Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phil Lester, Professor of Ecology and Entomology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

The discovery of yellow-legged hornet nests in Auckland is frightening.

There have been five confirmed detections to date. Two of these were small nests, more than a kilometer apart, which suggests there are likely more in the region.

Why should we worry? This hornet is a serious concern for all New Zealanders. Yellow-legged hornets are aggressive predators and can become highly abundant. They threaten people’s health, biodiversity and especially honey bees.

The yellow-legged hornet (Vespa velutina) was accidentally introduced into France in 2004. It then spread rapidly, at around 100 kilometres per year, and was established across France by 2017.

The hornet is now well established in Spain, Portugal, Germany and other European countries. It was first detected in the UK in 2016, and its predicted range extends as far north as Scotland. Their success in Europe suggests they could thrive across much of New Zealand.

In some European areas, densities of up to 13 nests per square kilometre have been recorded, with mature nests housing several thousands of workers. Some even reach up to 13,000 individuals.

Risk to people and pollinators

People can die from hornet stings. Yellow-legged hornets will aggressively defend their nests and have been known to attack people even from hundreds of metres away.

In parts of Europe, they are now considered one of the most common causes of analphylaxis, with multiple stings potentially leading to multi-organ failure. There have also been reports of eye injuries, particularly when well-meaning people attempt to destroy nests. Hornets can spray venom into eyes through the visors of beekeeping suits.

Their diet includes a significant proportion of honey bees. One European study found that 40% of their prey were honey bees, 30% flies and the remainder included other wasps and pollinators. In some high-pressure regions of Europe, beekeepers have reported losses of up to 80% of their hives once yellow-legged hornets became established.

More typical hive losses cluster around 30%. European beekeepers have resorted to desperate control measures – some even stand outside their hives with badminton rackets, swatting the hornets as they hover near the hive entrance.

When preying on honey bees, hornets hover outside hive entrances, waiting for tired bees to return from their foraging trips. The hornet snatches the bee mid-flight, kills it, and carries its body back to its nest as food. If bees sense the hornets, they may stop foraging altogether, staying inside the hive – a behaviour known as “foraging paralysis”.

The yellow-legged hornet poses a serious threat to both native and introduced pollinators, and to pollination itself.

Beekeepers in the UK are intensely worried, with reports of record numbers of nests this year, with infestations as far north as Yorkshire. One nest can consume around 11 kilograms of insects in a single season.

Quick action is key to eradication

New Zealand is uniquely vulnerable to wasp and hornet invasions. Unlike the UK and Europe, our biodiversity did not evolve alongside social hornets or wasps. Our native insects have no co-evolved or natural defences.

Add to that our warm, temperate climate, and it’s no surprise we already have some of the world’s highest wasp nest densities and hold the world record for the largest individual wasp nest, at 3.7 metres long. Hornets would likely become widespread and highly damaging if they established here.

If there is any chance of eradication, we must pursue it now.

Invasive hornets and social wasps are hard to eradicate, but it has been done before. In the United States, a programme to eliminate the giant Asian hornet (Vespa mandarinia) appears to have succeeded.

Closer to home, German wasps were successfully eradicated from the Chatham Islands. And Spain at least temporarily celebrated the eradication of the yellow-legged hornet from the island of Mallorca – although populations have since been rediscovered.

The key to success in any eradication programme is acting early, while populations are still small and localised.

Citizen science has played a vital role in early detection and eradication efforts for many invasive species, including these hornets. We have to find the hornet nests to destroy them and it is crucial to do so early in the year, before new queens and males are produced in autumn.

Public trapping and reporting of sightings have already proved invaluable overseas. We need people engaged and watching for these hornets now. Traps have been designed specifically for yellow-legged hornets in Europe, and the Ministry of Primary Industries would be wise to implement them here.

But homemade traps made from plastic drink bottles, cut in half with the top inverted, can work, too. The hornets are attracted to a range of foods in spring, including protein such as fish or meat, and even beer.

If any country can catch this hornet early, it’s New Zealand. Our tradition of public vigilance and commitment to protecting our unique biodiversity would be of major benefit now.

You can report any suspected sightings either online at report.mpi.govt.nz or by calling the exotic pest and disease hotline on 0800 809 966.

Phil Lester 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. A deadly European hornet has reached NZ – we can all help stop its spread – https://theconversation.com/a-deadly-european-hornet-has-reached-nz-we-can-all-help-stop-its-spread-268874

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charles Livingstone, Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University

The Melbourne Cup, a 3,200–metre race for horses more than three years old, has long been called “the race that stops the nation”.

Held each year on the first Tuesday in November at Flemington Racecourse in Melbourne, it attracts racehorses from overseas, politicians, sporting identities, fashionistas and others from among the wealthy and the famous.

It’s also a bonanza for betting companies. As Australia’s biggest one-day race gambling event, the total amount wagered currently exceeds that of any other Australian horse race by far.

But much of the gloss has been rubbed off. Other prestige races are coming up on its heels, and punters are increasingly drawn to betting on other activities – such as AFL and NRL.

And there’s also been a long-term decline in interest in animal racing in general, amid growing concerns about animal cruelty.

So, is the Melbourne Cup still stopping the nation in the way it used to? Here’s what the numbers reveal.

Shrinking crowds

In 2003, in-person attendance at the Cup was nearly 123,000, the biggest crowd since the turn of the millennium. By 2024, that had declined to 91,000.

The largest crowd in the intervening years was in 2010, when over 110,000 attended.

The Victoria Racing Club argues active attempts were made to reduce crowd sizes after 2003, when it became clear that a crowd of over 120,000 people made for an uncomfortable day at the races.

But the trend for attendance has been on a downward trajectory throughout the 21st century. There has been a modest recovery post-pandemic restrictions, but crowds are still well down from the peak.

A TV broadcast watched by fewer people across the nation

What about the Melbourne Cup’s TV audience? Many workplaces around the country still stop work to watch the race on TV – even in the work-from-home era. Victoria has a dedicated public holiday.

The Australian Financial Review reports that before 2015, the TV audience was over 3 million. In 2021, that declined to 1.7 million, and in 2022 to 1.35 million.

A new broadcaster, the Nine network, took that viewership back up to 1.9 million in 2024. But it’s still well off its high.

Bookmakers’ big day – but it is falling

Bookmakers love the Melbourne Cup. It provides them with a major opportunity to sign up new, casual punters who open an account to place a bet on the day.

Once they’re on board, the marketing to these customers is unending.

In 2022, turnover on the Cup – the amount that is bet, as opposed to revenue, which is the amount punters lose (and bookies keep) – was A$226 million.

By 2024, that had declined to $214 million.

According to Racing Victoria, this remains the highest-race turnover in Australia, well above the next placed. But it still represents a decline between 2022 and 2024 of about 13% in real terms (adjusted for inflation).

In recent years, total wagering turnover in Australia – meaning betting on any events, from sports to elections – has also surprisingly declined.

Total real wagering turnover was $22.3 billion in 2023-24, down from $31.2 billion in 2020-21 (again, in real terms).

A recent survey on gambling behaviour in New South Wales reported race wagering as a proportion of the NSW population declined from 24% in 2011 to 9.9% in 2024.

Participation in sports wagering in NSW, however, grew from 6.1% in 2019 to 7.6% in 2024, with stronger engagement among younger men.

Competition from ‘richer’ races

The Melbourne Cup also faces competition from relatively new entries in the prestige (group 1) race stakes.

For example, since 2017, Racing NSW has run The Everest, now a $20 million race, at Royal Randwick racecourse in Sydney, on Caulfield Cup day. It has since moved to second place in wagering turnover, surpassing every other race except the Melbourne Cup.

However, wagering turnover is well behind the Cup. Crowds are much smaller, too, at around 50,000. It needs to grow quite a bit to overshadow the Cup.

Societal shift

So, why is the Melbourne Cup, and horse racing generally, in decline?

Falling wagering overall, and the emergence of new gambling markets, go some way to explain it.

Researchers have also reported a societal shift towards “a strong animal ethics sentiment combined with a more generalised disdain towards the racing industry and its wider societal ramifications”

The “#Nuptothecup” movement is credited with much of this shift. It runs a website listing alternative activities and providing arguments against animal racing.

The parent organisation of this movement, the Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses, runs a “deathwatch” cataloguing the number of racehorses killed in races: 175 in 2024-25. This has become an important issue for many.

Those who support the Melbourne Cup tend to rely on slightly opaque economic arguments: it employs people, generates revenue for Victoria and boosts business income because of tourism.

The Cup is still big business. But it’s not as big as it used to be, either culturally or even in dollar terms.

Charles Livingstone has received funding from the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, the (former) Victorian Gambling Research Panel, and the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority (the funds for which were derived from hypothecation of gambling tax revenue to research purposes), from the Australian and New Zealand School of Government and the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education, and from non-government organisations for research into multiple aspects of poker machine gambling, including regulatory reform, existing harm minimisation practices, and technical characteristics of gambling forms. He has received travel and co-operation grants from the Alberta Problem Gambling Research Institute, the Finnish Institute for Public Health, the Finnish Alcohol Research Foundation, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Committee, the Turkish Red Crescent Society, and the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand. He was a Chief Investigator on an Australian Research Council funded project researching mechanisms of influence on government by the tobacco, alcohol and gambling industries. He has undertaken consultancy research for local governments and non-government organisations in Australia and the UK seeking to restrict or reduce the concentration of poker machines and gambling impacts, and was a member of the Australian government’s Ministerial Expert Advisory Group on Gambling in 2010-11. He is a member of the Lancet Public Health Commission into gambling, and of the World Health Organisation expert group on gambling and gambling harm. He made a submission to and appeared before the HoR Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs inquiry into online gambling and its impacts on those experiencing gambling harm.

– ref. Is the Melbourne Cup losing its appeal? Here’s what the numbers reveal – https://theconversation.com/is-the-melbourne-cup-losing-its-appeal-heres-what-the-numbers-reveal-268653

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gediminas Lipnickas, Lecturer in Marketing, University of South Australia

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly becoming commonplace, despite statistics showing that only approximately 7% to 13% (depending on size) of companies have incorporated AI into their regular business workflows.

Adoption in specific business functions is far higher, with up to 78% of companies reporting use of AI tools in at least one business area. And more than 90% of companies plan to increase AI investment within three years.

This surge in adoption is underpinned by expectations of significant efficiency gains and cost reduction.

Widespread implementation of AI is also accompanied by layoffs. Estimates vary, but it’s clear that within the next decade, millions of jobs will be reshaped or even replaced thanks to AI.

However, despite the lofty promises of AI, many companies aren’t seeing the payoff.
Data on productivity gains from AI use is murky at best, and many companies are facing costly implementation failures.

Organisations are falling for what is known as the doorman fallacy: reducing rich and complex human roles to a single task and replacing people with AI. This overlooks the nuanced interactions and adaptability humans bring to their work.

What is the doorman fallacy?

British advertising executive Rory Sutherland coined the term “doorman fallacy” in his 2019 book Alchemy. Sutherland uses the concept of the humble hotel doorman to illustrate how businesses can misjudge the value a person brings to the role.

To a business consultant, a doorman appears to simply stand by the entrance. They engage in small talk with those coming and going, and occasionally operate the door.

If that’s the entirety of the job, a technological solution can easily replace the doorman, reducing costs. However, this strips away the true complexity of what a doorman provides.

The role is multifaceted, with intangible functions that extend beyond just handling the door. Doormen help guests feel welcome, hail taxis, enhance security, discourage unwelcome behaviour, and offer personalised attention to regulars. Even the mere presence of a doorman elevates the prestige of a hotel or residence, boosting guests’ perception of quality.

When you ignore all these intangible benefits, it’s easy to argue the role can be automated. This is the doorman fallacy – removing a human role because technology can imitate its simplest function, while ignoring the layers of nuance, service and human presence that give the role its true value.

Doormen everywhere

As AI becomes increasingly common, many companies have started evaluating employees the way a consultant might evaluate a doorman. The judgement is based purely on the most visible, basic tasks they perform, such as taking food orders or answering phones.

The focus is on what can be automated and what costs can be reduced. What often gets overlooked is the broader value a person brings through context, judgement, and the countless invisible contributions that support a thriving workplace.

This narrow view leads straight into the doorman fallacy, assuming a role is simple because only the obvious parts are seen.

Earlier this year, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia fired 45 customer service staff and rolled out an AI voice bot, claiming the bot drastically cut call volumes.

After the workers’ union challenged the layoffs, the bank reversed its decision, admitting it “did not adequately consider all relevant business considerations and this error meant the roles were not redundant”.

