Cats and milk often go hand in hand in popular culture. But on dairy farms, cats do much more than enjoy a saucer of milk – their mousing skills are essential. That’s because dairy farms often have a problem with rats and mice due to their large grain and feed stores and a continuous supply of water and shelter.
Cats are thought to have been domesticated to protect granaries from rodents some 9,000 years ago. In our time, cats are widely used to keep rat and mouse numbers down around houses, farms, horse barns and factories.
But while you can make tax deductions on the upkeep of your working cats in the United Kingdom and United States, Australia’s thousands of working farm cats are not eligible. By contrast, farm dogs and horses in all three countries are recognised for the work they do. Their care is a tax-deductible business expense.
Our new research explores how cats are used as working animals on dairy farms. We found many dairy farmers preferred using cats over using poison for rodent control. For all farmers, the cost of sterilisation was too much, which can create problems of unchecked breeding. Registration fees are also a barrier.
If the care and upkeep of working cats was tax deductible, Australian farmers could manage their cats better without extra financial strain.
Why are working cats needed?
Dairy farming is Australia’s third-largest agricultural industry after cattle and wheat, and Australia is the world’s fourth-largest dairy exporter.
Within the industry, there are major changes underway. Small dairy farms are declining due to economic pressures. Financial returns are dropping and recent natural disasters have taken their toll.
To find out about how small and medium scale dairy farms rely on cats, we interviewed 15 dairy farmers in New South Wales and Queensland who had between three and 60 cats on their farms. Our sample of farmers is not representative, as we restricted the study to dairy farmers who had enrolled their cats in a free desexing program.
The dairy farmers we interviewed had come to rely heavily on their cats for ratting and mousing. Cats were not optional – they were essential for pest control.
Dairy farms are increasingly automated, with automatic milking machines taking over from humans. But rodents can cause real problems by nibbling through crucial wiring and rubber hosing, causing expensive and disruptive equipment breakdowns. As one farmer told us:
cats are cheaper than an electrician bill.
Another said:
we haven’t had [an equipment] breakdown in seven years since the cats turned up […] That on its own is worth thousands, plus no [downtime] with the milking machines out of action […] yeah, the pluses are just massive.
Rodents also eat and contaminate cattle feed and can spread diseases to livestock and humans. More mice and rats means more snakes, posing risks to humans, working dogs and cattle.
One farmer told us:
the cats […] work everyday where baits are only ever any good while you’ve got bait out.
Most of the farmers we interviewed said they would never farm without cats. “We couldn’t do without them now. Otherwise, you’d be overrun with rats”, one said.
Of our 15 interviewees, ten had previously relied on rat poison. The farmers told us poison was less effective, expensive and unsafe. Rat poison poses risks to wildlife, working dogs, pets and children. Rats and mice are also developing resistance to some poisons. Rat poison has to be continuously applied and can be expensive.
One farmer said:
baiting’s not great for the other wildlife, and we’ve got dogs and I’d prefer not to use the baits.
By contrast, the farmers told us working cats offered a long-term, low-maintenance solution. Farmers reported fewer rodents and fewer snakes.
Farmers clearly saw their cats as working animals. As one said:
they’re dead set working cats because of […] the saving on repairs, the saving on baiting and yeah, the cats are doing their job, they’re basically working for
me.
While some farmers saw the cats as purely functional, others appreciated their companionship, especially during solitary early morning milking.
Is it time for cat deductions?
While our interviewees reported strong upsides to using working cats, there are downsides.
Registration fees and permits can cost thousands of dollars, as an average sized dairy might have 20 or more working cats. There are other costs too, from desexing to tick treatment to vaccination to microchipping. Our recent research suggests desexing would reduce the risk from cats going feral.
As one farmer said:
the cost is too great to have to get all those cats done [sterilised] ourselves.
For farmers, these fees may be having unintended consequences such as added stress from financial worries and damage to mental health if farmers are forced to euthanise cats and kittens for population control. Waiving registration costs for working cats and providing funding to ensure cats are desexed would reduce the impact on wildlife.
At present, the Australian Tax Office recognises horses and dogs as working animals – provided they have been “trained for their role from a young age” and are not pets.
State and federal laws would have to be updated so working cats would be considered domestic cats, not feral cats, and biosecurity laws in states such as Queensland would have to be clarified. Tax rules would have to be changed too, as working cats would not meet the training requirement for working animals, given cats are natural predators of rodents.
But if these changes were made and farm cats were legally recognised, dairy farmers would have clear incentives to ensure their working cats are desexed, vaccinated and cared for.
Jacquie Rand is a registered specialist veterinarian in small animal internal medicine and has an honorary position at the University of Queensland. She is the executive director and chief scientist of the Australian Pet Welfare Foundation, which is largely funded by philanthropic gifts but also receives funding from the Queensland government’s Gambling Community Benefit Fund, the city of Ipswich and from many state, national and international granting bodies. She is affiliated with the Australian Veterinary Association and the Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists,
Caitlin Crawford is employed by the Australian Pet Welfare Foundation as a research officer.
Rebekah Scotney is affiliated with the Veterinary Nurses Council of Australia, the Australian and New Zealand Laboratory Animal Association and the Australian Psychological Society.
Pauleen Bennett and Vanessa Rohlf 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.
Great question Zavier, and one that palaeontologists (scientists who study fossil animals and plants) are interested in all around the world.
And let’s face it, kids of all ages (and I include adults here) are fascinated by dinosaurs that break records for the biggest, the longest, the scariest or the fastest. It’s why, to this day, one of most famous dinosaurs is still Tyranosaurus rex, the tyrant king.
These record-breaking dinosaurs are part of the reason why the Jurassic Park movie franchise has been so successful. Just think of the scene where Dr Alan Grant (played by New Zealand actor Sam Neill) is stunned by the giant sauropod dinosaur rearing up to reach the highest leaves in the tree with its long neck.
But how do scientists work out how big and heavy a dinosaur was? And what were the biggest dinosaurs that ever lived?
Calculating dinosaur size
In an ideal world, calculating how big a dinosaur was would be easy – with a nearly complete skeleton. Standing next to the remarkable Triceratops skeleton on permanent display at Melbourne Museum makes you realise how gigantic and formidable these creatures were.
By measuring bone proportions (such as length, width or circumference) and plugging them into mathematical formulas and computer models, scientists can compare the measurements to those of living animals. They can then work out the likely size and weight of dinosaurs.
Every palaeontologist has their own favourite formula or computer model. Some are more accurate than others, which can lead to heated arguments!
In palaeontology, however, we are not always blessed with nearly complete skeletons. In a process called “taphonomy” – basically, what happens to the bones after an animal dies – dinosaur skeletons can be broken up and bones lost.
The more fragmented the remains of a dinosaur are, the more error is introduced into size and weight estimates.
The reconstructed skeleton of a Patagotitan on display in London’s Natural History Museum. Getty Images
Enter the titanosaurs
If we could travel back in time to South America during the Cretaceous period (about 143 million to 66 million years ago), we’d find a land ruled by a group of four-legged, long-necked and long-tailed, plant-eating sauropods. They would have towered over us, and the ground would shake with every step they took.
These were the titanosaurs. They reached their largest sizes during this period, before an asteroid crashed into what is now modern day Mexico 66 million years ago, making them extinct.
There are several contenders among the titanosaurs for the biggest dinosaur ever. Even the list below is controversial, with my palaeontology students pointing out several other possible contenders.
But based on six partial skeletons, the best estimate is for Patagotitan, which is thought to have been 31 meters long and to have weighed 50–57 tonnes.
A couple of others might have been as big or even bigger. Argentinosaurus has been calculated to be longer and heavier at 30–35 metres and 65–80 tonnes. And Puertasaurus was thought to be around 30 metres long and 50 tonnes.
But while the available bones of Argentinosaurus and Puertasaursus suggest reptiles of colossal size (the complete thigh bone of Argentinosaurus is 2.5 metres long!), there is currently not enough fossil material to be confident of those estimates.
An artist’s reconstruction of Spinosaurus, thought to have been the largest carnivorous dinosaur. Getty Images
Spinosaurus rules North Africa
An ocean away from South America’s titanosaurs, Spinosaurus lived in what is now North Africa during the Cretaceous period.
By a very small margin, Spinosaurus is currently thought to have been the largest carnivorous (meat-eating) dinosaur, weighing in at 7.4 tonnes and 14 meters long. Other Cretaceous giants are right up there, too, including Tyranosaurus rex from North America, Gigantosaurus from South America, and Carcharodontosaurus from North Africa.
Spinosaurus is unique among predatory dinosaurs in that it was semi-aquatic and had adapted to eating fish. You can see in the picture above how similar its skull shape was to a modern crocodile.
Palaeontology is now more popular than ever – maybe because of the ongoing Jurassic Park series – with a fossil “gold rush” occurring in the Southern Hemisphere.
The latest Jurassic Park movie – in cinemas from July 2025 – is about finding the biggest prehistoric species from land, sea, and air.
Members of the public (known as “fossil forecasters”) are making new discoveries all the time.
So, who knows? The next discovery might turn out to be a new record holder as the biggest or longest dinosaur to have ever lived. There can be only one!
Hello curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au
Nic Rawlence receives funding from the Royal Society of New Zealand Marsden Fund.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karinna Saxby, Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne
The mental health of trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians is worse than the general population and the gulf is getting wider.
This is the first time the mental health of trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians has been tracked over time for so long using data that represents the whole population.
Here’s why we’re so concerned, and what we can do to help alleviate the distress.
Since 2022, the HILDA survey has included questions on gender identity. This allowed us to identify people who were trans (whose gender identity is not typically associated with their assigned sex at birth), nonbinary (who describe their gender outside of the female/male binary), gender-diverse (whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth, including people who don’t identify as male or female), or cisgender (whose gender identity and expression matches the biological sex they were assigned at birth).
So we were able to compare the mental health of Australians who identified as trans, nonbinary or gender-diverse to that of Australians who identified as cisgender.
What we found
Across the 22-year period, trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians consistently reported worse mental health than cisgender Australians.
Between 2001 and 2010, they scored five to seven points lower on mental health, which is a clinically relevant difference.
Between 2011 and 2022, the difference was even greater. Trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians scored eight to 13 points lower than cisgender Australians. We found these increasing disparities over time were even greater for young people (under 30 years old).
These trends remained even after controlling for other characteristics such as household income, education level and living in rural areas.
What’s behind this?
Several studies and reports indicate what could be behind these differences in mental health.
These experiences have profound and lasting impacts on mental health and health behaviours, such as seeking help for physical and mental health issues.
Trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse populations are more likely to experience gender dysphoria – the psychological distress that can arise when a person’s gender identity does not align with their sex assigned at birth.
Gender-affirming medical care (for instance, with puberty blockers, hormonal therapy or surgery) can help combat gender dysphoria. However many aspects of this care, particularly surgeries, are not currently funded in the public system in Australia. And not everyone has access to gender-affirming care, including young people who wish to start puberty blockers in Queensland’s public health system.
What can we do?
Improving trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse mental health requires urgent action at multiple levels if we are to avoid the devastating consequences for these Australians and their families.
1. Reduce stigma and discrimination
We need to reduce stigma and discrimination against trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians. We know discrimination or stigma directed at an individual (including harassment or abuse) and broader structural discrimination (for instance, through laws and policies or broader community attitudes) impacts the mental health of minority groups.
Governments must implement policies that protect against discrimination, including banning harmful conversion practices in all states and territories. These practices, which attempt to change or suppress a person’s gender identity, have been shown to cause lasting psychological harm.
Trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians also need legal protections in education, employment, and health care to help lessen and prevent the negative mental health impacts of discrimination and social exclusion.
2. Make services inclusive
Trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse community-controlled organisations should be adequately funded to provide peer support, mental health services and training for other health workers.
There must be a concerted effort to depoliticise this area of health care and acknowledge that gender-affirming care is essential, evidence-based medical treatment.
We hope the National Health and Medical Research Council review of clinical guidelines for gender-affirming care in young people will help consolidate the evidence and counter misinformation to ensure that trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse Australians receive the care they need.
Trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse people, and organisations that represent them, coauthored the paper mentioned in this article. We also value the contributions of Ricki Spencer and Ian Down (from LGBTIQ+ Health Australia).
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, contact QLife (call 1800 184 527 or chat online, 3pm–midnight, every day) or call Lifeline on 13 11 14 (24 hours a day).
Karinna Saxby has previously received funding from the Department of Health and Aged Care.
Dennis Petrie receives funding from the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care, the Department of Social Services, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council and the Medical Research Future Fund.
Glenda Bishop receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund.
Zoe Aitken receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Medical Research Future Fund.
Sara Hutchinson Tovar 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.
Signing off his 26-year parliamentary career three years ago, the retiring Labor MP Joel Fitzgibbon lamented a power imbalance that allowed the majority party routinely to railroad the national legislature.
In a refreshingly frank valedictory speech, the former minister claimed the House of Representatives had become nothing more than a rubber stamp for executive government.
And he criticised the practice of compelling MPs to vote in blocs, irrespective of their own judgement:
not only do governments typically hold the numbers; they are using them more ruthlessly within their party structures […] party discipline is strangling our democracy in an era when the world is changing so dramatically.
Voters apparently share his unease. The combined primary vote share of the Labor-Coalition duopoly has been declining since the 1980s from around 90%, to around 68%. The remainder is going to minor parties and independents.
Now, successive opinion polls suggest both major parties are likely to fall short of the 76 seats required for a simple majority. And Fitzgibbon has fretted in The Australian that the primary threat to national politics and governance may come from voters themselves. That is, if they should have the temerity to install crossbench MPs beyond the discipline of the two major parties.
Labor and Coalition supporters alike are now shaking in their boots, as are the parties of government. Of course, the minor parties have the champagne on ice, relishing the chance to hold the country to ransom. The Greens are salivating.
Holding the country to ransom? Salivating? It’s as if the voters have no deliberative intent.
What’s changed for Fitzgibbon? Perhaps this is nothing more than the familiar slouch into conservative chauvinism to which so many ex-parliamentary Labor men succumb.
The rightward drift of progressively-striped former legislators is a well-worn path, with names like Graham Richardson, Stephen Loosely, Gary Johns and John Black springing to mind.
Teal threat
Less openly canvassed are the unconscious gender biases, and the major party self-interests that are driving them.
One answer to “what’s changed?” is the electoral embrace of the Teals – seven conspicuously competent professional women defiantly occupying once blue-ribbon Liberal seats. These new MPs (six of whom came in at the last election) were successful because voters wanted to break free of the suited duopoly and the limited solutions it proffers.
While hardly radical, they have been outspoken on climate change policy, corruption in public administration, and the absence of serious structural taxation reform. To old-guard politicos for whom traditional binaries dominate, their needling from the crossbenches may seem almost insolent.
Their presence, which involved circumnavigation of the established party “meritocracies”, is viewed by many in the major parties as an existential threat to the two-party system. Yet it is the widely perceived mediocrity of the two-party dominance that is their very attraction to voters.
Denying people power
Fitzgibbon is hardly the first to hyperventilate about the perils of a hung parliament where crossbench MPs may have a role in assuring confidence and supply numbers to one side or the other. But his solution to this alleged problem is novel to the point of bizarre.
Despite calling Australia’s system “hyper-partisan”, he proposes that Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton might collude ahead of the election in order to agree
that whoever has the most seats post-election will be guaranteed supply and confidence for 18 months hence.
Leaving aside that the independent MPs are in fact, independent, Fitzgibbon’s fix flies in the face of the very chamber whose dwindling primacy he formerly eulogised. That is, he proposes an arrangement between two opposing blocs that would pre-emptively close out non-major party MPs, despite their authority deriving from the people.
This is not to say the question of any crossbench intentions in a hung parliament situation are beyond the limits of public conjecture. But a preventative neutering of their participation in the construction of a parliamentary majority (should it come to that) is a drastic and potentially counter-representative act.
Hung parliaments can work
Unlike many democracies, Australia has limited experience of minority governments at the national level.
The only recent example was the aforementioned Gillard-Rudd term (2010–2013). Notwithstanding leadership turbulence, a record number of bills were passed, despite the sense of numerical precarity and the need for clause-by-clause negotiation with cross bench MPs.
Legislating 561 bills – much higher than the previous Labor term – it also encountered higher resistance from the Coalition opposition, with 22% of bills opposed outright. Important legislative reforms included
That parliament’s reputation proved the old adage that history is written by the winners. By repealing the carbon price and hobbling other priorities, the subsequent Abbott government and its media enablers were able to depict the 44th parliament as extreme and dysfunctional.
It was neither.
Two-party cartel
In the current parliament, Teals like Allegra Spender have shown more interest in bold tax reform, while others like Zali Steggall have pushed harder on climate change and truth in political advertising.
It cannot be known which of the current crop of crossbench MPs will be re-elected or whether there will be more. But the trend in successive elections suggests Australians are tiring of the old parties and are looking for other options.
Suggesting clever tricks to freeze out these voters smacks of desperation and worse, cartelism. It is likely to hasten the demise of blocs which only recently combined to write new election campaign finance laws that give them the edge.
Voters are awake to this.
Mark Kenny does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Luxury hiking developments are popping up around Australia – fancy lodges, hot showers and extensive walking infrastructure.
While many opt for these deluxe alternatives to a backpack and tent, they can also stop independent hikers with smaller budgets from accessing national parks if not carefully planned.
National parks are open to all and are arguably some of Australia’s least locked-up lands. They are fundamental to Australia’s tourism offerings with 53 million domestic visits to national parks in New South Wales alone.
National parks are meant to support nature and community. Can remaking sections of them for a select clientele get in the way of these goals?
Why do we have national parks?
The primary purpose of national parks is to conserve nature and cultural heritage. A secondary purpose is for people to engage with and enjoy nature.
Parks agencies use many tools to support conservation and recreation, including building infrastructure or limiting the number of visitors.
Outdoor infrastructure – such as raised boardwalks on hiking trails and cabins for accommodation – can increase visitor comfort and improve physical access. It also helps protect habitat and reduces soil damage and problem behaviours by visitors.
Capping visitor numbers can prevent crowding and lessen physical and social impact. For example, visitors to Lord Howe Island is limited to the number of guest beds.
Infrastructure such as raised boardwalks can serve to protect the environment by reducing soil erosion and compaction — the Overland Track, Tasmania. Alex Cimbal/Shutterstock
Today’s national park visitors come from diverse backgrounds. They increasingly use parks as meeting places and have less outdoor survival experience. There is also a growing number of people seeking – and willing to pay for – “hero” experiences – exciting luxury activities that showcase unique aspects of a place.
This means parks agencies must cater to a broad audience. To do this, they are diversifying their offerings from basic experiences to include higher-cost adventures.
An example of the latter includes multi-day hiking routes, such as the Three Capes Track in Tasmania and the Milford Track in New Zealand.
They take place on well-established, high-quality trails maintained by parks agencies and catering to a limited daily number of independent fee-paying walkers. can you please say how much they cost, with a link? Readers will be interested.
Often, the trips are guided by private operators at extra cost.
While these projects may boost tourism, some fear they may exclude visitors on a budget.can we please attribute this – who holds these fears, and can we please provide a link?
Everyday Australians may find it increasingly difficult to enjoy national parks — Wilsons Promontory National Park, Victoria. I. Noyan Yilmaz/Shutterstock
Privatisation by stealth?
One of the main concerns with these developments is that private businesses profit from public assets with little benefit to conservation, the primary purpose of national parks.
Private operators are building luxury lodges and being granted concessions to operate guided hiking experiences in national parks.
Independent hikers can still visit the Three Capes Track in Tasmania, though the experience is no longer as accessible, affordable or spontaneous as it once was.
Increased infrastructure on the Three Capes Track in Tasmania has reduced accessibility for some hikers. Mandy Creighton/Shutterstock
The Falls to Hotham Alpine Crossing master plan
People are raising similar concerns about the Falls to Hotham Alpine Crossing master plan.
This master plan proposes a multi-day walking experience across the Victorian Alps.
It is a clear example of the tension between tourism development and accessibility.
A 2022 community consultation by the Victorian government noted “high levels of concern” for the plan. It centred on increased visitor numbers, the prospect of unprepared and inexperienced walkers, environmental damage, and the costs to stay in huts.
The proposal includes a longer walk, environmentally sensitive track upgrades, and new campsites.
The inclusion of commercially operated huts “tailored for those who desire an added level of comfort” is a concern for those opposed to the development.
Concerned community members worry the Falls to Hotham Alpine Crossing master plan will negatively impact the environment and attract unprepared and inexperienced walkers. Ainslie Holland/Shutterstock
Are there pros to development?
Advocates argue private investments in protected areas can support well-managed, sustainable tourism opportunities while generating revenue for conservation.
License fees from luxury lodges and guided tours may help fund park maintenance. Visitor caps and track upgrades protect against environmental degradation and offer controlled access that minimises visitor impact and reduces seasonality of visitation.
But opponents worry these projects prioritise profit over public access.
If national parks become exclusive spaces for wealthier visitors, they risk losing their purpose as places for all Australians to enjoy.
Sustainable tourism
The primary and overriding purpose of national parks is nature conservation. Recreation and tourism are secondary and should not undermine the park’s environmental and cultural integrity.
Visitor caps and serviced experiences are part of the toolkit to cater to an increasingly diverse population while protecting the very attraction visitors come to see.
Tourism development in protected areas, however, needs a social license and local community engagement is an important sustainability principle.
