestinians, in both the short and long term.

What is the state of the health-care system?

The health system in the Gaza Strip is in ruins. The Israeli Defence force has carried out at least 670 attacks on health services and facilities since October 7 2023.

The most recent World Health Organization update in February reported only 50% of hospitals were partially functional, and 41% of primary health-care facilities (for example, general practice clinics and pharmacies) were functional.

The latest report by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine indicates only four out of the 22 health centres it runs are operational.

This widespread and systematic destruction of health infrastructure and equipment puts health professionals and their patients in immediate danger. Shortages of medical supplies and lack of reliable electricity and water make it harder for health-care workers to provide care.

What about health-care workers?

More than 1,000 health-care workers – including nurses, surgeons and other clinicians, paramedics, pharmacists and technicians – have been killed in Palestinian territories in the last 17 months, according to estimates by the United Nations and Palestinian monitoring group Healthcare Workers Watch.

In September last year, a UN inquiry found Israeli security forces have deliberately killed, wounded, arrested, detained, mistreated and tortured medical personnel and targeted medical vehicles.

The latest report from Healthcare Workers Watch documents 384 cases of unlawful detention of health-care workers in Palestine since the current war began, 339 of them from Gaza.

Of these, 96 have provided testimonies of inhumane treatment. At least 185 are known to remain in detention and 24 are missing after hospital invasions.

Physicians for Human Rights Israel and The Guardian have also documented testimonies of medical personnel released from Israeli detention. Many say they were detained while carrying out medical duties.

They report being subjected to interrogations without legal representation, medical neglect and starvation, abuse and torture.

One senior consultant surgeon, Dr Issam Abu Ajwa, told journalists from The Guardian and Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism he was arrested while performing surgery and then detained for months without charge.

He alleges prison guards were given instructions to deliberately damage his hands: “They said they wanted to make sure I could never return to work”.

The Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) did not respond to the individual allegations but told The Guardian “suspects of terrorist activities” have been arrested and detained during fighting in the Gaza Strip. In a statement, the IDF said: “Those who are not involved in terrorist activity are released back to the Gaza Strip as soon as possible”.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk has said Israel’s claims hospitals are being used for military purposes are vague, unsubstantiated and “in some cases, they appear to be contradicted by publicly available information”.

What does this mean for people in Gaza?

Before October 7, Gaza’s health system was already unable to meet the needs of its population. The escalation of those needs due to the bombardment and reduced sanitation in a shattered health system is catastrophic.

Losing health-care workers – whether they are killed, injured or incarcerated – further depletes an overburdened system. As a result, ordinary people have reduced access to skilled and qualified personnel. And so do junior medical staff, meaning they miss out on opportunities to learn from the experience of senior staff.

All residents of Gaza, including health-care workers and their families, face serious threats to their health. A lack of adequate sanitation, nutritious food and safe water compounds other issues, such as increased risk of respiratory and diarrhoeal diseases, as well as complications during pregnancy and birth.

The UN estimates 50,000 women are currently pregnant in the Gaza Strip, with about 5,500 due to give birth in the next month. About 1,400 of these will require a caesarean section.

What about the long term?

Israel’s freeze on humanitarian aid, and the threat of resuming aerial bombardments, makes the planning and delivery of health services increasingly difficult.

In a population of 2.1 million there are large unmet needs from pre-existing conditions. The UN estimates 45,000 people in Gaza have heart disease, 650,000 have high blood pressure, more than 2,000 are diagnosed with cancer each year and more than 485,000 have mental illnesses.

Many more diseases will emerge in the aftermath of war. We have already seen a resurgence of polio in Gaza.

Without enough health staff, there is reduced capacity for public health surveillance and control – for example routine screening services and immunisation programs – and this increases the risk of disease outbreaks.

Health workers also play a vital role in training the next generation of health professionals. Disrupting this chain makes it harder to rebuild the health workforce and the health system more generally.

The impacts of war can’t simply be calculated in terms of fatalities, injuries and damaged health-care centres or facilities.

What’s also damaged is a shared commitment to humanitarian principles and the respect for human rights and international law.

Tania King receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, Medical Research Future Fund, veski and Suicide Prevention Australia.

Fiona Stanley receives current National Health and Medical Research Council and Australian Research Council funding as a mentor not Chief Investigator. I am retired University Professor and Institute Director – now only Patron.

Guy Gillor is a Jewish-Israeli-Australian researcher and policy analyst that has advocated for justice and equal rights in his homeland of Palestine/ Israel from a young age, and is currently involved with a number of Jewish-Australian anti-war campaigns. Guy currently works as Manager of Strategy Policy and Research for an Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisation.

Rob Moodie is affiliated with the Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW – national councillor) and Quit Nukes. He has received funding from National Health and Medical Research Council.

Tilman Ruff is affiliated with International Physicians for the Prevention of War (board member), International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Australia (board member, co-representative to International Steering Group), Medical Association for Prevention of War (international councillor), Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons Scientific Network (member), Initiative for Peacebuilding, University of Melbourne (board member).

– ref. Health-care workers should not be a target. In Gaza, their detention and death affect the entire population – https://theconversation.com/health-care-workers-should-not-be-a-target-in-gaza-their-detention-and-death-affect-the-entire-population-251146

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sally Baker, Associate Professor, Migration and Education, Australian National University

The damage inflicted by ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred on Queensland and northern New South Wales has been extensive. Several areas have had infrastructure badly damaged, and many homes have been destroyed.

With natural disasters set to become “situation normal” as the impacts of heating oceans and climate change accelerate, it’s crucial Australia consider contingency workforce planning.

Disasters such as these expose the extent of the severe skills shortages experienced in many parts of Australia, but especially in the regions. Each year, regional Australia loses to cities thousands of professional and trade-related people whose skills cannot be replaced.

Rebuilding, restoring and rehabilitating the affected areas will require the immediate and sustained work of skilled workers – but these are in short supply in many places.