In the United States, fast-food chain Taco Bell has been rolling out voice AI in its drive-throughs since last year, in hopes of cutting errors and speeding up service.

After a barrage of customer complaints and social media videos documenting various glitches, the company is now rethinking its AI use. Taco Bell’s chief technology officer conceded to the Wall Street Journal it might not make sense to only use AI at drive-through and that human staff might handle things better, especially during busy times.

These are not isolated examples. A recent report from software platform Orgvue states up to 55% of the companies that replaced employees with AI now acknowledge they moved too quickly. Some companies are rehiring the very people they let go.

On top of that, consumers dislike dealing with AI in customer service settings, and most say they’d likely choose a competitor that doesn’t use AI.

A job is more than a list of tasks

To avoid the doorman fallacy, companies must recognise jobs are more than the visible tasks listed on a job description.

Employees frequently contribute in subtle ways that leaders don’t see day-to-day, yet those contributions hold real value for customers and organisations as a whole.

Smart AI adoption requires a full understanding of the human elements inside every role. The concept of “efficiency” should be expanded to valuing customer experience and long-term outcomes as much as cost savings.

Before a company attempts to automate any roles and hand tasks over to AI, it must have a deep understanding of the roles in question. If the task needs human oversight and intervention, it’s not a good candidate for automation.

AI can be implemented in roles that don’t require human oversight, such as data entry, image processing, or even predictive maintenance that monitors the health of equipment – roles that are rule based and clearly measurable, freeing up people to do other things.

The evidence so far is clear: the best way to use AI is to pair it with human judgement. This approach preserves the parts of work where context, personal touch, and trust matter.

By supplementing human roles with AI, standardised and repetitive tasks can be completed efficiently, allowing individuals to focus on contextual work where a human touch is important.

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

– ref. The ‘doorman fallacy’: why careless adoption of AI backfires so easily – https://theconversation.com/the-doorman-fallacy-why-careless-adoption-of-ai-backfires-so-easily-268380

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christofer Clemente, Assistant Professor in Evolutionary Biomechanics, University of the Sunshine Coast

Every year on the first Tuesday of November, many Australians tune in to watch “the race that stops a nation”: the Melbourne Cup.

Run at Flemington across 3,200 metres (two miles), the Melbourne Cup dates back to 1861.

It’s one of the world’s richest races, with A$10 million in total prize money on offer this year.

The fastest winning time at Flemington came in 1990, when Kingston Rule flashed home in 3 minutes 16.3 seconds – an average speed of 58.7 kilometres per hour.

The highly trained thoroughbreds that compete are considered the best of the best in world racing. But are they really top of the tree in the broader animal kingdom?

As an evolutionary biomechanist specialising in the relationship between form, function and ecology of living and extinct animals, I ran the numbers to find out, comparing the fastest land animals in the world across 3,200 metres.

The maths behind the predictions

To compare thoroughbreds with different species in this hypothetical race, we need to estimate a few variables.

The first is the maximum steady speed an animal can maintain. In the scientific literature this is known as “critical speed”. At this pace, animals should be able to run around the track easily.

When sprinting, though, animals can only maintain a maximal effort for a short distance or time. This is called the “distance reserve”.

Using these values we can make some good guesses about how long different animals might take to run the 3,200m race, based on a formula designed by exercise physiologist Mark Burnley.

The formula looks at the time to run the race, the distance of the race, the distance reserve and critical speed.

For a full breakdown of the calculations used in the below predictions, check them out here.

Let the race begin

Let’s start off by looking at us humans. We can use marathon world-record pace as a practical stand-in for critical speed. The men’s world record marathon time was set by Kelvin Kiptum in 2023, who completed the 42km event in 2 hours 35 seconds, an average of 21km per hour.

Based on my formula, the best male runner would finish the Melbourne Cup in about 8 minutes 19 seconds (the fastest woman would take about 9 minutes 6 seconds).

That’s elite by any track standard but nowhere near the Melbourne Cup’s equine averages.

Of course, humans aren’t even the fastest animals on two legs, so what if we swapped sneakers for talons?

The ostrich brings a different kind of stride to the starting gate.

The ostrich is the world’s fastest biped, can run over a broad range of speeds, and is exceptionally economical, thanks to long tendons and elastic energy storage.

In 2016, researchers at the Royal Veterinary College in London tested the running speed of ostriches by putting tiny backpacks containing high-speed GPS units on them, then chasing them around a paddock with a quad bike (yes, really).

They found the top speed of ostriches was about 41km/h but the most preferred speed (when undisturbed) was 15.7km/h.

Conservatively, my prediction would be an ostrich finishing the Melbourne Cup in about 9 minutes 5 seconds.

That’s not far off what humans could do, but still off the pace of horses.

We need something faster.

The cheetah is the ultimate sprinter – but can it go the distance?

Using the same backpack from the ostrich study, the same research group headed to Africa to collect data on cheetahs hunting in the wild.

A remarkable top speed of 93km/h was recorded. Yet the typical mean top speed was around 54km/h and the longest hunting chases rarely exceeded about 500m before the cheetah either caught or abandoned its prey.

Rearranging our model and plugging it into the Melbourne Cup equation gives a predicted 3,200m time of around 9 minutes 30 seconds – worse than humans and ostriches!

We need something with more staying power.

Let’s try out an Aussie favourite.

Kangaroos are endurance oddballs: at some point in the 1970s, researchers managed to train a kangaroo to hop on a treadmill while wearing a metabolic mask.

This now classic lab experiment showed red kangaroos hop with remarkable efficiency for sustained speed. This comes from their extreme elastic energy recycling in the hindlimb tendons, combined with their unique hopping gait.

While this research shows kangaroos’ critical speed is about 23.4km/h, peak speed estimates are harder to find. Various unverified sources exist online that estimate it to be around 60–65km/h.

Using these estimates, I predict the kangaroo would be able to finish the Melbourne Cup in about 6 minutes 35 seconds.

That’s much better than humans and ostriches, but still well behind the horses.

Few animals are as specialised for high-speed sprinting as the greyhound.

Track data show elite racers reaching speeds of about 68km/h over 500m, with longer “stayer” races (700–950m) run at average speeds of about 56km/h.

Laboratory treadmill studies report these dogs can only sustain their highest pace for about a minute. Using stayer-distance race records only, and again using the aforementioned formula, the fastest greyhound would finish the Melbourne Cup in about 4 minutes 7 seconds.

That’s impressively close to the Melbourne Cup record. However, greyhounds rarely run more than 1km – their sprint-adapted muscle fibres lead to rapid heat build-up and fatigue, suggesting even this might be a generous estimate.

So, it appears thoroughbreds are in a class of their own. Maybe we need to find another competitor more horse-like.

In the 2005 cinematic masterpiece “Racing Stripes”, Stripes, an abandoned circus zebra competes in and (spoiler alert) wins the Kentucky Open.

Could a wild zebra beat our Melbourne Cup field?

In a 2018 study, researchers fitted GPS collars on seven zebras (and other species), gathering 1,801 runs from zebras. They found zebras had significantly lower maximal muscle power and acceleration than their lion pursuers.

They estimated a burst speed of about 54km/h and a conservative sustainable pace of about 26.5km/h.

Plugging this into our model gives a 3,200m estimate of about 8 minutes 8 seconds.

It’s respectable for a grazing ungulate but far behind elite stayers.

And the winner is …

So the science has spoken and the results are in. The Melbourne Cup thoroughbreds easily win this race against most other running species.

The greyhound finishes second if it can hang on, and the kangaroo comes home in a respectable third place. We’d then have to wait about two minutes for the next group to come in with the humans, zebras, ostriches and cheetahs all finishing around the same time.

Christofer Clemente 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. Could a cheetah win the Melbourne Cup? – https://theconversation.com/could-a-cheetah-win-the-melbourne-cup-267858

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Moreau, Associate Professor of Psychology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Ever worried that skipping breakfast might leave you foggy at work? Or that intermittent fasting would make you irritable, distracted and less productive?

Snack food ads warn us that “you’re not you when you’re hungry”, reinforcing a common belief that eating is essential to keep our brains sharp.

This message is deeply woven into our culture. We’re told constant fuelling is the secret to staying alert and efficient.

Yet time-restricted eating and intermittent fasting have become hugely popular wellness practices over the past decade. Millions do it for long-term benefits, from weight management to improved metabolic health.

This raises a pressing question: can we reap the health rewards of fasting without sacrificing our mental edge? To find out, we conducted the most comprehensive review to date of how fasting affects cognitive performance.

Why fast in the first place?

Fasting isn’t just a trendy diet hack. It taps into a biological system honed over millennia to help humans cope with scarcity.

When we eat regularly, the brain runs mostly on glucose, stored in the body as glycogen. But after about 12 hours without food, those glycogen stores dwindle.

At that point, the body performs a clever metabolic switch: it begins breaking down fat into ketone bodies (for example, acetoacetate and beta-hydroxybutyrate), which provide an alternative fuel source.

This metabolic flexibility, once crucial for our ancestors’ survival, is now being linked to a host of health benefits.

Some of the most promising effects of fasting come from the way it reshapes processes inside the body. For instance, fasting activates autophagy, a kind of cellular “cleanup crew” that clears away damaged components and recycles them, a process thought to support healthier ageing.

It also improves insulin sensitivity, allowing the body to manage blood sugar more effectively and lowering the risk of conditions such as type 2 diabetes.

Beyond that, the metabolic shifts triggered by fasting appear to offer broader protection, helping reduce the likelihood of developing chronic diseases often associated with overeating.

What the data showed

These physiological benefits have made fasting attractive. But many hesitate to adopt it out of fear their mental performance will plummet without a steady supply of food.

To address this, we conducted a meta-analysis, a “study of studies”, looking at all the available experimental research that compared people’s cognitive performance when they were fasting versus when they were fed.

Our search identified 63 scientific articles, representing 71 independent studies, with a combined sample of 3,484 participants tested on 222 different measures of cognition. The research spanned nearly seven decades, from 1958 to 2025.

After pooling the data, our conclusion was clear: there was no meaningful difference in cognitive performance between fasted and satiated healthy adults.

People performed just as well on cognitive tests measuring attention, memory and executive function whether they had eaten recently or not.

When fasting does matter

Our analysis did reveal three important factors that can change how fasting affects your mind.

First, age is key. Adults showed no measurable decline in mental performance when fasting. But children and adolescents did worse on tests when they skipped meals.

Their developing brains seem more sensitive to fluctuations in energy supply. This reinforces longstanding advice: kids should go to school with a proper breakfast to support learning.

Timing also seems to make a difference. We found longer fasts were associated with a smaller performance gap between fasted and fed states. This might be due to the metabolic switch to ketones, which can restore a steady supply of energy to the brain as glucose runs out.

Performance in fasted individuals tended to be worse when tests were conducted later in the day, suggesting fasting might amplify the natural dips in our circadian rhythms.

The type of test also mattered. When cognitive tasks involved neutral symbols or shapes, fasting participants performed just as well, or sometimes even slightly better.

But when tasks included food-related cues, fasted participants slipped. Hunger doesn’t create universal brain fog, but it does make us more easily distracted when food is on our minds.

What this means for you

For most healthy adults, the findings offer reassurance: you can explore intermittent fasting or other fasting protocols without worrying that your mental sharpness will vanish.

That said, fasting isn’t a one-size-fits-all practice. Caution is warranted with children and teens, whose brains are still developing and who appear to need regular meals to perform at their best.

Similarly, if your job requires peak alertness late in the day, or if you’re frequently exposed to tempting food cues, fasting might feel harder to sustain.

And of course, for certain groups, such as those with medical conditions or special dietary needs, fasting may not be advisable without professional guidance.

Ultimately, fasting is best seen as a personal tool rather than a universal prescription. And its benefits and challenges will look different from person to person.

David Moreau 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 fasting dull your mental edge? We crunched the data for the best advice – https://theconversation.com/does-fasting-dull-your-mental-edge-we-crunched-the-data-for-the-best-advice-264019

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Kent, Senior Lecturer in Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Wollongong

It’s becoming harder for many Australians to afford enough healthy food, especially in regional areas, our new research shows.

We surveyed almost 700 adults across the Illawarra and Shoalhaven regions of New South Wales – online and through local community centres. We asked residents about their access to food, well-being, mental health and social connections.

Food insecurity means not having reliable access to enough affordable, nutritious food. For some, it’s the worry that their money won’t stretch to the end of the week. For others, it means skipping meals or going without so their children can eat.

Food insecurity is often described as being purely financial, but our study highlights it’s also tied to well-being and social connection.