For national parks to operate as they are intended, free or low-cost options and access must be available alongside premium experiences.
This means that low-cost experiences such as facilitated by tent platforms or simple shelters need to be part of the spectrum of offerings.
National parks belong to everyone and their management must reflect this.
While tourism developments can offer benefits, they must not come at the cost of accessibility, affordability, or most importantly, environmental integrity.
Often, taxpayer money is invested in establishing these experiences.
Pascal Scherrer has received research funding from the NSW NPWS in the past.
Isabelle Wolf has received funding from the NSW NPWS in the past.
Jen Smart receives funding from the NSW NPWS Hawkweed Eradication Program for her PhD Scholarship.
Editor’s note: this article contains examples of offensive and abusive language.
Researchers have been reporting a disturbing rise in sexist, misogynist behaviour from students in school classrooms.
This includes Australian studies which show how the extreme views of the “manosphere” (online anti-women and anti-women’s empowerment communities) have infiltrated schools.
Last year, my colleagues and I reported on abusive behaviour of male students towards their teachers. This included students using language such as “slut” or describing women as “rapeable”. It also included reports of male students working in groups to physically intimidate female students and staff.
Following on from our research on schools, we are surveying university teachers about their experiences of antisocial language and behaviour.
So far, we have received 59 survey responses and done seven interviews. Most respondents so far are women and academics from minority backgrounds.
They are a mix of permanent and casual academic tutors and lecturers. They come from all around Australia, and teach mainly in education courses as well as the humanities, business, politics, health, human resource management and journalism.
Interviewees have spoken of a noticeable increase in disrespectful behaviour from some first- and second-year male students.
This includes examples of students watching sport or doing online betting during classes. As one respondent told us:
Young male students eat snacks during class and swing on chairs. They leave crumbs and rubbish behind and leave their chairs out and they leave all of the equipment. It’s someone else’s job to clean up after them.
Women in positions of authority are not respected. One respondent told us how male students question the teacher’s expertise in front of class members, saying “this has surged over the past year”.
Or as another respondent said:
They call their female tutor Miss. Hey Miss. Sorry Miss.
But the behaviour can extend beyond rudeness to intimidation. As one interviewee told us:
During tutorials over the past three years, behaviour has grown progressively worse from [a] largely Anglo-Australian cohort of [education students]. They sit exclusively in groups (gangs) and isolate students from other cultural backgrounds.
Another respondent described how students will gang up after classes and physically intimidate her.
If one male has a question, they wait until after class. All of the males stay behind. They are tall. They surround me to ask their question. If they don’t like the answer they ask, ‘who is higher than you? I will take this higher’. The behaviour is designed to unsettle. They have the power as a group. They know it.
Respondents also described a growing number of examples in which male students are readily expressing homophobic and sexist views during class discussions.
As one interviewee told us:
The anti-LGBTIQA+ backlash from students really shook me […]. There have been several examples of transphobia, homophobia and misogyny in my classes especially in recent years; managing these interactions in class is getting increasingly difficult as opinions are becoming more polarised.
Another academic described how misogyny and homophobia had become part of their classrooms:
Just last week, a student expressed their opinion that it was ‘OK to persecute lesbian and gay people’ because ‘they do not have children and contribute nothing to society, just like childless, single straight women’ and therefore do not ‘deserve the protection of the law’.
Problems with student evaluations
Previous Australian research has shown how anonymous student evaluations can be a platform for abusive comments against university staff.
This includes homophobic, violent and sexist commentary.
Academics in our study also singled out evaluations an an issue. One noted how she was described as “bossy” or “opinionated” for discussing diversity content with male teaching students.
Others described how they were changing the way they were teaching in relation to students’ aggression and potential feedback.
I have stopped challenging students for fear of the feedback as I am on probation. I can’t do a good job ethically and morally. I don’t want to teach any more. I am so sad about it. I grieve for it.
Another respondent explained:
Student evaluations are a real problem in this context, they have always been problematic, but with an ever more polarised discourse and the necessity to take firmer stands in class [this] make you inevitably unpopular with some students […].
Research has shown student evaluations can often contain abusive and harmful language. AYO Production/ Shutterstock
Staff are not supported
A key theme from our research so far is that, on the whole, staff do not feel supported by their universities when they experience sexism, abuse or other threatening behaviour from students. There may be official policies and guidelines but these are not stopping problematic behaviour.
Respondents told us staff are “made to feel they don’t know how to handle the situation enough” or as though “I am the problem”.
Another tutor reported:
The culture is that we need to be soft in our approach and keep students happy. They have to work to survive, they are under pressure. As a tutor, there isn’t backup or support for behaviour issues.
Our research is ongoing and draws on a modestly sized sample. Yet it suggests there are concerning trends not only in our schools but in our universities.
Universities should be places that nurture informed social critique and different viewpoints. But not to the point of abuse.
This suggests diversity education – around gender, race, sexuality and acceptance of differences – should be a core part of the university curriculum for all students.
Universities also need to do more to foster cultures that support and respect women and minority groups.
Professor Ed Palmer, Dr Sarah McDonald, Dr Eszter Szenes and Dr Daniel Lee all contributed to the research on which this article is based.
Samantha Schulz 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.
It feels like everything is slowly but surely being affected by the rise of artificial intelligence (AI). And like every other disruptive technology before it, AI is having both positive and negative outcomes for society.
One of these negative outcomes is the very specific, yet very real cultural harm posed to Australia’s Indigenous populations.
The National Indigenous Times reports Adobe has come under fire for hosting AI-generated stock images that claim to depict “Indigenous Australians”, but don’t resemble Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Some of the figures in these generated images also have random body markings that are culturally meaningless. Critics who spoke to the outlet, including Indigenous artists and human rights advocates, point out these inaccuracies disregard the significance of traditional body markings to various First Nations cultures.
Adobe’s stock platform was also found to host AI-generated “Aboriginal artwork”, raising concerns over whether genuine Indigenous artworks were used to train the software without artists’ consent.
The findings paint an alarming picture of how representations of Indigenous cultures can suffer as a result of AI.
How AI image generators work
While training AI image generators is a complex affair, in a nutshell it involves feeding a neural network millions of images with associated text descriptions.
This is much like how you would have been taught to recognise various objects as a small child: you see a car and you’re told it’s a “car”. Then you see a different car, and are told it is also a “car”. Over time you begin to discern patterns that help you differentiate between cars and other objects.
You gain an idea of what a car “is”. Then, when asked to draw a picture of a car, you can synthesise all your knowledge to do so.
Many AI image generators produce images through what is called “reverse diffusion”. In essence, they take the images they’ve been trained on and add “noise” to them until they are just a mix of pixels of random colour and brightness. They then continually decrease the amount of noise, until the correct image is displayed.
The process of creating an AI image begins with a text prompt by the user. The image generator then compares how the words in the prompt associate with its learning, and produces an image that satisfies the prompt. This image will be original, in that it won’t exist anywhere else.
If you’ve gone through this process, you’ll appreciate how difficult it can be to control the image that is produced.
Say you want your subject to be wearing a very specific style of jacket; you can prompt it as precisely as you like – but you may never get it perfect. The result will come down to how the model was trained and the dataset it was trained on.
We’ve seen early versions of the AI image generator Midjourney respond to prompts for “Indigenous Australians” with what appeared to be images of African tribespeople: essentially an amalgam of the “noble savage”.
Cultural flattening through AI
Now, consider that in the future, millions of people will be generating AI images from various generators. These may be used for teaching, promotional materials, advertisements, travel brochures, news articles and so on. Often, there will be little consequence if the images generated are “generic” in appearance.
But what if it was important for the image to accurately reflect what the creator was trying to represent?
In Australia, there are more than 250 Indigenous languages, each one specific to a particular place and people. For each of these groups, language is central to their identity, sense of belonging and empowerment.
It is a core element of their culture – just as much as their connection to a specific area of land, their kinship systems, spiritual beliefs, traditional stories, art, music, dance, laws, food practices and more.
But when an AI model is trained on images of Australian Indigenous peoples’ art, clothing, or artefacts, it isn’t also necessarily fed detailed information of which language group each image is associated with.
The result is “cultural flattening” through technology, wherein culture is made to appear more uniform and less diverse. In one example, we observed an AI image generator produce an image of what was mean to be an elderly First Nations man in a traditional Papuan headdress.
This is an example of technological colonialism, wherein tech corporations contribute to the homogenisation and/or misrepresentation of diverse Indigenous cultures.
We’ve also seen pictures of “Indigenous art” on stock footage websites that are clearly labelled as being produced by AI. How can these be sold as images of First Nations art if no First Nations person was involved in making them? Any connection to deep cultural knowledge and lived experience is completely absent.
Besides the obvious economic consequences for artists, long-term technological misrepresentation could also have adverse impacts on the self-perception of Indigenous individuals.
While there’s currently no simple solution, progress begins with discussion and engagement between AI companies, researchers, governments and Indigenous communities.
These collaborations should result in strategies for reclaiming visual narrative sovereignty. They may, for instance, implement ethical guidelines for AI image generation, or reconfigure AI training datasets to add nuance and specificity to Indigenous imagery.
At the same time, we’ll need to educate AI users about the risk of cultural flattening, and how to avoid it when representing Indigenous people, places, or art. This would require a coordinated approach involving educational institutions from kindergarten upwards, as well as the platforms that support AI image creation.
The future goal is, of course, the respectful representation of Indigenous cultures that are already fighting for survival in many other ways.
Glen Stasiuk received funding from Australian Research Council (ARC) in 2010 – project completed 2015
John McMullan 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.
Our new study, published this week in the journal Science Advances, compared changes in 745 proteins found in seabirds with and without plastics in their stomachs.
We focused on young sable shearwaters (seabirds, Ardenna carneipes). They were less than 90 days old and appeared healthy. Despite their young age, the birds with plastic in their stomachs had signs or symptoms of neurodegenerative disease, as well as kidney and liver disease.
We also found evidence of significant damage to the lining of the stomach, likely from microplastics that became embedded in the tissue. It meant proteins that should only be found in the stomach were detected circulating in the blood.
While our findings don’t directly relate to human health, this work paints a distinct picture of the insidious and slow impacts plastic can have on a bird’s health – even if it doesn’t kill them.
Some studies have found health impacts of plastics (such as increased exposure to heavy metals), while others have not. Why is that?
An initial study looking at plastic exposure might start out by just looking at what’s known as a single response. This could be the condition of the animal’s body, for example.
While important, such studies don’t account for the diversity of conditions an animal could realistically experience. If you’ve recently been unwell, you might respond to a health test differently than if you were fully healthy. Birds will, too.
Recently, a handful of more in-depth studies have documented a range of plastic impacts on birds; these were harmful, but not severe enough to cause death. For example, birds that consumed plastic had higher cholesterol, were smaller and had shorter wings, and had plasticosis, an inflammatory condition that leads to scar tissue formation.
But consider a loved one with an invisible, chronic health condition. To a stranger they might appear healthy, but their quality of life is actually impacted by their condition. The same is true for birds and other wildlife.
Thankfully, we have more fine-grained tools at our disposal.
The diversity of shapes, types, and colours of plastic items ingested by a single sable shearwater chick in 2022. Jennifer Lavers
Studying proteins
Proteomics is the study of protein composition and regulation, and the role these play in the body. While commonly used in the medical field and other disciplines, omic technologies (including proteomics) are rarely used in wildlife studies.
Certain key proteins are well-known markers of disease. For example, we found low levels of a protein called albumin in the blood of birds with plastic. Having less albumin is a sign of poor liver function.
Birds with plastic also had less of a protein called brain-derived neurotrophic factor. This protein plays a crucial role in the growth and survival of neurons (nerve cells), including those involved in the development of the birds’ ability to recognise each others’ song.
Our results suggest while not all birds die from plastics exposure, they may have health issues and suffer from reduced cognitive functions, including those needed for courtship (such as song). This may make it more difficult for them to successfully find mates and produce chicks.
Many of the health impacts from plastic exposure have been documented beyond the point of exposure – that is, the stomach. While our findings revealed notable damage to the stomach lining, changes have now been reported in liver, kidneys, spleen and brain of these chicks.
This suggests ingested plastic can have wide-ranging, potentially whole body consequences, and we’ve barely scratched the surface.
We must listen closely
It’s important to remember that all the worrying health impacts we found via protein analysis were documented in very young birds that were seemingly healthy.
So what does this mean for other wild species that haven’t yet benefited from proteomics analysis or other in-depth studies? Could these findings change our understanding of how microplastic exposure affects human health? This is a task for future research, but it’s not an easy one.
The reality is, we may never have comparable data for most of the world’s wild species. For our lab alone, it’s taken a decade of laying the groundwork to understand the complexity of this problem in a single bird species, one that’s relatively accessible and easy to work with.
For humans, we may never be able to put a number on the impact of plastics because of the huge array of personal, environmental and social determinants of health.
So, there’s a lot we can learn from these birds. As a society, it’s in our best interest to listen to the story they’re trying to tell us.
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to acknowledge research collaborator Alexander Bond from the Natural History Museum, UK.
Jennifer Lavers (Métis Nation ᓲᐊᐧᐦᑫᔨᐤ) receives funding from Detached Cultural Organisation and Pure Ocean Fund.
Alix de Jersey receives funding from Pure Ocean Fund, Holsworth Wildlife Endowment, the Natural History Museum, and Detached Cultural Organisation.
Jack Rivers Auty receives funding from The Pure Ocean Fund, Holsworth Wildlife Endowment, The Natural History Museum Science Investment Fund, and Detatched Cultural Organisation.
But we still don’t know a lot about the economic, employment and financial experiences of this community. Recent legal changes around how gender is administratively recorded in New Zealand may change this, however.
Our new research uses the growing body of data from a wide range of government agencies to look at the economic outcomes for people belonging to the trans and non-binary community – in particular in terms of employment and wage gaps.
The results should be a source of some concern for this already marginalised group.
Identifying the community
Our study focused on transgender individuals whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth, as well as those who do not identify as exclusively male or exclusively female. Different terms exist for this group, such as non-binary, transgender person of another gender, or gender-diverse.
Under the previous Labour government, New Zealand took steps to recognise people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. For example, the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Act 2021 introduced a new self-identification process for amending the sex on birth certificates.
And since 2013, Waka Kotahi (the New Zealand Transport Agency) has allowed people to define the gender they identify with on their driver license application.
We used data from the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), a database hosted by Stats New Zealand. The IDI uses data from agencies such as the Department of Internal Affairs, NZTA and Inland Revenue.
Stats NZ identifies and links the same individuals across different data sets using a particular characteristics (for example, name and birth date). Each person is then assigned a unique identifier.
To identify transgender and non-binary people, we used two datasets. The first was birth records, which contain assigned sex at birth. The second was self-reported gender in driver license applications.
We compared the driver license gender with birth-record sex to identify cisgender people (those whose birth record sex matches their driver license gender), transgender people (those whose birth record sex does not match their driver license gender which is either male or female), and gender-diverse people (those whose driver license gender is gender diverse).
Our research then mapped out socio-demographic characteristics of transgender and gender diverse people compared to cisgender people.
Measuring the gaps
Looking at the data, we found transgender and gender-diverse people were, on average, younger, less likely to be married or have children, and more often living in major urban areas when compared to cisgender people.
In addition, a substantially higher share of gender-minority people are prescribed medication for anxiety or depression.
Using various datasets from the IDI, we used empirical models to estimate two different economic outcomes for the period April 2022 to March 2023.
The first measured whether someone was categorised as “not in employment, education or training” (NEET). Our second indicator looked at differences in earnings from wages and salary.
We found individuals who identified as gender-minority were significantly less likely to be in employment, training or education compared to cisgender people. Transgender women and gender-diverse individuals were 10-12 percentage points more likely to be NEET than similarly situated cisgender men.
These trends also extended to earnings. Gender-diverse people earned around 60% less than cisgender men – in part due to less stable employment patterns.
Our study has limitations, of course. For example, it relies on data from those who have driver licences, which can vary by age or location. In 2018, rural residents aged 25-64 had higher full-licence rates (88%) compared to their urban counterparts (77%).
Moreover, not all transgender and gender-diverse people change their gender when applying for or renewing their driver license.
But the 2023 Census questionnaires on sexual orientation, gender identity and variation of sex characteristics presents the opportunity to learn more and establish a much needed, robust evidence base about this population.
The authors thank Tabby Besley, Managing Director at InsideOUT Kōaro, for her feedback.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Artist’s impression of a red dwarf (left) and a white dwarf orbiting each other, resulting in radio pulses.Daniëlle Futselaar/artsource.nl
In the past three years, astronomers have discovered a mysterious new type of radio source. We call these long period transients.
These objects emit bright radio signals that repeat every few minutes to every few hours. We have found about a dozen examples, but we still don’t understand which type of star could emit radio pulses in this peculiar way.
In new research published in Nature Astronomy today, we have discovered a new long period transient. Furthermore, we identified the stars responsible for the mysterious radio flashes – a breakthrough never achieved before.
Spoiler alert: they’re not the typical “cosmic lighthouses” you might expect.
What is a cosmic lighthouse?
You may have heard of cosmic objects called pulsars – they’re a type of neutron star.
Neutron stars are the remnants of extremely massive stars when they’ve reached the end of their life. Pulsars are rotating neutron stars; as they spin, they emit a beam of radio emission that we can detect on Earth. This is why pulsars are often called cosmic lighthouses – they “show” us a radio pulse on every rotation. We know of thousands of pulsars in our Milky Way galaxy.
You might think that sounds extremely similar to the mysterious long period transients I just described, and you’d be right.
However, the pulsars we know typically flash every second. These new objects show much slower repetition. According to theories about the evolution of neutron stars, pulsars that rotate this slowly shouldn’t exist.
So, is there another option?
White dwarfs are the other suggested source of long period transients. White dwarfs are the remnants of low-mass stars (like our Sun) at the end of their life, making them the smaller sibling of neutron stars.
The central stations of the International LOFAR Telescope, a radio telescope in Europe. LOFAR/ASTRON, CC BY
A cosmic detective hunt
Using the international LOFAR radio telescope in Europe, my colleagues and I discovered a new object: ILTJ1101+5521.
Ploughing through the LOFAR data, we found seven bright pulses. Taking a closer look at the timing of these pulses, we found that they arrive every two hours (every 125.52978 ± 0.00002 minutes to be exact).
This made ILTJ1101 a new example of a long period transient.
We compared the location of the radio pulses to optical catalogues, which list stars and galaxies that telescopes have observed in visible light. And there it was – we found there was a faint red star exactly at the location of our radio pulses.
However, the properties of the radio pulses indicated these radio signals couldn’t be generated by this red star alone.
A hidden companion
Many stars have a stellar friend. The two stars are bound to each other and orbit each other. Known as binary stars, such pairings are incredibly common. About 50% of the stars with a mass similar to our Sun have a binary companion.
To investigate whether this was true for the red star at the location of our radio pulses, we took a spectrum. A spectrum shows how much light the star emits at each wavelength.
Each type of star emits a unique spectral “fingerprint”. Over different observations, we saw the fingerprint of the red star shift to slightly longer or shorter wavelengths. This effect is known as the Doppler effect, indicating that the star is moving away from us in one observation and moving towards us in the other. That’s similar to how the pitch of an ambulance siren changes as it moves towards you and then recedes in the distance.
The only way this type of movement can be achieved is if the red star is in a binary with another star. We found that the two stars orbit each other every two hours– that’s their orbital period.
It matches up perfectly with the puzzling slow repetition of the radio pulses we detected.
What is the companion?
Alongside spectra, we also had photometry measurements of ILTJ1101. Similar to the spectra, the photometry measurements show the amount of light the stars emit at different wavelengths. However, the spectra only covered a limited wavelength range, whereas the photometry measurements were taken over a much broader range of wavelengths.
From these photometry measurements we found a small excess of blue light. This light is not expected from the red star alone, and cannot be produced by a neutron star.
A white dwarf, however, perfectly fit the brief.
This is how we figured out that the radio pulses from ILTJ1101 are coming from a white dwarf in a binary system with a red star.
Mystery solved? Not quite
Does this mean all long period transients are white dwarf binaries? Probably not.
Some of these long period transients show very clear pulsarcharacteristics. Additionally, the periods of some long period transients are only 18 minutes, which would be extremely short for an orbital period of a white dwarf binary. There is one other long period transient that is likely to be associated with a white dwarf.
The current landscape of long period transients is sparse. We need to find more of them to get a full understanding of these mysterious objects and how they work.
However, we now know that white dwarfs, with a little help from a stellar friend, can produce radio pulses just as bright as neutron stars.
Iris de Ruiter acknowledges support through the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery (OzGrav) and the CORTEX project of the research programme NWA-ORC which is (partly) financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO).
Anthony Albanese didn’t mince words in responding to Donald Trump’s refusal to grant Australia an exemption from the United States’ tariff on aluminium and steel. “This is not a friendly act,” the prime minister declared bluntly.
It’s hard to think when an Australian government has used such strong language about the United States.
The not-unexpected decision is less important for itself – we only export $800 million-plus worth of aluminium and steel annually to the US – than for its wider implications and portends. These are economic and political, but how far reaching they’ll be is near-impossible to predict.
Australia could be hit by future tariffs Trump has in mind. More generally, if the American tariffs trigger an international trade war, that will have serious fallout for us.
An even more basic question is: will the realignment the Trump administration is bringing to the US’s international outlook lead to a weakening in the Australian-American relationship?
