Some survivors will find peace and healing in Bali 2002 – but others may find the series triggering

September 23, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carmen Jacques, Research Officer, Edith Cowan University

Around 11pm on October 12 2002, the first of three separate bombs detonated when a suicide bomber entered Paddy’s Bar in Kuta, Bali.

Another bomb detonated shortly after outside the Sari nightclub, before a final explosion in front of the US consulate.

Stan’s new series, Bali 2002, takes a look at these attacks and their aftermath. The physical and emotional traumas play out with desperation and intensity.

The series also shows how our humanity comes out to shine in desperate and violent times. It shows friends helping friends, people helping strangers, doctors on holiday rushing to the hospital to lend a hand and the Australian Federal Police’s directive to help everyone – and not only prioritise Australians.

While the series creators should be lauded for their close consultations with attack survivors in making the series, this dramatisation highlights the very public nature of terrorism. This public nature can have highly personal impacts.

In my research into the events of this night and their aftermath, I have spoken to many people who were there or lost someone in the attack.

Some survivors will find solace in this sharing of their stories; others will struggle with the public commemoration.

Sharing stories

Some people affected by terrorism find telling their story can be harmful to their health and wellbeing. It locks them into a time and place of pain and suffering.

For others, telling their stories and of loved one’s experiences, lives and deaths is an important part of their healing processes.

Kev Paltridge lost his son Corey in the Bali bombings. He told me closure is “bullshit” and he still has “shit bad days”.

But he also said every time he tells his story, it helps him.

Kev doesn’t shy away from the darker side of his healing pathway – the three years of excessive drinking, his continued suffering and grief for Corey – because he knows there are some who were there who are still drinking and haven’t found an alternative pathway yet.

He hopes his story will help others as much as it helps him.

Journalist Nick Way was at the site of the Sari Club bombing hours after it occurred. He later worked as one of the producers on the documentary Cry Bali. During this process, working closely with survivors and their families, he told me “I learnt that very often, expressing feelings is part of the healing journey.”

Before and after

When a terror attack occurs, the media can create a sense of a “victim” identity, which divides a person’s life into one before and after terror, as if they came into being at that moment.

Bali 2002 buys into this division. It gives scant time to our survivors before the event, and these characters feel shallow.

The series also struggles in finding the right balance between the stories of the terrorists and the survivors. Too much focus is given to the individuals who undertook these attacks. More important are the stories of the victims, survivors, family members and first responders.

For some survivors I have spoken to, the trailer alone has triggered traumatic responses. Their capacity to watch the series is doubtful.

The series weaves together a dramatisation of the events alongside real footage. This raw footage adds realism, but the use of this footage is not signposted, and it could be triggering even to survivors who might feel up to watching a dramatised version of events.

Endurance

Bali 2002 is being released in advance of the 20th anniversary of the attacks.

In my research, I found recognising and remembering these events on fewer, more “significant” anniversaries we disavow the experience of living with terror after the experience of an event.

All the survivors I have spoken with endure every day. Kev told me he speaks to his son “every morning without fail”.

This endurance must be acknowledged and recognised.

The stories of their survival could have been stories of vengeance and hate and promoting more violence.

Instead, I have overwhelmingly found these stories are about hope and responsibility.

Nick told me he thinks “about building a new future for the people who feel oppressed and disadvantaged so that they might be [less] open to radicalisation”.

These are not saccharine stories about closure or forgiveness or forgetting. They are about living with and promoting an awareness of the effects that these attacks have upon everyday individual lives.

Lasting impacts

Every person I have talked with is still deeply affected by their experience.

Bali 2002 takes us from the weeks before the bombing to the 2005 death of the bomb maker, Husin. Viewers with little connection to the event will more than likely come away without an understanding of how survivors, their family members and first responders are still impacted two decades on.

A terrorism bombing is a moment where one is made powerless. They are subject to the will of the terrorist. It is so far outside the normal daily experiences it can cause a deep identity shift.

My research shows survivors of terrorism, their family members and first responders must find a way to fold the experience into their ongoing lives.

Sometimes they walk the tightrope gracefully and are well-balanced, at other times they can’t find their footing and are swaying dangerously over the abyss.

I hope some will find peace and healing in the airing of Bali 2002 and the sharing of these stories, but this won’t be true for all.

Bali 2002 is streaming on Stan from September 25.

Carmen Jacques would like to thank Kev Partridge, Nick Way, Gill Hicks and Andrew Wallace for their contributions to, and collaborations in, this research.

– ref. Some survivors will find peace and healing in Bali 2002 – but others may find the series triggering – https://theconversation.com/some-survivors-will-find-peace-and-healing-in-bali-2002-but-others-may-find-the-series-triggering-189538

Grattan on Friday: Can Jim Chalmers become a reforming treasurer?

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

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

Jim Chalmers’ long term ambition is similar to that of most treasurers. He wants to be prime minister. More immediately, he aspires to be a reformer, which has become harder in today’s electorate, with its low tolerance for pain.

Chalmers likes to talk about having “conversations” on economic matters with the public. On Tuesday – when he was playing down some good news about the $50 billion windfall in the budget outcome for 2021-22 – he spoke of the need for a “national conversation” about how we pay for all the expensive programs people want.

He’d been asked about Reserve Bank Governor Phil Lowe who last week said our fiscal problems demanded higher taxation, spending cuts or economic reforms to grow the economy, or all three. Desirably with a start this parliamentary term, said Lowe.

The governor, who’s in the gun for holding out the prospect of low interest rates continuing until 2024, is not elected and anyway, is not expected to be in his post beyond the expiry of his term in September next year.

Lowe has nothing to lose by being blunt. As a senior minister Chalmers has to be more careful. But he was pleased with Lowe’s words, as he was with similar public sentiments from treasury secretary Steven Kennedy recently.

“I do think we need to have a national discussion about the structural position of the budget, and how we fund the expectations that Australians legitimately have,” Chalmers said.

The cynic might say, talk’s cheap, action could cost votes.

Chalmers highlighted that five big spending areas – health, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, aged care, defence, and servicing the large public debt – were creating “substantial structural concerns”. The spending represented “a combination of the unavoidable and the desirable”.

Chalmers knows there must be a reckoning. But when, and in what form?

The government is squeezed by the promises it made (to remain a small target in order to get elected), the risks in breaking its word, and a volatile electorate.

We hear endless commentary about the (protected) Stage 3 tax cuts, but they are only one constraint. Apart from a crackdown on multinational tax avoidance, Labor pledged there would be no discretionary increases in tax this term.

In theory it has got greater flexibility on spending cuts and we can expect to see quite a few in the October budget, targeting the former government’s programs. This is not just a matter of removing “rorts” but also replacing that government’s priorities with its own.

Chalmers says this will be a “bread and butter” budget, suggesting the more fundamental attempts at reform will come later.

After this “standard” budget “there are multiple opportunities in multiple budgets over the course of the next three years or so, for us to properly engage the people in a proper national conversation about the services that we provide, and how we fund them,” Chalmers said.

Even so, making major changes this term will be difficult; equally challenging would be putting at the 2025 election a program for structural reform of the budget.

In 2019 Labor took to the election a big spending-big taxing policy; in 2022, it went for minimalism. Nevertheless, the election commitments involve extra spending, notably the generous child care policy, and improvements to aged care, including funding the (uncosted) wage rise for workers that will be handed down by the Fair Work Commission.

The government is also under pressure to do more on various fronts, for example, to extend paid parental leave.

Any “conversation” about what services people want from government can quickly get into tricky issues.

These include the sustainability of what’s being offered (think the ballooning NDIS, costing about $28.6 billion in 2021-22 rising to an estimated $34 billion in 2022-23), and the extent to which users should pay more for some services (think aged care).

Serious attempts to put spending on a better basis in the big areas would be met with loud protests from those losing out.

Then there’s the “conversation” about revenue. Leaving aside the Stage 3 tax cuts, many economists see the tax system as unfit for purpose. Certainly over the long term we need more revenue to finance programs.

But major tax reform takes political backbone, and efforts don’t necessarily come off. John Howard and Peter Costello introduced the goods and services tax, but the Coalition nearly lost the election at which it sought a mandate for it. Years before, when treasurer, Howard failed to get support in the Fraser government for a broad-based indirect tax.

And who can forget treasurer Wayne Swan’s attempt at a mining tax? Certainly not Chalmers, who worked for Swan at the time.

There was treasurer Scott Morrison’s spruiking of GST reform in Malcolm Turnbull’s government, which ended with him being slapped down by his prime minister.

Robert Breunig. Director of the Tax and Transfer Policy Institute at the Australian National University’s Crawford School says, “We’re really stuck on tax”.

“The Scandinavian countries are able to reform tax in anticipation of problems. Anglo-Saxon countries generally get into big trouble and are then forced into reform,” he says.

Breunig argues we have too much reliance on personal income tax and company tax, reducing economic incentives. He advocates targeting wealth, through changing tax arrangements on superannuation and imposing a national land tax, which would replace state stamp duties.

While reducing the tax breaks for superannuation might be obvious, the backlash when the Coalition undertook modest change some years ago was sharp. And a land tax-stamp duty trade off would involve getting the states on board.

What about changes to the GST? They would have been easier, Breunig says, in the days when the budget had multi-billion surpluses and losers could have been paid off.

Of course if Chalmers was really brave, he could push the idea of an inquiry into federal-state revenue arrangements, or even propose a tax summit as in 1985 (guarding against treasurer Paul Keating’s experience of his PM leaving him high and dry).

The reforming ambitions of a treasurer affect the dynamics of their relationship with the prime minister.

Bob Hawke, himself committed to economic reform, was supportive of Keating’s zeal, including on tax. But he also reined him in, when the politics came to the fore or there was insufficient stakeholder support for Keating’s goal.

Keating – whom Chalmers often speaks with and greatly admires – chafed under such restrictions.

So far Anthony Albanese has shown himself a cautious leader, in opposition and now in government. The exception is in a non-economic area – his commitment to a referendum on the Voice to Parliament.

Albanese and Chalmers appear to have a good relationship. It remains to be seen whether they will continue to march to the same beat on policy, or whether Chalmers will push for more and faster change, and how Albanese and other ministers react if that happens.

For a treasurer a “conversation” with the Australian people about economic reform must involve a whole other set of “conversations”, with the prime minister and colleagues. And those can test the mettle of all of them.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Can Jim Chalmers become a reforming treasurer? – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-can-jim-chalmers-become-a-reforming-treasurer-191174

Putin plays the annexation card, pushing the war in Ukraine into a dangerous new phase

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

A lot has changed since world leaders last met in person at the United Nations General Assembly: a global pandemic, a looming food crisis, economic stress, climate disasters – and, of course, the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

This week’s 77th session of the General Assembly coincides with Ukraine making impressive military gains against Russian forces. But right on cue, Russian president Vladimir Putin has unveiled a new strategy: annexation.

Russia-backed officials in the self-styled people’s republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, both of which Putin recognised as independent just before his tanks crossed the border, have called for referendums on joining Russia.

A “yes” vote will likely see Moscow annex about 15% of Ukraine’s total area. This is precisely what happened with Crimea, annexed and made part of Russia by law in March 2014. Along with Putin’s order for partial mobilisation of military reservists, it ushers in a new and perilous stage of the war.

Modern imperialism

Legal window dressing aside, annexation – where the territory of a country is taken, usually by force – is an aggressive, wrongful and dangerous act. It is not the same as cession, which involves the peaceful exchange of territory, or granting of independence by mutual consent.

Annexation was a feature of 19th-century imperialism. For much of the 20th century, from the League of Nations to the United Nations, the international community tried to prevent such actions and create platforms for peaceful coexistence.

That’s because annexation runs directly against the ideals of state sovereignty and territorial integrity. It provokes wars between countries and insurgencies within them. Since 1945, annexation by force has been rare, and never done by a permanent member of the Security Council against another UN member. Putin is turning this all upside down.

Scholars, diplomats and media will now be deployed to justify Putin’s actions. The UN General Assembly will ring with rhetoric about the right to self-determination of populations in eastern Ukraine, and the failure of the 2014 Minsk agreement to keep the peace there.

Russia will likely have the support of countries such as Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba and Iran. Western liberal democracies will argue the process is illegitimate. Other countries will try to sit on the fence, and how China will react remains unknown.

The aftermath of recent shelling in Donetsk, one of the territories Russia may soon annex.
Getty Images

Global consensus erodes

In an ideal world, these arguments would be settled by a unanimous agreement of the Security Council or the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which could resolve the dispute using established rules and precedents, as it has in the past. But this is not an ideal world.

Russia will veto any resolution against its interests at the Security Council, and has shown no inclination to allow the ICJ or another independent body to adjudicate. Putin did not suspend his invasion of Ukraine when the ICJ found his justifications for war were baseless.

If the territories are annexed, the option of installing UN peacekeepers becomes remote. And Putin will bristle at the idea of securing a peace deal by giving up what he will now claim is Russian territory.

In turn, this will prolong and deepen the sanctions, restrictions and bans in place against Russia and the occupied territories.

Defending the motherland

Further economic pressure coupled with increased arms transfers to Ukraine can be expected. Putin will respond in kind. Any hope of Russian gas supplies to Europe being resumed before Christmas will evaporate.

Most worryingly, if the annexed territories become part of Russia, Putin will be obliged to defend them with even greater force. The rationale shifts from supposedly defending others to fighting for the motherland.

