Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bridianne O’Dea, Little Heroes Professor of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Flinders University

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised a Coalition government would spend an extra A$400 million on youth mental health services.

This is in addition to raising the number of subsidised psychology sessions from ten to 20, which had been previously announced.

While extra funding for youth mental health is welcome, it’s important to target this in ways that will make a real difference to young people.

In our recent research, we asked young people about their experiences of waiting for mental health support, how they coped in the meantime, and what would really make a difference while they waited.

Rates of mental illness rising

An estimated one in seven Australian children and adolescents had a mental illness in the past 12 months. Rates of mental illness have also increased over time, particularly among younger generations.

The COVID pandemic led to a rapid rise in the number of children and young people seeing their GP for mental health problems. Visits for depression rose by 61% and eating disorders by 56% compared with before the pandemic.

The number of visits to the emergency department in New South Wales for self-harm, or plans or thoughts about suicide, have also increased since COVID.

The annual Mission Australia Survey reveals young Australians see mental health as one of their biggest challenges, with thousands calling for more support.

But there are long waits for care

Despite the greater demand for mental health treatment in Australia, there is very little information on how long young people wait to access it.

The Australian Psychological Society reported that during the pandemic, 88% of psychologists increased their wait times and one in five were not taking on new clients. This meant about half of people waited more than three months to begin psychological treatment. But this is for clients of all ages.

There is also little information on how young people experience the wait for treatment.

We asked young people about the wait for care

We recently published research on the wait times for mental health treatment for Australian teens.

We asked 375 young people aged 13–17 about the mental health care they have tried to access for their anxiety and depression and how long they waited to start treatment. We also asked them about their mental health while they waited, what helped them cope, and the types of support they received.

We found that on average, teens were waiting more than three months for their first session of treatment. Most teens waited to access psychologists and psychiatrists after a GP referral.

While their wait times varied, nearly all teens felt they waited “too long”.

Longer wait times were linked to poorer mental health, with more than 90% of teens reporting high distress while they waited. Many of the teens felt their feelings of worry and sadness had worsened and they had used risky and unhealthy ways to cope, such as spending more time alone, sleeping more, self-harming, and using alcohol and other drugs.

Most teens did not receive any support from their health-care providers during the wait time, despite wanting it.

One female 17-year-old had waited six months for treatment and told us:

It felt like I was hanging over a cliff and was just told to hold on.

Teens also felt their parents would benefit from greater support during the wait time. But we need more research to better understand how to help families.

Together, these findings show we desperately need to address wait times for young people’s mental health treatment.

Teens know the support they need

If teens are to wait for mental health treatment, they told us they need support while they do so.

Young people wanted more regular contact and “check-ins” from their service providers, someone to talk to during the wait, as well as more useful information on positive ways to cope.

Most teens in our study used digital mental health tools – such as mental health websites, online mental health checks, mobile apps, online chat services and forums – while they waited.

We’re developing digital mental health tools, in consultation with young people and GPs, to support doctors to care for their teen patients when treatment isn’t available right away. We’re testing the system of short digital mental health programs, supportive text messages and peer support in NSW this year.

But not all teens we surveyed found digital mental health tools helpful. So we need to offer teens a range of supports – from their family, their GP, and from their referred service provider – to help them cope while they wait for treatment.

What can governments do?

We must carefully consider when, where and how mental health funds are invested. If governments wish to see more young people treated for their mental health problems, then we need to look at how our health-care system will cope with the growing demand.

We also need national, transparent benchmarks for how long young Australians wait for mental health treatment. Only some health services in Australia have this. Other countries, such as the United Kingdom, have something similar to minimise the health risks of young people waiting too long for care.

Ultimately, though, we need to prevent mental health issues from starting in the first place. That would reduce the need for treatment, the very type young Australians are waiting too long for.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Bridianne O’Dea is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Investigator Fellowship (1197249) and a MRFF Millions Minds Mental Health Grant (2035416). Bridianne O’Dea received funding from the Buxton Family Foundation, Australian Unity, the Frontiers Technology Clinical Academic Group Industry Connection Seed Funding Scheme and the UNSW Medicine, Neuroscience, Mental Health and Addiction Theme and SPHERE Clinical Academic Group Collaborative Research Funding to conduct this research. Bridianne O’Dea is a member of the Australian Society for Mental Health Research and the International Society for Research on Internet Interventions. Bridianne O’Dea’s current work has received pro bono support from Deloitte Digital Australia.

– ref. The Coalition has promised $400m for youth mental health. Young people told us what they need – https://theconversation.com/the-coalition-has-promised-400m-for-youth-mental-health-young-people-told-us-what-they-need-253328

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fei Gao, Lecturer in Taxation, Discipline of Accounting, Governance & Regulation, The University of Sydney, University of Sydney

Tuesday night’s federal budget revealed a sharp drop in what was once a major source of revenue for the government – the tobacco excise.

This financial year, the government expects to earn revenue from the tobacco excise of A$7.4 billion. That’s down sharply from $12.6 billion in 2022–23, and an earlier peak of $16.3 billion in 2019–20.

The government expects this downward trend to continue. Australia’s heavy tobacco taxation has driven many consumers towards illicit cigarettes.

But this is more than just a problem for government coffers accustomed to revenue from the tobacco tax.

It presents a major challenge for a public health policy that has long relied on increasing tobacco excise duty as its primary tool to reduce smoking.

Read more:
The 2025 budget has few savings and surprises but it also ignores climate change

Climbing tax rates, falling revenue

If government revenue from tobacco is falling, it isn’t because we aren’t trying to tax it. Cigarette prices in Australia are among the highest in the world, with taxes making up a substantial chunk of the price.

About $1.40 of the cost of each cigarette represents excise duty. GST is payable on top of that.

Australia’s tobacco excise is indexed every March and September, in line with average weekly ordinary-time earnings.

On top of indexation, the excise rate is currently being increased by
an additional 5% each year, for a period of three years that began in September 2023.

This policy is grounded in the principle that higher costs deter smoking.
And smoking rates have fallen in recent decades. About 8% of Australians aged 14 and over still smoke daily, down from almost 20% in 2001.

Some of that fall has been offset by the rapid ascent of vaping. About 7% of Australians use e-cigarettes – about half of whom vape daily.

But while legal cigarette prices are prohibitively high for some, illegal alternatives are widely available and significantly cheaper. That’s because these unregulated products bypass excise and GST entirely.

Unintended consequences

The estimated value of illicit tobacco entering the Australian market has soared, from $980 million in 2016–17 to more than $6 billion in 2022–23. Of this $6 billion, almost $3 billion entered the market undetected.

The actual decline in tobacco excise revenue, as exposed in the latest budget papers, has been much more significant than previously forecast.

To make things worse, the cost of enforcement is rising. The 2025–26 federal budget allocates an additional $156 million over the next two years to combat illicit tobacco — on top of the $188 million committed in the previous budget.

There are other broader impacts on overall tax revenue. Convenience stores lose legitimate sales to illegal tobacco vendors, resulting in less corporate tax income.

Holding back broader public health efforts

On other measures, Australia has long been a global leader in tobacco control. The first health warnings on cigarette packets appeared in 1973.

In 2006, graphic health warnings were introduced. And in 2011, Australia pioneered plain packaging laws.

Such public health measures are set to get even stronger this year, with new requirements for every individual cigarette sold to have an “on-product” health warning such as “causes 16 cancers” or “shortens your life”.

These new regulations come into effect on April 1 2025, but retailers will have a three-month transition period to phase out existing stock.

The tight transition period may prove challenging for the legitimate cigarette trade.

But it is unlikely those who ply the unlawful trade in illegal tobacco – or their customers – will be particularly bothered by this latest attempt to wean the public off the habit.

No easy solution

The increasing heavy tobacco excise and the new law requiring warning messages on individual cigarettes have the potential to reduce tobacco consumption among those who purchase the product legally.

However, suppliers of black-market cigarettes – who now comprise an estimated 18% of market share – are unlikely to allow this initiative to affect their illegal trade.

The widespread move to vaping, with poor regulation, has further fuelled the black market for both products.

It is going too far to draw parallels with the prohibition era in the United States, when the manufacture, transportation and sale of alcohol was illegal. This was a brief but disastrous experiment in social engineering with unfortunate and, in retrospect, arguably predictable consequences.

But there are some unfortunate similarities when it comes to Australia’s tobacco tax policy, which has inadvertently encouraged black markets, criminality and organised crime.

Yet for the government, lowering the excise tax to encourage smokers back to legal cigarettes would be completely out of step with its public health objectives. Legal or illegal, black-market cigarettes and vapes still contribute to health risks, undermining the public health goals behind regulatory controls.

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. Tobacco excise revenue has tanked amid a booming black market. That’s a diabolical problem for the government – https://theconversation.com/tobacco-excise-revenue-has-tanked-amid-a-booming-black-market-thats-a-diabolical-problem-for-the-government-253329

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Digital Storytelling Team, The Conversation, The Conversation

➡️ View the full interactive version of this article here

Digital Storytelling Team 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. Policy tracker: how will Labor, the Coalition, the Greens and the independents make Australia better? – https://theconversation.com/policy-tracker-how-will-labor-the-coalition-the-greens-and-the-independents-make-australia-better-253345

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tanya Latty, Associate Professor, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney

Ants are among nature’s greatest success stories, with an estimated 22,000 species worldwide.

Tropical Australia in particular is a global hotspot for ant diversity. Some researchers believe it could hold some of the richest ant biodiversity on the planet, with an estimated 5,000 species in the tropics alone.

But if ants are so successful out in nature, why do they so often turn up in our homes and even upper-level apartments?

And what can we do to keep them out?

There’s probably an ant near you right now

Ants dominate the planet in terms of sheer abundance.

At any given moment, there are an estimated 20 quadrillion ants alive — that’s 20 followed by 15 zeros.

In fact, for every human being, there are roughly 2.5 million ants.

So the short answer to “Why are there ants in my house?” is simply this: there are a lot of ants.

We live on a planet where ants outnumber us by an almost unimaginable margin. The fact that a few occasionally wander into our homes shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Ants work from home (yours, that is)

Ants owe much of their success to their highly social nature.

Within the colony, some individuals (female queens and male drones) are responsible for reproduction, while others (workers) are busy caring for the young, cleaning or foraging for food. Workers ants are always female.

Ant colonies do not have leaders. They are an excellent example of collective behaviour and swarm intelligence, where individuals following relatively simple rules can collectively achieve far more than any individual could alone.

Just as the individual neurons in your brain can’t compose music, play football, or read articles, the brain as a whole can achieve all these feats and more.

Colonies of co-operating ants are capable of amazingly sophisticated behaviours such as:

• building efficient trail networks
• building living bridges with their bodies, and
• “farming” fungi and aphids (small, sap-sucking insects that feed on plants).

Ants even outperform humans on some cooperative cognition tasks.

The highly social nature of ants is a big part of their success — and a key reason why they are so good at finding their way into our homes.

Each colony contains thousands of intrepid workers, many of which are constantly searching for new food sources. If even a single ant discovers a valuable resource in your home, it can quickly share that information with its nest mates.

Different ant species use different methods of communication, but the ones that most often invade our homes tend to use “pheromone trails”.

When an ant finds a food source, she returns to her nest leaving little drops of pheromones as she goes; this trail guides other ants from their nest directly to the food source.

This highly efficient communication system means a single ant can rapidly recruit thousands of its nest mates to any food it finds.

Ants may also come inside in search of water, particularly when the weather is hot.

Some species prefer to build their nests in humid environments, which might explain why they are often found in bathrooms.

I once discovered an entire colony of sugar ants nesting inside my aquarium filter! The combination of high humidity and an enclosed structure made it an ideal place to build a nest.

On the flip side, heavy rains can flood ant nests, prompting colonies to seek drier ground — sometimes leading them straight into our homes.

I live in an upper-floor apartment. How did ants get in?

Many ant species are exceptional climbers, thanks to tiny adhesive pads and fine hairs on their feet.

These specialised structures allow ants to stick to walls and find footholds even on surfaces that appear smooth to the human eye.

Remarkably, some canopy-dwelling ants have evolved a behaviour known as “controlled descent” which protects them when they fall. By adjusting the position of their abdomens, falling ants can steer their trajectory, directing themselves back toward the tree trunk and safety.

How do I keep ants out of my house?

Well, good luck. No matter what you do, ants will probably enter your house at one time or another.

Finding a few ants in your home doesn’t mean your house is dirty. We simply live on a planet that is absolutely teeming with ants.

To minimise unwanted ant visits, start by eliminating any potential food sources that could feed a hungry ant.

Store all food in sealed airtight containers, clean behind the fridge and inside/under the toaster, avoid leaving pet food out longer than needed and make sure your bins are securely sealed.

Ants have tiny stomachs, so even small crumbs or the residue from spilled sugary drinks can be enough to entice them back.

If ants seem to be following each other in a line, try disrupting their chemical trail using vinegar or bleach. Be warned, however: ants are very good at repairing broken trail networks.

Seal any small cracks or entrance points that might allow ants to get into your home and make sure your windows and doors have well-fitting fly screens.

Insecticidal baits can kill ant colonies, but before you deploy the nuclear option, ask yourself: what harm are the ants really doing?

Most common home-invading ants do not sting and are pretty harmless. They can usually be redirected simply by removing their food source.

Ants are nature’s clean-up crew, tirelessly scavenging waste and helping to maintain a healthy, balanced ecosystem.

They also play important roles as predators and seed dispersers.

Before reaching for insecticides, consider whether a few ants in your house are truly a problem.

Tanya Latty co-founded and volunteers for conservation organisation Invertebrates Australia, is former president of the Australasian Society for the Study of Animal Behaviour and is on the Education committee for the Australian Entomological Society. She receives funding from the Australian Research Council, NSW Saving our Species, and Agrifutures Australia.

– ref. Ants in your house? Here’s how they get everywhere – even high up in tall buildings – https://theconversation.com/ants-in-your-house-heres-how-they-get-everywhere-even-high-up-in-tall-buildings-250625

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hamish McCallum, Emeritus Professor, infectious disease ecology, Griffith University

Last week, Queensland Health alerted the public about the risk of Australian bat lyssavirus, after a bat found near a school just north of Brisbane was given to a wildlife carer group.

The bat later died, but it was not confirmed whether it carried the virus.

This is not unusual. Volunteer wildlife carers respond to thousands of calls from the public every year after encountering sick, injured and orphaned bats. And testing them all routinely for the virus is not warranted or feasible.

Here’s what you need to know about the risk of catching Australian bat lyssavirus and how it can be treated.

What is bat lyssavirus?

Australian bat lyssavirus belongs to the same group of viruses that includes rabies – one of the most notorious diseases humans can catch from animals. Rabies causes about 59,000 deaths worldwide a year, mainly after dog bites. It is almost always fatal once symptoms appear.

Australian bat lyssavirus was discovered in 1996. There have been only three confirmed cases of the virus in humans in Australia, the most recent in 2013. All three were fatal.

Fortunately, because Australian bat lyssavirus and rabies are so closely related, the preventative measures that have been developed internationally against rabies can also protect humans from the effects of Australian bat lyssavirus.

Australian bat lyssavirus and rabies have a long incubation period (the period between exposure to infection and appearance of symptoms). If preventative treatments are given during the incubation period, they are highly effective in preventing disease and saving lives.

Such treatment reduces what is already a very low risk of illness and death to effectively zero.

How could I be exposed to the virus?

The virus is present in the saliva of some Australian bats, including the large flying foxes (fruit-eating bats) and some smaller bats that eat insects. But the proportion of bats infected by the virus is normally very low – less than 0.5%.

Infected bats may become sick and die, but some may appear unaffected. In other words, you can’t always tell just by looking at a bat whether it’s infected or not. However, there is evidence the virus is present at a higher level in sick bats than in healthy ones.

You cannot be exposed to the virus by being under a flying fox roost, even if the bats poo on you. You cannot be exposed by having bats in your roof or in a shed.

But the virus can be transferred to a human via either a scratch or bite. That’s if an infected bat scratches or bites you, or if their saliva is transmitted to an existing wound.

So you do need to be careful if you come across a sick or injured bat, or you find a child playing with a bat.

There is no evidence the virus regularly infects dogs and cats, although rabies does.

Nevertheless, given that Australian bat lyssavirus is a close relative of rabies and that rabies will infect most mammals, the possibility that it may sometimes spill over to mammals other than humans cannot be eliminated.

For example, in 2013 two horses in the same paddock became infected and had to be euthanised. The source of infection was not identified.

So you should also seek advice if you see an animal such as a dog or cat play with a dead or injured bat. Contact a wildlife care group for advice about the bat and a vet to discuss post-exposure treatment for your pet.

How great is the risk?

It is important to put the risk posed by Australian bat lyssavirus into perspective.

Although each of the three deaths known to have been caused by the virus since 1996 is tragic, in 2017-2018 alone, 12 people in Australia died from
bee or wasp stings.

Bats play an important role in our ecosystems. Without the pollination and pest control services bats provide, our increasingly fragmented native forests would struggle to recover after fires, and we’d need to use more pesticides on our crops. There is also no evidence bat lyssaviruses are increasing in Australian bat populations.

Is the risk to humans changing?

However, as we encroach upon natural habitats via land clearing we are likely to have increased contact with wildlife, including bats.

Mass mortality events in bats in Australia – such as those in recent years caused by extreme heat or bat paralysis syndrome (thought to be caused by bats ingesting an environmental toxin) – are likely to lead to increased contact between people, their pets and vulnerable bats.

The risk to human health is therefore likely increasing, albeit from a very low level.

What should I do?

First, don’t panic. Infection is extraordinarily rare and will continue to be so.

Second, don’t interfere with bat populations. Do not pick up sick or injured bats and do not allow your children or pets to play with them. Keep your pets inside at night to minimise potential contact with bats.

Third, if you or a member of your family is bitten or scratched by a bat, or suspect you have been, seek medical attention, including post-exposure treatment. People who regularly handle bats, such as wildlife carers or researchers, should be vaccinated in advance. They are also trained to handle bats safely and use appropriate personal protection equipment.

If you find a sick or injured bat, contact your local wildlife rehabilitation group or veterinarian.

Hamish McCallum receives funding from the US NSF and fron the EU Horizons program. His work on bat virus disease ecology has previously been funded by the US NSF and DARPA

Alison Peel receives funding from the US NIH. Her work on bat virus disease ecology has previously been funded by the ARC, US NSF and DARPA

Cinthia is a volunteer wildlife carer for a not-for-profit organisation based in Southeast Queensland that works with bats.

– ref. What is Australian bat lyssavirus? Can I catch it from bat poo? What if bats roost near me? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-australian-bat-lyssavirus-can-i-catch-it-from-bat-poo-what-if-bats-roost-near-me-252632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan Gaffney, Associate Professor of Palaeolithic Archaeology, University of Oxford

Owing to its violent political history, West Papua’s vibrant human past has long been ignored.