There are differing views on how Australia should handle Trump.
One approach suggests assuming (or hoping) the Australia-US relationship is so grounded in common interest, military ties and history that things will return to normal after a few disruptive years.
Another view says we must accept the US is becoming an unreliable partner and that, while its national interest might mean it would come to Australia’s aid if needed, we have less reason than before to assume it would do so. On this view, Australia has to put aside the old “great and powerful friends” mindset and understand it is likely to be much more on its own than it has previously thought.
Crossbencher Jacqui Lambie says, “America is no longer a reliable ally – hopefully that will change, but in the meantime we can’t keep assuming that America has our back, Trump clearly doesn’t have anyone’s back except his own”.
Similarly, there are varying opinions on how an Australian government should approach the Trump administration. Some argue, don’t poke the bear. Others say, stand up to a bully.
Albanese started by attempting an accommodating stance. He said he wouldn’t provide a running commentary on the president’s statements. He emphasised the positives from his February phone call with Trump, in which he argued the case for an Australian exemption and Trump said he would consider it.
The softly-softly line was not surprising when Australia was hoping for a carve out. But having found the special Australia-US relationship doesn’t make us “special”, now Albanese and his government are not pulling their punches, at least in their rhetoric. Albanese said the tariff rebuff was “against the spirit of our two nations’ enduring friendship”. Industry Minister Ed Husic went a lot further: “Let’s call a spade a spade. I think this is a dog act after over a century of friendship.”
Wisely, the government won’t retaliate with reciprocal tariffs, which it rightly says would only be self-defeating, hurting Australian consumers.
The government insists it will fight on for the exemption but success is surely unlikely (with the caveat nothing is certain with Trump).
In the difficult economic times looming, Australia will need where possible to team up with friends. Lowy Institute’s lead economist Roland Rajah points to potential opportunities to work with like-minded countries, including the Europeans, Japan and Canada for common interests. He notes Australia’s collaboration with other nations during Trump’s first term to push for a Trans-Pacific trade agreement after the US pulled out.
The Coalition immediately jumped on the US rebuff to argue it showed Albanese’s weakness, highlighted by the PM being unable to obtain another call with Trump.
“I want to make sure that we’re a government that can deal with our trading partners effectively and clearly the prime minister hasn’t been able to do this,” Peter Dutton said.
Dutton points to the Coalition’s success in getting an exemption under Trump Mark 1. It’s a more convenient than convincing argument. Joe Hockey, who was ambassador, reported how unhappy American officials were with that carve out. Given the universality of this tariff, there is no evidence there was any way of avoiding it.
Trade Minister Don Farrell is likely right in saying the administration probably decided from the start against exemptions.
When pressed on how the Coalition would have dealt with the issue, Dutton said: “We would have looked at a more comprehensive trade deal with the United States, I think in relation to the civil nuclear industry, in relation to rare earths and critical minerals. There is an enormous play for us in that space.”
Dutton is presumably putting this forward as what the Coalition, if elected in May, would pitch to the Americans.
The longer-term response from either side of politics to the Trump administration on key issues is not clear.
How would the Albanese government deal with US pressure to lift defence spending more or faster than the present plan of taking it from about 2% of GDP to around 2.4% by 2033-34?
Former Labor defence minister Kim Beazley told The Australian, “we do have to bear in mind what Trump’s saying and the others are saying. We have to up our spending to 3, 3.5%”.
We don’t know how high the Coalition would push defence spending. It is committed to an increase beyond Labor’s, but is yet to provide detail.
Malcolm Turnbull, in a frank character assessment of Trump this week, sent a megaphone message that Australia must stand up to him.
Turnbull spelled out a shocking truth about Trump. “It appears the more dependent you are on the United States, the closer you are to the United States, the more he feels he can extract value from you […] stand over you, extort you.”
International affairs expert James Curran, professor of modern history at the University of Sydney, was amazed at the strength of Albanese’s “not a friendly act” words. Curran describes it as a “gross overreaction”, given that so many countries will be subject to Trump’s tariffs. He says there are far bigger issues at stake in the relationship.
Curran doesn’t believe the Australian-American relationship will be seriously undermined by the Trump administration – although things will be “rattled and unsettled for a while” – because it is “so thick and deep”. But, he says, “forget the sentiment and talk of mateship, because they don’t count with the president”.
“With Trump, “you have to find a middle path, between poking him in the eye and getting down on your knees.”
Not an easy brief, for whomever forms the next government.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The publication by the Newcastle Herald of a political advertisement by Clive Palmer’s Trumpet of Patriots party stating “there are only two genders – male and female” has provoked a backlash that has seen the advertisement removed from the paper’s online edition.
The publisher, Australian Community Media, has apologised for printing it in the first place, and a scheduled appearance of the ad in The Age has been cancelled.
This raises a question about freedom of speech, particularly political speech.
There are three reasons why this advertisement does not deserve the protection of the free-speech principle.
The first is that it is factually wrong. The second is that it attacks people for an attribute of birth, and the third is that it is unjustifiably harmful, being calculated to arouse prejudice for political gain.
It is factually wrong because there are people in the community who are trans or gender-diverse. The Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne has a Gender Service clinic to assist children and adolescents in this situation. It states on its website that being trans or gender-diverse is seen as part of the natural spectrum of human diversity.
The clinic’s website also draws attention to the risk of harm to these often vulnerable young people. It states that they experience considerably higher rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm and attempted suicide compared with their cisgender peers because of their experiences of stigma, discrimination, social exclusion, bullying and harassment.
More generally, the British philosopher A. C. Grayling has developed a scheme for assessing harm arising from prejudice against people on the grounds of certain attributes.
In his scheme, he identifies what he calls attributes of birth: race, nationality, skin colour, gender, sexual orientation and disability among them. This provides valuable guidance about the attributes that deserve the most robust protection.
It is not necessary for the editor of a newspaper to be familiar with any of this in order to see that an advertisement of the kind published in the Newcastle Herald was totally indefensible. All that had to be done was to substitute race or skin colour for gender and ask: would we publish such an advertisement?
On top of that, since 1984 Australia has had a Sex Discrimination Act, the latest iteration of which makes it an offence to discriminate against a person on the grounds of gender identity or intersex status, making it clear that these are protected attributes under the law.
Australian Community Media said it has checks in place for political advertising, “but on this occasion the process failed and the advertisement was not reviewed before publication”.
The obvious question is, why not? Even at face value the advertisement is factually wrong as a matter of general knowledge, which would be as good a starting point as any for making a decision about whether to publish it.
The ad goes on to say: “We must stop confusing children in schools. Give them a safe and normal environment to grow and develop in and let them decide who they are when they become adults.”
This is the purest humbug. It pretends to stand for the protection of all children from “confusion”, while exposing some children to the risk of serious harm.
Nor can the ad be defended as a statement of opinion. It is unambiguously purporting to be a statement of fact.
At The Age, journalists reportedly wrote a formal letter of complaint to management after discovering the same ad was booked for the front page of that paper on Wednesday March 12.
However, The Age and News Corp newspapers have published other Palmer ads that have aroused indignation. On March 7, the front page of the Age carried an ad that read: “We don’t need to be welcomed to our own country.” On March 11 the front page ad said: “Too much immigration destroys infrastructure.”
Race is clearly an undertone in both of these, but they are directed at practices and policies, not at people’s personal attributes. In this way, they are categorically different from the ad about gender.
In no civilised country is the right of free speech absolute, although political speech enjoys a high degree of protection.
The point at which, by convention as well as law, democracies draw the line at free speech is the point where the speech does harm to others.
These limitations are derived from the harm principle developed by that champion of free speech, John Stuart Mill, in On Liberty. It remains a relevant standard even in the coarsened political atmosphere in which we live.
The fact that certain views may arouse indignation or even anger in others is not on its own a ground for suppressing them. Where unjustifiable harm is done, however, the law and ethics step in.
Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The 2022 election catapulted a new movement into Australian federal politics, with the election of six “teals”. The teals are part of a broader wave of “community independents” who are challenging the major parties, especially the Liberals and appealing to voters who want politics done differently.
As the 2025 election draws close, the Community Independents Project, which was founded in 2021 to support the grass root independents, will not only seek to retain the gains made but to increase the representation in the lower house.
We are joined on the podcast by the executive director of the Community Independents Project, Tina Jackson, who was a key figure behind Zali Steggall’s successful campaign against Tony Abbott in Warringah. Steggall was a forerunner of the teals.
On what makes a “community candidate” different from other Independents like Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Tasmania) or Dai Le, (Fowler, NSW) Jackson explains,
What distinguishes a community independent is that they’re selected by their communities through a grassroots process. It’s […] ground-up and not top-down. So communities decide they want better representation.
They listen to their communities. For example, they hold kitchen table conversations to find out what matters to them, their values and their issues, and then they search for a candidate that represents those issues and values. They run selection processes, then select and campaign for their chosen candidate. So every community has their own tweaks on this community-before-candidate theme, but at its heart, this bottom-up approach is what defines a community independent.
On the kind of issues these independents might be campaigning on now that the “Morrison” factor is gone, Jackson says each campaign will decide what issues to tackle, and a lot of the issues from the 2022 campaign aren’t going away,
The issues are not always the same. The need for climate action hasn’t gone away nor has the issue of integrity in politics nor equality. […] The community independents are already pursuing action on these in parliament. Concerns around cost of living obviously have grown [and] is going to be a much bigger issue this election.
In regional areas, they will be driven by their particular issues – might be education, might be health, local infrastructure and so on, and all of the community independents will be reflecting those issues and values that they’re told about by their communities. The other thing to say is there might not be the Morrison factor, but there is concern about Trumpian politics coming to Australia and there is a real sense that democracy is fragile and that we need to do everything to protect it. I think that is another layer this time around.
Jackson nominates three candidates she is most hopeful about and how they are challenging the notions of safe seats,
There are a lot of really exciting campaigns, but there are three in particular that I think [are] worth keeping an eye on. So one is Caz Heise in Cowper, and that’s in the mid-north coast of New South Wales around Port Macquarie and Coffs Harbour. The second one is Alex Dyson in Wannon in rural southwest Victoria. And [there is] Nicolette Boele in Bradfield in Sydney’s north.
These three, I think, are three in particular to watch. But if I could also add, no matter how many community independents win, communities have already won by being engaged in the political process, they’re making their seats marginal and there’s now no such thing as a safe seat.
While funding from Climate 200 remains a strong asset for the group, Jackson says it’s the “people power” that helps the most,
Well, it’s important to clarify […] that Climate 200 is a crowdfunding platform, and they have around 35,000 donors, and [Simon Holmes à Court’s] contribution is relatively small. So it’s Climate 200, not Simon, that helps fund campaigns. But Climate 200 is only one source of funding, and [in] reality, the campaigns need to raise a huge amount themselves, and they raise that directly.
There are also other funding sources like the Regional Voices Fund for regional campaigns. Cash is important because there are hard costs like signs and tee-shirts and flyers and so on. But what really drives the movement is the volunteers. It’s their time and their talent, not the cash. The value of the human capital behind the movement, it really is immense. So I’m not trying to underestimate the funding, because funding is, of course, important, but the real driving force behind the movement are the tens of thousands of volunteers. So without this people power, campaigns simply would not get off the ground, let alone succeed.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
A New Zealand-based Filipino solidarity network has welcomed the arrest of former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte by Interpol on charges of crimes against humanity on a warrant by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
“We congratulate the human rights activists — both from the Philippines and around the world — who held the line and relentlessly pursued justice for Filipino victims of the former Duterte regime,” said the Aotearoa-Philippines Solidarity (APS) in a statement.
“This arrest is a long time coming, with Duterte having been complicit in the extrajudicial killings of activists, trade unionists, indigenous peoples’ advocates, peasants and human rights lawyers since he was president back in 2016.
“His brutal and merciless so-called ‘war on drugs’ also led to the deaths of thousands of Filipinos — many of which were not involved in the drug trade at all or were merely drug addicts and low-level drug peddlers.
“Their only ‘crime’ was that they were poor, as documented by many human rights watchdogs that Duterte’s fake ‘drug war’ disproportionately targeted poor Filipinos.”
The APS statement said that Duterte had admitted to these crimes when he faced an inquiry before the Philippines’ House of Representatives in October last year.
“In that hearing, the former president admitted the existence of ‘death squads’ composed of ‘gang members’ and Philippine police personnel who would ‘neutralise’ drug suspects – both when he was president and as mayor of Davao City.
Police ordered to ‘goad suspects’ “He also [revealed] that he [had] instructed members of the Philippine National Police (PNP) to goad suspects to fight back or attempt to escape so they would have a reason to kill them.”
The APS noted that all these actions constituted crimes against humanity, the very charge laid against him by the ICC. Since the initial charges were laid against Duterte in 2017 by human rights activists, many had anticipated the day he would finally face justice.
“This arrest is a historic step towards justice and a reminder to all that no one is above the law. The APS extends our best wishes to the bereaved families of those killed during Duterte’s unjust ‘war on drugs’ and also its survivors,” the statement said.
The APS said challenge now was to ensure that justice was meted out by the ICC and Duterte was punished for his crimes.
“Let us not allow this monumental victory slip from our hands and ensure that all evidence against Duterte is brought to light and he faces consequences for the human rights violations he committed against the Filipino people.”
The statement said that Duterte’s arrest also served as a “warning to the US-Marcos regime” that any abuse of their powers and attacks on human rights would not go unpunished.
The continuation of indiscriminate military operations which violated international humanitarian law would also lead to the downfall of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr — who is the son of the 1970s dictator who declared martial law.
“Unjustified” and “not the way that friends and allies should be treated”. That’s how Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong have described the latest shot in United States President Trump’s trade war.
Effective today, there is a 25% tariff on all imports of steel and aluminium into the US – including on Australian products.
Australia’s direct economic hit will be relatively small – less than A$1 billion of steel and aluminium was exported to the US in 2023, according to data from UN Comtrade.
But the tariffs pose a more fundamental challenge to Australia’s trade strategy and how we manage key alliances in an era of resurgent protectionism.
No longer a hypothetical
Trump’s plan was announced in February, but Australia was hoping to negotiate an exemption, as in the previous Trump administration. They have not been successful.
This development shifts analysis from hypothetical to immediate. Steel and aluminium exports to the US represent just a tiny fraction – 0.2% – of Australia’s total exports, so experts expect the impact will not be widely felt.
Australia’s few ageing aluminium smelters pose no threat to the US’ aluminium producers, contrary to claims from US trade adviser Peter Navarro.
Steel is slightly different. Bluescope Steel will experience the biggest direct hit. It exports around 300,000 tonnes of semi-processed steel annually to the US. It will now be subject to tariffs.
While BlueScope is Australia’s largest single exporter of steel to the US, it also has a plant in Ohio that employs 4,000 workers and will see some initial short-term benefits from the tariffs that will hike up the price of Canadian steel imports.
In the long term, however, tariffs are an “own goal” in the trade game. Data from tariffs in the last Trump presidency have demonstrated their limited impact on generating jobs and negative effects on domestic industries that rely on these inputs.
Ripple effects
The next challenge for Australian steel and aluminium exporters, as well as their upstream and downstream counterparts, is how to navigate the uncertainty in global markets, as global supply chains adjust.
China may increase exports of cheaper steel and aluminium to Australia, putting further pressure on local producers, and potentially sparking further anti-dumping investigations.
More than 40% of Australia’s high-tech engines, 50% of aircraft and space parts and almost 60% of machine tools are sent to the US. These industries are at significant risk.
It’s also a worry for services suppliers, who export $6.2 billion worth of professional and other services each year. Australia’s largest exports to the US are financial services, gold, meat, transportation services and vaccines.
Many more exporters are watching anxiously in case these tariffs spark a global trade war and Australia is caught in the crossfire. The overnight tariff skirmish between Canada and the US shows the dangers of escalation.
The absence of Australian steel and aluminium from the US Trade Representative’s 2024 report on trade barriers highlights the arbitrary nature of this decision. Australian steel and aluminium have never been viewed as a threat to the US until now. They are inconsistent with the agreed tariffs between the two countries.
The Australian government might consider whether to bring a dispute to the World Trade Organisation (WTO), but due to the dismantling of its appeal body (also at the hands of the US), the WTO is currently something of a toothless tiger.
Australia’s commitment to (mostly) free trade means the government will refrain from imposing reciprocal tariffs on the US. This rationale makes sense: even reasonable retaliatory measures would be unlikely to protect Australian interests and instead merely escalate tensions.
While it’s cold comfort to affected Australian businesses, experts agree that Trump’s tariffs will become an “own goal” for the US, with prices certain to rise, causing additional pain for consumers and producers alike. Financial markets are already showing stress.
Damaging to the alliance
The failure to secure an exemption despite Australia’s strategic alliance with the US sends a concerning signal about how the US values its Australian relationship. Public support for the US alliance weakens in the face of apparent bullying and flouting of international rules.
What emerges is a trust deficit that extends beyond government relations to public sentiment. Many Australians may begin questioning whether the “special relationship” with the US delivers tangible benefits during times of economic tension.
Under the latest Trump administration, Australia has suffered a serious decline in trust that the US would act responsibly in the world, according to polls from the Lowy Institute.
In 2024, the same poll showed that an astounding 92% of Australians view political instability in the US as an “important” or “critical” threat to Australia’s vital interests.
Rethinking relations
Trump’s tariffs test Australia’s ability to balance different facets of its relationship with the US – security, cultural and economic interests.
It also raises questions about how Australia can best navigate an increasingly unpredictable global trade environment where traditional alliances provide less economic loyalty than they once did.
These tariffs are more than just a tax on specific materials. They are a timely reminder to Australian businesses of the importance of market diversification. But it also shows that the current US administration has thrown out the rule book. For at least the next four years, it is nothing like business as usual.
Lisa Toohey receives funding from the Australian Government for a research project on Weaponised Trade, funded under the Defence Strategic Research Grants Program.
The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) has launched an open letter calling on the Aotearoa New Zealand government to take action on the future of the besieged enclave of Gaza.
The network is asking Foreign Minister Winston Peters to speak up for the people of New Zealand to at least condemn Israel’s use of humanitarian aid as a weapon of war.
It also wants the government to call for international humanitarian and human rights law to be applied.
The PSNA says New Zealand has an internationally respected voice, and “we are asking the government to use this voice” for a lasting peace.
Israel says this is because it wants to extend the first phase of the ceasefire agreement rather than negotiate phase two which would see the agreed withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. The renewed blockade on food, water, fuel and medical supplies has been widely condemned as a breach of the ceasefire agreement and the use of “starvation as a weapon of war” by Palestinian groups, international aid organisations and many governments.
The United Nations Secretary General António Guterres has called for “humanitarian aid to flow back into Gaza immediately”. Israel has refused this request.
Compounding the crisis is US President Donald Trump’s recently declared intention to permanently remove all the Palestinian people of Gaza and send them to other countries such as Egypt and Jordan so Gaza can be rebuilt as a US territory in the Middle East — in his words “the riviera of the Middle East”.
Israel has accepted this US proposal but Palestinians and the vast majority of governments and civil society groups around the world are appalled at the scheme.
To this point our government has not commented on either Israel’s new blockade of humanitarian supplies into Gaza or the US President’s plan for ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian territory.
Back in December 2023, when the government was commenting, the Prime Minister stated “…Israel must respect international humanitarian law. Civilians and civilian infrastructure must be protected…Safe and unimpeded humanitarian access must be increased and sustained.”
None of this has happened in the more than 14 months since.
We are asking our government to speak out once more on behalf of the people of New Zealand to, at the very least, condemn Israel’s use of humanitarian aid as a weapon of war and to call for international humanitarian and human rights law to be applied.
We believe the way forward for peace and security for everyone who calls the Middle East home is for all parties to follow international law and United Nations resolutions so that a lasting peace can be established based on justice and equal rights for everyone in the region.
New Zealand has an internationally respected voice which can make a strong contribution to this end. We are asking the government to use this voice.
Labour supports sanctions against Israel Meanwhile, the opposition Labour Party said it would support Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick’s member’s bill calling for sanctions against Israel for its illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territories.
“The International Court of Justice (ICJ) declared the decades-long occupation illegal and called for Israel’s withdrawal, and for countries like New Zealand to take action,” Labour associate foreign affairs spokesperson Phil Twyford said in a statement.
“The New Zealand government recently voted at the UN General Assembly for a resolution calling for sanctions against Israel on this issue.
“Labour has been calling for stronger action from the government on Israel’s invasion of Gaza, including intervening in South Africa’s case against Israel in the International Court of Justice, creation of a special visa for family members of New Zealanders fleeing Gaza, and ending government procurement from companies operating illegally in the Occupied Territories.”
Twyford said New Zealand had long recognised Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem as illegal.
In 2016, the then National government co-sponsored a successful Security Council resolution that Israel’s settlements in the Occupied Territories were illegal.
Over the past two years, there has been some progress in improving the JobSeeker payment. But payment levels remain below the poverty line.
That’s according to Australia’s Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee’s 2025 report, released this week a fortnight ahead of the federal budget on March 25. This committee advises the Federal Government on ways to enhance economic inclusion and reduce disadvantage.
The committee is chaired by former Labor minister Jenny Macklin. It comprises experts in social security and economics, as well as leaders from the community sector, advocacy organisations, unions, business, and philanthropy. I am one of its members.
This year’s report focuses on the adequacy of supports, including JobSeeker payments, Commonwealth Rent Assistance and Remote Area Allowance. It also looks at how systems could be reformed.