This may also provide the justification for a large-scale military call-up, with mass conscription only one step away. But Putin is also taking a gamble. Mobilising hundreds of thousands more Russians into the military effort will deepen resentment against the war at home and risk undermining his own goals.

Alternately, despite US President Joe Biden’s recent warnings about the use of tactical nuclear weapons, Putin may feel he has a freer hand. Russian nuclear doctrine prioritises the protection of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state.

While this escalating sabre rattling is unlikely to deter Ukrainian attempts to regain what Moscow has taken, it may give many in the West pause. Supporting Ukraine could be interpreted as a direct attack on Russia, pushing the war into uncharted and very dangerous territory.

Alexander Gillespie 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. Putin plays the annexation card, pushing the war in Ukraine into a dangerous new phase – https://theconversation.com/putin-plays-the-annexation-card-pushing-the-war-in-ukraine-into-a-dangerous-new-phase-191165

How Victorian Labor’s failure on upper house electoral reform undermines democracy

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist), The Conversation

At the 2018 Victorian state election, Labor easily won a majority in the lower house of the Victorian parliament, but the upper house result was an anti-democratic shambles, as the Greens won just one of the 40 upper house seats, while three parties with very small vote shares won seats.

The 2018 upper house result was due to “group voting tickets (GVT)”, in which parties choose the preferences of all people who vote for them “above the line”.

Results like in Victoria 2018 have led to GVT being scrapped in New South Wales before the 2003 election, the federal Senate before the 2016 election, and in South Australia before the 2018 election, while reforms to the Western Australian upper house will be implemented at the 2025 election.

Victoria is the last Australian jurisdiction that still uses GVT. All other jurisdictions that used GVT have replaced it with systems that allow voters to direct their own preferences above the line. Preferences are either completely optional (NSW, SA and WA) or require at least six boxes to be marked above the line (federal Senate).

GVT will be used at the November 26 Victorian state election, after no changes to the electoral law were made by Wednesday’s last Victorian parliamentary sitting day before the election.

Victoria uses eight upper house regions that return five members each, so a quota is one-sixth of the vote, or 16.7%. In 2018 the Greens won 9.3% of the statewide upper house vote, but just one of 40 seats (2.5%). There were three occasions where a party won a seat in a region from under 0.1 quotas (1.5% of votes).

GVT allow very small parties to overtake far bigger parties on 100% preference flows from other parties’ above the line votes. When voters direct their own preferences, the GVT preference spiral does not occur. At the last federal election, preferences were only decisive in one Senate seat: David Pocock’s win in the ACT Senate.

Labor has neglected to reform GVT

Labor has been the Victorian government since the November 2014 state election, under Premier Daniel Andrews. In the eight years Labor has governed, they have never proposed anything to scrap GVT and move to a more democratic system. This is a dereliction of Labor’s responsibility to ensure elections are democratic.

At the 2018 election, the upper house result was 18 Labor out of 40, 11 Coalition, one Green, three Derryn Hinch Justice, two Liberal Democrats, and one each for Animal Justice, Sustainable Australia, Transport Matters, Fiona Patten and Shooters, Fishers & Farmers. As tied votes fail, 21 votes are needed to pass legislation.

Labor and the Greens alone could not pass reforms scrapping GVT through the current upper house, and the crossbenchers who owe their seats to GVT are not interested in reforms. But at the 2018 election, the Coalition lost three seats that they would have won under a fairer system.

The Coalition and Labor still easily have a combined majority in the upper house. Labor should have made a concrete proposal for reform. If the Coalition rejected that proposal, then the current situation would be their fault.

Labor has not even attempted to abolish GVT in the last eight years, so we will be stuck with an upper house elected by GVT for at least the next four years.

Labor likely to suffer losses in upper house if vote share falls

If the major parties are strong, the effect of GVT is reduced as they will win a large share of seats on filled quotas. In Victoria, if Labor won 50% in a region and the Coalition 33.3%, Labor would win three seats and the Coalition two.

Upper house vote shares at the 2018 election were 39.2% Labor, 29.4% Coalition, 9.3% Greens and 3.8% Hinch Justice. Labor won 16 of its 18 seats on raw quotas, and received some assistance in Western Metro and Northern Victoria regions.

At the May federal election, the Victorian Senate result had the Coalition down 3.6% from the 2019 election, but Labor’s vote was only up 0.3% with the Greens up 3.2%. Lower house polling for the state election suggests Labor’s primary vote will be down on 2018, with the Greens up.

If Labor’s vote falls, they will win fewer upper house seats on raw quotas, meaning they could be beaten by GVT snowballs. The Greens would benefit from a higher vote share to allow them to reach quota in the Southern Metro region as well as Northern Metro.

In 2018, Labor did well and the Greens and Coalition badly from GTV, but that will not necessarily apply at the forthcoming election. Even if Labor wins the lower house decisively, as polls currently indicate, the upper house could be a massive mess.

I have no idea which particular others will win seats: it’s a lottery that depends on preference deals. But Labor’s failure to do anything about this system could lead to anti-vaxxers winning seats.

What voters can do to thwart preference deals

For a valid vote, Victoria only requires five preferences below the line. The below the line section of the ballot paper has candidate names grouped by party. Voting below the line means the voter controls where their preferences go; it’s not up to party preference deals.

For a meaningful vote, it’s best if people vote at least 1-5 below the line. They can continue to number beyond 5, but only five preferences are required for a formal vote.

Adrian Beaumont 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. How Victorian Labor’s failure on upper house electoral reform undermines democracy – https://theconversation.com/how-victorian-labors-failure-on-upper-house-electoral-reform-undermines-democracy-190136

Why do humans grow two sets of teeth? These marsupials are rewriting the story of dental evolution

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Qamariya Nasrullah, Postdoctoral Research Associate in Evolutionary Morphology, Monash University

You only get 52 teeth in your lifetime: 20 baby teeth, followed by 32 adult teeth.

It’s not like that for all animals. Some, like rodents, never replace their teeth. Others, like sharks, keep replacing them again and again.

So why do we humans replace our teeth only once? And how does the whole tooth replacement process work?

These are tricky questions, and we don’t have all the answers. But a new discovery about the strange tooth-replacement habits of the tammar wallaby, a small Australian marsupial, may help shed some light on this dental mystery.

Not everybody replaces teeth the same way

It has been long assumed modern mammals all replace their teeth the same way. However, advances in 3D scanning and modelling have revealed mammals with unusual tooth replacement, like the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii) and the fruit bat (Eidolon helvum).

These mammals have given us important clues as to how humans and other mammals have evolved from ancestors with continuous tooth replacement.

How do humans make and replace teeth?

Human teeth begin growing between the sixth and eighth week of an embryo’s development, when a band of tissue within the gums called the primary dental lamina starts to thicken. Along this band, clusters of special stem cells appear at the sites of future teeth, known as “placodes”.

The placodes then begin to grow into teeth, going through the bud, cap and bell stages along the way. They form into their final shape and harden with layers of dentine and enamel. Eventually, they will erupt through the gums. The incisors are the first to erupt, as early as 6 months old, which is why its called theteethingphase!

This generation of teeth, which grow from the primary dental lamina, are known as “primary dentition”, or baby teeth.

Secondary or adult teeth grow a little bit differently. An offshoot of tissue called the successional lamina grows out from the baby tooth, and that tissue develops the replacement tooth like an apple on a branch of a tree. Adult teeth begin to grow before we are born, but take many years for the full set to form and eventually appear.

Replacement occurs when the adult teeth get large enough that they finally push out the baby teeth and remain as the permanent set of teeth for the rest of our lives. The first molar usually erupts between 6 and 7 years of age, while our wisdom teeth are the last to appear (roughly between 17 and 21 years of age).

Most mammals replace their teeth once in the course of their lives, like we do. This is known as “diphyodonty” (two sets of teeth).

Some groups of mammals, such as rodents, don’t replace their teeth at all. These “monophyodonts” get by with the same set of teeth for their whole lives. There are also a few unusual mammals, such as echidnas, that don’t grow any teeth at all!

Learning from the wallaby

The tammar wallaby is also a diphyodont, replacing its teeth only once.

Scientists long assumed it replaced its teeth in the same way humans do, though historical notes going back as far as 1893 noticed unusual things about this marsupial’s tooth development. For starters, while we replace our incisors, canines and premolars, tammar wallabies only replace their premolars.

Baby and adult teeth of the tammar wallaby. Scale bar equals 1 cm. Nasrullah et al.

Recently my colleagues at Monash University and the University of Melbourne and I observed the teeth of tammar wallabies from the embryo through to adulthood. We used a technique called diceCT, which combines staining and CT scanning, and found something surprising.

Instead of replacement premolar teeth developing from the successional lamina, they were in fact delayed baby teeth developing from the primary dental lamina.

This means the tammar wallaby does not have any traditional tooth replacement. This discovery opens up a huge set of new questions. What exactly are these teeth?

Tooth development of premolars in the tammar wallaby in 2D and 3D, showing the delayed baby tooth ‘P3’ appearing 47 days after its siblings ‘dP2’ and ‘dP3’

One explanation for these delayed baby teeth could be a link to our ancestry of continuous tooth replacement.

Your teeth are millions of years in the making

Unlike mammals, most other animals, including fish, sharks, amphibians and reptiles, replace their teeth multiple times (they are “polyphyodonts”). Mammals lost this ability around 205 million years ago.

The reason we stop making teeth is because our dental lamina degrades after our second set are made, while it remains active in polyphyodonts.

Interestingly, in modern and fossil polyphyodonts the replacement teeth often develop in groups of alternating waves, known as “Zahnreihen”.

While the tammar only replaces its premolars, these delayed baby teeth could represent the presence of the Zahnreihen still occurring in modern mammals.

This gives us a clue about how we have evolved from ancestors with continuous tooth replacement: by modifying and reducing a system that is hundreds of millions of years old.

In reptiles, teeth are replaced in waves, or ‘Zahnreihen’. Each blue line shows a single wave.
Whitlock and Richman

Research has also found that fruit bats (Eidolon helvum) make replacement teeth in unusual ways, including growing them in front of the baby tooth, behind it, beside it, or splitting off from it.

This is exciting because, together with the tammar, it shows there may well be a wealth of tooth replacement diversity across mammals happening right under our noses – or our gums!

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

– ref. Why do humans grow two sets of teeth? These marsupials are rewriting the story of dental evolution – https://theconversation.com/why-do-humans-grow-two-sets-of-teeth-these-marsupials-are-rewriting-the-story-of-dental-evolution-189796

As the 2022 AFLM season comes to a close, the game must ask itself some difficult questions – especially on racism

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Klugman, Research Fellow, Institute for Health & Sport, member of the Community, Identity and Displacement Research Network, and Co-convenor of the Olympic Research Network, Victoria University

“One more”. In two words, the great Noongar-Wajuk Australian Rules footballer Lance Franklin indicated he would play on until at least 2023. The statement “one more” also encapsulates the desire of the teams set to battle for the 2022 Australian Football League men’s (AFLM) premiership on Saturday. Geelong and Sydney, two powerhouses of the early 2000s, are each desperate for another flag after a number of close misses.

Unlike the supporters of both teams, the Australian Football League (AFL) will be hoping for a close compelling game with the outcome not known until the last few seconds. It is grand finals like Sydney versus West Coast in 2005, or Geelong versus St Kilda in 2009, that fuel the fever that drives the seemingly perpetual rise of the AFL.

In contrast to Franklin, 2022 is Gillon McLachlan’s final year at the AFL. The league’s CEO since 2014, McLachlan has deftly capitalised on the particular powers of sport. In an era where streaming companies have greatly reduced the sway of local TV channels, sport remains one of the few things most people still want to watch live. Those moments when it seems like nothing else matters have to be watched as they occur.

The recent $4.5 billion AFL TV rights deal might be seen as McLachlan’s crowning achievement. From 2025 to 2031, the AFL’s TV partners will pay $643 million per year for the right to broadcast the men’s and women’s competitions.

Yet McLachlan’s broader legacy as the steward of Australian Rules football is more damning, especially when it comes to three central issues: Indigenous players, AFLW, and head injuries.

Gillon McLachlan has secured a massive TV rights deal for the AFL, but there have been key downsides to his tenure as CEO.
James Ross/AAP

Urgent need to tackle entrenched racism

“One more” unfortunately also applies to the continuing stream of awful revelations of the racist treatment of Indigenous players during McLachlan’s time as CEO. The racist booing of the Adnyamathanha and Narungga man and dual Brownlow medallist Adam Goodes began at the end of McLachlan’s first year in charge, and continued unabated during 2015, driving Goodes from the game. After refusing to condemn the booing while it was occurring, McLachlan and the AFL eventually apologised and committed to pro-actively ensuring no player would ever be so isolated and unsupported in the face of racist treatment.

Yet, at the same time, the league and its biggest club, Collingwood, were denying Afro-Brazilian Héritier Lumumba’s accounts of the racist treatment he received. An eventual review found there was systemic racism at the Collingwood Football Club.

Belated apologies followed, as they did again this year to Eddie Betts (who is connected to the Gubrun and Wirangu/Kokatha Peoples) and others after Betts wrote about the awful 2018 men’s pre-season training camp of the Adelaide Crows, which included racist activities.

And just this week there have been devastating allegations that celebrated coaches Alastair Clarkson and Chris Fagan pressured young Indigenous players at Hawthorn to leave their partners and have their partners terminate their pregnancies.