Unlike its neighbour, the independent country of Papua New Guinea, West Papua’s cultural history is poorly understood. But now, for the first time, we have recorded this history in detail, shedding light on 50 millennia of untold stories of social change.

By examining the territory’s archaeology, anthropology and linguistics, our new book fits together the missing puzzle pieces in Australasia’s human history. The book is the first to celebrate West Papua’s deep past, involving authors from West Papua itself, as well as Indonesia, Australasia and beyond.

The new evidence shows West Papua is central to understanding how humans moved from Eurasia into the Australasian region, how they adapted to challenging new environments, independently developed agriculture, exchanged genes and languages, and traded exquisitely crafted objects.

Early seafaring and adaptation

During the Pleistocene epoch (2.5 million to 12,000 years ago), West Papua was connected to Australia in a massive continent called Sahul.

Archaeological evidence from the limestone chamber of Mololo Cave shows some of the first people to settle Sahul arrived on the shores of present-day West Papua. There they quickly adapted to a host of new ecologies.

The precise date of arrival of the first seafaring groups on Sahul is debated. However, a tree resin artefact from Mololo has been radiocarbon dated to show this happened more than 50,000 years ago.

Genetic analyses support this early arrival time to Sahul. Our work suggests these earliest seafarers crossed along the northern route, one of two passages through the Indonesian islands.

Interestingly, the first migrants carried with them the genetic legacy of intermarriages between our species, Homo sapiens, and the Denisovans, a now extinct species of hominins that lived in eastern Asia. Geneticists currently dispute whether these encounters took place in Southeast Asia, along a northerly or southerly route to Sahul, or even in Sahul itself.

In the same way modern European populations retain about 2% of Neanderthal ancestry, many West Papuans retain about 3% of Denisovan heritage.

As the Earth warmed at the end of the Pleistocene, rising seas split Sahul apart. The large savannah plains that joined West Papua and Papua New Guinea to Australia were submerged around 8,000 years ago. Much of West Papua’s southern and western coastlines became islands.

Social transformations during the past 10,000 years

As environments changed, so did people’s cuisine and culture.

We know from sites in Papua New Guinea that people developed their own agricultural systems between 10,000 and 6,000 years ago, at a similar time to innovations in Asia and the Americas. However, agricultural systems were not universally adopted across the island.

New chemical evidence from human tooth enamel in West Papua shows people retained a wide variety of diets, from fish and shellfish to forest plants and marsupials.

One of the key unanswered questions in West Papua’s history is when cultivation emerged and how it spread into other regions, including Southeast Asia. Taro, bananas, yams and sago were all initially cultivated in New Guinea and have become important staple crops around the world.

The arrival of pottery, some 3,000 years ago, represents movements of new people to the Pacific. These are best illustrated by iconic Lapita pottery, recorded by archaeologists from Papua New Guinea all the way to Samoa and Tonga.

Lapita pottery makers spoke Austronesian languages, which became the ancestors of today’s Polynesian languages, including Māori.

New pottery discoveries from Mololo Cave suggest the ancestors of Lapita pottery makers existed somewhere around West Papua. Finding the location of these ancestral Lapita settlements is a major priority for archaeological research in the territory.

Other evidence for social transformations includes rock paintings and even bronze axes. The latter were imported all the way from mainland Southeast Asia to West Papua around 2,000 years ago. Metal working was not practised in West Papua at this time and chemical analyses show some of these artefacts were made in northern Vietnam.

At all times in the past, people had a rich and complex material culture. But only a small fraction of these objects survive for archaeologists to study, especially in humid tropical conditions.

Living traditions and the movement of objects

From the early 1800s, when West Papua was part of the Dutch East Indies, colonial administrators, scientists and explorers exported tonnes of West Papuan artefacts to European museums. Sometimes the objects were traded or gifted, other times stolen outright.

In the early 1900s, many objects were also burned by missionaries who saw Indigenous material culture as evidence of paganism. The West Papuan objects that now inhabit museums in Europe, America, Australia and New Zealand are connections between modern people and their ancestral traditions.

Sometimes these objects represent people’s direct ancestors. Major work is currently underway to connect West Papuans with these collections and to repatriate some of these objects to museums in West Papua. Unfortunately, funding remains a central issue for these museums.

Many West Papuans continue to produce and use wooden carvings, string bags and shell ornaments. Anthropologists have described how people are actively reconfiguring their material culture, especially given the presence of new synthetic materials and a cash economy.

Far from being “ancient” people caught in the stone age – a stereotype propagated in both Indonesian and international media – West Papuans are actively confronting the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.

Despite our new findings, West Papua remains an enigma for researchers. It has a land area twice the size of Aotearoa New Zealand, but there are fewer than ten known archaeological sites that have been radiocarbon dated.

By contrast, Aotearoa has thousands of dated sites. This means West Papua is the least well researched part of the Pacific and there is much more work to be done. Crucially, Papuan scholars need to be at the heart of this research.

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. Fitting the ‘missing puzzle pieces’ – research sheds light on the deep history of social change in West Papua – https://theconversation.com/fitting-the-missing-puzzle-pieces-research-sheds-light-on-the-deep-history-of-social-change-in-west-papua-250616

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathy Reid, PhD Candidate, School of Cybernetics, Australian National University

Amazon has disabled two key privacy features in its Alexa smart speakers, in a push to introduce artificial intelligence-powered “agentic capabilities” and turn a profit from the popular devices.

Starting today (March 28), Alexa devices will send all audio recordings to the cloud for processing, and choosing not to save these recordings will disable personalisation features.

How do voice assistants work?

A voice assistant works by constantly listening for a “wake word”, such as “Alexa”. Once woken, it records the command that is spoken and matches it to an action, such as playing a music track. Matching a spoken command to an action requires what computer scientists call natural language understanding, which can take a lot of computer power.

Matching commands to actions can be done locally (on the device itself), or sound recordings can be uploaded to the cloud for processing. On-device processing has improved substantially in recent years, but is still less accurate than using the cloud, where more computer power is available.

Amazon is making two changes today

Alexa devices send recordings to the cloud by default. However, some high-end Echo models previously supported a setting called “Do not send voice recordings”.

If this setting was enabled, all recordings were processed locally. In practice, only a tiny fraction of Echo users (around 0.03% had this turned on.

In the first change, this setting is being disabled, and all recordings will be sent to the cloud.

Once in the cloud, recordings can be deleted or saved.

Saved recordings are used for Amazon’s Voice ID feature, which distinguishes between speakers in the same household and aims to provide a personalised experience.

Alexa users also have a setting called “Don’t save recordings”, which, if enabled, deletes cloud recordings once they’re processed. In the second change, if the “Don’t save recordings” setting is enabled, Voice ID will stop working, and with it, access to personalised features such as user-specific calendar events.

This two-step change means Alexa users need to make a trade-off between privacy and functionality.

Alexa loses a lot of money

Put simply, Amazon needs Echo devices to start making money.

As US voice assistant expert Joseph Turow has detailed, Amazon began selling Echo devices very cheaply as a “loss leader”. Amazon says it has sold more than 500 million Alexa devices, but between 2017 and 2021 alone the company lost more than US$25 billion on the project.

Amazon is looking to generative AI to turn the business around, with a US$8 billion investment in OpenAI competitor Anthropic.

In February, Amazon launched a new AI-powered Alexa+ system. It promises more natural interaction and the ability to carry out tasks such as booking flights. Alexa+ is currently only available in the United States.

“Agentic capabilities” such as booking flights require detailed profile information about the user on whose behalf they are acting. This would include details such as preferred products or services.

Voice ID and data from spoken commands assist Amazon in tying preferences to a particular person.

An AI-powered intermediary

How will Alexa+ help Amazon make money? The first way is via direct subscription fees: the service will eventually only be available to Amazon Prime members or people who pay US$19.99 per month.

But what may prove more important is that it will help Amazon to position itself as an intermediary between buyers and sellers. This is what Amazon already does with its existing e-commerce platform.

It’s easy to see the system in action when you search for a product on Amazon’s website. Alongside items sold directly by Amazon, you are presented with products from multiple sellers, each of whom pays Amazon to be listed.

Everybody pays the platform

Agentic capabilities are likely to have a similar business model. Service providers – such as airlines or restaurant reservation companies – would pay Amazon when Alexa+ refers customers to them.

Amazon’s move is part of a broader phenomenon termed “platform capitalism”. This takes in the crowdsourced content of social media platforms, “sharing economy” businesses such as AirBnb, and the automated gig work of the likes of Uber.

Platform capitalism has delivered benefits for consumers, but in general the greatest benefits flow to those who own the platforms and design their infrastructure, services and constraints.

How to protect your privacy

After receiving a US$25 million fine from the US Federal Trade Commission for retaining childrens’ voice recordings in contravention of US laws, Amazon has overhauled Alexa’s privacy settings.

The settings can be viewed and changed from the Alexa app on your smartphone, under “More > Alexa Privacy”. Alexa users may wish to review the settings in “Manage
your Alexa Data” to choose how long recordings are saved for and which
voice recordings to delete. Recordings may also be deleted using a voice
command.

As Alexa+ becomes available more widely, users will need to decide whether they are comfortable sharing data about their preferences with Amazon to enable agentic capabilities.

What are the alternatives?

For users who are uncomfortable with the privacy settings now available with Alexa, a private voice assistant may prove a better choice.

The Home Assistant Voice Preview is one example. It gives people the option to have voice recordings processed on-device, but offers less functionality than Alexa and can’t work with as many other services. It’s also not very user-friendly, being aimed more at technical tinkerers.

Users may face a trade-off between privacy and functionality, both within Alexa itself and when considering alternatives. They may also find themselves grappling with their own place in the increasingly inescapable systems of platform capitalism.

Kathy Reid receives funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) for her doctoral work and is a recipient of the Florence Violet McKenzie scholarship.

She currently contracts on a part-time basis to Mozilla Common Voice as a linguistic engineer. She is a past President of Linux Australia, Inc., an organisation dedicated to supporting open source communities and practices in the region. She was previously Director of Developer Relations at Mycroft.AI, a privacy-focused voice assistant, and held shares in the company, which is now dissolved. She has previously contracted with NVIDIA as a speech data specialist. NVIDIA provided hardware for Echo devices prior to 2021.

– ref. Everything you say to an Alexa speaker will be sent to Amazon – starting today – https://theconversation.com/everything-you-say-to-an-alexa-speaker-will-be-sent-to-amazon-starting-today-252923

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Altman, Vice Chancellor’s Fellow and Professorial Fellow, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

It seems Britain has one key inducement to offer US President Donald Trump: a state visit hosted by King Charles.

One can only imagine what the king thinks of this, but he will undoubtedly maintain a stiff upper lip and preside over several lavish dinners.

Following reports of this offer, which would make Trump the only US president to be twice hosted by a British monarch, stories surfaced that the US might become an associate member of the Commonwealth.

Read more:
The king has a tricky diplomatic role to play in inviting Trump for a state visit

There has been no official confirmation of this, but the story has been floated in several British newspapers.

What is the Commonwealth?

The Commonwealth came into existence as a means of retaining links with former British colonies, so there is a certain historical justification for the idea.

Almost all of Britain’s former colonies are now members of the Commonwealth of Nations, with Ireland and the US notable exceptions.

The Commonwealth is an organisation that ties together 56 countries, including a few in Africa that have been admitted despite not having been British colonies.

Of the 56, only a minority recognise the British king as their head of state, a point local monarchists are reluctant to acknowledge.

Indeed, some members of the Commonwealth, such as Malaysia, Brunei and Tonga, have their own hereditary monarchs.

In theory, all members are democratic, and several, such as Fiji, have at times been suspended from membership for failing on this count.

Whatever doubts we might have about the state of US democracy, it is hard to argue the US would fail to meet a bar that allows continued membership to states such as Pakistan and Zimbabwe.

The Commonwealth is largely seen as less important than other international groupings, and its heads of government meetings are often skipped by leaders of the most significant members.

Other than turning up to the Commonwealth Games, few recent Australian prime ministers have paid it much attention, compared to our membership of the G20 or the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).

Nonetheless, the Commonwealth does include a remarkable range of countries ranging from significant states such as India, Canada and South Africa to the many island states of the Pacific and the Caribbean.

While its work is largely unreported, it does provide a range of international assistance and linkages that otherwise would be out of reach for its smaller and poorer members.

Why is Trump interested in joining?

Trump, it can be assumed, has no interest in the Commonwealth as a means of better working with states such as Namibia and Belize.

The attraction seems to be linked to his strange reverence for royalty and a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the British sovereign.

King Charles is head of the Commonwealth through agreement of its members, probably in recognition of the extraordinary commitment his mother showed as the Commonwealth developed out of the old British Empire. Indeed, she clashed several times with her British ministers because of her loyalty to the Commonwealth.

But unlike the king’s British – and Australian – crown, this is not a position that belongs automatically to the British monarch.

So, while inviting Trump to Windsor Castle may be the gift of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, admission to the Commonwealth would require the agreement of all its members.

Given Trump’s demands to acquire Canada and to punish South Africa for recent land expropriation law, it is hard to imagine unanimous enthusiasm.

Read more:
Donald Trump is picking fights with leaders around the world. What exactly is his foreign policy approach?

Most member states are cautious about being too closely linked to either the US or China, although Australia might end up the last true believer in US alliances. Others, such as Ghana and Pakistan, depend considerably on Chinese aid.

In a world dominated by increasingly autocratic leaders, a middle power like Australia needs as wide a range of friends as possible. Most of us have only a vague sense of what the Commonwealth entails.

Like all international institutions, the Commonwealth often seems more concerned with grand statements than actual commitment.

But there is value in a global organisation whose members claim to be committed to:

democracy and democratic processes, including free and fair elections and representative legislatures; the rule of law and independence of the judiciary; good governance, including a well-trained public service and transparent public accounts; and protection of human rights, freedom of expression, and equality of opportunity.

Would Trump’s America meet those demands?

Dennis Altman 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. Trump is interested in joining the Commonwealth. It’s not up to him – or even the king – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-interested-in-joining-the-commonwealth-its-not-up-to-him-or-even-the-king-253217

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

Australians will go to the polls on May 3 for an election squarely centred on the cost of living.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visited Governor-General Sam Mostyn at Yarralumla first thing on Friday morning.

Later he told an 8am news conference at parliament house the election choice was “between Labor’s plan to keep building or Peter Dutton’s plan to cut.

“Only Labor has the plan to make you better off over the next three years,” he said. “Now is not the time for cutting and wrecking, punching down.”

Less than a week after the federal budget and following an earlier delay caused by Cyclone Alfred, the formal campaign starts with government and opposition neck and neck and minority government considered a real possibility.

But in recent days, the government has gained more momentum and Labor enters the campaign more confident than at the start of the year.

The aggregated January-March quarterly Newspoll had the Coalition leading Labor 51-49%, but Albanese leading Peter Dutton as preferred PM 45% to 40%. Polling only shows a snapshot of the present, and the campaign itself could be crucial to the election result.

This is the fourth consecutive election launched off the back of a budget, with both sides this week bidding for voters’ support with big handouts.

Labor pushed through legislation for its $17 billion tax cut, the first stage of which comes in mid next year. Opposition leader Peter Dutton in his budget reply promised a 12-month halving of excise on petrol and diesel and a gas reservation scheme.

Labor goes into the election with 78 seats in the lower house, and the Coalition with 57 (counting the seats of two recent Liberal defectors). The large crossbench includes four Greens and half a dozen “teals”.

With a majority being 76 seats in the new 150-seat parliament, the Coalition needs to win 19 seats for an outright majority. This would require a uniform swing of 5.3% (although swings are not uniform). A swing of less than 1% could take Labor into minority. The Coalition would need a swing of about 3.6% to end with more seats than the government. While all states are important if the result is close, Victoria and NSW are regarded as the crucial battlegrounds.

If the Coalition won, it would be the first time that a first-term government had been defeated since 1931, during the great depression.

Since the end of the second world war, while all first term governments have been reelected, each saw a two-party swing against them.

One challenge for Albanese is that he has only a tiny majority, providing little buffer against a swing.

The combined vote of the major parties will be something to watch, with the vote steadily declining from 85.47% of the vote just 19 years ago at the 2007 election, to only 68.28% at the 2022 election.

Labor won the last election with a two-party vote of
52.13% to the Coalition’s 47.87%.

As of December 31 2024, 17,939,818 Australians were enrolled to vote.

The start of the formal campaign follows a long “faux” campaign in which both leaders have been travelling the length and breadth of the country non-stop, with the government making a series of major spending announcement but the opposition holding back on policy.

Marginal seats based on the redistribution

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. Albanese calls May 3 election, with cost of living the central battleground – https://theconversation.com/albanese-calls-may-3-election-with-cost-of-living-the-central-battleground-250774

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

The usual story for a first-term government is a loss of seats, as voters send it a message, but ultimate survival.

It can be a close call. John Howard risked all in 1998 with his GST, and almost lost office, despite having a big majority.

But you have to go back to 1931 to find a first-term government thrown out.

So, going into this campaign, Anthony Albanese has the weight of history on his side. But modern day politics is volatile, and the voters are cranky, which has in recent months given the opposition hope it could run the government close or even defy the odds.

Government and opposition start the formal campaign with the polls close on the two-party vote. In the past few weeks, the government has improved its position, arguably to be now in the lead. If the election were held today, Labor would probably win more seats than the Coalition, and form government.

But the margins are narrow. With the next parliament, like this one, expected to have a large crossbench, present polling is pointing towards a minority government as a likely outcome. Things can change during a campaign.

Albanese started the term with substantial public goodwill – although his majority was razor thin, and his 2022 election owed more to the unpopularity of then prime minister Scott Morrison than to any real enthusiasm for Labor.

If one had to point to the single biggest political mistake the prime minister made, it was his over-investment in the Voice referendum. Whatever one thinks of the proposal itself, Albanese let it distract from what was a growing-cost-of-living crisis. The referendum was probably always destined to fail, but Albanese and the “yes” side were also out-campaigned by the “no” forces, strongest among them opposition spokeswoman Jacinta Price.

Albanese never properly recovered from the Voice’s defeat.

Early in the term the government was complacent about its opponents, believing Peter Dutton was unelectable. Indeed, that was a widespread view, including among many on the conservative side of politics. It underestimated Dutton’s strategic and tactical skills, the changing nature of the electorate, and how deeply the cost-of-living crisis – with its dozen interest rate rises under Labor, on top of one under Morrison – would bite.

Suburbia up for grabs

What was once ALP heartland, outer suburbia, is now up for grabs. Many of the tradies have become conservatives, to whom Dutton’s blunt, black-and-white political pitch is not just acceptable but potentially attractive.

