Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amanda Meyer, Senior Lecturer, Anatomy and Pathology in the College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University

His gaze softens as he draws closer to you. With one hand around your waist and the other cradling your jaw, he pulls you in. You look into his eyes, and notice his pupils have grown large and hungry.

So the story goes in every other romance novel, where enlarged pupils are commonly enlisted as imagery to indicate sexual arousal. And it’s not unusual to read advice online suggesting dilated pupils are a sure sign someone you like also likes you back.

But what does the science say?

In fact, it’s true: our pupils really do tend to grow large when we’re aroused. Here’s why.

What is the pupil?

The pupil is an opening in the iris (the coloured part of the eye) which directs light through the eyeball and onto the retina.

Typically this opening is 2-4 millimetres in diameter in bright light, and 4-8 millimetres in darkness.

The black colour of the pupil is the colour of the inside of your eye. Surrounding the pupil are two tiny muscles of the iris which are under separate control.

The muscle around the edge of the pupil acts like a sphincter. When stimulated by the parasympathetic nervous system (sometimes known as the “rest and digest” system), it contracts to close down the pupil.

On the outside of the sphincter, another muscle acts like the springs holding the trampoline mat.

When stimulated by the sympathetic nervous system (the “fight or flight” system), it shortens to enlarge the pupil.

Your pupils and the six ‘fs’

There are two different mechanisms to make the pupils dilate.

The first is by direct sympathetic nervous system stimulation causing the pupil to dilate (enlarge). This is triggered when you need or want to:

1. fight
2. flee
3. feed
4. fornicate
5. get a “fix” (of illicit drugs such as cocaine or methamphetamine)

The second is by stopping the signals of the parasympathetic nerves going to the sphincter muscle of the pupil. This is triggered when you need or want to focus (number 6).

Together, these are sometimes known as “the six f’s”.

So, is it the same for all of us?

A meta-analysis of 550 heterosexual men, 403 heterosexual women, 132 lesbian women, 124 bisexual men and 65 gay men reported that pupil dilation is related to your sex and your sexual preferences.

Overall, the study found men’s pupils dilate strictly according to their sexual preferences, and women’s pupils dilate more variably.

The study found that heterosexual men’s pupils dilated more in response to erotic imagery of women, and gay men’s pupils dilated more in response to erotic imagery of men.

However, lesbian women’s pupils also dilated more in response to erotic imagery of men, and heterosexual women’s pupils dilated for erotic imagery of men and women.

Are large pupils more attractive?

Interestingly, a study of 60 young adults (aged between 18 and 26) found pupils of 5 millimetre diameter most attractive.

A pupil of 5 millimetres is abnormal for situations in bright light. Could it be that we’re attracted to the types of pupils we’ve seen before in the relative darkness of an intimate setting?

The idea of large pupils being attractive isn’t new. During the Renaissance in Italy, women used eye drops made from a poisonous plant called Atropa belladonna (belladonna means “beautiful woman” in Italian) to make their pupils dilate. This gave them a wide-eyed, “seductive” look (it also, unfortunately, was rather dangerous).

The plant contains a chemical called atropine, which is still (safely) used today by ophthalmologists and optometrists to dilate the pupils for eye exams or surgery.

Getting in sync

Pupil dilation also plays a role in social and interpersonal interactions. Studies have found administration of oxytocin (a hormone associated with bonding and trust) enhances pupil responses to emotional expressions, suggesting increased sensitivity to social cues.

Pupil dilation synchrony between people has been linked to better teamwork and mutual attraction, reflecting shared arousal states.

This phenomenon, sometimes referred to as “pupil mimicry” or “pupil contagion”, aligns with other autonomic synchronisations such as heart rate.

It all goes to show that so much of connection and attraction is subconscious.

What else can make the pupils dilate?

Various substances and medical conditions can also affect pupil size. Stimulants such as Ritalin and Adderall, anticholinergics (often used to treat Parkinson’s disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), and certain medications such as phenylephrine (Sudafed PE), and benzodiazepines such as alprazolam (Xanax) can all cause pupil dilation.

So too can illicit drugs such as cocaine, ketamine, MDMA, LSD and cannabis.

Some neurological conditions or closed angle glaucoma, as well as stressful situations, can cause the pupils to stay dilated (a condition known as mydriasis).

If you have prolonged dilation of your pupils, you should speak to your doctor.

Does intellectual or emotional arousal cause pupil dilation?

When you are trying to solve a mathematics problem, listening carefully as you take notes, or listening to your favourite singer’s music, your pupils will enlarge.

Anticipation of rewards, emotional conflict, and processing of emotionally charged stimuli – such as scary movies or certain trigger sounds – also lead to increased pupil size.

Anxiety, pain, and even conditions such as fibromyalgia have also been linked to dilated pupils.

Context is everything

It is crucial to emphasise pupil dilation doesn’t automatically mean someone is aroused. Interpreting pupil dilation requires context, and you can’t assume big pupils means the person is attracted to you.

Verbal consent and other behavioural cues are essential.

If you’re wondering if the other person likes you, why not just ask?

Amanda Meyer is affiliated with the Australian and New Zealand Association of Clinical Anatomists, the American Association for Anatomy, and the Global Neuroanatomy Network.

Monika Zimanyi is affiliated with the Global Neuroanatomy Network

– ref. Why do our pupils dilate when we’re aroused? Anatomy experts explain – https://theconversation.com/why-do-our-pupils-dilate-when-were-aroused-anatomy-experts-explain-257452

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jim Arrowsmith, Professor, School of Management, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

Cuts to the public service, the decision to halt all pay equity claims, and the tight 2025 budget mean public service workers are facing an uncertain future.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the health sector. Since the 2024 budget, Health NZ has faced several reductions across its workforce. Nurses and rest home workers were also among the 33 pay equity cases stopped to save nearly NZ$13 billion over four years.

Last week, doctors at Gisborne Hospital announced plans to strike due to staffing shortages.

Industrial unrest could well be a feature of the next 18 months and an influence on the current government’s fortunes.

My ongoing research with union leaders, to be published later this year, maps out how they could emerge as a major force mobilising public opinion ahead of the 2026 general election – and how using “soft power” rather than just strikes could be key to success.

This research is part of an international project looking at health sector union strategies in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom.

The power of unions

Public sector unions have the power to influence change thanks to their concentrated membership in certain sectors, and their ability to cause significant disruptions with strikes. The New Zealand Nurses Organisation, for example, represents 77% of the registered nurse workforce.

But the potential power of New Zealand’s public service unions is tempered by their members’ commitment to the needs of the people they serve – for example, ensuring sick people still receive care.

Public service unions also need support from the public, given the state is their ultimate employer. This means unions first have to use the soft power available to them before deciding to strike.

For unions, soft power includes using employment rules and laws (“institutional” sources of power), alliances with groups representing people who use the sector’s services (“coalitional” sources), and messaging (“ideational”).

In the fight over pay equity, for example, unions are using institutional means (equal pay legislation) to fight for increased wages. They are also building coalitions with groups that use their services, and are articulating a clear case of fairness and efficiency to build wider support.

Even some lobby groups, such as Aged Care Association which represents aged-care facilities, have publicly supported union efforts towards pay equity, recognising the need for higher wages to address labour shortages.

Healthcare is a political frontline

In healthcare, the government pledged $8.2 billion in funding over four years in its first budget in 2024. In 2025, it set aside an extra $447 million for primary and out-of-hours care.

But unions representing doctors and nurses say the government is “just treading water”, identifying 4,800 vacancies in the current plan.

According to the unions, gaps include one in five senior hospital doctor positions and a quarter of hospital shifts lack sufficient nurses or midwives (the government has disputed these figures).

The situation is exacerbated by Australia and other countries actively recruiting for healthcare staff. Rising living costs also make New Zealand a less attractive proposition to new migrants.

Recent surveys by other major health unions focus on the impact of staff shortages on worker wellbeing and patient care. The scientific and technical union APEX reports a “workforce in survival mode” and the Public Service Association talks of “healthcare in crisis”.

In the care sector, members of trade union E tū have detailed how chronic understaffing leads to work intensification and insufficient time to care for residential or home-based clients.

A battle of messaging

The unions’ message is one of a vicious circle where staff shortages increase workloads in already demanding jobs, accelerating the number of departures and damaging the provision of care.

Addressing this, unions argue, requires better pay and more staff, including investment to grow the domestic pipeline of healthcare staff over the longer term.

The government’s message, however, refers to past blowouts, fiscal discipline and the need for more private sector involvement, and longer hours to meet its targets.

The question for unions is whether they will be able to get their messaging out to voters more effectively than the government.

In general, the profile of healthcare workers in people’s lives can create a more sympathetic message. Unions have also begun a coordinated strategy to unify and actively engage members as a platform for political outreach.

Campaigns such as the nurses union “Marangi Mai” (Rise Up) and E tū’s “Transforming Care” speak to workers more effectively than remote and protracted equal pay negotiations.

Finally, legal action and protests marshal media attention.

Cases filed under employment and health and safety laws expose “good employer” obligations and the need to ensure safe working conditions. “Informational pickets”, market stalls and alliances with user groups also get the message out, as do short sharp work stoppages.

Amid the ongoing debate around healthcare and what the sector needs, it is clear unions will need to use soft power tactics as well as strikes to advocate for workers. The strategies implemented in the public sector may also provide a road map for private sector workers considering their own actions.

Jim Arrowsmith 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. As government cuts bite, public service unions can use ‘soft power’ as well as strikes to win support – https://theconversation.com/as-government-cuts-bite-public-service-unions-can-use-soft-power-as-well-as-strikes-to-win-support-257006

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT University

Last month, Google announced SynthID Detector, a new tool to detect AI-generated content. Google claims it can identify AI-generated content in text, image, video or audio.

But there are some caveats. One of them is that the tool is currently only available to “early testers” through a waitlist.

The main catch is that SynthID primarily works for content that’s been generated using a Google AI service – such as Gemini for text, Veo for video, Imagen for images, or Lyria for audio.

If you try to use Google’s AI detector tool to see if something you’ve generated using ChatGPT is flagged, it won’t work.

That’s because, strictly speaking, the tool can’t detect the presence of AI-generated content or distinguish it from other kinds of content. Instead, it detects the presence of a “watermark” that Google’s AI products (and a couple of others) embed in their output through the use of SynthID.

A watermark is a special machine-readable element embedded in an image, video, sound or text. Digital watermarks have been used to ensure that information about the origins or authorship of content travels with it. They have been used to assert authorship in creative works and address misinformation challenges in the media.

SynthID embeds watermarks in the output from AI models. The watermarks are not visible to readers or audiences, but can be used by other tools to identify content that was made or edited using an AI model with SynthID on board.

SynthID is among the latest of many such efforts. But how effective are they?

There’s no unified AI detection system

Several AI companies, including Meta, have developed their own watermarking tools and detectors, similar to SynthID. But these are “model specific” solutions, not universal ones.

This means users have to juggle multiple tools to verify content. Despite researchers calling for a unified system, and major players like Google seeking to have their tool adopted by others, the landscape remains fragmented.

A parallel effort focuses on metadata – encoded information about the origin, authorship and edit history of media. For example, the Content Credentials inspect tool allows users to verify media by checking the edit history attached to the content.

However, metadata can be easily stripped when content is uploaded to social media or converted into a different file format. This is particularly problematic if someone has deliberately tried to obscure the origin and authorship of a piece of content.

There are detectors that rely on forensic cues, such as visual inconsistencies or lighting anomalies. While some of these tools are automated, many depend on human judgement and common sense methods, like counting the number of fingers in AI-generated images. These methods may become redundant as AI model performance improves.

How effective are AI detection tools?

Overall, AI detection tools can vary dramatically in their effectiveness. Some work better when the content is entirely AI-generated, such as when an entire essay has been generated from scratch by a chatbot.

The situation becomes murkier when AI is used to edit or transform human-created content. In such cases, AI detectors can get it badly wrong. They can fail to detect AI or flag human-created content as AI-generated.

AI detection tools don’t often explain how they arrived at their decision, which adds to the confusion. When used for plagiarism detection in university assessment, they are considered an “ethical minefield” and are known to discriminate against non-native English speakers.

Read more:
Can you spot the AI impostors? We found AI faces can look more real than actual humans

Where AI detection tools can help

A wide variety of use cases exist for AI detection tools. Take insurance claims, for example. Knowing whether the image a client shares depicts what it claims to depict can help insurers know how to respond.

Journalists and fact checkers might draw on AI detectors, in addition to their other approaches, when trying to decide if potentially newsworthy information ought to be shared further.

Employers and job applicants alike increasingly need to assess whether the person on the other side of the recruiting process is genuine or an AI fake.

Users of dating apps need to know whether the profile of the person they’ve met online represents a real romantic prospect, or an AI avatar, perhaps fronting a romance scam.

If you’re an emergency responder deciding whether to send help to a call, confidently knowing whether the caller is human or AI can save resources and lives.

Where to from here?

As these examples show, the challenges of authenticity are now happening in real time, and static tools like watermarking are unlikely to be enough. AI detectors that work on audio and video in real time are a pressing area of development.

Whatever the scenario, it is unlikely that judgements about authenticity can ever be fully delegated to a single tool.

Understanding the way such tools work, including their limitations, is an important first step. Triangulating these with other information and your own contextual knowledge will remain essential.

T.J. Thomson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is an affiliated researcher with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making & Society.

Elif Buse Doyuran receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a research fellow at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making and Society.

Jean Burgess receives funding from the Australian Research Council including the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S), and from the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Council.

– ref. Google’s SynthID is the latest tool for catching AI-made content. What is AI ‘watermarking’ and does it work? – https://theconversation.com/googles-synthid-is-the-latest-tool-for-catching-ai-made-content-what-is-ai-watermarking-and-does-it-work-257637

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fanny Kuhlin, PhD candidate in Sport Management (Sport Science), Örebro University

From the horrific Larry Nassar abuse scandal in United States gymnastics to the “environment of fear” some volleyball athletes endured at the Australian Institute of Sport, abuse in sport has been well documented in recent years.