The report makes ten recommendations. Of these, the highest priority is for the government to substantially increase the base rates of JobSeeker and related working age payments.
Doing so could deliver big economic and social benefits. Research shows a possible return to society of $1.24 for every dollar invested in increasing the JobSeeker rate.
A wide range of voices
In forming its ten recommendations for 2025, the committee consulted with a wide range of people with lived experience of economic exclusion and the social security system.
This spanned groups across a wide variety of backgrounds and circumstances, including people experiencing homelessness or unemployment, those living with a chronic condition or disability, and women who have experienced domestic violence.
We also commissioned research on some important questions. These included the benefits of increasing income support payments, how much money it costs to support healthy living, how to address family and domestic violence, and other impacts and costs of poverty in Australia.
Income payments were assessed against budget standards, which reflect the cost of living healthily. Daisy Daisy/Shutterstock
An investment in society
For this year’s report, the committee commissioned research from economics consulting firm Mandala to put a dollar figure on the possible social and economic returns from increasing the JobSeeker payment.
This research was the first of its type produced for Australia, and found society could earn a return of $1.24 for every dollar invested in increasing the JobSeeker rate.
This is because increasing the adequacy of JobSeeker payment would boost our national economic output through improved mental health, higher productivity and longer working lives.
It would also lead to decreased use of the healthcare system, and reduce levels of contact with the criminal justice system.
The cost of living
Further research by the University of New South Wales assessed levels of income support payments against “budget standards”.
These budget standards reflect the amount of money a family needs to purchase the goods and services required to enjoy an acceptable and healthy standard of living.
Researchers found single private renters in capital cities would need an increase of nearly 45% in total payments to cover their costs.
Single public renters in Fitzroy Crossing, a very remote town in Western Australia, would need an increase in support of nearly 67% to cover the extra costs of food and transport.
Other impacts of poverty
Other research examined the impact and costs of poverty to Australia. Some disturbing facts were uncovered.
Department of Social Services data show that despite two increases in Commonwealth Rent Assistance (CRA) since 2023, more than 200,000 of the 1.35 million recipients of CRA in December 2024 were paying more than half their income in rent.
People receiving JobSeeker are 14 times more likely to lack a substantial meal at least once a day.
And analysis by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare shows that people receiving JobSeeker are significantly more likely to die by suicide than the general Australian population.
International comparison
Despite recent increases, Australia remains near the bottom of OECD advanced economic nations when it comes to the adequacy of out-of-work payments for the short-term unemployed.
We rank better for the long-term unemployed. But as a percentage of median household disposable income (adjusted for household size), our benefits have fallen by more than any other of 24 high-income OECD countries.
The JobSeeker payment, and related income supports, have mainly been indexed in line with the consumer price index (CPI).
This has caused their relative base rates to fall significantly below existing benchmarks like the Age Pension, creating severe hardship for our neediest citizens.
Increasing JobSeeker and other payments would improve the lives of Australians in poverty. There would also be big benefits for health and productivity, with flow-on effects for our national economy.
Addressing family and domestic violence
Family and domestic violence is a major health, economic, and welfare issue in Australia.
The committee commissioned research by Social Ventures Australia and Professor Roslyn Russell on the effect government payments have on a victim-survivor’s decision to leave a violent relationship.
The research found 45% of wage earners permanently leave a violent partner the first time they try to leave. But among those receiving income support, this figure falls to 26%.
Many victim-survivors do not access government emergency financial support payments when leaving a violent relationship.
The research shows how elements of the system’s current design and delivery create barriers for victim-survivors to access and maintain an income at a time of crisis.
The committee found making it easier for survivors of family and domestic violence to interact with the social security payments system should be a priority.
Peter Whiteford receives funding from the Australian Research Council, and has received funding from the Department of Social Services. He is a member of the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee. The Hon. Jenny Macklin AC is the Chair of the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee and an Honorary Enterprise Professor of Social and Political Science at the University of Melbourne. She was Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (2007–2013) and Minister for Disability Reform (2011–2013).
Ice baths have become increasingly popular over the past few years. Fitness enthusiasts and casual exercisers around the world are embracing this trend that was once reserved for elite athletes.
Ice baths (also known as “cold water immersion”) are exactly what they sound like. They involve immersing your body in cold water for a set amount of time.
Social media is filled with videos of people plunging into freezing water, claiming this helps with everything from recovery after exercise to mental health.
But do ice baths live up to the hype? Here’s what the evidence says.
Ice baths for recovery after exercise
One of the main reasons people use ice baths is to reduce muscle soreness and improve recovery after exercise. Athletes, including endurance runners, weightlifters and football players, commonly use ice baths.
And there’s plenty of evidence to suggest ice baths can improve recovery after exercise.
Ice baths do this by reducing post-exercise inflammation, muscle swelling, and muscle damage, while improving the clearance of metabolites, such as lactate.
So, if you are someone who needs to perform bouts of intense exercise on back-to-back days, ice baths could be a good option.
But they shouldn’t be used all the time, even if you are an athlete.
As mentioned above, one of the ways ice baths work is by reducing inflammation in the muscle tissue that occurs after exercise. While this helps muscle recovery, this inflammation also acts as a signal that tells the body to adapt and become stronger.
For this reason, using ice baths too often (that is, after most training sessions) may blunt training-related increases in strength, endurance and power, as well as muscle growth.
Notably, ice baths don’t seem to harm aerobic fitness. This means you might be OK to use them as often as you want after aerobic training sessions.
More recently, ice baths have gained traction in the broader fitness and wellness communities. Proponents suggest they can enhance mental health, immune function, and overall wellbeing.
But the research in this space is sparse.
We recently did a systematic review examining all the published research looking at ice baths and health outcomes in the general population (rather than athletes).
We found only 11 studies, some of which used cold showers instead of ice baths. The evidence suggested regular cold water immersion might lead to small reductions in stress, small improvements in sleep quality and self-reported quality of life, and might reduce how often people get sick (such as with a cold or the flu).
However, many of these findings came from single studies, so they should be interpreted with caution until more research is conducted. Also, we didn’t explore how ice baths (and cold showers) may have caused these effects, so we don’t know exactly how they work.
Beyond exercise recovery, many people tout cold water immersion for general health and wellness. OlgaBerlet/Shutterstock
Are there any risks?
While there isn’t any research examining the dangers of ice baths at a population level, there are some possible risks.
In rare instances cold water immersion has been shown to lead to cold shock. This condition is caused by a rapid fall in skin temperature and can lead to gasping, hyperventilation, high blood pressure, and, infrequently, cardiac arrhythmia (irregular heartbeat), which can be fatal if not treated quickly.
There’s also some evidence to suggest staying in an ice bath too long (more than 30 minutes) can increase the risk of hypothermia, which is when body temperature falls dangerously low.
5 tips if you’re thinking of trying an ice bath
If you’re considering trying ice baths, there are a few things worth keeping in mind.
1. Don’t go too cold: Even though the word “ice” is in the name, most research has shown that 10–15°C is cold enough to optimise their effectiveness.
2. Don’t stay in too long: Ice bath durations vary quite broadly in the research, with some lasting as little as three minutes, and others as long as 30.
However, the most common range is 10–20 minutes, which seems to be more than enough to get any health and post-exercise benefits. So if you’re new to ice baths, starting with around 10 minutes total, broken up into 3–5-minute bouts, is a good place to start.
3. Enter slowly: Your stress response peaks in the first 30 seconds of cold water immersion, before fading away. To minimise your chance of getting severe cold shock, wait for this response to disappear before immersing your upper chest and face in the water (or even better, keep your face out of the water at all times).
4. Monitor how you’re feeling: Pay attention to how you’re feeling in the ice bath. While shivering is normal, dizziness or numbness might be a sign you should hop out.
5. Use them strategically: If you’re training to improve muscle strength, power, or size, consider using ice baths sparingly, rather than as a daily routine.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Set in 2042, new play The Robot Dog revolves around Janelle (Kristie Nguy), of Cantonese heritage, and her partner Harry (Ari Maza Long), a First Nations man.
Janelle’s mother, Wing Lam (Jing-Xuan Chan as a ghostly apparition), has recently passed. Janelle and Harry have temporarily moved back to Wing Lam’s home to finalise her belongings and reckon with her tragic death.
Part and parcel of the home is a robot dog called Dog (depicted by a real robot dog trundling around the stage), a therapy bot designed to be of service to humans, and an artificial intelligence (AI) smart house interface called Hus. Hus knows an alarming amount of information about the residents and is resolute at attempting to keep them on track with their daily tasks and responsibilities.
These two technological beings are in tension throughout. Hus works to maintain timelines and productivity (and offers inane daily motivational quotes); Dog seeks to understand the complexities humans experience in the face of grief and loss, despite his programming.
Dog seeks to understand the complexities humans experience in the face of grief. Tiffany Garvie/MTC
Part of the outstanding Asia TOPA Festival, which has transformed Melbourne’s cultural landscape into a vibrant and eclectic stage of storytelling and celebration, Melbourne Theatre Company’s education show The Robot Dog is co-written by Hong Kong born interdisciplinary artist Roshelle Yee Pui Fong and Luritja writer and technologist Matthew Ngamurarri Heffernan.
Through the vehicle of a family drama, the play emphasises the value of embodied knowledge and how this can never be replaced by artificial intelligence and technology.
Measuring values
The notion of robotic pets as a strategy for providing company and care for those who live alone or are elderly is not just a future imagining. It is a contemporary reality designed to battle an epidemic of isolation and loneliness.
Dog represents the best of AI with his aim to help the humans in his life. He appears to listen and learn from humans, evolving his emotional repertoire. Hus, on the other hand, represents the idea of AI as an omniscient and omnipresent being, wielding knowledge as power.
Both Hus and Dog are voiced by Chan in a masterclass performance of embodied knowledge, showcasing how nuanced vocal characterisation can create great emotion and context.
Jin-Xuan Chan plays Janelle’s mother, Wing Lam, and voices Dog and Hus. Tiffany Garvie/MTC
In the wake of her mother’s death, Janelle is struggling with complex emotions of anger, grief and disconnection. Her sense of cultural alienation seems compounded by the remnants of her mother’s life around her.
She finds herself frustrated at not being able to read the ingredients on a bag of salty Cantonese pork floss. She is again frustrated when the true value of her mother’s red Cheongsam cannot be calculated by the AI technology: Hus describes it as a mixture of polyester and mould, instead of understanding the garment as an invaluable material representation of her mother and her story.
To counter this feeling of disconnection, Hus encourages Janelle to use the “language augment” microchip that gives you instant fluency in your chosen language.
Eventually, in her frustration, she does. She becomes immediately able to read and speak the Cantonese language. But, of course, this approach has shortcomings. Some forms of knowledge cannot be passed down through the soulless automation of AI. They exist as spiritual, tactile and embodied understandings of equal and significant value.
Likewise, Harry ignores many calls from his mother because she speaks so fast in Language. He feels shame that he cannot keep up.
He experiences racial profiling in his workplace and uses the language augment to support his application for promotion, framing the idea of language acquisition as an economic benefit – rather than a personal reclamation of culture and belonging.
Intersecting cultures
The story moves through complex territory navigating cultural disorientation, systemic racism, dystopian AI futures and the ghosts and ancestors of our pasts.
At the centre of many narrative threads and ideas is a blending of two distinct cultures we don’t often see interwoven in this way. This intersection of Cantonese and First Nations Australians comes sharply and hilariously into focus in a debate about whose culture lays claim to the blue, red and white checkered plastic “Hong Kong/Blakfulla” bags that all Janelle’s mothers earthly belongings have been packed away in.
Reflecting the many intersecting complexities in the play, the bags function as a symbol of cultural tension and of grief, most notably when Harry attempts to “clean up” with little regard for what may be important to Janelle.
At the centre of the play is a blending of two distinct cultures we don’t often see interwoven in this way. Tiffany Garvie/MTC
The Robot Dog is a frank look at a possible future relationship between humans and AI, suggesting we are unlikely candidates for easy programming and will resist subordination to the pulse and rhythm of technological apparatus.
At the core of the play is a proverb, a key line of text from the show, “to forget one’s ancestors is to be a brook without a source, a tree without roots”.
Perhaps this suggests we may respond and adapt to new technological possibilities in our environment, but we remain anchored to ancient wisdom which exists in places that technology may never be able to reach.
The Robot Dog is at the Melbourne Theatre Company’s Southbank Theatre until March 21, before touring to Ballarat and Mildura.
Sarah Austin works for the University of Melbourne, and the Melbourne Theatre Company is a department of the University.
But an even more devastating catastrophe could happen at one of New Zealand’s most iconic tourism destinations, Piopiotahi/Milford Sound. And it is unclear how this disaster can be prevented.
The outcome of the Whakaari tragedy was that tourism on the island ceased immediately. The risk of tourism-related deaths there was considered too high to be acceptable to New Zealand society.
This is also clear from the inquiry and prosecutions that followed the tragedy and the civil law suits initiated on behalf of those killed or injured.
Our new analysis backs this up. We estimate the risk to life on Whakaari in 2019 was more than a hundred times greater than international risk acceptability criteria used to calculate tolerable risk levels from natural hazards.
Our research also estimates the statistical risk of tourism-related fatalities at Milford Sound to be about 50 times higher than at Whakaari.
This is because an earthquake-generated landslide can fall into the sound and turn it into a violent, long-lasting maelstrom of waves up to 17 metres high. This would devastate the shoreline and any vessels present, including cruise ships.
Our hazard estimate is based on the 16 landslide deposits of more than a million cubic metres that lie on the bed of Milford Sound. All of these must have fallen since the sound became ice-free about 17,000 years ago.
This animation shows how a landslide triggers a maelstrom of tsunami waves in a Norwegian fiord. Milford Sound would be similar.
The number of visitors (more than a million per year) and employees exposed to this hazard means that, on average, such an event could kill about 750 people every 1,000 years (based on visitor numbers at 2019 levels). Obviously, this would be catastrophic.
The consequences of this catastrophe would be much more severe and far-reaching than the Whakaari tragedy because of the large number of likely fatalities. Also, any cruise ships, with thousands on board, would be severely affected, perhaps even sunk.
An unpredictable, unpreventable disaster
Currently New Zealand has no specific regulations governing the degree of risk to which tourists may legitimately be exposed. But there is widespread international agreement that the maximum level of societally acceptable risk to life from natural hazards at a site is about one death per 10,000 years.
About a million people visit Milford Sound each year. Shutterstock/lembi
The occurrence of an earthquake-triggered landslide tsunami at Milford Sound cannot be predicted in advance. Nor can preventive measures ameliorate it.
The only warning would be the earthquake itself, giving people, at most, about seven minutes before the tsunami waves arrived. Because the wave run-up onto the shore would be about 100 metres high, escape would be impossible.
The only way to mitigate this catastrophe is to reduce the number of people exposed to the risk to about 1,000 per year, which in effect means closing Milford Sound to mass tourism.
This would, however, be an extremely contentious measure because of the international status of Milford Sound as part of a UNESCO world heritage area under New Zealand government auspices, and because the catastrophe might not occur for many centuries.
Stopping tourism has been the chosen solution at Whakaari. But the much smaller scale of the tourist operations there, and the correspondingly lower national impact of closure, contrast starkly with the Milford situation.
The alternative strategy at Milford would be for New Zealand society to collectively decide to accept the risk that, at any time in the future, hundreds of tourists could be killed. Beyond that, there would be the corresponding impacts on tourism and New Zealand’s reputation.
However, if we know a landslide-triggered tsunami at Milford Sound has the potential to kill hundreds of people and cause severe damage, the risk to life ought to be grossly unacceptable and only manageable by abandoning mass tourism at the site. These are the choices we face.
Tim Davies received funding from MBIE via GNS Science as part of the Resilience to Nature’s Challenges research programmes from 2014 to 2024.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan Hicks, Lecturer Active Communities & Social Impact / PhD Sports Biomechanics, Flinders University
For decades, sport coaching has been built on the idea that there is one correct way to perform a skill.
This has often been referred to as a gold standard technique that every athlete should replicate.
Whether it is basketball players trying to shoot like Steph Curry or Caitlin Clark or a runner attempting to sprint like Noah Lyles, aspiring athletes have generally been encouraged to copy the techniques of their heroes.
Traditional coaching has lent on the work of sports biomechanists to discover the “optimal” technique for skills in various sport disciplines.
These techniques, usually developed based on “averages” of what elite level athletes do, are used by sport coaches as the template against which all other athletes are measured.
That is, if we can replicate the technique of a higher-performing athlete, success will follow.
However, this approach ignores a crucial reality: no two athletes are built the same.
Every athlete has unique physical characteristics. Whether it is hand size, limb length, physical strength, running gait or neuromuscular coordination, they all contribute to how an athlete expresses their individual “movement signature”.
Forcing athletes to copy the technical features of the best athlete in the world may be unachievable.
The quick release, high arc shooting style of Curry has turned him into the leading three-point shooter in NBA history. But it is his unique expression of movement and his individual technique that allows him to knock them down from the logo (near half-way).
Steph Curry has revolutionised the NBA with his long-range shooting.
Yet, other long-range sharpshooters such as Luka Dončić (LA Lakers) and Kevin Durant (Phoenix Suns) have their own variation of shooting technique, which achieves the same thing: putting the ball in the basket.
If we forced them both to shoot like Curry, this variation would likely detract from their techniques and their shooting performance would almost certainly decline.
Variability is important
It is the “variability” in technique at the elite level of sport where the myth of a single optimal technique begins to unravel.
Many coaches have traditionally viewed deviations from what is considered optimal technique as an error, but researchers suggest movement variability – a concept that explains the natural changes in technique – is a normal part of skilled performance.
So, if elite athletes display a natural variation performing the same skill, even after years of training, why do we encourage our aspiring athletes to eliminate it?
And this variability is not exclusive to basketball.
For example, in sprinting, the top speed technique of Lyles, the Olympic 100m champion, is built on a powerful piston action of the legs and aggressive arm drive, which differs to that of rising Australian sprint star Gout Gout, whose technique relies on a more fluid stride pattern where he almost appears to be bouncing down the track.
The variation in Gout’s technique compared to that of Lyles’ is not a flaw, but a unique solution to the same movement challenge: maximising speed.
Interestingly, a recent systematic review suggests movement variability is essential for athletes who need to adapt their existing technique to different environments or physiological conditions such as fatigue.
This is not a technique which has been engineered by focusing on what’s deemed optimal. It is exploiting the variability which lies within the athlete’s possible solutions.
If there is only one optimal technique in this situation, the highlight reel never emerges.
Lessons for coaches and athletes
So, what is the way forward for sport coaches?
Encourage athletes to explore a variety of techniques and discover what works best for them, based on their unique characteristics.
But it also relies on the coach placing the athlete in situations where they can be creative and expand their movement bandwidth.
This is not to say coaches should let athletes perform a series of random movements and expect good technique to just happen.
There remain key performance indicators for all skills which adhere to biomechanical principles of efficient and effective movement.
But these indicators sit on a continuum – they are not fixed.
Elite sport simply offers insight into the techniques of top performers, not a defining set of movement criteria essential to specific sport skills.
For sport coaches, the goal is not to develop athletes based on a rigid technical model of one size fits all, but rather for athletes to develop a technique that aligns with their own strengths and physical characteristics.
So the next time someone says “just shoot it like Steph or Catilin”, reconsider it and find a way to shoot it how it feels best.
This is where true mastery begins.
Dylan Hicks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In Australia’s arid and semi-arid zones lives a highly elusive predator. It’s small but fierce and feisty, with big eyes, long hind legs and a pointy nose. A carnivorous marsupial, it comes out at night to hunt its favourite foods: insects and spiders.
It’s rare for people to see this animal in the wild, owing to a combination of its remote habitat, habit of hiding underground in the daytime, small size, camouflaged coat, and fast speed. For anyone lucky to see one in the wild, they’re very easy to confuse with a mouse.
But this animal isn’t a rodent – it’s a marsupial known as a kultarr (Antechinomys laniger). And only recently have scientists – including us – started to get a better grasp of their unique behaviour and crucial role in the ecosystem.
A cousin of the Tasmanian devil
The kultarr is a cousin of the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii), as well as dunnarts, antechinuses and phascogales.
Antechinuses and phascogales are known for “suicidal reproduction” or semelparity – dying after reproducing. Even though naturalist John Gould first described kultarrs as a type of phascogale (Phascogale laniger) in 1856, they do not reproduce in this way.
This small marsupial was given its unique genus name by Australian scientist Gerard Krefft in 1867. In 1906, a subspecies was named by British zoologist Oldfield Thomas.
Australian palaeontologist Mike Archer suggested it was a type of dunnart in 1981, but more recent studies have confirmed kultarrs and dunnarts are cousins, and likely originated from a common ancestor.
Nevertheless, some clarity is needed as there are differences between the two subspecies we recognise today (A. l. laniger and A. l. spenceri). These include their geographic range, the length of their tail and body, mammary glands and some cranial features.
Perhaps there is more than one species of kultarr?
Kultarrs are found across most states and territories except Victoria and Tasmania. They are about the size of a mouse, weighing up to 30 grams. Their fur is brown, fawn or sandy coloured, and their belly fur is white. They also have a long tail with a brush‐like tip, and large elongated hind legs.
Although the long legs of the kultarr make it look like it hops, it is a quadruped. So rather than hopping like a kangaroo, kultarrs walk or run using all four legs at speeds of up to 13.8 kilometres per hour. In comparison, the average human walking speed is roughly 4 km per hour.