The heartbreaking allegations resonate with Australia’s genocidal history. But they also reflect its shameful present. The incarceration of Indigenous peoples in places like Victoria continues to rise while children are being taken away from Indigenous mothers at the highest rates since at least the Stolen Generations.

Despite its celebratory narratives of racial inclusion and anti-racist action, the AFL and its clubs remain institutions that seek to possess Indigenous peoples and their land, rather than recognise and support their sovereignty.

It remains an indictment of McLachlan’s tenure that the white leadership of the AFL has never enacted a broad review of systemic racism throughout the league. He has also failed to institute a forum for truth-telling with a commitment to implement structural changes to redress its long, racist history.

The failures of the white leadership of the AFL to consider Indigenous peoples were once again on display when the first game of the AFLW’s Indigenous round began with a minute’s silence for the death of the queen who upheld, as well as symbolised, the genocidal colonisation of the lands that make up Australia.

The AFLW must be paid more than lip service

Like its relationship to Indigenous Australians, the league’s purported commitment to women’s football remains more symbolic than grounded in actions. While McLachlan deserves credit for accelerating the development of an elite national competition for women, as soon as the AFLW was launched in 2017 it became something of an afterthought to the league.

Indeed, the following year the AFL turned its attention instead to launching the men’s AFLX competition, redistributing most of the AFLW’s marketing budget to this shiny new gimmick. While the ill-advised AFLX lasted only two seasons, it not only distracted from the women’s competition when it was most in need of support, it also highlighted the disparity in how the AFL viewed the labour of the women and men who played the game. In 2019, for example, the four male captains of the AFLX sides each received more money for two weekends of work than the combined salaries of each AFLW side for the whole season.

The start of the AFLW’s seventh season amid the men’s finals has highlighted the jarring disjunctions between the two leagues. Despite many compelling contests, the resources that the league and its media partners invest in covering the men dwarfs that of the women.

AFLW games have often been scheduled at inconvenient times (such as 5.10pm on Fridays), so as not to clash with the men. None of the innumerable footy TV talk shows focus on the women’s game. AFLW games have fewer camera angles, no capacity for reviewing scores, and broadcasts end almost as soon as the games are over.

Pay parity continues to be a pressing issue for the AFLW.
Hamish Blair/AAP

The superb AFLW season 6 documentary series, Fearless, shows how things can be different. Using laudably high production values, it provides a gripping insight into the highly skilled teams and athletes of the AFLW competition. Yet those who run the AFLW are still yet to provide a clear plan for its development to either the public or the clubs themselves.

The huge new TV rights deal provides more than enough funds to make the AFLW fully professional. Yet recent history makes it hard to trust the AFL will do this well or in a timely fashion.

Turning a blind eye to head injuries and their devastating impact

Under McLachlan, the AFL has also failed to adequately deal with perhaps the greatest threat to the viability of both the AFLW and AFLM competitions. Head injuries and their devastating legacies remain a persistent issue.

Early in McLachlan’s tenure, the AFL’s medical advisory board made the confounding argument that concussions suffered in Australian Rules football were somehow different from those suffered in American football. More recently, they have hindered research into head injuries suffered by AFL players.

Geelong’s captain in Saturday’s grand final – Joel Selwood – is famous for, among other things, having developed a method of winning free kicks by inducing head-high tackles. Despite some attempts, the AFL has been unable to stop players wilfully harming themselves to gain an advantage in this manner.

A key limitation here is the league’s refusal to move to full-time professional umpires for its billion-dollar industry. In a further embarrassment to McLachlan, the 2022 Brownlow medallist, Patrick Cripps, was only eligible for the award because the AFL appeals board decided his head-high bump that concussed Callum Ah Chee did not merit a suspension.

Lance Franklin’s extraordinary combination of talent and hard work over more than a decade exemplifies the spectacle that continues to lead so many people to watch the game.

There is a significant chance that in Saturday’s grand final Franklin will do something that seems to transcend human possibility, creating the kind of must-watch moment that powers live sport.

Yet the incoming AFL CEO from 2023 faces considerable challenges to make AFL a safe space in which all Indigenous people can thrive without systemic racism, to fully realise the glorious potential of AFLW, and to make the game safe for all of those who play it.

Matthew Klugman has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council..

– ref. As the 2022 AFLM season comes to a close, the game must ask itself some difficult questions – especially on racism – https://theconversation.com/as-the-2022-aflm-season-comes-to-a-close-the-game-must-ask-itself-some-difficult-questions-especially-on-racism-190847

What’s this ‘longevity’ diet, and will it really make you live longer?

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

You may have heard about the longevity diet, and its promise of an extended life span – but what exactly is it and is it any different to other diets promoting good health?

The longevity diet is a set of eating recommendations compiled by a biochemist called Valter Longo, director of the University of Southern California’s Longevity Institute. He is known for his research on the role of fasting, the effects of nutrients on your genes and how these may impact ageing and the risk of diseases.

While the longevity diet has been targeted to older adults, it is also recommended for younger people. Longo has said he plans to live to 120 by following this diet.

So, what does the diet look like?

Foods in this diet are vegetables, including leafy greens, fruit, nuts, beans, olive oil, and seafood that’s low in mercury.

So most foods in the longevity diet are plant based. Plant-based diets are generally higher in vitamins and minerals, dietary fibre, antioxidants and lower in saturated fat and salt, which lead to health benefits.

Foods that are discouraged are an excess of meat and dairy, and those high in processed sugar and saturated fats.

For people who don’t want to go without dairy, the longevity diet recommends switching from cow’s milk to either goat’s or sheep’s milk, which have a slightly different nutrient profile. But there is little evidence sheep’s and goat’s milk provide more health benefits.

Including fermented dairy (such as cheese and yoghurt) in your diet, as recommended in the longevity diet, is beneficial as it provides a more extensive microbiome (good bacteria) than any milk.

Have you seen this diet before?

Many of you may recognise this as a familiar dietary pattern. It is similar to the Mediterranean diet, especially as both feature olive oil as the oil of choice. The Mediterranean diet is promoted and backed by a considerable body of evidence to be health promoting, reducing the risk of disease, and promoting longevity.

The longevity diet is also similar to many national, evidence-based dietary guidelines, including Australia’s.

Two-thirds of the recommended foods in the Australian dietary guidelines come from plant-based foods (cereals, grains, legumes, beans, fruits, vegetables). The guidelines also provide plant-based alternatives for protein (such as dried beans, lentils and tofu) and dairy (such as soy-based milks, yoghurts and cheeses, so long as they are supplemented with calcium).

Intermittent fasting

Another aspect of the longevity diet is the specified periods of fasting, known as intermittent fasting. The diet advocates eating in a 12-hour time-frame, and not eating for three to four hours before bed time.

Typically with intermittent fasting people fast for 16–20 hours with a four to eight hour window of eating. Another intermittent fasting option is the 5:2 diet, in which eating is restricted to about 2,000–3,000 kilojoules for two days of the week and for the other five days, eating normally.

The evidence indicates intermittent fasting may lead to improvements in insulin resistance, which leads to better blood glucose control. This can reduce your risk of type 2 diabetes and other chronic diseases, such as heart disease and obesity.

Maintain a healthy weight

The longevity diet recommends that people who are overweight eat only two meals a day – breakfast and either a midday or evening meal – plus just two low-sugar snacks. This is to try to reduce kilojoule intake for weight loss.

Bag of crisps — Reducing snacking reduces kilojoule intake.
The organic crave company/Unsplash, CC BY

Another important aspect of this recommendation is to reduce snacking, particularly of foods high in saturated fat, salt or sugar. These are the foods we typically refer to as discretionary/sometimes foods, or ultra-processed foods. These offer little nutritional value, and in some cases are linked to worse health outcomes.

Eat a rainbow of colours

The longevity diet recommends eating foods rich in nutrients, which most national dietary guidelines also advocate. This means eating a diet rich in plant foods, and a variety of foods within each food group.

Each colour fruit and vegetable contains different nutrients, so eating a range of coloured fruit and vegetables is recommended. The recommendation to select a range of wholegrains over refined cereals, breads, pasta and rice also reflects the best nutritional evidence.

Vegetables in a bowl — Different coloured vegetables have different nutrients.
Hello I’m Nik/Unsplash, CC BY

Restrict protein intake

This diet recommends a restricting protein intake to 0.68-0.80g per kilogram of body weight per day. This is 47-56g of protein a day for a 70kg person. For reference each of these foods contains about 10g of protein: two small eggs, 30g cheese, 40g lean chicken, 250mL dairy milk, 3/4cup lentils, 120g tofu, 60g nuts or 300mL soy milk. This is in line with government recommendations.

Most Australians easily consume this level of protein in their diet. However it is the elderly population, to whom the longevity diet is targeted, who are less likely to meet their protein requirements.

In the longevity diet it is recommended most of the protein comes from plant sources or fish. This may require special planning to ensure a complete range of all the nutrients needed if the diet is missing red meat.

Are there any problems with this diet?

This diet recommends taking a multivitamin and mineral supplements every three to four days. Longo says this prevents malnourishment and won’t cause any nutritional problems.

However, many health bodies including the World Cancer Research Fund, the British Heart Foundation and the American Heart Association do not recommend taking supplements to prevent cancer or heart disease.

Supplements should only be taken on your doctor’s advice, following a blood test showing a deficiency in a specific nutrient. This is because some vitamins and minerals may be harmful in high quantities.

If you are eating a variety of foods across all food groups, you are meeting all your nutrient requirements and shouldn’t need supplements.

The verdict?

This longevity diet is a compilation of many aspects of evidence-based healthy eating patterns. We already promote these as they improve our health and reduce the risk of developing chronic diseases. All of these aspects of healthy eating could lead to increased longevity.

What’s not mentioned in the longevity diet is the importance of exercise for good health and a long life.

Evangeline Mantzioris is affiliated with Alliance for Research in Nutrition, Exercise and Activity (ARENA) at the University of South Australia. Evangeline Mantzioris has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, and has been appointed to the National Health and Medical Research Council Dietary Guideline Expert Committee.

– ref. What’s this ‘longevity’ diet, and will it really make you live longer? – https://theconversation.com/whats-this-longevity-diet-and-will-it-really-make-you-live-longer-189140

There’s a huge surge in solar production under way – and Australia could show the world how to use it

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Blakers, Professor of Engineering, Australian National University

You might feel despondent after reading news reports about countries doubling down on fossil fuels to cope with energy price spikes.

Don’t. It’s a blip. While the Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to a temporary fossil fuel resurgence, it also accelerated Europe’s renewable ambitions. And the United States and Australia have finally passed climate bills. This week, federal energy minister Chris Bowen announced “Australia is back” on climate action.

There’s better news too. In March this year, the world hit one terawatt of installed solar. By 2025, the world’s polysilicon factories are predicted to bounce back from supply shortages and churn out enough high-purity silicon for almost one terawatt of solar panels every year.

Coupled with major growth in wind, pumped hydro, energy storage, grid batteries
and electric vehicles, the solar boom puts zero global emissions within reach before 2050.

Best of all – Australia could show the world how to add solar to their grid. You might not suspect it, but we’re the global leaders in finding straightforward solutions to the variability of solar power and wind. We’re showing that it’s easier to get carbon emissions out of electricity generation than many predicted.

solar farm — Solar power will ramp up sharply, if supply chain investment is any guide.
Shutterstock

Rapid, deep and cheap emissions reductions

This surge in the renewable supply chain allows sustained exponential growth that is already disrupting fossil fuel markets in some countries, notably Australia.

This year, global fossil fuel prices have skyrocketed in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In turn, that’s generated intense interest in solar and wind energy to boost domestic energy security, particularly in Europe, which needs to wean itself off Russian gas.

While fossil fuels are concentrated in countries such as Russia, Saudi Arabia and Australia, solar and wind resources are widely distributed. Most countries can generate all their own energy from the sun and wind.

Europe could readily become energy independent, harnessing its enormous North Sea offshore wind resources and solar in the south. Even densely populated countries such as Japan and Indonesia have far more solar and wind resources than they need.

Solar and wind now provide the cheapest new electricity generation in most markets. As a bonus, the widespread uptake of solar and wind will eliminate many of our worst air pollutants and improve our health.

Why are solar and wind winning?

In a word, cost. Solar and wind have won the race for the energy of the future because they are cheap. Once built, the fuel is free, and does not need to be imported or dug up.

Wind and solar are being built three times faster than everything else combined. It follows they will dominate future energy markets as existing fossil fuel generators retire and electricity use grows rapidly.

graph solar and other power sources — Global net generation capacity additions. Adapted from IRENA, CER, GWEC, WNA, GEM, ITRPV and IEA data.
Supplied, CC BY

Nuclear generation hasn’t grown in the past decade. Coal and gas plants able to capture and store carbon have not got traction in the energy market. Hydroelectricity can’t expand much further. There will, however, be a huge market for off-river pumped hydro energy storage.

There are no serious technical, environmental or material constraints to solar power on any scale. However, solar has been hit by supply chain issues in recent months, with major price spikes in polysilicon. These are common to any rapidly growing industry, and should resolve as more suppliers see the opportunity and enter the market.

There is enough land

Most of the world’s population live at moderate latitudes with good sunshine on most days. Here, solar is effectively unlimited. Those further north have abundant wind energy (particularly offshore wind) to offset weaker solar in winter.