This abuse in elite sport sport has been particularly visible but it is not just happening at the top level. Abusive and harmful practices are happening in all sports, at all ages and at all competition levels.

While sport can have many wonderful benefits for young people, it can also have a dark side, one where abuse can flourish, leading to serious psychological and physical harm.

How can parents ensure their children are safe?

Read more:
The 3 changes Australian sport must make after Volleyball Australia’s shocking abuse report

Abuse in sports

A 2022 Australian study showed 82% of children had experienced physical, psychological or sexual abuse during their time participating in community sport. This makes the abuse prevalence similar to that found in elite sport environments.

The line between abuse and acceptable behaviour is blurred more in sport than in many other environments.

For example, in school, it would be unacceptable for a teacher to scream at a child who performed poorly on a test but in sports, screaming is a commonly used strategy by a coach to correct a young athlete’s behaviour.

Research from earlier this year shows athletes often justify the behaviours of their coaches.

The following quote from an elite-level gymnast in an ongoing research project demonstrates how athletes often learn to accept abusive behaviours as necessary for their performance:

(He) was a strict coach. He spoke loudly […] but I’m a gymnast, I need that. I don’t know if everybody needs that but if I did something really bad, he screamed at me and this kind of gave me motivation to push myself more, so for me this type of coaching style was really good.

Challenges and changes

The “win-at-all-costs” mentality in many sports is also problematic.

When winning is everything, abusive practices are not seen as a problem to be stamped out but rather as legitimate strategies to motivate and toughen up the participants.

Athletes are not the only ones who normalise these practices. Parents, coaches and administrators might also come to tolerate, accept or even celebrate abusive behaviours and cultures as a “natural” part of sport.

This means experiences of abuse may flourish in such environments.

Thankfully, some sports organisations have in recent years made significant changes to reduce the likelihood of abuse and deal with cases as soon as they arise.

Sport Integrity Australia (SIA), for example, is implementing national policies for safeguarding and whistleblowing, where abuse and harmful behaviour can be reported.

SIA has also recently co-developed a course with other leading sport agencies to help coaches working with young athletes better navigate the complexities of physical, emotional and psychological development.

While these are potentially steps in the right direction, researchers have pointed out that similar efforts have achieved mixed results and there are no guarantees of athlete safety.

Parents may therefore rightly ask what they might do to protect their child(ren) from abuse and maximise the positive gains from participating in sport.

Tips for parents and caregivers

Firstly, parents and caregivers have the right to be included in their childrens’ sporting participation.

This involves being informed about training times and competition schedules, training content, coaching style and behavioural expectations.

Parents should also be welcomed to watch their children’s training sessions at any time and unannounced.

Denying parents information or access to facilities have been identified as a potential risk factors.

The right for inclusion also refers to decision-making. Sport is often hierarchical with authoritarian leadership styles, which are significant risk factors for abuse in sports.

So it is important children and their parents are provided with spaces and opportunities to have a say in matters related to their (child’s) sporting participation.

Secondly, young athletes and their parents/caregivers should be made aware of the policies and safety measures put in place to keep children safe.

If these are not clearly communicated, parents/caregivers are encouraged to ask what actions a club has put in place.

If protection and prevention are not developed, or considered limited or ineffective, parents are recommended to raise their concerns.

Lastly, parents should be conscious of the “win-at-all-costs” mentality found in many sports and consider how this can lead to abusive practices being accepted as a “natural” part of sport.

By staying informed, involved and attentive, parents can play a powerful role in supporting safer sporting environments for all children.

Natalie Barker-Ruchti is affiliated with Safesport Sweden.

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

– ref. What parents and youth athletes can do to protect against abuse in sport – https://theconversation.com/what-parents-and-youth-athletes-can-do-to-protect-against-abuse-in-sport-255614

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Farrier, Professor of Literature and the Environment, University of Edinburgh

Modern cities are evolution engines. Urban snails in the Netherlands and lizards in Los Angeles have developed lighter shells and larger scales to cope with the heat island effect, where temperatures can be several degrees above the surrounding area.

Artificial light makes an artificial dawn, shifting the time when birds sing, and has prompted urban bridge-dwelling spiders to develop an attraction to light, whereas ermine moths are losing theirs altogether. A mutation in the so-called “daredevil gene”, also found in downhill skiers and snowboarders, is making urban swans bolder and more tolerant of humans.

Our urban environments are pushing many species to reimagine their bodies and behaviours to suit municipal living; but some are also reimagining our cities. There’s lots to learn from how nature adapts to city life.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Anti-bird spikes are a hostile architecture for wildlife, designed to keep messy nature away from buildings. Yet, crows and magpies in Rotterdam, Antwerp and Glasgow strip the spikes away and use them to make their nests.

It’s difficult to imagine finding ease in a nest that has all the comfort of a tangled ball of wire, but the birds occupy them contentedly, improvising shelter from materials intended to exclude.

Evolutionary biologists call this process “exaptation”. For example, feathers originally evolved to keep bird-like dinosaurs like Archaeopteryx warm. These feathers were adaptations to colder temperatures and only later repurposed, or exapted, to allow flight.

Exaptation places repurposing at the heart of evolution; what if we were to design our homes on the same basis?

Repurposing waste

The Waste House is a two-storey model home in Brighton, made almost entirely from household and construction waste. When I visited the Waste House while researching my book, Nature’s Genius: Evolution’s Lessons for a Changing Planet, I loved the sense of possibility found in a staircase made of compressed paper or carpet tiles lapped like slates round its outside walls.

But what lingered most vividly were the little windows built into the inside walls, showing what materials they’d used as insulation: old duvets and bicycle inner tubes, and in one window a library of DVDs. One of these was a copy of Groundhog Day – a film where the same day repeats on an endless loop.

We’re similarly stuck in a rigid pattern of extraction, consumption and waste that plays again and again, day after day. But rather than a loop, this pattern is stubbornly linear, with hundreds of millions of tonnes of usable materials flowing into the dead end of landfill every year.

The problem is that so much of what we make is designed with a single use or purpose in mind. We tend not to think about what a material or an object could become at the end of its life. But exaptation teaches us to stop seeing things as they are, and instead imagine their potential to be something new.

In Edinburgh, Pianodrome is a performance space that’s assembled entirely from old pianos. Audiences climb staircases made of soundboards, clutching bannisters that were piano lids and rest their heads against seatbacks conjured from reclaimed keyboards. Destined for landfill, these instruments have instead found a new life as space for people to gather and perform.

But like all exapted features, their new life hasn’t erased the old. Pianodrome’s makers left the strings of the old piano harps in place, buried in the heart of the structure. Just as feathers still keep flighted birds warm, and spikes that kept birds from buildings help crows and magpies to protect their nests from predators, whenever a performance takes place inside it, pianodrome resonates like one giant instrument.

An exaptive approach could help birth a circular economy, taking us out of this damaging loop of extraction and consumption, and finding value in what we currently discard. Leaving materials to waste imposes a barrier, a limit on what could be. But the birds who build their nests from anti-bird spikes teach us that what was once a barrier can become a shelter.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

David Farrier 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. What birds can teach us about repurposing waste – https://theconversation.com/what-birds-can-teach-us-about-repurposing-waste-256519

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jody Webster, Professor of Marine Geoscience, University of Sydney

In the 20th century, global sea level rose faster than at any other time in the past 3,000 years. It’s expected to rise even further by 2100, as human-induced climate change intensifies. In fact, some studies predict a rise of up to 1.6 metres and possibly more due to the rapid melting of the Antarctic ice sheets.

These changes will have huge impacts on coastal ecosystems around the world, including coral reefs. To understand these future impacts, it can be useful to understand similar events from history.

Our new research, published today in Nature Communications, does just that. It reveals how the Great Barrier Reef in northern Australia responded to a dramatic rise in sea level some 13,000 to 10,000 years ago.

A hotly debated event

Several “meltwater pulse events” have been documented in the past. These occur when ice sheets disintegrate in a catastrophic fashion, resulting in a rapid surge in global sea levels.

One of these events, known as “meltwater pulse 1B”, remains hotly debated. It occurred roughly 11,500 years ago.

Early evidence from reef cores in Barbados suggested a sharp sea-level rise of approximately 14 metres between 11,450 and 11,100 years ago, with rates of roughly 40 millimetres per year.

Remarkably, this rate is about ten times faster than the current global rise.

However, this record conflicts with others, including from Tahiti and now from the Great Barrier Reef, which suggests a more gradual rise in sea levels.

Learning from geological archives

Somewhat paradoxically shallow-water reef systems can “drown” because corals, and other reef organisms, depend on light for photosynthesis. If the water gets too deep too fast, the reef will no longer keep up with the rise and it will drown.

But drowning can also occur due to other factors, such as increased temperature, sediment and nutrients, which can also add extra environmental stress to the reef – again making it more difficult to grow vertically and keep up with sea level rise.

Cores gathered from drowned fossil coral reefs preserved along the continental shelf edge of the Great Barrier Reef contain crucial information about historic corals, coralline algae and microbial reef structures known as microbialites. They offer a unique geologic time machine to better understand how past periods of rapid global sea level rise affected reef growth.

These geological archives also provide important clues about how ice sheets behaved in response to rapid global warming.

In 2010, an expedition of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program used a geotechnical drill ship to sample below the seafloor and reconstruct the growth and demise of the Great Barrier Reef over the past roughly 30,000 years. Five distinct stages were identified in response to major global climatic and oceanographic disturbances.

In this new study, we focused on a key reef stage called Reef 4. It formed between 13,000 and 10,000 years ago, just prior to the start of the modern reef as we know it.

We refer to this reef as the “proto-Great Barrier Reef”. Once a shallow-water barrier reef system, it now exists in a fossilised form at roughly 50 metres water depth and is now the home to deeper reef communtites in the mesophotic zone 30 to 150 metres below the surface.

An impressive ability to keep pace

Our study shows the Great Barrier Reef didn’t drown during meltwater pulse 1B. In fact, it continued to thrive with clear evidence of healthy, shallow-water reef assemblages (living in waters less than ten metres deep) persisting right through the rise in sea levels.

The reef not only survived but continued to grow upwards at rates between 4–6 millimetres per year. This rate of growth is comparable to modern healthy reef growth rates, demonstrating an impressive ability to keep pace.

We also calculated that the maximum possible sea-level rise during meltwater pulse 1B was between 7.7 and 10.2 metres over roughly 350 years. This equates to between 23 and 30 millimetres per year, but was likely less.

This is less than the Barbados estimate, and more consistent with observations from Tahiti where no sharp sea-level jump was found.

Importantly, this indicates that even the upper sea level rise bounds are within the survival limits of resilient reef systems such as the Great Barrier Reef – especially when environmental stressors, such as ocean warming, ocean acidification and sedimentation are low.

Limits to a reef’s resilience

Although the Great Barrier Reef survived sea level rise roughly 11,000 years ago, the world was very different back then.

Coral reefs faced less stress from human impacts. And ocean temperatures were rising more slowly.

But today’s reefs are already struggling, with UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee recently expressing “utmost concern” about the state of the Great Barrier Reef in particular.

This is due to warming, acidification and pollution. And these additional challenges decrease reefs’ ability to cope with rapid sea-level rise.

Our findings suggest abrupt sea-level jumps of more than 11 metres are unlikely to occur without major instabilities in ice sheets. The fact that such collapses likely didn’t happen during meltwater pulse 1B offers some reassurance. But we’re in uncharted territory now, particularly with the Antarctic ice sheet displaying early signs of instability.

Our study also shows the Great Barrier Reef has been remarkably resilient, adapting to changing sea levels and continuing to grow even as the ocean rose rapidly. This resilience, however, had limits. Ultimately, the reef we examined drowned roughly 10,000 years ago, likely due to a combination of environmental stressors, including increased sediment flux. At this time the shallow water reef ecosystem migrated landward to form the modern Great Barrier, leaving behind only deeper, mesophotic reef communities.

The lessons from the past are clear: reefs can adapt to environmental changes but there are limits.

Protecting modern reefs will require more than understanding their past. It means reducing emissions and limiting other environmental stresses such as sediment and nutrient runoff where possible.

Jody Webster receives funding from the Australian Research Council and ANZIC IODP.

Juan Carlos Braga receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Spanish Government.

Marc Humblet receives funding from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

Stewart Fallon receives funding from the Australian Research Council and ANZIC IODP.

Yusuke Yokoyama receives funding from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science and Japan Science and Technology Agency.

– ref. Will surging sea levels kill the Great Barrier Reef? Ancient coral fossils may hold the answer – https://theconversation.com/will-surging-sea-levels-kill-the-great-barrier-reef-ancient-coral-fossils-may-hold-the-answer-257830

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Lindenmayer, Distinguished Professor of Ecology, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University

Until now, Victorians believed their state was the sole home for Leadbeater’s possum, their critically endangered state faunal emblem. This tiny marsupial is clinging to life in a few pockets of mountain ash and snow gum habitat in the Central Highlands of Victoria.

But a few days ago, seven grainy photos taken by a trail camera in New South Wales revealed something very unexpected: a Leadbeater’s possum hundreds of kilometres away in the wet forests of Kosciuszko National Park.

For decades, we and other researchers have sought proof this possum existed in these forests. Now we have it. This is a moment of celebration. But it also signals the importance of well-resourced biodiversity surveys in uncovering our most threatened species and large national parks for conserving them.

While this newly discovered population reduces the risk of extinction, it doesn’t change the decline and risk of extinction of its Victorian relatives – or the steps needed to safeguard them.

Detected entirely by chance

In 2024, New South Wales threatened species ecologists Fred Ford and Martin Schulz set about looking for an entirely different species, the endangered smoky mouse. To find it, they set up a wide array of camera traps throughout wet forest areas of Kosciuszko National Park. A year later, they collected them and trawled through millions of photos.

Among all these images (including of smoky mice), there were seven which stunned them. A camera deployed near Yarrangobilly Caves captured a tiny possum scampering through leaf litter, holding its distinctive club-shaped tail erect. The possum looks around the monitoring site, showing its back and face stripes and heart-shaped face.