Labor’s appeal to working people in this campaign is that that the worst is over on the economy, with unemployment still low and real wages in (slightly) positive territory. The latest national accounts figures showed Australia’s per capita recession, which had lasted seven quarters, was over. The February interest rate fall has also been a plus for the government: it may not be a big vote changer but it has reinforced Labor’s argument that things are going in the right direction.

The question remains: will people buy the story of life getting better when they are still not back to where they were a few years ago, and continue to feel under the financial pump?

This week’s budget and Dutton’s reply have homed in on cost of living. The government has come up with modest tax cuts, starting mid next year. These were legislated in a rush before parliament rose, so the Coalition was forced into saying it would repeal them. Dutton countered by promising an immediate cut to the excise on petrol and diesel. The opposition leader also used his budget reply to open another front in the battle over the energy transition, with the promise of a gas reservation scheme.

In the past month or two, there has been some change in the political atmosphere. Dutton’s momentum seemed to have stalled. The tight internal disciple he had maintained frayed somewhat, with messages over some policy and internal fears Dutton had left policy announcements too late.

Will voters think they don’t know enough about Peter Dutton?

The risk for Dutton is that people will fear they’re buying a pig in a poke. He has run a small target strategy; leaders (Howard in 1996, Abbott in 2013) have won on these before.

But if Dutton’s policy offerings in the campaign fall short, or his policy doesn’t stand up to the forensic scrutiny that comes in a campaign, he is likely to stall. So far, Dutton has established himself as a strong negative campaigner but he has yet to come through as a positive alternative prime minister.

His signing up to Labor’s $8.5 billion bulk-billing initiative was an example of a short-term tactic to neutralise an issue that raised questions about the Coalition’s inability to produce its own health blueprint.

The government will mobilise industrial relations against the Coalition, arguing Labor has delivered benefits to workers that a Coalition government would attack. This is risky for Dutton. His plans for slashing the public service, curbing working-from-home and removing the right to disconnect will fuel Labor’s negative campaigning, which will focus too on Dutton’s general plan to cut spending.

The Trump factor

A major unknown is what impact overseas events will have on this election. There has been a general swing to the right internationally. But the Trump factor has become a danger for Dutton.

His opponents seek cast Dutton as Trump-lite. The opposition leader is a critic of Trump on Ukraine, and he’s aware Trumpism is now politically scary for many voters. Nevertheless, Dutton’s pre-occupation with the size of the public service and his emphasis on cuts (without giving detail) will, to some voters, sound like echoes (albeit faint) of Trump. Labor claims its focus groups show people have been increasingly seeing Dutton as Trumpist.

Trump this week announced tariffs on foreign cars (not a worry to Australia, which doesn’t make any anymore). Next week he’ll announced the next stage in his tariff policy. This will feed into the election campaign. The extent it does will depend on whether Australia is directly hit. The government is busy with intense last-minute lobbying.

The cost of living is front and centre in the election, but the recent appearance of Chinese ships near Australia and their live-fire exercise has contributed to making national security and defence (especially how much we should be spending on it) issues as well, although second tier for most voters.

Major attention in this election will be on the performance of independents. Half a dozen so-called teals seized Liberal seats in 2022, and it would be very hard for the Coalition to obtain a majority without regaining some of them. The Melbourne seats of Kooyong and Goldstein will be especially closely watched. In New South Wales, one teal seat has already been lost through the redistribution.

The teals ran last time on climate change, integrity, and equity for women. This election, climate is less to the fore in the voters’ minds, while we now have an anti-corruption body, the National Anti-Corruption Commission. And there is no Scott Morrison, who was a lightning rod for the Liberals’ “women problem”. So in terms of issues, the teals have a harder case to make than before.

On the other hand, people remain deeply disillusioned with the major parties, and the teals have had plenty of time to dig into their seats. The general “community candidate” movement has strengthened and broadened. Whatever its precise composition, the new House of Representatives is expected to have a large crossbench.

In the event of a hung parliament, the crossbench will come into play. This means its potential members, especially the teals, will be under pressure during the campaign to indicate what factors they would take into account in deciding to whom to give confidence and supply. They are likely to keep their cards close to their chests.

The election will also test whether the hardline positions the Greens have taken, on local and foreign issues, have alienated or attracted voters. The Greens are at an historic high with four seats in the lower house. The three of those that are in Queensland will be on the line.

Given the closeness of the polls as the formal campaign starts, what happens in the coming five weeks, and notably the personal performances of Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton could be crucial to the outcome. This is not one of those elections where either side can be confident it has the result in the bag.

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: uninspiring leaders, stressed voters and the shadow of Trump make for an uncertain contest – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-uninspiring-leaders-stressed-voters-and-the-shadow-of-trump-make-for-an-uncertain-contest-250775

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pandanus Petter, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National University

Now that an election has been called, Australian voters will go to the polls on May 3 to decide the fate of the first-term, centre-left Australian Labor Party government led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

In Australia, national elections are held every three years. The official campaign period only lasts for around a month.

This time around, Albanese will be seeking to hold onto power after breaking Labor’s nine-year dry spell by beating the more right-leaning Liberal Party, led by Scott Morrison, in 2022.

Now, he’s up against the Liberals’ new leader, a conservative with a tough guy image, Peter Dutton. It’s looking like a tight race.

So how do elections work in Australia, who’s contesting for the top spot and why is the race looking so close?

For Albanese, the honeymoon is over

Albanese was brought into power in 2022 on the back of dissatisfaction with the long-term and scandal-prone Liberal-National Coalition government.

At the time, he was considered personally more competent, warm and sensible than Morrison.

Unfortunately for Albanese, the dissatisfaction and stress about the cost of living hasn’t gone away.

Governments in Australia almost always win a second term. However, initially high levels of public support have dissipated over the first term. Opinion polls are pointing to a close election, though Albanese’s approval ratings have had a boost in recent weeks.

At the heart of what makes this such a tight contest are issues shared by many established democracies: the public’s persistent sense of economic hardship in the post-pandemic period and longer-term dissatisfaction with “politics as usual”, combined with an increased focus on party leaders.

Around the world, incumbents have faced challenges holding onto power over the past year, with voters sweeping out the Conservatives in the United Kingdom and the Democrats in the United States.

Australia has faced some similar economic challenges, such as relatively high inflation and cost-of-living problems.

Likewise, Australia – like many other established democracies – has long-term trends of dissatisfaction with major parties and the political system itself.

However, this distaste with “business as usual” manifests differently in Australia from comparable countries such the UK and US.

Australia’s voting system

In Australia, voting is compulsory, and those who fail to turn out face a small fine. Some observers have argued this pushes parties to try to persuade “swing” voters with more moderate policies, rather than rely on their faithful “bases” and court those with more extreme views who are more likely to vote.

In the UK, by comparison, widespread public distaste with the Conservatives, combined with low turnout and first-past-the-post voting, delivered Keir Steirmer’s Labour Party a dramatic victory. This was despite a limited uptick in support.

And in the US, turnout in the 2024 election was only about 64%. Donald Trump and the Republicans swept to power last year by channelling a deep anti-establishment sentiment among those people who voted.

And the country is now so polarised, that the more strongly identifying Democrat and Republican voters who do turn out to vote can’t see eye to eye on highly emotionally charged issues which dominate the parties’ platforms. Independent voters are left without “centrist” options.

Because Australia’s voting system is different, Dutton is unlikely to follow Trump’s far-right positioning too closely, despite dabbling in the “anti-woke” culture wars.

It also explains why Albanese’s personal style is usually quite mild-mannered and why he’s unlikely to present himself as a radical reformer.

However, neither man’s approach has made them wildly popular with the public. This means neither can rely on their own popularity to win over the public.

Another factor making Australia distinct is that voters rank their choices, with their vote flowing to their second choice if their first choice doesn’t achieve a majority. This means many races in the 150-seat lower house of parliament are won from second place.

Similarly, seats in the Senate (Australia’s second chamber, with the power to amend or block legislation) are won based on the proportion of votes a party receives in each state or territory. This gives minor parties and independents a better chance at winning seats compared to the lower house.

This means dissatisfaction with the major parties has in recent years created space for minor parties and a new crop of well-organised independents to get elected and influence policy. In 2022, around one-third of voters helped independents and minor parties take seats off both the Liberals and Labor in the inner cities.

To win government, Dutton will need to get them back, or take more volatile outer-suburban seats off Labor.

The big policy concerns

Against this backdrop, Australian voters both in 2022 and today have a fairly consistent set of policy concerns. And while parties want to be seen addressing them, their messaging isn’t always heard.

The 2022 Australian Election Study, run by Australian political researchers, revealed that pessimism about the economy and concerns about the cost of living were front of mind when Australians voted out the Liberal-National Coalition government last federal election.

This time around, one might think some relative improvement in economic factors like unemployment and cuts to interest rates would put a spring in the prime minister’s step.

However, the public is still very concerned about the day-to-day cost-of-living pressures and practical issues such as access to health care.

The government’s policy efforts in this direction – for example, tax cuts and subsidies for power bills – have so far not strongly cut through.

What have the major parties promised?

Comparing the parties’ platforms, Labor is firmly focused on economic and government service issues to support people in the short term.

Although expected to announce the election earlier, Albanese was handed the opportunity of delivering an extra budget by a tropical storm in early March. This included spending promises foreshadowed earlier, as well as a new modest tax cut as an election sweetener.

In the longer term, Labor has promised significant incentives to improve access to free doctor’s visits and focused on investments in women’s health, as well as technological infrastructure.

Labor is also encouraging more people to fill skill shortages through vocational education and promising to make the transition to renewable energy, while simultaneously supporting local manufacturing.

The Coalition, for its part, has been critical of these long-term goals and promised to repeal the newly legislated tax cuts in favour of subsidies for petrol. It has focused its message on reduced government spending, while strategically mirroring promises on health to avoid Labor attacks on that front.

Dutton has also proposed cuts to migration to reduce housing pressures and a controversial plan to build nuclear power plants at the expense of renewables.

Will these differences in long-term plans cut through? Or are people focused on short-term, hip-pocket concerns?

This election, whatever the result, will not represent a long-term shifting of loyalties, but rather a precarious compact with distrustful voters looking for relief in uncertain times.

Pandanus Petter is employed at the Australian National University with funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Australians almost never vote out a first-term government. So why is this year’s election looking so tight? – https://theconversation.com/australians-almost-never-vote-out-a-first-term-government-so-why-is-this-years-election-looking-so-tight-250249

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, Visitor, School of History, Australian National University

At the last federal election, Australia elected the largest lower house crossbench in its post-war federal history.

In addition to four Greens MPs, Rebekah Sharkie from the Centre Alliance and Bob Katter (with his own micro-party), there were ten independent MPs, seven of them new to parliament. These MPs have the freedom and flexibility to vote on every piece of legislation without having to adhere to any party-room pledge.

Micro-parties and independents also fared well in the Senate in 2022, thanks in part to the fact that we use proportional representation to elect our senators. In a half-Senate election with 40 vacancies, six went to the Greens, one to Independent ACT candidate David Pocock, one to United Australia Party Senator Ralph Babet and one to Pauline Hanson in Queensland.

Defections during the 47th parliament grew the crossbench even further. Five former Coalition MPs and Senators have moved to the crossbench, one over allegations of sexual harassment, one over the Voice to Parliament referendum and three over bruising preselection defeats.

Senator Fatima Payman defected from the Labor Party last year, citing problems with the party’s stance on Palestine, and has now set up the Australia’s Voice party.

Getting elected

Independents hardly enjoy a level playing field in federal elections. Brian Costar and Jennifer Curtin pointed out in their book, Rebels with a Cause, that independent candidates lack equal access to the electoral roll, do not initially benefit from the public funding that flows consistently to the major parties, and cannot be listed above the line on the Senate ballot paper unless they form a group or party.

Unless they are party defectors with a seat in parliament already, independent candidates also lack the advantages of incumbency. Previous research from the Australia Institute has shown the dollar value of an incumbent MP’s entitlements (in terms of their salary and those of staff, printing and travel allowances, public exposure), is about $2.9 million per term.

Once elected, though, Independents have shown the major parties that they can be very hard to beat. Helen Haines and her predecessor as Member for Indi, Cathy McGowan, have won four consecutive elections between them. Zali Steggall, who famously beat former prime minister Tony Abbott in the electorate of Warringah in 2019, has been re-elected once, and the people of metropolitan Hobart have returned former public servant and whistleblower Andrew Wilkie to Canberra five times in a row.

No safe seats

Political parties and journalists have conventionally treated certain seats as “safe” (if the winning party’s vote two-party preferred margin was 60% or higher), others as “fairly safe” (if the winning party’s 2PP margin was between 56% and 60%) and others as “marginal” (those won by less than 56% at the previous election).

But the days of safe and marginal seats are over. These terms belong to an age of two-party contests and more predictable preference flows. As Bill Browne and Richard Denniss of the Australia Institute have pointed out, the major party vote share has now “crossed a threshold” below which the idea of “safe seats” becomes redundant.

Independent candidates can win with a relatively low share of the primary vote. In 2022, community independent Kylea Tink won the electorate of North Sydney with 25% of the primary vote, having ranked favourably, but not first, on many voters’ ballots.

Holding on?

Several contests involving current crossbenchers may prove nationally influential in the event of a hung parliament. Tink, whose electorate has been abolished in a routine redistribution, will not be among the incumbents hoping to hold their seat.

The Liberal Party, by some accounts, perceives the Perth seat of Curtin, won by community independent Kate Chaney in 2022, as an important litmus test for the future. January saw a “surge in volunteers and donations” for Liberal candidate Tom White’s campaign, according to media reports.

Elsewhere, the Liberals are attempting to meet incumbent community independents with candidates that more closely resemble them. The Liberal candidate for Warringah, Jaimee Rogers, is, like the sitting member Zali Steggall, a former athlete with a public profile. Wentworth candidate Ro Knox, a former Deloitte consultant, will run against Allegra Spender, whose own pitch for re-election has emphasised tax reform and productivity.

In Victoria, Monique Ryan, who won the seat of Kooyong from then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg, will this time face Amelia Hamer, a local woman, professional and grand-niece of former Victorian premier Rupert Hamer.

There are exceptions to that pattern. Former RSL President James Brown was preselected as the Liberal candidate for Mackellar, currently held by community independent Sophie Scamps. And in Goldstein, there will be a rerun of the previous contest between community independent Zoe Daniel and her Liberal predecessor Tim Wilson.

At least three of the major party defectors in both houses are hoping to keep their seats, too. Gerard Rennick, formerly a Coalition senator who was denied a winnable spot on the Liberal National Party ticket, has registered the Gerard Rennick People First Party ahead of his bid for re-election this year. Rennick has pointed out that this will get his name “above the line” on the Senate ballot paper.

Former Liberals Ian Goodenough and Russell Broadbent have both indicated they will run as independents to defend their seats – Moore and Monash respectively – from their erstwhile colleagues.

Room for growth?

Despite the watershed result in 2022, the crossbench may grow yet. Fundraising group Climate 200 is reported to be backing up to 35 candidates across the country, and an army of volunteers has already begun to mobilise in support.

Health professional Carolyn Heise will hope that, with the support of the new campaign fundraiser the Regional Voices Fund, her second campaign in the regional electorate of Cowper may land her in parliament alongside Indi MP Helen Haines.

The retirement of shadow minister Paul Fletcher as member for Bradfield in inner-Sydney makes for a particularly interesting contest in that electorate. Gisele Kapterian, who won Liberal preselection against Warren Mundine, will campaign against community independent Nicolette Boele, who would need a swing of only 5% in her favour to win on her second attempt.

In Victoria’s western district, community independent Alex Dyson will attempt for the third time to win the seat of Wannon from shadow immigration minister Dan Tehan. Dyson came close in 2022 and would need only a 4% swing (two-candidate preferred) to win this time.

In 2022, community groups supported independent candidate Penny Ackery in her campaign against then-minister and now shadow treasurer Angus Taylor. The two-candidate preferred vote left the seat “relatively safe” (in old terms), but declining support for the Coalition saw the state electorate of Wollondilly (within Hume’s borders) elect community independent Judy Hannan in a “surprise win” at the 2023 state election.

There is plenty of potential for surprise victories and shock defeats at the forthcoming election. Community independents are running in at least four Labor-held seats. What should surprise nobody is that every vote in every seat will count on election day.

Joshua Black is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Australia Institute.

– ref. Australia’s embrace of independent political candidates shows there’s no such thing as a safe seat – https://theconversation.com/australias-embrace-of-independent-political-candidates-shows-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-safe-seat-250751

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University

They are neither as leafy nor as affluent as much of the Liberal heartland, but Peter Dutton believes the outer ring-roads of Australia’s capitals provide the most direct route to power.
He has been telling his MPs these once-safe Labor-voting suburbs are where the 2025 election can be won.

From the moment the Queenslander assumed control of the Liberal Party in 2022, he was intent on this suburbs-first strategy, even if it seemed historically unlikely and involved repositioning his formerly business-loyal party as the new tribune of the working class. As he told Minerals Week in September 2023:

The Liberal Party is the party of the worker. The Labor Party has become the party of the inner city elite and Greens.

This has been Dutton’s long game. It’s an outsider approach reminiscent of what US President Donald Trump had achieved with disaffected blue-collar Democratic supporters in the United States, and what Boris Johnson managed by turning British Labour supporters in England’s de-industrialised north into Brexiteers and then Conservative voters.

Read more:
Labor’s in with a fighting chance, but must work around an unpopular leader

A political gamble

It was not the obvious play but it may prove the right one.

After a tumultuous period in which the Liberals had cycled through three prime ministers and ignored a clear public clamour for policy modernisation on women, anti-corruption and climate change, the Morrison government had been bundled from office.

Morrison hadn’t merely failed to attract disengaged undecideds in the middle-ground, but had haemorrhaged engaged constituents from some of Australia’s safest Liberal postcodes.

Nineteen seats came off the Coalition tally in that election, yet Labor’s gain was only nine.

Something fundamental had happened. Six new centrist independents now sat in Liberal heartland seats – all of them professional women.

Numerically, they formed a kind of electoral Swiss Guard around the new Labor government’s otherwise weak primary vote and thin (two-seat) parliamentary majority.

In a sharp visual contrast to the Coalition parties, women made up around half of Anthony Albanese’s new Labor government and he moved to prioritise the very things on which the Coalition had steadfastly refused to budge – including meaningful constitutional recognition of First Peoples.

Albanese, it seemed, had tuned in to the zeitgeist. He would even go on to break a 102-year record a year later, becoming the first PM to increase his majority by taking a set off the opposition in a byelection. One more urban jewel shifted out of the Liberals’ column.

Dutton, however, never blinked.