We found more than one in three people had struggled to afford food in the past year. Those who were socially isolated or had a mental illness were twice as likely to experience food insecurity as the wider population.

The link likely goes both ways

In our survey, people who rated their mental health as only fair or poor were twice as likely to be food insecure. The same pattern appeared among people with diagnosed depression or anxiety.

This link likely goes both ways. The stress of wondering where your next meal will come from can take a toll on mental health, causing anxiety and fatigue. And having poor mental health can make it harder to plan meals, manage bills or ask for help.

A recent study from the United Kingdom and France reported similar results, finding mental health declined during months when people experienced food insecurity.

As one local resident aged 25–34 years told us:

I have been unable to purchase fresh fruit or vegetables which has left me heavily fatigued and has worsened my mood and anxiety disorders.

Why connection matters

People in our study who often felt isolated were also more likely to experience food insecurity.

Loneliness can make it harder to reach out for help, while financial stress can lead people to withdraw socially, compounding the problem.

As one mother aged 35–44 years said:

I don’t ever do a “full” shop anymore, my daughter and I just get by with whatever we have and try to make it stretch. It puts a strain on friendships because I don’t want my daughter to have friends over because we don’t have enough food to share.

People living in regional Australia can face extra challenges that heighten these risks. Geographic isolation often means fewer job opportunities, higher transport costs and limited access to affordable fresh food, especially in smaller towns where supermarkets and services are scarce.

One woman aged 18–24 years told us:

We can’t afford to have a fair diet because the supermarkets are too far to catch a bus and carry it home and we don’t have a car so we have to use Uber Eats which cost a lot more.

At the same time, regional residents may experience more barriers in accessing health care and mental health support, due to fewer community services and social networks.

Even when food relief is available, it doesn’t always reach those most in need. Less than one-quarter of severely food-insecure households in our study said they had accessed emergency food relief.

Many told us they preferred to deal with the issue themselves, which may be due to stigma around accessing support.

One father aged 45–54 years explained

When bills come in, as a parent, I will starve rather than see my children go hungry […] I do without so the rest of the family can eat.

For those in need, community centres often fill this gap despite not having enough resources to meet the growing demand.

Our research found people visiting community centres face higher levels of food insecurity and poorer health than the broader community, yet they report feeling more supported.

Community centres don’t just give out food, they also connect people to health care, education, employment and mental-health services. As local community centre managers said, “food is the glue” that brings people through the door and helps them find wider support.

Turning evidence into action

In addition to recent national statistics, some states and territories have begun monitoring food insecurity.

But we still don’t have a clear picture of what’s happening in many regional areas. Without good local data, it’s hard for governments and community services to see where the need is greatest or what support actually works.

The federal government’s upcoming Feeding Australia National Food Security Strategy is a step toward a coordinated national plan.

Read more:
Australia’s new food security strategy: what’s on the table, and what’s missing?

But the biggest impact will come from people already on the ground who understand what their communities need most.

In the Illawarra and Shoalhaven, this kind of data is already helping drive solutions. The Illawarra Shoalhaven Food Futures Taskforce brings together government, health workers, researchers and community organisations for practical, local action to ensure everyone has access to healthy, affordable food.

To really tackle food insecurity in Australia we need to deal with the causes: low income, housing stress, poor mental health and social isolation.

Local programs such as food hubs, community kitchens and food cooperatives, are also important. These initiatives often involve communities collectively purchasing, cooking and sharing lower-cost, nutritious food using supermarket surplus, donations or locally grown produce. They not only help put food on the table but support community connection, making them a key part of Australia’s long-term solution to food insecurity.

Katherine Kent has received funding from The Australian Nutrition Trust Fund, The Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success and The Dementia Collaborative Research Centre. She is affiliated with the Australian Academy of Science, National Committee for Nutrition.

Karen Charlton receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a Future Fellowship (2023-27) and has previously had funding from the Dementia Collaborative Research Centre, Bloomberg Philanthropy Foundation, Medical Research Futures Fund, Arepa Pty Ltd. and Actial Pharmaceuticals.

– ref. Food insecurity affects 1 in 3 regional people – and it’s worse for those with poor mental health – https://theconversation.com/food-insecurity-affects-1-in-3-regional-people-and-its-worse-for-those-with-poor-mental-health-268482

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne

When you think of palms, you might be mentally transported to tropical islands and beaches. But palms are a diverse and interesting group of plants of roughly 180 genera and more than 2,000 species. Most, but not all, grow in the tropics.

Australia has at least 50 native palm species, and one of my favourites is the cabbage tree palm, Livistona australis.

This slender palm can reach 25m or more in height with a stem diameter of 25–35cm. It has an extensive range down the Australian east coast from southern Queensland reaching almost to Orbost in Victoria. It is Victoria’s only native palm.

Strength and beauty

The stem of the cabbage tree palm has a very intricate patterning formed by the old leaf bases, which give the stem its strength.

If the stem is damaged, the cabbage tree palm cannot grow over or heal the damage. So, take care not to harm its stem (or, for that matter, the stem of other palms).

The cabbage tree palm has fan-shaped leaves about 10–30cm long. These occur at the end of leaf stalks (called petioles) that can be 1.5–2m long. Its small (3mm) white flowers are borne on what’s called a panicle (a branching spike), which can be up to 1.5m long.

The fruits are red but turn black when ripe. It’s at this stage they are ready to plant, if you wish to propagate.

Young palms may have little prickles or a rough texture at the base of the leaves. This is a protective mechanism common to many palms – but the long spines on some can really hurt if you’re not careful.

Cabbage tree palms are moderately frost-sensitive, but once they get up to a few metres in height they are quite tough. They’re resilient, drought-tolerant and cope well with full sun.

The older leaves dry out and hang down from the crown and may stay like this for some years. If many accumulate, they can eventually fall. This can be dangerous, so many gardeners have them regularly pruned.

However, in natural sites they are important nesting and feeding sites for birds and small native mammals such as bandicoots. In urban gardens, they may house possums and rodents.

The dead leaves can burn fiercely in a bushfire, but as long as the crown of the stem is not too badly burnt, cabbage tree palms are moderately fire-resistant. New leaves are produced quite quickly as part of the general fire recovery, as seen around Mallacoota and in New South Wales after the 2019–20 fires.

A useful plant

Like other palm species, cabbage tree palms have a long history of human use.

Indigenous people used leaves for basket-weaving, fibres for twines, ropes and fishing lines and medicine.

Young leaves were reported to be quite sweet and were boiled and eaten: hence the name cabbage tree palm.

The fruits are edible, but have to be cooked as they are quite tough. Parts of the stem can also be eaten as the “heart of the palm”. The heart of the palm can also be found in other palm species, such as the coconut palm (Cocus nucifera) or palmetto (Sabal species); the most common heart of the palm species, however, is the cultivated peach palm (Bactris gasipeas).

The crown is the softest part, but consuming it kills the palm.

Like most tall growing palms, the stems are very fibrous, which can make them difficult to cut with a chainsaw; the chain tends to clog.

This fibrous structure makes the stems quite flexible in strong winds, when the palms bend with the wind rather than breaking.

The fibre from cabbage tree palms was used by early European settlers to make a protective sun hat called a cabbage tree hat.

Like many palms, the root systems of cabbage tree palms are shallow, fibrous and very dense, meaning the plants can be readily dug up and transplanted (provided you take a sufficiently large root mass).

This puts natural palm populations at risk if they are dug up and sold without proper regulation.

If you wish to remove a palm, it’s best to dig below the stem and cut the larger fibrous roots. There may be ten or more roots – often 20mm or less in diameter – that can be easily cut, but even one or two can securely anchor the palm.

Patience is a virtue

Like many plants that have an arborescent (meaning tree-like) growth form, Livistona australis takes its time.

Details are sparse, but there are estimates of palms being nearly 400 years old.

Trees operate over much longer time scales than humans do and so when growing cabbage tree palms, you might need to be patient.

The cabbage tree palm can take between 20 and 60 years to develop a proper stem.

If you are keen to see your cabbage tree palm flower, don’t hold your breath. It may take, according to some estimates, 150-170 years before a first flowering. If you can wait that long, it usually happens between August and October.

Gregory Moore 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. Cabbage tree palm: a sweet-leafed Australian native that waits 150 years to bloom – https://theconversation.com/cabbage-tree-palm-a-sweet-leafed-australian-native-that-waits-150-years-to-bloom-266902

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Page Jeffery, Lecturer in Media and Communications, University of Sydney

In just over a month Australia’s social media ban will begin.

From December 10, those under 16 will only be able to see publicly available content on platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X and YouTube. They will not be able to have their own accounts.

For example, they could look up Taylor Swift’s latest music video on YouTube, but they would not be able to post their own content.

There are no penalties for children who access an account on an age-restricted platform, or for their parents. Platforms face fines of up to A$49.5 million if they don’t take reasonable steps to implement the ban.

While the changes have been welcomed by some safety experts and parent advocates, eSafety acknowledges, “many parents and carers are worried about how under 16s will react to no longer having access to social media accounts”.

If you have a child or teen who loves social media, how can you help approach this change, while minimising conflict in your family?

Read more:
The social media ban is coming, whether families like it or not: 5 ways to prepare kids and teens

Social media is already a source of conflict

My research shows young people’s social and digital media use is already a major source of conflict for families.

A lot of the tension comes from parents not understanding the important role digital media plays in young people’s lives, and young people reacting to “unfair” restrictions imposed by parents.

So conflict around screen time rules and parents’ social media restrictions is common. Young people can put a lot of pressure on their parents for devices or access to certain platforms to fit in with their peers (“but all my friends have it”).

One of the federal government’s rationales for the social media ban is to help parents manage this situation – because people are already finding it hard.

So, potentially, some families may find relief in being able to say “this is just what the government says, this is the law”.

Uncertainty ahead

But we still don’t really know what’s going to happen come December 10. Some of the criticism of the ban has been that young people will find a way around it, such as by using a VPN (which can mask location and identity). Experts are also concerned about the reliability and privacy implications of age verification technology,

Meanwhile, some parents may also help their children circumvent the restrictions.

If a lot of parents in a friendship group are helping their children get around the ban, this could in turn create pressures on other parents and lead to conflict or resentment in families.

Parents need to remember there is no blanket right or wrong answer. All families and kids are different and its important to make decisions based on your family values and your child’s maturity.

Acknowledge it’s hard

Either way, if young people are used to social media and suddenly it’s gone, they might be really sad, annoyed or angry. And parents will have to manage the fall out.

We know young people can forge important connections with others over social media. It’s not just mindless scrolling, it’s a significant way to interact with peers. This is especially important for marginalised young people.

So young people will need to find other ways to connect – and parents should help their kids maintain their social connections.

It’s also important parents are not dismissive and acknowledge this may be a difficult time and transition.

Young people tend to respond much better to rules and regulations when they are given a clear rationale and a clear reason.

For example,

I know it’s hard. It’s out of my hands, this is a decision made by the government. We may not like it, but this is the way it is. Can I help you find another way to connect with your friends or participate in these communities?

You may also want to note how time away from social media, where young people may be doomscrolling or exposed to cyberbullying, can be healthy.

Don’t assume kids are now ‘safe’

One risk of the ban is parents will now think kids are “safe” online. We know children are likely to find other spaces online – and if they don’t, their friends will. And the ban only covers certain platforms.

Parents needs to keep talking to their children about what they see and do online

Parents also need to keep providing opportunities for children to develop critical digital literacy skills – this means they can assess what they are reading and seeing and not just taking it on face value. Children also need help to navigate social relationships online as they grow up.

This means children under 16 need ongoing opportunities to explore online spaces with support and guidance. This doesn’t necessarily mean parents monitor everything their children do online. But they should show an interest in their children’s activities, and be available to help navigate any risks and tricky situations.

Catherine Page Jeffery receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Don’t dismiss kids’ sadness or anger. How to minimise family conflict over the social media ban – https://theconversation.com/dont-dismiss-kids-sadness-or-anger-how-to-minimise-family-conflict-over-the-social-media-ban-268881

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Nye-Butler, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Performance and Ecology Research Lab, Griffith University

Theatre has long gathered and connected communities through story and shared experience. The performing arts can educate, provoke and inspire climate action. Yet the industry grapples with its own environmental footprint.

In response, the Theatre Green Book was released as a free, global framework for sustainable theatre practice.

The Theatre Green Book began as a collective initiative by writer Paddy Dillon and theatre-makers in the United Kingdom, in response to calls for coordinated climate action within the arts. Since then, it has been adapted into more than 17 iterations and used in more than 50 countries.