Already it was hard to find people with the necessary skills to undertake infrastructure maintenance. Now people affected by ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred are joining long wait lists for electricians, plumbers, builders and other services.

Where are the workers when you need them?

The situation is stark. There are not enough skilled workers to support Australia’s day-to-day building and maintenance needs, let alone in response to disasters.

The federal government agency Jobs and Skills Australia estimates 67 occupations under the category “Technicians and Trades Workers” are in persistent shortage. This represents a third of the skills shortages in Australia.

These shortages are much more acute in regional, rural and remote parts of Australia. In these places, location is commonly cited as the reason why suitable applicants do not take the job.

This labour is not just a problem for disaster responses. These skills gaps are also pushing up construction costs, frustrating building works needed to relieve the housing pressure Australia-wide.

The situation is so bad states and territories are competing for tradespeople to move. The Western Australia government’s Build a Life in WA campaign, for instance, offers cash incentives to attract building and construction professionals, and skilled tradespeople.

Australia’s skills gaps are so entrenched, education and training schemes – such as apprenticeships – are not going to help quickly enough.

Instead, some see skilled migration as a possible solution. In 2024, peak bodies such as the Business Council of Australia and Master Builders Australia lobbied the Australian federal government for changes to the ways that migration can respond to the skills needs. They argue 90,000 new tradies were needed by the end of 2024.

However, Australia is competing with many other countries for skilled tradespeople. Traditional sources of migrant labour may not provide the number of skilled migrants needed.

An untapped source of skilled workers: refugees

One solution to these problems is exploring the untapped potential of the more than 122 million people who are displaced around the world. Many have the skills and experience that countries like Australia need.

One pilot program, the Skilled Refugee Labour Agreement Pilot, is being trialled by the Australian Department of Home Affairs.

This scheme provides concessions to the usual visa requirements for skilled migration. This helps refugees to overcome the administrative hurdles that exclude them from regular processes (such as not having a passport).

With this flexibility, the program — led by not-for-profit group Talent Beyond Boundaries — will match 500 refugees to employers by mid-2025.

To date, 40% of workers accessing this pathway in Australia have been recruited by employers in regional areas. Roughly 40% are technicians and trades workers.

This kind of solution helps the Australian government expand its response to the ever-increasing numbers of displaced peoples globally.

It also provides opportunities for employers to source skilled workers through the matching facility offered by Talent Beyond Boundaries.

Using their extensive Talent Catalog, Talent Beyond Boundaries can connect employers in professions with key skills gaps, and in areas experiencing severe skills shortages, to a pool of more than 120,000 skilled workers looking for an opportunity to restart their careers and lives in safety.

Recognising the skills in our midst

A second creative solution is to leverage the skills and expertise that already exist in Australia’s migrant and refugee communities.

The Billion Dollar Benefit campaign is spearheaded by not-for-profit group Settlement Services International. It estimates one in four permanent migrants in Australia are working below their skill level. The cost of failing to leverage these existing skills is about A$1.25 billion over five years, it estimates.

Tailoring solutions

We’re currently researching the economic, social and policy dimensions of skilled refugee labour mobility in addressing skills shortages in regional Australia, particularly for small and medium-sized employers.

Working with partner organisations Talent Beyond Boundaries and a think tank called the Regional Australia Institute, researchers at UNSW and ANU have been speaking to employers, community leaders, employment and settlement services in regional areas across the country. We’ve also been speaking with skilled refugee workers who have settled in regional Australia through the pilot.

What we are hearing is that businesses are desperate for workers ready to go. They are frustrated by the costly, lengthy and complicated processes of sourcing talent from overseas. The costs are especially prohibitive for small and medium enterprises.

Highly skilled refugees have told us the Skilled Refugee Labour Agreement Pilot has helped them regain a foothold in their careers, and rebuild their and their children’s lives, while also helping meet regional skills shortages.

Programs matching skilled refugees with employers and regions desperate for skilled workers can be a win-win.

Sally Baker receives funding from the Australian Refugee Council (Linkage: LP220100286) and the Australia Centre for Student Equity and Success to research on issues relating to refugee resettlement and educational and employment access.

Louise Olliff has previously done consultancy work for Settlement Services International and is funded by the ARC. She is a part-time Senior Policy Advisor for the Refugee Council of Australia. Talent Beyond Boundaries is a partner organisation in the ARC Linkage Grant she is funded through.

– ref. Regional Australia needs more workers to rebuild after disasters like Alfred. Skilled refugees could help – https://theconversation.com/regional-australia-needs-more-workers-to-rebuild-after-disasters-like-alfred-skilled-refugees-could-help-251909

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Matthews, Associate Professor and Head of School, School of Accountancy, Economics and Finance, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

Adrian Orr has so far not spoken about the reasons for his recent and unexpected resignation as Reserve Bank governor, but the sudden departure caused understandable speculation.

One suggestion has been that Orr was at odds with the government over his requirement that the Australian-owned New Zealand banks hold high levels of capital compared to other countries.

Whether this was indeed a reason for Orr’s resignation we can’t say. But it does raise important questions about Reserve Bank – and government – policies.

Set by the Reserve Bank, capital requirements specify the amount of equity banks need to have to cover future losses. Since 2022, banks have been required to hold enough equity to be able to survive a 1-in-200-year event.

But holding onto this much capital is expensive for banks. The higher requirements have led to higher interest rates – making it more expensive for people and businesses to borrow.

The government has long criticised the current capital requirements. Last August, Finance Minister Nicola Willis said she was open to making the Reserve Bank ease its regulation of banks – if a strong enough case could be made that it would improve competition and efficiency without undermining the stability of the financial system.

Making lending attractive again

The 2022 capital requirements meant the “big four” banks (ANZ, Westpac, ASB and BNZ) had to increase equity from 10.5% to 18% of their risk-weighted assets over the next seven years. Smaller banks had to increase their equity to 16%.