His first press conference as leader in 2022 had been notable for the absence of the usual mea culpa – a suitably contrite acknowledgement that he’d heard the message from erstwhile Liberals who had abandoned their party for more progressive community independents.

Instead, Dutton confidently responded that the 2025 election would be decided not in these comfortable seats but in the further-flung parts of Australia’s cities where people make long commutes to work and struggle to find adequate childcare and other services.

It was a bold strategy because it meant targeting seats with healthy Labor margins.
Canberra insiders wondered privately if this was brave or simply delusional. Some concluded it could only work as a two-election strategy.

Many asked where a net gain of 19 seats would come from if not through the recovery of most or all of what became known as the “teal” seats?

Yet the combative Liberal continued to focus on prising suburbanites away from Labor with a relentless campaign emphasising the rising cost-of-living under Labor.

Three years later and even accounting for the first interest rate cut in over four years, it is Dutton’s strategy that has looked the more attuned to the electoral zeitgeist.

So much so that he goes into this election with a realistic chance of breaking another longstanding electoral record: that of replacing a first-term government.

This hasn’t been done federally since the Great Depression took out the Scullin Labor government of 1929-1931.

It’s all about geography

While only votes in ballot boxes will tell, the Coalition’s rebounding support appears to have come from the outer mortgage belt, just as he predicted.

These voters absorb their political news sporadically via social media feeds, soft breakfast interviews, and car-radio snippets.

These are media where Dutton’s crisp sound-bite messaging around cost-of-living pressures has simply been sharper and more resonant than Labor’s.

And it is by this means that these voters may have picked up that a Dutton government would seek to deport dual citizens convicted of serious crimes, stop new migrants from buying property (a policy first ridiculed as inconsequential by Labor and since copied), and cut petrol excise, temporarily taking around $14 off the price of a tank of fuel.

These voters may have noticed Dutton’s campaign against the supermarket duopoly, which includes the option of forced divestiture for so-called “price-gouging”.

Recently, he added insurance conglomerates to that divestment hit-list.

And they might have heard his dramatic nuclear “solution” to high energy costs and emissions (in reality, devilishly complex and expensive).

On top of these, semi-engaged voters might recall Dutton’s culture-war topics for which he has regularly received generous media minutes, including:

• his opposition to what he called “the Canberra Voice”
• his defence of Australia Day
• his refusal to stand in front of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags
• his oft-made claim that a Greens-Teals-Labor preoccupation with progressive issues has left the cost-of-living crisis unaddressed.

Beyond such rhetoric, Dutton has had little to say in detailed policy terms. But will that matter? However comprehensive, Labor’s list of legislated achievements has, arguably, achieved even less purchase in the electoral mind.

Polls taken as the election campaign neared showed Dutton’s Coalition was well-placed to win seats from Labor in suburban and outer-suburban areas of Perth, Melbourne, and Sydney, as well as regional seats in the NSW Central Coast.

These include seats such as Tangney and Bullwinkel in outer Perth; McEwen and Chisolm in suburban Melbourne, and as many as seven seats in NSW – mostly on the periphery of Sydney or in the industrial Hunter Valley region.

There may be other seats to move also. Liberal sources say they like their chances in Goldstein, currently held by the Teal, Zoe Daniel. And with a recent conservative turn in the Northern Territory election to the CLP, seats like the ultra-marginal Lingiari and the numerically safer Solomon could also be in play.

A YouGov MRP poll reported by the ABC on February 16 put Dutton’s chances of securing an outright majority after the election at 20%.

It measured the Coalition’s two-party-preferred support at 51.1% over Labor on 48.9%. That represents a swing towards the Coalition of 3.2%. But it is where the swing occurs that matters most.

Seat-by-seat assessment of the YouGov results suggested the Coalition would be likely to win about 73 seats (median), with a lower estimate of 65 and an upper estimate of 80, if a federal election was held today.

The same modelling indicates Labor would go backwards, holding about 66 seats in the next parliament, with a lower estimate of 59 and an upper estimate of 72. This is just one, albeit unusually large poll, but it will concern Albanese that even on its upper margin of Labor seat holds, he would not retain a majority.

Of course, the campaign can change things and already, the delayed start caused by Cyclone Alfred introduced further variables in the form of a federal budget, replete with income tax cuts.

A succession of polls conducted through March point to a Labor recovery with a Redbridge poll of 2,007 respondents, taken over March 3–11 putting Labor ahead 51%–49%. The same poll however showed a majority of people worry that the country is heading in the wrong direction.

The final contest

In political circles, people talk about momentum in campaigns, and say things like “the trend is our friend”. If true, that electoral amity has leaned decisively towards Dutton for the past year, and only recently to Labor.

But caution is always advised. Election counts invariably throw up oddities – swings being more (or less) marked in one state compared to others, and seats retained (or lost) against a broader national trend on the night.

Such surprises give the lie to the concept of uniform swings and makes prediction of a final seat count more difficult.

If the polling consensus is broadly correct – rather than being the result of herding – and the source of Dutton’s rising support is former Labor suburbs, the question is, will those vote gains materialise at sufficient scale to translate into seat gains?

If so, this election could redraw the political map and require new thinking about major party voting bases, policies and strategies into the future.

The final outcome seems likely to turn on three things:

1. Dutton’s ability to stay on message about the cost-of-living through the campaign when others in his team, buoyed by Trump’s war on wokeness, want to raise tendentious social issues.

2. Albanese’s effectiveness in convincing wayward Labor voters that Labor has in fact delivered, that the economy has turned the corner, and that Dutton’s comparative toughness is code for budget cuts that would hit them hardest.

3. Unforeseen events – at home or abroad.

The Liberal leader is surprisingly well-placed. But remember, he is coming from a long way back.

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

– ref. Can Peter Dutton flip Labor voters to rewrite electoral history? It might just work – https://theconversation.com/can-peter-dutton-flip-labor-voters-to-rewrite-electoral-history-it-might-just-work-248664

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jason Chin, Senior Lecturer, College of Law, Australian National University

Lately, there have been many headlines on scientific fraud and journal article retractions. If this trend continues, it represents a serious threat to public trust in science.

One way to tackle this problem – and ensure public trust in science remains high – may be to slow it down. We sometimes refer to this philosophy as “slow science”. Akin to the slow food movement, slow science prioritises quality over speed and seeks to buck incentive structures that promote mass production.

Slow science may not represent an obvious way to improve science because we often equate science with progress, and slowing down progress does not sound very appealing. However, progress is not just about speed, but about basing important societal decisions on strong scientific foundations. And this takes time.

Unfortunately, the pressures and incentives modern scientists face are almost universally against slow science. Secure, permanent university jobs are scarce, and with budget cuts, this appears to be getting worse.

As a result, the pressure to publish has never been higher. Indeed, in my yearly performance meetings, I am asked how many articles I’ve published and what is the status of the journals I published in. I am not asked how robust my methods are and how discerning my peer reviewers were.

The problems with fast science

Our current “fast science” approach has produced a host of problems.

Much as with fast food, scientists are incentivised to produce as much science as possible in as little time as possible. This can mean cutting corners. We know, for instance, that larger samples lead to more trustworthy results because they are more likely to be representative of the relevant population. However, collecting large samples takes time and resources.

Fast science is also associated with gaming the system. As a hypothetical example, an educational scientist might collect data to find evidence for their theory that a new teaching style promotes better learning. Then, they look at the data and realise the intervention did not quite improve learning. But if you squint at it, there might be a trend if you drop a couple of pesky outliers that didn’t see a benefit. So, they do just that.

This an example of what’s known as a “questionable research practice”, because it’s not considered outright fraud by conventional standards. Surveys in many fields suggest these practices are widespread, with about 50% of scientists saying they have engaged in them at least once.

Fast science is also associated with more obviously unethical practices.

Reports of fabricated data are likely due, in part, to scientists trying to publish as quickly as possible. An industry has even sprung up around scientific fraud – what are known as “paper mills”. These organisations produce articles around fabricated data and then sell authorship to those papers.

Why trustworthy science takes time

So, what does slow science look like and how can it help?

The late English statistician Douglas Altman provided one of the most famous descriptions of the slow science mantra: “We need less research, better research, and research done for the right reasons”.

In many ways, it is the opposite of fast science: large samples and careful, well-documented, transparent practices.

Recall the hypothetical example of the scientists testing a new education practice. Rather than immediately jumping into data collection, the slow practice would be to first write a “registered report”. In other words, scientists would write out their theory and how they propose to test that theory, and send that out for peer review prior to collecting data.

The journal would then follow the normal process of soliciting peer reviews and allowing the scientists to revise their report in response to those reviews. Then, the authors would collect data, with publication in the journal being assured as long as they follow the agreed upon methods.

There are two major benefits to registered reports: it allows for peer feedback while it is still possible to improve the study and it removes an incentive to engage in questionable or fraudulent practices. Using the registered report format can take longer. But it is associated with more credible findings.

Two other slow practices worth mentioning are conducting research in a way that is reproducible and correcting errors in the existing body of research.

In theory, all science should be reproducible. That is, scientists should share their methods and data such that other scientists can both verify that work and build on it (developing new recipes, to continue the analogy to slow food).

Similarly, cleaning up the scientific record is incredibly important. For the same reasons that chef Gordon Ramsay likes to a clean a kitchen out before improving it, science needs to get a handle on what existing findings are reliable before we can build on them.

This means carefully going through existing publications to find studies that show indications of being fabricated or otherwise unreliable. This sleuthing is rare among university scientists because it does not typically result in publications. But it is highly important.

Slow science is slowly gaining steam

Currently, it requires bravery to engage in slow science.

Universities are keen to move up the university rankings lists. Those rankings are driven by publishing. So, universities hire, promote and retain their scientists based on their publications. This makes it risky to slow down.

There are, however, some reasons to hope. Movements are afoot to redefine research quality to take into account more aspects of slow science.

The Declaration on Research Assessment is a worldwide initiative to move away from ranking systems that ignore the principles of slow science.

Grassroots organisations are also creating platforms for more open and exacting peer review.

And advocates for more careful research practices have recently been appointed to important positions, such as with research funders and academic journals.

These developments are worth following and building upon because society does not need heaps of low-quality science. It needs science that deserves trust.

Jason Chin is affiliated with the Association for Interdisciplinary Metaresearch and Open Science (AIMOS), a charity that promotes the study and improvement of research methods. AIMOS is a co-founder of the open peer-review platform, MetaROR.

– ref. Reliable science takes time. But the current system rewards speed – https://theconversation.com/reliable-science-takes-time-but-the-current-system-rewards-speed-249497

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanne Enticott, Associate Professor, Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University

The most disadvantaged Australians have long experienced higher rates of mental illness than the broader population. But they also access fewer mental health services.

Increasing everyone’s access to mental health care led to the creation of the Better Access initiative, which subsidised psychology sessions under Medicare. Officially called Better Access to Psychiatrists, Psychologists and General Practitioners through the Medicare Benefits Schedule, the Howard government launched the initiative in November 2006.

During COVID, the former Morrison Coalition government temporarily expanded the yearly cap on the number of psychology sessions, from ten to 20. The Labor Albanese government reverted to ten sessions at the end of 2022.

Now the Coalition says if elected at this year’s polls, it will take the number of sessions back to 20.

But did capping sessions at 20 increase access to mental health care, especially for disadvantaged Australians? Or are there more effective ways to achieve this?

How does it work?

Australians can access up to ten rebated psychology sessions annually. Patients need to have a mental health treatment or management plan from their GP or psychiatrist.

The Australian Psychological Society recommends consultation fees of around $311 for a standard 46- to 60-minute consultation.

The typical Medicare rebate is $141.85 per session with a clinical psychologist and $96.65 with other registered psychologists. (All psychologists are university qualified mental health professionals, but clinical psychologists have more qualifications.)

Psychologists can choose their own fees. They can bulk bill (no out of pocket cost for patients) or charge consultation fees, leaving some patients hundreds of dollars out of pocket for each session.

How did access change during COVID?

To assess the changes during COVID, we need to consider three components: number of people accessing services, service use rates (number of sessions per population) and the average number of sessions per patient.

1. Number of people accessing services

In 2020-21, all states saw a 5% jump in the number of people accessing Medicare mental health services, coinciding with the first year of the COVID pandemic.

In the three years prior to this, there was an average yearly increase of about 3% more people.

However, a 2022 independent evaluation of the Better Access initiative showed that between 2018 and 2021, new users declined from 56% to 50%, with the steepest drop between 2020 and 2021.

This reduction in new users coincided with the temporary increased cap to 20 sessions.

Australians from disadvantaged backgrounds continued to have poorer access to psychologists than those from wealthier population groups, despite an increase in the number of sessions.

2. Service use rates (number of sessions per population)

Service use rates tell us how much a particular service is being used each year. To compare service use rates between different years, and because the Australian population is growing yearly, we report service use rates per 1,000 people in the population.

In 2020-21, service use rates for clinical psychologists and other psychologists increased by 18%. This was a large increase compared to the typical 5% increases in previous years. This persisted in the next two years.

When the cap on number of sessions was reduced to ten sessions, there was a small drop in service use rates, but it didn’t return to the pre-pandemic levels.

3. Average number of sessions people used

The increase in services occurring in the first two years of the COVID pandemic (and around the time as the cap temporarily increased from ten to 20 sessions), resulted in a small increase in the average number of sessions per patient.

In the ten years between 2013-14 and 2022-23, average number of sessions with a clinical psychologist increased from five to six sessions whereas the average number of sessions with other psychologists increased from four to five sessions.

Importantly, more than 80% of people received fewer than ten sessions.

What does this tell us?

Overall, most people used ten or fewer sessions, even when up to 20 sessions were available.

Some extra services were provided to existing clients during COVID and this may have actually prevented new people from receiving services.

So the evidence suggests simply increasing the number of rebated psychology sessions from ten to 20 for everybody isn’t the most effective approach.

What should Labor and the Coalition do instead?

We don’t limit the number of chemotherapy sessions for cancer patients, so why do we cap evidence-based psychological treatments for mental illness?

Instead of capping access to Medicare rebates for mental health care, access should be based on a person’s needs and treatment outcomes. The number of sessions should be determined collaboratively between the person and the provider, ensuring people receive the appropriate level of evidence-based care for their condition.

Measure outcomes

Currently in Australia for Medicare-funded mental health services, we only measure service activity. Patient outcomes are not collected, which hinders the development of value-based mental health care.

Without collecting outcomes, current initiatives to address inequities are only partially informed and may not work as intended.

We urgently need to establish a set of outcomes (patient-reported outcome measures and experience measures) through consensus with the community, providers, professional organisations and governments.

Address affordability

We should also address inequities, such as gap fees that act as barriers to accessing services.

Greater rebates and bulk billing incentives for vulnerable people can assist those with less money.

Offer other evidence-based support

Evidence also suggests people with mild to moderate mental health problems can benefit from psychological and social supports provided by people who are non-health-care professionals, such as the Friendship Bench and digital mental health programs.

We need to develop and invest in a range of services that cater to differing levels of need. This would ensure more specialised services are available for those with higher complexity or severity.

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. The Coalition wants to increase Medicare psychology rebates from 10 to 20 sessions. Here’s what happened last time – https://theconversation.com/the-coalition-wants-to-increase-medicare-psychology-rebates-from-10-to-20-sessions-heres-what-happened-last-time-249606

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Sturgiss, Professor of Community Medicine and Clinical Education, Bond University

As a GP and mum to two boys I have many experiences of trying to navigate the school morning when my boys aren’t feeling well. It always seems to happen on the busiest days.

None of us want to send our child to school when they are not well – I hate the thought of my kids feeling sick in the classroom and also the idea they might make other children sick.

Lots of families have someone for whom illnesses are more dangerous. They might have a weakened immune system because they are going through cancer treatment or suffer from another illness.

But it can be hard to tell. A child might be dramatically crying “my tummy HURTS” one minute and racing around with their sibling the next. Or you might wonder if they are angling for some time off in front of the TV.

How can you tell if your child is too sick to go to school?

Symptoms to look out for

In school-aged children here are some symptoms to consider.

Fever: if your child feels hot to touch, or you have a thermometer showing a fever (a temperature above 38 degrees), then they shouldn’t attend school.

This is even if you are giving them regular paracetamol or ibuprofen to keep their temperature down. Your child won’t feel comfortable at school with a fever and they have a high chance of making others unwell.

Vomiting and diarrhoea: children should stay home until it is at least 24 hours since their last vomit or runny poo. This is to reduce the spread of viral gastroenteritis (or stomach flu) and to make sure your child can stay hydrated and well. If your child is vomiting or has diarrhoea, it also is important to keep a close eye on them to make sure they are improving and to seek medical care if they are getting worse.

Runny noses: a runny nose without a fever might be a sign of hayfever, especially if your child has other symptoms like itchy eyes or sneezing. On its own, this is not a reason to stay home.

But a new runny nose with a fever is a reason to stay home. Many infections, including influenza, COVID and even measles can start with a fever and runny nose, although usually it signals a common cold.

The common cold needs rest, fluids and encouraging your child to keep their nose clear with gentle blowing or saline sprays. And a reminder, the annual flu vaccine is an excellent way to protect your family from the serious consequences of the “proper flu”.

Cough: there are many different reasons for a child to cough. This includes infections such as COVID, whooping cough and influenza and non-infectious reasons such as hayfever and reflux. If your child has developed a new cough, and especially if they are also feverish, this is a reason to keep them at home. A cough that doesn’t go away after two weeks should also be checked out by your GP.

Tiredness: mostly on Fridays, my kids are tired after a busy week – much like me! Tiredness can be an early sign of a lurking infection or some other health issue. But on its own is probably not a reason to keep your child home. However, ongoing tiredness is a good reason to have your child checked out by your GP as there are many causes from poor sleep to iron deficiency.

Poor appetite: kids’ appetites can vary so wildly, especially when they move into growing phases. Not wanting to eat breakfast in the morning might be an early gastro infection, a sign of constipation or nervous butterflies for the day ahead. If your child is otherwise OK, with no tummy pain, fever or tiredness, then a lack of appetite for breakfast is not a solid reason to stay home.

Watch out for school refusal

I find it helpful to let my child know if they stay home, they will need to stay in bed with no screens to rest and get well. This tends to separate the “truly feeling unwell” days from the “just hoping to have a rest” days.

But feeling unwell in the morning – particularly in the tummy, tiredness or unexplained headaches – can be an early sign something might not be going smoothly for your child at school or home.

School refusal is a serious problem where a child is completely overwhelmed and unable to attend school. It can come on gradually or suddenly. Talking with your child’s school is a critical first step if you are concerned about school refusal – it should be a conversation that happens promptly and your school should have procedures for helping you to manage it.

Read more:
Is it school reluctance or refusal? How to tell the difference and help your child

Phone a friend

If you’re not sure, consider giving a trusted friends or family member a quick call to talk things over.