Experts at The Australian National University and Zoos Victoria verified the photos, setting the ecology world abuzz.

A hunch confirmed

While we are delighted at this remarkable discovery, the detection is not a complete surprise.

Over three decades ago, this article’s lead author searched for Leadbeater’s possum around Yarrangobilly and many other parts of Kosciuszko National Park, guided by a bioclimatic model suggesting the cool wet forests in Kosciuszko National Park should suit the possum.

But detection cameras were not available then, and this possum is notoriously hard to spot. It’s tiny, nocturnal and spends its waking hours dashing through the dense understory of some of the world’s tallest forests looking for nectar, sap and insects.

Species experts from Zoos Victoria and Deakin University have also scouted parts of Kosciuszko National Park over the past decade, identifying potentially promising habitat.

In 2010 we got confirmation the possum had once occurred in the area, when jaw bones were identified among bones regurgitated by owls on the floor of a nearby cave.

But other bones from the cave floor date back an estimated 140–200 years. The bones were far from proof of a living population.

The possum’s existence remained an open question until these photos.

What does this mean for this possum?

We don’t know anything about this newly discovered Leadbeater’s possum population in NSW, other than the fact that it exists. Given the distance from the Victorian populations, we suspect that they may be genetically distinct.

In theory, the existence of a separate population 250 km away from the Victorian populations cuts the risk a single megafire or other catastrophe could push the species to extinction.

But while welcome, the discovery doesn’t reduce the need to urgently protect surviving Victorian populations, which remain highly threatened by bushfire, climate change, predation by cats, and the legacy of logging and land clearing.

In Victoria, some populations have dwindled as low as 40 animals and inbreeding is now a concern.

The possum typically relies on large old trees with hollows where it can breed and den. But these trees have substantially declined in Victoria over the past 150 years. Leadbeater’s possum also needs smaller trees for feeding and movement.

Surveys across the historical range of the species in Victoria since 2017 have failed to find any other hidden populations. Most surveys have found the habitat highly degraded from logging and fire.

The discovery won’t alter the possum’s critically endangered status at this stage, nor the ongoing work to support it.

In welcome news, the NSW Environment Minister announced the possum’s state conservation listing will be fast-tracked.

Of surveys and parks

Why did it take so long to find the possum? The main reason: a lack of resources preventing targeted investigations.

Even basic inventories of species have not been done across many of Australia’s important conservation areas.

Without well conducted surveys and monitoring, we are left overly reliant on chance detections for critical information. There could be other populations of imperilled species waiting to be rediscovered.

Properly managing our growing number of threatened species shouldn’t be based on luck. It should be enabled by adequate resources for threatened species recovery teams to discover, map, protect and manage threatened species and their habitat.

Increasing federal spending on the care of nature to 1% of the budget would go a very long way to closing these gaps.

Trail cameras, call playback and environmental DNA sampling mean we can now survey large and remote natural areas with relatively little effort for long periods of time.

Big parks are essential

Kosciuszko National Park supports much more than Australia’s highest mountains. The huge park spans 690,000 hectares, much of it forest.

Many of our most imperilled species are hard to detect. Protecting extensive areas of good-quality habitat boosts the survival chances for these species, even if we don’t yet have proof of life.

With so little high-quality habitat left in Australia, proper protection through new national parks (including in Victoria) is vitally important for the possum and many other species.

Passive protection isn’t enough either – adequate funding is critical to stop the environmental condition of parks from declining, due to threats like invasive species and extreme fires.

The world still contains wonder

These seven photos have given ecologists and nature lovers a real boost to their spirits. As detection techniques improve, what else is out there waiting to be found?

The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of Leadbeater’s possum experts Dan Harley, Arabella Eyre, John Woinarski and Brendan Wintle to this article.

David Lindenmayer receives funding from the Australian Government and the Victorian Government. He is a Councillor with the Biodiversity Council and a Member of Birds Australia.

Darcy Watchorn works for Zoos Victoria, a not-for-profit zoo-based conservation organisation. He is a member of the Ecological Society of Australia, the Australian Mammal Society, the Society for Conservation Biology, and the Royal Society of Victoria.

Jaana Dielenberg was employed by the now-ended Threatened Species Recovery Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program, which conducted research on the Leadbeater’s possum in Victoria. She is a Charles Darwin University Fellow and is employed by the University of Melbourne and the Biodiversity Council.

– ref. Decades of searching and a chance discovery: why finding Leadbeater’s possum in NSW is such big news – https://theconversation.com/decades-of-searching-and-a-chance-discovery-why-finding-leadbeaters-possum-in-nsw-is-such-big-news-257957

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Graeme Orr, Professor of Law, The University of Queensland

Election day was over four weeks ago. Yet the outcome in one House of Representatives remains unclear. That is the formerly Liberal Sydney electorate of Bradfield.

In real time, you can watch the lead tilt between Liberal hopeful, Gisele Kapterian and her teal independent rival, Nicolette Boele. The difference between them has been as small as one vote. As of Monday, that had shifted to 12 votes in the Teal’s favour. Still too close even for Antony Green to call.

What are the processes for resolving ultra-marginal results? And, more broadly, what accountability is there for problems in campaigning or the running of the election, such as the allegation that voters in one NSW town were misled about how to vote?

First, to the Bradfield saga. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) has until July 9 to declare the result. It then certifies a list of successful candidates, which it “returns”, attached to the original writ the governor-general used to formally begin the election.

Electoral challenges

Within 40 days of the writ being returned, any candidate or elector from the seat can “petition” its result. That’s not a petition calling for parliament to handle the matter. It means a formal pleading to the Court of Disputed Returns. For national elections, that means the High Court.

Remarkably few seats are challenged in Australia. On the happy side, this is because our election agencies are very professional. It’s also a matter of legal principle, arithmetic and resources.

To succeed in a challenge, you must show the outcome was likely to have been affected, by errors or breaches of the electoral act. With more than 100,000 voting in House of Representatives electorates, even a 0.5% margin means convincing a judge that a 500-vote lead was uncertain.

The last successful petition nationally was 12 years ago. The AEC admitted some lost ballots meant that the last couple of Western Australian Senate seats could have been different. The whole race had to be re-run.

In Bradfield, there’s no suggestion of impropriety. So it’s not like the last unsuccessful petition, from 2019, where the Liberals survived claims that misleading how-to-vote posters, directed at Chinese language speakers, might have affected the result.

Instead, the Bradfield loser would focus on disputed ballots. That would mean, for example, votes where their scrutineers noted some uncertainty. Such as whether a “1” was a “7”. A judge can then give a binding ruling on the intent of the ballot.

The loser might also try to find evidence of people being wrongly denied a ballot or wrongly issued one. The 40-day period to marshal evidence is strict.

Besides time limits, a challenger needs lawyers and risks paying the other side’s (and perhaps the AEC’s) legal costs if they lose the hearing.

Counts and recounts

Australian election counts are very thorough. This is in contrast to the United Kingdom, where local officials literally rush to be the first to declare, in the wee hours of Friday morning after voting closes at 10pm on a Thursday.

The figures we see on election night are “indicative” only, drawing on counts in thousands of polling places. Every ballot is transferred to a more central location, for official tallying. Ballots for weaker candidates are reviewed multiple times, as they pass on according to each elector’s preferences.

When a seat is ultra-close, the law permits a complete recount. AEC policy is to conduct one whenever the result is within 100 votes: in Bradfield, the initial result was a mere eight votes.

A losing candidate can also request a recount. Teal independent Zoe Daniel did that in her Melbourne seat of Goldstein, where Liberal Tim Wilson finished 260 votes ahead.

Recounts are resource intensive. So the AEC agreed to review all “1” votes for those candidates, and ballots put in the “informal” or invalid pile. Wilson finally won by 175 votes. A challenge to a margin of that size seems very unlikely.

Bad form or protest? Informal votes

What of votes that couldn’t be counted? We call these “informal”. Given turning-out to vote is compulsory – and the requirement to give preferences – Australia has long had a lot of informal ballots.

Upwards of half tend to be accidental, caused by people misnumbering the ballot or not understanding the rules. The highest rates are in seats with many new citizens from overseas, especially as long ballots of many of candidates is becoming common.

Maybe more than half, however, are deliberate, intended as protests against the system or parties. These include blanks and those scribbled with (sometimes obscene) comments. As faith in parties has declined, informals have risen. Also, due to “automatic enrolment”, more people are enrolled than ever, including some who’d rather not be. Informal ballots this year reached 5.6% of turnout. For perspective, that’s up just 0.4%.

Voters in the small town of Missabotti in the New South wales seat of Cowper, however, were miffed to find their polling booth had a 45% informal rate. That’s quite an outlier, even for a seat where electors had to rank a dizzying 11 candidates.

There are allegations a polling official misled some electors, by telling them they only had to number “6” candidates for the House. That is the rule for the Senate, not the House.

As preferences are not mandatory at NSW state elections, it’s understandable voters may have heeded such advice rather than the actual rule on the ballot. Such an error would be embarrassing for the AEC. But it could hardly ground an election challenge: the Nationals held Cowper by almost 5,500 votes.

Does that mean there’s no accountability? Anyone affected does not get to vote again. But the AEC is investigating. And after every election, it is grilled by a parliamentary inquiry that the public can contribute to.

In the end, every vote should be sacred. In reality, elections are huge logistical events and nothing is perfect. But there are courts and inquiries to offer remedies and improve things for the future.

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

– ref. In Bradfield, the election is not yet over. What happens when a seat count is ultra close? – https://theconversation.com/in-bradfield-the-election-is-not-yet-over-what-happens-when-a-seat-count-is-ultra-close-257956

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Herbert, Associate Professor in Developmental Psychology, University of Wollongong

You might have seen those heartwarming and often funny viral videos where parents or carers engage in long “talks” with young babies about this and that – usually just fun chit chat of no great consequence.

They’re often very sweet, and it’s lovely to see the babies’ faces lighting up at the sound of their mother or carer’s voice, or seeming to talk back. In one, the baby appears to reply in an accent strikingly similar to their carer’s:

So, what’s going on when we chat like this to babies? And is it better to chat to them in the tone and pace we’d use when talking to other adults, or is it OK to talk in a slower, higher pitched, sing-song voice?

Here’s what the research shows so far.

Talking to your baby matters

When you speak with your baby, they are exposed to a rich tapestry of sounds and movements. Can babies make sense of all this input?

Well, by the time they’re born babies are already highly experienced with their mother’s voice as well as other language sounds they’ve heard while in utero.

In fact, research shows newborns prefer listening to the language they heard in utero rather than an unfamiliar language.

They also prefer to hear the story their mother read aloud regularly in the final weeks of pregnancy, compared to a different story – regardless of who is reading it.

So, although newborns are yet to understand the meaning of these words, they are already tuned in to the importance of language.

Given the vast exposure that most young babies have with their parent’s voice, passively listening to mum or dad talking is likely to be comforting.

Time spent together in close physical contact with a highly familiar person producing familiar sounds creates a safe, secure space rich in learning opportunities.

Babies can learn a lot about conversational style from just listening to and watching the way their parent communicates.

In fact, babies mimic their parents’ gestures, which can help build their vocabulary over time. The social context influences language skills.

What if I run out of things to say?

If you’re not a fan of monologuing to your baby, don’t worry. They’re not missing out.

In fact, constant exposure to long monologues by a parent is unlikely to provide the baby with a particularly supportive language environment for developing their understanding or production of words.

Adult language is extremely complex. It takes a lot of experience with language before a string of sounds like “Yourdadlikeschocolatemoltenlavacake” can be interpreted as individual words linked to people, objects, or concepts.

One of the most effective ways to support early word recognition and promote attention to the structure of language is for the adult to use a simplified way of speaking to the baby.

“Parentese” is characterised by the use of higher pitch sounds, elongated vowels, and a slower pace of speaking. Real words are presented in a sing-song, happy voice.

Parentese draws the baby’s attention to words, and highlights how information in speech chunks together. Babies have been found to prefer to listen to this style of speaking compared to standard speech.

Speaking ‘parentese’

Parentese is not the same thing as “baby talk”. Baby talk involves the use of nonsense words, and the modelling of incorrect speech sounds and grammar. A baby is not being supported to learn the word “water” if they are repeatedly presented with a nonsense label like “waa waa” for their drink.

One US study found that when parents were trained to use parentese with their infants at six and ten months, the infants showed an increase in babbling and said more words at 14 months, compared to infants of parents who did not receive this training.

Other research has shown consistent use of parentese in the early years can help build the complexity of children’s language skills at five years of age.

Learning to talk is not simply the product of hearing lots of words. In the first weeks of life, infants are already beginning to produce coos and murmurs that both parents and outside observers judge to be intentional vocalisations.

Try responding to these sounds by imitating them and then interpreting what your baby might be trying to say. This enables them to take a turn as a social partner in the conservation.

When even very young babies take turns in conversations with an adult, the quality of their vocalisations increases.

At the youngest ages, time spent talking together in face-to-face interactions best supports language development.

With age, babies become increasingly interested in the objects in their environment.

So, what should I do?

An effective way to boost language learning from about nine months of age is to notice what’s captured your baby’s attention and talk about that.

Try labelling and describing what your baby is looking at, playing with, pointing at, or babbling towards.

Research by colleagues and I found encouraging parents to engage in 15 minutes of this kind of talk a day with their 11-month-olds for a month was effective in promoting vocabulary growth at 15 and 18 months.

Overall, a rich language environment is created by engaging with your baby in a wide range of activities – via games, songs, and reading aloud – not just having focused conversations.

Jane Herbert has received funding for these projects: 2012-15: Does promoting parents’ engagement with their infants benefit language development?” Nuffield Foundation (approx. £200,000). D Matthews (PI, University of Sheffield), JS Herbert (University of Sheffield), and J Pine (University of Liverpool). 2011-12: Does promoting parents’ engagement with their infants benefit language development? British Academy Small Research Grant (£7,500). Co-PIs: D Matthews (University of Sheffield), JS Herbert (University of Sheffield), and J Pine (University of Liverpool).

