After the stabbing of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel in an Assyrian Orthodox Church in Wakeley on Monday, and the killings in Bondi Junction shopping centre just two days earlier, many people in Sydney and in Australia more widely are tense.
With constant protests against Israel’s actions in Gaza and fears about a wider Middle East conflict, social harmony among religions and cultures in Australia is straining.
Dai Le is the independent member for the seat of Fowler, where the church incident took place. Hers is one of the most diverse electorates in the country.
On how the local community is feeling, Dai Le stresses:
The community is currently feeling on edge and there is tension in the community, since the attack.
As you can appreciate, people are on tenterhooks at the moment […] This just follows on from the Bondi killings that happened as well. So it’s just one day after another.
Talking about the alleged attacker, who is a teenager, she highlights some of the struggles facing young people:
Our young people are often very much feeling cut off from society. And I think that they are struggling with mental health issues. They’re struggling with the cost of living. They’re struggling with finding their identity and where they belong in today’s society, where it’s so fast paced, where there’s lots of expectations.
I can’t speak around this young man because I don’t know much about his history.
I do know is that young people need a lot of support, and need a lot to feel that they belong, that they are valued. And how do we do that? What can we create to make sure that they are valued members of our community?
Dai Le still remains hopeful and proud of Australia’s role as a multicultural society:
I still believe, though, that we are still a wonderful multicultural community. I believe that we have that great uniqueness. And Australia has always been welcoming, and I hope that Australia will continue to maintain our wonderful cohesiveness and harmony. If everybody, all the leaders, we work together to ensure the message is out there, that people are welcomed, that people have the right to practice their faith, that people feel that they belong in the community.
Finally, on her hopes for the budget, Dai Le focuses on the kitchen table issues:
I’ve asked the Prime Minister before to extend that excise fuel tax cut, because that will obviously bring down the petrol prices, which is above $2.10 and sometimes up to $2.50, for people because our community travels a lot for work. The grocery food prices that is kind of really just beyond anybody’s imagination how much it costs nowadays to do your grocery shopping.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Euan Ritchie, Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University
We’ve long known Australia’s main environmental protection laws aren’t doing their job, and we know Australians want better laws. Labor was elected promising to fix them.
But yesterday, the government walked back its commitments, deferring the necessary reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act indefinitely in the face of pressure from the state Labor government in Western Australia and the mining and resources industries.
Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek was on the front foot yesterday, promising the new national agency Environment Protection Australia and Environmental Information Australia will still go ahead.
But decisions by the planned agency can be overruled by the minister via expansive “call in” powers. And because Labor has backed away from rolling out essential legally enforceable national environmental standards this term, it’s hard to see how the agency can actually be the “tough cop on the beat” we were promised.
Labor promised substantive change that would prevent further species extinctions. But yesterday’s announcement was basically the continuation of business as usual.
Environmental organisations such as the Australian Conservation Foundation – which backed many of Labor’s proposed reforms – are now “deeply disappointed”.
What just happened?
Yesterday’s announcement effectively defers substantive change until after the next federal election.
Rather than a full package, the government has split its planned reforms into three parts, under the umbrella name of the Nature Positive Plan.
The first is the nature repair market, which many stakeholders – conservationists and business leaders alike – have been sceptical of. It was legislated in December, but nature repair projects can’t start until the market governance and methods are established.
The second will create the federal Environmental Protection Australia agency and Environment Information Australia body. The agency will be responsible for development assessments, decisions and compliance and enforcement, with staff drawn from existing divisions within the department, while the information agency will support decision-making with data, as well as report on progress against environmental targets.
But the third is the crucial bit – the reformed environment protection and biodiversity laws, and the legally enforceable national environmental standards underpinning them.
We need these standards and laws to properly address longstanding deficiencies such as lack of clear policy objectives and “no go” zones for development, failure to account for climate change impacts, ongoing native vegetation clearing and habitat destruction that drives extinction, and a lack of alignment with other laws.
But these vital elements have been deferred to “an unspecified date”. Despite the urgency of our extinction crisis, we have a cart but no horse in sight.
How did we get here?
In 2020, Graeme Samuel released his scathing report detailing the many failings of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. The laws, he wrote, were “ineffective” and needed fundamental reform. Labor came to office pledging to end extinctions, tackle climate change, and repair nature.
But two years later, little solid progress has been made. In cases such as the controversial Lee Point development planned in Darwin, the government has appeared to put development ahead of considerations of threatened species and First Nations’ cultural values.
Samuel called for comprehensive amendments to the laws within 12 months, and for full reform by 2022. Instead, the government only began consulting in May 2023, undertook a “lockup” consultation with peak environment bodies in October, and ran public consultation in November. Now we hear these reforms have been pushed back indefinitely.
In the West Australian, Minister Plibersek describes the changes as:
a staged rollout of sensible reforms that better protect Australia’s natural wonders, while also supporting faster, more efficient decision making […] This package is a win for the environment and a win for business
Speaking on ABC radio, she denied there was any “unnecessary delay”:
there is a careful approach to make sure we get this right, because this is generational change […] I’m not going to go into the parliament with a flawed set of laws that we can’t get support for.
This is questionable. In 2022, Australia signed up to the ambitious global push to turn around the destruction of the natural world, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We agreed to work to bring biodiversity loss almost to zero by 2030 and for native wild species to become more abundant and resilient by 2050. Deferring our main environment laws is not the way to do this.
Restoring nature isn’t possible without stronger environment laws
Preserving nature can only be done with substantive legislative reform, given Australia’s existing environmental laws do not effectively regulate and stop the ongoing destruction of nature.
As Samuel pointed out, our current laws are not keeping the environment in good shape. They focus on individual approvals for projects, not clear outcomes for the environment.
As it stands there will be no climate trigger – meaning no assessment of impact on climate change – despite the threat this poses to biodiversity. The Great Barrier Reef is suffering its worst recorded mass bleaching this year, the fifth in eight years.
Even so, fossil fuel production continues with many more projects awaiting approval.
Without the reformed environment protection laws, the strengthened Safeguard Mechanism – the government’s main plan to drive down emissions from large polluters – will not work properly. This is because environmental law needs to be amended so greenhouse gas emissions from new coal and gas developments are reported on and tracked.
In fact, without the national environmental standards – which the federal environment department dubs the “centrepiece of our reforms” – the whole package of reform seems toothless.
Labor’s failure so far to deliver on its promise puts their goals of “no new extinctions” and a “nature positive” future for Australia at risk.
Euan Ritchie receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Department of Energy, Environment, and Climate Action. Euan is a Councillor within the Biodiversity Council, and a member of the Ecological Society of Australia and the Australian Mammal Society.
Megan C Evans has received funding from various sources, including the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Research Award (2020-2023), the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, WWF Australia, and the National Environmental Science Program’s Threatened Species Recovery Hub.
Yung En Chee receives funding from an Australian Research Council linkage grant. She also receives funding and research contracts from Melbourne Water through the Melbourne Waterway Research-Practice Partnership 2023-2028. Yung En is a member of the Society for Conservation Biology.
From asking our smart speakers for the weather to receiving personalised advice from smartwatches, devices powered by artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly streamlining our routines and decision making. The technology is seeping into our lives in subtle ways.
Manufacturers gather vast amounts of user data to ensure these smart devices are responsive and personalised. But this can put users at risk of exploitation by malicious agents, such as hackers looking to steal your data.
As AI becomes more ubiquitous, consumers will also need to become savvier. If you want to enjoy the benefits of a smart everyday device, you should be aware of the safeguards needed to protect you from cyberattacks.
A smarter internet of things
Once we started connecting physical everyday devices like fridges, vacuum cleaners and doorbell cameras to the internet, the Internet of Things (IoT) was born. It is now estimated there are some 17 billion IoT devices worldwide.
IoT devices that existed before AI generally have simpler, more static functionalities, resulting in lower data privacy and security risks. These devices could connect to the internet and perform specific tasks they were programmed to do, such as remotely turning off lights or setting a thermostat.
However, they couldn’t learn from user interactions or adapt their functionalities over time. Manufacturers integrate AI into IoT devices to help them “understand” and better cater to user needs and behaviours.
For example, a smart speaker might gather behavioural information by listening to conversations in its environment. This helps it to better understand user preferences and commands, adapt its responses and offer more relevant content or suggestions. Ultimately, this enhances the experience – it makes the device more useful to you.
However, it also makes it less secure. With AI now embedded into such devices, it actually opens a new collection of pathways (known as an “attack surface”) for cybercriminals. For example, hackers can use inputs that deliberately cause the AI in the device to malfunction. They can also “poison” the training data of AI models to make them behave in specific ways.
In addition, a malicious attacker can obtain the AI training data through a model inversion attack. If an AI model has been trained on private or sensitive data, replicating this model could potentially expose information that should remain confidential.
A ‘smart’ doorbell camera can not just alert you someone’s on your porch, but potentially use image recognition to tell you exactly who they are. oasisamuel/Shutterstock
Manufacturers should do more
IoT devices have long been vulnerable to hackers due to lack of passwords, lack of encryption or outdated software. With this in mind, smart device manufacturers that prioritise security will implement strong encryption, provide regular software updates and ensure secure data management and transport.
However, users often aren’t aware of just how vulnerable their devices might be, or what kind of data they gather and where it goes.
There is a pressing need for industry standards that ensure all devices meet a minimum-security threshold before they come to market.
Manufacturers should provide detailed guidelines on how the collected data is processed, stored and protected. They should also explain any measures to prevent unauthorised access or data breaches.
Governments and industry have recognised the risks and invisible threats posed by AI. We have already seen the significant negative consequences when this is exploited. That is why laws on AI regulation are being drafted and implemented in Australia and around the world.
In the meantime, consumers must remain vigilant and take proactive measures – to ensure their digital lives bring about more benefit than harm.
How can I protect my devices from cyberattacks?
For a start, review all the devices in your home that connect to the internet. Try to identify AI-powered features, such as learning user behaviours or processing large datasets. These are common in smart speakers, home security systems and advanced wearable technology.
Secondly, explore the functionality of your devices and disable irrelevant or unnecessary AI features. This simple step could prevent AI from gathering personal information and its possible exposure.
Thirdly, when you purchase a device, examine the manufacturer’s security disclosure, often found on their website under titles like “Privacy”, “Security” or “Product Support”. It can also be found in user manuals and, sometimes, directly on the product packaging.
Make sure you understand what sort of AI technology the device uses and how data is collected, processed, stored and protected. What are the safeguards? Did the manufacturer use industry standards or subscribe to strong security guidelines like the European Union’s data protection regulation, GDPR?
Security disclosures can vary greatly in terms of clarity. Technical details can be difficult to understand, but information from the Australian government’s Consumer Data Right guidelines can help guide your decision.
Asking these questions will help with the selection of devices. Sometimes it is best to pick a manufacturer with a strong track record on security, rather than be swayed by price point alone.
Finally, always keep your IoT devices up to date: when your device requests to install an update, do this promptly. This ensures any security loopholes identified by the manufacturer are properly implemented, closing the opportunity for cyberattacks.
These good habits will go a long way to ensuring your privacy is safeguarded.
Chao Chen receives funding from various organisations, including industry partners for industry-driven research projects and government funding from the ARC and CSIRO.
Kok-Leong Ong receives funding from various organisations, including industry partners for industry-driven research projects and government funding from the NHMRC, MRFF and CSIRO.
Lin Li 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Britta Schaffelke, Manager International Partnerships and Co-ordinator of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN), Australian Institute of Marine Science
The fourth global coral bleaching event, announced this week, is an urgent wake-up call to the world.
While the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration’s announcement is not unexpected, it’s the second global mass bleaching in the past decade. It heralds a new reality in which we can expect more frequent and severe bleaching events as ocean temperature records continue to be broken.
Cycles of decline and recovery are normal for coral reefs, but the windows for recovery are now shorter. Stress events such as marine heatwaves are coming faster, with less warning. These events are also more widespread.
As the southern hemisphere shifts into winter, the northern hemisphere’s tropical oceans enter summer. Heat will start to accumulate, this year from a higher base. Reefs are more likely to be under greater heat stress earlier than in previous years.
Global mass bleaching events are “called” when significant coral bleaching is confirmed in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans.
The current event is shaping up to be one of the most severe yet. It began as severe heat stress accumulated in the northern hemisphere summer of 2023. It continued into the southern hemisphere summer of 2023–24.
In the past, summer temperatures on the Great Barrier Reef peaked around February. Now, ocean temperatures are higher for longer. We see maximums above historic values well into April.
On the Great Barrier Reef, large areas were exposed to record-breaking heat stress over its summer (December to March). Prevalent bleaching was observed on three-quarters of surveyed coral reefs in shallow water.
The images below show the reef at North Keppel Island in the southern Great Barrier Reef before bleaching in May 2023 and during bleaching in March 2024. (Click on and drag the slider back and forth to see the difference.)
While it is too early to know the full impact, it is shaping up to be one of the most serious and extensive mass bleaching events recorded on the Great Barrier Reef.
Coral reefs are vital for ocean health. They also provide food, income and coastal protection from storms and floods for an estimated 500 million people. They cover less than 1% of the seafloor but support at least 25% of marine species.
Like the polar regions, coral reefs are especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases are heating the oceans.
This current global event is still unfolding. Its full impacts will not be known for some time.
Some coral deaths are immediate. Some colonies recover, while others succumb after the ocean heat subsides. Complex local and species-specific differences are typical for the responses of corals to heat stress and their recovery after an event.
Bleaching occurs when corals under severe stress expel the symbiotic algae living in their tissues, causing them to turn completely white. Though not dead, corals are weakened by bleaching. Those that survive are more susceptible to diseases. Bleaching could also impair their capacity to reproduce.
More than 40 years of data analysed by the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network show a downward trend in the amount of coral on reefs between 2009 and 2018. This coral loss reflects the cumulative impacts of previous coral bleaching events and local pressures such as pollution, destructive coastal development and overfishing.
After the devastating multiyear bleaching event of 2014–17, some reefs regained some of the lost coral cover during low disturbance periods. Most of the gains were by fast-growing “tabular” corals, which may change reefs’ species composition.
Long-term monitoring identifies areas of coral reefs that recover naturally after a disturbance, and areas that don’t. This information helps reef managers and scientists know where to focus their efforts to assist reef protection and recovery.
At present, this information is often sparse. Monitoring the world’s reefs is challenging. The total global area of shallow-water coral reefs is estimated at 249,713 square kilometres. Many reefs are in remote locations.
Recent monitoring innovations will improve access to quality data in the medium term.
While devastating, mass coral bleaching events provide a unique opportunity for research to inform actions. In Australia and around the world, scientists are studying which corals are the most tolerant of heat, whether corals are adapting to marine heatwaves, why corals recover differently and how to use this knowledge for interventions that can improve reef resilience.
Science that enables actions that mirror the local conditions – both biophysical and socio-economic – will enable interventions to be more locally relevant.
How fast the world acts to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions driving global warming will determine which reefs, marine species and ecosystem functions and services can be maintained.
Science plays an important role here. Ideas are cheap but implementation is difficult and expensive. Effective global collaborations can find more cost-effective solutions to improve reef resilience.
Tackling local factors that affect the health of coral reefs remains important, as are innovations to protect and restore coral reefs. But, above all, urgent action to curb the effects of global climate change is vital for the health of our oceans and the people who depend on marine resources.
Britta Schaffelke works for the Australian Institute of Marine Science, a publicly funded research agency that receives funding from the Australian government, state government departments, foundations and private industry. She is the global co-ordinator of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network.
David Wachenfeld works for the Australian Institute of Marine Science, a publicly funded research organisation that receives funding from the Australian government, state government departments, foundations and private industry.
Selina Stead works for the Australian Institute of Marine Science, a publicly funded research organisation that receives funding from the Australian government, state government departments, foundations and private industry.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Philip C. Almond, Emeritus Professor in the History of Religious Thought, The University of Queensland
Wikipedia
Speculation about extraterrestrials is not all that new. There was a vibrant debate in 17th-century Europe about the existence of life on other planets.
This was the consequence of the transition from a Ptolemaic view, in which Earth was at the centre of the universe and everything revolved around it, to a Copernican view in which the Sun was at the centre and our planet, along with all the others, revolved around it.
It followed that if we were now more like other planets and moons close to us that revolved around the Sun, then they were more like Earth. And if other planets were like Earth, then they most likely also had inhabitants.
If the Earth move, it is a Planet, and shines to them in the Moone, and to the other Planitary inhabitants, as the Moone and they doe to us upon the Earth.
Similarly, the Dutch astronomer Christiaan Huygens (1629–95) believed life on other planets was a consequence of the Sun-centred view of Copernicus. But his speculation on such matters proceeded from the doctrine of the “divine plenitude”. This was the belief that, in his all-powerfulness and goodness, having created matter in all parts of the universe, God would not have missed the opportunity to populate the whole universe with living beings.
In his The Celestial Worlds Discover’d (1698), Huygens suggested that, like us, the inhabitants of other planets would have hands, feet and an upward stance. However, in keeping with the greater size of other planets, particularly Jupiter and Saturn, they might be much larger than us. They would enjoy social lives, live in houses, make music, contemplate the works of God, and so on.
Others were much less confident in speculating on the nature of alien lives. Nevertheless, as Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society alongside Isaac Newton, suggested in 1676, even though details of life on other planets were unknown, this did not prejudice “the Hypothesis of the Moon’s being habitable; or the supposal of its being actually inhabited”.
Heliocentric model from Nicolaus Copernicus’ De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres). Wikipedia
God’s work
That other worlds were inhabited also seemed an appropriate conclusion to draw from early modern science focused, as it was, on God’s work in nature.
Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes.
This was a theme developed at length by the most influential work on the plurality of worlds in the latter part of the 17th century, the Copernican Bernard Fontenelle’s Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes (Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds, 1686).
To Fontenelle, there was an infinite number of planets and an infinite number of inhabited worlds. For him, this was the result of the analogy, as a consequence of Copernicanism, between the nature of our Earth and that of other worlds.
But it was also the result of the fecundity of the divine being from whom all things proceed. It is this idea “of the infinite Diversity that Nature ought to use in her Works” which governs his book, he declared.
But there was a significant problem. If there were intelligent beings on the Moon or the planets, were they “men”? And, if they were, had they been redeemed by the work of Jesus Christ as people on Earth had been?
John Wilkins (1614–72), one of the founders of the new science, wrestled with the theological implications of the Copernican universe. He was convinced the Moon was inhabited. But he was quite uncertain whether the lunar residents were of “the seed of Adam”.
Wilkins’s simple solution was to deny their human status. The inhabitants of the Moon, he suggested in his The Discovery of a World in the Moone (1638), “are not men as wee are, but some other kinde of creatures which beare some proportion and likenesse to our natures”.
The frontispiece and title page of the second edition of Francis Godwin’s Man in the Moone. Wikipedia
In the end, Fontenelle was also to adopt this solution. It would be “a great perplexing point in Theology,” he declared, should the Moon be inhabited by men not descended from Adam. He only wished to argue, he wrote, for inhabitants “which, perhaps, are not Men”.
The existence of aliens – human, just like us – threatened the credibility of the Christian story of the redemption of all humans through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This was intellectual space in which only the theologically brave – or foolish – dared to travel.
It was much easier to reject the humanity of the alien. Thus, our modern belief that aliens are not like us originated as the solution to a theological problem. They became “alien”, literally and metaphorically. And, therefore, threatening and to be feared.
A product of the divine?
We no longer live in a universe that is seen as the product of the divine plenitude. Nor one in which our planet can be viewed as the centre of the universe. As a result, ironically, we have become aliens to ourselves: modern “alienation” is that sense of being lost and forsaken in the vast spaces of a godless universe.
In the early modern period, aliens were not looked upon as threatening to us. They were, after all (even if they were not “men”), the product of divine goodness. But, in the modern world, they both personify and externalise the threat to our personal meaning, one that results from our being in a world without ultimate meaning or purpose.
As projections of our own alienation, they terrify us, even as they continue to fascinate us.
Philip C. Almond 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 the aftermath of the tragic Bondi knife attack, Joel Cauchi’s parents have spoken about their son’s long history of mental illness, having been diagnosed with schizophrenia at age 17. They said they were “devastated and horrified” by their son’s actions. “To you he’s a monster,” said his father. “But to me he was a very sick boy.”
Mental illness and distress affects not only the person living with the condition, but family members and communities. As the prevalence of mental health problems grows, the flow-on effect to family members, including caregivers, and the impact on families as a unit, is also rising.
While every family is different, the words of the Cauchis draw attention to how families can experience distress, stress, fear, powerlessness, and still love, despite the challenges and trauma. How can they help a loved one? And who can they turn to for support?
Informal caregivers help others within the context of an existing relationship, such as a family member. The care they provide goes beyond the usual expectations or demands of such relationships.
Around 2.7 million Australians provide informal care. For almost a third of these the person’s primary medical diagnosis is psychological or psychiatric.
It has long been acknowledged that those supporting a family member with ongoing mental illness need support themselves.
In the 1980s, interest grew in caregiving dynamics within families of people grappling with mental health issues. Subsequent research recognised chronic health conditions not only affect the quality of life and wellbeing of the people experiencing them, but also impose burdens that reverberate within relationships, caregiving roles, and family dynamics over time.
Conditions such as depression, anxiety disorders, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia can severely impact daily functioning, relationships, and overall quality of life. Living with mental illness is often accompanied by a myriad of challenges. From stigma and discrimination to difficulty accessing adequate health care and support services. Patients and their families navigate a complex and often isolating journey.
The concept of family health acknowledges the physical and psychological wellbeing of a person is significantly affected by the family.
Amid these challenges, family support emerges as a beacon of hope. Research consistently demonstrates strong familial relationships and support systems play a pivotal role in mitigating the adverse effects of mental illness. Families provide emotional support, practical assistance, and a sense of belonging that are vital for people struggling with mental illness.
My recent research highlights the profound impact of mental illness on family dynamics, emphasising the resilience and endurance shown by participants. Families struggling with mental illness often experience heightened emotional fluctuations, with extreme highs and lows. The enduring nature of family caregiving entails both stress and adaptation over an extended period. Stress associated with caregiving and the demands on personal resources and coping mechanisms builds and builds.
Yet families I’ve interviewed find ways to live “a good life”. They prepare for the peaks and troughs, and show endurance and persistence. They make space for mental illness in their daily lives, describing how it spurs adaptation, acceptance and inner strength within the family unit.
When treating a person with mental illness, health practitioners need to consider the entire family’s needs and engage with family members. By fostering open and early dialogue and providing comprehensive support, health-care professionals can empower families to navigate the complexities of mental illness while fostering resilience and hope for the future. Family members express stories of an inner struggle, isolation and exhaustion.
There is a pressing need for a shift in research priorities, from illness-centered perspectives to a strengths-based focus when considering families “managing” mental illness.
There is transformative potential in harnessing strengths to respond to challenges posed by mental illnesses, while also supporting family members.
As the Cauchi family so painfully articulated, providing support for a family member with mental illness is intensely challenging. Research shows caregiver burnout, financial strain and strained relationships are common.
Health-care professionals should prioritise support for family members at an early stage. In Australia, there are various support options available for families living with mental illness. Carer Gateway provides information, support and access to services. Headspace offers mental health services and supports to young people and their families.
Beyond these national services, GPs, nurses, nurse practitioners and local community health centres are key to early conversations. Mental health clinics and hospitals often target family involvement in treatment plans.
While Australia has made strides in recognising the importance of family support, challenges persist. Access to services can vary based on geographic location and demand, leaving some families under-served or facing long wait times. And the level of funding and resources allocated to family-oriented mental health support often does not align with the demand or complexity of need.
In the realm of mental illness, family support serves as a lifeline for people navigating the complexities of their conditions.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Dr Amanda Cole is affiliated with the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses – Chair, Education and Accrediation Committee
The tragic Westfield attack in Sydney highlights the vulnerability of crowded public spaces. Six people were killed and many were injured by a knife-wielding attacker in a short period of time.
Traditionally, in response to mass casualty events, we depend on the actions of first responders, including police and ambulance services, who are the trained professionals. But there’s always a gap, however short, between when a crisis begins and when authorities arrive.
The actions of people at the scene are crucial in bridging this gap. The “zero responders” – bystanders who proactively assist – play a pivotal role in the immediate response. They can be key players in preventing, reporting and containing an incident.
An outdated and scientifically debunked theory about crowd behaviour in emergencies negatively characterises the role of the public. This theory, which incorrectly posits that crowds act irrationally and are driven by panic during life-threatening situations, is still widely believed.
In fact, this misconception has often led authorities to withhold information during emergencies to prevent panic.
However, empirical evidence tells a different story. Research on the 2005 London bombings, for example, reveals people often respond with rationality and altruism. Survivor accounts emphasise widespread acts of assistance and emotional support.
I have conducted experiments that simulate life-threatening scenarios to study crowd responses, including their flight and escape behaviours. These studies reveal that as the level of perceived urgency increases, people’s actions tend to become more constructive than irrational. Survival instinct is deeply entrenched within us and can be easily activated.
People can prevent harm
So, what do these insights say about responses to mass casualty events in crowded places? They suggest the public should be considered part of the emergency response team. I call them “zero responders” because these proactive individuals can save lives and minimise harm in the crucial initial moments before emergency services take control.
Zero responders can help prevent harm by reporting crises quickly. For instance, an analysis of 640 mass attacks in the United States from 1995 to 2020 highlights the crucial role of public awareness and swift reporting. More than half of these incidents were thwarted before anyone got hurt.
The US Department of Homeland Security’s If You See Something, Say Something campaign engages the public as key players in preventing terrorist attacks. This is a positive step toward including them in emergency preparedness and response. However, the initiative could extend beyond reporting to authorities. People can also act to minimise harm.
A prime example was observed during the recent tragic attack in Sydney, where active bystanders played a crucial role. Actions such as a samaritan confronting the attacker by using a bollard to create a barrier delayed the assailant’s progress.
This engagement impeded the attacker and bought precious seconds that may have saved lives. Therefore, referring to these individuals merely as “bystanders” does not do justice to their role. They acted as part of the emergency response, as immediate responders.
Zero responders’ role can also be significant in providing first aid to those who are injured. Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, there have been significant efforts in the United States to train the public in first aid CPR.
For those not positioned to intervene directly (those not near the source of danger or unable to assist), making efficient escape and evacuation decisions and encouraging others to do so is also vital in minimising harm.
My research, using computer simulations and controlled crowd experiments, has explored how simple behaviour changes, both in decision-making and physical actions, can make evacuations more effective.
Act swiftly and decisively
Many are familiar with the “run, hide, fight” protocol, which suggests people try to escape first, find a place to hide if they can’t leave, and confront the attacker as a last resort. While this is widely promoted in the US for active shooter situations, there are additional, more nuanced actions that can further enhance survival.
The misconception that people in a crisis typically panic can cause them to go out of their way not to appear scared. Consequently, some delay their response to assess the situation, worry about the embarrassment of reacting to a false alarm, or walk slowly away from the danger rather than run.
The minimal risk of overreacting in the event of a false alarm is far outweighed by the potential benefits of immediate action. This, in fact, demonstrates vigilance and risk awareness, rather than overreaction.
Another key aspect is agility in decision-making. This includes the willingness to revise initial decisions, such as which exit to use, as the situation evolves.
The public as responders
Different cultures and countries have different attitudes to zero responders. For instance, Israel enacted the Good Samaritan Law in 1998 to protect active bystanders from civil liability. This law compels bystanders to assist people in serious danger and even provides compensation for any costs or health damages incurred during the rescue.
Statistically, the more zero responders present during an emergency, the higher the likelihood of survival. While it is unrealistic to expect the entire population can be educated or trained for such scenarios, as not everyone may be willing or able to participate, research indicates comprehensive training of the entire community isn’t necessary for the benefits to be substantial.
Anyone can be a zero responder. Whether it’s through actions that impede or prevent an attack, assist the injured, or facilitate an efficient evacuation or sheltering, everyone has a role to play.
We should not overlook the crucial role of the public during mass casualty incidents. Societies can enhance their own protection by supporting zero responders and training for the public.
Milad Haghani receives funding from The Australian Research Council.
Not getting enough sleep is a common affliction in the modern age. If you don’t always get as many hours of shut-eye as you’d like, perhaps you were concerned by news of a recent study that found people who sleep less than six hours a night are at higher risk of type 2 diabetes.
So what can we make of these findings? It turns out the relationship between sleep and diabetes is complex.
The study
Researchers analysed data from the UK Biobank, a large biomedical database which serves as a global resource for health and medical research. They looked at information from 247,867 adults, following their health outcomes for more than a decade.
The researchers wanted to understand the associations between sleep duration and type 2 diabetes, and whether a healthy diet reduced the effects of short sleep on diabetes risk.
As part of their involvement in the UK Biobank, participants had been asked roughly how much sleep they get in 24 hours. Seven to eight hours was the average and considered normal sleep. Short sleep duration was broken up into three categories: mild (six hours), moderate (five hours) and extreme (three to four hours). The researchers analysed sleep data alongside information about people’s diets.
Some 3.2% of participants were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes during the follow-up period. Although healthy eating habits were associated with a lower overall risk of diabetes, when people ate healthily but slept less than six hours a day, their risk of type 2 diabetes increased compared to people in the normal sleep category.
The researchers found sleep duration of five hours was linked with a 16% higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, while the risk for people who slept three to four hours was 41% higher, compared to people who slept seven to eight hours.
One limitation is the study defined a healthy diet based on the number of servings of fruit, vegetables, red meat and fish a person consumed over a day or a week. In doing so, it didn’t consider how dietary patterns such as time-restricted eating or the Mediterranean diet may modify the risk of diabetes among those who slept less.
Also, information on participants’ sleep quantity and diet was only captured at recruitment and may have changed over the course of the study. The authors acknowledge these limitations.
Why might short sleep increase diabetes risk?
In people with type 2 diabetes, the body becomes resistant to the effects of a hormone called insulin, and slowly loses the capacity to produce enough of it in the pancreas. Insulin is important because it regulates glucose (sugar) in our blood that comes from the food we eat by helping move it to cells throughout the body.
We don’t know the precise reasons why people who sleep less may be at higher risk of type 2 diabetes. But previous research has shown sleep-deprived people often have increased inflammatory markers and free fatty acids in their blood, which impair insulin sensitivity, leading to insulin resistance. This means the body struggles to use insulin properly to regulate blood glucose levels, and therefore increases the risk of type 2 diabetes.
Further, people who don’t sleep enough, as well as people who sleep in irregular patterns (such as shift workers), experience disruptions to their body’s natural rhythm, known as the circadian rhythm.
This can interfere with the release of hormones like cortisol, glucagon and growth hormones. These hormones are released through the day to meet the body’s changing energy needs, and normally keep blood glucose levels nicely balanced. If they’re compromised, this may reduce the body’s ability to handle glucose as the day progresses.
These factors, and others, may contribute to the increased risk of type 2 diabetes seen among people sleeping less than six hours.
While this study primarily focused on people who sleep eight hours or less, it’s possible longer sleepers may also face an increased risk of type 2 diabetes.
Research has previously shown a U-shaped correlation between sleep duration and type 2 diabetes risk. A review of multiple studies found getting between seven to eight hours of sleep daily was associated with the lowest risk. When people got less than seven hours sleep, or more than eight hours, the risk began to increase.
The reason sleeping longer is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes may be linked to weight gain, which is also correlated with longer sleep. Likewise, people who don’t sleep enough are more likely to be overweight or obese.
Good sleep, healthy diet
Getting enough sleep is an important part of a healthy lifestyle and may reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes.
Based on this study and other evidence, it seems that when it comes to diabetes risk, seven to eight hours of sleep may be the sweet spot. However, other factors could influence the relationship between sleep duration and diabetes risk, such as individual differences in sleep quality and lifestyle.
While this study’s findings question whether a healthy diet can mitigate the effects of a lack of sleep on diabetes risk, a wide range of evidence points to the benefits of healthy eating for overall health.
The authors of the study acknowledge it’s not always possible to get enough sleep, and suggest doing high-intensity interval exercise during the day may offset some of the potential effects of short sleep on diabetes risk.
In fact, exercise at any intensity can improve blood glucose levels.
Giuliana Murfet receives funding from Diabetes Australia.
Giuliana Murfet is the Chair of the Medical Education and Scientific Advisory Council for Diabetes Australia.
ShanShan Lin 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.
Starting today, the High Court will hear a case to decide if the government’s indefinite detention of a bisexual Iranian man is lawful, partly because he is unwilling to voluntarily assist with the government’s attempts to deport him.
While the case turns on a narrow question of Australian constitutional law, it also raises urgent concerns about the human consequences of a flawed and discriminatory “fast-track” legal process for determining the status of asylum seekers who arrive by boat.
The case is tied to widely criticised immigration reforms the Albanese government is attempting to push through parliament. The reforms seek to punish people who do not actively cooperate in their own deportation, even in cases where people have good reasons for not cooperating or when certain countries, like Iran, do not accept the forced return of their citizens.
Refugees and refugee advocates will be watching today’s case closely as it may result in further, important limits on the immigration minister’s power to keep people indefinitely in detention. It could also affect up to 200 people currently being detained.
What the case is about
The case has been brought by a man known by the pseudonym “ASF17”, who claims a genuine fear of serious harm if he is forcibly deported to Iran, a country where sexual activity between men is illegal and can be punished by death.
Even though ASF17 arrived by boat in July 2013, he was only permitted to apply for refugee status in August 2015. In 2017, a officer in the then-Department of Immigration and Border Protection rejected his refugee visa application.
While it seems that ASF17 did not explicitly mention his bisexuality to this official, he clearly stated he could not return to Iran because of “his problems”. He has refused to cooperate with efforts to deport him since 2018.
Evidence shows there are many reasons why asylum seekers may not fully disclose the true extent of their fears of persecution at the initial stages of the asylum process. The reasons include trauma, shame, a lack of trust and uncertainty. The asylum process can also be especially stressful and re-traumatising for LGBTQI+ applicants.
ASF17 has consistently maintained his refusal to return to Iran, asking the government to send him “anywhere” but Iran. Despite this, the government has kept him in closed immigration detention since February 2014 and labelled him “non-compliant” for not voluntarily departing Australia.
Yet, this label of non-compliance fails to recognise that ASF17 may have compelling reasons for not complying with the efforts to deport him.
A flawed system for deciding asylum claims
Of specific concern is the fact ASF17 had his asylum claim determined by what is known as the “fast-track” process, a discriminatory and flawed legal process for determining – and, in practice, rejecting – refugee claims.
The “fast-track” system was intended to accelerate decision-making for the asylum claims of boat arrivals and limit their review options. It was introduced by the former Coalition government in 2014 and only applied to refugees who had arrived by boat between 2010–14. Concurrent policy changes also denied asylum seekers proper access to legal advice or translation services when preparing their claims.