The Australian version adapts the European framework to an Australian context. It was first published online in 2023 by myself (Grace Nye-Butler) and Chris Mercer. The second edition, published today, was developed in collaboration with First Nations performing arts practitioners and the wider industry.

This edition grounds sustainability in relationship, legacy and innovation. It offers a Country-centred approach that honours First Nations Custodianship of Country, connection to Culture and Community.

As Dalisa Pigram, co-artistic director of dance company Marrugeku, explained during collaboration for the book:

Country is the oldest ancestor and the first teacher. If you care for Country, Country will care for you. It has ways to reset things.

An Australia-centred response

The performing arts sector’s environmental footprint can be traced to a range of sources, from energy used for lighting and venues, to emissions from touring and audience travel, to materials used for sets, props and costumes.

A recent study by Griffith University researchers found 74% of practitioners believe Australia’s performing arts sector has a responsibility to act on the climate crisis. Yet only 28% of organisations currently measure their own environmental footprint.

The Theatre Green Book Australia provides a practical, step-by-step guide to help companies reduce their environmental impact across three key areas: productions, operations and buildings.

Towards regenerative and equitable futures

The second edition was trialled over six months with seven theatre companies: Bangarra Dance Theatre, Bell Shakespeare, Belvoir Street Theatre, Griffin Theatre Company, Monkey Baa, Performing Lines, and Sydney Dance Company.

The Green Book responds directly to the continent’s ecological and logistical challenges. It acknowledges, for instance, the vast distances involved in touring, the diversity of local ecosystems, and the distinct supply chains and materials used in Australia.

By using the framework, theatre companies can align with international sustainability efforts in a way that remains locally meaningful. It also opens opportunities for global collaboration.

As Sydney Dance Company resident stage manager Simon Turner said:

Enhancing the ability to think “outside the box”, collaborating with other organisations has broadened the possibilities to bolster [the company’s] sustainable practices.

Central to the Green Book’s approach is the view that sustainability should be seen as a creative opportunity – not a constraint.

Practical changes include setting up composting and worm farms, connecting to local community gardens, using biodegradable blood packs made from corn starch, and creating asset-tracking systems to reuse sets, props and costumes.

Cat Studley, production manager at Bangarra Dance Theatre, said, in reference to the company’s production of Illume:

When we built Illume and the large set element – an oversized trumpet shell – we explored various methods and chose 3D printing in recycled black ABS (synthetic polymer), helping us exceed our goal of 50% of onstage materials being recycled or reused.

The companies that took part also developed a strong peer-sharing network, exchanging ideas and resources.

Dani Ironside, company manager at Bell Shakespeare, said:

Connecting with other theatre companies has expanded our insights into what’s achievable and shown us that the roadblocks we once saw to reaching baseline goals are, in fact, possible to overcome.

Other initiatives included investing in additional resources for sustainable sourcing, shopping at op-shops instead of fast-fashion outlets, incorporating sustainability criteria into hiring and contractor selection, and actively recruiting people with eco-conscious values.

The success of the Theatre Green Book in Europe, and now in Australia, shows meaningful change is underway. With commitment and creativity, theatre companies are proving sustainability can be woven into the fabric of storytelling and production.

Antonia Seymour, executive director at Arts on Tour, said the trial outcomes were a promising sign that eco-thinking could become the new “normal” for the sector:

We knew the only way to drive momentum and embed eco-literate theatre-making in the sector was by working collaboratively, using a common language and a global framework.

This is a moment of collective opportunity. Through shared knowledge, the performing arts can lead the way in imagining and enacting a regenerative future.

The author would like to thank Chris Mercer, co-author of The Theatre Green Book Australia, for his contribution to this work.

Grace Nye-Butler is the co-director of the Theatre Green Book Australia and currently works as a Reseach Fellow at the Performance and Ecology Research Lab at Griffith University.

– ref. Op-shopping, worm farms and cornstarch blood bags: how Australian theatre is staging a greener future – https://theconversation.com/op-shopping-worm-farms-and-cornstarch-blood-bags-how-australian-theatre-is-staging-a-greener-future-267638

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

Opposition Leader Sussan Ley is looking like a dead woman walking.

The latest devastating Newspoll, which has Labor leading the Coalition 57–43% on the two-party vote and Ley’s net approval at minus–33, would be devastating at any time.

Her net approval has dropped 13 points since the previous poll, with her ill-judged remarks about US Ambassador Kevin Rudd and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Joy Division T-shirt no doubt contributing to the markdown.

Ley would be in terrible shape any time with these figures, let alone when the Liberals and the Coalition are in an existential crisis over energy policy, making her challenges over the coming days dire.

The Liberals are split over the 2050 net-zero target, but now that the Nationals have dumped it, they are inevitably being dragged closer to the position of the minor party.

Ley in the past said she wanted to see net zero reached as soon as possible. Now she will struggle to have the Liberals retain any commitment to it, even as an aspiration.

A few weeks ago, Angus Taylor, her main leadership rival, was said to be willing to go along with a compromise that involved net zero in some form, despite personal opposition to it.

Now, Taylor is said to be close to the Nationals’ position.

The Liberal moderates, especially the Liberals’ deputy Senate leader, Anne Ruston, are fighting a rearguard action. Ruston reportedly said in a Sunday meeting of senior Liberals that the Nationals were again putting a gun to the heads of the Liberals. Asked about this on Sky on Monday, Ruston said she didn’t talk about private meetings, but did not deny the report.

Another moderate, NSW Senator Andrew Bragg, told Sky “we should do net zero better than Labor’s done it”.

“I think, as I’ve said before, that you can get to net zero at some stage this century.”

Some moderates would be happy enough to see the Coalition split; so would some Nationals.

It’s not just Ley who’s in a weak leadership position – so is the Nationals’ David Littleproud, who has been pulled to the right by his own troops.

Most of the Nationals have never been keen on net zero, but the spike in One Nation’s vote in recent polls – a massive 15% in Newspoll – is concentrating their minds on the danger of being outflanked on the right.

It would take an opposition leader of enormous authority to find a way through this chaos, and Ley carries little or no authority.

No one can criticise her work rate, or her attempts to tap into the community. She tells her personal story, that of a varied life, as she tries to get known. But she lacks a strong framework of political beliefs to project. She comes across as unmoored.

Ley’s multiple enemies and critics want – and mostly expect – to see her removed. But they don’t want that to happen now. Ditching the Liberals’ first female leader six months in would look very bad, a caricature of a party with a “woman problem”.

With her opponents thinking it would be indecently early to move against her, Ley will be left in limbo. Then at some point, the Liberals will change leaders and quite probably remain as badly off.

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: Unmoored Ley has the appearance of a dead woman walking – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-unmoored-ley-has-the-appearance-of-a-dead-woman-walking-268103

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roger S. Seymour, Professor Emeritus of Physiology, University of Adelaide

If you’ve ever wondered why the giraffe has such a long neck, the answer seems clear: it lets them reach succulent leaves atop tall acacia trees in Africa.

Only giraffes have direct access to those leaves, while smaller mammals must compete with one another near the ground. This exclusive food source appears to allow the giraffe to breed throughout the year and to survive droughts better than shorter species.

But the long neck comes at a high cost. The giraffe’s heart must produce enough pressure to pump its blood a couple of metres up to its head. The blood pressure of an adult giraffe is typically over 200mm Hg – more than twice that of most mammals.

As a result, the heart of a resting giraffe uses more energy than the entire body of a resting human, and indeed more energy than the heart of any other mammal of comparable size. However, as we show in a new study published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, the giraffe’s heart has some unrecognised helpers in its battle against gravity: the animal’s long, long legs.

Meet the ‘elaffe’

In our new study, we quantified the energy cost of pumping blood for a typical adult giraffe and compared it to what it would be in an imaginary animal with short legs but a longer neck to reach the same treetop height.

This beast was a Frankenstein-style combination of the body of a common African eland and the neck of a giraffe. We called it an “elaffe”.

We found the animal would spend a whopping 21% of its total energy budget on powering its heart, compared with 16% in the giraffe and 6.7% in humans.

By raising its heart closer to its head by means of long legs, the giraffe “saves” a net 5% of the energy it takes in from food. Over the course of a year, this energy saving would add up to more than 1.5 tonnes of food – which could make the difference between life and death on the African savannah.

How giraffes work

In his book How Giraffes Work, zoologist Graham Mitchell reveals that the ancestors of giraffes had long legs before they evolved long necks.

This makes sense from an energy point of view. Long legs make the heart’s job easier, while long necks make it work harder.

However, the evolution of long legs came with a price of its own. Giraffes are forced to splay their forelegs while drinking, which makes them slow and awkward to rise and escape if a predator should appear.

Statistics show giraffes are the most likely of all prey mammals to leave a water hole without getting a drink.

How long can a neck be?

The energy cost of the heart increases in direct proportion to the height of the neck, so there must be a limit. A sauropod dinosaur, the Giraffatitan, towers 13 metres above the floor of the Berlin Natural History Museum.

Its neck is 8.5m high, which would require a blood pressure of about 770mm Hg if it were to get blood to its head – almost eight times what we see in the average mammal. This is implausible because the heart’s energy cost to pump that blood would have exceeded the energy cost of the entire rest of the body.

Sauropod dinosaurs could not lift their heads that high without passing out. In fact, it is unlikely that any land animal in history could exceed the height of an adult male giraffe.

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. Why do giraffes have such long legs? Animal simulations reveal a surprising answer – https://theconversation.com/why-do-giraffes-have-such-long-legs-animal-simulations-reveal-a-surprising-answer-266230

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Cooper, Associate Professor of Law, University of Waikato

As nations prepare to gather in Brazil next week for this year’s United Nations climate summit COP30, only a third have so far submitted the required update on their emissions-reduction commitments, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

China, the world’s largest emitter, and major fossil fuel exporters such as Iran, Russia and Australia, are among states that have updated their NDCs, but they have been criticised for lack of ambition.

Likewise, New Zealand, which announced in February it would commit to reducing emissions by 51–55% below 2005 levels by 2035. This amounts to only 1–5% above the country’s previous NDC of a 50% cut by 2030 and has been described as “underwhelming”.

This comes as UN Secretary-General Antonio Gutteres warned that humanity has failed to keep warming at 1.5°C and must change course urgently towards deeper and faster emissions cuts.

The Paris Agreement requires states to pledge successively more ambitious NDCs. Technically, New Zealand’s NDC represents a progression, albeit the smallest possible one.

It was criticised as insufficiently aligned with the Paris Agreement’s purpose to hold global average temperature rise well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to keep it at 1.5°C.

Lack of climate ambition

Several domestic climate-related legal and policy changes are sending a message that New Zealand’s coalition government isn’t treating climate change as a high priority.

The Fast-track Approvals Act, which came into force at the end of 2024, has accelerated permits to explore and develop New Zealand’s petroleum and mineral resources (including metallurgical coal used in steel production), facilitating new fossil fuel use at home and abroad.

In August this year, the government passed the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2025 to overturn a ban on offshore oil and gas exploration which had been in place since 2018. It also pledged NZ$200 million to co-invest in the development of new gas fields.

In October, the government lowered targets for methane emissions. This will require an amendment to the country’s flagship climate legislation, the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019.

The previous target was to cut methane emissions from livestock by 25–47% below 2017 levels, but the government has reduced this to 14–24% and ruled out a methane tax on agricultural emissions. This is contrary to the Climate Change Commission’s recommendation to raise the target to 35–47%.

New Zealand’s transport emissions continue to rise but the government axed a clean investment fund. And recently, it softened mandatory climate reporting requirements and lifted the threshold for how big a company needs to be before it has to report on its efforts to cut emissions.

There are some welcome developments, including the government’s NZ$46 million investment in a climate finance initiative in partnership with the United Kingdom.

The Transforming Island Development through Electrification and Sustainability (TIDES) fund will finance renewable energy projects in six Pacific Island countries – Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Islands, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands – that currently rely on imported energy. This will strengthen the Pacific region’s renewable energy options and reduce reliance on polluting and expensive diesel imports.

Also positive are government plans to double renewable energy by 2050 and to install 10,000 electric vehicle charging stations by 2030, although critics point out little progress has been made towards the latter.

But perhaps the clearest signal of the government’s move away from climate-conscious leadership is the decision in June this year to quit the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA). Established at COP26 in 2021, BOGA is an international coalition of states working to accelerate the managed phase-out of oil and gas production and support a just transition to clean energy.

Trade and climate commitments

Many of these moves have been defended as necessary to deliver on the government’s priority to build a stronger and more productive economy.