– ref. Is there a right way to talk to your baby? A baby brain expert explains ‘parentese’ – https://theconversation.com/is-there-a-right-way-to-talk-to-your-baby-a-baby-brain-expert-explains-parentese-257007

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachael L. Brown, Director of the Centre for Philosophy of the Sciences and Associate Professor of Philosophy, Australian National University

Head lice, fleas and tapeworms have been humanity’s companions throughout our evolutionary history. Yet, the greatest parasite of the modern age is no blood-sucking invertebrate. It is sleek, glass-fronted and addictive by design. Its host? Every human on Earth with a wifi signal.

Far from being benign tools, smartphones parasitise our time, our attention and our personal information, all in the interests of technology companies and their advertisers.

In a new article in the Australasian Journal of Philosophy, we argue smartphones pose unique societal risks, which come into sharp focus when viewed through the lens of parasitism.

What, exactly, is a parasite?

Evolutionary biologists define a parasite as a species that benefits from a close relationship with another species – its host – while the host bears a cost.

The head louse, for example, is entirely dependent on our own species for its survival. They only eat human blood, and if they become dislodged from their host, they survive only briefly unless they are fortunate enough to fall onto another human scalp. In return for our blood, head lice give us nothing but a nasty itch; that’s the cost.

Smartphones have radically changed our lives. From navigating cities to managing chronic health diseases such as diabetes, these pocket-sized bits of tech make our lives easier. So much so that most of us are rarely without them.

Yet, despite their benefits, many of us are hostage to our phones and slaves to the endless scroll, unable to fully disconnect. Phone users are paying the price with a lack of sleep, weaker offline relationships and mood disorders.

From mutualism to parasitism

Not all close species relationships are parasitic. Many organisms that live on or inside us are beneficial.

Consider the bacteria in the digestive tracts of animals. They can only survive and reproduce in the gut of their host species, feeding on nutrients passing through. But they provide benefits to the host, including improved immunity and better digestion. These win-win associations are called mutualisms.

The human-smartphone association began as a mutualism. The technology proved useful to humans for staying in touch, navigating via maps and finding useful information.

Philosophers have spoken of this not in terms of mutualism, but rather as phones being an extension of the human mind, like notebooks, maps and other tools.

From these benign origins, however, we argue the relationship has become parasitic. Such a change is not uncommon in nature; a mutualist can evolve to become a parasite, or vice versa.

Smartphones as parasites

As smartphones have become near-indispensible, some of the most popular apps they offer have come to serve the interests of the app-making companies and their advertisers more faithfully than those of their human users.

These apps are designed to nudge our behaviour to keep us scrolling, clicking on advertising and simmering in perpetual outrage.

The data on our scrolling behaviour is used to further that exploitation. Your phone only cares about your personal fitness goals or desire to spend more quality time with your kids to the extent that it uses this information to tailor itself to better capture your attention.

So, it can be useful to think of users and their phones as akin to hosts and their parasites – at least some of the time.

While this realisation is interesting in and of itself, the benefit of viewing smartphones through the evolutionary lens of parasitism comes into its own when considering where the relationship might head next – and how we could thwart these high-tech parasites.

Where policing comes in

On the Great Barrier Reef, bluestreak cleaner wrasse establish “cleaning stations” where larger fish allow the wrasse to feed on dead skin, loose scales and invertebrate parasites living in their gills. This relationship is a classic mutualism – the larger fish lose costly parasites and the cleaner wrasse get fed.

Sometimes the cleaner wrasse “cheat” and nip their hosts, tipping the scale from mutualism to parasitism. The fish being cleaned may punish offenders by chasing them away or withholding further visits. In this, the reef fish exhibit something evolutionary biologists see as important to keeping mutualisms in balance: policing.

Could we adequately police our exploitation by smartphones and restore a net-beneficial relationship?

Evolution shows that two things are key: an ability to detect exploitation when it occurs, and the capacity to respond (typically by withdrawing service to the parasite).

A difficult battle

In the case of the smartphone, we can’t easily detect the exploitation. Tech companies that design the various features and algorithms to keep you picking up your phone aren’t advertising this behaviour.

But even if you’re aware of the exploitative nature of smartphone apps, responding is also more difficult than simply putting the phone down.

Many of us have become reliant on smartphones for everyday tasks. Rather than remembering facts, we offload the task to digital devices – for some people, this can change their cognition and memory.

We depend on having a camera for capturing life events or even just recording where we parked the car. This both enhances and limits our memory of events.

Governments and companies have only further cemented our dependence on our phones, by moving their service delivery online via mobile apps. Once we pick up the phone to access our bank accounts or access government services, we’ve lost the battle.

How then can users redress the imbalanced relationship with their phones, turning the parasitic relationship back to a mutualistic one?

Our analysis suggests individual choice can’t reliably get users there. We are individually outgunned by the massive information advantage tech companies hold in the host-parasite arms race.

The Australian government’s under-age social media ban is an example of the kind of collective action required to limit what these parasites can legally do. To win the battle, we will also need restrictions on app features known to be addictive, and on the collection and sale of our personal data.

Rob Brooks receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Rachael L. Brown 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. Your smartphone is a parasite, according to evolution – https://theconversation.com/your-smartphone-is-a-parasite-according-to-evolution-256795

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Harcourt, Industry Professor and Chief Economist, University of Technology Sydney

The Northern Territory government recently announced the Dolphins, the NRL’s newest team that entered the league in 2023, would play a home game at TIO Stadium in Darwin every year from 2026 to 2028.

The Dolphins deal replaces a 12-year partnership between the NT and the Parramatta Eels, which ran from 2014 to 2025.

The NRL announcement came soon after the AFL’s Gold Coast played two “home” games at TIO Stadium during Sir Doug Nicholls Round, which is dedicated to Indigenous players, cultures and communities.

Looking ahead, Darwin will be the only capital city in Australia without an AFL or NRL team when the Tasmania Devils join the AFL in 2028 as its 19th team. The NT is, however, pushing hard to join as the AFL’s 20th club.

So, as the NRL dips its toes into the NT, will the AFL look to defend its territory?

The case for an AFL team in the NT

The “footy case” for a standalone NT team is strong: the Territory has produced rich reservoirs of football talent from Alice Springs to the Arafura Sea, with stars such as Michael Long, the Rioli family (Maurice Snr, Cyril, Dean, Daniel, Willie and Maurice Jnr) and Andrew McLeod dominating games and delighting fans.

According to James Coventry’s book Footballistics, the NT shines in terms of participation rates. Only about 250,000 people live in the Top End, but more than 13% participate in Aussie rules programs compared to 8% in Western Australia, 6% in South Australia and 2% in Victoria. In terms of girls and women, the Territory boasts the highest Aussie rules participation rate in the country.

The NT has traditionally been a strong source of AFL draftees, producing more per capita than any other state or territory except for Victoria and South Australia. Around 10% of AFL players are Indigenous, with many emanating from the NT.

But in recent years, Indigenous numbers have declined. In 2024, 70 men and 21 women players identified as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander – a decrease of 17% since 2020.

Read more:
It’s clear footy has an Indigenous participation problem, and the AFL draft is only part of the solution

An NT team would surely be a boon for Indigenous players who want to stay local.

In the NRL, about 12% of players identify as Indigenous, although only a handful come from the NT.

How would an AFL team look?

The Territory AFL Team Taskforce, in its strategic business case for the 20th licence, has examined a number of options.

These include current AFL clubs playing more matches in Darwin and Alice Springs, a relocated club, or a Darwin-based standalone NT team that also plays in Alice Springs.

The taskforce has also considered a northern Australia team (Darwin based but also playing in Cairns), although that is a less likely option at this stage given it would be hard to have two home grounds so far apart, along with the need to play some games in Alice Springs.

The NT plan also includes an AFLW team and possibly a reserves team in second tier competitions such as the Victorian Football League (VFL) or maybe even the South Australian National Football League (SANFL) or West Australian Football League (WAFL).

Of course, that’s the footy case. The economic case is much more complex.

Dollars and cents

A standalone NT team would need significant financial assistance from the AFL and governments to be successful.

The AFL distributes its profits among its clubs, with smaller teams receiving a greater share as part of its equalisation aims.

Even with a significant AFL contribution of A$7.83 million per year, the taskforce forecasted an NT club would need the federal and NT government to fund an operation funding gap of $18.89 million annually.

This would include a new or upgraded stadium, which would “anchor the opportunity to bid for a 20th licence,” according to AFL NT chairman Sean Bowden.

The taskforce noted:

The economic benefit to the NT could be as much as $559 million if the new club was provided with a new stadium. An AFL team would create 160 full-time jobs, bring game day activation of the economy and add $116 million a year in economic output to the Territory economy.

Other considerations

Hand in hand with the economic benefits come the social impacts.

The NT has serious problems with diabetes and associated health problems, education and imprisonment.

The taskforce has committed to develop pathways for elite AFL and AFLW footballers and also create a safety net of social programs for all Territorians under the umbrella of the NT AFL team.

The taskforce stated having elite pro sports teams could inspire Indigenous children, particularly in remote communities.

A big decision to make

As the NRL continues to make its presence felt in the NT, the AFL faces a big decision as the Territory pushes for a standalone team.

The prospect of Australia’s only indigenous game boasting teams from Tasmania to the Top End, and from the east coast to the west coast in every capital city, would no doubt warm the hearts of all football supporters.

It might also be too much for the AFL, as custodians of the great Australian game, to resist.

Tim Harcourt 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. As the NRL edges into Darwin, does the AFL need to be more proactive in the NT? – https://theconversation.com/as-the-nrl-edges-into-darwin-does-the-afl-need-to-be-more-proactive-in-the-nt-257809

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin Moffitt, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, Monash University

In 2017, in the wake of Brexit and Donald Trump’s first election win, populism was named the “word of the year” by Cambridge University Press.

Almost a decade later, we might have thought the term’s popularity would have faded.

But with Trump back in power in the United States, the Reform Party polling very well in the United Kingdom, and Argentinian president Javier Milei wielding his chainsaw at public events, populism is very much still with us.

But what is populism? Is it a left or right phenomenon? And is it here to stay?

What is populism?

Put simply, populism is a political phenomenon that revolves around the central divide between “the people” and “the elite”.

Although there is agreement on this divide, academics tend to disagree on two things when it comes to populism.

The first is what kind of phenomenon it is. Is populism an ideology (that is, a belief system)? A strategy? Or is it a kind of performative political style?

Secondly, experts disagree on whether populism is a threat or corrective to democracy. Some think it can be both.

Populism: left or right?

Much of the confusion about populism stems from the fact that it can appear across the ideological spectrum.

This is because “the people” and “the elite” are flexible terms, and populists can characterise them in very different ways.

Right-wing populists tend to characterise “the people” in socio-cultural terms, and often combine their populism with nativism.

Think for instance, of how Trump’s “people” are coded as White Americans.

Or, how Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi evokes Hindu nationalism in his definition of “the people”.

Other prominent right-wing populist leaders include the likes of Viktor Orban of Hungary, Nigel Farage of the United Kingdom, Geert Wilders of the Netherlands, and Australia’s Pauline Hanson.

Left-wing populists, meanwhile, tend to characterise “the people” in socio-economic terms. They often combine their populism with calls for economic redistribution or shifts in power.

Examples include Latin American populist leaders like Evo Morales of Bolivia and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, who sought to bring the poor into their conception of “the people”.

In the US, Bernie Sanders’ 2016 and 2020 presidential primary campaigns put the working class and people in precarious work at the heart of his “people”.

Other examples of left-wing populism include the Podemos and Syriza parties in Spain and Greece respectively.

This also means the way populists tend to define “the elite” is quite different.

Right-wing populist targets often include:

• government and policy elites (think of Trump’s “drain the swamp”)
• cultural elites (Trump’s attacks on media as “fake news”)
• academics (attacks on the “ivory tower”) and
• transnational bodies (such as attacks on the United Nations).

These groups are connected in right-wing populist discourse and purported to be undermining “the people’s” livelihood by abetting increased immigration or the destruction of “traditional values”.

Left-wing populists tend to target business and power elites, who they see as fleecing “the people” economically and keeping them from expressing their popular power (think of Occupy Wall Street’s divide between the 99% and the 1%).

Populists also tend to have a suspicion of transnational organisations. But while right-wing populists tend to focus on the likes of the United Nations and World Health Organisation, left-wing populists are more suspicious of business transnationals such as the World Trade Organization or World Economic Forum.

Is populism here to stay?

After every major election where a populist leader or party succeeds, there is inevitably talk of a “populist earthquake”, “populist wave” or “populist tsunami”.

These metaphors suggest populism has come out of nowhere, and is causing a major and unexpected shock to the system.

But that’s simply not the case.

If anything, the story of 21st century politics has been one in which populism has become “normalised” and “mainstreamed”.

Populists are no longer merely “challenger” parties nor minor parties.

They increasingly are among the top three parties in their respective countries (particularly in Europe), and have won government in places from the US to India to the Netherlands to Italy to Greece.

This success has seen them steadily viewed as viable and “normal” political players.

Meanwhile, mainstream parties and leaders have increasingly adopted elements of populists’ discourse, platforms and political styles, as a way to compete with populists.

This, ironically, has had the effect of legitimising populists in many countries; it makes their policies and discourse look more “acceptable”.

It’s important to be cynical about any pundit crowing about the “death” of populism – or, on the flipside, the idea it has come out of nowhere.

Populism is here to stay. Acknowledging that can help us better understand its appeal, which in turn, can provide hints about how to best deal with it.

Benjamin Moffitt receives or has received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation.

– ref. What is populism? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-populism-249369

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna-Karina Hermkens, Senior Lecturer and Researcher, Anthropology, Macquarie University

Bougainville, an autonomous archipelago currently part of Papua New Guinea, is determined to become the world’s newest country.

To support this process, it’s offering foreign investors access to a long-shuttered copper and gold mine. Formerly owned by the Australian company Rio Tinto, the Panguna mine caused displacement and severe environmental damage when it operated between 1972 and 1989.