The system resulted in a much higher rates of asylum claim rejection. Between 2015 and 2023, the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) – the body set up to review fast-track decisions – refused to find a person to be a refugee in 89% of cases.
Over the same period, success rates for Iranians before the IAA were just 16%, compared to 51% before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the non-fast-track process).
As we have previously argued, this high rejection rate says more about an unfair legal process designed to punish refugees than about the quality of their claims.
When in opposition, Labor clearly stated the fast-track process did not provide a “fair, thorough and robust assessment process”. And last year, the government put forth legislation to completely abolish the fast-track system and create a new Administrative Review Tribunal.
If the High Court finds that ASF17’s fear of being returned to Iran is a “good reason” for his unwillingness to participate in his own deportation, this will be an implicit recognition of the abject failures of the fast-track process.
An inhumane system of criminalisation
Last month, the government attempted to rush through draconian new legislation that would give the immigration minister sweeping new powers to force people like ASF17 to assist in their own removal from Australia. For example, the minister could order a person to apply for a passport or other documents from the country they’re seeking to escape.
Shockingly, if a person does not comply with such a direction, they could receive between one and five years in prison and a hefty fine.
Last week, a group of 22 refugee Tamil, Kurdish and Iranian women made a submission to a Senate committee now considering the legislation. The authors all sought protection over a decade ago and have built lives, families and communities in Australia. They wrote:
We are not ‘failed refugees’ – we have been failed by a broken visa system which never offered us a fair chance. Now, the government wants to punish us further.
These are extraordinary provisions without precedent in Australia. Even in the context of terrorism offences, a failure to comply with a direction does not result in mandatory imprisonment.
ASF17’s case could have significant implications for other people who sought asylum in Australia and had their claims rejected by the fast-track process. This includes thousands of Iranians on precarious “final departure” visas who have been living in Australia for the last decade and others on stalled “removal pathways” in immigration detention.
The High Court case could also set a new precedent on when people must be released from immigration detention. At present, a person must be released if there is “no real prospect” of their deportation in the “reasonably foreseeable future”. But it is unclear what this means in a range of situations, including where a person is unwilling or unable to participate in their own deportation for good reasons such as ill health or a genuine fear of persecution.
To compel those who have been subjected to Australia’s punitive system of indefinite detention to participate in their own deportation and criminalise them for not doing so is unjust – and should remain unlawful.
Sara Dehm receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Anthea Vogl receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care.
The Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) has proposed a new strategy to bolster the financial health of Olympic sports, ranging from minor sports such as table tennis to dominant codes such as basketball and swimming.
At the heart of this initiative is a plan to permit individual sports federations to independently market the iconic Olympic rings within Australia.
This marks a significant departure from the traditional approach of collective Olympic team sponsorships.
Spearheaded by AOC chief executive Matt Carroll, the move is designed to directly funnel sponsorship revenue into the sports themselves. This is particularly critical for sports that face significant financial challenges. As Carroll stated, “for a small sport, $50,000 is a lot of money.”
Carroll has underscored the precarious financial positions of these organisations, pointing out that even a modest influx of commercial funding could dramatically enhance their sustainability and growth.
The first hurdle to jump over
Despite the ambition of this strategy, the AOC faces an uphill battle in its implementation, with two primary obstacles standing in the way.
The first is the capability gap within smaller sports organisations.
Leveraging the Olympic brand effectively requires a sophisticated approach to marketing – many smaller federations are already stretched thin, lacking the resources, expertise, and person-power to mount successful marketing campaigns.
This capability gap raises questions about their ability to fully capitalise on the opportunity presented by the AOC’s new policy.
Fears of ‘obstruction and oblivion’
The second significant hurdle is rooted in the governance structure of Australian sports.
The federated system, while having its merits, poses considerable challenges to the cohesive and strategic application of the AOC’s initiative.
In a federated sport system, independent organisations oversee different levels (regional and state) of the sport under a central governing body (national), while maintaining autonomy in their respective jurisdictions.
This system tends to encourage siloed operations rather than unified, collaborative efforts.
The AOC’s plan is not merely a theoretical exercise – it is driven by financial imperative.
The committee has estimated an additional $2 billion is required) by 2032 to meet the needs of high-performance sports in Australia, with $1.5 billion of this earmarked specifically for enhancing athletes’ competitive capabilities.
This substantial figure underscores the critical need for innovative funding solutions, of which the AOC’s strategy represents a key component.
While the AOC’s initiative is interesting, it is but one of several potential pathways to addressing the funding shortfall faced by Olympic sports in Australia.
Other models and strategies have emerged globally, offering valuable lessons and alternatives.
For example, the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) has introduced access to their Team USA House in Paris as part of a hospitality package. This move underscores the potential for leveraging Olympic assets for direct funding, independent of government support.
Similarly, the concept of a national sports lottery has been floated within Australia. Such schemes have had a significant impact in other countries, notably Great Britain.
The British sports lottery, instrumental in the country’s Olympic success, especially post-2012 London Games, exemplifies how targeted funding mechanisms can transform a nation’s Olympic fortunes.
Another innovative approach to sports funding is the redirection of a portion of government taxes collected from sports betting.
Given the prevalence of sports betting in Australia, this represents a potentially untapped source of revenue that could provide a sustainable funding stream for sports organisations.
The recent decision by World Athletics to award cash prizes for medal performances introduces an additional dimension to the discussion of athlete and sport funding.
World Athletics announced it will become the first international federation to award prize money at an Olympics.
In Australia, gold, silver, and bronze medallists receive bonuses of $20,000, $15,000 and $10,000 respectively. This is likely to go up as Australia prepares to host the 2032 Games.
While such measures may benefit major sports with higher visibility, they also risk widening the financial gap between these and the smaller, less commercially attractive disciplines such as table tennis.
In other words, sports with bigger budgets can compensate their athletes while smaller sports can’t, so the gap may widen.
Looking ahead to the 2032 Brisbane Olympics
Looking ahead to 2032, it’s crucial for Australia to find strong, lasting ways to support sports.
This challenge goes beyond just helping elite athletes: it’s about enhancing the whole sports landscape to make it more inclusive and enjoyable for everyone.
Initiatives such as Play Well, alongside Queensland’s investment in a new centre for Parasports at the University of Queensland, are steps towards improving access to sports for individuals regardless of their abilities.
These efforts highlight the need for cooperation across various sectors and the importance of innovative funding methods.
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.
Indigenous businesses generate about A$16 billion a year in revenue and employ more than 116,000 people – almost as many as the massive Coles retail group.
But the contribution of these businesses to the Australian economy has long been underestimated.
This is despite Indigenous businesses delivering, among other things, important culturally sensitive health and education assistance in remote areas, professional and technical services to the mining industry and cultural training to corporations and government.
While all this work creates income and promotes economic self-determination for business owners and their employees, much of it is done out of sight without being properly identified in government statistics.
It is the most comprehensive longitudinal study of Indigenous entrepreneurial activity undertaken, examining 13,693 businesses operating in 2022, with the potential to capture data from more businesses in the future.
The snapshot integrates information from Indigenous business registries with the Australian Bureau of Statistics Business Longitudinal Analysis Data (BLADE) registry.
In this year’s 2022 snapshot, the third, we have for the first time included businesses that don’t identify as Indigenous by locating sole traders and partnerships with at least 50% Indigenous owners.
This is important because as sole traders and in partnerships often provide future Indigenous business leaders with their skills and trade.
Identifying as Indigenous seems to help
An analysis of COVID survival rates up to 2021-22 included in the snapshot found businesses that identified as Indigenous by registering on the Indigenous business registry were more likely to have survived than those that did not.
This seems to be because they were larger, more likely to be located in rural and remote areas less affected by lockdowns, and had better access to the JobKeeper and in some cases better access to procurement contracts.
Smaller sole traders, many of whom did not register as Indigenous, might have faced problems running a business during COVID while caring for family.
These findings point to the importance of providing support for sole traders and smaller partnerships with low incomes even if they are not registered as Indigenous.
More data needed
Still more work is needed to understand the Indigenous business sector. Our study provides only a partial representation because it still does not capture private and publicly-listed Indigenous companies that are not registered as Indigenous companies.
The Bureau of Statistics might be able to help by providing more data on the owners of these companies.
Without such information and a public profile, it is hard for Indigenous businesses to gain the recognition and trust needed to attract finance to enable growth.
If COVID has taught us anything, it is that complete and readily available data about businesses helps us understand what is happening on the ground and gives us feedback on the effectiveness of support.
The announced closure of Television New Zealand’s last primetime current affairs programme seems to be the final nail in the coffin for New Zealand’s television credibility. Coming a day after the announcement of the closure of Newshub, it shows that Kiwis have the worst television and video media in the Western world.
Let’s compare ourselves with our mates across the ditch. Australia’s ABC TV features a nightly current affairs show called 7.30. The blurb for it reads:
“Sarah Ferguson presents Australia’s premier daily current affairs program, delivering agenda-setting public affairs journalism and interviews that hold the powerful to account. Plus political analysis from Laura Tingle.”
Clearly 7.30 is far more serious than our Seven Sharp with its fluffy stories and advertorials. The ABC also screens six weekly current affairs shows and documentaries this week. Shows like Australian Story, Four Corners and Media Watch.
But Australia has five times as many people as we do so that’s why they can afford it, right?
Ireland has five million people, like NZ, but they still have primetime current affairs. In fact, the Irish enjoy quite a lot of it. The Irish version of TVNZ is RTÉ and features a nightly current affairs show called Nationwide and three weekly current affairs programmes on serious topics.
There are several other human interest factual programmes too, on subjects like history, gardening, dance and more. It’s the same in other countries with similar populations such as Norway, Denmark, Finland and so on.
It’s true that in New Zealand, there’s still the off-peak studio politics programmes like Q+A, and current affairs in te ao Māori are well examined on Whakaata Māori. But what about the rest of NZ?
Some people might say television is dead, and everything is online now. But nearly all online current affairs videos start out as television programmes. The only exceptions are Newsroom’s video investigations with Melanie Reid, and Stuff Circuit which is now disbanded. And for younger audiences there is Re: which TVNZ is also making cuts to.
Death of current affairs TV The death of New Zealand’s prime-time current affairs television has been a long time coming. At first it was documentaries that dwindled and then disappeared off our screens.
Other genres that are expensive to produce have also become extinct or rarer than a fairy tern — drama, science programmes, kidult, arts programmes, wildlife documentaries, chat shows. Now we can add consumer affairs and prime-time current affairs to the list.
But it doesn’t have to be this way. If other countries can do it, why not NZ?
This suggests either a lack of understanding of her role or a lack of ambition. She also let slip that there was no way she could save Newshub.
The only substantive solution to come from the minister is her promise to review the Broadcasting Act. But that review process was initiated by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage years ago and started under the Labour government.
Moreover, the Broadcasting Act does little more than lay out the rules for broadcasting complaints, election broadcasting, and establish NZ On Air, the BSA and Te Māngai Pāho.
Minister just tweaking The minister says she is reviewing the Broadcasting Act to create a “more level playing field” and allow media businesses to “innovate”. That doesn’t sound like it will do much for television and video current affairs, which will take much more than just tweaking how NZ On Air and the BSA work.
Perhaps she intends something much more comprehensive, such as a new funding stream for public media, perhaps through a levy, a compulsory subscription, or even a licence fee.
Despite her protestations, there are several options available to the minister. To save TVNZ’s Fair Go and Sunday, she could provide TVNZ with an interim cash injection (which is actually what governments often do in disasters) until the comprehensive long-term funding is sorted out.
To save Newshub she could promise to remove advertising from TVNZ, or partially on weekends only. This would throw Warner Bros Discovery a lifeline in the form of advertisers looking for a television station to advertise on. She does not have to stand by and watch while our media burns.
Sunday is only with us for a few more weeks. Enjoy it while it lasts.
During yesterday’s senate inquiry into supermarket pricing, Greens senator Nick McKim threatened to hold outgoing Woolworths chief executive Brad Banducci in contempt for refusing to directly answer questions about the company’s profitability.
McKim repeatedly asked Banducci for details about Woolworths’ return on equity, but the chief executive argued that another profitability metric – return on investment – was the better measure to focus on.
For Woolworths, the difference between these figures is significant. At the senate hearings, Banducci repeatedly said the company’s return on investment was about 10%. But analytics firm LSEG’s estimates put its return on equity at 26%.
So what’s the difference between these two measures? And in the highly charged setting of an inquiry into supermarket pricing, why might Woolworths prefer to focus on one over the other?
How do we judge profitability?
First, let’s consider what both measures are trying to capture – the company’s profitability.
Of course, we could dodge the “which ratio is better” issue altogether, by simply referring to the company’s actual reported profit last year. But this then raises another question. With a wide range to choose from, which profit figure should we look at? Before or after interest payments? Before or after tax?
As these answers change, the profitability of Woolworths varies significantly, ranging from about A$5.7 billion before interest and tax, to a more modest A$1.6 billion after interest and tax.
If we assume we’re interested in the company’s profitability after interest and tax, we still need to assess whether a profit of $1.6 billion is high, low or perfectly average for a firm like Woolworths.
Scaling and comparing profits
The way this is solved in markets, of course, is that profits are scaled. Scaling involves dividing a company’s profit by a measure that reflects the amount of investment required to generate it, enabling us to compare profitability among competing firms.
To do so, it is important to understand that firms raise capital – on which they earn a return – in two main ways: by raising equity (such as shares issued privately or on a stock exchange) and by taking on debt (funds borrowed from banks and other creditors).
Scaling profits by a common denominator allows us to compare them between similar firms, such as supermarkets. anystock/Shutterstock
Both return on equity and return on investment are scaled measures of profitability. But return on equity divides a company’s income by the total value of its equity, while return on investment divides it by the total value of all capital employed – both its equity and its debt.
As such, each measure gives a correct answer to a different question.
Return on investment is answering the question: what rate of return did your assets generate from each dollar of capital raised from both shareholders and debtholders?
Whereas return on equity answers: what rate of return did you generate for shareholders after accounting for the impact of your debt and taxes?
The income earned for shareholders by a firm holding debt is what’s left over after interest is paid on that debt. Provided the firm’s assets generate a higher rate of return than the interest rate paid on the firm’s debt, shareholder returns will be higher than if the company had not borrowed at all. This effect is significant for Woolworths shareholders, given the investment-grade rating it enjoys on its debt.
The disparity between return on investment and return on equity grows even larger as a company relies more heavily on borrowing – a practice long enjoyed by companies like Woolworths and Coles with such historically low risk.
Facing an increasingly hostile Senate Inquiry into his company’s profitability, it’s little surprise that Banducci pushed so enthusiastically for the adoption of his preferred measure.
Sean Pinder 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.
“Today is polling day. Polling Station opens at 7 am and closes at 4 pm. Be at the correct polling station and be in the voting line before 4 pm,” a text message from the Solomon Islands Electoral Commission alerting voters said this morning.
But even before the first ballot was cast a political party president and election candidate told RNZ Pacific on the eve of the election that coalition negotiations were already taking place and the first political lobbying camp is being set up at the Honiara Hotel.
The polls which opened at 7am will close at 4pm and more than 400,000 Solomon Islanders are expected to exercise their democratic right and vote to elect their national and provincial representatives.
According to the Electoral Commission, there are 334 election candidates in the running for the 50 available seats in the national election and only 20 of them are women.
There are 219 candidates contesting under parties and 115 as independents.
In the provincial assembly elections, there are 816 candidates contesting – 781 are men and 35 are women.
Out of this lot, 724 are contesting as independents and 92 under political party banners.
Independents outnumber party lists In both the national and provincial elections — which are being conducted simultaneously for the first time this year — independent candidates far outnumber the candidates fielded by any single political party.
Historically, independent candidates have always played a big part in the formation of coalition governments in Solomon Islands as king makers.
In fact, at the last election in 2019, the caretaker prime minister Manasseh Sogavare actually contested the election as an independent candidate, who formally registered his Our Party after the polls, and then proceeded to sign up most of the independent MPs to create what was the largest party in the last house.
The party president who told RNZ Pacific that coalition negotiations were already well underway said that the same strategy, or a variation of it, may again be employed in this election.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Many Australians with disability feel on the edge of a precipice right now. Recommendations from the disability royal commission and the NDIS review were released late last year. Now a draft NDIS reform bill has been tabled. In this series, experts examine what new proposals could mean for people with disability.
One of the main proposals of the review of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is the mandatory registration of all service providers. It is also one of the most controversial. A taskforce investigating the idea, announced by NDIS Minister Bill Shorten, will report by the end of June.
At present, registration is voluntary, except for a few high-risk services such as those that use restrictive practices or provide specialist disability accommodation. About 16,000 providers are registered, but more than 150,000 are unregistered.
Many people in the disability community are distressed by the plan. They say it will reduce their ability to choose people they know and trust as their service providers if those providers remain unregistered.
Extending provider registration (including in shared accommodation) makes sense, but not in the way proposed.
The NDIS review wants to make people in the scheme safer, get them higher-quality services, and collect data to better track the market – including monitoring abusive providers and workers. But instead of lurching to mandatory registration for all, the government could take a more nuanced approach to balance safety with the “dignity of risk”.
The recommendations
The premise of registration reforms is that the riskier the service provided, the more stringent the registration process should be. The review calls this a “graduated risk-proportionate regulatory model”. For example, a local laundry service would need to “enrol” with the National Disability Insurance Agency (the NDIA, which administers the scheme). This would involve an online application, ABN, Digital ID, bank account and contact details. The online application would also enable NDIA payments.