Sceptics point out you need more land or sea to produce the same amount of electricity as fossil fuel plants. While true, solar farms can happily coexist with livestock and cropping to create a double income for farmers. The solar electricity needed to power the world and eliminate all fossil fuels can be generated from about 1% of the land area devoted to agriculture.

map of solar resources — Most of the global population lives between the 35th parallels (the red lines) where there are good solar resources. Redder areas mean better solar.
World Bank, CC BY

Once we have cheap clean electricity, we can use it to eliminate the use of fossil fuels altogether by electrifying nearly everything: transport, heating, industry and chemical production. This could reduce emissions by three quarters.

Global electricity production will need to rise sevenfold to about 200,000 terawatt-hours a year to give everyone the energy needed to reach developed nation living standards. But this is not all that hard over the next 30 years. And the alternative – keep pumping warming pollutants into the atmosphere – will make the lives of our children harder and harder.

Together, solar and wind have passed two terawatts of installed capacity. That means we’re about 2% of the way to reaching the almost 100 terawatts of solar and wind required to decarbonise the world, while raising living standards.

Annual solar deployment needs to double every four years to get the job done by 2050–60 – similar to the global growth rate achieved over the past decade.

Australia can show the way

You might not think it, given the decade of political climate wars, but Australia is the world leader in terms of solar electricity produced per person.

graph showing australia solar uptakeq — Australia’s solar uptake dwarfs all other countries.
Andrew Blakers, Author provided

In Australia, solar and wind are booming while coal is rapidly falling. We’re already on track to reach 80-90% renewables by 2030. Remarkably, our per capita solar generation is twice as large as the second placed countries (Germany, Japan and the Netherlands) and far ahead of China and the USA.

Australia is quietly demonstrating how to accommodate huge new flows of cheap, clean electricity. The world will soon follow suit.

Andrew Blakers receives funding from ARENA and DFAT.

– ref. There’s a huge surge in solar production under way – and Australia could show the world how to use it – https://theconversation.com/theres-a-huge-surge-in-solar-production-under-way-and-australia-could-show-the-world-how-to-use-it-190241

‘We haven’t built it, and they’ve come’: the e-change pressures on Australia’s lifestyle towns

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Waters-Lynch, Lecturer in Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Organisational Design, RMIT University

Michael and Karen moved from Melbourne to Castlemaine, about 130km northwest of Victoria’s capital, in mid-2020 – using, like tens of thousands of Australians, the shift to remote work to make a larger lifestyle change.

They sold the small two-room inner-urban apartment they had bought in 2018 and bought a large three-bedroom home on a 1,200 square metre block in the historic goldfields town (population about 10,000).

“There’s an orchard, an amazing garden for growing veggies, and a good shed out the back,” enthuses Michael. “I have a room now for full-time remote work and a third bedroom for the baby, which is on its way.” He plans to convert the shed into a studio for Karen, an artist.

But not everything was easy. “The internet connection has been dropping in and out, repeatedly and for large durations,” Michael says. “I’ve had to use my phone’s 3G hotspot as a backup.”

We’ve tracked the experience of Michael and Karen along with 20 other households in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland to better understand how the influx of “e-changers” to “lifestyle towns” is affecting infrastructure and social cohesion.

This demographic shift has long been predicted – facilitated by technology and the population stresses in major cities. But the pandemic accelerated the trend.

Slow internet speeds are just the tip of the infrastructure pressures being placed on hundreds of towns within a few hours’ drive of cities – the sweet spot for e-changers looking to combine city jobs with country town lifestyles. Others include health and education services, water security and, most urgently, housing availability and affordability.

Helen Haines, the independent federal member for the rural Victorian electorate of Indi, has put it like this:

For a long time, when we talked about regional development, we said ‘build it and they will come’. Well we haven’t built it and they’ve come.

It’s a challenge that will require cooperation between federal, state and local policy makers to resolve.

Rise of the e-changers

In 2016 demographer Bernard Salt described living in a country town while keeping a city-based job as the ultimate Australian lifestyle choice:

“Move to a lifestyle town, telecommute using broadband, and come into the city perhaps once a week for face-to-face meetings. Sounds pretty damn good to many Australians.”

He estimated about one in six Australians were interested in doing this. The major obstacle: having a job they could do from home. But based on Australian Bureau of Statistics data, he predicted the proportion of the workforce able to work from home would double from 4% in 2016 to 8% by 2026.

COVID-19 has dramatically changed that trajectory, with up to 40% of the workforce working from home during the pandemic’s peak.

This, along with favourable interest rates, enabled tens of thousands to make the shift. Between July 2020 and June 2021 the population of regional Australia grew by about 70,900, while capital cities declined by 26,000 – the first time in 40 years that regional population growth outpaced the cities.

Most of this shift occurred in NSW and Victoria. Sydney’s population fell about 5,200, while the rest of the state increased by 26,800. Melbourne’s population declined by about 60,500, with the rest of the state picking up 15,700.

Indicative of the e-change trend was the decline in the median age of those migrating away from the cities (from 38 to 34 in South Australia, from 37 to 33 in NSW, and smaller changes elsewhere).

Looking at lifestyle hotspots

Our research mostly focused on e-changers moving to “hotspots” – towns within a few hours’ commute of a capital city. But we also included some towns further afield, such as Broken Hill in far-west New South Wales and Rockhampton in central Queensland.

We were interested in their experiences with remote work, given Australia’s fixed broadband speeds already lag behind most industrialised countries, ranking 65 of 182 countries on a current global index. Regional towns generally fare even worse.

Two households in our study did report better speeds but nine said slowness and bad connection limited their ability to use it for work. One recounted spending weeks chasing their service provider before it was discovered the copper wiring to their home had eroded. These problems are unlikely to get better in any area affected by heavy rainfall and flooding events.

Gentrification hurting low-income residents

A more fundamental issue for lifestyle towns is what growing populations mean for the attributes attracting e-changers in the first place.

In the Hunter Valley, Southern Highland and Shoalhaven regions of NSW, and in the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast areas in Queensland, house prices rose more than 35% in the 12 months to January 2022.

Shoalhaven, about 200 km south of Sydney, is just within the 'sweet spot' for e-changers seeking a country lifestyle while keeping their city jobs. — Shoalhaven, about 200 km south of Sydney, is just within the ‘sweet spot’ for e-changers seeking a country lifestyle while keeping their city jobs.
Shutterstock

This has contributed to an unprecedented rental crisis, displacing those on lower incomes and making it harder for local businesses to fill job vacancies.

A discussion paper published by the Regional Australia Institute in May 2022 noted that while regional Australia’s population grew by an average of 76,500 people a year in the decade to 2020, the number of homes approved for construction declined in five of those ten years. It argues that market forces alone are insufficient to address the problem.

Population influxes also risk altering the appealing character of lifestyle towns. The population surge in Torquay on Victoria’s Surf Coast, for example, has seen the once sleepy coastal town come to resemble an outer suburb of Geelong.

Investment urgently needed

Michael and Karen may not stay in Castlemaine. But they don’t plan to move back to Melbourne. They are considering Tasmania. They like working remotely, having more space and time for their young family, being closer to nature and the sense of community a country town offers.

All the evidence suggests hundreds of thousands more will follow their path, with hybrid and remote work here to stay.

Good planning and policy is needed to ensure this historic demographic shift does not overwhelm these towns. To maintain their livability and ability to accommodate remote work, they require urgent investment in telecommunications and transport infrastructure, health and education services and – most of all – housing.

Julian Waters-Lynch received funding from the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) to conduct this research.

Andrew Glover received funding from the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) to conduct this research.

Tania Lewis received funding from the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) to conduct this research.

– ref. ‘We haven’t built it, and they’ve come’: the e-change pressures on Australia’s lifestyle towns – https://theconversation.com/we-havent-built-it-and-theyve-come-the-e-change-pressures-on-australias-lifestyle-towns-188228

Peppa Pig has introduced a pair of lesbian polar bears, but Aussie kids’ TV has been leading the way in queer representation

By The Conversation -

September 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Damien O’Meara, PhD Candidate, Media and Communications, Swinburne University of Technology

Peppa Pig’s first same-sex couple, a pair of lesbian polar bears, were recently introduced after a petition to include a same-sex family received nearly 24,000 signatures.

Children’s television has often been a place to push the boundaries of diverse representations onscreen. In particular, Australian children’s TV has been a global leader in screen diversity, including gender and queer representation.

Emmy-winning Australian series First Day (2020-22) tells the story of a transgender girl starting high school.

Another Emmy-winner, Hardball (2019-21) includes gay dads for one of the lead characters.

Even recent updates to The Wiggles’ line-up has placed a greater emphasis on gender diversity, including adding a non-binary unicorn.

Diverse representation

Children’s TV is often less risk averse than programming aimed at adults.

The ABC is empowered to take risks with representations of gender and sexuality in children’s programming because of its publicly funded role.

But such progressive portrayals can sometimes chafe with outdated expectations of children’s television. In 2004, Play School faced controversy for showing lesbian mothers.

As social acceptance has progressed, Australian children’s TV has been able to achieve more queer representations.

Talking to the Queering Australian Screens research project, television professionals often praised the genre for its openness to new ideas, representations and bringing in new talent.

Tony Ayres, Creator of Nowhere Boys (2013-18), observed those who commission children’s TV are “generally very open to diverse representation”.

This representation happens behind the scenes, too, with Ayres describing how these shows often give new talent their first credit.

David Hannam, who has written for several kids’ TV shows including Dance Academy (2010-13), said children’s television “has led the way”.

Speaking of his time at the Australian Children’s Television Foundation, Hannam noted the foundation had an “almost charter responsibility” to show diversity on screen, “with great caution and responsibility”.

Julie Kalceff created First Day, which starred a young trans actor, Evie McDonald, as a trans girl starting high school.

When she was developing the show, Kalceff shared that she was initially concerned about what would be allowed on children’s TV:

There were no trans people on television. There were no TV shows with trans actors in the lead role. I thought there’s no way the ABC is going to do this. And there’s no way they’re going to do it with kids’ TV. But to their credit, the ABC was so supportive, and was so behind the project from the beginning.

What audiences want

It is not only TV producers who are eager to widen representation in children’s television. Audiences are also seeking out more inclusive content.

Just like Peppa Pig in the UK, there have been calls in Australia for more diversity in animated hit Bluey, with the show adding its first Auslan signing character in June.

One of our research projects, Australian Children’s Television Cultures’ 2021 survey found 90% of Australian parents believe diverse representation is an important element of children’s TV.

As one father explained:

Diversity on screen helps children learn about people with different upbringings from their own, expanding their empathy for and curiosity about other people.

In contrast to the controversy Play School received nearly 20 years ago for its inclusion of same-sex parents, a mother praised the show for “doing a fantastic job” of depicting diversity in relationships.

Not everyone believes Australian television is doing enough. One survey respondent praised the way shows like Bluey reflect Australian culture, but said he would “love to see more LGBT representation […] It would be nice as a kid to know you’re valid.”

Uncertain futures

The streaming era has changed how families and children watch TV. This raises concerns about the future of Australian children’s content.

The recent removal of quotas for Australian networks to air a minimum number of hours of children’s television, alongside the absence of quotas on streaming services, has led to a reduction in the production of local kids’ TV.

From Play School to Bluey, children’s TV has reflected the richness of Australian cultural life. There is a risk that if Australian child audiences need to rely on international content, future generations will not see themselves on screen.

With the loss of local voices, Australian kids’ TV may also lose its ability to push boundaries of diversity and inclusion.

We are conducting a survey of parents and guardians with children aged up to 14 about how families watch kids’ TV in the streaming era. You can participate here.

Damien O’Meara is a Research Assistant for the Australian Children’s Television Cultures research project at Swinburne University of Technology.

Liam Burke receives funding from the Australian Children’s Television Foundation (ACTF).

– ref. Peppa Pig has introduced a pair of lesbian polar bears, but Aussie kids’ TV has been leading the way in queer representation – https://theconversation.com/peppa-pig-has-introduced-a-pair-of-lesbian-polar-bears-but-aussie-kids-tv-has-been-leading-the-way-in-queer-representation-190648

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Time for the Auditor General to investigate Mahuta contracts

By Bryce Edwards -

September 21, 2022

Analysis by Dr Bryce Edwards.

Political Roundup: Time for the Auditor General to investigate Mahuta contracts

Pressure is increasing on the Auditor General to undertake an inquiry into numerous contracts, appointments and grants awarded to members of Cabinet Minister Nanaia Mahuta’s family by various government departments she has had official responsibility for.

Allegations and revelations are mounting up, meaning this issue can no longer be ignored. As economist and political commentator Eric Crampton wrote yesterday, if the allegations – especially those documented by Herald journalist Kate McNamara – bear up, then “New Zealand is a fundamentally corrupt country. If it doesn’t, the air needs clearing”.

Latest revelations about the Mahuta family contracts

Three government agencies have been undertaking reviews this year into how they came to give contracts to Mahuta’s husband, Gannin Ormsby, and other close family members. Ormsby owns a consultancy, Ka Awatea Services, which has been contracted to supply services in the last couple of years to Kāinga Ora, the Ministry for the Environment, and the Department of Conservation. Another consultancy, Kawai Catalyst, is owned by Ormsby’s nephew and wife, Tomoko and Waimirirangi Ormsby, and has also gained government contracts.

The latest revelation, which MacNamara reported on yesterday, is that Kāinga Ora has admitted it did not follow correct procedures in awarding a contract to Ormsby, and is now undertaking a review of how this occurred. MacNamara reports: “Housing Minister Megan Woods has confirmed that Crown housing agency Kāinga Ora was deficient in its conflict of interest processes in awarding Ka Awatea Services a $66,846 (excluding GST) contract.”