It also sparked a decade-long civil war from 1988 to 1998 that killed an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 civilians and caused enduring traumas and divisions.

Industry players believe 5.3 million tonnes of copper and 547 tonnes of gold remain at the site. This is attracting foreign interest, including from China.

Australia views Bougainville as strategically important to “inner security arc”. The main island is about 1,500 kilometres from Queensland’s Port Douglas.

Given this, the possibility of China’s increasing presence in Bougainville raises concerns about shifting allegiances and the potential for Beijing to exert greater influence over the region.

Australia’s tangled history in Bougainville

Bougainville is a small island group in the South Pacific with a population of about 300,000. It consists of two main islands: Buka in the north and Bougainville Island in the south.

Bougainville has a long history of unwanted interference from outsiders, including missionaries, plantation owners and colonial administrations (German, British, Japanese and Australian).

Two weeks before Papua New Guinea received its independence from Australia in 1975, Bougainvilleans sought to split away, unilaterally declaring their own independence. This declaration was ignored in both Canberra and Port Moresby, but Bougainville was given a certain degree of autonomy to remain within the new nation of PNG.

The opening of the Panguna mine in the 1970s further fractured relations between Australia and Bougainville. Landowners opposed the environmental degradation and limited revenues they received from the mine. The influx of foreign workers from Australia, PNG and China also led to resentment. Violent resistance grew, eventually halting mining operations and expelling almost all foreigners.

Under the leadership of Francis Ona, the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) fought a long civil war to restore Bougainville to Me’ekamui, or the “Holy Land” it once was.

Australia supported the PNG government’s efforts to quell the uprising with military equipment, including weapons and helicopters.

After the war ended, Australia helped broker the Bougainville Peace Agreement in 2001. Although aid programs have since begun to heal the rift between Australia and Bougainville, many Bougainvilleans feel Canberra continues to favour PNG’s territorial integrity.

In 2019, Bougainvilleans voted overwhelmingly for independence in a referendum. Australia’s response, however, was ambiguous.

Despite a slow and frustrating ratification process, Bougainvilleans remain adamant they will become independent by 2027.

As Bougainville President Ishmael Toroama, a former BRA commander, told me in 2024:

We are moving forward. And it’s the people’s vision: independence. I’m saying, no earlier than 2025, no later than 2027. My benchmark is 2026, the first of September. I will declare. No matter what happens. I will declare independence on our republican constitution.

Major issues to overcome

Bougainville leaders see the reopening of Panguna mine as key to financing independence. Bougainville Copper Limited, the Rio Tinto subsidiary that once operated the mine, backs this assessment.

The Bougainville Autonomous Government has built its own gold refinery and hopes to create its own sovereign wealth fund to support independence. The mine would generate much-needed revenue, infrastructure and jobs for the new nation.

But reopening the mine would also require addressing the ongoing environmental and social issues it has caused. These include polluted rivers and water sources, landslides, flooding, chemical waste hazards, the loss of food security, displacement, and damage to sacred sites.

Many of these issues have been exacerbated by years of small-scale alluvial mining by Bougainvilleans themselves, eroding the main road into Panguna.

Some also worry reopening the mine could reignite conflict, as landowners are divided about the project. Mismanagement of royalties could also stoke social tensions.

Violence related to competition over alluvial mining has already been increasing at the mine.

More broadly, Bougainville is faced with widespread corruption and poor governance.

The Bougainville government cannot deal with these complex issues on its own. Nor can it finance the infrastructure and development needed to reopen the mine. This is why it’s seeking foreign investors.

Open for business

Historically, China has a strong interest in the region. According to Pacific researcher Anna Powles, Chinese efforts to build relationships with Bougainville’s political elite have increased over the years.

Chinese investors have offered development packages contingent on long-term mining revenues and Bougainville’s independence. Bougainville is showing interest.

Patrick Nisira, the minister for commerce, trade, industry and economic development, said last year the proposed Chinese infrastructure investment is “aligning perfectly with Bougainville’s nationhood aspirations”.

The government has also reportedly made overtures to the United States, offering a military base in Bougainville in return for support reopening the mine.

Given American demand for minerals, Bougainville could very well end up in the middle of a battle between China and the US over influence in the new nation, and thus in our region.

Which path will Bougainville and Australia take?

There is support in Bougainville for a future without large-scale mining. One minister, Geraldine Paul, has been promoting the islands’ booming cocoa industry and fisheries to support an independent Bougainville.

The new nation will also need new laws to hold the government accountable and protect the people and culture of Bougainville. As Paul told me in 2024:

[…]the most important thing is we need to make sure that we invest in our foundation and that’s building our family and culture. Everything starts from there.

What happens in Bougainville affects Australia and the broader security dynamics in the Indo-Pacific. With September 1 2026 just around the corner, it is time for Australia to intensify its diplomatic and economic relationships with Bougainville to maintain regional stability.

Anna-Karina Hermkens receives funding from the Australian Research Council to follow and analyse Bougainville’s journey towards independence.

– ref. Bougainville wants independence. China’s support for a controversial mine could pave the way – https://theconversation.com/bougainville-wants-independence-chinas-support-for-a-controversial-mine-could-pave-the-way-254320

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Albert Palazzo, Adjunct Professor in the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at UNSW Canberra, UNSW Sydney

If war breaks out someday between the United States and China, one of the major concerns for Australia is the impact on its trade.

Our trade routes are long and exposed. Every year, thousands of merchant ships — bulk carriers, tankers, container ships and other types — visit Australian ports to deliver imported goods and pick up exports for delivery at distant ports.

When a cargo ship of petroleum leaves the Persian Gulf for refining in East Asia, then sails for Australia, the total trip is approximately 20,000 kilometres. The ship passes through lonely stretches of sea and numerous choke points, such as the Strait of Malacca in Southeast Asia, often within range of missiles and other weapons.

Such attacks could come from Chinese ships in the event of a war, or as we’ve seen in the Middle East with the Houthi rebels, they could also come from militants seeking to disrupt global shipping.

Australia’s current defence strategy cites the security of our “sea lines of communication and maritime trade” as a priority. The aim is to prevent an adversary from cutting off critical supplies to our continent in a war.

To achieve this, the government has embarked on the lengthy process of expanding the Royal Australian Navy surface and sub-surface fleet, including the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines.

As I explain in my forthcoming book, The Big Fix: Rebuilding Australia’s National Security, the problem with the government’s maritime plan is that it is built on a deeply flawed foundation and cannot deliver what it promises.

A flawed maritime plan

Defence documents insist on a need for the Australian Defence Force to be able to project naval power far from Australia’s shores in order to protect the nation’s trade. The presence of these warships would ostensibly deter attacks on our vital shipping.

However, those who developed the maritime plan do not appear to have considered whether the merchant ships delivering this trade would continue to sail to Australia in the event of a war — presumably with China.

The reality is that Australia’s A$1.2 trillion of exports and imports are carried in ships owned by non-Australian companies, flying foreign flags and largely crewed by citizens of other countries.

Decisions about whether to continue sailing to Australia during a conflict would be made in overseas boardrooms and capitals. The Australian government has no leverage to force the owners of these ships to continue to service our continent. Australia’s national interests may well not be the paramount concern.

Nor does the Australian government have the option to turn to Australian-flagged vessels. Australia’s shipping list contains only a handful of domestically owned and flagged cargo ships available in case of war.

In fact, the biggest vessel (by length) that the government could take into service is the Spirit of Tasmania IV ferry.

If all goes according to schedule, at some point in the 2040s, Australia will have at most 26 surface warships and perhaps eight nuclear-powered submarines the navy hopes to acquire through the AUKUS deal.

Due to training and maintenance requirements, the total number of vessels available at any one time would be more on the order of ten.

In other words, the government’s future maritime plan — costing hundreds of billion dollars — may result in just ten available ships at any given time to protect the nation’s trade over thousands of kilometres.

What could work instead

Fortunately, Australia has other options for safeguarding its trade that don’t necessitate the building of warships.

Our first investment in security should be diplomatic. The government should prioritise its investment in diplomacy across the region to promote security, including trade security.

Regional countries are best placed to secure the waterways around Australia, particularly from the most likely future threat: Houthi-like militants.

The Australian government should also modernise its shipping regulations and include in the budget provisions for war-risk insurance. Such insurance could compensate owners for the potential loss of ships and cargoes as an inducement for them to sail to and from Australia during war.

The government must also encourage greater investment in our national resilience. Currently, the biggest risk during a conflict is an interruption to the nation’s liquid fuel supply. We must greatly expand our on-shore reserves of fossil fuels in the short term, while initiating a nation-building project to electrify the economy in the long term. Electrification would eliminate a considerable vulnerability to national security.

Read more:
Fuel shortages and bare pharmacies: we need to talk about what a possible war with China could look like

Additionally, the government should identify and subsidise vital industries, such as fertilisers and certain medicines, which are essential to the continued functioning of our society in the event of a war. This would reduce our reliance on imports of critical materials.

Lastly, Australian industries, with the government’s assistance, should further diversify their trading partners to reduce over-dependence on one or two main destinations.

Trade is undoubtedly important to Australia and the government is correct to protect it. But it is also true that not all security problems are best answered by the military.

This is particularly important since the size of our planned fleet is obviously insufficient for the enormous task it will face. Either Australia invests in impossibly large numbers of warships or it takes a different path.

The art of war requires a balance between the desired ends and the means to achieve them. This simple statement underpins the formation of all good strategy, which a state ignores at its peril.

Unfortunately, in the case of the nation’s maritime plan, the ends and means are seriously out of whack. Instead of setting itself up for failure, the government needs to put aside its ineffectual maritime plan and choose the means that do align with the ends. Only then will it be possible to protect Australia’s trade.

Albert Palazzo was the long-serving director of War Studies for the Australian Army.

– ref. Australia’s plan to protect its trade in war is flawed. We can’t do it with nuclear submarines – https://theconversation.com/australias-plan-to-protect-its-trade-in-war-is-flawed-we-cant-do-it-with-nuclear-submarines-256557

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maria Maley, Senior Lecturer in Politics, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National University

Three and a half years ago, then-sex discrimination commissioner Kate Jenkins’ Set the Standard report was handed to federal parliament, commissioned after Brittany Higgins’ allegations of sexual assault in Parliament House, which had shocked the public and politicians alike. Since then, work has been underway to implement its 28 recommendations.

The report found unacceptable levels of sexual harassment, bullying and misconduct in parliamentary workplaces, and laid out a radical plan to create a standards regime. The plan would provide tools to deal with such conduct, and try to prevent it by changing the culture of parliament.

In 2025, parliament’s implementation of the Jenkins review is due to be evaluated by an external independent reviewer. Have the recommendations been implemented? What are the prospects for continued reform of conduct in the parliamentary workplace? Will the election of an historic number of women into parliament create pressure for further reform?

Action after the review

On February 8 2022, the first sitting day of federal parliament after the Jenkins review had been handed down, both houses of parliament made an historic statement of acknowledgement and apology to the victims of misconduct in its workplace. It stated:

We say sorry. […] This place and its members are committed to bringing about lasting and meaningful change to both culture and practice within our workplaces. We today declare our personal and collective commitment to make the changes required.

Parliamentarians committed to implement all 28 recommendations of the Jenkins review. A cross-party body was created to lead the implementation process.

Known as the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce, it had members from both houses of parliament, ministers and legislators, Labor, the Coalition, the Greens and one independent parliamentarian. It worked hard for three years to design and put in place the rules and mechanisms laid out in the Jenkins review, before disbanding in September 2024.

The magnitude of the changes parliament had to make should not be understated. Among many ground-breaking reforms, it involved developing codes of conduct and a body to enforce them by investigating complaints about breaches of the code.

In February 2023, both houses of parliament agreed on codes of conduct. In October 2024, an Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission was established to receive complaints, investigate and make findings about misconduct. There are seven commissioners, appointed from outside parliament, who are lawyers, former public servants, tribunal members and ex-ombudsmen. For the first time, there will be external independent review of parliamentarians’ conduct.

An independent human resources body for the parliamentary workplace was also created, known as the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service. These are huge achievements and represent historic reforms.

In line with Jenkins’ recommendations, the taskforce committed to an external independent review of parliament’s implementation of the Jenkins report.

But has it been effective?

It is hard to evaluate new rules, systems and bodies that are in their infancy, but one part of the new standards architecture does not represent best practice. After the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission has completed an investigation of a parliamentarian’s conduct, made findings and recommended sanctions, it will hand its report to the privileges committee in each house.

The privileges committees are made up of parliamentarians, almost exclusively members of the major parties. It is up to these committees to decide on any action to be taken. We won’t know if they depart from the commission’s recommendations, as standards commission reports are not public.

In the United Kingdom House of Commons, which represents best practice in this area, independent investigation reports are handed to a parliamentary committee called the Committee on Standards. Half the members of that committee are MPs, but half are “lay members” – that is, appointed members of the community, including lawyers and HR professionals.

The House of Commons established its standards regime in 2018, and has reviewed and improved it over time. Lay members were placed on the committee because it was evident MPs found it difficult to judge the conduct of their peers and struggled to hold them accountable.

Unfortunately Australia’s new standards system leaves decisions in the hands of parliamentarians, without the corrective and robustness that members of the public would provide. Will the federal parliament continue to reform and reshape its arrangements if they prove not to be robust enough?

Ongoing leadership is needed if parliament is to continue to address conduct issues, drive culture change and refine and develop its new standards regime. Some believe the culture of parliament has improved since the Jenkins review. Others disagree.

There are still recommendations of the review that have not been addressed. These include developing a ten-year strategy to increase diversity in the workplace, establishing a health and wellbeing service in parliament, and introducing an alcohol policy. Now that the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce has disbanded, who will continue to advance the reform process?

In October 2024, parliament decided to create a Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards. Its functions include reviewing the operation of the new codes and the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission.