Then there would be three tiers of registration: basic, general, and advanced. Basic registration would involve self-assessment and stated commitment to NDIS Practice Standards. General and advanced registration would involve an audit that providers arrange and pay for themselves. For many small businesses and contractors, this could prove onerous and expensive.
The review proposes using one dimension to determine risk: the kind of service being provided. But this does not give NDIS participants – the people receiving services – the ability to take on some of the risk of screening workers themselves if they so choose.
People with disability want the right to choose who comes into their homes. Shutterstock
Some people with disability want more options, even if it involves risk
When the NDIS was designed more than a decade ago, it purposely enabled the use of unregistered providers by legislating different plan management options. This deliberate policy choice was to encourage competition and innovation.
All providers, whether they register or not, have responsibilities to participants. All providers can have complaints raised against them through the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and are held to the NDIS Code of Conduct. And who is allowed to self-manage is already subject to a risk assessment undertaken by the NDIA.
Deciding who supports them matters to people with disability, especially when support workers are in their homes and helping them with the most personal of care, such as getting in and out of bed, dressing or showering.
Trusted networks of workers may have been built up over many years. Yet, by categorising this kind of care as “high risk”, the proposal for mandatory registration means directly hired staff could have to undergo and pay for an audit and do extra training. Such requirements could make many established support arrangements unviable.
Some people in the NDIS use unregistered providers not by choice, but by necessity. In areas where there are very few providers, termed “thin markets”, working with unregistered providers can be the difference between getting a service and receiving no services at all.
Unregistered providers tend to provide more short-term or one-off services, meaning the costs of registration might outweigh the benefits for some providers. For example, some providers who mainly work with non-disabled clients might choose to stop providing NDIS services rather than register, which would be a problem in markets with few or one provider.
A lot of the data the government needs to track down and strike off dodgy providers or workers will come through the enrolment process into the scheme’s new payment system once established. This will record providers’ business name, ABN or Digital ID, bank account details, location and contact details.
This information means authorities stand a much better chance of tracking spending and taking enforcement action when needed. It should help the government keep participants safer while cracking down on fraud – without necessarily requiring mandatory provider registration.
Where to from here
We need to see less heat and more light around the purpose of regulatory reform.
The focus on mandatory registration comes at the expense of deeper thinking about the problems good regulatory design needs to solve, like the shocking abuse Lee-Anne Mackey suffered from carers in her group home.
People with disability deserve a more nuanced approach to regulating disability services – one that retains choice while enhancing regulatory and other protections in the settings where it is most needed.
Grattan Institute’s Disability Program has support from the Summer Foundation.
Do you find yourself endlessly scrolling through streaming channels, wondering what to watch among the hundreds (or thousands) of options? Do you worry about spending more money on yet another subscription just to watch the latest show everyone is talking about? Do you miss the days when we had just five channels to choose from – and someone else was making the choices about what was playing? Do you ever just wish you could watch Home and Away, 24 hours a day, every day?
Well, there is a channel for that.
On “FAST TV” – or, free ad-supported streaming TV – in Australia you can watch a channel entirely dedicated to Home and Away, or another that plays Border Security non-stop. You can watch Mythbusters on a loop, or hours and hours of Baywatch.
You can watch channels curated by genre, like “Cooking & Culture” or “Property Dreams”, or by sporting code. Some channels recreate those you might remember from your Foxtel days, like MTV Reality and Nick Toons, or The Movie Hub and “Throwback TV”.
FAST channels (or “FASTs”) resemble traditional broadcast or cable channels. They run on a linear schedule, interspersed with blocks of ads. But they are entirely free and delivered over the internet – and our recent audit of the market found there are more than 640 available in Australia.
FASTs are offered on most smart TVs, as well as on some local broadcasters’ video-on-demand services.
They first became available in Australia in 2020 when Samsung launched Samsung TV Plus. LG Channels, TCL Channels and VIDAAtv (on Hisense TVs) have since entered the market.
If you have one of these smart TVs, you might have access to FAST channels. These are normally displayed in the app-launcher row on the smart TV home screen and in the electronic program guide.
7Plus and 10Play offer more than 50 FAST channels each, and 9Now and SBS On Demand recently each added a couple of FAST channels. Plex, a free media player and video app you can download onto your smart TV, offers more than 200 FAST channels.
So why do they exist?
For TV manufacturers like Samsung and LG, FASTs add value to a customer’s initial purchase and manufacturers make money from advertising and the data they collect from users.
For Australian television stations, FASTs help their streaming catalogues look bigger and allow them to use the content they’ve licensed in a different way.
Arguably, the audience for shows like Home and Away and Border Security are used to linear TV (and the advertising that comes along with it), and they might enjoy a lean-back experience where they can binge these shows.
Manufacturers like Samsung have their own FAST channels. M-SUR/Shutterstock
FAST channels are being promoted to audiences as the solution to streaming frustrations such as subscription fatigue, choice paralysis and increasing costs. With these channels you don’t have to choose what to watch next; instead, you can sit in front of whatever is on. A study by Samsung found ads within FAST environments are perceived as shorter and less disruptive than broadcast TV. And, of course, FASTs are free.
FASTs also provide content audiences might not be able to find anywhere else. They exist across several key niches (in our research, we found channels for gaming, yoga, poker, wrestling, fashion, cooking, spirituality and finance) and serve particular diasporic communities in Australia. For example, LG Channels offers a suite of South Korean channels.
Some of the 1,500 FAST channels in the United States have started making exclusive new content, but at the moment the FAST channels in Australia only offer existing content.
The FAST channels of Australian television stations offer recognisable, high-quality titles, mostly exclusive to one platform.
But we found that the FAST channels offered by smart TV manufacturers in Australia have a long way to go to catch up with the quality of those from the broadcasters.
Manufacturers have opted for quantity over quality. As a result, their FAST channels can be quite obscure and erratic. We observed poor video quality and channels that are slow to load, glitchy or prone to malfunction. Programming is regularly labelled incorrectly or confusingly in the electronic program guide.
We also found a surprisingly high proportion of empty ad slots, even on the more premium manufacturer FAST channels. This means that you might be left sitting through a repetitive holding screen during designated “ad” breaks.
FASTs are a great way for Australians to supplement paid subscriptions with a range of free channels. There will no doubt be more investment in this market in the years ahead.
But our research suggests, so far, FASTs have largely flown under the radar of Australian audiences and it remains to be seen whether they can provide a satisfying substitute to streaming in practice.
A 24-hour Home and Away channel might not be a threat to Netflix just yet – but a channel dedicated to a new and exclusive show? That might be a different story.
Alexa Scarlata has been working on a project funded by the Australian Research Council (FT190100144) and SBS.
Ashleigh Dharmawardhana 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 the early 20th century, canaries were used as early warning systems in coal mines to alert miners to rising levels of carbon monoxide.
A small unremarkable fish may fill a similar role in coastal ecosystems around Aotearoa New Zealand.
Triplefins, or kokopara, are common in a range of shallow coastal habitats across the country. They are a diverse group of fishes, with 26 endemic species living on our shores, and they make excellent “canaries” for the coastal marine environment, helping us to understand and possibly address pollution.
Research using triplefins has already shown increased consumption of microplastics by fish living closer to urban areas. Studies have also identified molecular responses to multiple chemical pollutants and described cognitive damage caused by loss of habitat complexity.
We are finding what is called “skyglow” affects triplefin growth patterns, with consequences for their ability to forage.
An underwater ‘canary’
Human activity around coastal waters is intense, about triple the rate of other areas, and it affects ecosystems such as beaches and wetlands.
Coastal urbanisation introduces a range of challenges for near-shore ecosystems, including pollutants, plastics, sound and light.
Light pollution is often recognised for the limitations it imposes on astronomers and stargazers, but a growing body of research has begun to document effects on the health of animals and ecosystems.
Triplefins have already shown that fish living closer to urban areas are more exposed to microplastics and noise pollution. Wikimedia Commons/Ian Skipworth, CC BY-SA
Scientists have found coastal fishes in tropical and temperate environments, including the common triplefin, reproduce and grow in a cyclical pattern which follows the monthly lunar cycle.
Patterns in nocturnal illumination (known as artificial light at night, or ALAN) of surface waters have a surprisingly large impact on these fish. The prevalence of light pollution from cities (in this case New Zealand’s capital Wellington) can potentially interfere with their breeding cycles.
Long-term trends in skyglow over the Wellington region have revealed elevated levels of nighttime illumination up to 60 kilometres from the city centre.
Analysis of triplefin samples from nearby waters has identified altered growth patterns, manifesting in different body shapes. The health consequences include decreased swimming and foraging ability and make life harder for fish developing in brighter waters.
Bright city lights
It may not seem that the effects of light on a tiny fish are a big deal, but triplefins are a clear indicator of what could be happening in other fish.
In marine ecosystems, small changes have a way of propagating further up the food chain. In the light pollution example, theory suggests small-scale, relatively short-term fluctuations in small prey species like the common triplefin are likely to appear later as long-term fluctuations in larger species at a greater spatial scale, with genuine implications for pelagic fisheries.
In an instance such as this, the triplefin is indeed acting as a canary for potential changes affecting the entire marine food web.
We know what affects one fish species may not affect others. But equally, we can’t carry out experiments on every species. What the humble triplefin can tell us is that coastal ecosystems are in trouble, not just from water quality and pollution, but from the lights and sounds of our big cities.
Like the miners, we need to pay attention to the animals we use as indicators. The triplefins are asking us to embrace the dark and there are many ways in which our cities can do this.
Communities can choose LED lightbulbs and shaded fixtures for street lights, so they only point down. Sensible use of dimmers and timers will help turn off unnecessary lights. In fact, Aotearoa New Zealand hosts two of the world’s few dark sky reserves, in Aoraki-McKenzie and, more recently, in the Wairarapa, as well as two dark sky sanctuaries (Aotea/Great Barrier Island and Rakiura/Stewart Island).
New Zealand could be on track to become the second dark sky nation in the world (after Niue).
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.
So weighed down have Americans become by student debt, and so potent a political issue has it become in the US, that President Biden plans to waive interest or write off money owing by 30 million of them.
He is doing it bit by bit, in the face of resistance from the US Supreme Court. He has already axed or wound back 4.3 million debts, and on Friday cancelled 277,000 more.
The benefits, as he keeps telling anyone who will listen in the lead up to the November election, are likely to be increased consumer spending, better mental health and credit scores for borrowers, and increased home ownership.
In Australia, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is under pressure to do something – anything – for Australians under the same sort of pressure.
Every June, the amount owed jumps
Every June the amount that someone who has borrowed under the Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) jumps. Because the jump is linked to inflation, and because inflation has been low for decades, in most Junes the jump has been small, until last June.
On June 1 2023, Australians who had made no payments over the previous year faced a jump of 7.1%. Someone who had owned $25,000, suddenly owed $26,770, and so on.
The good news is there’s likely to be some change, and we are likely to hear about it soon, in the lead-up to the May budget.
The bad news for borrowers is it won’t be debt relief of the kind Biden is offering.
It’s worse in the US
While in both Australia and the US it’s the government that lends to pay student fees rather than private lenders (who don’t like the risks) in the US the loans are really onerous, requiring fixed monthly repayments over a set period of time, regardless of the borrower’s circumstances.
In Australia and the United Kingdom and New Zealand and some other countries that have copied Australia’s system, the loans are income contingent, meaning they only need to be repaid when the borrower’s income rises to a certain level.
At the moment Australia’s repayment threshold is A$51,550 per year, meaning anyone who earns less than that doesn’t need to repay a cent, perhaps forever if their income never climbs that high.
Where payments are required, they are taken out in the same way as income tax is, each fortnight for pay-as-you-earn employees.
Buried within Biden’s announcement is a decision to move towards an Australian-style plan he has called SAVE, which stands for Saving on a Valuable Education.
If it becomes law, single Americans won’t have to repay until they earn US$32,800. For an American supporting a family of four the threshold will be US$67,500. It will be an Australian-style system.
Easy wins for Albo
While Australia’s system is much better than the one in the US and has been copied around the world, it is far from perfect.
A simple change, identified by the report of the Australian Universities Accord delivered to Education Minister Jason Clare, in February is to increase the amount owing each year by either the rate of increase in prices or the rate of increase in wages, whichever is lower.
Usually, prices increase by less than wages, which is why the system was set up in 1988 to index amounts owed to prices.
But last year, unusually, prices increased faster than wages. In those years it would be simple to lift the amount owed only in line with wages, as the report recommends.
The amount owed needs to increase in line with something, because otherwise its value would shrink rapidly as prices rose. The government doesn’t charge interest (which would hurt) so instead it lifts the amount owed in line with prices to ensure that compared to other things it remains little changed.
Make repayments more like tax
Although we repay student loans through the income tax system, we don’t do it like income tax.
Here’s how it works for tax: on our first $18,200 of income we pay nothing, then we pay 19 cents in the dollar for each extra dollar we earn up to the next threshold, and so on. The key words here are “for each extra dollar”. We continue to pay nothing on the first $18,200 we earn.
Higher education loans work differently. For them, we repay nothing until we earn $51,550, and then at that point, even if we earn just one dollar more, we pay one per cent of all our annaul income, the entire $51,550 (which amounts to $515).
It’s a repayment cliff that sends us backwards. It means earning an extra dollar costs us more than $500 in that year. It can mean an effective marginal tax rate of 500%.
The cliff matters. Each year, there’s an impressive cluster of taxpayers who happen to be earning just under the threshold. More likely to be women than men, they might be deciding not to work in order to keep their incomes below the threshold.
Make it easier to get home loans
Britain and other nations that copied Australia’s system don’t impose large repayments in one hit, and the economist who designed Australia’s system now says that part of the system was “an error, a mistake”.
That economist, Bruce Chapman, has suggested a redesign that would require collections only on extra rather than total incomes, a proposal the report to the government endorses.
And there’s something else Albanese can do. Right now Australia’s banking regulator requires banks to count student loans as debt for the purpose of determining who can get a housing loan, knocking some former students out.
Chapman says it would make more sense to treat the compulsory payments as tax, which is how they function. All they do is reduce after-tax income, and for low earners, they don’t even do that. It’d get more people into housing.
Two major critical minerals projects in Queensland and South Australia are to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal government loans as part of the Albanese government’s new Future Made in Australia policy.
New loans worth $400 million will go to the Australian company Alpha HPA to deliver Australia’s first high-purity alumina processing facility in the Queensland port city of Gladstone.
The project is expected to create about 490 jobs during construction and more than 200 when it is completed.
The company will use Australian-owned intellectual property and technologies to produce high purity alumina, which is a critical mineral used in LED lighting, semiconductors, lithium-ion batteries and other high- tech applications.
The loans will be provided by Export Finance Australia through the government’s $4 billion Critical Minerals Facility and Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility.
The government is also lending $185 million to Renascor Resources to fast track the first stage of its South Australian Siviour Graphite Project at Arno Bay on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsular.
An earlier loan for the project was approved in February 2022.
Stage One will deliver about 150 construction jobs and 125 ongoing jobs when the project is operational. Stage Two is expected to involve another 225 construction jobs and more than 120 jobs operational once operating in Bolivar near Port Adelaide.
Renascor Resources will deliver purified graphite for lithium-ion batteries needed for electric vehicles and renewable technologies.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the two projects would help bring “good and secure jobs in manufacturing, and clean, reliable energy”.
Resources Minister Madeleine King said Australia’s critical minerals and rare earths were “key to building renewable technologies such as solar panels, batteries and wind farms, as well as defence and medical technologies”.
Queensland Premier Steven Miles – who faces an election this year – said the announcement by the Prime Minister showed “the confidence government and industry have in the great state of Queensland”.
Critical minerals are defined as metallic or non-metallic elements found in the earth that are both crucial for modern technologies or national security and face the risk of supply chain disruption.
Australia has identified 26 such minerals, and in Feburay added nickel to the list.
Albanese announced plans to introduce a Future Made in Australia Act last week, saying he wanted to “bring together in a comprehensive and co-ordinated way a whole package of new and existing initiatives to boost investment, create jobs and seize the opportunities of a future made in Australia”.
On Monday the government announced a Medical Science Co-investment Plan that identified priorities for government support including digital health, medical devices, innovative therapeutics and sustainability.
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.
Water is one of Australia’s most valuable commodities. Rights to take water from our nation’s largest river system, the Murray-Darling Basin, are worth almost A$100 billion. These rights can be bought and sold or leased, with trade exceeding A$2 billion a year. But water is also being stolen (no-one knows how much) and the thieves usually get away with it.
The federal Labor government came to power promising to crack down on water theft in the Murray-Darling Basin. The Productivity Commission has also expressed concerns about a lack of compliance and enforcement.
The Inspector General of Water Compliance, Troy Grant, has also described existing powers to deter theft as ineffective, and called for urgent action to address inconsistencies in the various state laws that penalise theft from the Murray-Darling Basin. That was almost a year ago.
In our new research, we identified the many relevant laws operating in the basin. We examined these laws and found maximum penalties range wildly. It is a dog’s breakfast. Surely we can do better.
How did we get into this mess?
The mishmash of water theft laws and penalties across the basin is unfortunate but not surprising.
Water in the Murray-Darling Basin is managed under a joint agreement between the federal government, the basin’s four states (Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia) and the Australian Capital Territory.
This agreement could be dissolved at any time, should any one state or territory decide to quit.
Murray-Darling Basin compliance is now managed by the Office of the Inspector General of Water Compliance, an independent group of public servants, typically former police officers.
As Inspector General, Grant has been given powers to reduce water theft, uphold compliance with Murray-Darling Basin rules, and restore confidence among those living and working in the basin.