According to Kāinga Ora, Ormsby’s firm was hired to “engage Māori and to understand Māori perspectives on Kāinga Ora urban development work”. The firm then used another relative, Rama Ormsby, to do the work.

It seems no conflict of interest declarations were sought or received from any of the participants, despite Mahuta then being the Associate Minister for Housing with specific responsibility for Māori housing.

MacNamara reports: “Woods previously said that ‘a verbal conflict of interest was declared’ when the contract was initiated, however that statement was corrected late last week with the clarification that no “formal” conflicts, written or verbal, were declared.”

The “Extraordinary pattern” of government contracts

All three contracts that Ka Awatea Services has won with the government agencies were awarded while Ormsby’s wife, Nanaia Mahuta, had ministerial responsibilities for those agencies. Furthermore, as MacNamara reports, “All of the contracts were awarded on a sole source basis, without competitive bids.”

In terms of the contracts provided by the Ministry for the Environment to the family firms Ka Awatea Services and Kawai Catalyst, a review has just been released that shows “a litany of deficiencies in the process of awarding the contracts”. For example, due to the family connections the contracts should have been signed off by the Ministry’s chief executive. Further conflicts of interest were not sufficiently discussed or managed.

The Department of Conservation is also reviewing the process that led to Ka Awatea Services being awarded a $52,000 contract, which has not yet been fully delivered.

In her latest Herald report, MacNamara also reveals that the Government’s Criminal Cases Review Commission has employed Ormsby as a “connector” since January 2021. She reports: “It has been asked whether Ormsby’s criminal record was considered relevant in his hiring but has not yet responded. In 2003, Ormsby pleaded guilty and was convicted on one charge of assaulting a woman.”

In addition, the Waikato Regional Council has recently employed Ormsby for $33,000 to provide consulting services to identify issues Māori were facing in the area, and last year the Ministry of Māori Development gave his firm a $28,000 grant to assist on suicide prevention.

Has Nanaia Mahuta dealt with the conflicts of interest appropriately?

Both the Prime Minister and Nanaia Mahuta have suggested that there is nothing to see here, saying the Minister has followed the correct procedures in dealing with the conflicts of interest arising from these family contracts.

The first device for dealing with a conflict of interest has been for the Minister to essentially recluse herself from the situation by temporarily transferring responsibility in the portfolio to another minister. For example, when her sister Tipa Mahuta was appointed chair of the new Three Waters regulatory advisory group, the Minister passed her Local Government responsibilities to Kelvin Davis while the decision was made.

But this hasn’t always occurred. Kate McNamara points out, for example, when she “appointed Waimirirangi Ormsby to the group that produced the He Puapua report”, this was deemed unnecessary because Ormsby was not a “close relative”.

Mahuta also says that she has covered herself by declaring “conflicts of interest” to the Cabinet Office and colleagues whenever they have arisen. However, just because such a conflict is declared doesn’t mean that it is no longer a problem.

Commenting on this recently to the Herald, Prof Karin Lasthuizen, the Chair in Ethical Leadership at Victoria University of Wellington, has argued that this can be like a passenger declaring the possession of forbidden goods on arrival into the country but not then doing anything about it: “Saying you can manage this conflict is like saying to Customs, ‘Yup I’ve got a big hornets’ nest to declare’, and then Customs says, ‘Okay, here’s a form for you to fill out and you will be fine’. Of course it doesn’t work that way for a reason, and that’s the problem itself and the consequences it might have. You can’t actually bring in a hornets’ nest into the country even if you declare it.”

Is an independent investigation required?

So far, no other journalist or media outlet seem to be covering the ongoing questionable contracts apart from the Herald’s Kate MacNamara. She has written six reports on the topic so far this year. TVNZ’s Q+A programme did raise some of the allegations with Mahuta in an interview by Jack Tame recently, but she was able to easily swot away the questions, painting a picture of herself as a victim of malicious and anonymous online smears and wasn’t challenged on this.

To be fair, there might well be ulterior motives in the scrutiny that is currently being applied to Mahuta from some quarters. The Opposition are continuing to ask questions in Parliament, obviously hoping to inflict damage on the Government. But that’s their legitimate role, and many of the facts about the Mahuta contracts have only come to light through questions being asked in Parliament.

Some have even attempted to paint questions being asked about potential corruption or nepotism as being racist. For example, on Newshub, Labour-aligned commentator Shane Te Pou denounced criticism of Mahuta as “racism and double standards”.

The Herald’s Audrey Young says it’s time to clear the issue up once and for all, saying Mahuta should just front foot the issue because questions are mounting, and they are distracting the Minister from important work: “They have reached such a pitch that she herself should refer the matter to the Public Service Commission or Auditor-General to get an independent opinion and draw a line under it.”

This seems the correct approach. Even if Mahuta and her family have done nothing wrong, it would be very useful for government agencies to review how they deal with conflicts of interests. The issues are too big to be ignored, and the need to prevent corruption is too important to be brushed aside.

Other items of interest and importance today

SAM UFFINDELL
RNZ: Sam Uffindell’s accusers happy for report on MP’s conduct to be made public
Peter Dunne: National leaves Uffindell the loser
Russell Palmer (RNZ): Luxon defends handling of Uffindell report, not shared with colleagues
Mike Hosking (Newstalk): Plenty of lessons from Uffindell saga
Herald Editorial: Sam Uffindell remains a quandary for National and Christopher Luxon (paywalled)

POLITICIAN SAFETY
Jenna Lynch (Newshub): Labour considering axing iconic election walkabout as Grant Robertson reveals details of abuse
William Hewett (Newshub): National Party leader Christopher Luxon confident election walkabouts will continue as Deputy PM questions politicians’ safety
Claire Trevett (Herald): ‘Intense threats’: Deputy PM Grant Robertson flags fears for MPs’ safety on election campaign
Jo Moir (Newsroom): Threats against MPs ‘greater and more intense’

GOVERNMENT AND PARLIAMENT
Richard Prebble (Herald): National’s Christopher Luxon must rule Māori Party out of the running (paywalled)
Michael Neilson (Herald): Labour MP Anna Lorck accused of being bully working ‘to be better MP’
RNZ: Bullying allegations: Labour MP Lorck says she’s working on it
David Farrar: Why no Commission of Inquiry?
Bronwen Summers (Insight Aotearoa): Tribal Labour

PM’S INTERNATIONAL TRIP
Thomas Coughlan (Herald): Jacinda Ardern has arrived in New York – here’s what she’s doing (paywalled)
Bridie Witton (Stuff): PM Jacinda Ardern’s warm welcome at United Nations general assembly
Bridie Witton (Stuff): Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern catches ride to New York with Justin Trudeau
Lana Andelane (Newshub): Queen Elizabeth death: Jacinda Ardern showcases New Zealand designers at state funeral
Te Aorewa Rolleston (Stuff): The 24-hour race to get a hat fit for Queen’s farewell to Jacinda Ardern

ECONOMY, EMPLOYMENT AND INEQUALITY
Brianna Mcilraith (Stuff): New Zealanders’ wealth jump leads the world: Report
Dave Armstrong (Stuff): We vaccinated almost 100% per cent of our community. We can do the same with feeding them
Thomas Coughlan (Herald): Jacinda Ardern brushes off UN call for tax on energy companies
RNZ: Banks keep economic headwinds at bay with $1.7b profit in last quarter
Mark Quinlivan (Newshub): New Zealand facing higher inflation or unemployment rising as economist warns one ‘needs to win’
Rob Stock (Stuff): Are banks cashing in on higher interest rates?
Rob Clark (BusinessDesk): With the job market so tight, the power is with the workers (paywalled)
Dita De Boni (NBR): Death of mighty union totara coincides with workplace turmoil (paywalled)
Cameron Smith (Herald): Lessons so far from the world’s biggest four-day work week trial (paywalled)

GOVERNMENT’S SOCIAL INSURANCE SCHEME
Thomas Manch (Stuff): Govt’s hallmark income insurance scheme faces stiff political and business opposition
Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): Big employers rail against proposed $3.5 billion Income Insurance Scheme
Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): Income Insurance Scheme: what it would mean for you
Pattrick Smellie (BusinessDesk): Inflation risk seen in income insurance scheme (paywalled)
Imogen Wells (Newshub): Government’s fiscal fiascos: New cost of living payment, scrapped KiwiSaver tax revelations
Jamie Ensor (Newshub): KiwiSaver tax: Officials suggested sweeteners for Kiwis to soften blow of GST costs, ministry had concerns about changes

HOUSING
Kiri Gillespie (Herald): Tauranga iwi leader questions whether housing plan will help those most in need
Kelly Makiha (Herald): Rotorua tourism operators want Government fix for ‘brand damage’ (paywalled)
Miriam Bell (Stuff): First-home buyers are back, ‘past peak pessimism’

EDUCATION
John MacDonald (Herald): Battery-farm schooling needs its wings clipped
RNZ: Are open learning classrooms actually good for children?
Sinead Gill (Stuff): Party using ‘harmful’ racial slur as dress code was approved by university
Katarina Williams (Stuff): Lecturer emails diatribe to students after many failed to watch online class

MEDIA
Michael Bassett: Jacinda’s waste of public interest journalism funds
Richard Harman: Parliament pulls plan to protect journalists’ sources (paywalled)
Rachel Stewart: Rachel Stewart v2.0, My Second Coming

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND ELECTIONS
Dileepa Fonseka (Stuff): Use your vote, renters, you’re more powerful than you think
Emma Vitz (Spinoff): How many mayoralty races could ratepayer voters have decided?
Brigitte Morten (NBR): Viv Beck and the real toll of running for office (paywalled)
Oliver Lewis (BusinessDesk): More allegations against former CCHL boss emerge (paywalled)

OTHER
Duncan Greive and Ben Gracewood (Spinoff): A report card: Eight charts that show how New Zealand managed the pandemic
Steve Kilgallon (Stuff): Official mourning of Queen Elizabeth II is over: NZ Republic is ready to talk about the future
Jem Traylen (BusinessDesk): Head of the public service speaks out on NZTA ads (paywalled)
Martin Devlin (NBR): Administrative idiocy at its finest (paywalled)
Charlotte Muru-Lanning (Spinoff): What does a te reo Māori city look like?

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: National’s unsatisfactory exoneration of Sam Uffindell

By Bryce Edwards -

September 21, 2022

New-Zealand-Parliament — New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.

Analysis by Dr Bryce Edwards.

Political Roundup: National’s unsatisfactory exoneration of Sam Uffindell

It’s hard to have confidence in the National Party’s supposed exoneration of MP Sam Uffindell over allegations of ethical violations as an adult. The party’s processes have been far too opaque, which means there will always be a cloud over the integrity and character of their new MP for Tauranga. And, perhaps even worse for National, it raises questions about the party’s own integrity and transparency.

Yesterday Sam Uffindell announced at a press conference that an independent investigation into his behaviour as an adult at the University of Otago had “cleared” him. Together with National’s leader Christopher Luxon and party president Sylvia Woods, Uffindell fronted up to the media to report on the month-long investigation carried out by Kings Counsel lawyer Maria Dew.

According to Luxon, Dew’s investigation didn’t substantiate allegations about Uffindell’s university bullying “as reported in the media”. Apparently, Dew had interviewed various witnesses and, Luxon says there were “differing accounts” about Uffindell’s flatting conduct. And on the basis of this, National rejected complaints about Uffindell by his former flatmate and her father.

Does this constitute a whitewash?

The big problem with yesterday’s announcement is that National is expecting the public to take its word on the investigation and outcome. The party is refusing to release Dew’s report in any form. It won’t even release an executive summary of it.

Nor will the report’s author front to the public about what her investigation found. In similar cases, investigating authors have released their own precis of the confidential report.

None of this has happened, which should make the public suspicious that a whitewash has occurred. This doesn’t mean Dew has acted inappropriately, but that her report can’t be accepted as an exoneration of Uffindell if it can’t be read and verified as such.

Of course, there is no rule that says National needs to release anything. It is the party’s prerogative about how it handles such information.

However, by choosing not to be transparent National forfeits credibility on the issue, and risks losing public confidence. If a party is not willing to be transparent on a key issue of public interest, then how can it credibly criticise the Labour Government’s lack of transparency on so many issues?

Politicians are quick to appeal to things like “safety” and “confidentiality” when justifying such secrecy. And, they have done so in this case, knowing full well that privacy needs to be taken seriously. But the suspicion should be that they are using these justifications as weasel words for their own interests. There are simply not credible reasons why redacted versions of reports such as this can’t be made public. There are always ways to protect privacy while being open to scrutiny.

Given the opaqueness, political journalist Jo Moir says: “It is almost impossible to form a view on whether National leader Christopher Luxon made the right call reinstating Tauranga MP Sam Uffindell back into his caucus.” Furthermore, “it is impossible to know what other behaviour may or may not have been raised during the investigation.”

National is also still refusing to release the “terms of reference” that the party gave to Dew when it employed her to investigate Uffindell. This is very suspicious – because the public is not seriously able to interpret anything about the report’s supposed findings without knowing what she was told to investigate and what she wasn’t allowed to investigate.

The details of how the investigation was carried out, and it’s parameters are important. We don’t even know who was interviewed. Moir explains this well: “It would be a big call for Dew to conclude Uffindell didn’t do anything wrong at university if the only people she spoke to were friendly allies who support the MP’s version of events. It’s also unknown whether any other allegations surfaced about his time at King’s College or St Paul’s Collegiate, Hamilton, the school he moved to after being asked to leave King’s College.”