This committee should play a leadership role on conduct and culture issues, but its membership is tightly restricted. The government dominates positions and all members must also be members of the privileges committees. Presiding officers are not permitted to sit on the committee, despite their important leadership roles and responsibilities in parliament. Crossbenchers and independent parliamentarians are largely locked out of the committee (only two positions are reserved for them), despite the fact they have often been the leading voices calling for culture change.

With the influx of many more women and new faces into the parliament after the election, there is an opportunity to press for continued reform and for membership of the joint committee to include diverse voices from across the parliament.

In 2021 Maria Maley worked as a consultant to the Jenkins Review.

– ref. Three years after the Jenkins report, there is still work to be done on improving parliament culture – https://theconversation.com/three-years-after-the-jenkins-report-there-is-still-work-to-be-done-on-improving-parliament-culture-257810

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Panos Karanikolas, Research officer, Melbourne Social Equity Institute, The University of Melbourne

In an emergency, police are often the first called to the scene. But they are rarely equipped to deal with complex mental health crises.

Following recent parliamentary inquiries and royal commissions there has been a push – led by researchers, advocates and some senior police officials – for a shift to a health-led and paramedic-first response.

South Australia is one of a number of states trialling a program based on a “co-responder” model. This means trained specialists accompany police to some mental health call-outs in the community.

So, how do co-responder programs work? And are they effective? Here’s what the evidence says.

The current situation

Mental health legislation in all states and territories gives police the power to use “reasonable force” to transport people who “appear to have a mental illness” to hospital to prevent harm.

In most cases, this involves police taking people experiencing mental health crises to hospital emergency departments, without help from mental health clinicians or paramedics.

Overburdened emergency departments have long wait times for mental health and are often inadequate at responding to people experiencing distress.

Those who need mental health support may not need a hospital stay.

One study found only one in five (23%) of those taken to emergency by police – usually after expressing intention to self-harm – were admitted.

The strain on police resources is also significant. For example, in New South Wales, police now respond to triple zero calls about mental health crises in the community every nine minutes (in Victoria it’s every ten).

Criminalising mental health

The mere presence of police alone can escalate already heightened emotional situations.

Police frequently lack training in mental health, with combative police culture and the militarisation of police training presenting significant problems.

Police often acknowledge they are ill-equipped to intervene in a mental health crisis.

Yet, about one in ten people who access mental health services have previously interacted with police.

These encounters can be risky and even deadly.

People who experience mental health issues are over-represented in incidents of police use of force and fatal shootings.

Police involvement can also lead to the criminalisation of people with mental health issues and disability, as they are more likely to be issued with charges and fines or be arrested.

Yet the main reason police take people to hospital is for self-harm or suicidal distress, and most are not deemed to be of risk to others.

What do people with mental health issues want instead?

In our research, conducted in 2021–2022, we interviewed 20 people across Australia who’d had police intervene when they had a mental health crisis.

Those we spoke to often had multiple experiences of police call-outs over their lifetime.

They told us excessive use of force by police had traumatising and long-term effects. Many were subject to pepper spray, tasers, police dogs, batons, handcuffs and restraints, despite not being accused of committing criminal offences.

For example, Alex*, said:

I was having an anxiety attack, and they pepper sprayed me. I had bruises all over my hands from the handcuffs they put on really roughly, even though I wasn’t under arrest. Then they took me to hospital.

In our study, people with mental health issues said they would prefer an ambulance-led response wherever possible, without police attending at all.

They also wanted to be linked to therapeutic and community-based services, including mental health peer support, housing, disability support and family violence services.

What are co-responder programs?

Co-responder programs aim to de-escalate mental health incidents, reduce the number of emergency department presentations and link people experiencing mental health crises with services.

These programs, such as the one being trialled in South Australia, mean mental health clinicians (for example, social workers, counsellors or psychologists) attend some mental health incidents alongside police.

Peer-reviewed research shows these kinds of responses can be effective when compared to traditional police-led interventions.

An evaluation of a co-response program in Victoria found the mental health response was quicker and higher quality than when police attended alone.

The success of programs in the United States and Canada shows many mental health crises can safely managed without police involvement, for example by addressing issues such as homelessness and addiction with health workers, and reducing the number of arrests.

Limited by a lack of resources

While the evidence shows co-responder schemes are valued by people with lived experience, they are often limited by under-resourcing.

Co-responder programs are not universally available. Often, they do not operate after usual business hours or across regions.

There is also a lack of long-term evaluations of these programs. This means what we understand about their implementation, design and effectiveness over time can be mixed.

More broadly, the mental health sector is facing significant and ongoing labour shortages across Australia, posing another resourcing challenge.

How can responses to mental health crises be improved?

Last year, the final report from the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System recommended paramedics should act as first responders in mental health crises wherever possible, instead of police, diverting triple zero calls to Ambulance Victoria.

However that reform has been delayed, with no indication of when it may be implemented.

A 2023 NSW parliamentary inquiry also remarked on the need to explore reducing police involvement.

Co-responder and ambluance-first models offer an improvement.

But our research suggests people with lived experience of mental health issues want more than ambulances replacing the police as crisis responders.

They need a mental health system that supports them and provides what they needed, when they need it: compassionate, timely and non-coercive responses.

*Name has been changed.

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

Panos Karanikolas is a member of the Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council (VMIAC). He received funding for this research from the National Disability Research Partnership as part of a partnership with VMIAC.

Chris Maylea receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, and national and state legal aid commissions.

Hamilton Kennedy 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. Police aren’t properly trained for mental health crises – but they’re often the first responders. Here’s what works better – https://theconversation.com/police-arent-properly-trained-for-mental-health-crises-but-theyre-often-the-first-responders-heres-what-works-better-257641

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jaime Comber, Senior Research Consultant in Energy Futures, University of Technology Sydney

We all want homes that keep us warm in winter and cool in summer, without breaking the bank. However, Australian homes built before 2003 have a low average energy rating of 1.8 stars out of 10. This means they’re often uncomfortable to live in and expensive to run.

There’s a strong case for a “renovation wave” of home energy upgrades across Australia. Reducing the use of fossil gas and improving the energy efficiency of existing housing by nearly 50% is also central to achieving net zero emissions by 2050.

Energy-saving upgrades such as solar panels, batteries, insulation, draught-proofing and hot water heat pumps also reduce the cost of energy bills. So while there’s an upfront cost, upgrades can reduce household expenses in the long run.

We wanted to find out what’s holding people back from getting energy-saving upgrades. We surveyed 100 Australian households and interviewed 19 people about their experiences. Our new research revealed five major barriers that stop these upgrades from being accessible to most households. Suppliers, governments and community organisations can all help overcome these barriers.

1. Information about upgrades is confusing and overwhelming

Households told us the amount of information out there about energy saving upgrades is overwhelming and sometimes conflicting. There are many different types of upgrades and product choices, making it challenging to identify which options provide the best value and what to do first. People found it difficult to know what information and which suppliers to trust.

Households need clear information from a trusted source about what their homes need. Many governments internationally, such as Scotland, provide online resources and tools to provide tailored advice to help with this.

Energy upgrade programs run by neutral community organisations and councils can also help, such as Rewiring Australia’s Electrify 2515 or Geelong Sustainability’s Electric Homes Program. These programs use their expertise to vet suppliers and ensure households receive good deals and high quality products.

2. Homes need to engage multiple suppliers and tradespeople

Many households worked on their home gradually, one upgrade at a time. Each upgrade involved a labour-intensive process of researching products, selecting companies, getting quotes and managing the disruptions caused by the installation. One Sydney homeowner told us:

The process of needing both a plumber and an electrician to change to induction cooking was frustrating. [We had to] to coordinate availability times and appliance delivery.

Australians need companies that can do multiple upgrades at once, to simplify and streamline the process. In Ireland, the government helped stimulate a market for organisations that can cover all the upgrades needed by a household.

3. Households are losing opportunities for straightforward upgrades

Every year, Australians invest billions in home renovations. They spent more than A$3 billion in the December 2024 quarter alone.

One of the best times to improve your home is during major renovations or when old appliances, such as hot water systems, break down. If you’re already facing disruptions and need to spend money, it can be an easy and more cost-effective way to increase your home’s energy efficiency at the same time.

Yet our research found advice on energy-saving upgrades was rarely provided to people undertaking major renovations or emergency replacements unless they asked for it. Households needed to seek out builders, architects and tradespeople who specialised in sustainability to get advice on an energy-saving renovation.

Providing energy upgrades to homes should be a standard component of modern renovations. Otherwise, households are missing out on easy and more affordable opportunities to get these upgrades.

4. Many tradespeople lack knowledge of energy-saving upgrades

Our research found tradespeople are the most common point of contact for households. They can be a valuable source of information and advice to facilitate upgrades. However, many households reported difficulty finding tradespeople knowledgeable about – and willing to install – energy-saving upgrades.

Some upgrades, such as solar panels, require specialised workforces. Others, such as hot water heat pumps are usually installed by regular plumbers and electricians.

Some tradespeople lack the knowledge to advise on energy-saving upgrades or need training to install new technologies to a high standard. This situation leaves households vulnerable to misinformation, with a shortage of skilled workers to do their upgrades.

Tradespeople require increased support and incentives to make energy-saving measures part of their skill set. This is especially true in regional areas, where there are fewer products and workers available.

5. The costs are too high for many households

A final, significant barrier was the cost of home upgrades, which often caused households to drop out early in the process. Australian households, particularly those with less disposable income, need more help with the upfront cost.

One way to do this is through targeted government rebates, which are currently only available in some regions. Another is affordable and accessible financing, like that available in Tasmania and the ACT. The national Home Energy Upgrades Fund could also be extended to make sure available finance matches the scale of the challenge.

Also needed are long-term reforms such as mandatory disclosure of energy performance when homes are sold and minimum energy standards for rental properties, which are currently only required in some jurisdictions in Australia. When these are both addressed we can make comfortable, and affordable homes the norm rather than the exception.

A worthwhile journey

Roadblocks aside, households also shared the joy and satisfaction of completing home energy upgrades. While the journey was often difficult, those who reached the end of the road were overwhelmingly pleased with the results. A homeowner who had installed solar panels and undertaken draught-proofing and insulation in Adelaide said:

It’s nice not to have huge electricity bills, and but I find it’s that day to day stuff of actually being comfortable that makes the biggest difference.

This research was undertaken by Jaime Comber, Kamyar Soleimani, Ed Langham, Nimish Biloria, Leena Thomas and Kerryn Wilmot from the University of Technology, Sydney.

Jaime Comber received funding for this research as part of the Energy Upgrades for Australian Homes (EUAH) initiative – a national collaboration between research, industry and government partners to enable scalable, community-led energy upgrades. EUAH is funded through the RACE for 2030 cooperative research centre, which includes contributions from the NSW Government, Government of South Australia and Knauf Insulation. The project is led by Climate-KIC Australia and Monash University.

Ed Langham undertakes contract research for government, community and consumer advocates, and the clean energy industry. This research was funded as part of the RACE for 2030 Cooperative Research Centre’s Energy Upgrades for Australian Homes project, which is co-funded by Australian Government, NSW Government, Government of South Australia and Knauf Insulation. Ed is also affiliated with Schumacher Institute for Sustainable Systems, based in the UK.

Nimish Biloria receives funding through the RACE for 2030 Cooperative Research Centre. This research was undertaken as part of the Energy Upgrades for Australian Homes initiative, which is funded in part by the NSW Government, the Government of South Australia, and Knauf Insulation. Before this, Nimish Biloria has received funding from various governmental bodies, not-for-profit organizations, and the Industry such as the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA), City of Sydney, AusIndustry Smart Cities and Suburbs Program, Transport for New South Wales, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Leigh Place Aged Care, Sydney, NSW, HMI Technologies.

– ref. These 5 roadblocks are standing in the way of energy-efficient homes – https://theconversation.com/these-5-roadblocks-are-standing-in-the-way-of-energy-efficient-homes-256906

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Graham, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Sydney

With the Reserve Bank of Australia easing monetary policy, interest rates are on the way down.

Already this year, mortgage pre-approvals had begun to rise, suggesting many aspiring home buyers are excited by the prospect of cheaper home loans.

With further cuts expected before the end of the year, some economists are predicting we could be on the cusp of another house price boom. Lower interest rates enable people to borrow more and potentially spend more on homes, bidding up prices.

So, how might the Reserve Bank’s actions affect home buying behaviour and the housing market more broadly? Research offers us some clues.

How rates affect prices

Research shows that when a central bank lowers its benchmark interest rate, mortgage interest rates usually follow suit.

We saw this following the Reserve Bank’s May decision to cut rates. Australia’s big four banks immediately announced similar reductions in rates for new and existing borrowers.

Lower rates reduce the cost of servicing a loan. This is a big deal for Australian home buyers, whose mortgages can be very large.

With the average house price in Australia now hitting about $1 million, an 80% loan saddles the typical home buyer with $800,000 in debt.

Back in March, the average interest rate on new mortgages was 6%. For the average million-dollar house, this implies a monthly repayment of around $4,796, using the standard formula for amortising loans.

After the Reserve Bank cut the cash rate by 0.25 percentage points, this implies a new monthly repayment of $4,669 – $127 less. That’s a small, but surely welcome, relief for mortgage holders.

Combined with the Reserve Bank’s prior rate cut in February, such borrowers are now saving more than $250 a month relative to the start of the year.

Everyone can borrow more

Lower rates can also improve the borrowing capacity of new home buyers.

Before a bank issues a new mortgage, it weighs the ability of a borrower to service the loan. It does this by considering the amount of income they’ll have left over after meeting typical expenses.

This is known as a borrower’s “net income surplus”, and the proportion of this that is used to service a loan is known as the “net surplus ratio”.

The maximum ratio is capped at 90%, but the typical mortgage is lent against a ratio of less than 70%.

If a household earns $100,000 per year and allocates 25% to expenses, it can afford $4,375 in monthly mortgage repayments at a 70% net surplus ratio.

Given the previous interest rate of 6%, this maximum monthly repayment implies the household can afford to borrow $680,000. But after a 0.25 percentage point rate cut, this household can now afford a $695,000 home loan.