The government sees trade as crucial to this. It has heralded the free-trade agreement between the European Union and New Zealand as a successful catalyst for boosted trade, supporting 8% growth in two-way trade and reaching a record $21.6 billion of annual trade in goods and services since it came into force in May 2024.

But the EU-NZ free-trade agreement should also act as a reminder that international trade must go hand in hand with responsible action on climate change. The agreement commits both parties to:

effectively implement the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement, including commitments with regard to nationally determined contributions and … to refrain from any action or omission that materially defeats the object and purpose of the Paris Agreement.

It also requires parties to:

promote the mutual supportiveness of trade and climate policies and measures, thereby contributing to the transition to a low greenhouse gas emission, resource-efficient and circular economy and to climate-resilient development.

The central aim of the Paris Agreement is to strengthen the global response to climate change by limiting global temperature rise. Government actions that loosen emissions targets and facilitate and invest in new fossil fuel use are contrary to this aim.

Consequently, such actions risk undermining the EU-NZ free-trade agreement and other agreements crucial to delivering on the government’s promise of economic growth.

As New Zealand’s representatives head to Brazil, they should have this trade-climate connection firmly in mind. Climate-attuned policies at home alongside stronger international commitments, including an ambitiously revised NDC, are necessary for limiting destructive climate change. They also make good economic sense.

Nathan Cooper 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. COP30: NZ’s lack of climate ambition undermines global goals and free-trade agreements – https://theconversation.com/cop30-nzs-lack-of-climate-ambition-undermines-global-goals-and-free-trade-agreements-267727

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roger S. Seymour, Professor Emeritus of Physiology, University of Adelaide

If you’ve ever wondered why the giraffe has such a long neck, the answer seems clear: it lets them reach succulent leaves atop tall acacia trees in Africa.

Only giraffes have direct access to those leaves, while smaller mammals must compete with one another near the ground. This exclusive food source appears to allow the giraffe to breed throughout the year and to survive droughts better than shorter species.

But the long neck comes at a high cost. The giraffe’s heart must produce enough pressure to pump its blood a couple of metres up to its head. The blood pressure of an adult giraffe is typically over 200mm Hg – more than twice that of most mammals.

As a result, the heart of a resting giraffe uses more energy than the entire body of a resting human, and indeed more energy than the heart of any other mammal of comparable size. However, as we show in a new study published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, the giraffe’s heart has some unrecognised helpers in its battle against gravity: the animal’s long, long legs.

Meet the ‘elaffe’

In our new study, we quantified the energy cost of pumping blood for a typical adult giraffe and compared it to what it would be in an imaginary animal with short legs but a longer neck to reach the same treetop height.

This beast was a Frankenstein-style combination of the body of a common African eland and the neck of a giraffe. We called it an “elaffe”.

We found the animal would spend a whopping 21% of its total energy budget on powering its heart, compared with 16% in the giraffe and 6.7% in humans.

By raising its heart closer to its head by means of long legs, the giraffe “saves” a net 5% of the energy it takes in from food. Over the course of a year, this energy saving would add up to more than 1.5 tonnes of food – which could make the difference between life and death on the African savannah.

How giraffes work

In his book How Giraffes Work, zoologist Graham Mitchell reveals that the ancestors of giraffes had long legs before they evolved long necks.

This makes sense from an energy point of view. Long legs make the heart’s job easier, while long necks make it work harder.

However, the evolution of long legs came with a price of its own. Giraffes are forced to splay their forelegs while drinking, which makes them slow and awkward to rise and escape if a predator should appear.

Statistics show giraffes are the most likely of all prey mammals to leave a water hole without getting a drink.

How long can a neck be?

The energy cost of the heart increases in direct proportion to the height of the neck, so there must be a limit. A sauropod dinosaur, the Giraffatitan, towers 13 metres above the floor of the Berlin Natural History Museum.

Its neck is 8.5m high, which would require a blood pressure of about 770mm Hg if it were to get blood to its head – almost eight times what we see in the average mammal. This is implausible because the heart’s energy cost to pump that blood would have exceeded the energy cost of the entire rest of the body.

Sauropod dinosaurs could not lift their heads that high without passing out. In fact, it is unlikely that any land animal in history could exceed the height of an adult male giraffe.

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. Why do giraffes have such long legs? Animal simulations reveal a suprising answer – https://theconversation.com/why-do-giraffes-have-such-long-legs-animal-simulations-reveal-a-suprising-answer-266230

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Nicole Driessen, Postdoctoral Researcher in Radio Astronomy, University of Sydney

On October 29, Comet 3I/ATLAS reached its closest point to the Sun.

This point, known as perihelion, was around 210 million kilometres from the Sun, or 1.4 times the distance between the Sun and Earth, and it was on the opposite side of the Sun to Earth. This means the Sun has been blocking the comet from our view (from Earth). There are already reports it’s been detected again using ground-based telescopes.

The comet is the third interstellar object (hence the “3I”) we’ve detected flying through our Solar System.

When it was first detected on July 1 2025 by the Asteroid Terrestrial Last Alert System (or “ATLAS”), one of the first questions people asked was “but is it aliens?”.

This isn’t the first time the alien question has come up in the context of a new astronomical discovery. But although it might be fun, it can also detract from the real (and very cool) science, and fuel misinformation.

A long history of speculation

Similar alien speculation arose when the first two interstellar objects were discovered: 1I/2017 U1 ‘Oumuamua and Comet 2I/Borisov.

And it doesn’t just happen for interstellar objects.

In 2019, I wrote my first public article about a discovery I made as a PhD student. I had found radio light coming from a binary star system, the first object found by the MeerKAT telescope to be changing brightness over time. Even though this had nothing to do with aliens, the editor asked me to include speculation about them.

In 1967, Jocelyn Bell Burnell, then a PhD student, discovered a rapidly repeating flash of radio light.

As a joke, she labelled it LGM 1 for “Little Green Men”, but the astronomers working on it did not really believe they had discovered aliens. They were, however, concerned about the possibility that alien-related media coverage would sensationalise the discovery and hinder their scientific investigations.

A 7 billion-year-old visitor

This concern remains for astronomers today.

Comet 3I/ATLAS is possibly the oldest thing we’ve ever seen in our Solar System. Our Solar System formed 4.6 billion years ago, while recent research points to Comet 3I/ATLAS possibly being more than 7 billion years old.

It has spent a lot of that time zipping through the universe just to spend a few months in our Solar System. When the comet reached perihelion, that’s probably the closest it’s been to a star in at least millions of years.

Research has shown the comet has more carbon dioxide in its outer layers than has been seen in most comets in our Solar System. It also has a higher ratio of nickel to other elements than has been seen in local comets.

These chemical signatures give us a unique insight into the chemical composition of the cloud of gas that formed the solar system where the comet came from.

This is one of the key reasons why we should only be asking about aliens when all other possibilities are exhausted. When we talk about aliens first, we might miss all this amazing information.

As astronomer Carl Sagan said (in his rewording of a principle by French mathematician Pierre-Simon Laplace), “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. It’s true we can’t completely explain every detail of the comet yet, but not knowing everything is not evidence of aliens.

Embrace the uncertainties

Talking about aliens also leaves room for misinformation to spread.

For example, there have been claims of things such as trajectory shifts and Comet 3I/ATLAS “hiding” behind the Sun. Despite no evidence to support this, I received many questions along these lines when I spoke about the comet online. This demonstrates how easy it is for misinformation to be generated and spread when we’re talking about “aliens”.

There are ways to see the comet while it’s on the other side of the Sun. For example, the European Space Agency plans to observe the comet using the Mars Express, ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter and the Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer.

And if you’d like to see the trajectory of Comet 3I/ATLAS and find out where it is right now, you can.

There might be something to be learned from poets here. Romantic poet John Keats wrote about something he called “negative capability”. It’s a strange name, but the concept is about being able to sit with “uncertainties, mysteries and doubts” and be content with not knowing.

There’s a lot we don’t know about Comet 3I/ATLAS and about the universe. It wouldn’t be much fun to be an astronomer if we knew everything already. But when there’s something unknown, we humans like to fill that gap.

For astronomy mysteries, the gap tends to be filled with aliens. However, not knowing all the answers is not proof of aliens. It just means that we have work to do.

Laura Nicole Driessen is an ambassador for the Orbit Centre of Imagination at the Rise and Shine Kindergarten, in Sydney’s Inner West.

– ref. Is it aliens? Why that’s the least important question about interstellar objects – https://theconversation.com/is-it-aliens-why-thats-the-least-important-question-about-interstellar-objects-268665

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milad Haghani, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow in Urban Risk and Resilience, The University of Melbourne

In September, US electric car maker Tesla rolled out a semi-autonomous driving feature it describes as “the future of transport” in Australia.

As its name suggests, the Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system blurs the line between human and machine control. Our current licensing and road-safety frameworks were not designed to handle this situation.

A federal government strategy for high-tech road transport released last week has little to say about how this new semi-autonomous technology should be managed.

As experts in cities and transport, and how people use them, we have some concrete policy ideas for how to manage this innovation safely: changes to licensing rules, safety testing, and accountability and transparency.

What is ‘supervised self-driving’?

Tesla’s new system is the most advanced form of semi-autonomous driving yet available to Australian consumers.

The car can follow routes from start to finish, handle intersections, change lanes, and respond to traffic lights. These tasks go well beyond traditional “autopilot” or adaptive cruise control.

Tesla says that “under your active supervision”, the system “will drive you almost anywhere”. Despite “full self-driving” in the product name, the active supervision part is crucial.

Early testing in Australia by reviewers from The Drive and CarExpert shows a technically impressive system that is nevertheless far from flawless:

• the car recognises signs but doesn’t always read or reliably interpret them
• lane changes can be slow, sometimes confusing nearby drivers
• navigation can falter when satellite coverage is weak
• the system occasionally selects the wrong lane or misjudges right of way
• it may park awkwardly, at times straddling two bays
• wearing dark sunglasses can confuse the camera that monitors the driver, and disable the system.

The overall impression is of a vehicle that can handle itself most of the time, but which needs an actual driver ready to take over at a moment’s notice. And to be fair to Tesla, the company does say the system “requires an attentive driver to maintain proper control of the vehicle who must be ready to take immediate action at all times”.

Is Australian regulation keeping up?

The federal government’s new National Road Transport Technology Strategy outlines how Australia plans to prepare for connected and automated transport.

The strategy commits to developing a “consistent national regulatory framework” for automated vehicles. However, it notes that implementation will rely on state and territory transport strategies, which set out more detailed plans for adopting and deploying new technologies.

In short, the strategy recognises automation but says little about how it will be governed.

What policies could work?

Supervised automation occupies a grey zone between human and machine control. Australia’s current policy framework has yet to define how that space should be managed.

There is no single solution, but several areas stand out where modest, evidence-based steps could help the supervised driving technology mature safely.

1. Driver training and licensing reform

Supervised automation changes what it means to drive. The driver’s role shifts from active control to continuous monitoring. Research shows people are not naturally good at this.

When drivers are not required to maintain continuous control, their awareness of their situation can erode quickly. This may lead to slower or poorer reactions when they need to take control.

Modest updates to existing licensing tests could help to address this. State authorities could introduce additional knowledge questions or a short modules covering these systems and their limitations.

These would ensure every driver using such systems has at least a basic understanding of how they work, and where human accountability begins and ends.

2. Pre-deployment certification and transparency

Before semi-autonomous systems reach the public, they should demonstrate they can perform safely under local road, climate and traffic conditions.

At present, Australia has no requirement for such validation. Once a vehicle meets the Australian Design Rules, manufacturers can activate or modify automation features via software updates. They do not have to submit supporting safety data or seek regulatory approval.

Manufacturers could be required to provide validated performance data before releasing updates. This might include things such as how often and how well humans take over from the system, how often sensors fail and what happens afterwards, and measures of how effectively the system avoids crashes.

Trials of “beta” or experimental software could still be possible, but only within regulator-approved test zones under controlled monitoring.

A complementary step would be to embed minimum performance benchmarks for these systems within the Australian Design Rules or ANCAP safety-assessment protocols. These might cover the timing of alerts, the reliability of the system, and transparency of about the system’s performance.

3. Accountability and data integrity

At present, Australia has no requirement for semi-autonomous car manufacturers to share data on crashes, near-misses, or times when the system turns off or hands over to the human driver.

When incidents occur, the evidence often stays solely with the company. This limits public scrutiny and independent investigation.

Here, Australia can learn from regulations in other jurisdictions.

For example, California publishes annual “disengagement reports” from all developers testing automated systems. The European Union requires manufacturers to retain and share data from critical safety systems for crash investigation and oversight.