The new requirements were met with some resistance. This was due, in part, to concerns about how the move would affect bank customers.

To meet higher capital requirements, banks focused on lending that generated higher returns. They also charged higher interest rates to compensate for the increased levels of capital required for the loans.

Financial analytics company S&P Global described the rules as the toughest bank capital requirements in the world and noted the risk of reduced access to credit, particularly for smaller businesses.

Calls for change

Even before Orr’s resignation, members of the coalition government had called for changes to the capital requirements.

In January, ACT leader David Seymour sought information from the Ministry for Regulation on the issue.

Seymour has said going back to the former levels of bank capital would support economic growth by enabling more lending to business at more affordable interest rates.

In its study on the banking sector, the Commerce Commission also suggested revising bank capital requirements to address competition issues.

The 2022 capital requirements have influenced the type of lending banks do and the interest rates they have applied.

The more capital banks have to hold against a loan, the higher the interest rate required to cover that cost. This means home loans are more expensive under the current rules. If the requirements reduced (and nothing else changes) home loan interest rates would reduce.

At the same time. other types of lending – such as business loans – would become more attractive if capital requirements drop and banks have to have less equity on hand.

With a limited pool of funds available to lend, this may mean banks make fewer home loans and more personal and business loans.

Careful consideration needed

In the end, there is no guarantee a new Reserve Bank governor will reduce the capital requirements. And, under the current rules, the governor is the one who gets to make that call.

While the government has some say in the appointment process, the Reserve Bank board is responsible for recommending the next appointee.

Whoever finally takes the post will have to weigh up the benefits of any rule changes with the potential risks – including what the uncertainty of frequent rule changes do to the wider economy.

They will also need to take into account why Orr pushed for the higher capital requirements to begin with. He worried that in the event of a global financial disaster, the four major Australian-owned banks might abandon New Zealand customers.

Having the higher levels of capital forced the banks to have a greater financial cushion against losses and reduced the risk of bank failure. And ultimately, no government wants a bank to fail, with the personal and economic costs that would entail.

Claire Matthews is a Senior Fellow of Finsia and a Certified Member of INFINZ. She received a grant from the RBNZ to assist with expenses associated with her PhD in 2004.

– ref. Calculated risk: will the next Reserve Bank governor relax capital requirements for banks? – https://theconversation.com/calculated-risk-will-the-next-reserve-bank-governor-relax-capital-requirements-for-banks-251713

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deanna Tepper, Associate Lecturer, Psychology, La Trobe University

Domestic cats have been living alongside humans for an estimated 10,000 years, first as rodent control and then as the couch-warmers we know and love. A far cry from the lone predator lifestyle of their ancestors, today millions of cats worldwide live within human families. More than 30% of households in the United States and Australia own a cat.

We highly value the relationships we share with these furry companions, frequently considering them friends, family members or even “children”.

And this sentiment may be shared, with cats demonstrating affection through seeking out our company, physical contact and engaging in play. Like a secret language between friends, there is even evidence to suggest cats have developed specific vocalisations to communicate with their owners.

Despite this, cats are typically seen as aloof and elusive. But how true is this? Do cats form friendships beyond us?

A complex recipe

Firstly, what does a cat friendship look like? Behaviours that may indicate friendship between two cats include social grooming, such as licking each other’s fur, head rubbing, spending time together and playing together.

In contrast, behaviours such as charging, fighting or chasing may indicate a disagreement is brewing or already underway.

Cats also have very few “conflict defusing” signals in their behavioural repertoire, choosing to run away or avoid each other rather than attempt reconciliation during conflict.

Such disharmony can be stressful for the cats. Many owners end up wondering how to maximise the chances of fostering a positive relationship between their cat and other animals – or if they should get them a “friend” at all.

The recipe for successful feline friendships is a little complex. Research on cat dynamics in unowned, free-ranging cats has found close relationships are more likely to form – and last – if they are:

• both female
• grow up together
• are closely related and
• live in close proximity to one another.

Indoor-only cats can also form strong friendships with other cats in the household. Similar to unowned free-ranging cats, cats who have been introduced to one another at a young age, who are related, and who have lived together for a long-time, are more likely to be close friends.

However, among de-sexed cats, male pairs show closer bonds than male-female pairs. Female pairs are the least likely to be friends.

Their first introduction is also the most predictive factor for positive long-term relationships.

What about outdoor friends?

We know less about the social lives of pet cats that are allowed to roam outside, but the default behaviour for most cats is one of competitiveness and territorialism.

That said, cats will typically try to avoid confrontations with others.

While some research has found interactions between roaming cats are usually calm, they can and do sometimes result in fights – particularly if food is around or they venture into an unfamiliar unowned cats’ territory.

To complicate things further, two cats are more likely to fight within a household if they are allowed outside – likely due to bringing in unfamiliar scents.

We also can’t forget the problematic relationship cats can have with native fauna, sometimes decimating local wildlife populations. In many places, especially in parts of Australia, cats are not allowed outdoors for this reason.

There are also dangers to their own health and safety if allowed to roam, such as misadventure, risks from road traffic or even disgruntled neighbours.

Cats and dogs … in harmony?

While research has mainly explored cats’ friendship with each other, cats can also have positive relationships with other species. For example, while cats and dogs are commonly depicted as mortal enemies, they can live harmoniously, often sleeping and playing together.

However, once again the importance of early exposure and slow introductions in developing this relationship cannot be overstated.

Interestingly, it also appears that indoor cats are friendlier towards their canine companions than cats allowed outdoors. This is possibly because outdoor cats may be exposed to multiple dogs, many of which aren’t happy to see them.

Who’s your cat’s closest friend?

So, should your pet cat have a friend? As you may have guessed by now, the answer to cat friendships is complicated.

If you do plan to introduce your cat to a new companion, here are some suggestions to follow. Firstly, cat introductions should be slow and supervised to increase the chance of a positive first meeting.