And following the 0.50 percentage points of cuts we’ve seen since January, this household’s borrowing capacity is up by $30,000.

Pulling up the ladder

For an individual home buyer, this extra borrowing may be enough to secure that dream home. But the rate cut affects everyone at the same time, increasing the borrowing capacity of home buyers all over the country.

All of this extra mortgage credit feeds housing demand, which is likely to pour more fuel into an already overheated market.

Indeed, recent research indicates that a 0.25 percentage point cut in the cash rate will likely lead to a 1.5–2% increase in average house prices over the following one to two years.

That’s an extra $20,000 on the current $1 million average home value.

Research also suggests the impact of interest rates across local housing markets may be strongest where housing supply is tightest and houses are already more expensive.

Mortgages get bigger

While lower rates reduce the cost of a given mortgage, the average mortgage size needs to grow to keep up with higher prices.

Recall that the monthly payment associated with an 80% loan on a million-dollar home at 6% interest was $4,796. If the interest rate falls by 0.25 percentage points but house prices rise by 2%, the new monthly payment is little changed, at $4,762.

On top of this, the 20% down payment on that new home will now have increased – by $4,000.

Is there hope for first home buyers?

Despite the initial excitement of lower rates, aspiring home buyers may be disappointed to see the price of their dream home climb further out of reach. Some may end up no better off than they had been previously.

Others might try to snap up a home before lower rates are completely priced in – motivated by a fear-of-missing-out (FOMO). Research suggests it can take a year or more before house prices peak following a rate change.

And others still may decide to keep renting for the time being. Fortunately for them, recent research shows that changes in interest rates do not materially affect the rents that landlords charge their tenants.

Finally, one option is holding savings in the stock market while they wait, perhaps diversified via exchange-traded funds, as these assets usually rise in value following an interest rate cut.

It’s never a good idea to panic. It’s always important to think through your options before diving into the market. And remember, our discussion here is only for general information and is not intended to be financial advice. All investments carry risk.

James Graham has received research funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute and is a member of Sydney YIMBY.

– ref. With interest rates on the way down, could house prices boom? Here’s what research suggests – https://theconversation.com/with-interest-rates-on-the-way-down-could-house-prices-boom-heres-what-research-suggests-257724

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claudia Sandberg, Senior Lecturer, Technology in Culture and Society, The University of Melbourne

As we head into a new month of streaming, here’s a fresh wave of TV ready to challenge, transport and entertain you.

This month’s picks span genre and geography, from an eerie dystopian Buenos Aires, to a witty, awkward cyborg hero. Reality TV also gets a scandalous twist with the return of The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives. And Deaf President Now! delivers a powerful documentary on a historical milestone for Deaf rights.

There’s something for every kind of viewer — and every kind of mood.

The Eternaut

Netflix

Argentine sci-fi The Eternaut opens with a group of old friends in Buenos Aires meeting to play the card game truco on a hot summer night – when things suddenly get eerie.

The power goes out and a poisonous snowfall starts to blanket the city, killing thousands of people instantly. The survivors must get answers, quickly, as they start to grasp the true strength of their invisible enemy.

Based on Héctor Germán Oesterheld’s 1950s comic of the same name, The Eternaut portrays apocalypse through a deeply local and political lens – and in doing so has struck a chord in Argentina.

Directed by Bruno Stagnaro and led by Argentine film icon Ricardo Darín, as protagonist Juan Salvo, the series emphasises the power of collective heroism, and subtly critiques the current government’s uncompromising neoliberal approach.

It also pulses with national pride. Buenos Aires is not glamorized; real neighbourhoods are shown as classic Argentine tango, rock and folk plays in the background. Most importantly, Argentine identity is celebrated through themes of community spirit, grassroots resistance, and ingenuity in times of crisis.

The Eternaut feels both timely and timeless. Its slogan, “no one survives alone,” resonates for a country that has been long marked by both trauma and resistance efforts.

Its emotional weight is further deepened by Oesterheld’s legacy, including the tragic disappearance of him and his family members under the military rule of the 1970s.

With a second season on the way, this series is a powerful ode to Argentina.

– Claudia Sandberg

Read more:
Why Netflix’s The Eternaut is one of the most important shows to come out of Argentina in recent years

Murderbot

Apple TV+

Murderbot, Apple’s adaptation of Martha Wells’ science-fiction novella, All Systems Red (2017) is a satisfying combination of action, sci-fi and comedy. The show centres on a security unit (SecUnit) – an indentured private security cyborg – who secretly cracks the programming of its governing chip, granting itself autonomy.

Murderbot (Alexander Skarsgård), as it dubs itself, is both horrified and fascinated by humans. It’s far more afraid of eye contact, emotions and direct conversation than any physical danger. It’s also obsessed with mainlining media, particularly the ridiculous soap opera The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon.

Murderbot is hired, reluctantly, by some hippy scientists from a group of “freehold” planets – ones that exist outside the Corporation Rim – to act as protection on a scientific expedition. It goes quickly awry.

Wells’ award-winning novella, the first in an equally good series, limits us to the first-person perspective of the sarcastic cyborg. The series expands this frame beautifully, building on the source material’s dry humour to create a world that is both goofy and grounded.

And while there are serious themes at play, such as the way SecUnits are effectively enslaved, and the violent capitalist dominance of the Corporation Rim, the show is not heavy. Skarsgård offers a pitch-perfect performance of the awkward, anxious robot – its eyes flickering in horror as the scientists try to befriend it.

The opening minutes of the first episode are clumsy and on-the-nose, but ignore them. This otherwise well-designed and well-directed show cracks along with brisk, highly-entertaining 22-minute episodes.

– Erin Harrington

The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives, season two

Disney+

Season one of The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives had us hooked at the end of 2024. Now, the women have returned for an explosive 10-episode second season.

The reality series follows a group of Mormon women living in Utah. While the title may have you anticipating stories of faith and motherhood, the show is more focused on the personal lives of Mormon mothers who rose to TikTok fame due to scandal and infamy.

Season one saw the women grapple with balancing traditional Mormon values with their online lives and subsequent businesses (along with the fallout from a “soft-swinging scandal”). Season two further highlights infidelity, jealously and money.

Old characters are brought back, with finger-pointing ex-husbands and former alienated friends adding to the fray. Police are called, insults are thrown and many of the women delve deeper into their pasts.

The show flips flops between difficult moments such as processing the death of loved ones and difficult pregnancies, with parties and poorly executed party games. At one point the women play pregnancy roulette (a game no one should recommend), and take pregnancy tests which are anonymously read out to the group. Chaos ensues.

And after watching, you can search for the TikTok accounts of the stars and watch new drama unfold in real-time – or watch them “correct” and expand on past situations based on their own perspectives – far removed from show’s editors.

– Edith Jennifer Hill

Deaf President Now!

Apple TV+

Deaf President Now! is a stirring documentary about an iconic student uprising at Gallaudet University, the world’s only Deaf university, in 1988. The film chronicles how Deaf students – tired of being led by hearing leadership – decided to take things in their own hands come the 1988 Gallaudet presidential election.

With two of the three candidates being Deaf, the appointment of Elisabeth Zinser, a hearing candidate unfamiliar with Deaf culture, sparked outrage. Fuelled by decades of marginalisation, the students barricaded campus gates, burned effigies of Zinser and marched to the Capitol, calling for Deaf leadership in Deaf spaces.

It worked. The protest forced Zinser’s resignation and ushered in Irving King Jordan, Gallaudet’s first Deaf president.

The film juxtaposes historic footage with present-day interviews with key leaders of the movement, allowing them to tell their stories their own way. These reflections, delivered in American Sign Language (ASL), underscore how storytelling itself can become an act of resistance for Deaf people.

At the same time, the documentary wrestles with a paradox. Co-directed by Deaf activist Nyle DiMarco and hearing filmmaker Davis Guggenheim, the film exemplifies how Deaf storytelling still often has hearing involvement, especially when the story is packaged for a mainstream audience.

Nevertheless, the release of Deaf President Now! couldn’t have been more timely. With disability rights in the United States threatened under Trump, the film is a call to action. It reminds us Deaf culture isn’t just about language: it’s about Pride, self-determination and visibility.

– Gemma King, Samuel Martin and Sofya Gollan

Read more:
Deaf President Now! traces the powerful uprising that led to Deaf rights in the US – now again under threat

The Surfer

Stan, from June 15

In Lorcan Finnegan’s The Surfer, our unnamed protagonist (Nicolas Cage) is returning to his former Australian home from the United States. He is newly divorced, and trying to buy a beachside property to win back his family.

He takes his teenage son (Finn Little) for a surf near the property, but they are run off by an unfriendly pack of locals.

Returning alone to the beachside car park to make some calls, he is besieged there by the same gang, and this continues over the next several days. The gang is led by a terrifying middle-aged Andrew Tate-esque influencer, Scally (Julian McMahon), who runs the beach like a combination of a frat bro party and wellness retreat.

It is impossible to think of an actor other than Cage who could make a character like this so enjoyable to watch. Cage’s distinctively American confidence has no resistance to the terrifying switches of Australian masculinity from friendly to teasing to violent.

The Surfer is an absolute blast. A lot of the fun is in anticipating each dreadful humiliation – and it somehow turning out worse than you could have expected.

The Surfer beautifully captures the natural surroundings, stunning views and shimmering heat of Australian coastal summer. At the same time, a confined, semi-urban feature like a beachside car park feels bleak and uninviting.

As a film setting, it is both a spectacular wide-open vista and stiflingly claustrophobic – a perfect mechanism for The Surfer’s psychological horror.

– Grace Russell

Read more:
Dishevelled, dehydrated delirium: new Aussie film The Surfer, starring Nicolas Cage, is an absolute blast

Fred and Rose West: A British Horror Story

Netflix

The story of serial killers, Fred and Rose West, has been highly narrativised since their shocking crimes were discovered in Gloucester in 1994. The horror of the Wests lies in the juxtaposition of their seemingly ordinary suburban family and what was hidden beneath the foundations of their home.

Fred and Rose West: A British Horror Story takes us back to the moment of that revelation via previously unheard interview tapes and recordings of the property search – and of Rose while she was kept in a safe house. Family home videos add to the disturbing sense of the couple’s duplicity.

Interviews with the family of some of the victims emphasise the ongoing pain caused by the Wests, who preyed on vulnerable young women. Meanwhile, Fred’s interviews reinforce his determination to protect his wife: “I trained Rose to do what I wanted. That is why our marriage worked out so well.”

Many details of the Wests’ true horror, however, are absent: the incredible torture suffered by the victims; Fred and Rose’s own childhoods of abuse and Fred’s earlier assault of young girls, including his own sister; and any reference to the couple’s surviving children and the extraordinary abuse they suffered.

The horror of this new documentary is present in the couple’s habitual lies, their casual attitude to violence and murder, and their refusal to take responsibility for their many crimes. Yet it only scratches the surface of the Wests’ true horror story.

– Jessica Gildersleeve

The Four Seasons

Netflix

The Four Seasons follows three 50-something affluent couples as they holiday together over the course of a year.

Friends since college, the group’s easy camaraderie is upended by Nick’s (Steve Carroll) bombshell decision to leave his seemingly unsuspecting wife, Anne (Kerri Kenney-Silver), after 25 years of marriage. The announcement sends shockwaves through the other couples, testing their own relationships.

Adapted from Alan Alda’s bittersweet 1981 comedy of the same name, the series preserves the film’s narrative conceit, unfolding over four seasonal mini trips. Episode one opens in full spring at Nick and Anne’s bucolic lake house.

Given the luxury on display, you’d be forgiven for mistaking The Four Seasons as another entry in the “rich-people-behaving-badly” genre. But while there’s plenty of quips and snarky humour, what unfolds is ultimately much kinder – less a scathing indictment of wealth and more a gentle exploration of the banalities of love and middle age.

The show’s creators make the most of the expanded running time to humanise the sextet. The open marriage between gregarious Italian Claude (Marco Calvini) and husband Danny (a marvellous Colman Domingo) updates the source material without sliding into tokenism or homonormativity.

The prickly Type-A Kate (Tina Fey) and peacekeeper Jack (Will Forte) provide the series’ beating heart, in a relationship that feels lived-in and familiar.

Despite its focus on ageing, loss, mortality and grief, The Four Seasons offers comfort viewing at its finest, best enjoyed with a cup of tea and a loved one who’s known you for decades.

– Rachel Williamson

Gemma King receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Claudia Sandberg, Edith Jennifer Hill, Erin Harrington, Grace Russell, Jessica Gildersleeve, Rachel Williamson, Samuel Martin, and Sofya Gollan do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Scandalous mormons, dystopian Buenos Aires and Nicolas Cage down under: what to watch in June – https://theconversation.com/scandalous-mormons-dystopian-buenos-aires-and-nicolas-cage-down-under-what-to-watch-in-june-257549

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul N. McDaniel, Associate Professor of Geography, Kennesaw State University

Detroit’s population grew in 2024 for the second year in a row. This is a remarkable comeback after decades of population decline in the Motor City.

What explains the turnaround? One factor may be Detroit’s efforts to attract and settle immigrants.

These efforts continue despite a dramatic national shift in tone toward new arrivals. This includes executive orders from the second Trump administration targeting immigrant communities, international students and their universities, and cities in which immigrants live.

We study urban geography and immigrant integration. Despite these federal policy shifts, our own research and that of others has found that local leaders in cities across the U.S. are actively working to bring immigrants in and help them become part of local communities, generally for economic reasons.

Our recent publications on immigrant integration and immigrant community engagement show how and why cities adapt to changes in their population and economies.

Detroit and other former immigrant gateway metro areas such as Buffalo, New York; Cleveland, Ohio; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and St. Louis, Missouri experienced significant immigration in the early 20th century. These population booms were followed by a period of decline in immigration numbers.

Now these cities are using branding strategies to construct inclusive identities designed to attract and retain immigrants. It may be surprising to think of a city branding itself, but local governments often work with private nonprofits to shape and manage their city’s image. They try to build a unique and desirable identity for the city, differentiate it from competitors, and attract new businesses, residents and tourists this way.