Like the Tasmanian devil, the kultarr is a fierce predator, although its prey is smaller – mainly consisting of arthropods. Studies of kultarrs in captivity have shown they have a very simple digestive tract and digest food very quickly, in about an hour.
During the daytime, kultarrs hide in cracks in the soil or burrows made by other animals such as native hopping mice. These cracks and burrows keep the kultarrs safe from predators while they sleep and provide a stable temperature that helps save energy. At night they come out in search of food and mates.
Kultarrs also use torpor, a reduction in metabolic rate and body temperature, to save energy. They can adjust their body temperature to as low as 11°C, and stay in torpor for around 2–16 hours, particularly at times when temperatures are low and food is scarce.
As kultarrs are so elusive and rarely observed by field researchers, much of what we know about their biology is based on studies of them in captivity.
For example, captive studies have provided information on their reproduction and their behaviour, such as warming up on heat rocks after using torpor to save energy.
Two recent studies analysed historic footage of a captive colony of kultarrs to learn more about their behaviours.
The studies found the most common behaviours displayed in captivity were exploration of their environment and foraging for food. They were also looking out for potential predators by staying alert.
These behaviours are important when breeding animals for conservation actions, such as translocation and reintroduction, which involve relocating animals from one area to another to avoid threats or reintroducing captive bred animals into their former habitat.
The studies highlight the importance of having captive colonies of native marsupials to further understand behaviour and other aspects of their biology that are difficult to study in the wild, particularly in elusive nocturnal species like the kultarr.
Being a marsupial, kultarrs give birth to underdeveloped young that are permanently attached to the nipples for 30-48 days, as shown here. Hayley Stannard
A kultarr colony
Very few captive colonies of marsupials exist in research institutions.
In 2007, we established a kultarr colony at Western Sydney University. We learned a huge amount about kultarr biology during the six years the colony was operational. It helped provide new knowledge to aid species conservation and inform translocation or reintroduction programs.
Threats to kultarrs include habitat degradation, natural flooding events, fire and pesticides. Introduced and native predators, such as feral cats, foxes, owls and snakes, also prey on kultarrs.
Whole populations of kultarrs may migrate to new locations seasonally. We think that’s the case because researchers will do extensive surveys, find many, and then survey again, and there are none. Unlike rodents that boom after rainfall in response to better conditions – more food and habitat (plant growth) – kultarrs appear to be more readily seen in drier conditions.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature listed the kultarr as “data deficient” in 2008. Eight years later, it upgraded the species to the status of “least concern”.
But there is still a great deal we don’t know about these elusive little animals, particularly the current population stability – and even if there is more than one species of kultarr out there.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
With the sudden departure of New Zealand’s Reserve Bank Governor, one has to ask whether there is a pattern here — of a succession of public sector leaders leaving their posts in uncertain circumstances and a series of decisions being made without much regard for due process.
It brings to mind the current spectacle of federal government politics playing out in the United States. Four years ago, we observed a concerted attempt by a raucous and determined crowd to storm the Capitol.
Now a smaller, more disciplined and just as determined band is entering federal offices in Washington almost unhindered, to close agencies and programmes and to evict and terminate the employment of thousands of staff.
This could never happen here. Or could it? Or has it and is it happening here? After all, we had an occupation of parliament, we had a rapid unravelling of a previous government’s legislative programme, and we have experienced the removal of CEOs and downgrading of key public agencies such as Kāinga Ora on slender pretexts, and the rapid and marked downsizing of the core public service establishment.
Similarly, while the incoming Trump administration is targeting any federal diversity agenda, in New Zealand the incoming government has sought to curb the advancement of Māori interests, even to the extent of questioning elements of our basic constitutional framework.
In other words, there are parallels, but also differences. This has mostly been conducted in a typical New Zealand low-key fashion, with more regard for legal niceties and less of the histrionics we see in Washington — yet it still bears comparison and probably reflects similar political dynamics.
Nevertheless, the departure in quick succession of three health sector leaders and the targeting of Pharmac’s CEO suggest the agenda may be getting out of hand. In my experience of close contact with the DHB system the management and leadership teams at the top echelon were nothing short of outstanding.
The Auckland District Health Board, as it then was, is the largest single organisation in Auckland — and the top management had to be up to the task. And they were.
Value for money As for Pharmac, it is a standout agency for achieving value for money in the public sector. So why target it? The organisation has made cumulative savings of at least a billion dollars, equivalent to 5 percent of the annual health budget. Those monies have been reinvested elsewhere in the health sector. Furthermore, by distancing politicians from sometimes controversial funding decisions on a limited budget it shields them from public blowback.
Unfortunately, Pharmac is the victim of its own success: the reinvestment of funds in the wider health sector has gone unheralded, and the shielding of politicians is rarely acknowledged.
Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior has arrived back in the Marshall Islands yesterday for a six-week mission around the Pacific nation to support independent scientific research into the impact of decades-long nuclear weapons testing by the US government.
Forty years ago in May 1985, its namesake, the original Rainbow Warrior, took part in a humanitarian mission to evacuate Rongelap islanders from their atoll after toxic nuclear fallout in the 1950s.
The Rainbow Warrior was bombed by French secret agents on 10 July 1985 before it was able to continue its planned protest voyage to Moruroa Atoll in French Polynesia.
Escorted by traditional canoes, and welcomed by Marshallese singing and dancing, the arrival of the Rainbow Warrior 3 marked a significant moment in the shared history of Greenpeace and the Marshall Islands.
The ship was given a blessing by the Council of Iroij, the traditional chiefs of the islands with speeches from Senator Hilton Kendall (Rongelap atoll); Boaz Lamdik on behalf of the Mayor of Majuro; Farrend Zackious, vice-chairman Council of Iroij; and a keynote address from Minister Bremity Lakjohn, Minister Assistant to the President.
Also on board for the ceremony was New Zealander Bunny McDiarmid and partner Henk Haazen, who were both crew members on the Rainbow Warrior during the 1985 voyage to the Marshall Islands.
Bearing witness “We’re extremely grateful and humbled to be welcomed back by the Marshallese government and community with such kindness and generosity of spirit,” said Greenpeace Pacific spokesperson Shiva Gounden.
“Over the coming weeks, we’ll travel around this beautiful country, bearing witness to the impacts of nuclear weapons testing and the climate crisis, and listening to the lived experiences of Marshallese communities fighting for justice.”
Gounden said that for decades Marshallese communities had been sacrificing their lands, health, and cultures for “the greed of those seeking profits and power”.
However, the Marshallese people had been some of the loudest voices calling for justice, accountability, and ambitious solutions to some of the major issues facing the world.
“Greenpeace is proud to stand alongside the Marshallese people in their demands for nuclear justice and reparations, and the fight against colonial exploitation which continues to this day. Justice – Jimwe im Maron.“
During the six-week mission, the Rainbow Warrior will travel to Mejatto, Enewetak, Bikini, Rongelap, and Wotje atolls, undertaking much-needed independent radiation research for the Marshallese people now also facing further harm and displacement from the climate crisis, and the emerging threat of deep sea mining in the Pacific.
“Marshallese culture has endured many hardships over the generations,” said Jobod Silk, a climate activist from Jo-Jikum, a youth organisation responding to climate change.
‘Colonial powers left mark’ “Colonial powers have each left their mark on our livelihoods — introducing foreign diseases, influencing our language with unfamiliar syllables, and inducing mass displacement ‘for the good of mankind’.
“Yet, our people continue to show resilience. Liok tut bok: as the roots of the Pandanus bury deep into the soil, so must we be firm in our love for our culture.
“Today’s generation now battles a new threat. Once our provider, the ocean now knocks at our doors, and once again, displacement is imminent.
“Our crusade for nuclear justice intertwines with our fight against the tides. We were forced to be refugees, and we refuse to be labeled as such again.
“As the sea rises, so do the youth. The return of the Rainbow Warrior instills hope for the youth in their quest to secure a safe future.”
Supporting legal proceedings Dr Rianne Teule, senior radiation protection adviser at Greenpeace International, said: “It is an honour and a privilege to be able to support the Marshallese government and people in conducting independent scientific research to investigate, measure, and document the long term effects of US nuclear testing across the country.
“As a result of the US government’s actions, the Marshallese people have suffered the direct and ongoing effects of nuclear fallout, including on their health, cultures, and lands. We hope that our research will support legal proceedings currently underway and the Marshall Islands government’s ongoing calls for reparations.”
The Rainbow Warrior’s arrival in the Marshall Islands also marks the 14th anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster.
While some residents have returned to the disaster area, there are many places that remain too contaminated for people to safely live.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Raquel Peel, Research Supervisor, University of Technology Sydney, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, University of Southern Queensland and Senior Lecturer, University of Notre Dame Australia
Some friendships outlast romantic connections and can prove to be more meaningful. Friends help us get through day-to-day challenges and make the tough stuff more bearable. For older people, a close circle of friends is associated with living longer.
But having close friends can also involve conflict and even break-ups. Breaking up with a friend can be as devastating as breaking up with an intimate partner.
For most of us, friendship is the first close relationship we will form outside of the home environment. Learning to communicate and manage conflict with friends starts in childhood, and shapes our personal and social development, as well as our self-esteem.
So how can deal with conflict in adult friendships in a healthy way? And how do you know if it’s time to call quits on the friendship?
How is conflict different in friendships?
Relationships with friends are often seen as needing less work to maintain than other kinds of relationships. They might be less structured than work relationships and less involved than romantic relationships. The dynamic of our friendships is often very different to how we relate to work colleagues and romantic partners.
Some of the characteristics we display with friends might be also very different to how we behave with others. Male friendships, for example, often involve using insults to show a close bond. For some people, it can be difficult to transition to a relationship where you can be yourself, be vulnerable and have difficult conversations.
Having these deeper conversations with friends means conveying concern, empathy and solidarity. Again, this might look different than in other relationships, especially among men, who often opt for a direct approach when communicating with friends. A direct approach is a way of showing concern, but might sound like an interrogation.
It’s also important to be able to regulate our emotions. This means being able to recognise, manage and respond to your own emotions (such as anger or envy), allowing you to de-escalate situations and avoid conflicts getting out of hand. Research has shown people with better emotional regulation tend to be more popular, have more friends and are more successful maintaining long-term friendships.
Are you ready to forgive?
If you’ve been fighting with a friend and want to repair the relationship, you will need to be open to forgiveness. This will help restore connection, security, happiness and meaning in your relationship.
But people’s willingness to forgive differs across gender and personality types, with some being more willing to forgive than others.
Our willingness to forgive will also depend on how we perceive the issue. Active transgressions (such as physical altercations, insults, lies and gossip) are often perceived as more severe and harder to forgive than passive transgressions (such as failing to act by not apologising).
However, if an interaction with a friend has left you feeling mistreated (physically or emotionally), consider what you are willing to stand for or let go. Weighing-up if the value of the friendship warrants the work to maintain it can be very difficult.
In some cases, conflict might be a result of you outgrowing the friendship. Letting the connection go might be better for your mental health.
I want to repair my relationship with my friend. But how?
Before you repair a relationship, you first need to acknowledge your own feelings, your friend’s experience, and how the interaction has affected the relationship.
When bringing up your grievances with a friend, initiate a conversation about the issue with honesty, discuss the issue in context and find a way forward together, using these core tenets:
Connection
Intimacy in friendships means having honest conversations and spending quality time together. Ask your friends real questions and give them honest advice. With a foundation of open communication, you can solve disagreements and differences when they arise.
Express your own feelings and views using “I feel like” statements rather than blaming the other person with “you do this” or “think that” statements. Instead, show empathy and acknowledge your friend’s perspective.
Forgiveness
When you’re ready, asking for and granting forgiveness can be a powerful way to reconnect. You can do this verbally or non-verbally, such as with a hug.
But try not to negotiate conditions (“I will forgive you when…”). This might be a sign you’re not ready yet.
Boundaries
If a friendship is hurting you, affecting your wellbeing and functioning, it may be beyond repair. Feeling physically unsafe or being subject to verbal abuse or manipulation are signs of victimisation, not healthy conflict. Consider creating distance and seeking support elsewhere from people you can trust.
Raquel Peel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Australia has failed to win an exemption from Donald Trump’s 25% tariffs on aluminium and steel, but the government has vowed to fight on for a carve out.
The White House spokeswoman, Karoline Leavitt, told Australian media in Washington “there will be no exemptions” from the tariffs, which come into effect imminently. Pressed on why, she said “America First steel”.
She said, “If they want to be exempted, they should consider moving steel manufacturing here”.
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said the government would continue to lobby for an exemption. He pointed out it had taken the Coalition government many months to win a carve out from tariffs under the first Trump administration.
“Tariffs don’t make any sense, it’s an act of kind of economic self harm. We’ll be able to find other markets for our steel and our aluminium and we have been diversifying those markets. But we’re obviously really disappointed with this.
“I would say, though, we’ll keep advocating to the United States on this issue. Last time around it was nine months before we got an exemption in relation to steel and aluminium out of the Trump administration in its first term. So, we’ll keep pressing the case, we’ll keep diversifying our own trade. But look, there’s no hiding this, we’re really disappointed with this decision.”
Opposition deputy leader Sussan Ley said the government “just hasn’t done enough”.
“All of the other leaders of the Quad and AUKUS, Japan, India, the UK, travelled to the US, and they had face-to-face meetings, and they did what they needed to do. They advocated fiercely in their country’s interests, but this prime minister has been nowhere to be seen.”
But given no exemptions are being provided, a personal trip by the Albanese would likely have had little effect. The PM made the case for an exemption to the president in a call some weeks ago. In that conversation Trump indicated he would consider Australia’s case, but the government quickly became pessimistic about the administration giving it a special deal.
BlueScope, while expressing disappointment, saw one silver lining. “BlueScope produces more than 3 million tonnes of steel per annum at its NorthStar BlueScope plant in Delta, Ohio. As the US tariffs come into effect the company expects to see the positive impact from an improvement in steel prices.”
Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull this week predicted Trump would shy away from exemptions this time around. While some observers said Turnbull’s broad attack on Trump, whom he called a bully, could work against Australia’s lobbying, it almost certainly was irrelevant, given all representations were rejected.
The Australian concern is less the direct impact of the tariffs – our exports of steel and aluminium to the US are limited – but the fallout from an international trade war that could be sparked by Trump’s policies.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
The plan in Germany is to use the ‘lame-duck’ Parliament that was voted out on 23 February 2025 to alter that country’s constitution. To do this, a two-thirds majority is required in Parliament, and the Chancellor-elect (Friedrich Merz) believes he will not be able to get such a majority in the new parliament, which convenes at the end of March.
To achieve this change in Germany’s constitution, the provisional coalition (CDU/CSU/SPD) will need the support of either the Green Party (in the new parliament) or the ‘liberal’ (ie like New Zealand’s ACT) Free Democratic Party (who will not feature in the new parliament). Hitherto – before 2025 – the CDU, the FDP, and the SPD, were the main supporters of the debt brake. They understood it – in 2009, when it was added to the Constitution – as a means of hobbling any future government which might oppose fiscal austerity; as a means of baking-in, for all foreseeable time, their particular macroeconomic philosophy.
(New Zealand, though with a less formal constitution, has the 1989 Reserve Bank Act and the 1994 Fiscal Responsibility Act effectively baked in. And for similar reasons; to make it extremely difficult for a future government to undertake reforms similar to the very popular macroeconomic policies that were implemented, and successful, in the late 1930s.)
Germany has less than two weeks to break its self-imposed shackle. If they miss that deadline, if they have to use the new parliament, they will have to do something like what Adolf Hitler did in 1933 with the Enabling Act. The irony is that the parties expected to vote against the emergency measure will be the parties – strong in Eastern Germany – who, if in power, would benefit most from a general release of the debt brake.
For the Green Party it will be a case of ‘Which side are you on?’; the Establishment or the Anti-Establishment? This vote may be ‘make or break’ for the German Greens. Historically, the Greens have been opposed to the use of the debt brake to hobble progressive domestic policies. Will they now favour a piece of unprincipled political manoeuvring so that Germany can put itself in a position to make war on Russia or in support of Israel?
A Case for Comparison: New Zealand’s ‘Constitutional Crisis’ of 1984
Robert Muldoon was New Zealand’s caretaker Prime Minister in the week of so after his political defeat in the 14 July 1984 election. The constitutional crisis unfolded the following Monday.
Before and during the election campaign, the Labour Party’s ‘Finance Minister in Waiting’ Roger Douglas had indicated a desire to devalue the New Zealand Dollar by around twenty percent. This set up a ‘one-way-bet’ within the monied community; sell New Zealand dollars for another currency, wait for the election, then buy-back New Zealand dollars. At best there would be windfall capital-gains of 20%; at worst there would be no losses.
So, in the weeks leading up to the election, a financial crisis took place on account of the dramatic rundown of foreign exchange reserves. After the election, Douglas and Prime Minister elect David Lange wanted Robert Muldoon to immediately devalue the New Zealand dollar by twenty percent. Muldoon was reluctant to grant the one-way-speculators their maximum windfall profits; he favoured a much smaller five-percent devaluation.
This reluctance was presented as a constitutional crisis, because the ‘lame duck’ Prime Minister (and Finance Minister) disagreed with the incoming administration. Though eventually Muldoon conceded. Subsequently, the foreign exchange crisis has always been dubbed a constitutional crisis – a crisis of democracy – because the outvoted ‘lame-duck’ government was reluctant to give way to the government-elect. On the matter of the best policy, Muldoon was correct; a 5% devaluation would have been optimal. But nobody seemed to care about that; the barely contested narrative was that in a proper democracy the incoming parliament is always right, even when it’s wrong!
On this basis, what Friedrich Merz is planning to do should be a political scandal. But it probably won’t be. In the end, its all about who’s pushing the narratives, and whose interest it is to buy into which narrative.
Friedrich Merz’s double narrative
In Merz’s first narrative, public debt is bad, so bad that it must be curtailed through a country’s constitution. In his second narrative, Russia is worse; and the United States has become an unreliable ally. Merz still wants to have it both ways. He wants Germany (and the European Union) to continue to be self-hobbled on social spending, including those automatic stabilisers that prevent recessions turning into depressions. He wants to have access to unlimited public debt only for a limited purpose; freedom to wage war, to pursue military spending (despite his country not being under military threat). Mainly as a concession to his putative coalition partner, Merz will agree to use public debt (beyond that presently allowed for) to provide some improvements in public capital infrastructure. He continues to promulgate both an anti-public-debt narrative and an anti-Russia narrative. He wants to perpetuate a forever stalemate in the Russia-Ukraine war, and to promote a baseless domino theory narrative about Russia’s global military ambitions. Germany borders neither Russia nor Ukraine.
Certainly, there is an argument for Germany to have a defence force in balance with the totality of the public sphere, especially in a liberal democracy which sets its own foreign policy. In that context, any German government should be able to persuade the entire parliament (not just two-thirds) to proceed by removing the debt brake without privileging military spending. The recently elected German government should be able to do this with the Bundestag-elect. But in the present context, the constitutionally dubious proposal is not about self-defence, but in about the pursuit of a geopolitical narrative which posits an urgent need for Western Europe to escalate the Russia-Ukraine War.
Historical Military Conflicts between Russia and Foreign Powers since Tsar Peter the Great
While Russia expanded eastwards in much the same way as the United States expanded westward, there has never been anything like evidence that Russia would like to become a global hegemon. As such, Russia has never attacked German territory with expansion in mind. Russia did ‘liberate’ Eastern Europe at the end of World War Two, and continued to control most of Eastern Europe (including a portion of Germany). But that was the end of a vicious conflict in which Germany coveted much of Russia’s territory. Russia (or Soviet Union as the Russian Empire was then) never sought to extend its living space into Germany, though it did inadvertently in 1945 (in the former East Prussia, the Kaliningrad enclave today).
World War One started on 1 August 1914, when Germany declared war on Russia. And the Soviet Union’s ‘Great Patriotic War’ began when Germany invaded the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941.
Other great power military invasions of the Russian Empire included that by Sweden in the 1700s (Sweden was a ‘great power’ then), repelled by Tsar Peter the Great. Then there was Napoleon’s invasion by France in 1812, the subject of Tolstoy’s novel War and Peace. Then there was the conflict in the 1850s in Crimea, involving United Kingdom and France and Florence Nightingale (Crimean War); and an abortive invasion by United Kingdom and United States on the incipient Soviet Union in August 1918 (at Archangel and at Vladivostok). (In addition, Russia fought Japan in Manchuria in 1905; Japan opened hostilities. Both Russia and Japan were emulating the prior European powers’ aggression towards China.)
The Domino Theory as applied to Russia
We should mention the Soviet Invasion of its neighbour, Afghanistan, in 1979. This serves as an analogue for the present Russia-Ukraine war. It this stage we should note several things: that Afghanistan was the neighbour of the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union had genuine concerns about western-power game-playing in Afghanistan, that Afghanistan was not intended by Soviet Russia as the first domino of a global military campaign, and that the world is still dealing with the unforeseen consequences of post-1976 foreign-power-meddling in Afghanistan. The 1989 outcome, a withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan, should not be seen as a credible template for an end to the present war. (‘Game playing’, for the West, is a semi-formal process, representing an application of game theory, a branch of economics.)