Your house should also have plenty of safe spaces, toys and puzzle feeders, scratching posts, and separate food and litter areas in a quiet spot. Providing these resources will help prevent resource guarding (where cats stop other cats from accessing things they need or like) and reduce conflict between the animals.

At the end of the day, while cats can form friendships with other animals, they aren’t crucial to their health and happiness.

Your cat’s closest relationship is the one it has with you. Ensuring they have lots of opportunities to bask in your attention and engage in play is likely enough for even the most social of felines. After all, they have their “aloof and elusive” reputations to uphold.

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. Do cats have ‘friends’, or do they always vie for territory? Animal experts weigh in – https://theconversation.com/do-cats-have-friends-or-do-they-always-vie-for-territory-animal-experts-weigh-in-249013

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Hutchinson, Professor in Theoretical Physics, University of Otago

As part of a major reform of the science sector, the government plans to set up a research organisation focused on emerging technologies, including quantum technologies.

The first quantum revolution – based on understanding how electrons behave in semiconductors to make computer chips possible – brought us computers and smart phones.

We are now in the middle of the second wave of quantum capabilities, which heralds quantum computing, enhanced sensing systems and secure communication technologies.

New Zealand has a strong history in quantum physics, tracing back to Ernest Rutherford’s pioneering investigations of the structure of the atom. More recently, quantum-optics physicist Dan Walls made numerous contributions to understanding the quantum nature of light that are now used in precision measurements, including at the gravitational wave detector LIGO in the US.

Walls and his co-worker Crispin Gardiner established a school of physics in New Zealand that trained many of the world’s leading quantum opticians.

The legacy of this is that New Zealand enjoys an enviable reputation for its contributions to quantum science. But to turn this legacy into a thriving commercial sector, we need sufficient investment to train the next generation of STEM-literate young people and to take the world-leading ideas developed here out to the market.

The weird world of quantum physics

Earlier this month, the United Nations launched the International Year of Quantum Science and Technology to mark a century since the initial formulation of quantum mechanics by Austrian theoretical physicist Erwin Schrödinger and Germany’s Werner Heisenberg, of “cat” and “uncertainty” fame, respectively.

The moniker “quantum” comes from another German physicist, Max Planck. His assertion was that energy could only come in discrete packets, or quanta, such as the energy in light being made up of photons.

The logical consequence of this, according to Schrödinger and Heisenberg, is that waves and particles are just the extreme limits of how we can view the substance of the world. An electron, which we tend to think of as a particle, can have wave-like properties. Light, which we consider a wave, can also behave like a particle.

Understanding the wave-like properties of electrons is what underpins the electronics industry. Understanding the quantum nature of light gives us lasers and optical-fibre communications technologies.

However, the technologies we have developed so far are just the beginning. The second quantum revolution utilises the more weird and wonderful consequences of Planck’s seemingly innocuous “quantisation” of energy.

As long as we don’t look, a quantum particle can be in a superposition of two states at once.

In Schrödinger’s example, a cat in a closed box could be alive and dead at the same time, until we check. Similarly, as an electron spins around its axis, it can have its spin axis pointing up or down. This two-option system can be used to make bits – the zero and one binary building blocks of all computation.

In the quantum world, a new option is allowed: the superposition of zero and one bits. It turns out that, with this new option available, we can construct some algorithms that are faster than anything available through classical logic. This is the promise of quantum computing, the advent of which is on our doorstep.

The risks and rewards of quantum computing

Quantum computation offers both benefits and risks. For example, a quantum algorithm set to surpass classical computing is known as Grover’s search algorithm.

This will speed up the search of vast quantities of information and could optimise logistics, investigations of molecular configurations for drug discovery and myriad other opportunities in computation and design. But it could also compromise privacy and expose people to the attentions of bad actors.

Much of our current information security is based on an encryption system developed in 1977 and known as RSA after the authors of its description (Rivest, Shamir and Adleman). RSA is based on the factorisation of big numbers into their unique prime factors.

RSA2048 is currently unbreakable by modern computers. But a recent survey suggested it could be broken in a day by a quantum computer developed within the next 15 years. This would render current encryption for banking and all information exchange obsolete.

New encryption protocols have been developed but need to be implemented to protect information and money.

Technical challenges of quantum technologies

Quantum properties can also be used to make sensors for electric, magnetic and gravitational fields, leading to applications in medicine and environmental monitoring, but also military and nefarious activities.

The development of quantum technologies faces huge technological challenges and can only proceed effectively through international collaboration.

However, the very nature of the benefits and risks can lead to protectionism and drive the pursuit of national advantage. Because of this, there is a real threat to access to supply chains and new technology.

It is therefore imperative New Zealand is part of international collaborations developing these technologies. We may not build our own quantum computing facility, but we do provide important niche expertise.

For example, we have capability in the development of quantum memories to store quantum information and in quantum transduction (where a quantum state of light can be transferred from one frequency to another) which will be essential for networking quantum computers.

Last month, the OECD published a quantum technologies policy primer. This provides an early foundation for governments to understand the benefits and risks of quantum technologies and outlines the policy opportunities and challenges.

It highlights the need for early, anticipatory governance to ensure equitable benefits accrue from these new technologies. And it identifies a critical risk in the looming lack of appropriately skilled young people.

For New Zealand, this stresses the ever growing need for investment to ensure we can train, attract and retain top talent. New Zealand has a solid foundation in quantum science. It is imperative we capitalise on it for the benefit and security of the nation.

David Hutchinson receives funding through MBIE’s Quantum Technology Aotearoa platform and from the Ministry of Education through the Dodd-Walls Centre of Research Excellence. Until September 2024 he was a departmental science advisor to MBIE, and he is a member of the OECD Global Forum on Technology quantum expert panel.