Several legal and regulatory questions also remain unresolved, regarding who is responsible for crashes, what drivers’ obligations are, and how insurance should work.

What now?

Australia faces the task of making rules for the in-between space of “supervised self-driving”.

The technology itself is no longer experimental. It is active on our roads. What’s experimental is how we govern it.

Building clear, modest guardrails now will help ensure that automated mobility develops safely. We shouldn’t wait for major incidents to reveal the gaps and create a drive for hurried regulation.

Milad Haghani receives funding from The Australian Government, The Office of Road Safety.

Angus McKerral receives funding from the National Road Safety Action Grants Program and is a member of the Australasian College of Road Safety.

Kristen Pammer has received funding from government road safety programs and is a member of the Australasian College of Road Safety.

Michael Regan has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

Zahra Shahhoseini 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. ‘Supervised’ self-driving cars are here – and Australia’s laws aren’t ready. Here are 3 ways to fix them – https://theconversation.com/supervised-self-driving-cars-are-here-and-australias-laws-arent-ready-here-are-3-ways-to-fix-them-268381

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leonora Risse, Associate Professor in Economics, University of Canberra

All those thousands of hours that Australians put towards unpaid household work and care – cooking, cleaning and caring for family members – are an essential thread that keeps our economy stitched together.

But they’re not recognised in official economic statistics.

My new research puts a dollar value on what all this unpaid labour is worth to the economy: about A$688 billion. That’s equivalent to around one-third of gross domestic product – and is mostly contributed by women.

What happens when we count it in?

The System of National Accounts, which guides how countries worldwide define “production” and measure the size of their economy, is limited to activities that have a price tag or market wage.

Unpaid work and care falls outside this official definition.

In my new academic paper, published in the Economic Record, I calculate a dollar value of this unpaid productive activity by adding up how much it would cost if we were to pay someone an hourly wage do this work as their paid job.

For example, we can value each unpaid hour looking after children as the equivalent of a childcare worker’s average hourly wage.

Each hour spent on housework can be calculated by using a domestic cleaner’s wage as a proxy. And time spent on meal preparation can be proxied using a kitchen hand’s typical wage.

Women contribute the bulk (61.5%) of total time spent on unpaid work and care, based on data collected by the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Time Use Survey.

The average time and type of unpaid work that women do, which tallies to 3 hours and 56 minutes per day, equates to A$771 worth of labour per week.

Men’s typical unpaid work and care, which averages 2 hours and 28 minutes per day, adds up to $493 weekly.

Tallying up for the population, women’s unpaid labour is worth the equivalent of $427.3 billion per year. Men’s unpaid work amounts to $261 billion. Yet none of this vital work is counted in our national accounts.

Women’s real contribution to the economy

Let’s imagine we add another column to our national accounts ledger which now counts this invisible labour and adds it to our measurement of paid labour.

We see that women’s share of total labour effort in the economy expands to 47.2%. This compares with just 36.8% when we only count paid work.

One problem with this “replacement wage” methodology is many of these proxy occupations used to value unpaid work and care are female-concentrated – and systematically undervalued on the basis of gender.

We can fix this by estimating a wage equation, using HILDA Survey data, to measure the extent by which an occupation is systematically paid less (or more) on the basis of its gender composition. While we’re at it, we can also estimate the wage premium enjoyed by men irrespective of their industry and occupation.

When we adjust for these sources of gender-based undervaluation, women’s share of total labour climbs to 50.5%.

In other words, women and men are contributing roughly equal labour effort to our economy. But it’s not reflected in the way we measure our economy, or in the gender gaps that persist in pay, wealth, assets and control over resources.

These findings have practical use in setting wages, dividing up household assets, and even measuring productivity.

The observed decline in measured productivity – occurring at the same time the care sector is rapidly swelling in size – could very well be due to an economic system that is failing to fully recognise the value of female-concentrated sectors.

This is about more than just numbers

The invisibility and under-recognition of “women’s work” – that is, the work that society assigns to women – is not just a matter of numbers.

It’s an erasure and diminishing of the value of women’s capabilities and contributions to our economy.

The gender biases embedded in conventional economic architecture are a marker, and driver, of women’s lower status, power and decision-making authority.

Feminist economics have long been pointing out the shortcomings of economic frameworks that centre on the productive activities traditionally assigned to men. As feminist academic Marilyn Waring bluntly observed:

The laws of economics and those that govern the UNSNA [United Nations Systems of National Accounts] are creations of the male mind and do not reflect or encompass the reality of the female world. The conceptual models are limited to the world that the economist knows or observes, and housework is most certainly not part of that world.

Counting unpaid work and care is now possible with the Australian Bureau of Statistics bringing back the Time Use Survey in 2020–21. The survey was previously last conducted in 2006.

This ongoing investment in Australia’s data infrastructure is crucial for applying a gender lens to our economic statistics and policy analysis, undoing gender biases, and shining a spotlight on uncounted “invisible” work.

Leonora Risse receives research funding from the Trawalla Foundation and the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia. She serves as an Expert Panel Member for the Fair Work Commission and the Parliamentary Budget Office, and is a member of the ABS Time Use Survey Reference Group.

– ref. Unpaid ‘women’s work’ is worth $427 billion, new research shows. See how much your unpaid labour is worth – https://theconversation.com/unpaid-womens-work-is-worth-427-billion-new-research-shows-see-how-much-your-unpaid-labour-is-worth-267860

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amy Maguire, Professor in Human Rights and International Law, University of Newcastle

As the year begins to wind down, and the days grow longer, our critics have a fresh slate of films and series to keep you glued to your screen.

This month’s streaming picks include a 90s “filmic time capsule”, some tense US political drama (refreshingly set in a non-Trumpian America), and the harrowing real-life story of child sex abuse at a Jewish school in Melbourne. There’s also some sharp, tender animation from the creator of Bojack Horseman.

Whether you’re chasing comfort, catharsis or a good cliffhanger, November’s streaming picks are sure to delight.

Surviving Malka Leifer

Stan

Surviving Malka Leifer, directed by Adam Kamien, centres the survivors of Leifer’s abuse. Sisters Nicole Meyer, Dassi Erlich and Elly Sapper reveal their trauma and claim their power through this film.

The sisters are interviewed alone and together and we see their video diaries. While the sisters recount their abuse, we are often taken into a constructed dollhouse, classroom and courtroom where the sisters are represented as tiny dolls. A spider moves about these constructed rooms – it appears enormous relative to the dolls.

Alongside Freya Berkhout’s haunting original music and the raw accounts of the documentary subjects, these devices heighten the sense of risk and vulnerability in the film. As we follow the chronology of the sisters’ campaign to bring Leifer to Australia, we become ever more engaged in their rising panic about whether she will face justice.

We learn about the sisters’ psychological torment, to the point of suicidality and hospitalisation. The delay in justice is central to the film’s narrative. The sisters’ trauma was compounded over their many years of campaigning and waiting.

Surviving Malka Leifer tells several important stories. We see how the perceived interests of an insular religious community are prioritised over the victims of sexual abuse. We see how legal processes, especially when protracted, re-traumatise victims and maintain their vulnerability as abusers pose counter-narratives before courts.

We also see three women who have persisted through unimaginable trauma in their campaign for justice. Their courage is breathtaking.

– Amy Maguire

Read more:
New documentary about the Malka Leifer case centres trauma, persistence and survival

The Diplomat, season three

Netflix

Season three of The Diplomat is back, with romance and comedy wrapped up in high politics. Star of the show, Keri Russell, is the United States ambassador in London and a possible candidate for the vice presidency. Instead she ends up as second lady, maintaining a trans-Atlantic marriage with her vice-president husband, the infuriating Hal Wyler (Rufus Sewell).

The program is infused with nostalgia for a pre-Trumpian world, symbolised by the ascension of President Grace Penn (Allison Janney) who, like her First Gentleman Todd Penn (Bradley Whitford), also starred in West Wing (1999-2006). That series, with its thoughtful and liberal president, represented a vision of politics which has now largely vanished in the US.

Meanwhile there is growing tension between the US and Britain, whose prime minister Nicol Trowbridge (Rory Kinnear) is a thug without charm. This tension dates back to an attack on a British naval vessel, in which the US was apparently involved. But if the exact reasons for it seem murky, it’s because the show moves at such a fast pace – and we are carried along as it features increasingly improbable romantic entanglements.

The Penn White House remains more attractive than its real-life counterpart. And President Penn doesn’t seem interested in demolishing part of the building.

– Dennis Altman

The Celebrity Traitors UK

ThreeNow (New Zealand) and 10 Play (Australia)

The British didn’t do The Traitors first, but they definitely do it the best. The reality show pits traitors against faithful in a social deduction game built on bluffs, double bluffs, “murders” and banishments – with a stack of money awaiting the winners.

The latest season, technically a spin-off, stars UK celebrities – and it’s really bloody good. As usual, there’s dramatic footage of the Scottish Highlands, the looming Adross castle, many extremely camp cutaways, some outrageous and well-produced outdoor missions, and host Claudia Winkleman stalking around in impeccable knitwear, whispering threats and encouragements in equal measure.

The winnings (apart from bragging rights) go to charity. Kudos to the casting director; this season’s lineup features national treasures such as Sir Stephen Fry and Jonathan Ross (dubbed the “big dogs” early on), as well as sporting stars, actors, singers, comedians, presenters and Gen Z celebs. They’re all thrown into scenarios that cut through carefully curated personas.

The season particularly excels at juxtaposing the gothic with absurdity. Where else would beloved actress Celia Imrie be caught out loudly stress-farting before a particularly gross challenge? It also plays with preexisting friendships and professional relationships in a sly fashion, as the cast struggle to play as strategically as “civilian” casts usually do.

You might tear your hair out at some people’s ability (or lack of) to figure out the show’s deceptions, but it all makes for impeccable viewing for old fans and newbies alike.

– Erin Harrington

Son of a Donkey

Netflix

Son of A Donkey, from the comedy duo Superwog (brothers Theodore and Nathan Saidden), tells the epic tale of Theo, his best friend Johnny, and Theo’s unnamed parents as Theo attempts to buy back his impounded car and to resolve his daddy issues once and for all.

Superwog are part of the third wave of wog humour. Here, their skewering of the vagaries of modern life leans more to the carnival of Pizza (2000–07) than the cosmopolitan ethos of Acropolis Now (1989–92). But the juxtaposition of classical music against some of the show’s more ridiculous scenes serves as a sly wink to its audience.

Its satire of an Epstein-esque sex island, conspiracy theorists, Jordan Peterson and the manosphere is at once ludicrous and needle-sharp. Even as they sink into a misogynist rabbit-hole, Johnny’s grandma is there to remind them who really is the boss in the ethnic family.

The main challenge for the Saidden brothers is to move from the disconnected episodic approach of Superwog to a cohesive narrative arc for Son of A Donkey. In this, they largely succeed, progressing the overarching story incrementally across the six episodes even as each has their own micro-misadventure.

Ultimately – despite flying shoes and rancid food – wog blood is thicker than water.

– Jess Carniel

Read more:
From Wog Boy to Son of a Donkey: how ‘wog humour’ made Australian comedy its own

Monster: The Ed Gein Story

Netflix

The Ed Gein Story is the third season of Ryan Murphy’s anthology series, Monster, an examination of violent killers at the centre of some of America’s most shocking crimes. This latest instalment follows the life and crimes of one of the most culturally impactful serial killers of the 20th century – a man who inspired the films Psycho (1960), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) and The Silence of the Lambs (1991).

Perhaps most surprising, then, given Gein’s reputation, is the sensitivity and empathy shown to him in Murphy’s portrayal. In Monster, Gein is abused, downtrodden, soft-spoken, lonely and easily confused. His killings are (largely) unplanned – the result of bursts of anger. His desecration and mutilation of corpses is suggested to be a simultaneous function of his desire to bring his much-missed mother back to life, and to experiment with his own gender identity.

Murphy’s depiction is not limited to a reenactment of Gein’s crimes. It also looks at his influence on popular culture, via other serial killers who emulate his actions, as well as big-screen adaptations by directors such as Alfred Hitchcock.

But ultimately, as Monster would have it, it is we who are responsible for Gein’s celebrity. As Gein himself tells the viewer: “you’re the one who can’t look away”.

– Jessica Gildersleeve

Mother and Son, season two

ABC iView

Season two of Mother and Son, a beautiful remake of the original 1980s–90s Australian sitcom, is just as strong as the first. And luckily, viewers don’t need to have seen the original show in order to enjoy it. The latest season features significant character development, as well as some delightful gender and genre gear shifts that make for cutting-edge situational comedy.