But he was forced to drop 62 cases in February 2023 due to poor state legislative support, inconsistent approaches to water theft, and allowances for some irrigators to balance their accounts in arrears. Basically, Grant stated you had to be a moron to be caught.
Dropped cases lead to questions about water values, continued supply reliability, the extent of environmental harm, and the future security of water rights.
In New South Wales, the independent regulator spoke to neighbouring farmers about water theft (Natural Resources Access Regulator)
It’s almost 15 years since the most recent review of water theft legislation across state and federal boundaries, which highlighted clear inconsistencies in penalties and approaches to cases.
It’s also nearly ten years since the ABC Four Corners report into large-scale water theft, illustrating the dangers of environmental water harms and wanton disregard by some users for the rights of others.
But if the basin suffers another serious drought, as predicted by many researchers, it is likely theft will become a top concern for all involved, particularly regulators at state and federal levels.
We tested this by combining rainfall and runoff data from the Bureau of Meteorology with climate projections from the CSIRO Climate Futures Model and the Garnaut Climate Change Review, to generate a model of future water flows into the southern Murray-Darling Basin up to 2100.
Our research shows we’re on track for a water runoff catastrophe by around 2060, and the eventual collapse of the river’s systems by around 2080. Less rain and higher evaporation rates means less water will runoff the land into streams, rivers and storages. Sobering stuff.
Our research shows the Inspector General is right: a base comparison of the laws in each state show clear differences, along with the penalties that sit behind them. Calls for greater certainty and consistency are yet to resonate. The positive lessons to be drawn from successful processes are falling on deaf ears.
But we did find some consistent aspects worth noting, which could help us better understand and analyse the legal framework for penalising water theft in the Murray-Darling Basin. This is the “pyramid” approach to assessing cases and applying penalties, using a tiered framework of increasing severity that looks to be applied universally throughout the basin.
The pyramids are based on existing principles already in use for water management around the world.
Most Murray-Darling Basin states already follow this approach. Yet some states do it better than others.
The independent regulator in NSW uses the pyramid approach, where increasing impacts of non-compliance result in more severe responses as you move up the ‘enforcement pyramid’ Author supplied
Legal inconsistency also stems from some states being unwilling to “climb to the top” of the pyramid and initiate court proceedings against the most egregious offenders. This leads to lower penalties in most cases.
We also note New South Wales has adopted satellite technology to identify and track water theft. This is a good example for others to follow.
Towards consistent laws
Consistency in compliance and certainty across state jurisdictions will help restore confidence in the water market, and ultimately ensure the Murray-Darling’s water flows are protected from thieves.
We need certain and severe penalties for water theft across the Murray-Darling Basin and Australia as a whole. Such penalties may garner a wider appreciation of the value of the environment.
Addressing water theft issues consistently and with certainty offers opportunities for Australia to again lead the way in effective water governance and compliance reform globally.
But progress has been slow. This is deeply concerning, especially as water flows into the basin will dwindle as the climate changes.
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.
In the space of three days, there have been two devastating knife attacks in Sydney. Your child may have seen these on the news or social media. Or they might be hearing about it from friends or at school.
How can parents help children and teenagers process this news and ensure they feel safe in their community?
Follow your child’s lead
All children are different. Some are naturally more anxious or sensitive. Some will take a greater interest in the news. Rather than just thinking about your child’s age, you can be guided by your child’s level of interest and knowledge about recent events.
Kids are often better able to cope with hearing difficult or distressing news than we might give them credit for.
Talking about events helps children understand what happened and gives us a chance to reassure them. This doesn’t mean you need to go into a lot of detail. In fact, a calm, simple, factual answer is best.
If your young child has heard news about the Bondi Junction attack, you might say:
That man was unwell in his mind. He hurt other people but he was stopped by police. Most people struggling with feeling or thinking problems get help and never hurt anyone.
You don’t need to give vivid details or discuss anything beyond the question our child asked.
If your child is upset or anxious about what has happened, it’s important to notice, listen to and acknowledge their emotions.
You can also empathise with your child – what has happened is awful and scary. Their response is perfectly natural.
Parents can sometimes think they should not give children’s fears or anxieties any space, in case they become worse. Dismissing them (“don’t think about it!”) seems like an easy way to make a problem go away. But emotions are tricky and the opposite is actually true.
When we allow emotions to be freely expressed, we help children understand the situation and to process and move through their emotions.
Talk about how rare these events are
It’s also important to introduce some facts into the conversation.
Even though we have had two events in quick succession, such attacks are extremely rare in Australia (in fact, that’s why they make the news in such a significant way).
You can also tell your child there are strict laws against people hurting other people, and there are lots of services to help. We see the police and hospitals responding and helping when bad things happen. We also see every day people in the community coming together to help and support one another.
Our own reaction matters
Parents are role models for their children. In times of stress, children look to parents to understand what’s happened, what the risk is and how they should respond.
If parents are really emotional and show they are upset, fearful, or anxious, it can be scary or unsettling for children, as it suggests the situation is out of control.
It helps if we read the news and process our own emotions away from young children.
With older children, it’s possible to discuss our shared feelings of grief, sadness and horror. But it’s still important for parents to be calm, so we demonstrate everything is okay.
Continue normal routines
Sticking to familiar daily routines helps us and our children feel safe. This is because it’s reassuring for children to see life continuing unchanged.
So it’s important to head back to the shops, or to places of worship, just as you normally would.
If your child expresses concerns, listen to them, empathise, reassure them what happened was extremely rare, and quietly continue on with daily life.
Other activities are also great for helping your child feel safe. This includes getting outside, getting active, and having fun time together, playing, being light-hearted and silly. All these things help our bodies relax.
Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council
Tomer Berkowitz 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Greg Barton, Chair in Global Islamic Politics, Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University
Just days after the deadly Westfield Bondi attacks, a second knife attack in Sydney has generated widespread shock and grief. This time, a 16-year-old entered an Assyrian church and rushed forward to stab the popular bishop presiding over a service, together with a priest who rushed to his defence. The shocking events were captured on the church’s video stream, and the news quickly reached thousands of members of Sydney’s large Assyrian community.
While both priests were injured, thankfully the knife blows were not fatal. Parishioners immobilised the attacker, and police and paramedics swarmed the church. Police moved quickly to identify the assailant and analyse his apparent motivation before announcing they were treating the attack as a terrorist incident early this morning.
Public knife attacks are rare in Australia, and for Sydney to experience two in quick succession has rightfully alarmed many and, understandably, led to comparisons between the two. A lot of the discussion is around why the Bondi Junction shopping mall attack in which six were killed wasn’t considered terrorism, but this shocking, but non-lethal, attack was.
So what do we know about the church attack, and what important distinctions can be made between it and the awful events at Bondi?
Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel has developed a large following, not just in Australia but in the Assyrian diaspora around the world, with his live-streamed sermons. Shortly after seven o’clock on Monday night, the video feed of the Christ The Good Shepherd Church in Sydney’s outer west went dead, but not before it captured the shocking attack and parishioners rushing forward to help.
Almost immediately, crowds gathered outside the church. We don’t yet know the motivations of the people who turned up, but it can be assumed they were there because they either saw or heard of what had happened and rushed over out of concern.
Tragically, at some point the dynamics of the fast-swelling crowd took a dark turn. Instead of letting the large police and ambulance presence continue to handle the situation, some emotional onlookers turned on the authorities. Multiple police officers and paramedics were injured and vehicles were heavily damaged.
It’s likely the fact the attack was captured on video, and therefore able to be shared and watched over and over again, added to the combustibility of an already volatile situation. It would appear the attack was deliberately planned to provoke an angry response. But what exactly happened in the crowd is the subject of one police investigation.
Why is it considered a terrorist act?
The other investigation is an anti-terrorism one. This is because while the teenager acted alone, it’s very likely they had received encouragement and backing from others. The Unabomber is one of the very few documented cases of someone committing violence for ideological reasons truly in isolation.
This lone actor attack in Sydney is reminiscent of the 2015 murder of police accountant Curtis Cheng. He was shot dead by a 15-year-old who had been radicalised by supporters of Islamic State. It later came out in court the attack had been planned by three other people, who also supplied him with the gun.
Police were quick to pronounce the knife attack on Monday to be an act of terrorism. Having identified the attacker, they would have been studying his social connections and examining his digital footprint.
The police assessment would have also given attention to the particulars of the church targeted. Assyrians (people from northwest Iraq, northeast Syria and southeast Turkey) are almost exclusively Christian, belonging to one of the old churches in existence, living in precisely that part of the world in which the Islamic State established its brutal caliphate.
It’s telling that before the caliphate was established, Assyrians made up just 3% of the Iraqi population. But in the wake of Islamic State sweeping across northern Syria and Iraq, Assyrians soon made up 40% of Iraqi refugees. The trauma of those years is recent history, fresh in the minds of many.
The recent Islamic State claim of responsibility for the recent deadly attacks in Moscow, is a reminder the group remains a live and growing threat. For these reasons police will be looking for any evidence that Islamic State might have played a role in inspiring this attack.
Terrorism or not terrorism?
Events at the church have been under a bigger spotlight given the events of the days preceding it.
Despite early misinformation, police said that they believe the Bondi killer, Joel Cauchi, was not motivated by a larger political cause – that is, a terrorist motivation. Instead, they say he lashed out violently because of anger control issues related to mental ill-health.
But of the six people he killed, five were women. Women also make up the majority of those injured. The one man who lost his life, security guard Faraz Tahir, a Muslim refugee from Pakistan, was attacked because he bravely rushed towards danger in an attempt to try to stop Cauchi. NSW Police Commissioner Karen Webb said Cauchi deliberately targeted women.
So if someone is targeting a specific group of people, isn’t that terrorism? Why does it matter if they were killing based on gender or religion? Is misogyny not terrorism?
Put simply, the defining characteristic of terrorism is perpetuating violence in the name of a higher, broader cause. Terrorists have a belief in a collective goal, and see themselves as being backed by people who share that belief. Misogyny can be an element of their motivation and justification of hatred, but it’s part of a larger political project.
Basically, it boils down to whether these violent actors think they’re part of a political or religious movement that’s going to change the system, or whether they are simply angry men projecting loathing and driven by personal demons. The two, of course, are not mutually exclusive.
This is not to undermine the damage that angry men can, and do, inflict. Domestic violence is a bigger threat to Australians than terrorism. Calling something a terrorist act doesn’t make it more or less serious than anything else, rather the categorisation is to provide conceptual clarity for the sake of the ensuing investigation.
Events at Westfield Bondi Junction and the Assyrian Christ The Good Shepherd Church are both awful, but while they share some similarities, they are different sorts of crimes with different drivers and enablers. As police investigations continue, we’ll come to better understand the nature of both.
Greg Barton receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is engaged in a range of projects funded by the Australian government that aim to understand and counter violent extremism in Australia and in Southeast Asia and Africa.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olaf Meynecke, Research Fellow in Marine Science and Manager Whales & Climate Program, Griffith University
A juvenile hammerhead at Burleigh Beach, watched by snorkellersOlaf Meynecke, CC BY-NC-ND
For the second year in a row, over 100 hammerheads have gathered at one of Australia’s busiest beaches, Burleigh Beach in the Gold Coast.
Why aren’t we alarmed? Because these are small scalloped hammerheads, not the larger great hammerhead. Even this species is feared far more than it deserves. Plus, these scalloped hammerheads are juveniles between 40 cm and 1 metre.
Scalloped hammerheads prefer tropical and temperate oceans. But as the oceans heat up, they’re moving further south – just as we’re seeing in Western Australia, where these timid sharks are now gathering off Perth.
These remarkable sharks are one of the few social sharks, gathering in large numbers as juveniles and adults. But this behaviour makes them easy to catch and kill for their fins or meat. Their numbers have fallen by over 80% over the last five decades. It’s urgent we find ways to protect them wherever they school.
Up to 100 scalloped hammerheads have gathered off the popular Gold Coast swimming and surfing beach, Burleigh Beach, in April 2024. Credit Roving Media
Why are they here?
Schooling behaviour is about safety in numbers. This behaviour – known in sharks as “shivering” – can also help them hunt prey. Sharks of similar age tend to migrate and form a shiver together.
For young sharks, the open ocean has many dangers with very few places to hide from larger sharks. Young scalloped hammerheads seek sheltered, warm waters with abundant small prey, where they can grow fast.
Last year, young scalloped hammerheads spent several weeks at the end of the summer at Burleigh Beach on the southern Gold Coast.
Why this location? This year’s gathering of even more sharks at the same location and time as last year coincides with warm water temperatures of 26°C. This, combined with the sheltered waters behind the sand bar and an abundance of small prey, means Burleigh might hit the sweet spot.
High rainfall in recent months has brought more nutrient-laden runoff into the ocean, boosting prey species such as small fish, squid and crustaceans.
Where the young sharks migrate after this is still being studied. But during the cooler months we do see young scalloped hammerheads skimming the sea surface further offshore. As adults, they can swim vast distances, reaching as far as Papua New Guinea or Pacific island nations.
We have seen a similar shiver of scalloped hammerheads in the Shoalwater Island Marine Park off the coast from Perth’s southernmost suburbs. Here, young hammerheads have gathered since 2011.
These sharks are bigger in size than those on the Gold Coast, though still considered immature. The Perth aggregation happens during summer and takes place a few hundred kilometres further south than the Gold Coast. In fact, it’s the most southerly known aggregation in Australia.
On the east coast of Australia, this species has been sighted as far south as Sydney with a remarkable sighting of about 15 sharks last year in January. We don’t yet know if they are reliably gathering here.
We’re primed to associate the word “shark” with danger. But of the world’s 500 plus shark species, there are only a handful which pose any kind of threat.
Still, when sharks appear close to shore near popular beaches, safety concerns spike.
It’s important to stress that this gathering of young sharks poses no threat to people. In fact, it’s the opposite. Hundreds of people have swum out to see them where they gather, drawn by social media posts and news coverage. Unfortunately, sharks have been chased and are unable to keep swimming close together for their safety.
While it’s encouraging to see so many people interested, it also points to the need to show our interest respectfully. We don’t want to exhaust or scare off these young sharks.
Hunted for flesh and fin
The world’s authority on threatened species lists the scalloped hammerhead as critically endangered. This means in the last 70 years, scalloped hammerhead numbers have fallen globally by at least 50% of its pre-1950 abundance globally. It’s sought for its high-value fins and meat.
Despite this, scalloped hammerheads can still be legally caught in Australia by both commercial and recreational fishers. They often also suffocate in shark nets such as those at Burleigh Beach.
Shark nets are at least partly responsible for the decline in scalloped hammerhead and other shark populations. Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia have maintained their shark nets despite the lack of evidence that they make swimmers safer.
Shark nets regularly kill hammerheads. This image shows a dead hammerhead in a net off the Gold Coast. Olaf Meynecke, CC BY-NC-ND
There are signs of positive change. From January 1 this year, taking and possessing of any hammerhead sharks became illegal for commercial and recreational fishers in Queensland.
But Northern Territory fishing boats can take up to 50 tonnes of each hammerhead species every year, while Western Australia has no limits at all.
What’s next for the scalloped hammerhead?
In February, Australia’s threatened species committee advised environment minister Tanya Plibersek to leave the species’ conservation status as “conservation dependent” rather than “endangered”.
As a result, the species can still be fished without recovery plans in place.
This is disappointing, as the committee’s advice overlooks the lack of conservation management since the species was last assessed in 2018 and ignores the lack of evidence of any recovery.
The fact this shark is now appearing in more southern waters suggests a climate link as well. Other shark species have headed southward as the oceans heat up. Young scalloped hammerheads may well be doing the same.
Given their plight, we should look to safeguarding aggregation areas wherever possible.
Olaf Meynecke is affiliated with the citizen science organisation Humpbacks & Highrises and Manager of the Whales and Climate Program
Jessica Meeuwig and Naima Andrea López 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.
Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson’s victory in the defamation action brought against them by Bruce Lehrmann is the second big win inside a year for the Australian media using the defence of truth. However, it comes at a heavy cost to the reputations of the industry and the profession of journalism.
The evidence about the Seven Network’s efforts to get Lehrmann to give an exclusive interview for its Spotlight program, allegedly including the purchase of cocaine and prostitute services for him, cast a pall over the way commercial TV news programs operate.
These allegations were denied by Seven, but invoices and receipts said to support them were produced in court. Justice Michael Lee stated in his judgment that they were uncontradicted by any evidence in reply from Lehrmann.
By contrast with this unsavoury episode, only ten months ago, in June 2023, Australians saw journalism at the opposite end of the ethical spectrum when The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Canberra Times proved the substantial truth of the imputation that Ben Roberts-Smith was a war criminal. It was a victory based on extraordinary feats of investigative journalism on a matter of grave public interest.
Network Ten and Wilkinson also produced journalism dealing with a matter of grave public interest. They can claim credit for giving a voice to Brittany Higgins, now proved to be the victim of rape, by interviewing her on The Project, and in doing so standing up for the right of all women victims to be heard.
But the credit is tarnished by their actions first in disrupting Lehrmann’s criminal trial and second by serious journalistic weaknesses in the production of The Project interview itself.
The interview won Wilkinson a silver Logie, but her acceptance speech was considered by the ACT Supreme Court to be so prejudicial in favour of Higgins as to amount to trial by media.
The trial was postponed and ultimately collapsed because of juror misconduct, with no findings against Lehrmann.
Justice Lee acknowledged that Wilkinson had cleared her speech with Ten’s senior litigation counsel, Tasha Smithies, whose conduct in this matter he criticised, and was encouraged by the network to make the speech. In these respects, he said, Wilkinson had been badly let down by those she turned to for advice.