Despite the historical record being one of Western European aggression towards Russia – and not vice versa – the present conflict in Ukraine is being increasingly framed (without evidence) as Russia waging a ‘domino war’, meaning that once the Ukrainian domino is knocked over, there will be no halting Russia’s alleged ambitions to control the western world. (Indeed, in the White House rhetorical fracas on 28 February, the comment by Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy that set off Donald Trump was the suggestion that Trump might “think differently” when Russia had secured territory on the Atlantic coast of Europe.)
In three years, Russia has not had sufficient military power to fully appropriate the Oblast of Donetsk, in Ukraine. Under what conceivable scenario might the Putin military machine have the capacity or competence to threaten Germany or indeed any part of the European Union?
This is not the first time of course that the domino theory has been applied to Russia. Many of us will remember how North Vietnam was portrayed as a ‘Communist’ stooge – a Soviet Union proxy – and that if the Communists won in Vietnam they would be all around the Pacific Rim next.
1885 and all that
Going further back into history, there was the Russian Scare, which peaked in New Zealand in 1885. New Zealand’s major cities still have the gun emplacements constructed in 1885, to protect the colony from the Russians! Near the albatross colony at Taiaroa Head, Otago, there is a disappearing gun that’s still in pristine condition. And the similar gun at Auckland’s North Head is also a major tourist attraction.
It’s worth noting that the 1880s was in New Zealand a period of fiscal austerity – the global Long Depression, and in New Zealand – in which defence spending was being pushed despite what was, for all practical purposes, a public sector debt brake.
What was happening in and around 1885 was conflict in Afghanistan between the United Kingdom and the Russian Empire; conflict in which the United Kingdom was portraying Russia as a domino-style aggressor. (Refer the Panjdeh Incident. This period in British military history was sometimes known as the Great Game, and it includes the Crimean War.)
Russia has always seen Ukraine as being part of Greater Russia. Indeed, Kyiv was Russia’s foundation city. In 2022, Russia’s Plan A was to do to Ukraine exactly what the United States did to Iraq in 2003; use military force to bring about regime change through conquest. Aggression, indeed. That war was apparently within the ‘international rules’; or was an ‘acceptable’ departure from those rules. (And, as of now, civilian casualties in Ukraine have been fewer than those of Iraq in the Iraq War.)
Russia’s Plan B has been to redraw the former provincial boundary between Russia and Ukraine, as Russia did in Georgia in 2008 with the effective incorporation of South Ossetia into Russia. (In 2008, there was no subsequent domino invasion of the wider world, and the West was not as invested in Georgia as it came to be in Ukraine.) These border disputes reflect that the former Soviet Union provincial boundaries might not have been optimised for a world in which former republics have become nation states.
From 1999, the United States has overseen the process in which a new state, Kosovo, has been created through a split that Serbia was forced to accept; it was a commonsense rationalisation arising from the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, despite the supposed sanctity of international borders.
None of these issues warranted escalation into a world war. Nor does the present Ukraine dispute. Nor did the Third Balkan War (1914); a war that did (but needn’t have) become World War One.
The irony is that Plan B, the plan Russia is following, is the lesser plan; a partial military conquest is always lesser than a full conquest such as the 2003 Iraq War. And a second irony is that, if hostilities do not end this or next month, then Russia (which seems to have settled for some form of Plan B) may end up achieving its original Plan A goal.
War is a nasty business. There should always be alternatives to war, so that conflicting security concerns can be understood and managed peacefully. It requires international ‘players’ seeking mutual optimisation rather than ‘victory’ for one party over another.
What has been the game of the United States and its European proxies?
Three Well-Informed Realists
John Mearsheimer is an American international relations scholar and practitioner who distinguishes between the ‘liberals’ and the ‘realists’ in places like Washington. He’s firmly in the realist camp. And he’s able to evaluate the debates between the two groups. This short clip on YouTube is an interview with John Anderson, former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia (under John Howard). He traces how, from the time of Bill Clinton’s presidency, the liberal foreign policy hawks have always pushed for the ongoing eastward expansion of Nato after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. And how realists (including former senior European political leaders Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel) opposed this, especially the push to get Nato into Ukraine and Georgia; but were outmanoeuvred by the ‘liberals’. Journalist Peter Hitchens echoes this realist view, also in an interview with Anderson, noting how democracies will get into wars on the basis of overhyped narratives, and on account of those same narratives find it almost impossible to get out of these wars.
Jeffrey Sachs is an esteemed Harvard and Columbia University development economist, who’s been a consultant on global economic development and has been a first-hand witness to much geopolitical policymaking over the last four decades. You can see and hear Sachs in this long clip; in an address/discussion to the European Parliament in late February 2025. He connects the 1990s’ United States expansionist project to the philosophy of Zbigniew Brzezinski, for example outlined here in A Geostrategy for Eurasia, Foreign Affairs 1997; though noting that American unipolar hegemony builds on British Empire principles that go back to Lord Palmerston in the 1850s, and to the early twentieth century theories of Halford Mackinder. Brzezinski was an important figure, United States’ rival foreign policy guru to the pragmatic realist Henry Kissinger in the 1970s. It was under Brzezinski’s period in power as National Security Adviser, in the late 1970s under Jimmy Carter, that the Cold War – dampened in the early 1970s under Richard Nixon’s presidency – reheated; and that the United States started meddling in Afghanistan.
Peter Turchin is the Russian-born American cliodynamicist (scholar of long period history with the use of long-period statistics) who wrote in End Times (2023) and a number of other important books in the last quarter-century. He has substantial insights into the political and business dynamics of the United States, and of Russia along with its historical satellites such as Belarus and Ukraine. Turchin sees – for the 1990s – the United States, Russia, and Ukraine as true plutocracies (or ‘oligarchies’), subject to the power and foibles of the very rich. For the United States, that influence has waxed and waned throughout its history, but has always been there. Russia, Turchin observes, ceased to be a plutocracy after what was effectively a coup in the late 1990s on the part of the former military/bureaucratic establishment. Belarus never got started as an oligarchy. But Ukraine continues as a true plutocracy, and the United States liberal establishment invested heavily into ensuring that Ukraine would remain so. He says in End Times “By 2014, American ‘proconsuls’, such as veteran diplomat Victoria Nuland, had acquired a large degree of power over the Ukrainian plutocrats.” On this basis, it would seem to be true that the American Lobby in Ukraine operated much as the Israel Lobby operates in the United States. (And we sort-of know the stories of the Bidens’ interest [Joe and Hunter] in Ukraine.)
Conclusion
Germany is dowsing the embers of a twice-vibrant democracy. A war that might have been a small regional war threatens to become a world war, as big liberal-mercantilist (money-focused ‘economically conservative’ and ‘socially liberal’ political classes who are indifferent to unselected genocides and mass-suffering-events) economic powers such as Germany (and the United Kingdom) become less democratic and more bellicose. If we treasure our democratic principles, we should at least take notice.
The Russia-Ukraine War is a mucky border conflict between two countries with a long and intertwined shared history, and with more than enough ‘stirring of the pot’ from outside to convert a regional security dispute into an existential global security threat. It can be settled with a deal that reflects the military situation, rather than by democratically compromised sabre-rattling from Western Europe. After a fluid war in 1950 followed by an extended bloody stalemate – and a change of government in Washington – the 1953 Korean War cease-fire enabled the Republic of Korea (South Korea) to become an economic superpower. An independent capitalist Republic of Ukraine (or, if necessary, West Ukraine) might do the same.
(In that context, we note that Korea’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Syngman Rhee, “refused to sign the armistice agreement that ended the [hostilities], wishing to have the peninsula reunited by force”. Syngman Rhee’s country was saved, though not by him.)
*******
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
The age-old saying “you are what you eat” rings true – diet quality affects our health from the inside out. While a healthy diet can improve health and wellbeing, a poor diet increases the risk of chronic health conditions such as obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
But Australians’ diets appear to be getting worse, not better. Our new modelling study suggests by 2030, our diets will comprise almost 10% less fruit, and around 18% more junk food. This puts us further away from national targets for healthy eating.
A public health priority
A healthy diet is a priority area of the National Preventive Health Strategy. This strategy sets clear goals to improve diet quality by 2030, including increasing fruit and vegetable intake, and reducing consumption of discretionary or “junk” food.
Junk foods (such as cakes, chips, chocolate, confectionery, certain takeaway foods and sugary drinks) are high in saturated fat, salt and sugar, and should only be consumed occasionally and in small amounts.
The preventive health strategy stipulates adults should be consuming two servings of fruit per day and five serves of vegetables, and should be reducing discretionary foods to less than 20% of total energy intake.
Currently, we’re sitting well short of these targets.
We wanted to know whether we might be able to achieve these goals by 2030. So we combined unique data on Australians’ diets with predictive models to map out how our diets are likely to change by 2030.
The CSIRO Healthy Diet Score survey has been running since 2015. This survey uses short questions to measure intake of the five healthy food groups, including fruit and vegetables, as well as discretionary foods. The questions ask about how often people eat certain foods, and how much they eat, to determine an individual’s average daily consumption.
We analysed data from more than 275,000 people who completed this survey between 2015 and 2023. We used predictive modelling techniques called generalised linear models to forecast future diet trends against the national targets. We also broke our findings down by sex and age.
What we found suggests we’re heading in the wrong direction.
Overall, we found fruit consumption is declining. On average, Australians were eating 0.1 fewer serves of fruit in 2023 than they did in 2015. If this trend continues, we expect a further 9.7% decrease in the average serves of daily fruit to 1.3 serves per day by 2030, well below national targets.
While vegetable consumption appears steady at around 3.7 serves per day, this is well below the recommended daily intake of 5 serves per day.
Concerningly, we are also seeing an increase in consumption of discretionary foods. Average daily intake increased by 0.7 serves between 2015 and 2023, with a further 0.8 serve increase predicted by 2030 (an 18% rise). That’s a 1.5 serve (40%) increase in just 15 years.
We can’t put an exact figure on how junk food intake stacks up against the targets, because we looked at serves per day, while the targets are about the proportion of total energy. However, the figures we identified constitute significantly more than 20% of total energy intake.
Things look worse for women. By 2030, women are predicted to be eating 13.2% less fruit and 21.6% more discretionary foods compared to 2023. For men, our predictions suggest a 4.8% decrease in fruit intake and a 19.5% increase in junk foods.
Despite a greater change in women, men are still predicted to be eating more discretionary foods by 2030 (6.3 serves per day for men versus 4.6 for women).
For Australians aged 30 and above, both fruit and vegetable intake are declining. Adults aged 31–50 have the lowest reported fruit and vegetable intake, but the largest change is in adults 71 and older. For these older Australians, we estimate a 14.7% decrease in fruit consumption and a 6.9% decrease in vegetable consumption by 2030. That’s equivalent to a decrease of 0.5 serves of fruit and 0.2 serves of vegetables since 2015.
Discretionary food intake is on the rise in all age groups, but particularly in younger adults.
However, young Australians (18–30 years) may be eating more discretionary foods, but they’re also the only ones eating more healthy food as well. Both fruit and vegetable consumption are increasing for young Australians, with our modelling suggesting a 10.7% and 13.2% respective rise in average serves per day by 2030.
Although this is a positive sign, it’s not enough, as these projections still put young Australians below the recommended daily intake.
Some limitations
Our modelling helps us to understand diet trends over recent years and project these into the future.
However, the research doesn’t tell us what’s driving the worrying trends we’ve observed in Australian diet quality. There are likely to be a variety of factors at play.
For example, many Australians understand what a “healthy balanced diet” is, but what we eat could be affected by social and personal preferences.
It could also be related to cost of living and other pressures which can make fresh food harder to obtain. Also, the area where we live can influence how easy or hard it is to make healthy food choices.
Understanding the root causes behind these changes is a vital area of future research.
In terms of other limitations, our study only focused on the diet quality of Australian adults and didn’t investigate trends is children’s diets.
Also, we only looked at fruit, vegetables and junk food in this study. But we are currently studying changes in the whole diet, taking in other food groups as well.
What can we do?
Australian diets are going in the wrong direction, but it’s not too late to correct the path. We need to ensure all Australians understand what constitutes a healthy diet, and can afford to maintain one.
While no one person, sector or organisation can do this alone, by working together we can put a greater focus towards eating a healthy diet. This includes reviewing policy around the availability and price of fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as looking at our own plates and swapping the junk food for healthier options.
Danielle Baird, a Team Leader in Nutrition and Behaviour at CSIRO, contributed to this article.
As an employee of CSIRO, Matthew Ryan has worked on projects funded by government.
As an employee of CSIRO, Gilly Hendrie has worked on various projects funded by government, industry and research councils.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kerrie Sadiq, Professor of Taxation, QUT Business School, and ARC Future Fellow, Queensland University of Technology
For over a decade, there has been an increase in calls for multinational corporations to be forced to disclose tax information publicly. The idea is that enhanced transparency reduces tax avoidance and the use of tax havens.
There is also growing recognition that paying taxes is a corporate social responsibility. To date, voluntary corporate tax reporting regimes have had mixed success.
High quality tax information is important as it allows stakeholders to assess corporate behaviour. People are able to better consider whether companies are doing the right thing. For example, investors and media want to know whether companies are using tax havens. Currently, it is only voluntary information that tells us this.
In our latest study, we examine the influence of the chief executive on the decision to provide tax information. Specifically, whether chief executives’ moral characteristics influence their views on tax reporting. We found they do – that benevolent CEOs are more likely to be tax transparent.
Changes are coming
The voluntary nature of tax reporting in Australia is about to change.
Starting this financial year, companies that meet certain requirements must disclose their global group’s revenues, profits, and income taxes to the public. They will also need to disclose the global group’s activities and related party dealings.
Broadly, the rules will apply to large multinationals with an annual Australian turnover above A$10 million. This regime is known as public country-by-country reporting.
This mandatory regime is the latest attempt by the Australian government to increase corporate tax transparency. Nearly a decade ago, the Board of Taxation produced a voluntary tax transparency code.
It provides a framework for corporate tax disclosure to encourage large businesses to take the lead and become more transparent, and help educate the public about their compliance with Australian tax laws.
Many of our largest companies follow this voluntary code. However, the information provided is of mixed quality.
The question remains: why? It is well understood that some companies view paying taxes as a mere legal obligation, while others see it as a social obligation. The same view is held when it comes to reporting tax information.
Why we need high quality tax data
Tax reporting is increasingly viewed as a way for entities to demonstrate compliance with their corporate social responsibility to pay taxes.
High quality data will tell stakeholders about tax practices including details on related party dealings, tax governance, and tax contributions. Companies that provide high quality data are those complying with the code recommended by the Board of Taxation. Investors and the media are then able to interpret the information to make informed decisions.
We know corporate social responsibility is influenced by corporate leadership, with the moral characteristics of board members affecting disclosure quality. One way to measure this characteristic is to determine a chief executive’s decision to be involved in not-for-profit leadership.
Like all strategic decisions, corporate tax policy and transparency are influenced by the preferences of its top leaders. We examine what leadership characteristics would contribute to a decision to provide high-quality tax reporting.
What makes a benevolent leader?
Specifically, we look at CEO characteristics to see if their charitable nature influences their views on tax reporting. Leaders who contribute their time and talent to not-for-profit organisations are likely to be charitable and are considered benevolent leaders.
Our study revealed that between 30% to 45% of chief executives in the top ASX 300 have leadership positions in non-profits. Those in the consumer staples sector lead the way at 54%. And 57% of women CEOs are benevolent, compared with 32% of male CEOs.
Given their benevolent nature, it might be expected these same leaders would be more likely to view paying taxes and providing the public with information as a social responsibility.
In our study, the top 300 Australian listed firms were analysed to see if CEOs who were also leaders at non-profits were more likely to run a transparent company.
Transparency was an indicator the leaders believed the public should understand the company’s tax practices and be provided with high quality tax information.
We discovered CEO benevolence is a moral characteristic that influences the tax disclosure quality of the top 300 listed firms.
Our study also finds CEO benevolence significantly influences voluntary tax disclosure quality. This suggests a company run by a benevolent CEO is more likely to see tax and reporting as a corporate social responsibility.
Leading in tax transparency
Our study shows benevolent leaders are more likely to be tax transparent.
The companies they lead publish high-quality tax information. When tax reporting is left to leaders to decide what information will be shared, leadership characteristics such as benevolence influence decision-making.
The opposite is also true. Leaders who do not act benevolently are likely to run a company that provides less tax information. This suggests they view tax obligations as being purely legal.
It is logical, therefore, that the government response is also legislative in the form of public country-by-country reporting.
Australia is one of the global leaders in corporate tax transparency. As we move to the new mandatory regime, it is important to understand what factors contribute to a company’s decision to provide high-quality information to the public.
Only time will tell whether regulation requiring disclosure will solve a current lack of quality information.
Kerrie Sadiq currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She has previously received research grants from CPA and CAANZ.
Ellie Chapple is affiliated with the Financial Research Network Ltd
Ashesha Weerasinghe 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.
In wet forests of southeastern Australia, superb lyrebirds engage in extraordinary behaviour – tilling the soil to create habitats for their prey to flourish.
The superb lyreird scratches through the leaf litter and topsoil while foraging, using its powerful claws to search for invertebrates such as worms, centipedes, spiders, crustaceans and insects.
This loosens the soil, allowing more air and water to infiltrate, and speeding up the decomposition of organic material. Our new study shows this creates an ideal habitat for the invertebrates on which it feeds – ensuring they grow large and ensuring the lyrebirds’ future buffet.
So, lyrebirds essentially “farm” their food resource by cultivating the forest floor. This behaviour is rarely seen in the non-human world. It extends across millions of hectares, potentially delivering far-reaching benefits to forest ecosystems.
A remarkable species
The superb lyrebird is mainly found in moist eucalypt forests in southeastern Australia. It is known for its mimicking song and, in the case of the males, ornate, lyre-shaped tail feathers.
Lyrebirds are considered “ecosystem engineers”. This means their foraging changes the environment in ways that affect other species.
Our previous research has shown superb lyrebirds can move an astounding 155 tonnes of litter and soil per hectare of forest floor each year.
The scale of this disturbance suggests it must affect the invertebrates that live in the soil, including those on which lyrebirds rely for their food. Did this in turn benefit the lyrebirds themselves? Our research set out to test this.
What our research involved
Our two-year project involved three sites in the tall forests of Victoria’s Central Highlands.
At each site, we established three experimental plots (3m × 3m), each involving a different “treatment”.
The first treatment involved fencing off the plot to create a lyrebird-free environment. We left these areas alone for two years.
The second treatment also fenced out lyrebirds. But at these, we visited monthly to rake the litter and soil, mimicking lyrebird foraging and scratching. We used a three-pronged, claw-like rake the same width as a lyrebird’s foot. But unlike the lyrebird, we didn’t eat the bugs we encountered!
In the third treatment, we marked the plots with metal stakes, but no fence. This allowed lyrebirds to forage as they pleased.
We collected a sample of soil and leaf litter from each plot at the start of the study, and then again in each spring season.
Then, with help from a specialist insect scientist, known as an entomologist, we counted and classified the invertebrates in the samples – a whopping 197,880 creatures in all.
What we found
We compared samples from the fenced plots – both those that excluded lyrebirds and prevented them feeding, and those where we raked to mimic lyrebird foraging.
We found the raked plots had more types and a larger amount of invertebrates than the undisturbed plots. This suggests turning over the litter and soil creates conditions for invertebrates to thrive and grow bigger.
Then we compared samples from the raked plots and plots where lyrebirds had been free to forage. Again, invertebrates in the raked areas were bigger and more diverse. This was because in both treatments invertebrates had increased, but some had been eaten by lyrebirds in the unfenced plots.
These results provide evidence – albeit unsurprising – that lyrebird feeding affects the invertebrate community on the forest floor. But it also shows that lyrebird cultivation of the litter and soil allow invertebrates to rapidly increase in number and type, replacing what lyrebirds harvest.
Our research shows lyrebirds scratch and modify the forest floor in ways that promote bigger and more diverse food sources. This makes it one of only a few non-human animals known to farm their prey.
Other well-known examples include leaf cutter ants in South America, which grow elaborate fungus “farms” in their nest chambers. The ants weed out unpalatable fungi and select premium leaf matter to feed their crop.
And in West Africa, foraging by both the greater flamingo and the fiddler crab changes mudflats in ways that increase algal biofilms, their shared food resource.
The interaction between lyrebirds and invertebrates has wide benefits for forests. Invertebrates help cycle nutrients and disperse seeds. They also provide food for many birds, small mammals and reptiles.
In this way, the superb lyrebirds’ farming-type behaviour plays an important role in maintaining forest biodiversity. This fascinating behaviour also provides yet another reason to celebrate the complexity of nature.
Alex Maisey has received funding from Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment – Equity Trustees Charitable Foundation. He is affiliated with the Sherbrooke Lyrebird Study Group.
Andrew Bennett has received funding in recent years from the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action, Victoria; the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC; BirdLife Australia and the Macdoch Foundation. He is affiliated with the Ecological Society of Australia, the Australian Mammal Society, BirdLife Australia, and the International Association for Lanscape Ecology.
Angie Haslem has received funding from the Victorian Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action and is affiliated with the Ecological Society of Australia. She currently works for the Victorian Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action
That’s not as eye-wateringly high as the United States (124%), the UK (101%) or Japan (216.3%) – but it’s bad enough at a time when crucial infrastructure spending is overdue.
The government wants to reduce that debt ratio to within the 20-40% range. Simultaneously, however, the coalition government is committed to income and possibly corporate tax cuts.
Some might label this a form of cognitive dissonance: high investment and growth, with low taxes and spending. But in the meantime, New Zealanders can look forward to possible solutions being presented at this week’s Infrastructure Investment Summit, a central plank in the government’s “going for growth” plan.