– ref. Quantum technologies are changing our world – what does NZ need to be part of the next revolution? – https://theconversation.com/quantum-technologies-are-changing-our-world-what-does-nz-need-to-be-part-of-the-next-revolution-249466

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maxine Newlands, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Policy Futures, University of Queensland, Adjunct Principle Research Fellow, Cairns Institute, James Cook University

In 2022, the national vote for independents or minor parties was the highest in almost a century. A third of Australians voted for someone who wasn’t running for Labor or the Coalition.

This has been interpreted as a phenomenon largely playing out in inner-city electorates.

But this election, it will pay to keep an eye on independents running in regional and rural Australia. Growing grassroots support suggests they, along with minor parties, will pose a major challenge to the two-party dominance that’s slowly diminishing.

Building independent momentum

Independents and minor parties have long been a feature of Australian politics, despite Australia’s political setup favouring a two-party system.

But as successive federal elections have shown, traditional two-party voting is changing.

In 2019, one in four voters preferred minor or independent candidates. In 2022, it was one in three.

Pollsters predict on two-candidate preferred, there will be a swing towards independents in regional and rural seats, and swings against them in the inner cities.

Labor movements have been drifting away from their manufacturing heartland, towards cities and metropolitan issues. The Coalition, meanwhile, has held steady in the cities and even grown in regional areas, but declined in rural seats.

In 2013, the Community Independents Project was cofounded by Cathy McGowan and Alana Johnson, targeting inner-city seats.

Then, six weeks before the 2019 federal election, Climate 200 emerged as a second network of independent, community-minded candidates.

By 2022, the results were reflected in both the upper and lower house, with ten independents elected to the House of Representatives – the largest crossbench since 1934 – and ten of the 40 incoming senators representing minor parties or independents.

Now, they have their sights set on regional or provincial and rural seats. They are repeating the 2022 strategy of mostly women candidates issuing a challenge to Liberals in formerly “safe” seats.

‘Kitchen table’ campaigners

Claiming the two major parties have abandoned regional and rural Australia, independents are pitching themselves as the solution.

However, they take care to distinguish their goals from the Teal movement’s focus on city seats.

Candidates include former teachers, nurses, lawyers, regional health leaders, financial education specialists, natural resources managers, community support centre chief executives, solar-energy innovators, and a radio show host.

Health, wellbeing, regional access to medical facilities and the housing crisis are key issues. This is because construction lags behind population growth in areas such as Queensland’s Sunshine Coast and the outer northwestern suburbs of Sydney and outer west of Melbourne.

The strategy is simple: conversations around the kitchen table, community centre meetings, and “listening campaigns” focusing on hyper-local issues.

It’s a movement that pays homage to a more direct model of democracy.

Big money, big aims

A Community Independent candidate is supported by a network of organisations including the Regional Voices Fund, Climate 200, Voices AU, Community Independent Projects plus other media, legal and branding firms.

While the candidates may differ in background and even in policy priorities, the idea is they represent the community, not the interests of a party. A focus on climate change is also key.

The movement is aiming to raise $2 million for rural and regional candidates, through the Regional Voices Fund. The target is getting five regional and rural crossbenchers into the next parliament.

So far, the regional fund is supporting 12 candidates:

• one each in Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia

• four in New South Wales

• and five in country Victoria.

Priority will be given to defending key independent seats, including Indi in southeast Victoria, where Helen Haines holds a 1.4% margin against the Liberal Party’s Ross Lyman.

Of the 35 independent candidates supported by the Community Independent movement, four came close in 2022 and are recontesting.

Caz Heise will try again for the New South Wales seat of Cowper, currently held by the Nationals on a margin of just 2.4%.

Another Nationals-held NSW seat, Calare, will be challenged again by Kate Hook, who attracted 40% of the vote in 2022.

In Victoria, Alex Dyson cut the Liberal margin from 10.2% to 3.5% in Wannon in the previous election, and will be hoping to win this time.

And in Queensland, Suzie Holt will try again for the seat of Groom. Previously a very safe Liberal seat, there was a 13.65% swing against the party in 2022.

A primed electorate

The ground is fertile for success. Take Queensland as an example.

It’s the state with the most regional seats outside the capital. In 2019, Queensland saw a substantial growth in a minor party and independent vote, propelled largely by a regional, populist and conservative backlash against progressive metropolitan policy agendas.

Almost 90% of Queensland voters endorsed a major party in 1996, but just 70% did so in 2019.

Queensland’s politics is shaped by populism, with distrust of outsiders, elites and people from southern states. Such slogans such as “don’t take my coal job and I won’t take your soy latte” are readily deployed, priming a disenfranchised electorate to look for alternatives outside the usual dichotomy.

In WA, changes to the Legislative Council on a state level remove the distinction between city and country members of the upper house. It’s ignited a similar city vs country divide.

So while the regions have much lower populations than cities, due to preferential and proportional voting systems, independents and minor parties can have an outsized influence on politics without being in government.

Though if minority government predictions prove correct, successful candidates may find themselves in government anyway.

Maxine Newlands is affiliated with Australian Political Studies Association, Environmental Politics and Policy group as co-convenor of the group.

– ref. Independents took cities by storm last election. This time, they’ve got regional Australia in their sights – https://theconversation.com/independents-took-cities-by-storm-last-election-this-time-theyve-got-regional-australia-in-their-sights-250894

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Lewin, Melbourne Laureate Professor, University of Melbourne; Director, The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity

On March 11, 2020, as COVID continued to spread rapidly around the globe, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared a pandemic.

More than 7 million people have since died from COVID. The virus, and the public health measures enacted to control it, have had far-reaching effects on societies around the world.

Five years on, the virus continues to circulate. But, thanks to vaccines and immunity acquired from infections, hospitalisations and deaths due to COVID are vastly less frequent than in previous years.

Meanwhile, long COVID continues to have a major impact on people’s lives. Estimates suggest more than 400 million people around the world have had or are currently living with long COVID.

At this point, Australia and the world must take the lessons of COVID – in areas from surveillance, to outbreak response, to vaccines and therapeutics – to be better prepared for the next pandemic.