Here are three reasons why Detroit and other cities want to welcome immigrants:

1. Encouraging economic growth and attracting talent

Immigration has a positive impact on the economy, research shows.

Local leaders in Detroit recognize that in a global economy, a thriving industrial sector and robust labor market are linked to the contributions of immigrant communities. They also understand that the growth of these communities brings positive economic ripple effects.

Immigrants are more likely than the general population to own their own businesses. Organizations such as Global Detroit encourage entrepreneurship through programs such as the Global Talent Retention Initiative, Global Talent Accelerator and Global Entrepreneur in Residence and provide resources for small businesses.

Immigrants also fill labor needs, from high-tech fields such as engineering and research to manual labor sectors such as construction and food service.

The City of Detroit Office of Immigrant Affairs promotes economic development and immigrant integration through education, English as a second language programs, economic empowerment and community resources.

These efforts are paying off by attracting immigrants to the city.

This economic impact extends to tourism as well. The region’s marketing campaigns embracing diversity shape how visitors perceive the region. The Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau spotlights the unique experiences the city’s diverse neighborhoods offer to tourists.

2. Enhancing community and regional resilience

Regional resilience describes a region’s ability to withstand and adapt to challenges such as economic shocks and natural disasters. Cities like Detroit that are still trying to bounce back from deindustrialization know from experience how critical this is.

Immigration contributes to regional resilience, research shows. In addition to supporting local economies and strengthening the labor force, the arrival of immigrants in Detroit has helped offset native-born population decline, stabilizing the overall population and bolstering local tax bases.

According to our analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data, the Detroit-Warren-Dearborn metro area grew by 1.2%, from a total population of 4,291,843 in 2010 to 4,342,304 in 2023.

According to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the Detroit metro area’s native-born population decreased by 58,693 people during that 13-year period, while the foreign-born population increased by 109,154. The top five countries of origin for immigrants in the metro area are India, Iraq, Mexico, Yemen and Lebanon.

From 2023 to 2024, the metro area’s population gained 40,347 immigrants and lost 11,626 native born residents – resulting in a population gain of 28,721.

Efforts to welcome immigrants in Detroit and its surrounding communities contributed to this trend of immigrant population growth offsetting overall population decline.

3. Promoting social cohesion and enhanced civic engagement

Successful place brands are rooted in inclusion and a strong civil society. Detroit’s rich tapestry of cultures in areas such as Dearborn and Hamtramck creates a vibrant regional identity.

Organizations such as Global Detroit’s Welcoming Michigan actively support local grassroots efforts to build mutual respect and ensure that immigrants are able to participate fully in the social, civic and economic fabric of their hometowns.

Examples include Global Detroit’s Social Cohesion Initiative, Common Bond and Opportunity Neighborhoods. These initiatives help bring neighborhood residents of various backgrounds together to share their cultures, support each other’s small businesses and socialize. Such programs strengthen the region’s democratic foundations and enhance its appeal as a welcoming and inclusive place to live.

Forging a way forward

Detroit has found that welcoming immigrants and integrating them into the life of the city is one way to navigate the economic, political and cultural challenges it faces.

And it is not alone in embracing this strategy. Other cities practicing similar strategies include Baltimore; Boise, Idaho; Charlotte, North Carolina; Dallas; Dayton, Ohio; Louisville, Kentucky; New Orleans; Pittsburgh; Roanoke, Virginia; and Salt Lake City.

Although not all cities choose to pursue such strategies, in those that do, local leaders signal a region ready for a globalized future.

Paul N. McDaniel previously received funding from the National Geographic Society, served on the Content Advisory Board for the Welcoming Standard and on the Steering Committee for Welcoming America’s One Region Initiative, and is a member of the American Association of Geographers.

Darlene Xiomara Rodriguez was co-PI on funding received from the National Geographic Society and served on the national pilot program with Welcoming America One Region Initiative’s Steering Committee and Program Evaluation Team.

– ref. Detroit’s population grew in 2023, 2024 − a strategy to welcome immigrants helps explain the turnaround from decades of population decline – https://theconversation.com/detroits-population-grew-in-2023-2024-a-strategy-to-welcome-immigrants-helps-explain-the-turnaround-from-decades-of-population-decline-255557

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ivis García, Associate Professor of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University

When powerful storms hit your city, which neighborhoods are most likely to flood? In many cities, they’re typically low-income areas. They may have poor drainage, or they lack protections such as seawalls.

New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward, where hundreds of people died when Hurricane Katrina broke a levee in 2005, and Houston’s Kashmere Gardens, flooded by Hurricane Harvey in 2017, are just two among many examples.

With those disasters in mind, the Federal Emergency Management Agency made a big change to its Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide in 2023. The agency began encouraging cities, towns and counties to address equity in their hazard mitigation plans, which outline how they will reduce disaster risk.

Local governments have an incentive to follow those federal guidelines: Those that want to receive FEMA hazard mitigation assistance – money which can be used to repair aging infrastructure like roads, bridges and flood barriers – or funding from other programs such as dam rehabilitation have to develop local mitigation plans and update them every five years.

The new guidance required cities to both consider social vulnerability among neighborhoods in their disaster mitigation planning and involve socially vulnerable communities in those discussions in ways they hadn’t before.

However, as the U.S. heads into what forecasters predict will be an active 2025 hurricane season, that guidance has changed again. The Trump administration’s new FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide 2025 talks about public involvement in planning but strips any mention of equity, income or social vulnerability. It mentions using “projections for the future” to plan but removes references to climate change.

Who is most at risk in hurricanes, and why

Hurricanes and other storms that cause flooding don’t affect everyone in the same way.

A legacy of redlining and discrimination in many U.S. cities left poor and minority families living in often risky areas. These neighborhoods also tend to have poorer infrastructure.

In the past, local mitigation plans just focused on fixing roads or protecting property in general from storm damage, without recognizing that socially vulnerable groups, such as low-income or elderly populations, were more likely to be hardest hit and take much longer to recover.

The FEMA 2023 guidance encouraged communities to consider both the highest risks and which neighborhoods would be least able to respond in a disaster and address their needs.

The equity requirement was designed to ensure that local plans didn’t just protect those with the most wealth or political influence but considered who needs the help most. That might mean providing information in multiple languages in emergency alerts or investing in flood prevention in neighborhoods with aging infrastructure like roads, bridges and flood barriers.

How New York City’s 2024 plan helped

New York City’s 2024 Hazard Mitigation Plan, for example, included a thorough social vulnerability assessment to identify neighborhoods with high percentages of people who were living in poverty or were older, disabled or weren’t fluent in English.

Knowing where disaster risk and social vulnerability overlapped allowed the city to boost investments in flood protection, emergency communication and cooling centers during summer heat in neighborhoods such as the South Bronx and East Harlem. These neighborhoods historically faced some of the greatest risks from disasters but saw little investment.

Further, New York’s plan calls for expanding outreach and early warning systems in multiple languages and enhancing infrastructure in areas with high concentrations of Spanish speakers. These kinds of changes help ensure that vulnerable residents are more likely to be better protected when disaster strikes.

Why is FEMA dropping that emphasis now?

FEMA’s reasoning for the guidance change in 2025: make it quicker and easier to get plans approved and unlock federal funding for projects like flood barriers, storm shelters and buyouts in areas at high risk of damage.

It’s a pragmatic move, but one that raises big questions about whether residents who are least able to help themselves will be overlooked again when the next disaster strikes.

And FEMA isn’t alone — other agencies, like the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and its Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery program, have made similar changes to their own disaster planning rules. Community Development Block Grant funds for disaster recovery are flexible and can be used for things like rebuilding homes and businesses, restoring infrastructure and helping local economies recover.

What this means for low-income areas

Some experts worry that the changes might mean low-income and other at-risk communities will be ignored again when cities develop their next five-year mitigation plans. Research from the Government Accountability Office shows that when something is required by law, it gets done. When it’s just a suggestion, it’s easy to skip, especially in places with fewer resources or less political will to help.

But the short-lived rules may have already helped in one important way: They made cities and states pay attention to social vulnerability, climate change and the needs of all their residents.

Many local leaders have learned the value of using data to understand where socially vulnerable residents face high disaster risks. And they have a model now for involving communities in decision-making. Even if those steps are no longer required, the hope is that these good habits will stick.

Where and how communities invest in disaster protection affects who stays safe and who faces higher risks from flooding, hurricanes and other disasters. When government policy shifts, it’s not just about paperwork – it’s about real people.

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. Hurricane season is here, but FEMA’s policy change could leave low-income areas less protected – https://theconversation.com/hurricane-season-is-here-but-femas-policy-change-could-leave-low-income-areas-less-protected-256985

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

The button was pressed to electronically distribute preferences for the New South Wales Senate today. All analysts expected Labor to win the final seat, for a three Labor, two Coalition, one Green result. Instead, One Nation won the final seat, for a two Labor, two Coalition, one Green and one One Nation result. This is a One Nation gain from the Coalition.

Six of the 12 senators for each state and all four territory senators were up for election on May 3. Changes in state senate representation are measured against 2019, the last time these senators were up for election. State senators elected at this election will start their six-year terms on July 1.

Senators are elected by proportional representation in their jurisdictions with preferences. At a half-Senate election, with six senators in each state up for election, a quota is one-seventh of the vote, or 14.3%. For the territories, a quota is one-third or 33.3%.

Final primary votes in NSW gave Labor 2.63 quotas, the Coalition 2.06, the Greens 0.78, One Nation 0.42, Legalise Cannabis 0.24, Trumpet of Patriots 0.17, the Libertarians 0.13 and Family First 0.11. One Nation defeated Labor’s third at the final count by 0.89 quotas to 0.87.

Labor was hurt by the Greens being well short of quota, and getting preferences from left sources that would otherwise have gone to Labor, while right-wing parties united behind One Nation. The Greens only crossed quota at the second last count, and their small surplus wasn’t enough for Labor to catch One Nation.

I covered Senate results from other states and territories earlier and this week.

In the later piece, I talked about the two-party count. This isn’t finished yet in NSW or Victoria, but one side of politics usually needs about 57% of the two-party vote in a state to win four of the six senators (four quotas). This is very difficult to achieve.

In Tasmania, Labor won the two-party count by over 63–37, but missed out on three senators owing to Jacqui Lambie. In South Australia, Labor won by over 59–41 and the left won a 4–2 Senate split. In Victoria, Labor leads by nearly 57–43, and the left won a 4–2 Senate split. In Western Australia and NSW, Labor won by less than 56–44 and the Senate was tied 3–3 between left and right.

Out of the 40 Senate seats that were up at this election, Labor won 16 (up three), the Coalition 13 (down five), the Greens six (steady), One Nation three (up two) and Lambie and David Pocock one each (both steady). The Coalition lost senators in all mainland states, with Labor gaining in Victoria, South Australia and Queensland, and One Nation in NSW and WA.

The 36 state senators elected in 2022 won’t be up for election until 2028. For the whole Senate, Labor has 28 out of 76, the Coalition 27, the Greens 11, One Nation four and there are six others. Labor will need either the Greens or the Coalition to reach the 39 votes needed for a Senate majority.

In 2022, the United Australia Party (UAP) won a seat in Victoria. During the last term, Lidia Thorpe defected from the Greens, Fatima Payman from Labor and Tammy Tyrrell from the Jacqui Lambie Network. The six others are these four, Pocock and Lambie.

Counting Thorpe, Payman and Pocock as left and the UAP as right, the left overall has a 42–32 Senate majority, with two others (Lambie and Tyrrell).

National Senate primaries and results by state

Nationally, Labor won 35.1% of the Senate vote (up 5.0% since 2022), the Coalition 29.9% (down 4.4%), the Greens 11.7% (down 0.9%), One Nation 5.7% (up 1.4%), Legalise Cannabis 3.5% (up 0.2%), Trumpet of Patriots 2.6% and Family First 1.5%.

Labor won 34.6% nationally in the House of Representatives, so their Senate vote was 0.5% higher than in the House. It’s likely the lack of a Teal option helped Labor in the Senate.

This table shows the senators elected in each state and territory in 2025, with the seat share and vote share at the bottom. Despite the losses in NSW and WA, Labor and the Greens are overrepresented in the Senate relative to vote share.

Others are greatly underrepresented, but this is because most other parties are either left or right-wing, and their preferences go to Labor, the Greens, the Coalition or One Nation rather than to more others.

For the combined left to lose control of the Senate in 2028, they would need to lose four seats. The only seat that looks vulnerable is the WA seat won by Payman for Labor in 2022. Even if the Coalition wins in 2028, the Senate is likely to be hostile to the Coalition.

At a double dissolution election, all senators are up for election at the same time. If the Coalition wins in 2028, a double dissolution would be an option to seek to change a hostile Senate.

Preference distributions for WA and Queensland

Final WA primary votes gave Labor 2.53 quotas, the Liberals 1.86, the Greens 0.90, One Nation 0.41, Legalise Cannabis 0.28, the Nationals 0.25 and Australian Christians 0.19.

One Nation defeated Labor’s third at the final count by 0.90 quotas to 0.86. When the Nationals were excluded, the Liberals got a large surplus. As in Victoria, Liberal preferences heavily favoured One Nation over Labor and Legalise Cannabis.

But Legalise Cannabis preferences were not as good for Labor as in Victoria, with Labor winning these preferences by 13 points over One Nation, rather than 24 points in Victoria.

Final Queensland primary votes gave the Liberal National Party 2.17 quotas, Labor 2.13, the Greens 0.73, One Nation 0.50, Gerard Rennick 0.33, Trumpet of Patriots 0.26 and Legalise Cannabis 0.25.

Both the Greens and One Nation easily reached a quota on the distribution of preferences, with Rennick finishing far behind on 0.55 quotas.

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. Shock NSW Senate result as One Nation beats Labor to win final seat – https://theconversation.com/shock-nsw-senate-result-as-one-nation-beats-labor-to-win-final-seat-257888