The aspiration is to attract crucial infrastructure investment from overseas wealth funds to leverage local economic and employment growth. The mostly Asia-Pacific investors attending manage funds collectively worth trillions – although convincing them to spend will be harder than inviting them to the summit.
Public-private partnerships revisited
Central to the desired outcomes will be public-private partnerships (PPPs). These generally consist of consortia of funders, builders, designers and managers which construct and operate public infrastructure.
For investing in asset construction and operation, funders receive guaranteed revenue from user payments, such as road and bridge tolls or school and hospital fees. The infrastructure can then operate on rolling service contracts, or transfer to public ownership after a fixed term (commonly 25 years).
In theory, infrastructure is built, government borrowing is minimised and public services improve. In reality, PPPs try to offset capital expenditure (borrowings) against operational expenditure, thus lowering the initial debt burden but extending the terms. In effect, a hire-purchase agreement for infrastructure.
For all that, and given the parlous state of its infrastructure, New Zealand must find ways to fund major improvements to roads, rail, sanitation, drainage and housing.
The country will also need to combat a looming deficit of skilled professionals. As Engineering New Zealand noted in February, the current construction slowdown has led to a serious decline in qualified engineers.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop are talking up the benefits of public-private partnerships. Getty Images
What investors want
With the effects of climate change already being felt in the 21st century, much basic infrastructure still reflects its 19th century origins. Indeed, New Zealand has long suffered from lags between aspiration and investment.
For example, the Public Health Acts of 1848 and 1875 instigated substantial investment in mains water and sewerage infrastructure. Yet “night soil” removal remained commonplace into the 20th century – right up to the 1960s in Auckland.
However, as political commentator Matthew Hooton rightly noted last week, “investors don’t put money into countries but into projects”. To secure the kind of investment needed, that means projects that can demonstrate minimal risk and high revenues.
The government will open registrations of interest for the first stage of the Northland Expressway at this week’s summit. But other projects in the mix – defence force camps, prisons, court buildings – seem unlikely to meet the minimum size requirements for funders.
PPP investors are in the risk management business. Negotiations can be time-consuming, sometimes lasting years. Risks are costed into concept proposals and preliminary design.
The process, from negotiation to actual construction, can easily outlive a term of government. And there is always the temptation for subsequent governments to renegotiate the scope of a project and its costs.
But once performance requirements are set and signed off, nothing changes without additional and usually high cost increases. The recent fiasco around the Interislander ferry replacements demonstrates the challenges inherent in government procurement.
Projects that outlive governments
The prime minister will no doubt point enthusiastically to his government’s PPP framework having qualified Labour Party support. But investors will still see a three-year electoral cycle and its risks: a 25-year PPP could outlast five or more governments – what impact will this have?
Similarly, New Zealand’s earthquake-prone geology will affect calculations. How does a PPP in an earthquake zone factor in 25-plus years of seismic risk?
Looking ahead to this week’s summit, New Zealand will need to offer projects with serious scale to attract serious investment: flood defences, major public housing, water and drainage assets, another Auckland harbour crossing, significant road improvement and replacement.
Such proposals are on the table, in theory at least. The real question is whether New Zealanders are comfortable with the dynamics of long-term contracts with substantial service charges that will last decades.
Because today’s politicians will be writing contracts our grandchildren will still be bound by.
John Tookey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Paolo* was just 15 years old when he witnessed the Philippine National Police (PNP) mercilessly kill his father in 2016.
Nearly nine years later, the scales are shifting as Rodrigo Duterte, the man who unleashed death upon his family and thousands of others, now faces the weight of justice before the International Criminal Court (ICC).
“Finally, naaresto din, [pero] dapat isama si [Senator Ronald dela Rosa], dapat silang panagutin sa dami ng pamilyang inulila nila. (Finally, he’s arrested but Dela Rosa should’ve been with him, they should be held accountable for how many families they left in mourning),” he said.
Paolo, then a minor, was also accosted and tortured by Caloocan police — from the same city police who would kill 17-year-old Kian delos Santos less than a year later.
He was threatened not to do anything else or else end up like his father. Paolo carried the threats and the fear over the years, even as he hoped for justice.
This hanging on for hope in the face of devastation was not for nothing.
The ICC has been investigating the killings under Duterte’s flagship campaign, which led to at least 6252 deaths in police operations alone by May 2022. The number reached between 27,000 to 30,000, including those killed vigilante-style.
Duterte was presented by the Philippine government’s Prosecutor-General with the ICC notification of an arrest over crimes against humanity upon his arrival from Hong Kong on this morning.
Slow but sure step to justice Paolo is not the only one rejoicing over Duterte’s arrest. Many families, including those from drug war hot spot Caloocan City, see this as the long-awaited step toward the justice they have been denied for years.
When the news broke, Ana* was overcome with joy and thanked God for giving families the strength and unwavering faith to keep fighting for justice. She knew the weight of loss all too well.
In 2017, police stormed into their home in Caloocan City and brutally killed her husband and father-in-law in a single night.
Ana, who was five months pregnant at that time, was caught in the violence and was hit by a stray bullet. She and other victims have since been supported by the In Defence of Human Rights and Dignity Movement.
“Sa wakas, unti-unti nang nakakamit ang hustisya para sa lahat ng biktima (At last, justice is slowly being achieved for all the victims),” she recalled thinking when she read that Duterte had been arrested.
But Ana is wishing for more than just imprisonment for Duterte, even as she welcomed the long-awaited accountability from the former president and his allies.
“Sana din ay aminin niya lahat ng kamalian at humingi siya ng kapatawaran sa lahat ng tao na biktima para matahimik din ang mga kaluluwa ng mga namatay (I hope he also admits to all his wrongdoings and asks for forgiveness from every victim, so that the souls of those who were killed may finally find peace),” she said.
Brutality they endured For the families, the ICC’s move and the government’s action are an acknowledgment of the brutality they endured. The latest development is also a validation of their grief and provides a glimmer of hope that accountability is finally within reach. After years of being silenced and dismissed, they see this moment as the start of a reckoning they feared would never come.
Celina, whose husband was shot dead in a drug war operation, feels overwhelming joy but is wary that the arrest is just part of a long process at the ICC.
“Ang sabi nga po, mahaba-habang laban ito kaya hindi po sa pag-aresto natatapos ito, bagkus ito ay simula pa lamang ng aming mga laban [at] naniniwala kami at aasa sa kakayahan at suporta na ibinibigay sa amin ng ICC [na] sa huli, mananagot ang dapat managot, maparusahan ang may mga sala,” she said.
(As they say, this is a long battle, so it does not end with the arrest. Rather, this is only the beginning of our fight. We believe in and will rely on the ICC’s capability and support, knowing that in the end, those who must be held accountable will face justice, and the guilty will be punished.)
‘Duterte should feel our pain’ The wounds left behind by the drug war killings remain deep. The families’ losses are irreversible, yes, but they see this arrest as a long-awaited step toward the justice they have fought for years to achieve.
It is a stark contrast to the reality they have lived following the deaths of their loved ones. They were constantly under threat from the police who pulled the trigger. Many families had to flee to faraway places, leaving behind their own communities and source of livelihood.
“Nakakaiyak ako, hindi ko alam ang dapat kong maramdaman na sa ilang taon naming ipinaglalaban ay nakamit din namin ang hustisyang aming minimithi (I’m in tears — I don’t know what to feel. After years of fighting, we have finally achieved the justice we have long been yearning for),“ said Betty, whose 44-year-old son and 22-year-old grandson were killed under Duterte’s drug war.
For Jane Lee, the arrest only underscores the glaring disparity between the powerful and the powerless.
“Mabuti pa siya, inaresto ng mga kapulisan. Ang aming mga kaanak, pinatay agad,” she said. “Napakalaki ng pagkakaiba sa pagitan ng makapangyarihan at ordinaryong taong tulad namin.”
(At least he was arrested by the police. Our loved ones were killed on the spot. The difference between the powerful and ordinary people like us is enormous.)
Lee’s husband, Michael, was gunned down by unidentified men in May 2017, leaving her to raise their three children alone. Since then, she has volunteered for Rise Up for Life and for Rights, a group composed mostly of widows and mothers who remain steadfast in demanding justice for drug war victims.
Collective rage Families from Rise Up in Cebu also voiced their collective rage against Duterte who ordered killings from the presidential pulpit for six years. They hope that Duterte will feel the same pain they felt when their loved ones were forcibly taken away from them.
This afternoon, Duterte condemned the alleged violation of due process following his arrest. His allies are also echoing this messaging, calling the arrest unlawful.
His longtime aide, Senator Bong Go, Go, tried to access Duterte in Villamor Air Base, asking the guards to let him deliver pizza since they hadn’t eaten yet.
“Katiting lang iyan sa ginawa mo sa amin na sinira mo ang aming buhay at hanapbuhay dahil sa iyong pekeng war on drugs,” the families of drug war victims in Cebu said. “Wala kang karapatan na kumuha ng buhay ng iba [kasi] Diyos lang may karapatan kaya sa ginawa mo, maniningil ang taumbayan lalo na kaming mga pamilya ng mga naging biktima.”
(That is nothing compared to what you did to us. You destroyed our lives and livelihood because of your fake war on drugs. You have no right to take another person’s life; only God has that right. Because of what you have done, the people will demand justice, especially we, the families of the victims.)
There is still no clear information on what comes next, whether Duterte will be immediately transferred to the International Criminal Court headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands, or if legal battles will delay the process.
But Mila*, whose 17-year-old nephew was killed by police in Quezon City in 2018, hopes for one thing if the former president finds himself in a detention cell soon: “Sana huwag na siya lumaya (I hope he is never set free).”
Vanuatu’s media community was in mourning today following the death of Marc Neil-Jones, founder of the Trading Post Vanuatu, which later became the Vanuatu Daily Post, and also radio 96BuzzFM. He was 67.
His fearless pursuit of press freedom and dedication to truth have left an indelible mark on the country’s media landscape.
Neil-Jones’s journey began in 1989 when he arrived in Vanuatu from the United Kingdom with just $8000, an early Macintosh computer, and an Apple laser printer.
It was only four years after Cyclone Uma had ravaged the country, and he was determined to create something that would stand the test of time — a voice for independent journalism.
In 1993, Neil-Jones succeeded in convincing then Prime Minister Maxime Carlot Korman to grant permission to launch the Trading Post, the country’s first independent newspaper. Prior to this, the media was under tight government control, and there had been no platform for critical or independent reporting.
The Trading Post was a bold step toward change. Neil-Jones’s decision to start the newspaper, with its unapologetically independent voice, was driven by his desire to provide the people of Vanuatu with the truth, no matter how difficult or controversial.
This was a turning point for the country’s media, and his dedication to fairness and transparency quickly made his newspaper a staple in the community.
Blend of passion, wit and commitment Marc Neil-Jones’s blend of passion, wit, and unyielding commitment to press freedom became the foundation upon which the Vanuatu Trading Post evolved. The paper grew, expanded, and ultimately rebranded as the Vanuatu Daily Post, but Marc’s vision remained constant — to provide a platform for honest journalism and to hold power to account.
His ability to navigate the challenges that came with being an independent voice in a country where media freedom was still in its infancy is a testament to his resilience and determination.
Marc Neil-Jones faced numerous hurdles throughout his career — imprisonment, deportation, threats, and physical attacks — but he never wavered. Image: Del Abcede/Asia Pacific Report
Neil-Jones faced numerous hurdles throughout his career — imprisonment, deportation, threats, and physical attacks — but he never wavered. His sense of fairness and his commitment to truth were unwavering, even when the challenges seemed insurmountable.
His personal integrity and passion for his work left a lasting impact on the development of independent journalism in Vanuatu, ensuring that the country’s media continued to evolve and grow despite the odds.
Marc Neil-Jones’ legacy is immeasurable. He not only created a platform for independent news in Vanuatu, but he also became a symbol of resilience and a staunch defender of press freedom.
Marc Neil-Jones explaining how he used his radio journalism as a “guide” in the Secret Garden in 2016. Video: David Robie
His work has influenced generations of journalists, and his fight for the truth has shaped the media landscape in the Pacific.
As we remember Marc Neil-Jones, we also remember the Trading Post — the paper that started it all and grew into an institution that continues to uphold the values of fairness, integrity, and transparency.
Marc Neil-Jones’s work has changed the course of Vanuatu’s media history, and his contributions will continue to inspire those who fight for the freedom of the press in the Pacific and beyond.
Rest in peace, Marc Neil-Jones. Your legacy will live on in every headline, every report, and every story told with truth and integrity.
Photojournalist Ben Bohane’s tribute Vale Marc Neil-Jones, media pioneer and kava enthusiast who passed away last night. He fought for and normalised media freedom in Vanuatu through his Daily Post newspaper with business partner Gene Wong and a great bunch of local journalists.
Reporting the Pacific can sometimes be a body contact sport and Marc had the lumps to prove it. It was Marc who brought me to Vanuatu to work as founding editor for the regional Pacific Weekly Review in 2002 and I never left.
The newspaper didn’t last but our friendship did.
He was a humane and eccentric character who loved journalism and the botanical garden he ran with long time partner Jenny.
Rest easy mate, there will be many shells of kava raised in your honour today.
Last Monday, March 3, the Bureau of Meteorology warned residents of Queensland and New South Wales that Tropical Cyclone Alfred was coming their way. The storm was expected to hit the coast on Thursday or Friday.
By Wednesday, landfall was expected on Thursday night, and residents braced for impact. And then the waiting began.
The storm stalled, dithered and eventually weakened before reaching land early on Saturday morning. But alongside punishing winds, rain and flooding, another kind of damage spread during the long wait: conspiracy theories and misinformation were rife on social media.
They were part of a growing worldwide trend. As climate change ramps up, extreme weather proliferates and trust in authorities declines. Every large natural disaster triggers a wave of conspiracy theorising.
Suspicions of ‘weather modification’
The most persistent theme among the conspiracy theorists is the idea that Cyclone Alfred was “geoengineered” – the result of human efforts to control weather or climate. “Weather modification is real,” one member of a Facebook community group ominously posted, linking to a site listing patents for geoengineering.
A commenter on a community Facebook page points to information about weather modification in a conversation about Cyclone Alfred. Facebook
The post argued that the position of the cyclone as far south as Brisbane was due to deliberate human intervention.
Of course, tropical cyclones have crossed the coast of southeast Queensland before – and as recently as 2019 one came very close.
However, it is true that human activity may have played an indirect role in Cyclone Alfred’s behaviour. As the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience has noted, human-driven global warming means cyclones are likely to move farther south more often.
The spectre of geoengineering
What is geoengineering exactly? Among climate experts, the word is often used to describe proposed actions to mitigate climate change, such as adding tiny particles to the upper atmosphere to reflect away sunlight or attempting to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.
However, in conspiracy theories, geoengineering is more likely to refer to supposed secretive attempts to directly control weather. Like many conspiracy theories, these ideas often contain elements of the real and the fantastical.
A common element of the Cyclone Alfred theory (and others like it) is that the storm was created by the High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP). This project, originally created by the United States military and now at the University of Alaska, studies auroras by transmitting radio waves into a layer of Earth’s atmosphere called the ionosphere.
Though HAARP is real, there is no evidence that radio waves can create a weather event. Weather forms much closer to the ground, in a layer of the atmosphere called the troposphere.
Another theory claimed that Cyclone Alfred was the result of cloud seeding. This is the practice of “seeding” the atmosphere with tiny particles that trigger the formation of rain clouds under the right conditions. Cloud seeding has really been attempted, but the jury is out on how effective it is.
However, triggering some rain is quite different to creating a cyclone or changing the path of one. Experts say these are impossible, mainly due to the amount of energy it would take to produce and then control a cyclone’s path.
Despite the lack of scientific support for these theories, the seemingly endless wait between preparation and impact gave plenty of time for people to spread misinformation and conspiracy theories on social media.
This led some to declare the cyclone a “media beat-up”, or a fever dream based on media lies. It was, they claimed, “just like covid” – the government and media were conspiring to induce people to give up their freedoms.
A commenter in a Facebook community group claims Cyclone Alfred was ‘a complete con’. Facebook.
A growing problem
Misinformation around natural disasters and climate change is a growing problem.
Last October in the US, Hurricane Milton hit Florida and caused catastrophic flooding in Georgia and South Carolina. Online conspiracy theories suggested Milton too was “seeded” or engineered. Social media was flooded with AI-generated clips and out-of-date media.
The problem of climate-related misinformation is getting worse. Last year, when the United Nations recommended urgent action to combat misinformation and disinformation, climate change was one key area of focus.
As online misinformation and conspiracy theories rise, social media companies such as Meta (owner of Facebook, Instagram and Threads) and X (formerly Twitter) are withdrawing from active content moderation strategies. Instead, they are shifting the burden onto users through community-driven fact checking.
The problem of misinformation is particularly pronounced in community groups on Facebook. These groups may have thousands of members and often only loose moderation.
However, they are increasingly becoming sources of misinformation and conspiracy theories intermingled with genuine information and sound advice.
Why conspiracy theories?
Why are we so compelled by misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Climate change is unpredictable, and is creating more intense weather events than before. In the face of such uncertainty it may be easier to retreat to the clear narratives offered by conspiracy theories.
If a cyclone was created by the government, it has a clear cause. Those affected have a clear place to direct their fear, frustration and anxiety.
What can be done?
There is plenty governments and social media platforms can do to combat the spread of misinformation, if they have the desire to do so. But the everyday user should be cautious.
In times of disaster, seek out trusted sources of information. Remember that nature is unpredictable and advice can and will change. Community groups can be excellent places for practical support, but they are not filled with experts.
Latching on to a conspiracy theory may feel good. It can create a clean-cut world of heroes and villains.
Naomi Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Shortly after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, the new government led by rebel leader Ahmed al-Sharaa pledged to unite Syrians and establish a “civil peace” in the country.
In recent days, this fragile peace has been tested. Late last week, clashes broke out between government security forces and the remnants of pro-Assad militias in the former president’s stronghold of Latakia province on the northwestern coast. More than 1,000 people were killed, mostly civilians.
In a positive sign, a major deal was struck on Monday between the government and another armed faction, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region in northeastern Syria. The SDF has agreed to integrate all of its forces and institutions with the central government in Damascus.
Yet, the threat of more violence in the fractured country remains. This raises serious doubts about whether al-Sharaa’s vision can become a reality.
What caused the recent violence?
The unrest in Latakia was sparked by an ambush attack by pro-Assad gunmen against government security forces (composed primarily of former rebel fighters) last Thursday. This reignited old wounds from Syria’s 13-year civil war, triggering the deadliest violence since the fall of al-Assad in December.
According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, at least 1,068 civilians were killed in the violence – mostly members of the Alawite minority (a sect of Shiite Islam), as well as some Christians.
The United Nations said it had received “extremely disturbing” reports of entire families being killed, including children.
Many members of Assad’s family and his former regime’s high-ranking officials belong to the Alawite minority. Tensions have persisted between these Assad loyalists and the new government, which is dominated by Sunni factions with a history of jihadist and anti-Shiite leanings.
The government said its operations against the pro-Assad forces had ended by Monday. Al-Sharaa also acknowledged that human rights violations had occurred and announced an investigation to identify those responsible.
However, he placed primary blame on the pro-Assad groups for instigating the violence. While defending the crackdown overall, he stressed that security forces should not “exaggerate in their response”.
Following the violence, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio expressed solidarity with Syria’s religious and ethnic minorities, calling on the interim government to hold the perpetrators accountable.
The European Union, which recently eased some restrictions on Syria to support an “inclusive political transition”, also condemned the violence.
Transitional justice is key
In a diverse and deeply divided country like Syria, the decades of dictatorship eroded national identity and fueled sectarian conflict. This is why a comprehensive process of transitional justice is essential.
Such a process would help bridge the divisions between different ethnic and religious communities. This would foster national unity, while respecting the unique identities of individual groups.
Although the new administration has emphasised the importance of social cohesion, its forces are accused of acting counter to this pledge and carrying out extrajudicial killings. Sectarian rhetoric from some pro-government figures has only further inflamed tensions.
These developments underscore Syria’s urgent need for an independent transitional justice committee. Without a structured approach to hold those accountable for crimes committed under the Assad regime and national reconciliation, the country risks replacing one cycle of repression with another. This will only deepen grievances, not heal them.
A well-designed justice process is crucial to help Syrians move beyond the trauma of the previous regime and build a stable, inclusive future.
Challenges to a united Syria
Amid the ongoing turmoil, the recent agreement signed between the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and al-Sharaa’s government has raised hopes the country may still have a chance to maintain its unity and avoid fragmentation.
However, the details of how the SDF forces will be integrated remain unclear. Will the Kurds finally achieve their long-held demand for semi-autonomy within a federal state? Or will this integration mark the end of their aspirations?
The situation is equally complex for the Alawites and Druze communities in the western and southern regions of Syria, given they have two powerful regional forces backing them.
Israel has made significant inroads in the Druze areas of southern Syria, offering to defend the Druze if necessary. Similarly, Iran continues to support the Alawites, with its leadership predicting an uprising against the new Syrian regime.
These dynamics present serious obstacles to Syria’s unity. In such a polarised environment, a federal system may be the last viable option to preserve the country’s cohesion. However, if the new regime continues to reject this idea, the country risks fragmentation and undoubtedly more violence.