You can also contact Healthdirect on 1800 022 222 (or 13 Health if you are in Queensland). This is a national phone service open 24 hours for anyone who has symptoms and needs advice on what to do next.

Liz Sturgiss receives funding from the NHMRC, MRFF, RACGP Foundation, Diabetes Australia and VicHealth that is unrelated to this article. She is affiliated with Australian Journal of Primary Health (CSIRO), Australian Prescriber, RACGP, NAPCRG, Guidelines Development Committee for the review and update of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Overweight and Obesity in Adults, Adolescents and Children in Australia and Australasian Association for Academic Primary Care.

– ref. How can I tell if my child is too sick to go to school? – https://theconversation.com/how-can-i-tell-if-my-child-is-too-sick-to-go-to-school-252731

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Coates, Program Director, Housing and Economic Security, Grattan Institute

Of all the problems facing Australia today, few have worsened so rapidly in the past 25 years as housing affordability.

Housing has become more and more expensive – to rent or buy – and home ownership continues to fall among poorer Australians of all ages.

Housing makes up most of Australia’s wealth, so more expensive homes concentrated in fewer hands means growing wealth inequality, with a marked generational divide.

To unwind inequality, we need to make housing cheaper, and that means building much more of it.

Housing has become more expensive

The price of the typical Australian home has grown much faster than incomes since the turn of the century: from about four times median incomes in the early 2000s, to more than eight times today, and nearly 10 times in Sydney.

Housing has also become more expensive to rent, especially since the pandemic.

Rental vacancy rates are at record lows and asking rents (that is for newly advertised properties) have risen fast – by roughly 20% in Sydney and Melbourne in the past four years, and by much more in Brisbane, Adelaide, and Perth.

Home ownership is falling fast among the young

Rising house prices are pushing home ownership out of reach for many younger Australians.

In the early 1990s it took about six years to save a 20% deposit for a typical dwelling for an average household. It now takes more than 12 years.

Unsurprisingly, home ownership rates are falling fastest for younger people. Whereas 57% of 30–34 year-olds owned their home in 2001, just 50% did so by 2021. And just 36% of 25–29 year olds own their home today, down from 43% in 2001.

And home ownership is falling fastest among the poorest 40% of each age group.

Fewer homeowners means more inequality

People on low incomes, who are increasingly renters, are spending more of their incomes on housing.

The real incomes of the lowest fifth of households increased by about 26% between 2003–04 and 2019–20. But more than half of this was chewed up by skyrocketing housing costs, with real incomes after housing costs increasing by only 12%.

In contrast, the real incomes for the highest fifth of households increased by 47%, and their after-housing real incomes by almost as much: 43%.

Wealth inequality in Australia is still around the OECD average but has been climbing for two decades, largely due to rising house prices.

In 2019–20, one-quarter of homeowning households reported net wealth exceeding $1 million. By contrast, median net wealth for non-homeowning households was $60,000.

Since 2003–04, the wealth of high-income households has grown by more than 50%, much of that due to increasing property values. By contrast, the wealth of low-income households – mostly non-homeowners – has grown by less than 10%.

The growing divide between the housing “haves” and “have nots” is largely generational. Older Australians who bought their homes before prices really took off in the early 2000s have seen their share of the country’s wealth steadily climb.

This inequality will get baked in as wealth is passed onto the next generation.

Some Australians will be lucky enough to inherit one or more homes. Others – typically those on lower incomes – will receive none.

To unwind inequality, we need to make housing less expensive

We haven’t built enough

Australians’ demand for housing since the turn of the decade is a story of historically low interest rates, increased access to finance, tax and welfare settings that favour investments in housing, and a booming population.

But one widely-blamed villain – the introduction of the 50% capital gains tax discount in 1999, together with negative gearing – is likely to have played only a small part in rising house prices.

That’s because the value of these tax advantages – about $10.9 billion a year – is tiny compared to Australia’s $11 trillion housing market.

Instead, the biggest problem is that housing construction in recent years hasn’t kept up with increasing demand.

Strong migration over the past two decades has seen Australia’s population rise much faster than most other wealthy countries in recent decades, boosting the number of homes we need. Rising incomes, and demographic trends such as rising rates of divorce and an ageing Australia, have further increased housing demand.

Yet Australia has one of the lowest levels of housing per person of any OECD country, and is one of only four OECD countries where the amount of housing per person went backwards over the past two decades.

This is largely a failure of housing policy. Australia’s land-use planning rules – the rules that dictate what can get built where – are highly restrictive and complex. Current rules and community opposition make it very difficult to build new homes, particularly in the places where people most want to live and work.

More homes would mean less inequality

Fixing this will allow mores home to get built, moderate house price growth, and reduce barriers to home ownership. In turn, this will reduce the inequalities created by our broken housing system.

Easing planning restrictions is hard for governments, because many residents don’t want more homes near theirs.

The good news is that the penny has started to drop and state governments – particularly in Victoria and New South Wales – are making meaningful progress towards allowing more homes in activity centres and on existing transport links.

But now the real test begins: how will governments respond to the backlash from people who would prefer their communities to stay the same?

How well governments hold the line against the so-called NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard) will tell us a lot about what we can expect to happen to inequality in Australia in the future.

Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the federal and Victorian governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute’s activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities, as disclosed on its website.

Joey Moloney and Matthew Bowes 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. 25 years into a new century and housing is less affordable than ever – https://theconversation.com/25-years-into-a-new-century-and-housing-is-less-affordable-than-ever-250067

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zuleyha Keskin, Associate Professor of Islamic Studies, Charles Sturt University

Eid is a special time for Muslims. There are two major Eid celebrations each year: Eid al-Fitr is celebrated at the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting, and Eid al-Adha is connected to the dates of Hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

Eid, which means “festival” or “feast” in Arabic, is a celebratory occasion for more than one billion Muslims worldwide. However, in some countries, especially multicultural ones like Australia, Muslims don’t always celebrate Eid on the same day. Here’s why.

Eid comes 10-12 days earlier each year

Beyond different groups celebrating on different days, the timing of Eid celebrations also shift as a whole each year. That’s because Islam follows the lunar calendar, based on the moon’s cycles – unlike the Gregorian calendar, which follows the sun.

As such, dates on the Islamic calendar come 10–12 days earlier each year. This means the dates of both Eids also move about 11 days forward each year.

In terms of the Islamic calendar:

• Eid al-Fitr happens on the 1st of the month of Shawwal (the 10th month), which comes right after the month of Ramadan.
• Eid al-Adha happens on the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah (the 12th month), during Hajj.

What about local discrepancies?

Since Islam follows the lunar calendar, determining the start of each Islamic month, and the dates of both Eids, requires sighting the new crescent moon, which comes directly after the new moon (the phase in which the moon is invisible).

But there are different methods for doing this, and different scholarly interpretations regarding what method is best. These variations are the reason one group in a community might celebrate on a Sunday, while others may celebrate on a Monday.

Some Muslims believe each country should rely on its own local moon sighting.

This means if the new crescent moon is visible in neighbouring countries, but not in Australia (such as if it’s hidden behind clouds), then Australia should celebrate a day after its neighbours. The organisation Moonsighting Australia follows this method, only declaring Eid when the moon is seen locally.

However, others argue if the moon has been sighted anywhere in the world, it should be accepted by all Muslims as the start of the new Islamic month. Some Muslims in Australia opt for this “global moon sighting” approach, following Saudi Arabia’s Eid announcement even when the moon is not sighted locally.

Apart from the question of where the crescent moon is sighted, there are also different views over how it should be sighted. Many scholars believe in physically sighting it with the eyes, as was practised during the time of Prophet Muhammad.

But some Muslim countries, such as in Turkey and parts of Europe, use astronomical calculations to predict the new moon’s birth. This allows them to pre-set the date of Eid months, or even years, in advance.

Australia versus majority-Muslim countries

In Muslim-majority countries, deciding the day of Eid happens at a government level.

For example, in Saudi Arabia, the Supreme Court officially declares the date based on moon sighting reports. This decision sets the timing for Eid prayers and public holidays for the entire nation, allowing for unified celebrations across the country.

But Muslims in Australia come from diverse cultural backgrounds, and hold varying views regarding how the moon should be sighted. Some may follow the Eid announcement from their country of origin. Others may rely on local announcements, or on dates set by peak bodies such as the Australian National Imams Council.

One 2023 report published by the ISRA Academy surveyed more than 5,500 Muslims in Australia to understand how they determined the date of Eid.

The findings reveal notable differences across communities. Respondents from the Arab community were almost evenly split between following their local mosque (28.5%) and the Australian National Imams Council (28.0%), with a slightly lower percentage (23.9%) following Moonsighting Australia. Only 0.6% followed their country of origin.

Among the Turkish community, 16.1% followed their country of origin, while the largest proportion (28.5%) relied on a local mosque or Islamic organisation. But given Turkish mosques tend to follow Turkey’s state religious institution, Diyanet, most Australian Turks (44.6%) ultimately align with Turkey’s decision on Eid.

Of the others, 18.8% followed Moonsighting Australia and 14.6% following the national imams’ council.

In the African Muslim community, 48.4% followed Moonsighting Australia, while 32.8% relied on a local mosque, and 11.7% on the imams’ council.

Eid celebrations will keep evolving

While celebrating Eid on different days may seem divisive and fragmenting, there are positive aspects to this.

For one thing, it means Australian Muslims actively seek out information from various religious authorities. This reflects a high level of public engagement in religious decisions – rather than following blindly.

The strong influence of organisations such as the Australian National Imams Council and Moonsighting Australia also suggests local religious institutions are a trusted source for guidance.

Moreover, the high percentage of Muslims now following Moonsighting Australia indicates a trend towards a localised determination of Eid. And this trend will likely become stronger with the emergence of third- and fourth- generation Australian Muslims who are less connected with their ancestral homelands.

Only time will tell whether most Australian Muslims will eventually celebrate Eid on the same day. In the meantime, families and communities continue to navigate these differences with understanding and respect.

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

– ref. Why Muslims often don’t celebrate Eid on the same day – even within one country – https://theconversation.com/why-muslims-often-dont-celebrate-eid-on-the-same-day-even-within-one-country-248227

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

Oops. Anthony Albanese’s own department pre-empted its boss on Thursday. Some unfortunate official, pressing the wrong button, posted on X that the government was in “caretaker” mode, although the prime minister had not yet called the election.

There was a grovelling apology from the department, saying it was trying to find out why the error occurred.

No matter. The department was only a day early. Albanese goes to government house on Friday for an election on May 3.

Indeed, most players and observers had expected, before cyclone Alfred, that the campaign, with its “caretaker” period, would be well under way by now.

Instead, we’ve had this budget week that’s seen an auction of handouts.

First, the budget announced the tax cuts, which are more than a year away, and will be delivered in two stages, They are, to use Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ description, “modest”.

Then came Peter Duttlon’s counter hit – a halving of the excise on petrol and diesel, briefed out ahead of his budget reply. The benefit would come more quickly – but would only last a year. This is a recycled, extended version of the Morrison government’s 2022 excise cut. Labor supported the 2022 move, but rejects Dutton’s proposal.

The budget we nearly didn’t have gave Chalmers the stage to strut his stuff. Budget weeks traditionally belong to treasurers who, among other things, do a walkabout through the ranks of the journalists who are “locked up” and ploughing through the embargoed budget documents. So some old hands were surprised when the PM appeared with a senior staffer to do his own walkabout. Precedents didn’t come to mind.

Labor sought to wedge the Coalition by pushing through legislation to enshrine the tax cuts. The Coalition voted against them in parliament, then declared if elected, it would repeal them. Dutton has confirmed he won’t be announcing any policy for tax cuts closer to the election.

For the Liberals, to be seen opposing an income tax cut is unusual and risky. It’s made for campaign slogans. “The only thing they don’t want to cut is people’s taxes,” Albanese declared. “Labor is the party of lower taxes.” Both sides will be watching their polling carefully in coming days to see whether this stand rebounds against the Liberals.

The opposition believes its excise reduction will hit the mark, especially in the seats it is most targeting – those in the outer suburbs where people drive a lot.

But Kos Samaras, from the Redbridge political consultancy, predicts people will see this “arms race” of hand outs as providing just band-aids, with the measures likely to cancel each other out.

Apart from the excise measure the other big initiative in Dutton’s reply was his plan for a gas reservation scheme.

This is designed to fill what has been an apparent big hole in the opposition’s energy policy. It has its ambitious (many would say unrealistic) nuclear plan for the long term. But if it is arguing it would be able to bring down energy bills any time soon, it needs a here-and-now policy to do so.

Its answer is to turn to gas. That requires ensuring a reliable and adequate supply for the local market, to drive down the price.

“Gas sold on the domestic market will be de-coupled from overseas markets to protect Australia from international price shocks,” Dutton said in his Thursday speech. “And this will drive down new wholesale domestic gas prices from over $14 per gigajoule to under 10 per gigajoule.”

Dutton told the ABC after his address that the price fall could be achieved by the end of this calendar year.

That estimate sounds like a hostage to fortune. Precision can be dangerous when it comes to energy promises. Who can forget that number Labor put out so confidently before the last election – a $275 fall in household power bills?

Critics will find all sorts of issues with Dutton’s east coast reservation scheme, including that it would be heavily interventionist and there’s no guarantee it would work. Labor says Dutton is reheating one of its old plans, and that the government has the gas situation under control anyway.

The opposition says its plan is in line with warnings on gas supply released by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on Thursday.

The potential effectiveness of Dutton’s gas plan will be highly contested. What is not in dispute is that the partisan divide over the energy transition will be one of the central issues of the campaign.

This week the prime minister has had a spring in his step. The polls have improved somewhat, and the “vibe” seems to be with him. Responding to a challenge from a couple of podcasters, he playfully put the phrase, “delulu with no solulu” into a speech to describe his opponents. Never mind that middle-aged politicians sound slightly absurd when they try to be hip. Albanese is a confidence player and at the moment his confidence is up.

The tactical games aren’t just around the tax cuts. Calling the election first thing Friday carpet bombs Dutton’s budget reply.

And once the election is called, parliament will be prorogued and that will scrap the Friday sitting of estimates committees, denying the opposition an opportunity to quiz officials about the budget and other matters. (On Thursday, the “caretaker” fiasco became public during an estimates hearing, surprising officials from the PM’s department who happened to be appearing at the time.)

For his part, Dutton understands the odds against him.

Political scientist Rodney Tiffen, in an analysis of federal campaigns from 1972 to 2022, found no example where an opposition had started the campaign roughly equal in the polls and won, and three where it had lost (1980, 1987, and 2004). “All winning oppositions started the campaign already ahead,” Tiffen writes in a chapter in The Art of Opposition.

In his budget reply, Dutton delivered one revealing line: “This election is as much about leadership as it’s about policy”.

Dutton casts himself as the leader who would make the tough decisions. “I will lead with conviction – not walk both sides of the street,” he said.

“I will be a strong leader and a steady hand – just as John Howard was.”

Dutton might see Howard as his role model, but it will be a big leap of faith for many voters to see the opposition as a contemporary Howard.

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. Grattan on Friday: an ‘arms race’ of promises as prime minister set to call election – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-an-arms-race-of-promises-as-prime-minister-set-to-call-election-251257

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

Oops. Anthony Albanese’s own department pre-empted its boss on Thursday. Some unfortunate official, pressing the wrong button, posted on X that the government was in “caretaker” mode, although the prime minister had not yet called the election.

There was a grovelling apology from the department, saying it was trying to find out why the error occurred.

No matter. The department was only a day early. Albanese goes to government house on Friday for an election on May 3.

Indeed, most players and observers had expected, before cyclone Alfred, that the campaign, with its “caretaker” period, would be well under way by now.

Instead, we’ve had this budget week that’s seen an auction of handouts.

First, the budget announced the tax cuts, which are more than a year away, and will be delivered in two stages, They are, to use Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ description, “modest”.

Then came Peter Duttlon’s counter hit – a halving of the excise on petrol and diesel, briefed out ahead of his budget reply. The benefit would come more quickly – but would only last a year. This is a recycled, extended version of the Morrison government’s 2022 excise cut. Labor supported the 2022 move, but rejects Dutton’s proposal.

The budget we nearly didn’t have gave Chalmers the stage to strut his stuff. Budget weeks traditionally belong to treasurers who, among other things, do a walkabout through the ranks of the journalists who are “locked up” and ploughing through the embargoed budget documents. So some old hands were surprised when the PM appeared with a senior staffer to do his own walkabout. Precedents didn’t come to mind.

Labor sought to wedge the Coalition by pushing through legislation to enshrine the tax cuts. The Coalition voted against them in parliament, then declared if elected, it would repeal them. Dutton has confirmed he won’t be announcing any policy for tax cuts closer to the election.

For the Liberals, to be seen opposing an income tax cut is unusual and risky. It’s made for campaign slogans. “The only thing they don’t want to cut is people’s taxes,” Albanese declared. “Labor is the party of lower taxes.” Both sides will be watching their polling carefully in coming days to see whether this stand rebounds against the Liberals.

The opposition believes its excise reduction will hit the mark, especially in the seats it is most targeting – those in the outer suburbs where people drive a lot.

But Kos Samaras, from the Redbridge political consultancy, predicts people will see this “arms race” of hand outs as providing just band-aids, with the measures likely to cancel each other out.

Apart from the excise measure the other big initiative in Dutton’s reply was his plan for a gas reservation scheme.

This is designed to fill what has been an apparent big hole in the opposition’s energy policy. It has its ambitious (many would say unrealistic) nuclear plan for the long term. But if it is arguing it would be able to bring down energy bills any time soon, it needs a here-and-now policy to do so.

Its answer is to turn to gas. That requires ensuring a reliable and adequate supply for the local market, to drive down the price.

“Gas sold on the domestic market will be de-coupled from overseas markets to protect Australia from international price shocks,” Dutton said in his Thursday speech. “And this will drive down new wholesale domestic gas prices from over $14 per gigajoule to under 10 per gigajoule.”

Dutton told the ABC after his address that the price fall could be achieved by the end of this calendar year.

That estimate sounds like a hostage to fortune. Precision can be dangerous when it comes to energy promises. Who can forget that number Labor put out so confidently before the last election – a $275 fall in household power bills?

Critics will find all sorts of issues with Dutton’s east coast reservation scheme, including that it would be heavily interventionist and there’s no guarantee it would work. Labor says Dutton is reheating one of its old plans, and that the government has the gas situation under control anyway.

The opposition says its plan is in line with warnings on gas supply released by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on Thursday.

The potential effectiveness of Dutton’s gas plan will be highly contested. What is not in dispute is that the partisan divide over the energy transition will be one of the central issues of the campaign.