Uffindell might be a victim of National’s opaqueness

Uffindell himself is likely to be disadvantaged by National’s decision to keep all the details of the report’s investigation under wraps. Although it might prevent some of the more damaging details from impacting Uffindell and National in the short-term, it’s likely to prevent Uffindell from fully recovering from this scandal. It means that the public doesn’t really have closure on this episode. The public, and in particularly the voters of Tauranga, will remain suspicious of him given National isn’t willing to be open about what their investigation came up with.

Of course, Uffindell is likely to now refuse to discuss and be interviewed about the controversy by appealing to the fact that he’s been “cleared” and he wishes to put it behind him. But many voters will find this unsatisfactory.

Is the National Party exonerated by the report?

National didn’t just commission an investigation to determine Sam Uffindell’s fate, but also to attempt to clear the party itself of wrongdoing or a lack of integrity in its processes.

Hence with yesterday’s announcement both Luxon and Wood attempted to use it to boost confidence in the party as a whole, and show that they have dealt with the issue appropriately. But questions still remain.

As Claire Trevett writes today, “Luxon’s attempts to persuade the public that the National Party’s culture was changing – and that he was the man to deliver on that change and put together a strong team – are also dented. The very first selection on his watch has gone awry.”

Questions are also still being asked about why Luxon claims he wasn’t aware of Uffindell’s background earlier. It is now clear that Uffindell himself volunteered the information to the party’s pre-selection panel in Tauranga prior to his by-election campaign. And journalist Richard Harman reports today that, “National Party practice is that the panel would have reported to the party board of which Luxon is a member. Either it did not do that — or he somehow missed the report. That is the only way he could not have known about it before the story broke on Stuff.”

But at yesterday’s press conference both Luxon and Wood refused to confirm or deny that a report had been given to the leadership about Uffindell’s selection issues prior to the by-election. Suspicions therefore remain that Luxon himself has in some way been partly responsible for allowing this scandal to occur in the first place.

Do we need better systems of political accountability for party scandals?

It is now becoming a trend for political parties to bring in external lawyers and Kings Counsels to carry out investigations on internal party issues such as alleged integrity violations by politicians and party activists. For example, Labour has also used Kings Counsels such as Maria Dew to help deal with their own scandals. And they have also been guilty of failing to make enough of the resulting information public.

There is no doubt that the use of these processes can be positive. But we should also be careful not to treat Kings Counsel investigations as some sort of magic mechanism that is beyond reproach or scrutiny. Nor is their claimed “independence” beyond question. After all, as University of Auckland public law lecturer Edward Willis pointed out yesterday: “It is important to remember that they are being paid to do this work, usually by someone who has an interest in the outcome.”

If politicians want to exonerate themselves, then they are going to have to come up with a better process and, in particular, one that brings the public more into the process. The various mechanisms that both National and Labour have been using lately are rather elite and legalistic. As Wills argues, “Reassuring or convincing the public of a particular view requires bringing the public into the process.”

He concludes: “The way the report has been presented to the public in substance is as a National Party document for internal purposes. That, that may be appropriate. But it does not and cannot draw a line under the matter from a public/political perspective.”

Wills believes it’s especially important that the terms of reference (ToR) for such investigations are made public. He says these make a huge difference, as the “clever or cynical use of careful terms of reference can shape the substantive outcomes.” He concludes: “So if you want someone to rely on the KC investigation/report you need to let that person know what the ToRs are, and the person has to understand why the ToRs are appropriate to the issues giving rise to the investigation.”

The Uffindell scandal won’t be the last – we seem to be faced with more and more allegations of integrity violations in politics. Even in just the last few weeks, we have been evaluating claims and counterclaims relating to Labour MPs Anna Lorck and Gaurav Sharma. And, so often, the outcomes of these scandals are opaque and unsatisfactory. It seems we need to find new and better ways to deal with scandal politics that don’t involve politicians trying to close the discussion down.

Further reading on Sam Uffindell and the National Party

Maryana Garcia (Herald): Sam Uffindell: Bay of Plenty National Party stalwarts back Tauranga MP reinstated to caucus
Michael Neilson (Herald): Bullying report: National MP Sam Uffindell allegations unproven, back in party but long-term future uncertain
Claire Trevett (Herald): Questions all round as Sam Uffindell survives (paywalled)
Mark Quinlivan (Newshub): Sam Uffindell saga a ‘big wake-up call’ for National Party, political commentator says
Martyn Bradbury (Daily Blog): RNZs attempt to ‘Santamaria’ Uffindell fails: Winners & Losers
Dan Sheridan (Stuff): Bay of Plenty MP Todd Muller’s ‘relief’ at Sam Uffindell’s reprieve
Jane Patterson (RNZ): National MP Sam Uffindell reinstated to caucus on the back of secret King’s Counsel report
Richard Harman: National Party won’t confirm or deny whether they told Luxon about Uffindell (paywalled)
Luke Malpass (Stuff): Sam Uffindell is back in the National Party caucus. Will this saga just be an early career hump?
Jo Moir (Newsroom): Luxon not keen on Uffindell report seeing light of day
Glenn McConnell (Stuff): What we know – and don’t know – about the Sam Uffindell bullying claims
Claire Trevett (Herald): Bullying report: Further allegations against National MP Sam Uffindell unproven, Maria Dew KC investigation finds (paywalled)
Glenn McConnell (Stuff): Sam Uffindell welcomed back to National, says investigation ‘cleared’ him of university bullying
Tess McClure (Guardian): New Zealand National party reinstates MP after inquiry clears him of bullying
Christina Huang (1News): Sam Uffindell welcomes outcome of bullying investigation
Anna Whyte (1News): National MP Sam Uffindell cleared, to return to Parliament
RNZ: Robertson critical of National releasing Uffindell investigation findings on day of Queen’s funeral
Jamie Ensor (Newshub): Sam Uffindell to return to National caucus after report doesn’t back up allegation
Brent Edwards (NBR): Sam Uffindell cleared by independent report (paywalled)

Other items of interest and importance today

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS
Conan Young (Local Democracy Reporting): Huge majority of mayoral candidates not backing Three Waters – survey
Simon Wilson (Herald): The questions I want to ask Wayne Brown (paywalled)
Helen Harvey (Stuff): New Plymouth election billboard campaign falls foul of council’s own rules
Erin Gourley (Stuff): Why some local candidates are affiliated with political parties
Laura Walters (Stuff): Key questions about women in local politics
Troy Matich (Spinoff): A first-time voter’s guide to voting for the first time
Georgina Campbell (Herald): Taupō deputy mayor takes on the mayor
Susan Botting (Herald): Northland local body elections: Whangārei mayoral candidates outline their vision
Todd Niall (Stuff): It’s over to voters as the clock counts down to Auckland’s new council
The Facts: South Islanders vote more than North Islanders

HOUSING
Felix Desmarais (Local Democracy Reporting): Rotorua emergency housing motels: Grant Robertson says Government is taking concerns “very, very seriously”
Lianne Dalziel (Herald): On housing intensification – ‘one size does not fit all’
Don Brash: House prices – where to from here?
Michael Koziol (Sydney Morning Herald): Crowded house(s): Can New Zealand’s planning reforms show Sydney the way?
Bernard Hickey: Choosing dirt, tax-free capital gains and low debt over new homes for kids
Geraden Cann (Stuff): Government ‘open to ideas’ after Christchurch ‘gives finger’ to intensification
Matthew Martin (Stuff): Rotorua iwi leaders call for an end to emergency housing crisis
Rachel Moore (Stuff): Motel gets $3 million in govt cash, then goes into liquidation
Zizi Sparks (Herald): Rotorua emergency housing: Te Arawa calls for end to practice
Duncan Garner (NBR): Stop and act: housing changes a disaster on your front porch (paywalled)
Ashley Church (One Roof): Is NZ’s housing market really in freefall?

GOVERNMENT AND PARLIAMENT
Kate MacNamara (Herald): Nanaia Mahuta’s husband’s firm awarded contracts: Kāinga Ora now third government agency to review process (paywalled)
Bridie Witton (Stuff): Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern due in New York for United Nations General Assembly
Thomas Coughlan (Herald): NZ must ‘step up’ on climate, says Helen Clark ahead of annual United Nations meeting
Michael Neilson (Herald): Latest political poll points to tight race for National and Labour with right and left blocs even
David Farrar: My submission to the Standing Orders Review

COVID
Mike Munro (Herald): The straitjacket comes off but we’re not out of the woods (paywalled)
Steven Joyce (Herald): Covid-19 rules are gone — let the inquiry begin (paywalled)

OTHER
Chris Trotter (Interest): The languages of sovereignty and democracy
Joanne Naish (Stuff): Fear more children may end up in hospital amid rise in delays for dental check-ups
Lois Williams (Newsroom): Conservationists, Ngāi Tahu vying over West Coast land
Bernard Orsman (Herald): Transport Minister Michael Wood rejects official advice on consultation for plans to ban cars on some roads
Hamish Cardwell (RNZ): Climate Change Commission chair Dr Rod Carr calls for reform of emissions trading scheme
Dita De Boni (NBR): A big week for organised labour in the workplace (paywalled)
Graham Adams (BFD): Our Prime Minister’s Two-Faced View of Democracy

‘Serial’ podcast’s Adnan Syed has murder conviction vacated. How common are wrongful convictions?

By The Conversation -

September 21, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hayley Cullen, Associate lecturer, University of Newcastle

In 2000, 18-year-old Baltimore man Adnan Syed was convicted of murdering his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, in 1999. Syed was sentenced to life in prison and served close to 23 years in prison for the crime.

That was until this week, when Syed was released from prison at the age of 41 after his murder conviction was vacated by a Baltimore City Circuit Judge.

The vacation of his conviction doesn’t mean Syed is formally recognised as innocent. Instead, Judge Melissa Phinn expressed serious concern over Syed’s initial conviction based on new evidence as well as evidence that was not handed over to Syed’s defence team. Syed and his supporters have always maintained his innocence.

Syed has been released from prison, but Phinn has ordered him to remain on house arrest. The state has 30 days to make a decision as to whether Syed will face a new trial, or whether the case will be dismissed.

While Syed’s fate remains undetermined, he’s just one of many people around the globe who have spent time in prison for crimes they strongly contend that they did not commit.

Unfortunately, wrongful convictions do happen, and they often share similar underlying causes.

The case and the podcast

The murder of Hae Min Lee was the first case featured on the highly popular podcast series Serial, one of the pioneers of the true-crime podcast genre.

It very quickly became one of the most rapidly downloaded podcasts of all time, and the first series now boasts over 300 million downloads worldwide since its release in 2014.

Lee was a senior high-school student at Woodlawn High School in Baltimore, Maryland. She disappeared one day after school, and her body was found in a nearby park one month later. Based on the results of the autopsy, Lee had been strangled.

As Lee and Syed had dated not long before the time of Lee’s death, Syed became a prime suspect. Other suspects emerged, but none were investigated as closely as Syed.

Cell tower records that placed Syed’s phone near the location of the park where Lee’s body was buried implicated him. A former classmate of Syed’s, Jay Wilds, also provided testimony indicating that he had assisted Syed with disposing Lee’s body. These two pieces of evidence ultimately formed the basis of the case against Syed that led to his eventual conviction.

After Syed was convicted, a close friend of the Syed family contacted reputable journalist Sarah Koenig in 2013, who independently investigated the case. Serial shone light on some of the oddities of the case, including the inconsistencies in the testimony given by Wilds and the lack of forensic evidence linking Syed to the crime.

For some, Serial consolidated the suspicion they held towards Syed, and for others, it cast serious doubt over his conviction.

The podcast’s popularity contributed to the ongoing fight for Syed’s freedom over the years.

How common are wrongful convictions?

One problem with wrongful convictions is that it’s impossible to know exactly how frequent they are. This is because many people in prison who say they are innocent never receive the opportunity to have their cases reviewed.

Even if we conservatively estimate that criminal convictions are accurate 99.5% of the time, an error rate of 0.5% could still result in thousands of wrongful convictions in the US alone each year.

In 2020, The National Registry of Exonerations in the United States reported over 2,600 exonerations following wrongful convictions across the United States since 1989. That number is always on the rise.

In the closest Australian repository of wrongful convictions, there were 71 documented wrongful convictions between 1922 and 2015.

What often leads to a wrongful conviction?

Wrongful convictions often share a common set of causes. The Innocence Project was founded in 1992 and has overturned the wrongful convictions of 375 people in the United States using DNA evidence.

Based on the Innocence Project’s data, the factors that are most common in wrongful conviction cases are:

mistaken eyewitness identification
improper or invalid forensic science
false confessions
and informant testimony.

The National Registry of Exonerations has also identified misconduct as a common factor in known wrongful convictions.

In Syed’s case, issues with the validity of the cell phone evidence and the accomplice witness testimony provided by Wilds are among those common factors.

Based on known Australian wrongful conviction cases, the most common factors appear to be:

police misconduct
erroneous judicial instructions to the jury
forensic errors or misleading forensic evidence
incompetent defence representation
and false witness testimony, among others.

If Syed is indeed innocent of the murder he was convicted of, the 23 years of his life that he lost are a grave injustice. Lee’s family have also suffered tremendously and would continue to suffer with the lack of closure that comes with Syed’s wrongful conviction.

Any of us could be at risk of being wrongfully convicted, and the suffering that it comes with. Increasing education about what factors are common in wrongful conviction cases may hopefully mean we can make more informed decisions, should we ever hold an individual’s freedom like Adnan Syed’s in our own hands.