There is not one weak link in the ensemble cast. Denise Scott, who plays the mother, Maggie, and Matt Okine, who plays her son Arthur, are one of the best pairings in recent comedy history. They are supported the most by Angela Nica Sullen, the “golden child” Robbie, and the lovely alternative parent/adult child pairing of Tony and Maya, played respectively by Ferdinand Hoang and Catherine Van-Davies.

The tension between comedy and accessibility – especially the looming “D word” (dementia) for Maggie, and Arthur’s social isolation – makes the story arc of each episode and the overall season quite compelling.

This season is a collection of dark, funny and thoughtful moments. And the stunning cameos from Jean Kittson and Virginia Gray are wonderful easter eggs for those with a deeper knowledge of Australian comedy.

– Liz Giuffre

House of Dynamite

Netflix

It’s Dr. Strangelove meets Rashomon in Kathryn Bigelow’s House of Dynamite. The film has blasted onto Netflix with 22.1 million views in the first three days.

It details the 39-minute countdown until a nuclear missile hits America’s mainland. The Pentagon has taken issue with the film over its claim that America’s missile defence system isn’t perfect, whereas screenwriter Noah Oppenheim stands by his research for the film. Oppenheim is, however, “glad” the Pentagon watched it – “or is watching and is paying attention to it, because this is exactly the conversation we want to have”.

The ensemble cast is stacked with Rebecca Ferguson, Anthony Ramos, Tracy Letts, Idris Elba, Gabriel Basso, Greta Lee, Kaitlyn Dever and Jared Harris all having great moments in the tense drama.

House of Dynamite has a Rashomon-style narrative, where the countdown is told three times over with new perspectives each time. In the first segment, Rebecca Ferguson holds a tense conference call where we hear the voices of Greta Lee and Idris Elba, and see Jared Harris and Gabriel Basso via a screen. In later segments, we see this countdown from their perspectives.

Some may find the handheld camera distracting, and the ending frustrating, but the film is nonetheless intense, with Bigelow never letting up the pressure. With its apolitical, hard-working staffers, it feels very at odds with the contemporary political climate. This seems a deliberate choice from Bigelow.

In the moment, several players realise that while they know they need to focus on their jobs, they have loved ones in the target city. Do they stop what they are doing and tell them they only have minutes left to live?

– Stuart Richards

Disclosure

Netflix

There is almost an unwritten rule that every great 1990s thriller must have Michael Douglas playing the scandal-prone leading man. Douglas doesn’t disappoint in Disclosure (1994). He pays Tom Sanders, a middle manager at the DigiCom computer company who is falsely accused of sexual harassment. Demi Moore is also at the height of her star power here playing Meredith Johnson, the young, predatory career woman who lies and cheats her way to the top.

However, it’s Donald Sutherland who really steals the show as Bob Garvin, the power-hungry director who gets a sadistic thrill from playing favourites among the staff, and promoting his sexy, surrogate “daughter” Meredith above more senior and meritorious colleagues.

There are many guilty pleasures in this 90s filmic time capsule. First, there is the nostalgic amusement of watching clunky, outdated technologies (answering machines! CD-ROMS!) being presented as contemporary or even cutting-edge. The film also features a deliciously melodramatic soundtrack and other neo-noir elements. The first image we have of Meredith Johnson (Demi Moore), for example, is a close shot of her black, killer high heels. When the camera pans up to her blood red lips and defiant stare, we are reminded of the old sexist stereotype of the manipulative “vamp”.

Like many other erotic thrillers of the 1990s (think Fatal Attraction) Disclosure offers the politically-conservative reaction against female power that feminist Susan Faludi famously described as the “backlash”. The film is certainly dated in its sexual politics. On the other hand, its subplot about economic recession, redundancies, ruined careers, competition and corruption remain relevant and very entertaining.

– Susan Hopkins

Long Story Short, season one

Netflix

Long Story Short is a quirky adult animation that oozes charm and heartfelt realness. The series centres on podcast scriptwriter and playlist creator, Avi Schwooper, a character based somewhat on the lived experiences of creator Raphael Bob-Waksberg, the mind behind BoJack Horseman (2014–2020).

In this first season, Long Story Short explores Avi’s everyday existence in California, negotiating his complex attachments to his parents, siblings, ex-wife, daughter, and his Jewish faith.

Episodes jump between various decades and generations up to the 2020s and routinely grapple with the absurd. Episode 6 (“Wolves”) satirises the public education system in the US via a bizarre lockdown situation, which occurs when wolves start roaming the halls of the middle school Avi’s daughter, Hannah, attends.

Episode 3 (“There’s a Mattress in There”) also stands out as affecting. It focuses on Avi’s neurodivergent brother, Yoshi, on a quest to prove himself equal to his siblings, only to be undone by unscrupulous capitalists.

Visually speaking, the series has a groovy colour palette reminiscent of vintage storybooks, and a distinctive hand-drawn aesthetic. Each figure is both exaggerated yet realistic in a way that avoids slipping into caricature thanks to the influence of designer and supervising producer Lisa Hanawalt.

There are some strong, resonant themes around family, memory, selfhood and generational continuity. It is funny, yet achingly sad – a bit like life, really.

– Phoebe Hart

Amy Maguire receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Jess Carniel received funding from the Army History Unit for her research into wog history.

Dennis Altman, Erin Harrington, Jessica Gildersleeve, Liz Giuffre, Phoebe Hart, Stuart Richards, and Susan Hopkins 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. ‘Wog’ humour, tense US politics and real-world monsters: what to watch in November – https://theconversation.com/wog-humour-tense-us-politics-and-real-world-monsters-what-to-watch-in-november-268647

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

Once again, the Nationals have got out in front of the Liberals on a key issue, this time net zero, announcing on Sunday they were dumping their commitment to it.

This is not unexpected, but more than awkward for their Coalition partner. It makes it trickier for the Liberals to retain the target – which is politically important in city seats – albeit in some watered-down form. It raises the question: if the Liberals stick with net zero what does that mean for the Coalition relationship?

And it puts the Liberals under greater pressure to get a policy out quickly. The party will now speed up its release – it was already planning to do this before Christmas.

The early positioning follows the pattern of the Voice referendum, where the Nationals announced their opposition ahead of the Liberals. In climate and energy debates over the years, the Nationals have been earlier out and more stridently conservative than the Liberals.

The Nationals party room, after several hours of discussion on Sunday, agreed unanimously to a revised policy that says Australia should cut its emissions in line with the developed world, rather than moving faster to order to achieve net zero by 2050.

On Saturday, the party’s federal council called on the parliamentary party to drop the net zero commitment. The Nationals signed up to it in 2021 when Scott Morrison was prime minister and Barnaby Joyce was deputy prime minister and Nationals leader.

The council’s resolutions are not binding on the parliamentary party, but the timing of the council and the parliamentary party meeting was coordinated, given it was clear where the party was moving.

Nationals leader David Littleproud told a Sunday news conference, “We are not walking away from reducing emissions. We can peg ourselves to the rest of the world. If the world moves we move with them”.

He described this as an “agile” model, and was anxious to distance it from denying climate change.

Litteproud said Australia had cut emissions more than like countries. “OECD countries have been cutting their emissions by 1% per year. Australia has been cutting its emissions by about 2% per year – double the OECD rate.”

The Nationals policy would tie the reduction to the average of OECD countries (this would exclude China and India which are not full OECD members). Under this formula the Albanese government’s 2035 target of a 62%-70% cut on 2005 levels would come down to a 30%-40% cut.

“Our emissions cuts will be capped and calibrated, which is common sense,” Littleproud said.

“The responsibility will be shared and transparent,” he said.

He pointed to the “proven model” of the Emissions Reduction Fund, saying that in 2014-2023 it “facilitated real emission reductions that didn’t ruin the economy.

“We will incentivise lower emissions through a renewed Emissions Reduction Fund. This will be a small fraction of the $9 billion now being spent each year on net-zero subsidies, regulations, and administrative costs.

“Our approach will increase investment in cheaper electricity by broadening the Capacity Investment Scheme [which presently excludes coal and gas] to include all energy technologies and remove the moratorium on nuclear energy,” Littleproud said.

Senator Matt Canavan, one of those leading the work on the new policy, said that under the Albanese government’s plans Australia would be cutting its emissions at a rate three times more than the rest of the world.

Littleproud said he had informed Opposition Leader Sussan Ley of the Nationals’ position. After the Liberal Party reached its position the two parties would talk. He would not speculate on what the Liberals would do.

Liberals gave their views on net zero on Friday at a meeting organised by a Coalition backbench committee.

Within the Liberal Party there is a spectrum of views, with hardline conservatives wanting to ditch the net zero commitment, some moderates strongly believing in keeping the 2050 target firmly in place, and yet others seeking a compromise such as retaining the target as an aspiration.

Environment Minister Murray Watt said once again in the Coalition “we’re seeing the tail wagging the dog”.

“We’ve got the National Party, which didn’t even rate 4% of the vote in the last federal election, dictating terms to the Liberal Party who claim to be the majority party in a coalition,” Watt told the ABC,

He said it was a repeat of the nuclear issue “where the National Party went out first to drag the Liberal Party into supporting nuclear, only to be resoundingly rejected by the Australian people at the last election”.

The Greens Sarah Hanson-Young denounced the Nationals’ policy move – and sought to invoke it in relation to another issue, the government’s attempt to get a deal with the opposition or the Greens for its changes to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

“The question I have for the Labor party now is how on earth can you work with such a ridiculous, out-of-touch party like the Coalition in order to pass your environment laws over the next few weeks, or indeed into next year?” Hanson-Young said.

Crossbencher Zali Steggall said the Nationals’ decision showed they were “captured by fossil fuel interests”.

Another independent, Allegra Spender, said the Liberals “are left with a choice – either be honest that the Nationals are once again setting the Coalition’s climate policy, whatever words the Libs come up with to dress up their own policy, or split with the Nationals altogether”.

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: Nationals dump net zero – say Australia shouldn’t cut emissions faster than comparable countries – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-nationals-dump-net-zero-say-australia-shouldnt-cut-emissions-faster-than-comparable-countries-268100

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gemma McKibbin, Senior Research Fellow in Social Work, The University of Melbourne

Allegations of sexual abuse by early childhood educators have rocked Australia in recent months.

Now, the ABC’s investigation into the childcare sector has revealed hundreds more cases – this time committed by children against other children.

But some distressed parents have told the ABC their concerns were not taken seriously by the centre or police because it happened between children.

So, when is sexual behaviour from children normal and when is it abusive? And how can we intervene to make sure it doesn’t keep happening?

What is child-on-child sexual abuse?

These kinds of incidents can be difficult to pin down – and even to describe.

Practitioners and researchers often use the term “harmful sexual behaviour” to acknowledge abusive behaviour can be driven by childhood trauma, and to avoiding stigmatising children who sexually harm.

But research I have done with colleagues interviewing victim-survivors shows they often prefer the term “child-on-child sexual abuse”. It also seems to be the term people are using to seek help and information on platforms such as Reddit and among some survivor advocates.

So, what is it?

Children’s sexual behaviour is typically understood on a continuum, from “normal” to “problematic” through to “harmful”.

At pre-school age:

• normal sexual behaviour might involve playing “mummies and daddies” or using “rude” words to be funny

• problematic sexual behaviour might mean children trying to expose their own genitals or those of other children, or trying to engage siblings or others in masturbation (touching themselves or each other).

• harmful sexual behaviour can involve forcing other children into penetrative acts, such as oral sex, or coercing other children into sexual “play”.

Read more:
7 ways to teach little kids about body safety before they can talk

Victim-survivors of this kind of abuse may feel confused about their experiences, even as adults, because they were made to feel complicit or the abuse was not taken seriously. Adults may dismiss the behaviour as kids’ normal exploration or experimentation.

But child-on-child sexual abuse is not normal. The impacts on victim-survivors are profoundly negative and lifelong, comparable to adult-perpetrated sexual abuse.

What we know – and don’t know – about why it happens

We actually know very little about very young children in Australia who develop problematic sexual behaviours.

But the evidence we do have shows early childhood educators often receive training about mandatory reporting of child abuse, but no specific training about how to identify and intervene when child-on-child sexual abuse occurs.

One 2002 study from the United States looked at 37 preschool aged children with problematic sexual behaviours. It found more were female (65%) than male (35%), contrary to studies in school aged children. And while we know harmful sexual behaviour can stem from abuse, many (62%) did not have histories of sexual abuse.

However, the majority had been exposed to other forms of sexual activity: 35% had seen sexually explicit imagery and 27% had witnessed their parents have sex.