However, he went on to say she was an experienced journalist who might have realised the speech was fraught with danger if she had thought it through as a journalist rather than as a champion of Higgins.
This attachment to Higgins’ cause was a fundamental weakness that underlay the many substantive criticisms Justice Lee made of the journalistic motives and processes leading up to The Project interview.
From the outset, Wilkinson had said to Higgins’ boyfriend, David Sharaz, that she proposed to “hold Britt’s hand through all this”.
Justice Lee observed that while he was aware of the need to build rapport and deal sensitively with a person presenting as a victim of sexual assault, assessing the credibility of someone making claims of serious wrongdoing required a degree of detachment that was absent in the interactions between The Project team and Higgins.
The second weakness was that Wilkinson and the producer of the program, Angus Llewellyn, failed to keep an open mind. In Justice Lee’s words, all contemporaneous records suggested they never doubted the truth of Higgins’ account.
For them, he said, the most important part of the story was Higgins’ narrative in which others were putting up roadblocks to her quest for justice.
It was this cover-up or victimisation allegation that had generated so much notoriety and public interest, yet it had contained inconsistencies, falsities and imprecisions that the journalists had failed resolve.
Justice Lee also raised doubts about Higgins’ motive for doing the interview. Llewellyn had given evidence that he thought Higgins wanted to speak out about her experience to create change, to prevent it from happening to anyone else, and did not consider she had a vendetta.
While conceding there might have been some truth in this, Justice Lee said any suggestion Wilkinson or Llewellyn approached the story with disinterested professional scepticism was undermined by the way they were prepared to assist in the plans of Sharaz and Higgins to use the allegations for immediate political advantage.
He said Sharaz’s political motives were made plain by his expressed intention to liaise with an opposition frontbencher to deploy the allegations against the government during Question Time.
Yet Llewellyn had evidently considered this to be of no consequence, leading Justice Lee to say that any journalist who did not think Sharaz had a motivation to inflict immediate political damage would have to be “wilfully blind”.
Moreover, Llewellyn and Wilkinson had expressed a willingness to assist in the political use of the serious charges they were supposedly interrogating and assessing with independent minds.
So once more in this saga, journalists and the media were revealed as having become partisan political participants in the story.
Previously we had seen The Australian newspaper and one of its columnists, Janet Albrechtsen, insert themselves into the inquiry established by the ACT government into the way the criminal case against Lehrmann had been handled.
According to a judicial review of that inquiry by the ACT Supreme Court, the chair of the inquiry, Walter Sofronoff, engaged in 273 interactions with Albrechtsen over the inquiry’s seven months. This included 51 phone calls, text messages, emails and a private lunch in Brisbane.
It was alleged during the judicial review that Albrechtsen was an “advocate” for Lehrmann, and the review found that Sofronoff’s extensive communications with her gave rise to an impression of bias in the findings he made against the former ACT director of public prosecutions, Shane Drumgold.
This phenomenon of journalist as participant undermines public trust in the credibility of the media.
In his recent book Collision of Power, Martin Baron, who was executive editor of the Washington Post throughout Donald Trump’s presidency, takes a strong stand against this trend.
He argues that the more journalists are perceived as partisans, the less their reporting will be believed.
At a time of peril for democratic institutions, we need to be good stewards of our own, reinforcing standards rather than abandoning them.
The Project did right by Higgins and by helping to elevate the issue of violence against women. But this was achieved by journalistic attitudes and practices that did not stand up to scrutiny.
Justice Lee described the Lehrmann saga as “an omnishambles” that had inflicted widespread collateral damage. The media and journalism have not escaped.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Coral Gartner, Director, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame, The University of Queensland
The Australian government is currently considering a bill to implement the next stage of reforms to vaping regulation.
At present, vaping products that don’t contain nicotine can be sold in regular shops, such as convenience stores, like tobacco products are. To use vaping products that contain nicotine, people must have a prescription from a doctor or a nurse practitioner, and get the prescription filled at a pharmacy.
The current bill will address this issue by ending the sale of nicotine-free vaping products by general retail stores. But it’s not only teenagers who have accessed nicotine vaping products without a prescription. Most adults who vape, including those who use vaping products to quit smoking, don’t have a prescription either.
In a new paper, we argue allowing pharmacists to dispense nicotine vapes without a prescription would be a practical way to ensure people who are using them to quit smoking can access them, while reducing the chance they’ll fall into young hands.
Why are people vaping without a prescription?
Research shows vaping can help people quit smoking and may be more effective than other nicotine replacement therapies. For people who have not succeeded with other methods, using vapes to quit smoking may be a reasonable option. Although certainly not risk-free, the health risks of vaping are likely to be much lower than those of smoking because vapes emit far lower levels of harmful chemicals than cigarettes.
Some doctors will not prescribe vaping products because they are not approved medicines. Others lack knowledge about their use for smoking cessation or find the reporting requirements for prescribing them too onerous. Prescribers must notify the Therapeutic Goods Administration via an online form within 28 days of prescribing nicotine-containing vapes.
With fewer GPs bulk billing, there are also substantial patient costs involved in seeking a prescription for nicotine vapes.
Vaping regulation is currently being reformed in Australia. Oleggg/Shutterstock
The current law risks criminalising people who vape nicotine without a prescription because possession without a prescription is illegal. The maximum penalties vary from a fine of A$45,000 in Western Australia to two years in jail in the Australian Capital Territory or the Northern Territory.
The ACT minister for population health, Emma Davidson, is reportedly working on a bill to remove the penalties for unauthorised personal possession of nicotine vapes in the ACT.
However, a simpler option would be to change the classification of nicotine vapes from prescription-only (schedule 4) to pharmacist-only (schedule 3). This would allow pharmacists to supply nicotine vapes without a prescription.
Additional requirements could be added, such as banning advertising of vapes, and standards for providing in-pharmacy smoking cessation counselling alongside vaping product supply.
As well as removing penalties for possession without a prescription, other possible benefits would include reduced costs and greater access for patients. This model also retains health practitioner oversight of vaping product supply.
What other options are being discussed?
Some lobbyists are promoting the idea all vaping products should be regulated like tobacco. This would allow vaping products, including those containing nicotine, to be sold by general retailers to people aged 18 and over with no health practitioner involvement.
While some political parties support this model, most Australian health and medical organisations do not. Regulating vapes like tobacco may seem like a reasonable option, but there are several factors to consider.
Pharmacists are governed by professional standards and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency. Strong sanctions, including restrictions on practice, can occur for pharmacists who do not comply with professional standards and laws, such as illegal supply of medicines.
Pharmacists currently supply other pharmacist-only (schedule 3) medicines directly to the public. These include pseudoephedrine (cold and flu medicines), salbutamol (asthma puffers) and naloxone (for reversing an opioid overdose).
Some people may be concerned that without a prescription, certain customers may purchase nicotine vapes to supply to youth illegally. However, pharmacists have previously developed innovative ways to reduce diversion of medicines where this has become a problem.
For example, pseudoephedrine can be used to make methamphetamine. Real-time monitoring of sales of cold and flu medicines containing pseudoephedrine has reduced the diversion of these medicines from pharmacies into methamphetamine production.
Further, after additional planned reforms are implemented this year, the types of vaping products that pharmacies can supply – only tobacco, mint or menthol flavoured vapes sold in plain pharmaceutical packaging – will be less attractive to youth.
Pharmacists already play an important role in supplying smoking cessation nicotine products and services. They offer advice and counselling about the full range of assistance and medications available for quitting smoking.
Therefore, pharmacist-only supply of nicotine vaping products without a prescription would utilise the skills, knowledge and accessibility of pharmacists to support people who wish to use nicotine vapes to quit smoking, while preventing inappropriate sales to youth.
Coral Gartner receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council and the Australian Research Council. She is the current president of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco Oceania Chapter and is a member of the Public Health Association of Australia.
Kathryn Steadman receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Australian Research Council.
Professor Nissen was a past president of the Queensland Branch of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, and a past national board member and vice-president. of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. Professor Nissen was a past member of the Therapeutic Good Administration Advisory Committee on Chemicals Scheduling (ACCS).
The Voynich manuscript has long puzzled and fascinated historians and the public. This late-medieval document is covered in illustrations of stars and planets, plants, zodiac symbols, naked women, and blue and green fluids. But the text itself – thought to be the work of five different scribes – is enciphered and yet to be understood.
In an article published in Social History of Medicine, my coauthor Michelle L. Lewis and I propose that sex is one of the subjects detailed in the manuscript – and that the largest diagram represents both sex and conception.
Manuscript 408, also called the Voynich manuscript, is held at a Yale University library. Yale University Library
Research on the Voynich manuscript has revealed some clues about its origins.Carbon dating provides a 95% probability the skins used to make the manuscript come from animals that died between 1404 and 1438. However, its earliest securely known owner was an associate of Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II, who lived from 1552 to 1612, which leaves more than a century of ownership missing.
Certain illustrations (the zodiac symbols, a crown design and a particular shape of castle wall called a swallowtail merlon) indicate the manuscript was made in the southern Germanic or northern Italian cultural areas.
One section contains illustrations of naked women holding objects adjacent to, or oriented towards, their genitalia. These wouldn’t belong in a solely herbal or astronomical manuscript. To make sense of these images, we investigated the culture of late-medieval gynaecology and sexology – which physicians at the time often referred to as “women’s secrets”.
Women illustrated in the manuscript are shown holding unidentified objects towards their genitalia. Yale University Library
First we looked at Bavarian physician Johannes Hartlieb (circa 1410–68), who lived around the time and place the Voynich manuscript was made.
Hartlieb wrote about plants, women, magic, astronomy and baths. He also recommended the use of “secret letters” (such as a cipher, secret alphabet, or similar) to obscure medical recipes and procedures that may result in contraception, abortion or sterility.
Although his secret alphabet hasn’t survived, analysing his work has helped us understand the attitudes that would have inspired the use of encipherment at the time. For instance, Hartlieb felt a strong apprehension about “women’s secrets” becoming widely known. He worried his writings could facilitate extramarital sex and that God would condemn him if this happened.
In his un-enciphered writings, he either refuses or hesitates to write about certain topics, such as post-partum vaginal ointments, women’s sexual pleasure, claims of women giving birth to animals, the “correct” coital positions for conception, libido-altering dietary advice, and information about poisonous, hallucinogenic, contraceptive or abortive plants.
Writing for male aristocrats in vernacular Bavarian (rather than academic Latin), Hartlieb says such knowledge should be restricted from sex workers, commoners, children, and in some cases from women themselves – who were becoming increasingly literate.
As a man who valued heterosexual marriage and women’s “modesty”, and who condemned lust, promiscuity and prostitution, he was perfectly conventional for his milieu.
If such attitudes were widespread back then, was the censorship of women’s secrets also widespread? The short answer is: yes.
During our research, we decoded a number of ciphers from this period (but none from the Voynich manuscript). The longest was a 21-line cipher from late-medieval northern Italy that obscured a recipe with gynaecological uses, including abortion.
We also found many examples of authors self-censoring, or of readers erasing or destroying information in gynaecological and/or sexological texts. Censors would often only obscure a few words, usually genital terms or plant names in recipes – but sometimes they would remove entire pages or chapters.
One Bavarian manuscript includes recipes for invisibility and magic spells for sexually coercing women, after which two pages have been removed. The censor writes this removal was done “not without reason”.
The Rosettes
By analysing the Voynich illustrations through this lens, we propose the Rosettes – the manuscript’s largest and most elaborate illustration – represents a late-medieval understanding of sex and conception.
Our proposal is in keeping with the patriarchal culture of the time and resolves many of the manuscript’s apparent contradictions. It also allows us to identify several of the illustration’s features.
The Rosettes illustration consists of circles, tubes, dots, bulbs, passageways, castles and town walls. Yale University Library
In late-medieval times the uterus was believed to have seven chambers, and the vagina two openings (one external and one internal).
We believe the nine large circles of the Rosettes represents these, with the central circle representing the outer opening, and the top-left circle representing the inner opening. The eight outer circles have smooth edges since they represent internal anatomy, while the central circle has a shaped edge since it represents external anatomy.
Abu Bakr Al-Rāzī, a Persian physician who influenced late-medieval European medicine, wrote that five small veins exist in the vaginas of virgins. We see these running from the top-left circle towards the centre.
The five veins running from the top-left to the central circle. Yale University Library
Physicians back then also believed a male and female component were necessary for conception, and both of these were called “sperm”. These are shown in yellow (male) and blue (female). Women were thought to receive pleasure from the motion of the two sperms in the uterus, which is depicted through the lines and patterns.
It was also thought the uterus had two horns or spikes, which we can see on the top-right and bottom-right circles.
A closeup of the bottom ‘horn’. Yale University Library
The castles and town walls may represent wordplay on the German term schloss, which had meanings including “castle”, “lock”, “female genitalia” and “female pelvis”.
A closeup of a castle embedded in the illustration. Yale University Library
And the two suns in the far top-left and bottom-right likely reflect Aristotle’s belief that the Sun provides natural heat to the embryo during its early development.
Aristotle thought the Sun provided natural heat to the embryo. Yale University Library
While many features of the illustration are yet to be understood, our proposal is worth close scrutiny. We hope future research into the manuscript will approach it through a similar lens. Perhaps, with enough clues, we might find a way to finally decode this elusive text.
Keagan Brewer receives funding from a Macquarie University Research Fellowship.
Earlier this year, Neuralink implanted a chip inside the brain of 29-year-old US man Noland Arbaugh, who is paralysed from the shoulders down. The chip has enabled Arbaugh to move a mouse pointer on a screen just by imagining it moving.
In May 2023, US researchers also announced a non-invasive way to “decode” the words someone is thinking from brain scans in combination with generative AI. A similar project sparked headlines about a “mind-reading AI hat”.
Can neural implants and generative AI really “read minds”? Is the day coming when computers can spit out accurate real-time transcripts of our thoughts for anyone to read?
Such technology might have some benefits – particularly for advertisers looking for new sources of customer targeting data – but it would demolish the last bastion of privacy: the seclusion of our own minds. Before we panic, though, we should stop to ask: is what neural implants and generative AI can do really “reading minds”?
The brain and the mind
As far as we know, conscious experience arises from the activity of the brain. This means any conscious mental state should have what philosophers and cognitive scientists call a “neural correlate”: a particular pattern of nerve cells (neurons) firing in the brain.
So, for each conscious mental state you can be in – whether it’s thinking about the Roman Empire, or imagining a cursor moving – there is some corresponding pattern of activity in your brain.
So, clearly, if a device can track our brain states, it should be able to simply read our minds. Right?
Well, for real-time AI-powered mind-reading to be possible, we need to be able to identify precise, one-to-one correspondences between particular conscious mental states and brain states. And this may not be possible.
Rough matches
To read a mind from brain activity, one must know precisely which brain states correspond to particular mental states. This means, for example, one needs to distinguish the brain states that correspond to seeing a red rose from the ones that correspond to smelling a red rose, or touching a red rose, or imagining a red rose, or thinking that red roses are your mother’s favourite.
One must also distinguish all of those brain states from the brain states that correspond to seeing, smelling, touching, imagining or thinking about some other thing, like a ripe lemon. And so on, for everything else you can perceive, imagine or have thoughts about.
To say this is difficult would be an understatement.
Take face perception as an example. The conscious perception of a face involves all sorts of neural activity.
But a great deal of this activity seems to relate to processes that come before or after the conscious perception of the face – things like working memory, selective attention, self-monitoring, task planning and reporting.
Winnowing out those neural processes that are solely and specifically responsible for the conscious perception of a face is a herculean task, and one that current neuroscience is not close to solving.
Even if this task were accomplished, neuroscientists would still only have found the neural correlates of a certain type of conscious experience: namely, the general experience of a face. They wouldn’t thereby have found the neural correlates of the experiences of particular faces.
So, even if astonishing advances were to happen in neuroscience, the would-be mind-reader still wouldn’t necessarily be able to tell from a brain scan whether you are seeing Barack Obama, your mother, or a face you don’t recognise.
That wouldn’t be much to write home about, as far as mind-reading is concerned.
But what about AI?
But don’t recent headlines involving neural implants and AI show some mental states can be read, like imagining cursors move and engaging in inner speech?
Not necessarily. Take the neural implants first.
Neural implants are typically designed to help a patient perform a particular task: moving a cursor on a screen, for example. To do that, they don’t have to be able to identify exactly the neural processes that are correlated with the intention to move the cursor. They just need to get an approximate fix on the neural processes that tend to go along with those intentions, some of which might actually be underpinning other, related mental acts like task-planning, memory and so on.
Thus, although the success of neural implants is certainly impressive – and future implants are likely to collect more detailed information about brain activity – it doesn’t show that precise one-to-one mappings between particular mental states and particular brain states have been identified. And so, it doesn’t make genuine mind-reading any more likely.
Now take the “decoding” of inner speech by a system comprised of a non-invasive brain scan plus generative AI, as reported in this study. This system was designed to “decode” the contents of continuous narratives from brain scans, when participants were either listening to podcasts, reciting stories in their heads, or watching films. The system isn’t very accurate – but still, the fact it did better than random chance at predicting these mental contents is seriously impressive.
So, let’s imagine the system could predict continuous narratives from brain scans with total accuracy. Like the neural implant, the system would only be optimised for that task: it wouldn’t be effective at tracking any other mental activity.
How much mental activity could this system monitor? That depends: what proportion of our mental lives consists of imagining, perceiving or otherwise thinking about continuous, well-formed narratives that can be expressed in straightforward language?
Not much.