I have previously worked on a voluntary basis for Not Guilty: The Sydney Exoneration Project, a separate organisation that reviews cases of potential wrongful conviction.

– ref. ‘Serial’ podcast’s Adnan Syed has murder conviction vacated. How common are wrongful convictions? – https://theconversation.com/serial-podcasts-adnan-syed-has-murder-conviction-vacated-how-common-are-wrongful-convictions-190968

We helped fill a major climate change knowledge gap, thanks to 130,000-year-old sediment in Sydney lakes

By The Conversation -

September 21, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Francke, Research Fellow, University of Adelaide

Lake Couridjah, Thirlmere Lakes National Park in New South Wales Shutterstock

Plants capture around half the carbon we emit by burning fossil fuels, making them a crucial part of mitigating climate change. But carbon is often released back into the atmosphere when plants die, decompose and eventually turn into dirt.

Carbon is only permanently removed from the atmosphere if it’s stored in sediments that accumulate at the bottom of oceans, lakes, reservoirs, or in peat bogs.

Our latest research on the Thirlmere Lakes near Sydney aimed to find out how trees, shrubs and soils in Australia’s eastern tablelands responded to climate changes over the last 130,000 years. The key question we sought to answer was whether carbon stored in Australia’s trees, shrubs, and soils contribute to the pool of carbon stored safely in lake sediment.

The answer, we determined, depends on a number of crucial factors, and erosion plays an essential, previously neglected, part.

Erosion is like a conveyer belt for carbon – it transports carbon to the lake from nearby hills where plants die. We found when the climate near Sydney was warm and wet, then trees and shrubs flourished and erosion was reduced. So while more carbon was stored in plants, it took longer for carbon in soil to be safely buried in the lake.

Previous research has shown ignoring the impact of erosion on carbon burial has caused Australia to overestimate the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere over the last 50 years, by a staggering 40%.

The cycle of carbon

Plants capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during photosynthesis, and store carbon in their tissue. So what happens when plants die?

The equation is easier for the oceans: dead phytoplankton (tiny algae floating close to the surface) sinks to seafloor, where most of its captured carbon is stored safely far away from the atmosphere. On land things are more complex.

When trees and shrubs die, they cover the surface, decompose and become part of the soil. In fact, 80% of carbon on land is stored in soils. Decomposition releases some of the captured carbon back into the atmosphere, unless they’re buried deep.

In Australia, much more carbon is stored when weather conditions are wetter. During the strong La Niña event of 2010-2012, large areas of the Australia’s dry interior and temperate landscape experienced significant “greening”.

Research shows 20% more carbon was captured from the Earth’s atmosphere during this La-Niña event due to increasing plant growth. Australia contributed more than half of this.

The Thirlmere Lakes during dry conditions.
Timothy J. Cohen, Author provided

The last 130,000 years

The story is even more dramatic if you look back at the last 130,000 years. During this time, the planet experienced cycles of two climate phenomena: glacial periods and interglacial periods.

A “glacial” period is characterised by much colder and drier conditions, when wide parts of northern Europe, Eurasia, and America were covered by ice kilometres thick. The last time it peaked was around 21,000 years ago.

Australia endured warmer and wetter conditions during “interglacial” periods, which peaked around 125,000 years ago and again over the last 11,600 years.

For our research, we drilled deep into Sydney’s Thirlmere Lake mud, and pulled up long columns of sediment containing traces of vegetation, climate, and erosion from the last 130,000 years. We observed significant changes in the types of vegetation growing in the catchment over this time.

Shrubs and large trees such as eucalypts flourished during warmer and wetter interglacial periods. They were less abundant when it was colder and dry during glacial periods, when grass and herbs became more common.

Large trees capture more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than grasses and herbs. And this captured carbon then accumulates in the surface of soils when the plant dies.

But how is the soil-carbon transported from the slopes where the trees and shrubs grow, to the bottom of the lake?

Extracting sediment cores from a lake.
Fabian Boesl, Author provided

Soil erosion

Erosion – whether gravity, water or wind – forms our landscape and is essential for the accumulation of soil carbon in lakes, reservoirs and the oceans.

The deeper the carbon is buried in the sediments of these reservoirs, the more efficiently it is locked away from the atmosphere. In contrast, the longer it remains on the slopes and in soils close to the surface, the more it decomposes, and carbon dioxide is released back into the atmosphere.

For the wider Sydney region, more plant growth occurred during the interglacial period, which take up vast amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. But this may be offset by decreased erosion. And indeed, our data suggests decreased erosion during interglacial periods.

This decreased erosion is because of the protection of trees which, for example, stabilise the soil with their roots. Indeed, we found tree cover slows the rate that soil carbon moves from slope to lake by nearly 10 times.

This means there’s much more time for soils to decompose on the slope, and to release carbon back into the atmosphere.

Nevertheless, we still recorded significantly higher carbon storage in lake sediments during warmer and wetter periods, thanks largely to the greater growth of trees and shrubs compared to grasses, which are more abundant during interglacial periods. This compensates for the reduced erosion.

We also found the lake transformed into a productive wetland during warm periods. This means more carbon is also captured by plants growing in the lake.

What will happen under climate change?

The interplay between climate, vegetation, and erosion is difficult to quantify. Our research fills a critical gap in knowledge, as climate models currently don’t account for soil-carbon erosion.

Those models assume all soil-carbon is eventually emitted back into the atmosphere, introducing uncertainties into climate predictions.

The Thirlmere Lakes during wet conditions.
Fabian Boesl, Author provided

Future climate change may raise the risk of the Thirlmere Lakes drying out, which means the sediments will be exposed, which promotes decomposition. This means the previously stored carbon will be emitted back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.

Extreme aridity may also reduce terrestrial plant growth, as it did during the millennium drought.

Further, destruction of vegetation by severe bushfires reduce biomass yield to the wetlands. Preserving Australia’s unique native terrestrial vegetation and wetlands is therefore essential to sustain the continent’s role in the global carbon cycle.

The research at the Thirlmere Lakes was funded by the NSW Department of Environment and Heritage and commenced following community concerns that nearby mining was affecting the hydrology of the lakes and the Friends of Thirlmere Community group continues to advocate for the protection and enjoyment of the area. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Matthew Forbes to this article. We acknowledge the contribution of the Aboriginal people of the area who are the first custodians of Country.

Alexander Francke receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Anthony Dosseto receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Haidee Cadd receives funding from The Australian Research Council.

Tim Cohen has received funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC); ARC Centre of Excellence Scheme (Project Number CE170100015) and ARC Future Fellowship (FT180100524) and NSW OEH Thirlmere lakes Research Program

– ref. We helped fill a major climate change knowledge gap, thanks to 130,000-year-old sediment in Sydney lakes – https://theconversation.com/we-helped-fill-a-major-climate-change-knowledge-gap-thanks-to-130-000-year-old-sediment-in-sydney-lakes-187784

‘An obsession with order, hierarchy, and one’s place within it’: what The Queue says about Englishness

By The Conversation -

September 21, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cynthia Sear, PhD Candidate, The University of Melbourne

As we have seen from coverage of “The Queue” – capitalised and thus now, apparently, a proper noun – the English are proud of their queuing prowess.

The Queue for the queen lying in state is portrayed as testament to the English ideals of civility, duty and sacrifice.

David Beckham’s 13-hour wait in the crowd was widely praised, while TV hosts Holly Willoughby and Phillip Schofield’s alleged (although denied) “push-in” has been admonished.

But The Queue is part of a bigger picture. Like class, the English propensity to celebrate queuing illuminates a peculiar national obsession with order, hierarchy, and one’s place within it.

Queueing as a form of ceremony

Let’s address something important: are we talking here about Britishness or Englishness? What is seen to define an English person, British person or person
of the United Kingdom is a matter of considerable debate. Our choice of the word “English” over “British” in this article reflects the fundamental Englishness of the British national project, to which the monarchy is central.

The English proclivity for queuing has been the subject of cultural commentary for decades.

In 1946 Hungarian humourist George Mikes reportedly noted:

An Englishman, even if he is alone, forms an orderly queue of one […] [queueing is] the national passion of an otherwise dispassionate race.

British anthropologist Kate Fox, author of Watching the English, wrote that in the 2011 London riots:

I witnessed looters forming an orderly queue to squeeze, one at a time, through the smashed window of a shop they were looting.

Queueing as a form of ceremony, such as seen in London this week, is perhaps a particular type of queue.

In defiance of the typical English reservedness, The Queue has been credited with fostering cameraderie and even chance meetings.

Queuing in England and around the world

Of course, it’s not only the English who queue. Regulating the flow and order of people is a universal human need.

Saving space in densely populated urban milieu, Japanese people form tight zig-zags.

In Spain, the penultimate person to arrive for a bus merely nods to the last person to let them know whom to follow.

In both cases, what appears to be anarchy is, in fact, tightly regulated.

However, there is something culturally distinctive about the English queue. The English seem to have a fondness for publicising their queuing ability.

Queuing and deficiency

While much of the recent coverage has emphasised the egalitarianism of The Queue, researchers such as Joe Moran have noted queuing has endured a chequered past.

In economically impoverished postwar Britain, food queues became a source of national resentment.

Many felt the queue was an unfair method of distribution – especially for older people, mothers with young children or working women, who faced more difficulty to wait in line for essential items.

In the late 1940s and early 1950s Winston Churchill seized on the unpopularity of queues to argue:

We [The Conservatives] are for the ladder. Let all try their best to climb. They [Labour] are for the queue. Let each wait in his place till his turn comes.

Queues, he argued, were socialist, and that, should a Labour government have its way, the country could become “Queuetopia”.

In the 1960s and ‘70s the English faced recurrent queues at banks and post offices. The queue was widely depicted as a symptom of inefficiency of the national economy, something one might expect on the other side of the Iron Curtain, but not appropriate for Britain.

Throughout the late 1970s and the 1980s, associating queues with incompetence and disorganisation was a constant theme in politics.

Advertising firm Saatchi and Saatchi produced a 1978 election poster for the Conservatives depicting a queue outside the unemployment office and the slogan: “Labour isn’t working”.

Queues and queue-jumping

More recently, as observed by sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild, the queue and queue-jumping have been weaponised in political discourse regarding minorities.

As one of us (Andrew Dawson) has noted, many of Britain’s white working class perceive the British policy of multiculturalism as a relegation of their status.

The benefits that flow to immigrant ethnic minorities are often presented as an unfair “push-in” for the social mobility ladder, allowing them to effectively “jump” Britain’s class queue.

That queuing for social occasions such as the queen’s death has been reimagined in recent years as a positive phenomenon is curious.

Whether in a queue or a ladder, however, such appeals to social organisation are about knowing one’s place – a particularly English preoccupation.

Ask any Englishperson about their position in society. Depending upon their class, they may be embarrassed or affronted by the question, but they will have an answer, whether they share it with you or not (determined, again, by their class).

To this end, the reaction to Willoughby and Schofield’s alleged transgression speaks to the ability of this class system to reassert itself in the face of celebrity and fame.

People queue to see the queen lying in state. — People queued for hours to see the queen lying in state.
Shutterstock

Perhaps The Queue helps to explain why Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, has experienced such hostility upon entering British society. Not just because of discriminatory and racist attitudes based on her biracial, divorcee, actress status, but also because she is American.

Queuing is seen by some as antithetical to America’s rampant individualism – where your place is often imagined as malleable rather than rigid, dependent on achievements, popularity and wealth.

Australians also may recoil at suggestions of one’s place in society, with some insisting that in contrast to the stuffy British “motherland”, we are a classless society.

While “The C-word”, as the Australian author Tim Winton called class, of course very much exists in Australia, we have far less of a vocabulary or understanding of class than the English.

While it may be less obvious in Australia, or railed against in America, many English people continue to embrace these systems even as the wider world moves on in seemingly disordered ways.

Cynthia Sear receives funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship Grant.

Andrew Dawson 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. ‘An obsession with order, hierarchy, and one’s place within it’: what The Queue says about Englishness – https://theconversation.com/an-obsession-with-order-hierarchy-and-ones-place-within-it-what-the-queue-says-about-englishness-191059

We can’t solve Australia’s mental health emergency if we don’t train enough psychologists. Here are 5 fixes

By The Conversation -

September 21, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dana Wong, Associate Professor & Clinical Neuropsychologist, La Trobe University

Almost 50% of Australians experience mental illness in their lifetime, costing our economy up to A$220 billion annually, according to pre-pandemic figures.

The full impact of the pandemic on our nation’s mental health is still emerging, but early signs are bleak, with one in five Australians experiencing a mental health disorder between 2020 and 2021.

This includes 3.3 million people with anxiety disorders, 1.5 million with mood disorders, 650,000 with substance use disorders, and more than 3,000 deaths by suicide every year.

But accessing help can be very difficult. Government investment in psychology training programs is part of this problem.

A severe shortage of psychologists

Currently, the federal government is meeting only 35% of its psychology workforce target.

One in three psychologists report having closed their books to new patients, due to overwhelming demand. Despite this, psychology workforce issues were not on the agenda at the recent jobs and skills summit.

Brain and mental health disorders including stroke, dementia, ADHD, depression and alcohol/substance misuse are major causes of disability, with significant personal and societal impacts.