Ali Mamouri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
On Monday, the Australian Federal Police declared it and 14 antisemitic attacks a “con job” by organised criminals who were trying to distract police or use it as a bargaining chip to influence prosecutions.
Following dawn raids, more than 140 charges have been laid, including for arson, possessing prohibited weapons, and destroying property – but not terrorism.
On radio, New South Wales Premier Chris Minns said the acts had “unleashed terror” that was very real for the Jewish community, despite revelations about the true motive.
Minns did not say the explosives and attacks would qualify legally as terrorism, but his comments raise an important question: can “fake” terrorism still be terrorism, especially if it causes significant fear?
Terrorism requires a political, religious or ideological cause
Australia’s legal definition of terrorism is found in the federal Criminal Code. It triggers many offences and it targets both conduct and threats – but these must all be done for the purpose of advancing a “political, religious or ideological cause”.
This motive requirement is the main element that distinguishes terrorism from crimes such as murder, assault and property damage.
It is the major barrier to prosecuting these acts as terrorism. The apparent motive was to benefit organised crime interests. It cannot be terrorism if it was not intended to advance a political, religious or ideological cause.
There is another requirement that terrorism be designed to intimidate part of the community (or a government), but this is additional to the motive requirement, and both need to be proven. If any single element in a prosecution fails, the defendant will be found not guilty.
This does not lessen the significant impacts on the Jewish community. It just explains why terrorism charges have not been laid.
What about hoax terrorism?
In addition to the main terrorism offences, there are offences for hoax terrorist acts. These were created in 2002 as part of Australia’s first legal responses to terrorism.
These do not rely on the definition of the terrorist act, so the motive requirement explained above need not be proven. However, they apply only in very specific cases, similar to copycat anthrax attacks, in which someone uses the postal service to induce a false belief that an article contains an explosive or dangerous substance (for example, if someone sends a letter containing harmless white powder with a threatening note).
A similar offence applies where someone uses a carriage service to make a hoax threat. This could apply if an organised criminal group phoned in a fake bomb threat.
This sounds quite similar to recent events, but the offence relates to the use of a carriage service to make a fake threat – not the discovery of real explosives.
This might seem a ridiculous conclusion: that the threat was actually not fake enough. If an organised criminal group phoned in a “genuinely fake” threat, they could have been prosecuted under federal terrorism laws, but not if they planted real explosives.
This is a product of trigger-response lawmaking in terrorism. The postal hoax laws were drafted in direct response to events in the US after 9/11, and the legacy remains.
In any case, the hoax offences do not attract any higher penalties than the ones being charged. In NSW, destroying or damaging property with fire attracts the same maximum penalty of ten years’ imprisonment.
Political and community needs
It is important to remember that police and prosecutors will make decisions to pursue specific charges based on the evidence available and the likelihood of a successful conviction for the highest penalty.
This will be based on their previous experience. If they believe they can secure a conviction for arson or property damage, but a case for terrorism or hoax terrorism might fail, they will prefer the charges with the higher chance of success.
As members of the wider community, we may wish to see different or additional charges laid, but we will not know all the evidence behind a decision to allege one crime or another.
Police and prosecutors are not infallible, but we can trust they will aim to secure the highest available penalty.
It is understandable that governments, the opposition and the wider community want clear statements and answers about whether a crime is terrorism or not. Unfortunately, this level of clarity is not always available.
In the midst of a crisis, such as the Sydney Lindt Cafe siege or Wieambilla ambush, it can be difficult to know all the circumstances that gave rise to the event, and an offender’s motivations.
In the aftermath, it can take months – even years, through major inquests and inquiries – for consensus to arise. Even then, views on whether a given act was terrorism may still differ.
The most definitive answer comes when a jury of 12 community members finds an offender guilty of terrorism beyond reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, this sort of clarity is not always possible, because the evidence available means a terrorism charge was not pursued, or an offender was killed in the attack.
It is rarely an urgent question for governments and communities to know whether organised crime activities will be prosecuted under one law or another, but terrorism provokes a special, understandable concern – especially in the current environment. It reflects valid community needs to denounce antisemitism as terrorism and achieve justice for victims.
But justice can be achieved regardless of the specific charges that police and prosecutors pursue. Better that they secure convictions, even for “lesser” crimes in the community’s eyes, than they seek terrorism charges and fail.
Keiran Hardy receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a Discovery Project on conspiracy extremism.
Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred is the latest in a succession of extreme rainfall events to wreak havoc on coastal communities in New South Wales and Queensland.
This is a massive area, affecting hundreds of thousands of households, with tens of thousands of people stranded. Similar numbers of properties are likely to be damaged.
It’s only been three years since the same general region was affected by major flooding. Many people are still recovering. So, how exactly do we think about and measure the cost of such catastrophes? What lessons have been learnt, and how well are they being practised?
It’s too early to make a comprehensive estimate of the costs of Alfred, as some impacts are continuing to unfold. But previous natural disasters offer us a framework for thinking about them.
The costs of natural disasters can be accounted for in different ways. Impact costs include social, financial, economic, environmental and cultural values.
These can be broken down further into direct, indirect and intangible costs. Intangible costs are things with value that do not contribute directly to the market economy.
An assessment of the 2022 Queensland floods, produced by Deloitte Access Economics for the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, estimated the total cost of impacts to be A$7.7 billion.
Tangible economic costs were estimated at $3.1 billion, and intangibles at $4.5 billion. Intangible losses included mortalities, injuries and long-term changes in health and welfare caused by the event.
Some costs are hard to measure
Not so long ago, economic estimates were restricted to direct losses on property and infrastructure, and lost income for individuals and businesses, so we’ve come a long way.
Even though estimates are becoming more sophisticated, they generally cover social, financial and economic impacts. Environmental and cultural losses are often less of a focus, unless they are closely linked to income.
If you ask people why they love living in a particular place, they’ll often say its because a location is special to them. That might be because of the relationships they have with neighbours or community activities they take part in.
These things aren’t featured in measures of economic activity, but they are a feature of people’s lives.
This raises the issue of marginal costs. When we only look at the dollar cost of damage, we can lose sight of how disproportionately it can impact the more vulnerable groups in society.
This includes those who rent, those with limited incomes, the elderly, those with limited mobility or long-term medical conditions (mental and physical), recent immigrants and marginalised groups in society, including traditional owners.
Lasting damage from a natural disaster can include things like loss of identity, a place to live, treasured possessions, loss of a loved animal or family breakdown.
Insurance only goes so far
Another way to assess the cost of a catastrophe is through an insurance lens – losses that are recoverable through insurance and those that are not covered.
The Insurance Council of Australia has become much more proactive in recent years, recognising that preparedness and prevention can minimise these losses.
But insuring against major catastrophes relies on reinsurance, policies purchased by insurance companies themselves to cover peak losses.
The federal government has also established its own Cyclone Reinsurance Pool with the aim of pushing down premiums for consumers.
Well-targeted relief can bring benefits. One study examining the response to the 2010–11 Queensland floods found the government’s post-disaster relief payments were effective in aiding economic recovery.
A new reality
The governance arrangements surrounding disasters in Australia – national plans for how to prepare, respond and recover – are rapidly evolving. This has been largely driven by the disasters themselves.
Disasters in Australia have historically been bad, but infrequent. Now they are occurring on an almost annual basis.
Some locations are more exposed than others, including northeast NSW and southeast Queensland. The economic cost of the 2010-11 Queensland floods was estimated to be equivalent to 5.2% of the state’s gross domestic product (GDP) in that year.
Losses will continue to mount as such events become more frequent and severe.
That means we need to look at the full economic picture of the catastrophe life cycle. For climate events, this means looking not only at what we spend on insurance, preparation, prevention and recovery, but also the money invested in fossil fuels and subsidies.
The Climate Council has projected that parts of Australia might become uninsurable by 2030. A recent report by Climate Valuation looks at high-end flood risk down to suburb and address level.
Such projections are almost certainly underestimated because the models that are used do not adequately predict how fast extreme events are changing.
People need relief now, but we cannot continue to finance our own destruction over the longer term.
Roger Jones does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
While some parts of southeast Queensland and northern New South Wales are still on alert for flooding, others are starting the difficult clean-up process as flood waters recede.
Stagnant water after floods provides the perfect breeding ground for mosquitoes. So as you clean up, remember to empty containers of water and other reservoirs around your house and yard such as water-filled boats, trailers and other large objects. Get rid of debris that may be collecting water too.
This year, mozzies are carrying the usual viruses we want to avoid, such as Ross River virus, but the potentially deadly Japanese encephalitis virus has also been detected in parts of New South Wales and Queensland.
But while flood waters may boost mosquito numbers, outbreaks of disease don’t always follow. Hurricanes in North America have been associated with increased mosquito populations but few outbreaks of disease.
In Australia too, there are few examples of mosquito-borne disease outbreaks after cyclones – with a notable exception. After Tropical Cyclone Zoe made landfall in 1974, we had one of the one of the biggest outbreaks of Murray Valley encephalitis virus later in the year.
Health authorities in Queensland and NSW are monitoring activity of mosquitoes and mosquito-borne pathogens. A/Prof Cameron Webb (NSW Health Pathology)
Japanese encephalitis is already active
Somewhat dry conditions in the summer of 2024-25 have meant mosquito populations in many regions of eastern Australia have remained well below average.
Humans have also been infected. Cases are rare but the disease can be serious, with symptoms ranging from fever, headache, and vomiting through to disorientation, coma, seizure and brain swelling. One person has died of the virus this year.
Japanese encephalitis virus first arrived in southeastern Australia over the summer of 2021-2022. That followed extensive flooding across the Murray Darling Basin thanks to the arrival of La Niña. At the time, there were phenomenal numbers of mosquitoes that continued over subsequent years as the above average rainfall continued.
Mosquito numbers this summer have only been a fraction of what was recorded during those seasons influenced by La Niña. The activity of Japanese encephalitis in 2024-25 has scientists scratching their heads, as it goes against the commonly held theories that greater mosquito numbers combined with increased waterbird activity (typically following flooding) drive greater transmission of viruses such as Japanese and Murray Valley encephalitis.
Fortunately, there is no evidence of these viruses along the coast of southeast Queensland through to northern NSW.
But regions where the virus has already been active, such as Darling Downs in Queensland and Moree in NSW, may see substantial rainfall as a result of ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred.
Thousands of cases of infection are reported across the country each year, including in urban areas of southeast Queensland and northern NSW.
Concerns about Ross River diseases were already raised with heavy rain and flooding in northern Australia this summer. Case numbers often peak at the end or summer and early autumn. So there is potential for greater activity in the coming months.
Other mosquito-borne pathogens, such as Barmah Forest virus, may also be circulating and may cause cases of mild disease but these occur far less commonly than those due to Ross River virus infection.
Protect yourself while cleaning up
If you’re out cleaning up after the storms, try to avoid mosquito bites.
Cover up with long-sleeved shirts, long pants and covered shoes for a physical barrier against mosquito bites.
Use topical insect repellents containing DEET, picaridin, or oil of lemon eucalyptus. Be sure to apply an even coat on all exposed areas of skin for the longest-lasting protection.
For those living or working in regions of Queensland, NSW and Victoria at risk of Japanese encephalitis, a safe and effective vaccine is available.
Cameron Webb and the Department of Medical Entomology, NSW Health Pathology and University of Sydney, have been engaged by a wide range of insect repellent and insecticide manufacturers to provide testing of products and provide expert advice on medically important arthropods, including mosquitoes. Cameron has also received funding from local, state and federal agencies to undertake research into various aspects of management of various medically important arthropods.
For many people, the most visible impact of Cyclone Alfred was the damage big waves and storm surge did to their local beaches.
Beaches in southeast Queensland and northeast New South Wales are now scarred by dramatic sand cliffs, including the tourist drawcard of Surfers Paradise.
Sand islands off Brisbane – Bribie, Moreton and North Stradbroke – protected the city from the worst of the storm surge. But they took a hammering doing so, reducing their ability to protect the coastline.
The good news is, the sand isn’t gone forever. Most of it is now sitting on sandbars offshore. Over time, many beaches will naturally replenish. But sand dunes will take longer. And there are areas where the damage will linger.
Why did it do so much damage?
Cyclone Alfred travelled up and down the coast for a fortnight before crossing the mainland as a tropical low. On February 27, it reached Category 4 offshore from Mackay. From here on, the cyclone’s intense winds whipped up very large swells.
By the time the cyclone started heading towards the coast, many beaches had already been hit by erosion-causing waves. This meant they were more vulnerable to storm surge and further erosion.
As Alfred moved west to make landfall, it coincided with one of the the year’s highest tides. As a result, many beaches have been denuded of sand and coastal infrastructure weakened in some places.
Timelapse showing the coastal erosion caused by ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred, looking north from Surfers Paradise to The Spit. UNSW Water Research Laboratory
Which beaches were hit hardest?
Areas south of the cyclone’s track have been hit hardest, from the Gold Coast to the Northern Rivers.
Some beaches and dunes have significantly eroded. Peregian Beach south of Noosa has lost up to 30 metres of width.
Erosion cliffs, or “scarps”, up to 3 metres high have appeared on the Gold Coast. It exposed sections of the last line of coastal defence – a buried seawall known as the A-line, constructed following large storms in the 1970s.
Up and down the Gold Coast, most dunes directly behind beaches (foredunes) have been affected by storm surge of up to 0.5 metres above the high tide mark and eroded. Even established dunes further inland have been eroded.
Up to 3 metre high dune erosion scarps have appeared along the Sunshine Coast. Javier Leon, CC BY-NC-ND
Where did the sand go?
In just a week, millions of tonnes of sand on our beaches seemingly disappeared. Where did it go?
Beaches change constantly and are very resilient. As these landforms constantly interact with waves and currents, they adapt by changing their shape.
When there’s a lot of energy in waves and currents, beaches become flatter and narrower. Sand is pulled off the beaches and dunes and washed off offshore, where it forms sandbars. These sandbars actually protect the remaining beach, as they make waves break further offshore.
Dunes form when sand is blown off the beach on very windy days and lands further inland. Over time, plants settle the dune. Their roots act to stabilise the sand.
Healthy dunes covered in vegetation are normally harder to erode. But as beaches are washed away during large storms and the water level rises, larger waves can directly attack dunes.
The tall erosion scarps have formed because dunes have been eaten away. In some areas, seawater has flooded inland, which may damage dune plants.
As coastal conditions return to normal, much of this sand will naturally be transported back ashore. Our beaches will become steeper and wider again.
It won’t be immediate. It can take months for this to occur, and it’s not guaranteed – it depends on what wave conditions are like.
Some sand will have been washed into very deep water, or swept by currents away from the beaches. In these cases, sand will take longer to return or won’t return at all. Dunes recover more slowly than beaches. It may take years for them to recover.
Australia’s east coast has one of the longest longshore drift systems in the world, where sand is carried northward by currents to eventually join K’Gari/Fraser Island.
Can humans help?
Sand will naturally come back to most beaches. It’s usually best to let this natural process take place.
But if extreme erosion is threatening buildings or roads, beach nourishment might be necessary. Here, sand is added to eroded beaches to speed up the replenishment process.
Other options include building vertical seawalls or sloping revetment walls. These expensive methods of protection work very well to protect roads or buildings behind them. But these engineered structures often accelerate erosion of beaches and dunes.
We can help dunes by staying off them as much as possible. Plants colonising early dunes are very fragile and can be easily damaged. Temporary fencing can be used cheaply to trap sand and help dunes recover. Re-vegetating dunes is an efficient way of reducing future erosion.
How can we prepare for next time?
The uncertainty on Cyclone Alfred’s track, intensity and landfall location kept many people on edge, including at-risk communities and disaster responders. This uncertainty puts many scientists under enormous pressure. Decision-makers want fast and clear information, but it’s simply not possible.
In Australia, almost 90% of people live within 50km of the coast. In coming decades, the global coastal population will grow rapidly – even as sea level rise and more intense natural disasters put more people at risk.
As the climate crisis deepens, rebuilding in high-risk areas can create worse, more expensive problems.
Communities must begin talking seriously about managed retreat from some areas of the coast. This means not building on erosion-prone areas, choosing not to defend against sea incursion in some places and beginning to relocate houses and infrastructure to safer heights inland.
Decision-makers should also consider deploying nature-based solutions such as dunes, mangroves and oyster reefs to reduce the threat from the seas.
Technology has advanced rapidly since Cyclone Zoe made landfall in this region in 1974. We can track weather systems from satellites, get up-to-date weather and wave forecasts on our phones and use drones to see change on beaches and dunes.
But these technologies only work if we use them. The Gold Coast has the world’s largest coastal imaging program. But most other coastal regions don’t conduct long-term monitoring of dunes and beaches. Without it, we don’t have access to data vital to protecting our beaches and communities.
Javier Leon received funding from The Australian Research Council and the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. He is affiliated with Surfrider Foundation Australia.
But supplies are only one part of the picture, and their usefulness is limited without trained health-care workers who know how to treat and care for patients.
Health-care workers are the most critical component of any health system. Despite being protected under international law, they have been killed and injured at alarming rates in Gaza since October 7 2023.
There is also growing evidence of inhumane treatment and abuse of health-care workers in Israeli detention. This has serious implications for the health of Palestinians, in both the short and long term.
What is the state of the health-care system?
The health system in the Gaza Strip is in ruins. The Israeli Defence force has carried out at least 670 attacks on health services and facilities since October 7 2023.
The most recent World Health Organization update in February reported only 50% of hospitals were partially functional, and 41% of primary health-care facilities (for example, general practice clinics and pharmacies) were functional.
The latest report by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine indicates only four out of the 22 health centres it runs are operational.
This widespread and systematic destruction of health infrastructure and equipment puts health professionals and their patients in immediate danger. Shortages of medical supplies and lack of reliable electricity and water make it harder for health-care workers to provide care.
What about health-care workers?
More than 1,000 health-care workers – including nurses, surgeons and other clinicians, paramedics, pharmacists and technicians – have been killed in Palestinian territories in the last 17 months, according to estimates by the United Nations and Palestinian monitoring group Healthcare Workers Watch.
In September last year, a UN inquiry found Israeli security forces have deliberately killed, wounded, arrested, detained, mistreated and tortured medical personnel and targeted medical vehicles.
The latest report from Healthcare Workers Watch documents 384 cases of unlawful detention of health-care workers in Palestine since the current war began, 339 of them from Gaza.
Of these, 96 have provided testimonies of inhumane treatment. At least 185 are known to remain in detention and 24 are missing after hospital invasions.
Physicians for Human Rights Israel and The Guardian have also documented testimonies of medical personnel released from Israeli detention. Many say they were detained while carrying out medical duties.
They report being subjected to interrogations without legal representation, medical neglect and starvation, abuse and torture.
He alleges prison guards were given instructions to deliberately damage his hands: “They said they wanted to make sure I could never return to work”.
The Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) did not respond to the individual allegations but told The Guardian “suspects of terrorist activities” have been arrested and detained during fighting in the Gaza Strip. In a statement, the IDF said: “Those who are not involved in terrorist activity are released back to the Gaza Strip as soon as possible”.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk has said Israel’s claims hospitals are being used for military purposes are vague, unsubstantiated and “in some cases, they appear to be contradicted by publicly available information”.
What does this mean for people in Gaza?
Before October 7, Gaza’s health system was already unable to meet the needs of its population. The escalation of those needs due to the bombardment and reduced sanitation in a shattered health system is catastrophic.
Losing health-care workers – whether they are killed, injured or incarcerated – further depletes an overburdened system. As a result, ordinary people have reduced access to skilled and qualified personnel. And so do junior medical staff, meaning they miss out on opportunities to learn from the experience of senior staff.
All residents of Gaza, including health-care workers and their families, face serious threats to their health. A lack of adequate sanitation, nutritious food and safe water compounds other issues, such as increased risk of respiratory and diarrhoeal diseases, as well as complications during pregnancy and birth.
In a population of 2.1 million there are large unmet needs from pre-existing conditions. The UN estimates 45,000 people in Gaza have heart disease, 650,000 have high blood pressure, more than 2,000 are diagnosed with cancer each year and more than 485,000 have mental illnesses.
Without enough health staff, there is reduced capacity for public health surveillance and control – for example routine screening services and immunisation programs – and this increases the risk of disease outbreaks.
Health workers also play a vital role in training the next generation of health professionals. Disrupting this chain makes it harder to rebuild the health workforce and the health system more generally.
The impacts of war can’t simply be calculated in terms of fatalities, injuries and damaged health-care centres or facilities.
What’s also damaged is a shared commitment to humanitarian principles and the respect for human rights and international law.
Tania King receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, Medical Research Future Fund, veski and Suicide Prevention Australia.
Fiona Stanley receives current National Health and Medical Research Council and Australian Research Council funding as a mentor not Chief Investigator. I am retired University Professor and Institute Director – now only Patron.
Guy Gillor is a Jewish-Israeli-Australian researcher and policy analyst that has advocated for justice and equal rights in his homeland of Palestine/ Israel from a young age, and is currently involved with a number of Jewish-Australian anti-war campaigns. Guy currently works as Manager of Strategy Policy and Research for an Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisation.
Rob Moodie is affiliated with the Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW – national councillor) and Quit Nukes. He has received funding from National Health and Medical Research Council.
Tilman Ruff is affiliated with International Physicians for the Prevention of War (board member), International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Australia (board member, co-representative to International Steering Group), Medical Association for Prevention of War (international councillor), Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons Scientific Network (member), Initiative for Peacebuilding, University of Melbourne (board member).