Some areas we went right – and wrong

Our diagnostic laboratories across Australia were well prepared. Laboratories at the Doherty Institute diagnosed the first case of COVID in Australia and were the first to isolate and share the virus globally in early 2020.

At the same time, a national public health response was quickly put in place. This involved measures such as closing borders, setting up testing centres, and limiting gatherings.

But there are several areas where we could have mobilised more effectively.

During the early stages of the pandemic, there were, at times, challenges with sharing data as well as biological samples and the ingredients for COVID tests between the different states and territories.

For example, there are currently restrictions in place that limit sharing of virus strains between states and territories. But when a new strain emerges, many laboratories need access to it to evaluate their testing capabilities.

One recommendation from an independent 2024 review of the federal government’s COVID response was an Australian Centre for Disease Control. An interim version was launched in early 2024 and the Australian government is investing A$251.7 million in this important initiative.

The goal for the new centre for disease control will be to provide independent technical advice on infectious diseases to government. It will also facilitate rapid integration of data from all states and territories leading to a more unified response.

At the start of a pandemic, we need to understand everything about the new virus and at great speed. This needs systems in place in “peace time”, ready to be mobilised in “war time”.

Back in 2020, we had protocols ready for hospitalised patients and intensive care units to collect specimens and also start new clinical trials. But we were not prepared on many other fronts, for example to collect samples or study how COVID was transmitted in the community or in different key groups.

Every day counts at the start of a pandemic.

Harnessing medical technologies

Relatively recent technological advances in both diagnostics (RAT tests) and vaccine development (the use of messenger RNA, which gives our body genetic instructions to fight COVID) have put us in a strong position to be at the cutting edge in any pandemic response.

Moderna, one of the two companies that pioneered the mRNA vaccines, has established its Asia-Pacific headquarters in Melbourne. CSL, which made the AstraZeneca COVID vaccines in Australia and manufactures several other vaccines, has now incorporated mRNA in its repertoire.

This capability means Australians could have immediate access to mRNA vaccines in the event of another pandemic. We could also potentially manufacture these vaccines for low- and middle-income countries in our region.

But what if we can’t make an effective vaccine to fight a future pandemic? This is a situation we must be prepared for, as we’ve seen with infections such as HIV, where after 40 years of trying and billions of dollars spent, we still don’t have a vaccine.

In such a situation, we will need to rely on antiviral drugs. The way we currently make antiviral drugs takes significantly longer to develop than vaccines. And although we have some broad spectrum antiviral drugs, the most potent antivirals are very specific – meaning one drug treats only one type of virus.

To be better prepared for future pandemics, many groups around the world are working on developing a library of drugs that work against whole families of viruses that could cause the next pandemic.

Another approach is to develop totally new technologies that are fully tested for one virus, but can be easily adapted to a new virus. This approach could allow more rapid deployment, as the details of safety and dosing would already be understood.

This is one of the major goals of the recently launched Cumming Global Centre for Pandemic Therapeutics based at the Doherty Institute.

These ambitious efforts will require global collaboration, sharing resources and engagement of the private sector.

Once we have a vaccine or drug that works, we need agreed systems in place to ensure widespread equitable access. We fell seriously short of this goal with COVID. Some low- and middle-income countries received vaccines months or years later than high income countries. For treatments, antivirals such as Paxlovid were never available in many countries.

This is one goal of an agreement led by the WHO, called the “pandemic accord”, to have member states agree on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. But after years of discussion, there remains no binding agreement.

Preparing for the next pandemic

As COVID was (partly due to advances in technology) the most intensively studied pandemic in human history, we have a unique resource in the record of what happened to inform our response to any future pandemic.

And this is likely a matter of when, not if. New infectious disease outbreaks have continued to emerge over the past five years, including mpox, which was declared a public health emergency of international concern in July 2022 and again in August 2024.

Right now, there’s an outbreak of a new viral disease in the Congo, the origins of which have still not been identified.

We know bats, thought to be the source of the coronavirus behind the COVID pandemic, carry an enormous spectrum of viruses that potentially threaten us. But new pandemics can also arise through mosquitoes and close contact with other animals.

Pandemics are global, not national, problems. We are at a pivotal time where countries including Australia must step up their commitments to this global effort. This will need politicians to rely on the evidence and lessons learned from COVID as well as private and public investment.

Unfortunately, five years down the track, we still have a long way to go to be prepared for the next pandemic.

Sharon Lewin receives funding for her research from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the National Institutes of Health, the American Foundation of AIDS Research, mRNA Victoria, the Medical Research Future Fund and Gilead Sciences. Her institution has received funding from the National Foundation for Australia China Relations. She has received honoraria paid to her personally for participation in advisory boards for Gilead Sciences, Merck. Viiv Healthcare, Abbvie, Esfam and Immunocore. She is the Director of the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity and the Cumming Global Centre for Pandemic Therapeutics. She is the immediate past President of the International AIDS Society. The Doherty Institute has provided modelling and advice to the Australian government pertaining to COVID.

Peter C. Doherty 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. 5 years since COVID was declared a pandemic, we’re still poorly prepared for the next one – https://theconversation.com/5-years-since-covid-was-declared-a-pandemic-were-still-poorly-prepared-for-the-next-one-245362

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Green, Senior Lecturer, UniSA Education Futures, University of South Australia

Bullying is one of the top concerns Australian parents have about their children’s health.

Unfortunately about one in four Australian students between Year 4 and Year 9 report being bullied at least every few weeks.

The federal government has recently set up a six month “rapid review” to look at what schools are doing and how best to address bullying.

But what can you do if your child is being bullied at school?

Read more:
There’s a new ‘rapid review’ into school bullying. Research shows we need to involve the whole school to stop it

What is bullying?

Recognising a child is being bullied and knowing what to do about it can be difficult for parents.

It’s important to understand what is and isn’t bullying.
Bullying is about deliberately using power and status to repeatedly cause distress to, or control another person.