Timely diagnosis, assessment and treatments for these complex conditions are crucial. However, these services require psychologists with advanced training. This includes clinical psychologists, clinical neuropsychologists, counselling psychologists, educational and developmental psychologists, forensic psychologists and health psychologists. These psychologists are comprehensively trained in assessment, intervention and treatment of people with mental illness and brain conditions.

Hundreds of hospital-based psychology positions remain unfilled, with patients (including children) waiting up to two years for care. Positions are often advertised for months with no qualified applicants, particularly in regional and remote hospitals.

University students sit with laptops. — Some students are unable to undertake psychology university courses due to affordability, which can impact equity of access and student diversity.
Shutterstock

Psychology training places are declining despite high demand

Postgraduate psychology courses are costly to run, requiring high staff-to-student ratios and incurring high clinical supervision and placement costs.

Unlike medical degrees, government funding for these programs does not come close to covering the costs of the courses. The recently reduced federal government support is half that given to veterinary science. This means universities lose money on these programs, making them an unattractive financial prospect for ever-tightening higher education budgets.

This has led to program closures, despite consistently high demand for training places. Across Australia, the number of clinical neuropsychology training programs has fallen from eight to five in the past ten years. There have been similar reductions in health, counselling and forensic psychology training.

La Trobe University’s neuropsychology program received more than 300 applications annually for up to ten places, yet the program was closed in 2020. Similarly, according to course conveners, clinical psychology programs regularly receive at least 20 applicants for each available place.

Universities are now resorting to reducing government-funded masters places in favour of costly full-fee places (around $35,000 each year), impacting affordability, equity of access and student diversity. This disrupts any endeavour to develop a culturally and socioeconomically representative workforce and fails to meet the needs of our healthcare sector.

Many psychologists choose to enter better-paying private practices straight out of university, bypassing public health roles. This affects the general public’s access to mental health services.

We must do better. Vulnerable people living with mental health problems deserve to be supported and protected.

A person is on a train looking sad. — Vulnerable people might miss out on mental health services due to lack of affordability and limited psychologists available.
shutterstock

5 solutions to the psychology workforce problem

There are straightforward steps that could go a long way to addressing this issue.

Increase funding for postgraduate psychology training so universities do not lose money by offering these programs.
Ensure a minimum number of Commonwealth Supported Places (that is, with no, or reduced, student fees) are protected for students in psychology training programs and make sure these align with workforce demands and job vacancies.
Consider training models that incorporate “return-of-service” obligations. This is when the government subsidises student fees but requires graduates to engage in paid health services work for a minimum period, such as two years.
Invest in joint university/health service psychology staff positions (as occurs in medical training) to provide supervision and placements within the sector.
Increase placement opportunities for postgraduate students via better collaboration between universities, services and government.

All Australians deserve to have their mental health needs supported by trained and qualified psychologists. Investing in the psychology workforce will be good for the economy, increase total workforce participation, reduce wait times and save lives.

The authors would like to thank Tamara Cavenett (President, Australian Psychological Society) and Lynda Katona (Manager, Psychology Services, Alfred Health) for their contributions to this article.

Dana Wong receives research grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) and the Stroke Foundation. Dana is President-Elect of the Australasian Society for the Study of Brain Impairment, and a member of the APS College of Clinical Neuropsychologists.

Catriona Davis-McCabe is the President-Elect of the Australian Psychological Society and an Adjunct Senior Lecturer/Researcher at Curtin University.

Joanne Wrench is the Manager, Psychology at Austin Health and Chair of the Victorian Hospital Heads of Psychology.

Katherine Lawrence has previously received research grant funding from Australian Rotary Health.

Lorelle Burton is Chair of the Heads of Departments and Schools of Psychology Association (HODSPA) and is Professor and Head of the School of Psychology and Wellbeing at the University of Southern Queensland

– ref. We can’t solve Australia’s mental health emergency if we don’t train enough psychologists. Here are 5 fixes – https://theconversation.com/we-cant-solve-australias-mental-health-emergency-if-we-dont-train-enough-psychologists-here-are-5-fixes-190135

Remote control: why Auckland’s local election is neither local nor democratic

By The Conversation -

September 21, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grant Duncan, Associate Professor, School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University

With local body elections currently under way, democracy makes its triennial appearance in New Zealand’s towns and cities once again. But elections alone don’t automatically make for democratic governance at street level. And this is particularly true of Auckland.

Since the unification of regional, city and district councils in 2010, the so-called “super city” has been run by a single Auckland Council.

It covers a diverse urban and rural region of 1.7 million people, spread across more than 4,894 square kilometres. The mayor and 20 councillors set the rates, pass bylaws and control city planning.

The 21 subordinate local boards have no rating or regulatory powers. On the old maxim of “no taxation without representation”, local board members aren’t representatives in a full political sense. It’s the power to tax that really matters.

So, in effect, 21 people represent 1.7 million. That’s a ratio of one elected representative to approximately every 81,000 people – somewhere between the populations of Whangārei and Dunedin.

Power imbalance

By comparison, at the national level there is one member of parliament to every 42,700 people. Auckland has 23 electorate MPs, and 16 list MPs are based in the region. That’s 39 MPs in Auckland compared with 20 councillors and one mayor.

Ironically, Aucklanders are better represented in parliament in Wellington than in the council chamber in downtown Auckland.

Compare this also with Central Hawkes Bay District, for example, where there are nine council members, including a mayor, representing 14,142 people: a ratio of one to 1,571.

A vote there is clearly worth a lot more – roughly 53 times more – than one in Auckland. That other old maxim of “one person, one vote” comes to mind. Little wonder Hawkes Bay voted not to unify its local government along the same lines as Auckland.

While representing and taxing 81,000 people, an Auckland ward councillor is rarely heard or seen by residents between elections. Your chances of bumping into one in Queen Street to say “g’day” and tell them your thoughts are almost zero.

Local boards have no rating or regulatory powers, despite each covering populations the size of cities. In 2018, for example, the Waitematā Local Board area had an estimated 82,866 residents, and Devonport-Takapuna 57,975.

Whether you’re a farmer close to the northern or southern border of the council territory, or an inner-city student, the real decision makers are remote and largely beyond the influence of ordinary ratepayers and voters.

Democratic deficit

Compounding this had been the historical decline in voter turnout for local elections, with participation down to 42% in 2019. This is the opposite of general elections: following a low in 2011, turnout rose to 81.5% of those enrolled in 2020.

In Auckland, there are presently 22 candidates running for mayor, most of whom get no voice in the media. To get ahead in this election requires more than just competence and a good track record. You need plenty of money, wider political backing and, above all, media attention.

But media space is limited, so news coverage and live debates focus on those deemed to stand a chance of getting within the first three or four places.

This process, and the subsequent withdrawal of two centre-right candidates, has seen the media and pollsters anoint two remaining front-runners: the centre-right Wayne Brown and the centre-left Efeso Collins. Neither is clearly ahead in polls.

But given the forgone conclusions of previous mayoral contests, Aucklanders at least have a real electoral choice of leadership styles and visions for the city’s future.

Collins espouses a caring and inclusive approach that looks to the interests of the city’s worst-off, as well as its economic development. Brown pushes the pragmatic and task-oriented attitude of an engineer who prides himself on “fixing” things.

Expensive to fix: Auckland’s Britomart railway station under construction as part of the city’s giant transport infrastructure project.
Getty Images

Centralisation of power

This close and less predictable contest may help boost participation. But it doesn’t negate the essential problem of genuine representation.

Auckland’s many problems are expensive to fix – and expensive to leave unfixed. The solutions frequently involve partnerships with central government, which to a large extent was the reason for unifying the region’s governance in the first place.

Cabinet ministers, it was believed, should be able to call one person – the mayor – when dealing with the city’s significant infrastructure deficits. Even so, much of the city’s real assets and services were carved off into “council-controlled organisations”, entities with their own governance structures. Many argue the council should exert more control over these.

Whatever the motivation, the outcome has certainly not been an improvement in local democracy. The governance of Auckland is remote from, and happens high above the heads, of ratepayers and residents.

This attenuated system of representation appears to reflect a national, indeed international, trend towards centralisation of government.

Not only has the unification of Auckland thinned out representation and put up barriers to participation, across the whole country we’ve seen central government overruling local government in matters such as public health, urban development and water use.

Regardless of where you might stand on those issues, we certainly hear a lot less about devolving decision making closer to those directly affected.

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

– ref. Remote control: why Auckland’s local election is neither local nor democratic – https://theconversation.com/remote-control-why-aucklands-local-election-is-neither-local-nor-democratic-190837

In The Australian Wars, Rachel Perkins dispenses with the myth Aboriginal people didn’t fight back

By The Conversation -

September 21, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Heidi Norman, Professor, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Technology Sydney

First Nations people please be advised this article mentions colonial violence towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

The Australian Wars is a new three-part TV series directed and produced by Arrernte and Kalkadoon nations filmmaker Rachel Perkins.

Perkins travels across vast territory to capture key aspects of a war that lasted more than 100 years, from the landing of the First Fleet in 1788 until the 1920s.

The series traces some of the key phases, sites and underlying features of frontier wars here on home soil.

It sets out to understand why the war was never declared, why the British didn’t follow their own laws, and the tactics and strategies Aboriginal people deployed defending their land and survival.

Perkins asks us to consider this difficult history, why there are only a handful of monuments to this warfare, and how it should be memorialised.

To ask these questions, Perkins deploys stunningly shot re-enactments, archives, artefacts, biography, expert evidence and uses place to great effect.

The series treats the viewer with the ability to critically reflect and ask why we still struggle to come to terms with this history.

The frontier wars

The “frontier wars” were the conflicts between Europeans and Aboriginal people over access to land the British sought to occupy exclusively without any agreement, treaty or settlement. This series emphasises Aboriginal people resisted these wars in multiple ways, including warfare. Aboriginal people are still resisting these wars today, in the courts.

The Australian Wars is an important contribution to truth-telling. Perkins provides a public reckoning with the means by which the British Empire – followed by independent democratic Australian governments – managed to grab the entirety of the land assets of the continent.

The dominant narrative of Australian settler colonialism was once sunny tales of possession, sustained by hard toil. Aboriginal acts of resistance, refusal and warfare were somehow miraculously omitted.

Only in recent decades has a more truthful account of the past emerged. New conversations and responsibility are slowly navigating the realities of the frontier, the shared history of “both sides” and how the past can be remembered.

Reconciliation Australia’s “Reconciliation Barometer” survey identified only 64% of non-Indigenous Australians believed the frontier wars occurred. Some 30% of respondents were unsure and 6% rejected the factual accuracy of significant aspects of Australia’s colonial history.

The Australian War Memorial, once tasked with considering how to reflect frontier wars in Australia’s story, rejected any inclusion of the frontier wars in its exhibitions.

The documentary returns to the theme of rejecting this part of Australia’s history and asks: how can the frontier wars be remembered and memorialised?

Perkins reminds us that as many people – both black and white – died in the frontier wars as did in overseas conflicts featured at the Australian War Memorial.

The moving frontier

The Australian Wars draws together experts of Australian history, detailed studies of the expansive colonial records, the oral testimony of survivors’ descendants and new archaeological research.

With this trove of references, Perkins reveals the extent and breadth of violence, the global networks of military men and the strategies they honed on the frontier, and the technology that came to enable this.

Ultimately, we learn unfettered access to the land resource was the driving factor. The rule of law, claims of humanitarianism and Christianity were readily dispensed with in pursuit of land.

Perkins begins this story in the nation’s capital at the War Memorial. She then follows the moving frontier from the Sydney settlement to Tasmania and crossing Bass Strait. The story then moves with rapid pace from south to north and across the top end to the Kimberley, as settlers expanded across landscapes in always violent encounters.

She dispenses with the abiding myth Aboriginal people didn’t fight back.

In each location Perkins focuses on, we see different strategies deployed, tactical advantage held at times by Aboriginal people, the fear and terror struck in the settlers, and the military actors and strategy that underpinned the colonial settlements.

By the third episode, as the frontier heads north, settlers take lessons from Sydney, Tasmania and the New South Wales grasslands country. Moving with much greater speed aided now by horses, the settlers recruited skilled Native Mounted Police, used repeating rifles and developed systems and infrastructure to confine Aboriginal people to prisons.

But the Aboriginal peoples whose lands were being invaded were fast developing new tactics.

In Queensland alone it is estimated 72,000 Aboriginal men, women and children were killed.

How do we remember?

The series prompts us to ask: if not war, then what do we call the process by which the land, once all carefully delineated and peopled, is occupied by settlers?

How do we remember this and memorialise those who died?

Perkins tells us this violence was often very well documented. This violence was acted against people whose eyes you could see. Yet from Lake George, just outside the nation’s capital, to the Sydney wars and massacres, Tasmania, Queensland and to the Kimberley, sites of violence are overwhelmingly unmarked, unobserved, save for colonial names: “Blackfellows Bones”, “Victory Hill”.

The silence continues.

Leading Australian historian Henry Reynolds says the frontier wars are our most important war because of where they were fought and what they were about: the outcome determined the ownership and sovereign control of a whole continent.

As he comments in the series “what can be more important than that to us?”

The Australian Wars is on SBS and SBS on Demand from today.

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

– ref. In The Australian Wars, Rachel Perkins dispenses with the myth Aboriginal people didn’t fight back – https://theconversation.com/in-the-australian-wars-rachel-perkins-dispenses-with-the-myth-aboriginal-people-didnt-fight-back-190967

In The Australian Wars, Rachel Perkins dispenses the myth Aboriginal people didn’t fight back