Our mental lives are flickering, lightning-fast, multiple-stream affairs, involving real-time percepts, memories, expectations and imaginings, all at once. It’s hard to see how a transcript produced by even the most fine-tuned brain scanner, coupled to the smartest AI, could capture all of that faithfully.
The future of mind reading
In the past few years, AI development has shown a tendency to vault over seemingly insurmountable hurdles. So it’s unwise to rule out the possibility of AI-powered mind-reading entirely.
But given the complexity of our mental lives, and how little we know about the brain – neuroscience is still in its infancy, after all – confident predictions about AI-powered mind-reading should be taken with a grain of salt.
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.
Conservation “good news” stories – the release of native birds into new habitats, for example – are always welcome. They recognise the work of conservation staff and volunteers who do the hard slog of checking trap lines and removing weeds.
The reality is, however, that Aotearoa New Zealand’s environment is in deep trouble. Talk of a “crisis” can be unhelpful if it encourages a sense of hopelessness. But with the government’s Fast-track Approvals Bill approaching rapidly, now is arguably the time to use the word.
The bill encourages development, but gives government ministers the power to circumvent key environmental planning and protection processes for (as yet unnamed) infrastructure projects.
By emphasising short-term economic gain, it risks eroding the country’s already fragile natural capital and pushing biodiversity further into decline.
With public submissions on the bill closing at the end of this week, there are numerous reasons to call for caution and a pause. These can be divided into five broad categories.
1. Much has been lost already
Ecosystems cannot be restored. Once destroyed, they are gone forever. This is known in restoration ecology as the “Humpty Dumpty effect”. Here are just some of the facts:
only 22% of Aotearoa’s original vegetation remains
at least 79 species extinctions have been recorded
remaining species currently threatened or at risk include 94% of reptiles, 90% of seabirds, 74% of land birds, 76% of freshwater fish and 46% of plants
90% of our wetlands have been lost, as well as 80% of our active sand dune ecosystems
The science of restoration ecology is relatively young. We can plant trees and shrubs, and reintroduce some animals previously present in a restoration area. But we do not currently have the knowledge to restore lichens, mosses, fungi and invertebrate communities.
These all play a major role in the functioning of ecosystems, including decomposition and nutrient cycling.
2. Habitats are fast disappearing
New Zealanders often imagine native vegetation is well protected and the wholesale land clearance practised by earlier generations has stopped.
But many terrestrial ecosystems are still being cleared today for development. Between 2012 and 2018, almost 13,000 hectares (the equivalent of 13,000 rugby fields) of native vegetation was lost due to development.
The Department of Conservation is underfunded and has not been able to assess and reclassify more than 2.7 million hectares of stewardship land. Much of this contains rare ecosystems. But it has the lowest protection and may be a prime target for development under the proposed fast-track legislation.
3. Unique NZ has international obligations
Around 80% of most native species – 81% of insects, 100% of reptiles, frogs and bats, 84% of plants, 72% of birds, and 88% of freshwater fish – are found nowhere else in the world. New Zealand has been designated one of 25 global biodiversity “hot spots” for conservation priority.
However, more than 33% of New Zealand species are classified “data deficient”, meaning we don’t know enough to determine whether they are threatened with extinction.
We’re also discovering new species every day. Only an estimated 50% of insect species have been scientifically described, including just 30% of Hymenoptera (wasps, ants and bees – including pollinators and natural biocontrol agents).
4. Environment underpins economy, health and culture
Biodiversity and healthy ecosystems provide critical services that prop up human populations. They regulate the climate, prevent erosion, cycle nutrients, filter air particles and water, and mitigate floods.
Ecosystem processes, such as pollination and soil formation, underpin primary production and provide pest and disease resilience. They contributed an estimated NZ$57 billion (27% of the country’s GDP) to human welfare in 2012.
Failing to recognise the value of New Zealand’s natural capital – which has previously often been regarded as value-less economically – risks leaving future generations with even less to support their economy, health and wellbeing.
Degraded ecosystems can reach a tipping point, when they collapse and stop functioning – for example, the “eutrophication” of freshwater systems, which become nutrient-rich and depleted of oxygen.
There is now extreme pressure on the biodiversity that supports healthy ecosystems. The economic loss from soil erosion alone (192 million tonnes lost annually) is estimated at NZ$250-$300 million each year. It takes a thousand years to generate three centimetres of topsoil – and it is running out rapidly.
Degraded ecosystems are less resilient to disturbance and are vulnerable to invasive species. Roads and tracks created during development can prevent the movement of native animals, while creating “highways” for weeds, pests and diseases.
These affect native ecosystems as well as farms and orchards, adding to the country’s already very high pest management bill.
Taken together, the potential long-term costs on ecosystems and the vital services they provide need to be carefully considered before the proposed legislation comes into force.
Margaret Stanley has received funding for technical advice from the Ministry for Primary Industries and the Ministry for Environment, and for research from the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment’s National Science Challenges.
It also means important income for Stuff, but it will also stretch the company’s staff, finances and technology.
Stuff will provide a one-hour bulletin each weekday and a half-hour on weekends.
Stuff will also retain a live Newshub website.
Warner Bros Discovery chief executive and Stuff publisher Sinead Boucher confirmed the arrangement at a joint news conference today.
Boucher had told her staff the company will “definitely be bringing some Newshub staff” to produce the 6pm bulletins.
She then told reporters she was unsure how many staff would be required, but it would be fewer than “40 to 50” specified in a “stripped back” proposal from Newshub’s own staff.
‘We are digital first’ “We’re not getting into the TV business. We are a digital first multimedia company building a new 6pm product for Warner Brothers,” she said.
Mediawatch understands many media companies approached WBD with proposals to provide news after the company first proposed the cost-saving closure in late February.
However, by the time of the confirmation earlier this month most of those had been rejected by WBD.
Sky TV was also reported to be in the running. It currently runs a Newshub-produced bulletin at 5:30pm each weekday on the free-to-air channel Sky Open and would require a replacement. It also had plenty of TV production facilities.
Sinead Boucher said a Sky bulletin was not included in the deal, but she hoped there would be discussions about that.
Negotiations were carried out in secret both before and after Warner Bros Discovery (WBD) confirmed the complete closure of Newshub on July 5, leaving the company with no news presence.
Stuff refused to comment during the process and Stuff journalists told RNZ Mediawatch on Monday night they were unaware of an impending announcement.
“We didn’t want to raise expectations for Newshub staff when we weren’t sure what would be required,” Boucher told reporters today, explaining that the deal had been done in haste.
Why do the deal – and what’s it worth? The money WBD is putting into the deal is confidential but it is certain to be just a fraction of the current cost of running Newshub, which would run to tens of millions of dollars a year.
WBD was clearly determined to carve that cost off the bottom line of its loss-making local operation. The financial benefit for Stuff may not be great taking the set-up and running costs into account.
WBD’s Glen Kyne said neither company would comment on specific commercial details, but when asked about the possible profit margin for Stuff, Boucher said: “Both parties are satisfied with where we have ended up.”
But while the audience for TV news bulletins is declining — and the ad revenue has fallen accordingly — it is still substantial for TVNZ 1 and Three. The “appointment viewing” time of 6pm creates a viewing peak which the TV broadcasters use to hold viewers for the entertainment or factual programmes that follow.
Former Newshub chief Hal Crawford told Mediawatch the overall audience for Three could collapse without news in the evening.
“There’s still a reason that the 1 and the 3 on remotes around the country are worn down. News is the one programme that runs 365 days a year . . . which the schedule is going to rely on to lead into prime time. So the rest of your schedule is going to dwindle. Ratings are gonna fall off and everything is going to go to pieces,” Crawford told Mediawatch.
“The loss of the newsroom represents the loss of the ability to respond to any event in real time. That is the heart and soul of a traditional TV broadcaster.”
Why Stuff? Stuff has journalists in more places around the country than any other news publisher.
Stuff’s publisher Sinead Boucher recently told a parliamentary committee it had journalists in 19 locations, even after years of cuts and successive retrenchments.
“We have replatformed our business and have new ways of working. We look at this as starting this bulletin afresh rather than using the broadcast-heavy technology of today,” she told reporters at today’s news conference.
It also has audio and video production facilities at some sites and some senior journalists with TV reporting and presenting experience, such as former Newshub political editor Tova O’Brien, former TV3 current affairs reporter Paula Penfold and senior journalist Andrea Vance.
But Stuff video ventures have not endured. It launched its own free online video platformPlay Stuff in mid-2019. It also hired key former TV3 current affairs staff for its own longform video productions but disbanded the Stuff Circuit team earlier this year.
When the Stuff app and website were refreshed recently, short vertical videos were added as a feature, called Stuff Shorts.
Stuff’s weakness has in the past been a dependence on newspaper advertising. It was only last year that Stuff launched its first paywalls for online news for three of its mastheads.
Stuff’s main rival NZME has half the country’s radio networks in addition to newsrooms supplying its newspapers and websites. NZME’s New Zealand Herald has been getting revenue from “premium content” digital subscriptions for four years.
After Boucher acquired Stuff in 2020, Stuff embarked on a digital transition creating more digital audio and video content. It has hired executives from multimedia companies such as Nadia Tolich (ex-NZME now Stuff Digital managing director) and former NZME digital leader Laura Maxwell, now Stuff’s chief executive.
Can you remember a time when you felt stressed leading up to a big life event and then afterwards felt like a weight had been lifted? This process – the ramping up of the stress response and then feeling this settle back down – shows completion of the “stress cycle”.
Scientists and researchers refer to the “stress response”, often with a focus on the fight-or-flight reactions. The phrase the “stress cycle” has been made popular by self-help experts but it does have a scientific basis.
The stress cycle is our body’s response to a stressful event, whether real or perceived, physical or psychological. It could be being chased by a vicious dog, an upcoming exam or a difficult conversation.
The stress cycle has three stages:
stage 1 is perceiving the threat
stage 2 is the fight-or-flight response, driven by our stress hormones: adrenaline and cortisol
stage 3 is relief, including physiological and psychological relief. This completes the stress cycle.
Different people will respond to stress differently based on their life experiences and genetics.
Remaining in stage 2 (the flight-or-flight response), can lead to chronic stress. Chronic stress and high cortisol can increase inflammation, which damages our brain and other organs.
When you are stuck in chronic fight-or-flight mode, you don’t think clearly and are more easily distracted. Activities that provide temporary pleasure, such as eating junk food or drinking alcohol are unhelpful strategies that do not reduce the stress effects on our brain and body. Scrolling through social media is also not an effective way to complete the stress cycle. In fact, this is associated with an increased stress response.
The prefrontal cortex is responsible for higher-order control of our thoughts, behaviours and emotions, and is goal-directed and rational. The amygdala is involved in reflexive and emotional responses. Higher amygdala activity and lower prefrontal cortex activity explains why we are less rational and more emotional and reactive when we are stressed.
There are five types of activities that can help our brains complete the stress cycle?
It can help to understand how the brain encounters stress.
When you exercise, there is more blood flow to the brain and higher activity in the prefrontal cortex. This is why you can often think more clearly after a walk or run. Exercise can be a helpful way to relieve feelings of stress.
Exercise can also increase the volume of the hippocampus. This is linked to better short-term and long-term memory processing, as well as reduced stress, depression and anxiety.
Overly negative thinking can trigger or extend the stress response. In our 2019 research, we found the relationship between stress and cortisol was stronger in people with more negative thinking.
Higher amygdala activity and less rational thinking when you are stressed can lead to distorted thinking such as focusing on negatives and rigid “black-and-white” thinking.
Activities to reduce negative thinking and promote a more realistic view can reduce the stress response. In clinical settings this is usually called cognitive behaviour therapy.
At home, this could be journalling or writing down worries. This engages the logical and rational parts of our brain and helps us think more realistically. Finding evidence to challenge negative thoughts (“I’ve prepared well for the exam, so I can do my best”) can help to complete the stress cycle.
3. Getting creative – a pathway out of ‘flight or fight’
Creative activities can be art, craft, gardening, cooking or other activities such as doing a puzzle, juggling, music, theatre, dancing or simply being absorbed in enjoyable work.
Flow is a state of full engagement in an activity you enjoy. It lowers high-stress levels of noradrenaline, the brain’s adrenaline. When you are focussed like this, the brain only processes information relevant to the task and ignores non-relevant information, including stresses.
4. Getting social and releasing feel-good hormones
Talking with someone else, physical affection with a person or pet and laughing can all increase oxytocin. This is a chemical messenger in the brain that increases social bonding and makes us feel connected and safe.
Laughing is also a social activity that activates parts of the limbic system – the part of the brain involved in emotional and behavioural responses. This increases endorphins and serotonin and improves our mood.
5. Self-soothing
Breathing exercises and meditation stimulate the parasympathetic nervous system (which calms down our stress responses so we can “reset”) via the vagus nerves, and reduce cortisol.
A good cry can help too by releasing stress energy and increasing oxytocin and endorphins.
Emotional tears also remove cortisol and the hormone prolactin from the body. Our prior research showed cortisol and prolactin were associated with depression, anxiety and hostility.
Whether it’s watching a funny or sad movie, exercising, journalling, gardening or doing a puzzle, there is science behind why you should complete the stress cycle.
Doing at least one positive activity every day can also reduce our baseline stress level and is beneficial for good mental health and wellbeing.
Importantly, chronic stress and burnout can also indicate the need for change, such as in our workplaces. However, not all stressful circumstances can be easily changed. Remember help is always available.
If you have concerns about your stress or health, please talk to a doctor.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800.
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.
Former Spanish football federation chief Luis Rubiales may face significant consequences for his non-consensual kiss of Spanish soccer star Jenni Hermoso.
But this is not the norm for perpetrators of gender-based violence in sport. Our research – which reviewed 25 years of studies examining women’s experiences of gender-based violence in sport – found perpetrators are rarely held to account.
More commonly, they are free to continue abusing victims with impunity.
Luis Rubiales, the former Spanish football federation chief, has been charged with one count of sexual assault and one of coercion.
The shocking reality of gender-based violence in sport
Women’s sport is championed as a platform for empowerment and equality but previous studies have shown gender-based violence is highly prevalent, ranging from 26 to 75% across psychological, physical and sexual violence, depending on how the violence has been defined and measured.
There have been many historical and contemporary cases of abuse, bringing to light some of the concerns about how perpetrators were able to continue their abuse for so long.
Our research systematically gathered and analysed the collective voices of women who experienced gender-based violence in sport to understand their experiences better and to inform future prevention and response initiatives. Participants included current and former athletes, coaches, umpires and managers.
The research found women in sport experience multiple types of violence (sexual, physical, psychological, financial), often by more than one perpetrator. Coaches or other authority figures are the most common perpetrators, followed by male athletes or members of the public.
We found a “normalisation” of these violent behaviours in the sporting context; they were seen as expected and were routinely excused in order to get results.
When women do speak up and complain, our research highlighted that organisational responses are impotent at best, actively malevolent and cruel at worst.
Complaints often go nowhere, codes of conduct may not exist, and there is a strong lack of confidentiality because “everyone knows everyone”.
In some cases, women were mocked and told they’d imagined the abuse, a deliberate strategy by the organisation to put “success” and “winning” before the safety of women.
Justice is sometimes only achieved when women act as a group to voice their experiences and confront abusers.
Importantly, our research found the unique context of sport as an extended or surrogate family created the conditions for “sporting family violence”.
Athletes spend significant time within the sporting family unit, creating close relationships with their coach, other authority figures and teammates.
The coach as a father figure
The coach as a father figure was a consistent theme across several studies, with some athletes stating the coach knew more about them than their parents.
If a coach was regarded as “the best”, often no one questioned him. This gave coaches enormous power, which they used to isolate women they abused from both the sport family and their actual family, exerting coercive control to maintain an environment of secrecy and dominance.
Finally, our research found women are still seen as inferior to men and treated as “other” in the sporting context. Consequently, there is a hostility to women, who are perceived as a threat to the hegemonic masculinity of sport.
This was a particularly strong theme in non-traditional female sports such as judo and boxing, and for women in management or official roles.
Power is a key factor running through all our findings, and while women may be able to exercise some power through collective resistance, power often remains with men and sports institutions that are complicit.
Initiatives to address gender-based violence in sport must recognise the many forms of violence women experience, and the different ways in which power and violence play out.
Of course, this still shows the extent of the collective voice needed to push for change.
While we applaud this and the reckoning of Rubiales’ actions, and cheer for the collective voice standing with women like Jenni Hermoso, it would be negligent to forget the many silenced women’s voices in sport who bear the brunt of violence within a space often considered their family.
Fiona Giles occasionally volunteers for the national and state Greens on election days.
Kirsty Forsdike receives funding from the Australian Sports Commission, the Olympic Foundation for Culture and Heritage and the Department of Jobs, Precinct and Regions of the State Government of Victoria.
When the people of Solomon Islands go to the polls on Wednesday, they will be voting for more than just a new prime minister. The election will also be a referendum on whether the country continues with incumbent Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare’s growing strategic alliance with China.
Sogavare has remained secretive about the details of the security pact his government recently signed with China and is deeply sensitive to critique, particularly from the Australian media. In 2022, for example, he threatened to ban ABC journalists investigating the country’s links with China.
US Admiral John Aquilino on why a security deal between Solomon Islands and China is so concerning.
The security pact is just one small part of China’s sprawling Belt and Road Initiative, which has resulted in an expansion of Chinese influence across the region. This includes a focus on media. China has funded the training of Pacific journalists and their travel to China, and provided local media with syndicated content and financial support for infrastructure and vehicles.