This week the prime minister has had a spring in his step. The polls have improved somewhat, and the “vibe” seems to be with him. Responding to a challenge from a couple of podcasters, he playfully put the phrase, “delulu with no solulu” into a speech to describe his opponents. Never mind that middle-aged politicians sound slightly absurd when they try to be hip. Albanese is a confidence player and at the moment his confidence is up.

The tactical games aren’t just around the tax cuts. Calling the election first thing Friday carpet bombs Dutton’s budget reply.

And once the election is called, parliament will be prorogued and that will scrap the Friday sitting of estimates committees, denying the opposition an opportunity to quiz officials about the budget and other matters. (On Thursday, the “caretaker” fiasco became public during an estimates hearing, surprising officials from the PM’s department who happening to be appearing at the time.)

For his part, Dutton understands the odds against him.

Political scientist Rodney Tiffen, in an analysis of federal campaigns from 1972 to 2022, found no example where an opposition had started the campaign roughly equal in the polls and won, and three where it had lost (1980, 1987, and 2004). “All winning oppositions started the campaign already ahead,” Tiffen writes in a chapter in The Art of Opposition.

In his budget reply, Dutton delivered one revealing line: “This election is as much about leadership as it’s about policy”.

Dutton casts himself as the leader who would take the tough decisions. “I will lead with conviction – not walk both sides of the street,” he said.

“I will be a strong leader and a steady hand – just as John Howard was.”

Dutton might see Howard as his role model, but it will be a big leap of faith for many voters to see the opposition as a contemporary Howard.

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. Grattan on Friday: an ‘arms race’ of promises as prime minister set to call election on Friday – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-an-arms-race-of-promises-as-prime-minister-set-to-call-election-on-friday-251257

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wesley Morgan, Research Associate, Institute for Climate Risk and Response, UNSW Sydney

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton says a Coalition government would introduce a long-awaited gas reservation scheme, in a budget reply speech that puts energy policy firmly at the centre of the upcoming election campaign.

On Thursday night, Dutton pledged a national gas plan that he claimed would “prioritise domestic gas supply, address shortfalls and reduce energy prices for Australians”.

Under the proposed reservation policy, gas companies would be required to divert more gas to the Australian market, rather than sell it overseas. Dutton also pledged measures to speed up development approvals for proposed gas projects.

A gas reservation scheme could help to ease supply concerns in Australia. Labor is expected to announce its own plan to reserve more gas for domestic use.

Gas reservation policy may ruffle the feathers of gas importers such as Japan. But it offers a chance to reset relations with our energy-trading partners, and position Australia as a renewable-energy powerhouse.

However, Dutton’s plan to expand gas production is a folly. No new gas projects are needed to meet Australia’s energy needs. The best way to cut energy prices is to accelerate the shift to the cheapest form of energy – which is from wind, solar and storage.

Gas reservation: a long time coming

Australia is one of the world’s biggest gas exporters. But only a fraction of gas produced here is used to power our homes and businesses. Around 80% is exported or is used to liquefy gas so it can be shipped abroad.

This means despite massive production, parts of Australia face potential gas shortages. The Australian Energy Market Operator has warned of a seasonal supply crunch in the nation’s south from 2028, as production in Bass Strait declines. Reserving gas for the domestic market instead of exporting it could close these potential gaps.

The idea of reserving gas for use in Australia is broadly popular. It is supported by Australia’s manufacturing industry, and crossbenchers including David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie.

Western Australia has had a gas reservation policy for more than a decade. However, federal policymakers have, to date, not followed suit.

This is likely in part due to opposition from the gas industry, which has traditionally opposed the move, arguing it would discourage investment and create uncertainty.

There have also been concerns the policy could harm Australia’s relations with strategic partners – especially Japan.

Spotlight on Japan

Australia supplied 43% of Japan’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) in 2022. Japan has previously expressed concern about federal government moves towards diverting Australia’s gas supplies for domestic use, saying it could threaten long-established trade practices and future Japanese investment.

However, contrary to Japan’s claims, Australian gas is not needed to keep the lights on. Gas use in Japan is falling. Today, Japan on-sells more gas to other nations than it imports from Australia.

Importantly, gas contributes to dangerous climate change – both when it leaks into the atmosphere as methane, and when it is burned, releasing carbon dioxide and other pollutants.

Around a quarter of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions come from the production and use of gas. Australian gas burned overseas is also responsible for substantial carbon emissions in other countries .

Tokyo’s finance for gas projects in Australia is slowing the shift away from fossil fuels and diverting investment, workforce, and supply-chain capacity away from clean energy industries.

Diverting Australian gas to meet local needs would help reset trading relations in our region. Australia’s economic prospects are tied to embracing our potential as a clean energy superpower. This requires signalling to our trading partners our intention to shift away from gas extraction for export.

No new gas is needed

In his budget reply, Dutton pledged to audit development-ready gas projects with a focus on the southern states and, as previously announced, fast-track a decision on Western Australia’s Northwest Shelf gas project.

A Coalition government, if elected, would also:

• invest A$1 billion into a critical gas infrastructure fund
• increase gas pipeline and storage capacity
• prevent gas companies from prolonged delays in drilling offshore gas fields.

However, Australia does not need any new gas projects. We only use a fraction of what we produce.

What’s more, evidence suggests more gas production will not bring prices down. East coast gas production has doubled over the past decade even as gas prices have tripled.

Keeping more gas onshore may help with energy prices. But the best way to reduce power bills is to shift to the cheapest form of electricity generation – which is renewables, not gas.

Australia’s gas use is declining as we move to cleaner, cheaper and more efficient types of energy for homes and businesses.

On the east coast, gas consumption has declined by 25% in the past decade. Just last week the Australian Energy Market Operator found gas demand is falling faster than anticipated.

Reducing gas use even faster would avoid potential seasonal shortages.

Gas has a small, short-term role as Australia switches to renewables, smoothing out electricity supplies when demand exceeds generation from wind, solar and energy storage.

But the gas won’t be used very often. And a looming surge in batteries to store renewable energy is also likely to displace gas generation at peak times.

Research suggests production from Australia’s existing projects through to 2035 could meet our remaining gas needs for 60 years.

A domestic reservation policy could ensure this gas is used to avoid potential supply gaps.

Our shared clean energy future

With a national gas reservation scheme on the table no matter who wins the election, Australia will have some tough conversations ahead with international customers – especially Japan.

However both Australia and Japan have committed to cut emissions over the next decade and achieve net-zero emissions in their economies by 2050.

Gas will play an ever-dwindling role in both countries in coming years, as it is replaced by cleaner forms of energy from wind, solar and storage.

Government efforts to manage the energy transition should not encourage new gas projects. Instead, it should position Australia at the forefront of the clean energy revolution.

Wesley Morgan is a fellow with the Climate Council of Australia.

– ref. Dutton unveils plan to force more gas into Australian market and expand production in major pre-election pitch – https://theconversation.com/dutton-unveils-plan-to-force-more-gas-into-australian-market-and-expand-production-in-major-pre-election-pitch-253228

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

Anthony Albanese is set to announce on Friday that Australians will go to the polls on May 3, after he makes an early morning visit to Governor-General Sam Mostyn.

The prime minster’s timing means Thursday night’s budget reply from Opposition Leader Peter Dutton will be quickly overshadowed. A day of Senate estimates scrutiny of the budget will be also be scrapped.

In his budget reply, Dutton announced a raft of proposed spending cuts and several new measures. The one big handout, a year-long halving of the fuel excise rate, had been foreshadowed ahead of the speech.

Dutton announced a Coalition government would introduce a National Gas Plan to secure a domestic supply of gas, and invest $1 billion in a Critical Gas Infrastructure Fund.

The gas plan would be aimed at ensuring the local supply, putting downward pressure on prices in the medium term.

Meanwhile, Dutton’s proposal to cut the excise on petrol and diesel came under sharp attack on Thursday from the government.

The excise plan is the opposition’s counter to the government’s $17 billion tax cuts announced in Tuesday’s budget, which were rushed through parliament on Wednesday night. Dutton said the “so called tax cut ‘top up’ is simply a tax cut cop-out”.

Other Coalition initiatives announced by Dutton include a new target of 400,000 apprentices and $400 million for youth mental health.

A Coalition government would cut Labor’s $20 billion Rewiring the Nation Fund, the $10 Housing Australia Future Fund and the $16 billion production tax credits. It would also reverse the 41,000 increase in Canberra-based public service.

In his speech, Dutton declared the election was “as much about leadership as it’s about policy”.

“The choice is clear at the next election,” he said, declaring he would be “a strong leader and a steady hand – just as John Howard was.

“I will make the tough decisions – not shirk them. I will put the national interest first. I will lead with conviction – not walk both sides of the street.”

He said he had “real life experience”, pointing to his police force service and time as a small business owner. He was “someone who came from a working-class background and knows the value of hard-work and the aspiration that drives Australians.”

Dutton declared the Coalition would “provide the moral and political leadership needed to restore law, order, and justice”.

“Under Labor, you will get the same weakness of leadership that has compounded crime and emboldened antisemitism on our streets,” Dutton said.

He said that “All too often, this prime minister is too weak, too late, and too equivocal”.

Homing in on the energy issue, Dutton said “under the Coalition, energy will become affordable and reliable again”.

He said “the only way to drive down power prices quickly is to ramp-up domestic gas production.

The Coalition would “prioritise domestic gas supply, address shortfalls, and reduce energy prices for Australians”.

“We will immediately introduce an east coast gas reservation.

“This will secure an additional 10% to 20% of the east coast’s demand – gas which would  otherwise be exported.

“Gas sold on the domestic market will be de-coupled from overseas markets to protect Australia from international price shocks.

“And this will drive down new wholesale domestic gas prices from over $14 per gigajoule to under 10 per gigajoule.”

The Coalition’s investment of $1 billion in a Critical Gas Infrastructure Fund would increase gas pipeline and storage capacity,

“We will put in place ‘use it or lose it’ stipulations for gas drilling companies – so offshore gas fields are not locked-up for years.

“And we will ensure we will have a fit-for-purpose gas trigger to safeguard supply.

“This plan will deliver lower wholesale gas prices which will flow through the economy.”

Dutton said this election was “sliding doors moment for our nation”.

“A returned Albanese Government in any form won’t just be another three bleak years. Setbacks will be set in stone.”

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. Albanese to call election on Friday as Dutton pledges fuel tax relief and national gas plan – https://theconversation.com/albanese-to-call-election-on-friday-as-dutton-pledges-fuel-tax-relief-and-national-gas-plan-253241

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

The opposition has unveiled its response to Labor’s A$17 billion “top-up” tax cuts outlined in Tuesday night’s federal budget: cheaper fuel for Australians.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton will take to the election a policy to halve the fuel excise for 12 months. It would drop from 50.8 cents a litre to 25.4 cents, costing the government $6 billion.

It is a revival of the six-month reduction by the Morrison government ahead of the 2022 election.

So, how much might people save at the fuel pump? Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor is touting savings of around $1,500 over 12 months for families who fill up (not just top up) two cars every week.

But few households consume anywhere near this much petrol. Households with electric cars – or no car at all – will get no direct benefit.

Lowering petrol and diesel prices also shows a lack of commitment to climate action. It reduces the incentive for people to switch to electric cars, use public transport or drive less.

Read more:
Peter Dutton promises $6 billion 12-month halving of petrol and diesel excise

Not everyone benefits from cheaper fuel

Cutting petrol prices is not a well-targeted way of helping those people doing it tough. On average, high-income households spend more on petrol than low-income households. There’s also significant variation by area.

By updating modelling we did at the time of the Morrison government fuel excise cuts, we find that under Dutton’s proposal, the average inner-city household in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide will save around $270 over 12 months. The average outer suburban household in these cities will save $450.

Inner-city dwellers drive less as they have more ability to use public transport, or even walk or ride to work. It is people on the urban fringe, and some inner regional areas, who typically face long commutes.

Across inner regional Australia, areas relatively close to major cities, the average household saves $410. For outer regional, remote and very remote areas, total savings fall in the range between $370 and $410.

Effects on inflation

If the cut to the excise of about 25 cents is fully passed on, the retail petrol price should drop from around $1.80 to $1.55, around 15%. As petrol has a weight of 3.7% in the consumer price index, the direct impact would be to reduce the CPI by around 0.5% when it is introduced and increase it by 0.5% a year later.

There will be some, likely much smaller, indirect effects. Retailers may pass on some of the reduced cost of having goods delivered to them. Tradies may pass on some of their reduced cost of driving. As a very visible price, there may be some impact on inflationary expectations.

On the other hand, the increased purchasing power – and therefore spending – by some households may push up other prices.

As the impact is temporary, and will not be reflected in the trimmed mean measure of underlying inflation, it is unlikely to have much effect on interest rate decisions by the Reserve Bank.

What will be the effect on the federal budget?

Dutton claims his policy will cost the budget around $6 billion.

But this assumes the cut remains temporary. It is unlikely that households will feel cost-of-living pressures have gone away by mid-2026. A Dutton government would be under pressure to extend the cut in the May 2026 budget to avoid petrol prices going back up.

History shows governments find it hard to reverse cuts once implemented. In 2001, for example, the Howard government was panicked by poor opinion polls into suspending indexation of the petrol excise when prices reached $1 a litre.

Indexation was not restored for 14 years, at an estimated cost of more than $40 billion in forgone tax revenue.

What are the political impacts?

With this policy, it would appear Dutton is giving up on trying to regain the former Liberal seats lost to the Teals. Voters in these inner city seats drive less than the average and are more concerned about climate change.

He seems instead to be concentrating his campaign on outer suburban seats and what were termed in the Abbott era “Tony’s tradies”.

So, is it a good idea?

In 2022, the Economic Society of Australia asked 46 leading economists whether they thought cutting the fuel excise would be good economic policy. Not a single one thought it was a good idea. It’s unlikely that sentiment has changed.

John Hawkins was formerly a senior economist with Treasury and the Reserve Bank.

Yogi Vidyattama has previously received funding from The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts to do research related to fuel excise and road pricing in 2016-2017.

– ref. We calculated how much Dutton’s excise cut would save you on fuel – and few will save as much as promised – https://theconversation.com/we-calculated-how-much-duttons-excise-cut-would-save-you-on-fuel-and-few-will-save-as-much-as-promised-253214

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Therese O’Sullivan, Associate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics, Edith Cowan University

Alone Australia is back this week for a third season on SBS. And its ten contestants are learning what it means to be really hungry.

They’ve been dropped alone into separate areas of the Tasmanian wilderness to film their experiences of the elements, isolation and hunger. The person who lasts the longest wins the A$250,000 prize.

The contestants are trying various methods to find food. But not everyone’s had success in fishing, trapping and foraging. And the effects on their bodies and minds are already evident.

Here’s what happens when hunger and starvation kick in.

Shelter, water, food

After shelter and water, food is a main concern for long-term survival – not just for Alone Australia contestants.

Many of us are familiar with the feeling of hunger – discomfort caused by a lack of food. Hunger is a complex process that involves regulation of blood glucose levels and release of hormones that control appetite and how full you feel. For instance, when we are hungry, the stomach produces the hormone ghrelin, telling us it’s time to eat.

Starvation is a much more serious state. It’s a long period without enough food that results in severe disruption to how the body normally works.

A healthy person may be able to survive without food for around one to two months. However, the length of time is likely to be affected by many factors including age, sex, fitness, health, sleep and access to clean drinking water.

Last year’s winner of Alone Australia made it to 64 days, much of it without enough food.

But even successful survivalists can struggle to find and eat enough food to meet their requirements. One previous contestant lost as much as 11 kilograms over eight days.

What happens if you don’t have enough food?

A lack of food doesn’t just affect your body size. It also affects the way your body functions. People can experience extreme tiredness, have trouble remembering recent events, and feel colder due to a drop in body temperature.

Prolonged starvation can also have psychological impacts and affect the way you think, reason and make decisions.

We have some clues from a study that would be unethical to reproduce today.

The Minnesota Starvation Experiment started in 1944 to examine the effects of starvation on the body. The idea was to replicate the degree of starvation experienced in areas of Europe during world war two.

Thirty-six healthy young men who were conscientious objectors to war service volunteered to undergo a six-month semi-starvation phase where their calorie intake was halved, followed by a three-month rehabilitation.

Data showed they lost an average of one-quarter of their body weight (including a reduced heart mass).

But other impacts included depression, fatigue and irritability. One participant said:

little things that wouldn’t bother me before or after would really make me upset.

Participants had difficulty concentrating, and their attitudes towards food changed dramatically. They had constant thoughts about food, hoarded food and even started collecting cookbooks. Many of these attitudes and behaviours lasted even after rehabilitation back to a normal diet.

Yes, feeling ‘hangry’ is real

Most Australians will be fortunate to never experience the same levels of starvation as in the Minnesota experiment or in Alone Australia.

But even skipping a meal can have an impact on our wellbeing. We become
“hangry” – when hunger leads us to be irritable or angry.

A study of 64 participants from Europe tracked their hunger and emotions over 21 days. The more hungry the participants were, the more hangry they felt and the more unpleasant feelings they reported (for example, feeling depressed or stressed versus feeling relaxed or excited).

When people are hungry, they are also more likely to have intrusive, mind-wandering thoughts.

In a complex reading and comprehension task, the minds of people who hadn’t eaten for five hours wandered more than the minds of people who had eaten recently. Those who were hungry also performed worse on the task.

So in Alone Australia, it’s easy to see how hunger can lead people to lose focus on what they’re doing, and their minds wandering. Rather than focusing on the best spot to go fishing, contestants’ minds can wander to feelings of self-doubt.

Hunger also affects decision making

Feeling hungry also affects how you make rational decisions, but there’s conflicting evidence.

Hungry people are more likely to make impulsive decisions about food. In Alone Australia, this might result in a decision to eat fish raw rather than cooking it first, a more hazardous choice due to an increased risk of infection from parasites.

However, hungry people can show better judgement when making complex decisions with uncertain outcomes – like a gambling task. So being mildly hungry (in this study, overnight fasting) might sharpen your survival instincts. In Alone Australia, hungrier contestants may make better decisions around where to place hunting traps.

But hunger’s effect on decision making is likely to depend on the context. It may make people more impulsive in some situations, but more strategic and willing to take risks in others.

For the contestants in Alone Australia, some risk taking will be required to secure an ongoing food supply. This will be crucial to successfully surviving in the Tasmanian wilderness.

Therese O’Sullivan 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. Alone Australia is back. An expert explains what happens to your body and mind when you’re starving – https://theconversation.com/alone-australia-is-back-an-expert-explains-what-happens-to-your-body-and-mind-when-youre-starving-249937

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Keneally, Post-Doctoral Research Fellow in Environmental Microbiology, University of Adelaide

You might know South Australia’s iconic Coorong from the famous Australian children’s book, Storm Boy, set around this coastal lagoon.