What should intervention involve?

Some evidence suggests most children who display harmful sexual behaviour do not go on to perpetrate abuse as adults.

This is true when children receive therapeutic intervention by a specialist practitioner who works with harmful sexual behaviour in children, such as a social worker, counsellor or psychologist.

They work with children and young people and their families, to develop safety plans and help them understand how and why the abusive behaviour developed, and what can be done to prevent abuse in the future.

But there is a gap in our understanding of how best to identify and most effectively address this growing issue. A new national framework for approaches to children with harmful sexual behaviours will help guide clinical practice when the National Office for Child Safety releases it. We don’t yet know when this will be.

Colleagues and I have also helped develop a program to address child-on-child sexual abuse, called “Power to Kids in Schools”. The program trains educators how to have “brave conversations” about healthy relationships, exploitation and sexual safety.

It also helps them identify problematic and harmful sexual behaviours and intervene appropriately. For example, an educator may notice behaviour changes and ask directly if the child is experiencing abuse or exploitation from another child.

This kind of program could be adapted to use in childcare centres, and help fill the gap so educators understand better how to actively intervene.

We are also developing a website and helpline called “What’s OK?” Australia, based on successful models in the United Kingdom and United States. School aged children and young people will be able to access anonymous help if they are worried about their sexual thoughts and behaviours.

What you can do

Attention this week has been on sexual abuse in childcare centres. But child-on-child sexual abuse can happen anywhere, to any child. There are particularly alarming forms of child-on-child sexual abuse emerging that are sadistic, often perpetrated by groups of teen boys and young men.

At early ages, one of the most protective things we can do is teach kids about body safety – and we can do this at any age, even before they can talk.

But it is equally important to target contextual factors, such as children’s access to sexually explicit material and platforms that facilitate sexual abuse.

As safe adults, it is also our responsibility to learn about this form of abuse and to stay vigilant.

If a child discloses sexual abuse by another child, do not dismiss it. Believe them, and act to make it stop.

If this story has raised any issues for you, please contact one of the services below:

• Lifeline, 24-hour crisis support and suicide prevention: 13 11 14
• Bravehearts, counselling and support for survivors of child sexual abuse: 1800 272 831
• Kids Helpline (ages 5–25 and parents): 1800 55 1800

Gemma McKibbin receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Centre for Action on Child Sexual Abuse.

– ref. How to recognise child-on-child sexual abuse – and how to respond appropriately – https://theconversation.com/how-to-recognise-child-on-child-sexual-abuse-and-how-to-respond-appropriately-268762

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daryl Higgins, Professor & Director, Institute of Child Protection Studies, Australian Catholic University

Parents have spoken about harrowing cases of their young children being abused by other children in daycare centres, as part of an ABC investigation into the New South Wales sector.

How common is sexually abusive behaviour between children?

Why does it happen? And what can daycare centres do about it?

Read more:
7 ways to teach little kids about body safety before they can talk

What does the data say?

There is no national data to track these incidents in childcare centres.

The national childcare regulator reports on the number of “serious incidents”. But there is a lack of detail around what these involve and they don’t even necessarily include child abuse.

States and territories also report on “reportable conduct allegations” (claims of abuse of children) in early childhood. But there are inconsistent standards, expectations and enforcement mechanisms across jurisdictions.

The best data we have about all forms of child sexual abuse is from the 2023 Australian Child Maltreatment Study. As part of the study, a nationally representative sample 8,503 Australians aged 16 and older were asked about their experiences of child maltreatment, including child sexual abuse.

Overall, 28.5% of the group reported they had experienced child sexual abuse. The interviewer then asked who did this to them. As a proportion of the population, here’s what they said about abuse from other young people:

• 10% of Australians reported child sexual abuse from other known children or adolescents (not romantic partners)

• 2.5% reported sexual abuse from adolescent romantic partners

• 1.4% reported sexual abuse from an unknown adolescent

• 1.6% reported sexual abuse from a sibling.

As the study relied on adults recalling childhood experiences, it may mean it’s an under-representation of cases, particularly very early in childhood.

We need a lot more data about what’s going in the early years.

Is the problem getting worse?

Nevertheless, the Australian Child Maltreatment Study study suggests sexual abuse between peers is becoming more common.

Those aged 16-24 were more likely to have been sexually abused by a peer (18.2%) than by an adult (11.7%). Older age groups were more likely to have been abused by adults. For example, of those aged 25-44, 14.1% reported having experienced child sexual abuse by another young person, compared to 17.9% by an adult.

This pattern suggests we have made some progress in reducing the rates of adult perpetrated child sexual abuse, but sexual abuse between peers is increasing.

Read more:
New research shows some gains but fresh difficulties in combating child sexual abuse

Why is this happening?

We can understand this at both an individual and situational level.

If a child is engaging in harmful or abusive sexual behaviours, this may be because they have been exposed to sexual abuse, violence in the home, pornography, or other trauma. They may be reenacting or processing something they have seen or experienced.

But there are also situational factors that enable this behaviour, such as a lack of supervision. We know this is an issue in childcare centres if there are low staff numbers, educators are overworked or there is a lack of adequate training.

How can centres respond?

Research tells us we need to create safe environments for little (and bigger) kids. On top of adequate supervision, this means:

• everyone, from kids to educators and parents, understands body safety (what is appropriate touching? What are healthy boundaries?)

• everyone is able to recognise if something is not right

• everyone feels safe to talk to someone if they need to

• trusted adults take incidents or concerns seriously.

This then means, even if a child is at risk of harming a peer or inappropriate touching – there is little chance they will have the opportunity to do so. And there is a culture to support healthy interactions between kids.

It should not matter who is in the room or the playground, every child deserves to feel and be safe.

Read more:
With a new minister for early childhood education, what can the federal government do to make centres safer?

How should childcare centres talk about bodies?

Children are naturally interested in their bodies and other people’s bodies. This is part of growing up and learning about their world.

If curious children do something inappropriate, good quality childcare centres will deal with these episodes calmly, as they arise. For example, a child might say:

I felt yuck because Sam asked me to pull down my pants.

Educators should respond in a kind, empathetic way and not shame anyone involved.

They can use the situation to explain we don’t ask our friends to do this. And just because someone asks us to do something to or with our bodies, it does not mean we have to say yes. We often think of consent education being the job of high schools, but this education needs to start much earlier.

Educators can also model this. For example, with little children, they should let them know they will be changing their nappy. For example,

You need a nappy change because you’ve done a wee. Do you want Alex or Kim to do it?

This teaches children a safe adult only touches your genitals for the purposes of care or hygiene, and always with communication and respect.

These micro-level practices build up over time. Ideally, they can also help show parents what is healthy and safe behaviour.

We should not demonise little kids

Lastly, we should not demonise children who engage in harmful sexual behaviour.
Most children do not go on to offend later in life.

What they need is support, guidance and supervision, not stigma or exclusion. While schools or childcare centres sometimes isolate children who have harmed others, exclusion rarely addresses the root cause and can make the problem worse.

Instead, we need to create opportunities for positive, healthy relationships and help children experience safe and appropriate forms of touch. For example, high-fives, hand-holding and hugs within clear boundaries and supportive adult supervision.

Abusive behaviours between children are deeply distressing, but are also preventable. By ensuring strong supervision, body safety education from early years, and responding to children with empathy rather than fear, we can protect kids.

Daryl Higgins receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council (as one of the Chief Investigators on the Australian Child Maltreatment Study), Australian government and state/territory government departments.

Gabrielle worked with the Australian Child Maltreatment Study (ACMS) team as part of her PhD candidature. She has also previously worked for Bravehearts in various roles, including for the Turning Corners program, which provides support to young people who have displayed harmful sexual behaviours.

– ref. How common is sexually abusive behaviour between children? How should daycare centres respond? – https://theconversation.com/how-common-is-sexually-abusive-behaviour-between-children-how-should-daycare-centres-respond-268760

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Graffam-O’Meara, PhD Candidate in Theatre, Monash University

What makes a good death? Quietly surrounded by friends and family or going out in a flash of blazing glory (whatever that means)?

Would you like to know when you’re going to die?

Will knowing when you die help you to appreciate all the small finalities – the last time you drive a car, the last touch of grass on your fingertips, the last time you feel your partner’s breath on your cheek, a final kiss on the lips?

Or do these small closures matter at all when looking backwards is a distraction from “the great unknown” that lies ahead?

Do you deserve the right to choose when you die?

Author Cory Taylor was confronted with these questions when diagnosed with melanoma after a biopsy of a mole on the back of her right leg. She was just about to turn 50.

Death in modern Western society exists in a peculiar limbo – simultaneously sanitised and sensationalised. We’ve outsourced dying to hospitals, nursing homes and palliative care units, creating physical and emotional distance that leaves too many people unprepared for when loss arrives.

In her 2016 book Dying: A Memoir, published just months before her death, Taylor writes:

For this is one of the most lamentable consequences of our reluctance to talk about death. We have lost our common rituals and our common language for dying, and must either improvise, or fall back on traditions about which we feel deeply ambivalent.

Taylor exposes the cost of our cultural avoidance: by refusing to engage meaningfully with mortality, Western society has left individuals to face death’s deepest questions in isolation.

Playwright Benjamin Law brings Dying: A Memoir to the stage in a one-woman show starring Genevieve Morris, directed by Jean Tong for Melbourne Theatre Company.

Immediate intimacy

Morris gives a commanding performance. She brings a formidable presence to her portrayal of Taylor and fluidly inhabits a range of characters in Taylor’s world: doctors, siblings and acquaintances connected to Exit International, a support and advocacy group for voluntary euthanasia.

Tong’s direction creates immediate intimacy with the audience. Morris begins out of character, gently acknowledging the difficulty of discussing death while honouring Taylor, before the performance proper begins. This connection with her audience is strengthened across the show.

Set and costume design (James Lew), lighting design (Rachel Lee) and sound design (Darius Kedros) all function to support Morris’ delivery, its constant movement and fluidity.

Red theatre chairs on wheels form the main set piece, which Morris rearranges into various configurations. The surrounding black walls feature small reveals and cracks of light that reflect thematic shifts.

The sound design anchors each scene with precision: the hum of a doctor’s waiting room, the noise and clatter of a restaurant, the clinical quiet of a psychologist’s office. Mostly understated, it punctuates key moments with purposeful intensity, working to mark emotional shifts.

Oppressive lighting pervades the production, its unrelenting bleakness mirroring the subject matter too literally. The lack of variation or contrast flattens what could be a more visually complex exploration of its themes.

Evading the emotionally complex

Law’s persistent examination of the end of Taylor’s life within his adaptation reveals an evasion of the book’s more emotionally complex and spiritually challenging entanglements.

Taylor’s memoir spans three interconnected acts; Law’s adaptation fixates primarily on the first, circling questions about euthanasia and the right to a “good death” in ways that lean into and recapitulate parts of popular debate.

Acts two and three of Taylor’s memoir overflow with childhood recollections – vivid, nostalgic landscapes painted through thick descriptive prose and family memory. These sections reflect closely the relationship with her mother and father, giving rise to questions of: where do we come from? What is home? How are we formed and by who?

This complex and poetic examination of life is excised from Law’s play. But, for his part, he manages to embed his signature biting wit while telling Taylor’s story.

On the frustrations of managing one’s final affairs, and specifically password retrieval, Morris turns to the audience and flatly delivers the line: “If cancer doesn’t kill me, two factor authentication will.”

The situation with an over-enthusiastic therapist is described as a “government-subsidized hostage situation”.

These moments of searing humour help make the story feel fresh and grounded.

However, Law chooses didacticism to end the play as Morris steps out of character again. The choice drains the production of Taylor’s sharp intelligence and emotional depth, leaving the audience instructed rather than stirred. Despite a chorus of sniffles amongst the audience, the ending is strangely unmoving.

It avoids the mess and the grit that fascinates Taylor in composing her memoir. She quotes T.S. Eliot:

In my beginning is my end
Old fires to ash, and ashes to the earth
Which is already flesh, fur and faeces
Bone of man and beast, cornstalk and leaf

The kind of raw and unflinching acceptance of death’s physical reality that inspired Taylor is upended in favour of what is, sadly, a little too sterile and neat.

Dying: A Memoir is at Melbourne Theatre Company until November 29.

Jonathan Graffam-O’Meara 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. A stage adaptation of Dying: A Memoir asks the big questions about death – but ends up strangely unmoving – https://theconversation.com/a-stage-adaptation-of-dying-a-memoir-asks-the-big-questions-about-death-but-ends-up-strangely-unmoving-267635