It is not usually a “one off” (although cyberbullying can involve a single post/image, which may be viewed many times or reposted over a long period of time).

It can involve repeated verbal, physical and/or social behaviours (on and offline) intended to cause physical, social and/or psychological harm.

Younger children tend to use more physical forms of bullying. Older children may use more subtle forms of covert and manipulative bullying, which harms social relationships. This can include excluding someone from a group and spreading rumours.

What are the signs a child is being bullied?

Look out for any unexplained changes in your child.

This may include physical injuries, a change in their participation in school or other activities or shifts in friendships. Your child may also be more anxious and nervous, withdrawn or angry.

You know your child best, but directly asking how their friendships are going, may be met with resistance. So if you want to talk about it, a more casual approach may be a better first step. This could include in the car after school/sport or walking together somewhere.

What if your child says they are being bullied?

Children may not want to tell anyone they are being bullied out of fear of things getting worse.

But if and when they do tell, it is often to a parent before friends or the teacher/school.

For parents, hearing your child is being bullied is confronting.
But try to stay calm and resist any urges to trivialise, ridicule, blame, get angry or downplay what is being reported. For example, don’t dismiss it as other kids “just being bitchy/nasty”.

Remember no one chooses to be victimised and it takes courage for a child to report and share what has happened.
Listen for the emotion in their voice to know how to connect with them. Are they scared, nervous and/or angry?

Let your child know it’s not OK for this to happen, and that it is not their fault. This validates your child’s feelings. Let them know you support them and are going to help.

What can you do next?

Talk with your child about what to do next.

They may ask you not to go to the school because they are worried it will make things worse for them. Let them know you are taking responsibility for dealing with this now. This means letting the school know, so you can work together to address it.

Gather evidence demonstrating this may not be an isolated incident: what has happened, when, where and over how long. Keep a record of what your child has shared with you, especially images or posts if the bullying is happening online.

How to work with the school

Research shows it is crucial for parents and schools to work together to address all forms of bullying. This means both parties are taking responsibility and sharing all relevant information to stop the bullying and support the victimised child.

Before you formally notify the school, read the school’s anti-bullying policy, so you know what to expect the school to do.

When you come to report your concerns, clearly and calmly tell your child’s story of being bullied. Provide evidence and a timeline to the teacher in writing.

Ask when you can expect a response about what will be done. Check back in and ask for a progress report.

Schools should outline the steps they will take once it has been reported. This includes how long the investigation will take, when they will get back to you, and what they are putting in place to protect your child.

Keep trying

If you don’t find initial responses timely or transparent, you may choose to escalate the matter to the next level.

This could mean speaking to the school principal or a more senior teacher, or eventually contacting your state’s department of education or school’s government body (for non-government schools).

If you need more information, you and your child can get support from KidsHelpine and Youth Law Australia. The eSafety Commissioner also has specific advice about cyberbullying.

You can also find more tips on the federal government’s Bullying No Way Website and its Student Wellbeing Hub.

Deborah Green has received funding from the Commonwealth government to explore bullying.

Barbara Spears has received funding in the past from the Australian Research Council, the Commonwealth government and South Australian government.

– ref. What can you do if your child is being bullied? – https://theconversation.com/what-can-you-do-if-your-child-is-being-bullied-250799

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jason Nassios, Associate Professor, Centre of Policy Studies, Victoria University

Infrastructure Victoria has released a draft 30-year plan outlining how the state can grow sustainably.

It focuses on key areas like transport, housing, energy, and public services to support a growing population and improve liveability. The plan also suggests ways to make the state’s infrastructure and tax system fairer, more efficient and more sustainable.

The plan’s recommendations are expected to cost between A$60 billion and $75 billion, mostly spent before 2035. This is around 10% of Victoria’s yearly economic output in 2023-24, spread over the next decade.

With Victoria already spending record amounts on infrastructure, and budget deficits forecast until 2025-26, finding the money to fund social housing, transport and other projects is a key challenge. We estimate the Infrastructure Victoria proposals would add between $4 billion and $5 billion to Victorian government expenditure each year.

Yet one of its proposals — replacing stamp duty with an annual land tax — would only cost between $1 million and $5 million to implement, but generate substantial gains for Victorian households.

Why replace stamp duty with land tax?

Stamp duty is one of the biggest barriers to moving house in Victoria and other Australian states. This tax, which people pay when they buy property, adds thousands of dollars to the cost of moving.

In 2022-23, Victorians paid about $12 billion to move house. Of this, $3 billion went to actual moving costs (like real estate services, and removalists) and $9 billion was stamp duty.

That’s an effective tax rate of 300% on the true cost of moving, and in 2023 added about $40,000, or 5.3%, to the cost of purchasing the average Victorian home.

High stamp duty discourages people from relocating, even when their needs change — whether that’s moving for a new job, finding a bigger home for a growing family or downsizing after retirement. This leads to longer commutes, traffic congestion and a less efficient housing market. JI: is it worth adding a link for ‘discourages people’?

Switching from stamp duty to an annual land tax would make moving easier and spread the tax burden more fairly.

Instead of a large, one-time tax when buying a home, all landowners would pay a smaller tax each year. This would help fund schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure more sustainably.

What can we learn from Canberra?

Victoria University’s Centre of Policy Studies studied a similar reform in the Australian Capital Territory, where stamp duty has been gradually phased out since 2012 and replaced with higher general rates (a type of land tax).

Each year, the ACT government sets a target for how much money it needs to raise. Landowners then pay a share of that total, based on the value of their land.

One of the biggest benefits of this approach is that it raises money more efficiently. Unlike other taxes, land taxes don’t discourage investment or economic activity.

The study found removing stamp duty had a big positive impact on the ACT’s economy. Around 80% of the economic boost came from removing stamp duty, while introducing land tax also had benefits. By studying transaction data from the ACT, we showed each 10% reduction stamp duty rates drove a 6% rise in property transactions.

Would it help housing affordability?