This internationally important wetland is sacred to the Ngarrindjeri people and a haven for migratory birds. The lagoon is the final stop for the Murray River’s waters before they reach the sea. Tens of thousands of migratory waterbirds visit annually. Pelicans, plovers, terns and ibises nest, while orange-bellied parrots visit and Murray Cod swim. But there are other important inhabitants – trillions of microscopic organisms.

You might not give much thought to the sedimentary microbes of a lagoon. But these tiny microbes in the mud are vital to river ecosystems, quietly cycling nutrients and supporting the food web. Healthy microbes make for a healthy Coorong – and this unassuming lagoon is a key indicator for the health of the entire Murray-Darling Basin.

For decades, the Coorong has been in poor health. Low water flows have concentrated salt and an excess of nutrients. But in 2022, torrential rains on the east coast turned into a once-in-a-century flood, which swept down the Murray into the Coorong.

In our new research, we took the pulse of the Coorong’s microbiome after this huge flood and found the surging fresh water corrected microbial imbalances. The numbers of methane producing microbes fell while beneficial nutrient-eating bacteria grew. Populations of plants, animals and invertebrates boomed.

We can’t just wait for irregular floods – we have to find ways to ensure enough water is left in the river to cleanse the Coorong naturally.

Rivers have microbiomes, just like us

Our gut microbes can change after a heavy meal or in response to dietary changes.

In humans, a sudden shift in diet can encourage either helpful or harmful microbes.

In the same way, aquatic microbes respond to changes in salinity and freshwater flows. Depending on what changes are happening, some species boom and others bust.

As water gets saltier in brackish lagoons, communities of microbes have to adapt or die. High salinity often favours microbes with anaerobic metabolisms, meaning they don’t need oxygen. But these tiny lifeforms often produce the highly potent greenhouse gas methane. The microbes in wetlands are a large natural source of the gas.

While we know pulses of freshwater are vital for river health, they don’t happen often enough. The waters of the Murray-Darling Basin support most of Australia’s irrigated farming. Negotiations over how to ensure adequate environmental flows have been fraught – and long-running. Water buybacks have improved matters somewhat, but researchers have found the river basin’s ecosystems are not in good condition.

The Coorong is out of balance

A century ago, regular pulses of fresh water from the Murray flushed nutrients and sediment out of the Coorong, helping maintain habitat for fish, waterbirds and the plants and invertebrates they eat. While other catchments discharge into the Coorong, the Murray is by far the major water source.

Over the next decades, growth in water use for farming meant less water in the river. In the 1930s, barrages were built near the river’s mouth to control nearby lake levels and prevent high salinity moving upstream in the face of reduced river flows.

Major droughts have added further stress. Under these low-flow conditions, salt and nutrients get more and more concentrated, reaching extreme levels due to South Australia’s high rate of evaporation.

In response, microbial communities can trigger harmful algae blooms or create low-oxygen “dead zones”, suffocating river life.

The big flush of 2022

In 2022, torrential rain fell in many parts of eastern Australia. Rainfall on the inland side of the Great Dividing Range filled rivers in the Murray-Darling Basin. That year became the largest flood since 1956.

We set about recording the changes. As the salinity fell in ultra-salty areas, local microbial communities in the sediment were reshuffled.

The numbers of methane-producing microbes fell sharply. This means the floods would have temporarily reduced the Coorong’s greenhouse footprint.

When we talk about harmful bacteria, we’re referring to microbes that emit greenhouse gases such as methane, drive the accumulation of toxic sulfide (such as Desulfobacteraceae), or cause algae blooms (Cyanobacteria) that can sicken people, fish and wildlife.

During the flood, beneficial microbes from groups such as Halanaerobiaceae and Beggiatoaceae grew rapidly, consuming nutrients such as nitrogen, which is extremely high in the Coorong. This is very useful to prevent algae blooms. Beggiatoaceae bacteria also remove toxic sulfide compounds.

The floods also let plants and invertebrates bounce back, flushed out salt and supported a healthier food web.

On balance, we found the 2022 flood was positive for the Coorong. It’s as if the Coorong switched packets of chips for carrot sticks – the flood pulse reduced harmful bacteria and encouraged beneficial ones.

While the variety of microbes shrank in some areas, those remaining performed key functions helping keep the ecosystem in balance.

From 2022 to 2023, consistent high flows let native fish and aquatic plants bounce back, in turn improving feeding grounds for birds and allowing black swans to thrive.

Floods aren’t enough

When enough water is allowed to flow down the Murray to the Coorong, ecosystems get healthier.

But the Coorong has been in poor health for decades. It can’t just rely on rare flood events.

Next year, policymakers will review the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, which sets the rules for sharing water in Australia’s largest and most economically important river system.

Balancing our needs with those of other species is tricky. But if we neglect the environment, we risk more degradation and biodiversity loss in the Coorong.

As the climate changes and rising water demands squeeze the basin, decision-makers must keep the water flowing for wildlife.

Christopher Keneally receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. His research is affiliated with The University of Adelaide and the Goyder Institute for Water Research. Chris is also a committee member and former president of the Biology Society of South Australia, and a member of the Australian Freshwater Sciences Society.

Matt Gibbs receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water.

Sophie Leterme receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC). Her research is affiliated with Flinders University, with the ARC Training Centre for Biofilm Research & Innovation, and with the Goyder Institute for Water Research.

Justin Brookes 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. When a 1-in-100 year flood washed through the Coorong, it made the vital microbiome of this lagoon healthier – https://theconversation.com/when-a-1-in-100-year-flood-washed-through-the-coorong-it-made-the-vital-microbiome-of-this-lagoon-healthier-252633

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pi-Shen Seet, Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Edith Cowan University

Australia’s defence spending is on the rise. The future defence budget has already been increased to 2.4% of GDP. There is pressure from the new Trump administration in the United States to raise this further to at least 3%.

The Albanese government has brought forward A$1 billion in defence spending for the 2025 federal budget. The Coalition in turn has promised to spend even more if elected.

However, it is unclear whether the money will be spent wisely. Our recent research found that current defence planning may leave the Australian Defence Force (ADF) poorly prepared for future conflicts.

To keep up, Australia must develop capabilities for contemporary “grey zone” operations (coercive statecraft activities that blur the line between peace and war, or fall short of war), as well as future 21st-century conflicts. Priority areas are cyber, information and space technologies.

Positive signs and missteps

In the past two years, we have seen a slew of announcements about the current and future capabilities of the ADF.

Some have been positive. A new Defence Space Command has been set up. The 2023 Defence Strategic Review and 2024 Defence Industry Development Strategy were both promising.

There have also been missteps. The MRH90 helicopters have been stood down. A $7 billion military satellite project was cancelled. And the Collins class submarines face ongoing problems.

Defence experts have complained of “a lack of clear purpose and intent, a lack of direct connection between strategic objectives and industry policy, and a continuing project-by-project approach”.

The ADF acknowledges the need for advanced technological capabilities. However, in practice it is still too focused on platforms and hardware suited more for the conflicts of the past.

The current context and challenges

Several Defence reviews over the past 50 years have found that the ADF procurement and acquisition system lacks the agility and resources to adapt to changes in the strategic environment.

Defence spending as a share of GDP has been declining in Australia since the end of the Vietnam War. Notably, the ADF has focused on reducing costs, lowering errors in defence procurement, outsourcing to industry, and speeding up acquisition.

Read more:
FactCheck: is Defence spending down to 1938 levels?

Despite the recent plans to increase defence budgets, critics argue the strategy is too little, too late. It delays the acquisition of most new capabilities to beyond five years from now.

On October 30 2024, Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy announced a major acquisition of missiles, other guided weapons and explosive ordnance. Many of these acquisitions were simply plugging existing gaps, and would not be ready until at least 2029.

Many of the acquisitions (such as missiles, 155mm ammunition and submarines) did not quite align with the government’s Defence Innovation, Science and Technology Strategy (DISTS) launched the previous month.

The hard task of planning ahead

Making plans for defence procurement is a difficult task. The strategic environment changes quickly, and technology can move even faster. As a result, planned acquisitions may be irrelevant by the time they arrive.

However, there are ways to get better at forecasting. These include horizon scanning, to spot potentially important developments early, and systemic design for a big-picture approach. These approaches can also be combined with AI-supported analysis tools including scientometrics (which analyses the amount of research in different areas and how it is all linked) and natural language processing.

We used these tools in recent research funded by the Australian Defence Department to explore the impact of emerging technologies on ADF capabilities.

Scanning the horizon

In our first project, we conducted a comprehensive horizon scan of emerging technologies, focusing on cyber, internet of things (or networked smart devices), AI, and autonomous systems.

We used scientometric research methods, which provide a bird’s-eye view of research into disruptive and converging technologies.

This was supplemented by a survey asking industry professionals and experts to evaluate emerging technologies. In particular, we asked about their potential impact, likelihood of deployment or utilisation, extensiveness of use, and novelty of use in future conflicts.

The survey data was analysed using a qualitative, machine-driven, AI-based, data analysis tool. We used it for text mining, thematic and content analyses.

We found the likelihood of deployment and utilisation of cyber technologies in conflict is very high in the near term, reflecting the growing challenges in this area. Similarly, AI technologies were also singled out for their immediate potential and urgency.

We concluded that to maintain a competitive edge, the ADF must invest significantly in these priority areas, particularly cyber, network communications, AI and smart sensors.

Designing better systems

Our second project was a systemic design study evaluating Australia’s opportunities and barriers for achieving a technological advantage in light of regional military technological advancement.

The study highlighted ten specific technologies or trends as potential force multipliers for the ADF. We found three areas with immediate potential and urgency: cybersecurity of critical infrastructure, optimisation and other algorithmic technologies, followed by space technologies.

These findings were reinforced in further research supported by the Army Research Scheme. It found the ADF’s capabilities for operating effectively in the “grey zone” will be strongly facilitated by ensuring it is maintaining its technological edge in the integration of its cyber capabilities and information operations.

A widespread challenge

The ADF is not alone in these challenges. For example, successive UK governments have also identified persistent challenges in defence acquisition. These have included issues with budgetary planning due to limited competition, significant barriers to entry for new enterprises, and the constantly evolving geopolitical landscape.

However, this should not be an excuse. Instead, in line with the Defence Innovation, Science and Technology Strategy, and as our research has found, it should serve as a catalyst for action.

The ADF should focus on fostering emerging technologies and enabling the development of disruptive military capabilities to deliver asymmetric advantage for the ADF. As Australia’s Chief Defence Scientist notes, this will help get emerging technologies into the hands of our war fighters faster.

The authors would like to acknowledge the following people from Edith Cowan University who contributed to the research: Helen Cripps, Jalleh Sharafizad, Stephanie Meek, Summer O’Brien, David Suter and Tony Marceddo.

Pi-Shen Seet received funding from the Australian Department of Defence’s Strategic Policy Grant Program and the Australian Army Research Scheme.

Anton Klarin receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence’s Strategic Policy Grant Program and the Australian Army Research Scheme.

Janice Jones receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence’s Strategic Policy Grant Program and the Australian Army Research Scheme

Mike Johnstone receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence’s Strategic Policy Grant Program and the Australian Army Research Scheme.

Violetta Wilk receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence’s Strategic Policy Grant Program and the Australian Army Research Scheme.

– ref. Defence spending: our research shows how Australia can stop buying weapons for the wars of the past – https://theconversation.com/defence-spending-our-research-shows-how-australia-can-stop-buying-weapons-for-the-wars-of-the-past-242788

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rodrigo Rossi Nogueira Rizzo, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Neuroscience Research Australia

Jason, a 42-year-old father of two, has been battling back pain for weeks. Scrolling through his phone, he sees ad after ad promising relief: chiropractic alignments, acupuncture, back braces, vibrating massage guns and herbal patches.

His GP told him to “stay active”, but what does that even mean when every movement hurts? Jason wants to avoid strong painkillers and surgery, but with so many options (and opinions), it’s hard to know what works and what’s just marketing hype.

If Jason’s experience sounds familiar, you’re not alone. Back pain is one of the most common reasons people visit a doctor. It can be challenging to manage, mainly due to widespread misunderstandings and the overwhelming number of ineffective and uncertain treatments promoted.

We assessed the best available evidence of non-drug and non-surgical treatments to alleviate low back pain. Our review – published today by the independent, international group the Cochrane Collaboration – includes 31 Cochrane systematic reviews, covering 97,000 people with back pain.

It shows bed rest doesn’t work for back pain. Some of the treatments that do work can depend on how long you’ve been in pain.

Is back pain likely to be serious?

There are different types of low back pain. It can:

• be short-lived, lasting less than six weeks (acute back pain)
• linger for a bit longer, for six to twelve weeks (sub-acute)
• stick around for months and even years (chronic, defined as more than 12 weeks).

In most cases (90-95%), back pain is non-specific and cannot be reliably linked to a specific cause or underlying disease. This includes common structural changes seen in x-rays and MRIs of the spine.

For this reason, imaging of the back is only recommended in rare situations – typically when there’s a clear suspicion of serious back issues, such as after physical trauma or when there is numbness or loss of sensation in the groin or legs.

Many people expect to receive painkillers for their back pain or even surgery, but these are no longer the front-line treatment options due to limited benefits and the high risk of harm.

International clinical guidelines recommend people choose non-drug and non-surgical treatments to relieve their pain, improve function and reduce the distress commonly associated with back pain.

So what works for different types of pain? Here’s what our review found when researchers compared these treatments with standard care (the typical treatment patients usually receive) or no treatment.

What helps for short-term back pain

1. Stay active – don’t rest in bed

If your back pain is new, the best advice is also one of the simplest: keep moving despite the pain.

Changing the way you move and use your body to protect it, or resting in bed, can seem like to right way to respond to pain – and may have even been recommended in the past. But we know know this excessive protective behaviour can make it harder to return to meaningful activities.

This doesn’t mean pushing through pain or hitting the gym, but instead, trying to maintain your usual routines as much as possible. Evidence suggests that doing so won’t make your pain worse, and may improve it.

2. Multidisciplinary care, if pain lingers

For pain lasting six to 12 weeks, multidisciplinary treatment is likely to reduce pain compared to standard care.

This involves a coordinated team of doctors, physiotherapists and psychologists working together to address the many factors contributing to your back pain persisting:

• neurophysiological influences refer to how your nervous system is currently processing pain. It can make you more sensitive to signals from movements, thoughts, feelings and environment

• psychological factors include how your thoughts, feelings and behaviours affect your pain system and, ultimately, the experience of pain you have

• occupational factors include the physical demands of your job and how well you can manage them, as well as aspects like low job satisfaction, all of which can contribute to ongoing pain.

What works for chronic back pain

Once pain has been around for more than 12 weeks, it can become more difficult to treat. But relief is still possible.

Exercise therapy

Exercise – especially programs tailored to your needs and preferences – is likely to reduce pain and help you move better. This could include aerobic activity, strength training or Pilates-based movements.

It doesn’t seem to matter what type of exercise you do – it matters more that you are consistent and have the right level of supervision, especially early on.

Multidisciplinary treatment

As with short-term pain, coordinated care involving a mix of physical, occupational and psychological approaches likely works better than usual care alone.

Psychological therapies

Psychological therapies for chronic pain include approaches to help people change thinking, feelings, behaviours and reactions that might sustain persistent pain.

These approaches are likely to reduce pain, though they may not be as effective in improving physical function.

Acupuncture

Acupuncture probably reduces pain and improves how well you can function compared to placebo or no treatment.

While some debate remains about how it works, the evidence suggests potential benefits for some people with chronic back pain.

What doesn’t work or still raises uncertainty?

The review found that many commonly advertised treatments still have uncertain benefits or probably do not benefit people with back pain.

Spinal manipulation, for example, has uncertain benefits in acute and chronic back pain, and it likely does not improve how well you function if you have acute back pain.

Traction, which involves stretching the spine using weights or pulleys, probably doesn’t help with chronic back pain. Despite its popularity in some circles, there’s little evidence that it works.

There isn’t enough reliable data to determine whether advertised treatments – such back braces, vibrating massage guns and herbal patches – are effective.

How can you use the findings?

If you have back pain, start by considering how long you’ve had it. Then explore treatment options that research supports and discuss them with your GP, psychologist or physiotherapist.

Your health provider should reassure you about the importance of gradually increasing your activity to resume meaningful work, social and life activities. They should also support you in making informed decisions about which treatments are most appropriate for you at this stage.

Rodrigo Rossi Nogueira Rizzo receives funding from the Australian Government’s Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF).

Aidan Cashin receives funding from a National Health and Medical Research Council Investigator Grant

– ref. Do any non-drug treatments help back pain? Here’s what the evidence says – https://theconversation.com/do-any-non-drug-treatments-help-back-pain-heres-what-the-evidence-says-253122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rowan Martin-Hughes, Senior Research Fellow, Burnet Institute

In January, the Trump administration ordered a broad pause on all US funding for foreign aid.

Among other issues, this has significant effects on US funding for HIV. The United States has been the world’s biggest donor to international HIV assistance, providing 73% of funding in 2023.

A large part of this is the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which oversees programs in low- and middle-income countries to prevent, diagnose and treat the virus. These programs have been significantly disrupted.

What’s more, recent funding cuts for international HIV assistance go beyond the US. Five countries that provide the largest amount of foreign aid for HIV – the US, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Netherlands – have announced cuts of between 8% and 70% to international aid in 2025 and 2026.

Together, this may mean a 24% reduction in international HIV spending, in addition to the US foreign aid pause.

We wanted to know how these cuts might affect HIV infections and deaths in the years to come. In a new study, we found the worst-case scenario could see more than 10 million extra infections than what we’d otherwise anticipate in the next five years, and almost 3 million additional deaths.

What is HIV?

HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) is a virus that attacks the body’s immune system. HIV can be transmitted at birth, during unprotected sex or thorough blood-to-blood contact such as shared needles.

If left untreated, HIV can progress to AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome), a condition in which the immune system is severely damaged, and which can be fatal.

HIV was the world’s deadliest infectious disease in the early 1990s. There’s still no cure for HIV, but modern treatments allow the virus to be suppressed with a daily pill. People with HIV who continue treatment can live without symptoms and don’t risk infecting others.

A sustained global effort towards awareness, prevention, testing and treatment has reduced annual new HIV infections by 39% (from 2.1 million in 2010 to 1.3 million in 2023), and annual deaths by 51% (from 1.3 million to 630,000).

Most of that drop happened in sub-Saharan Africa, where the epidemic was worst. Today, nearly two-thirds of people with HIV live in sub-Saharan Africa, and nearly all live in low- and middle-income countries.

Our study

We wanted to estimate the impact of recent funding cuts from the US, UK, France, Germany and the Netherlands on HIV infections and deaths. To do this, we used our mathematical model for 26 low- and middle-income countries. The model includes data on international HIV spending as well as data on HIV cases and deaths.

These 26 countries represent roughly half of all people living with HIV in low- and middle income countries, and half of international HIV spending. We set up each country model in collaboration with national HIV/AIDS teams, so the data sources reflected the best available local knowledge. We then extrapolated our findings from the 26 countries we modelled to all low- and middle-income countries.

For each country, we first projected the number of new HIV infections and deaths that would occur if HIV spending stayed the same.

Second, we modelled scenarios for anticipated cuts based on a 24% reduction in international HIV funding for each country.

Finally, we modelled scenarios for the possible immediate discontinuation of PEPFAR in addition to other anticipated cuts.

With the 24% cuts and PEPFAR discontinued, we estimated there could be 4.43 million to 10.75 million additional HIV infections between 2025 and 2030, and 770,000 to 2.93 million extra HIV-related deaths. Most of these would be because of cuts to treatment. For children, there could be up to an additional 882,400 infections and 119,000 deaths.

In the more optimistic scenario in which PEPFAR continues but 24% is still cut from international HIV funding, we estimated there could be 70,000 to 1.73 million extra new HIV infections and 5,000 to 61,000 additional deaths between 2025 and 2030. This would still be 50% higher than if current spending were to continue.

The wide range in our estimates reflects low- and middle-income countries committing to far more domestic funding for HIV in the best case, or broader health system dysfunction and a sustained gap in funding for HIV treatment in the worst case.

Some funding for HIV treatment may be saved by taking that money from HIV prevention efforts, but this would have other consequences.

The range also reflects limitations in the available data, and uncertainty within our analysis. But most of our assumptions were cautious, so these results likely underestimate the true impacts of funding cuts to HIV programs globally.

Sending progress backwards

If funding cuts continue, the world could face higher rates of annual new HIV infections by 2030 (up to 3.4 million) than at the peak of the global epidemic in 1995 (3.3 million).

Sub-Saharan Africa will experience by far the greatest effects due to the high proportion of HIV treatment that has relied on international funding.

In other regions, we estimate vulnerable groups such as people who inject drugs, sex workers, men who have sex with men, and trans and gender diverse people may experience increases in new HIV infections that are 1.3 to 6 times greater than the general population.

The Asia-Pacific received US$591 million in international funding for HIV in 2023, which is the second highest after sub-Saharan Africa. So this region would likely experience a substantial rise in HIV as a result of anticipated funding cuts.

Notably, more than 10% of new HIV infections among people born in Australia are estimated to have been acquired overseas. More HIV in the region is likely to mean more HIV in Australia.

But concern is greatest for countries that are most acutely affected by HIV and AIDS, many of which will be most affected by international funding cuts.

Rowan Martin-Hughes receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. He has previously received funding to conduct HIV modelling studies from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, Gates Foundation, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, World Bank and World Health Organization.

Debra ten Brink has previously received funding to conduct HIV modelling studies from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, Gates Foundation, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, World Bank and World Health Organization.

Nick Scott receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. He has previously received funding to conduct HIV modelling studies from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, Gates Foundation, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, World Bank and World Health Organization.

– ref. Foreign aid cuts could mean 10 million more HIV infections by 2030 – and almost 3 million extra deaths – https://theconversation.com/foreign-aid-cuts-could-mean-10-million-more-hiv-infections-by-2030-and-almost-3-million-extra-deaths-253017

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Linda Mussell, Senior Lecturer, Political Science and International Relations, University of Canterbury

With the government’s Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Bill about to become law within days, New Zealand’s already high incarceration rate will almost certainly climb even higher.

The new legislation essentially limits how much judges can reduce a prison sentence for mitigating factors (such as a guilty plea, young age or mental ability). A regulatory impact statement from the Ministry of Justice estimated it would result in 1,350 more people in prison.

This and other law changes are effectively putting more people in prison for longer. By 2035, imprisonment numbers are expected to increase by 40% from their current levels, with significant cost implications. Last year, the Corrections budget was NZ$1.94 billion, up $150 million from the previous year.

In sheer numbers, the Ministry of Justice projects the prison population will increase from 9,900 to 11,500 prisoners over the next decade. But Minister of Corrections Mark Mitchell recently said government policies could see a peak of 13,900 prisoners over that period.

New Zealand’s imprisonment rate is already high at 187 per 100,000 people. That’s double the rate of Canada (90 per 100,000), and well above Australia (163 per 100,000) and England (141 per 100,000).

Accounting for imprisonment and population projections, New Zealand’s prisoner ratio could be between 238 and 263 per 100,000 by 2035. That is higher than the current imprisonment rate in Iran (228 per 100,000).

The role of remand

Much of this increase is driven by the number of people awaiting trial or sentencing on remand. This has risen substantially in the past ten years and is expected to keep rising.

Remand prisoner numbers are projected to nearly equal sentenced prisoners in 2034. Among women and young people, remand numbers are already higher than for sentenced prisoners.

In October 2024, 89% of imprisoned youth were on remand, a 15% increase in seven years. In December 2024, 53% of women prisoners were on remand, more than double the 24% rate a decade ago. Men on remand comprise 41% of prisoners, nearly double the 21% rate a decade ago.

Māori are affected most by these increases, making up 81% of imprisoned youth, 67% of imprisoned women and 53% of imprisoned men.

Some 30% of those on remand are not convicted. Of those who are, data released to RNZ last year showed 2,138 people (15% of remand prisoners) were not convicted of their most serious change, almost double the 2014 figure of 1,075 people.

Significant court delays can mean people are remanded for a long time. By 2034, it is projected the average remand time will be 99 days, compared with 83 days in February 2024. As well as being a human rights concern, this is very expensive.

Putting more people away for longer

Crime and imprisonment rates fluctuate independently of each other, as the former Chief Science Advisor acknowledged in a 2018 report. Increasing imprisonment rates are the result of political decisions, not simple arithmetic.

The Bail Amendment Act 2013 reversed the onus of proof in certain cases, meaning the default rule is that an accused person will not be granted bail. This results in more people being sent to prison while awaiting a hearing, trial or sentencing.

When this week’s changes to the Sentencing Act come into effect, they will further constrain judges’ discretion, capping sentence reductions for mitigating factors at 40% (unless it would be “manifestly unjust”).

At the same time, it has become more difficult for prisoners to return to the community. For example, some are kept in prison or recalled because they do not have stable housing. (Dean Wickliffe, currently on a hunger strike over an alleged assault by prison staff, was arrested for breaching parole by living in his car.)

Last year, Corrections received $1.94 billion in operating and capital budget, a $150 million increase to account for rising imprisonment numbers and prison expansion. There was no meaningful increase in funding for rehabilitation programmes or investment in legal aid.

Imprisoning people is expensive. The cost of a person on custodial remand has almost doubled since 2015, from $239 a day to $437. For sentenced prisoners, it is $562 per day. This comes to between $159,505 and $205,130 per year to confine one person.

The Waikeria expansion and beyond

Corrections has developed a Long-Term Network Configuration Plan to meet anticipated prison population growth. This year’s budget in May will fund 240 high-security beds and 52 health centre beds at Christchurch men’s prison, at a cost of approximately $700-800 million.

Those 240 beds will fit within 160 cells, meaning “double-bunking”. This is known to have a significant impact to prisoner health and rehabilitation, and can also add to staffing costs.

Former corrections minister Kelvin Davis acknowledged this before the first 600-bed expansion of Waikeria prison, costed at $750 million in 2018. By June 2023, that had increased by 22% to $916 million.

The second Waikeria expansion will deliver another 810 beds for an estimated $890 million, although the exact budget has been unclear. These projects will involve public private partnership, a model known for not always delivering the cost savings and service quality initially promised.

There will be other costs for facilities maintenance, asset management services and financing. And there can be unanticipated costs, too. For example, the government’s partner in the Waikeria expansion, Cornerstone, claimed $430 million against Corrections in 2022 for “time and productivity losses” due to COVID-19.

These overall trends are happening while the government is also cutting funding for important social services. Shifting resources to improve social supports would be a better option – and one that has worked in Finland – than pouring more money into expanding prisons.

Linda Mussell 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. New sentencing laws will drive NZ’s already high imprisonment rates – and budgets – even higher – https://theconversation.com/new-sentencing-laws-will-drive-nzs-already-high-imprisonment-rates-and-budgets-even-higher-253119

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Andrews, Senior Manager, Policy & Engagement, Australian National University

The year 2000 marked an inflection point for many Western countries, including Australia, in their outlook towards the world.

The focus began to shift away from the peacekeeping interventions that had dominated the previous decade to one shaped by counter-terrorism operations and deployments to the Middle East.

The threat of terrorism hasn’t gone away. But Australia is much more preoccupied by threats of a different nature 25 years later, largely emanating from China. These include cyber attacks, economic coercion, political interference, and the harassment of Australian Defence Force (ADF) ships, aircraft and personnel.

Though our international outlook has changed a lot over the past quarter century, Australia’s alliance with the US has remained a constant throughout.

However, as our militaries have grown closer, the US-China competition has also intensified. Combined with the array of unpredictable and destabilising decisions coming from the second Trump administration, this closeness has caused some unease in Australia.

Evolving threats and challenges

In December 2000, the Howard government released its first Defence White Paper. This marked the beginning of a period of major change in Australia’s international outlook and presence.

It emphasised that “two interrelated trends seem likely to shape our strategic environment most strongly – globalisation and US strategic primacy”. It also noted that “military operations other than conventional war [were] becoming more common.”

The paper was prescient in respect to China’s rise, as well. It said:

The United States is central to the Asia-Pacific security system […] It will be in Asia that the United States is likely to face the toughest issues in shaping its future strategic role – especially in its relationship with China.

There is a small but still significant possibility of growing and sustained confrontation between the major powers in Asia, and even of outright conflict. Australia’s interests could be deeply engaged in such a conflict, especially if it involved the United States.

Yet, nine months after that document’s release, the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001, followed by the Bali bombings of 2002, began to dramatically reshape the global security outlook.

A few days after the September 11 attack, Howard invoked the ANZUS Treaty for the first and only time, joinging US President George W. Bush’s “war on terror”. Australian forces then deployed to Afghanistan as part of the US-led invasion in October 2001.

By the time the 2003 Foreign Policy White Paper was released, it highlighted “terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, regional disorder and transnational crimes such as people smuggling” as the key features of Australia’s “more complex security environment”.

A month later, Australia joined the US-led “coalition of the willing” to invade Iraq to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein and locate and destroy stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction believed to be there. (It later emerged that evidence of the existence of these weapons was erroneous.)

Australia contributed 2,000 troops to the mission. Our soldiers remained actively engaged in training, reconstruction and rehabilitation work in Iraq until July 2009.

Both of these events tied Australia’s foreign policy interests to the US to a greater degree than any time since the Vietnam War.

Although the relationship with the US had been critical to Australian defence and foreign policy for decades, it had become less prominent in Australia’s strategic planning in the years following the end of the Cold War.

US support – and diplomatic pressure on Indonesia – had been vital in securing the post-referendum presence of Australian peacekeepers in East Timor in 1999. However, it was the “war on terror” that really re-centred the relationship as core to Australian foreign policy.

In fact, Australia was even referred to as the US’ “deputy sheriff” in the Asia-Pacific – a nickname used by Bush in 2003 that caused some unease at home and in the region.

This image has since gone on to have significant staying power, and it’s proved difficult for Australia to dislodge.

History repeating?

Though the accusations of war crimes levelled against Australian special forces in Afghanistan continue to reverberate, our foreign policy focus has shifted firmly back to our own region.

This change was driven in large part by the perceived threat posed by a rising China. While the need to focus more on China was acknowledged as early as the 2009 Defence White Paper, this emphasis became most pronounced under Scott Morrison’s leadership.

The 2024 National Defence Strategy portrayed Australia as facing “its most challenging strategic environment since the Second World War”.

It advocated for a significant change in the ADF’s strategic objectives and structure, noting the optimism of the 1990s had been “replaced by the uncertainty and tensions of entrenched and increasing strategic competition between the US and China”.

Today, the military ties between the US and Australia are arguably as close as they have ever been.

The ADF operates top-tier US platforms like the F-35 combat aircraft, P-8 maritime patrol aircraft, M1 Abrams tanks, and AH-64 Apache helicopters. Defence Minister Richard Marles has gone so far as to say the ADF should not only interoperable with the US, but interchangeable.

If all goes to plan, Australia will also build and operate its own fleet of nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS partnership in the coming decades.

At the same time, US President Donald Trump’s “America First” positioning has made the US’ closest allies nervous.

His early moves have put paid to the notion that globalisation is the goal all major states are pursuing. In fact, some argue that deglobalisation may be taking hold as the US aggressively enacts tariffs against its allies, pursues economic onshoring and withdraws from key international bodies.

These actions have led to many to question whether Australia has become too dependent on its major ally and if we need to emphasise a more self-reliant defence posture. However, this is much easier said than done.

Looking back, the year 2000 represented the beginning of a period of major change for Australian foreign policy. Such is the pace of change now, we may view 2025 in the same light in another quarter century.

Whether Australia’s alliance with the US will face long-term harm is yet to be seen. No matter how the bilateral relationship may change, the Indo-Pacific region will continue to be at the core of Australia’s foreign policy outlook, much as it was at the turn of the century.

This piece is part of a series on how Australia has changed since the year 2000. You can read other pieces in the series here.

David Andrews has not personally received funding from any relevant external bodies, but he has previously worked on projects funded by the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Home Affairs, and Defence. David is a member of the Australian Labor Party and Australian Institute of International Affairs, and previously worked for the Department of Defence.

– ref. Australia may no longer be a ‘deputy sheriff’, but its reliance on the US has only grown deeper since 2000 – https://theconversation.com/australia-may-no-longer-be-a-deputy-sheriff-but-its-reliance-on-the-us-has-only-grown-deeper-since-2000-252501

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul McGreevy, Professor, School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney

In the wild, dogs spend a lot of their time chewing on bones, carcasses, sticks and kernels. For example, Australian dingoes can feed for up to 108 minutes in a single session.

But most domestic dogs chew far less than their free-roaming counterparts. This is largely because of the introduction of easy-to-eat, processed pet foods such as kibble, which now comprises the majority of domestic dogs’ diet.

This is a problem because although chewing carries some risks, overall it has significant benefits for dogs.

As our new review, published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, demonstrates, it enriches the physical, psychological and emotional health of dogs in many interconnected ways.

1. Food acquisition and nourishment

Dogs chew primarily to nourish themselves.

Their large canine, premolar and molar teeth and wide gape help them to capture and dismember prey. Chewing whole carcasses provides them access to marrow, fibre and minerals that would otherwise be inaccessible.

When they are not chowing down on body parts, free-ranging dogs forage on nuts, berries, and insects – a portion of which are also hidden in kernels, shells or exoskeletons and require chewing.

2. Clean teeth and oral hygiene

Dental disease is one of the most common health issues in companion and kennelled dogs. It is more common in smaller and older dogs.

The abrasive action of chewing on hard and fibrous materials helps to remove and prevent the formation of plaque.

This reduces bad breath, gum disease, tooth loss and therefore the requirement for dental procedures at the vet clinic.

Of course, dogs with existing dental issues might find it impossible to chew. And it is recognised that some dental fractures may arise from chewing.

3. Gastrointestinal health

Chewing between meals can help facilitate digestion in all mammals.

It can also prevent stomach inflammation and stimulate peristalsis (waves of contractions) in the gastrointestinal tract.

This helps maintain regular bowel movements and stool consistency.

4. Healthy microbiome

The action of chewing promotes resident bugs that comprise a healthy microbiome and reduces harmful microbes, both in the oral cavity and in the lower intestine.

The microbes of the microbiome work for their own survival and also for that of their dog host, for whom they help maintain healthy oral hygiene and gut health.

5. Stress management

Chewing stimulates the rest-and-digest elements of a dog’s life and can reduce acute stress.

This gives dogs a potential mechanism to manage some of the challenges of both boredom and over-arousal.

In this way, providing long-lasting chewables can help to alleviate anxiety associated with challenging situations such as being home alone.

6. Bone density

Stress is common to all mammals. It causes a release of cortisol, a hormone that can reduce bone density and, over time, lead to osteoporosis.

Because chewing makes dogs less stressed, it can help to prevent some forms of osteoporosis by reducing corticosteroid concentrations in the blood.

7. Performance and focus

Dogs can moderate their own arousal levels if they have the opportunity to chew.

This appears to be bidirectional in that chewing can be stimulating for a bored dog or calming for an unsettled dog.

As such, chewing may be a unique means of bringing dogs into the Goldilocks zone of arousal, also known as “eustress”. This zone improves a dog’s ability to focus, learn and perform complex tasks.

8. Ageing well

Dogs are living longer than they have in the past. Because of this, more are experiencing cognitive decline.

Research has shown that in other mammals, such as humans and rodents, chewing can protect cognitive function.

For dogs already suffering some loss of cognitive function, chewing, with its variety and manipulative challenges, may be a valuable management tool to help sustain quality of life.

9. Positive welfare

The pet industry supplies myriad chewable products ranging from toys, dried or fresh animal products and commercially made chews.

They are meeting the market populated by carers who’ve noticed their dogs relish chewing.

Dogs usually become enlivened when offered chews, seeking them out and playing with them.

Some even find a chew so highly valuable that they risk breaking bonds with dog or human family members by exhibiting resource-guarding behaviours.

When we fail to provide chewables, dogs will instead select other less appropriate articles to serve their purpose. In the smorgasbord of potential targets in our homes, leather shoes are often toward the top of the menu.

10. Happy dogs make happy humans

The very latest study on dog-human relationships has revealed a correlation between dogs’ cardiac responses to positive interactions and those of their human guardians.

Although this study focussed on co-operative breed types, such as herding dogs, known to be highly responsive to humans, it demonstrated that cardiac activity of dogs and their owners mirrored each other. It also indicated cross-species connections comparable to those found in attachment relationships between humans.

So, providing your dog with a way to de-stress can have the same benefits for your own emotional and physiological state.

Incorporating chewing into the daily lives of our dogs may be one simple yet important way to ensure they are living happy and healthy lives. Note that chewing ability is individual and advice on the type of chew and its suitability for your dog should be sought from your veterinarian.

We would like to acknowledge the enormous contribution of Rimini Quinn to this article.

Paul McGreevy has received funding from the Australian Research Council, RSPCA Australia and animal welfare focussed philanthropy. He is a member of the British Veterinary Association and currently sits on the NSW Veterinary Practitioners Board.

Kathryn Mills is affiliated with University of Sydney School of Veterinary Science

– ref. Happy dogs make happy humans, and 9 other reasons science says dogs need to chew – https://theconversation.com/happy-dogs-make-happy-humans-and-9-other-reasons-science-says-dogs-need-to-chew-244028