One of the main arguments for replacing stamp duty with land tax is its effect on housing prices. Economists widely agree land taxes reduce land values, which makes housing more affordable. JI: worth adding a link ‘widely agree’?

However, the impact of removing stamp duty is less predictable. Our previous research found the effect on house prices depends on how often properties are bought and sold. Apartments, for example, tend to change hands more frequently than houses. Because of this, removing stamp duty tends to push up apartment prices more than house prices.

Even so, the overall effect of the reform is a drop in property prices. The challenge is ensuring this price reduction is evenly spread across different types of housing.

A fairer tax system

To make the system fairer, policymakers could adjust how land tax is applied. One option is to introduce a fixed-rate component, as proposed in New South Wales. Another idea, suggested 15 years ago in the Henry Tax Review, is to base the tax on the per-square-metre value of land.

Another key factor is housing supply. If planning laws allow more high-density housing in inner suburbs, price changes could be better managed.

We also need short-term solutions

Replacing stamp duty with land tax is a long-term reform that would take years to fully implement. The ACT, for example, planned a 20-year transition.

If all state governments implemented this reform, we estimate Australian households would ultimately be better off by about $,1600 per household per year.

In the short term, other policies could help improve housing affordability. These include increasing Commonwealth Rent Assistance and rethinking first-home buyer support. These steps could complement broader tax, infrastructure and housing supply reforms.

The Victorian government is seeking feedback on the draft plan before releasing the final version later this year. This is an opportunity for Victorians to contribute ideas on how to shape the state’s future and ensure its infrastructure and tax system work for everyone.

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. Replacing stamp duty with a land tax could save home buyers big money. Here’s how – https://theconversation.com/replacing-stamp-duty-with-a-land-tax-could-save-home-buyers-big-money-heres-how-251472

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kim M Caudwell, Senior Lecturer in Psychology | Chair, Researchers in Behavioural Addictions, Alcohol and Drugs (BAAD), Charles Darwin University

Do you ever find yourself taking a sneaky few minutes out of your work day to play a game on your phone?

You might try and solve the day’s Wordle – and you wouldn’t be alone. American players rack up a whopping three days a year of game time.

There are hundreds of ways we can distract ourselves from work, and not surprisingly, this can make us feel a bit guilty. Some games have become popular in part due to their low risk of being detected at work.

Managers have long surveilled employees in an effort to reduce distractions, and maximise productivity (as famously satirised in the 1999 cult cinema classic Office Space).

However, meetings, chat and email are now ironically contributing to “digital noise” that undermines productivity and wellbeing.

So, are there any benefits to taking a short break from the grind?

‘Exercising’ your brain

Over the last few decades, there has been a continued interest in whether engaging in brain-stimulating activities – even for short periods – may help “exercise” our brain. There have been claims that activities which engage our attention and memory could prevent cognitive decline in older age.

So, playing something like Wordle might seem a good way to warm our brains up, or help us improve at problem-solving. However, the purported benefits of “brain training” are hotly debated.

Much of this debate relates to what scientists refer to as ecological validity – the extent to which a study’s methods or findings relate to the “real world”. Simple cognitive tasks may have little relevance to the many kinds of cognitive skills we use at work, such as typing an email while in an online meeting.

To improve ecological validity, scientists often strive to create what is termed mundane realism: making the lab feel like the real world, like South Bank University’s “fake pub” in London, used to study drinking culture.

It is difficult to replicate office environments experimentally, and difficult to generalise from one work setting to another.

However, there are some ideas as to how taking breaks that involve games might impact our work and wellbeing in different ways.

Making room for recovery experiences

One way workplace breaks might benefit us is by creating opportunities for recovery experiences: activities that create a sense of detachment or relaxation, and tend to involve a feeling of mastery or control.

Recovery experiences tend to enhance wellbeing and productivity, primarily by reducing exhaustion, or increasing engagement.

Research has shown workplace breaks make people feel more energetic and enthusiastic, and less fatigued. And, video games appear to create recovery experiences.

Facilitating teamwork and enhancing culture

Another way to think about workplace breaks involving games is their potential to create team-building opportunities.

In a way, Wordle sparked a modern workplace watercooler conversation. These have long been thought to improve culture and collaboration.

Wordle workplace discussions have involved colleagues competing for the quickest solves, sharing hints and swapping strategies.

Games which require players to reach a solution may work well in generating conversation, or by simply incorporating fun in an otherwise humdrum work day.

Research has also shown that playing games with colleagues positively impacts team cohesion and performance, even on a subsequent task. This suggests playing games like Wordle with peers or team members might improve communication skills, and give people valuable experience in working together to solve problems.

This is especially relevant to modern workplaces where employees may not be working in the same location, or could be working on different components of an overarching project.

The de-intensification of work

Given the culture of busyness associated with modern work, we need to ensure employees can make the best use of breaks, including those used for games, to realise any productivity or wellbeing gains.

For example, one study showed that when employees were overstretched, those who engaged in breaks involving cognitive activities tended to feel worse at the end of the workday. So it is important to consider whether taking a break might be restorative, or counterproductive.

We also need to be realistic about our propensity to underestimate how long we are spending taking a break. Spending too much time on non-work related tasks might raise suspicions from colleagues and managers alike – and could create challenging workplace scenarios.

Although, we also need to keep in mind that many work breaks are nevertheless interrupted or cut short by work – which is not good for us either.

Approaches such as the Pomodoro Technique can help us manage work and breaks effectively. Organisations adopting a four-day working week are considering how the technique might get the best out of their employees.

So, taking a few minutes to crack the day’s Wordle as a means to engage in some friendly competition – or as a simple solo endeavour – might be exactly the kind of break we need to optimise work productivity, without undermining our health and wellbeing.

Nothing to disclose

Kim M Caudwell 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. Can playing games like Wordle help improve work and workplaces? – https://theconversation.com/can-playing-games-like-wordle-help-improve-work-and-workplaces-247689