There are allegations this funding has come with strings attached. The ABC reported last year that Solomon Islands’ oldest newspaper had received money from China in exchange for favourable coverage. (The Solomon Star’s editor said the newspaper maintained its independence – and had tried for years to obtain funding from Australia.)
The influence of Beijing is now so significant, the longtime journalist and Pacific specialist Sue Ahearn has said China is winning the information war in the Pacific.
Yet, according to research conducted by the ABC last year, Pacific islanders still overwhelmingly rely on – and trust – Australian media more than any other country’s media. In fact, five of six islands polled said ABC was the most valued and preferred international broadcaster.
Australia can’t rest on its laurels. It needs to build on this trust.
The concern about China’s influence on Pacific media comes as the international broadcasting section at the ABC is trying to reboot. This comes after it made redundancies and cuts to services as part of efficiencies forced on it by the former Coalition government. Although the ABC maintained some broadcasting to the Pacific under the Coalition government, its international division had become a shadow of its former self.
The Albanese government has refocused efforts on the Pacific more broadly, pledging A$2 billion in the last budget to boost Australia’s security efforts in the region. It also boosted funding to the ABC’s international division with a $32 million grant, and invested another $8.5 million through 2027–28 to increase the reach of the ABC and other Australian media content across the region.
The funding boost has sent the ABC into a local recruitment drive to hire broadcast staff, particularly those who come from the region. It is also commissioning more “bespoke” lifestyle and sport content for the region.
The ABC and the Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation signed a memorandum of understanding last month. It formalised their “commitment to collaboration and support, with an emphasis on content sharing and media development programs”.
However, this funding has not yet allowed the ABC to provide a basic, reliable news service specifically for the Pacific to complement local services.
Solomon Islands media challenges
However, news outlets in Solomon Islands and, indeed, the wider Pacific still face entrenched challenges.
Some of these challenges are due to the small population base in many countries, limited advertising revenue and marginal profits. Research from the University of the South Pacific has found the Pacific has among the highest journalist attrition rates in the world. News outlets are mostly staffed by young, inexperienced and underqualified journalists, who are tasked with reporting on extremely complex issues.
Another challenge is the cultural system of wantok – broadly meaning “one talk” in the Pijin language of Solomon Islands, which means a network of kin and connection. Because of wantok, many stories remain untold due to conflicts of interest involving journalists writing critical stories on their own families.
However, that hasn’t stopped all fearless reporting. A year-long investigation involving Solomon Islands journalists working for an international organisation, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, reported last week that Sogavare has built at least eight new houses in and around the capital, Honiara, despite earning a modest salary. Sogavare did not respond to questions for the report, but has defended his land purchases in the past, saying he received loans from banks.
But this story, which is clearly of significance to voters heading to the polls, is not widely known and has mostly been distributed via Facebook on a volunteer-run news site, The Pacific Newsroom.
In such an environment, there is a clear need for a greater Australian media presence, not only to provide unbiased information to Solomon Islands voters and support the local media, but also to report on elections and other domestic issues for regional audiences.
This is why the ABC needs guaranteed funding for its international services – free from further government or managerial interference – to ensure this role in supporting Pacific media isn’t lost again.
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.
A pro-independence activist in New Caledonia is warning France to immediately halt its planned constitution amendments or face “war”.
The call for a u-turn follows proposed constitutional changes to voting rights which could push the number of eligible anti-independence voters up.
Pacific Independence Movement (le Mouvement des Océaniens indépendantistes) spokesperson Arnaud Chollet-Léakava was one of the thousands who took to the streets in Nouméa in protest last Saturday.
He told RNZ Pacific that tensions were high.
“We are here to tell them we must not make this mistake,” Chollet-Léakava said.
“Step by step, I think there will be war.”
Anti-independence supporters with French flags gathered on Nouméa’s Baie de la Moselle last Saturday. Image: RRB/RNZ
A nearby counter-protest in Nouméa also had a large turnout.
People there wore the French flag, a contrast to the sea of blue, red, green and yellow representing the Kanak flag at the pro-independence rally.
A dog wearing a Kanak flag at the pro-independence rally last Saturday. Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
Solange Ponija was one of thousands at the pro-independence rally in Nouméa.
The constitutional change — if pushed through — will tip the balance of voting power onto the French side, she said.
She feared the indigenous people of New Caledonia — the Kanak people — will lose in their fight for independence:
“They want to make us a minority . . . it will make us a minority!
“The law will make the Kanaky people a minority because it will open the electoral body to other people who are not Kanaky and who will give their opinion on the accession of Caledonia to full sovereignty,” Ponija said.
Security was high last weekened with more than 100 additional security forces sent from France for the protest and counter-protest. Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
‘Heading towards a civil war’ A French man who has lived in New Caledonia for two decades said independence or not, he just wanted peace.
The man — who wanted to remain anonymous out of fear of retribution — said he moved to New Caledonia knowing he would be living on colonised land.
Having experienced violence in 2019, the man begged both sides to be amicable.
“[It’s] very complicated and very serious because if the law is not withdrawn and passed. We are clearly heading towards a civil war,” he said.
“We hope for peace and we hope that we find a common agreement for both parties.
“People want peace and we don’t want to move towards war.”
The constitutional bill was endorsed by the French Senate on April 2.
The next stage is for the bill to be debated, which has been set down for May 13.
Then both the Senate and the National Assembly will gather in June to give the final stamp of approval.
This would allow any citizen who has lived in New Caledonia for at least 10 years to cast their vote at local elections.
The Kanaky New Caledonia pro-independence rally last Saturday. Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andy Ward, Senior Lecturer in Music, School of Business and Creative Industries, University of the Sunshine Coast
Shutterstock
What’s that sound you hear – a combination of down-tempo hip-hop, menacing bass, distorted drums and plucky synths? It’s phonk!
Still have no idea what we’re talking about? You’ve probably heard it if you’re on TikTok, awkwardly played over a Peaky Blinders or Jordan Peterson clip that has snuck into your algorithm.
TikTok user Shortbadger certainly cuts to the chase explaining the genre in one of their videos: “creators wanted people to not just hear their words, but feel their words”. Shortbadger also uses comedy to hint at phonk’s subversive (and sometimes troubling) nature.
Actually, Phonk has an altogether more interesting history. On the surface it seems to be another musical resurgence story driven by the social media economy – a bit like Sophie Ellis-Bextor’s Murder on the Dancefloor or Kate Bush’s Running up that Hill, both of which re-entered the charts after years of relative obscurity.
But once you dig a little deeper, you’ll find government censorship, online rebellion and the disruption of American-dominated popular culture.
By smashing together components of hip-hop, EDM, metal and dubstep, phonk is placed as one of the most prominent new genres of music. And with it comes a subversion of popular music taste-making – and a whole lotta politics.
While you may not be directly familiar with the ’90s Memphis hip-hop scene, you will have felt its influence in popular music from recent decades. Known for its expert and nuanced use of the Roland 808 drum machine (particularly pitched kick-drums and snappy hi-hats), styles such as trap and other modern EDM and hip-hop movements owe a lot of their stylistic choices to this scene.
Artists such as DJ Screw, a hip-hop DJ originally from Texas, initially championed phonk by using this palette of sounds in their mixtapes – and helped popularise the style through the mid-’90s.
But it wasn’t until rapper and producer SpaceGhostPurrp started releasing his SUMMA PHONK mixtapes in the early 2010s that phonk really gained attention. He then worked as a producer for hip-hop stars ASAP Rocky and Wiz Khalifa, helping to cement the stylistic elements of phonk in the hip-hop zeitgeist.
The rise of phonk through racing culture
Fast-forward to early 2020: COVID is dominating the world news; lockdowns have led to an uptick in social media use; the post-truth era of Trumpism marches forward; and Spotify dominates music streaming through its self-serving, exploitative model of music commerce.
This was the perfect storm in which phonk could be repositioned as the soundtrack of the TikTok generation. By the last quarter of 2020, TikTok had amassed more than 700 million global users, overtaking Spotify to become the main outlet through which music promotion (and exploitation) could occur.
Much like the DIY expansion of dubstep that took place some ten years ago, young artists such as KORDHELL and $WERVE! brought millions of ears to their phonk music by attracting attention from talent scouts, including at Spotify.
Incidentally, 2020 was also the year Spotify launched in Russia as a new platform for the proliferation of Russian underground music. This scene had also started embracing the stylistic ethos of phonk from the US.
In fact, what you’re most likely to identify as phonk today is actually a sub-movement called “drift phonk”, championed by Russian producers in the early 2020s. The name comes from the marriage of the music with TikTok videos of drift car racing.
Drift phonk’s ominous rhythms and detuned (shifted from the original pitch) melodies are a perfect match for the adrenaline-fuelled culture of underground street racing. The relationship between phonk and racing videos helped spread the style across social media. It even extended to the Fast and Furious franchise, with the release of Drift Tape (Phonk Vol 1).
Much like hip-hop and punk before it, phonk’s use of distorted and aggressive sounds engages young audiences struggling with anxiety brought about by the state of the world. It’s a subversive soundtrack to a generation rallying against authority in a challenging geopolitical landscape.
Phonk’s future is assured
In early 2022, in the midst of its invasion of Ukraine, the Russian Kremlin clamped down on TikTok by banning all non-Russian content. A state-owned company even tried (and ultimately failed) to develop a rival video platform of its own.
Less than a month after the start of the invasion, the Russian government had legislation on “fake news” that made any anti-Russian military content illegal and punishable by imprisonment. Spotify pulled its availability in March 2022, citing the new law as its key reason.
Meanwhile, TikTok still remains available in Russia, but with significant content restrictions, so Russian makers of drift phonk may have had their market pathways severed.
Nonetheless, phonk lives on – ringing loudly in the ears of social media platforms. And while it’s often tied to critiques of our ever-shrinking attention span (given how widely it’s consumed through TikTok), it has undoubtedly become a part of our cultural zeitgeist.
From the meme-level phonk walk that is so 2023, to fresh 2024 Oscars content, creators are continuously finding new, inventive ways to use this music.
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.
In the wake of witnessing tragic events, many people turn to online communities such as Reddit to discuss and process their experiences. A common bit of advice users give each other is to play Tetris to help combat traumatic memories.
Where does this idea come from, and can this iconic computer game really help in the treatment of conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder?
The answer is a partial “yes”, but with caveats. It depends on several factors, such as the specific symptoms, the timing of the event and also receiving other types of psychological treatment.
Millions of people have played some of the many iterations of Tetris over the decades. Aedrian/Unsplash
Firstly, what is Tetris?
A deceptively simple computer game, Tetris first appeared in 1985. Today, it remains one of the most popular games in history, available for free online and on numerous gaming platforms.
The puzzle game involves a simple visuospatial task (that is, relating visual information to physical space). A series of randomly generated block shapes float down from the top of the screen, and the player’s goal is to create “lines” with the shapes by rotating and moving them. A completed line is cleared from the screen, reducing a potential pile-up of shapes.
The longer you can keep going, the higher the score. The simplicity of this puzzle format is both mindful and engaging.
While most people who witness a traumatic event won’t require treatment, the psychological harm of a powerfully distressing event can have lasting effects in some.
In PTSD, a single traumatic event or series of traumas create a collection of distressing symptoms. This can include reliving the event through nightmares and flashbacks, a sense of the world being a darker, more complicated place, as well as hypervigilance and fear. The brain is seemingly inoculated by the trauma and sensitised to anticipate further trauma.
How might playing Tetris help PTSD?
The human brain has limited capacity to process or recall memories of events. In 2009, researchers at the University of Oxford proposed that playing Tetris when the brain is trying to store visual memories would overload its capacity and “distract” the visual memory circuits.
Therefore, playing Tetris shortly after a distressing event could interrupt these processing centres within the brain. In turn, this would reduce the recurrence of unwanted visual memories – intrusions – associated with the trauma.
It has also been proposed Tetris may be helpful when reactivating memories of historical trauma during treatment with a psychologist.
Essentially, Tetris is thought to work as a “cognitive vaccine” for intrusive visual memories of trauma.
Research on the effects of Tetris on PTSD is still evolving.
The initial study in 2009 successfully resulted in three times fewer intrusions than the non-Tetris group. However, this work was conducted in laboratories by showing participants films of traumatic events, playing Tetris for ten minutes shortly after watching the videos, and measuring the number of intrusions experienced over the following week.
Although encouraging, this initial research was done in a highly controlled setting and may not apply in the real world.
However, several clinical studies have been conducted since 2017, and summarised in a recent literature review. These relatively small studies showed that playing Tetris reduced the number of intrusions in women experiencing birth trauma, people involved in vehicle accidents, war refugees and war veterans.
Although most studies involved participants playing Tetris for 10–40 minutes shortly after a traumatic event (between 30 minutes and 72 hours), recent research shows there may be benefits up to seven years after childbirth-related trauma – by reactivating the intrusive visual memory and playing Tetris for 20 minutes.
While these results are encouraging, we need more robust research with larger groups of participants to be more certain of the effects of Tetris, particularly in the real world.
All earlier studies involved playing the game with professional guidance, so we don’t know how it works without this support.
Using Tetris to help with intrusive memories stems from the idea our brains can only process a limited amount at once. cottonbro studio/Pexels
Would other visuospatial games be helpful?
Any game with a focus on visuospatial tasks may possibly help. Limited studies directly compare Tetris with other games. However, a study involving 54 volunteers compared the effects of playing Tetris versus word games versus no games.
Both the Tetris and the word gaming groups reported relatively fewer intrusive memories than the non-gaming group.
So, should I play Tetris if I experience a traumatic event?
The current evidence of Tetris’ efficacy is limited to studies where people were supported by professionals. This evidence indicates that:
playing Tetris (or perhaps a similar game) for around 20 minutes in the hours after experiencing a traumatic event may help to reduce subsequent intrusive memories
playing Tetris at the point of recalling a previous traumatic experience may also reduce intrusions and distress
Tetris may be used as part of a treatment strategy by a healthcare professional.
Remember, Tetris is not a panacea for trauma. Intrusive memories are not completely eradicated by playing the game and PTSD includes several symptoms that won’t improve via gameplaying. If someone experiences PTSD-type symptoms, they likely need professional help.
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.
When former prime minister Helen Clark spoke out against New Zealand potentially compromising its independent foreign policy by joining pillar two of the AUKUS security pact, foreign minister Winston Peters responded bluntly:
On what could she have possibly based that statement? […] And I’m saying to people, including Helen Clark, please don’t mislead New Zealanders with your suspicions without any facts – let us find out find out what we’re talking about.
Pillar one of AUKUS involves the delivery of nuclear submarines to Australia, making New Zealand membership impossible under its nuclear-free policy.
But pillar two envisages the development of advanced military technology in areas such as artificial intelligence, hypersonic missiles and cyber warfare. By some reckonings, New Zealand could benefit from joining at that level.
Peters denies the National-led coalition government has committed to joining pillar two. He says exploratory talks with AUKUS members are “to find out all the facts, all the aspects of what we’re talking about and then as a country to make a decision.”
But while the previous Labour government expressed a willingness to explore pillar two membership, the current government appears to view it as integral to its broader foreign policy objective of aligning New Zealand more closely with “traditional partners”.
Official enthusiasm
During his visit to Washington last week, Peters said New Zealand and the Biden administration had pledged “to work ever more closely together in support of shared values and interests” in a strategic environment “considerably more challenging now than even a decade ago”.
In particular, he and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken agreed there were “powerful reasons” for New Zealand to engage practically with arrangements like AUKUS “as and when all parties deem it appropriate”.
Declassified documents reveal the official enthusiasm behind such statements and the tightly-curated public messaging it has produced.
A series of joint-agency briefings provided to the New Zealand government characterise AUKUS pillar two as a “non-nuclear” technology-sharing partnership that would elevate New Zealand’s longstanding cooperation with traditional partners and bring opportunities for the aerospace and tech sectors.
But any assessment of New Zealand’s strategic interests must be clear-eyed and not clouded by partial truths or wishful thinking.
Traditional allies: NZ foreign minister Winston Peters meets US Secretary of State Antony Blinken for talks in Washington, April 11. Getty Images
Beyond great power rivalry
First, the current government inherited strong bilateral relations with traditional security partners Australia, the US and UK, as well as a consistent and cooperative relationship with China.
Second, while the contemporary global security environment poses threats to New Zealand’s interests, these challenges extend beyond great power rivalry between the US and China.
The multilateral system, on which New Zealand relies, is paralysed by the weakening of institutions such as the United Nations Security Council, Russian expansionism in Ukraine and a growing array of problems which do not respect borders.
Those include climate change, pandemics and wealth inequality – problems that cannot be fixed unilaterally by great powers.
Third, it is evident New Zealand sometimes disagrees with its traditional partners over respect for international law.
In 2003, for example, New Zealand broke ranks with the US (and the UK and Australia) over the invasion of Iraq. More recently, it was the only member of the Five Eyes network to vote in the UN General Assembly for an immediate humanitarian truce in Gaza.
Role of the US
In a robust speech to the UN General Assembly on April 7, Peters said the world must halt the “utter catastrophe” in Gaza.
He said the use of the veto – which New Zealand had always opposed – prevented the Security Council from fulfilling its primary function of maintaining global peace and security.
However, the government has been unwilling to publicly admit a crucial point: it was a traditional ally – the US – whose security council veto and unconditional support of Israel have led to systematic and plausibly genocidal violations of international law in Gaza, and a strategic windfall for rival states China, Russia and Iran.
Rather than being a consistent voice for justice and de-escalation, the New Zealand government has joined the US in countering Houthi rebels, which have been targeting commercial shipping in the Red Sea.
The world has become a more complex and conflicted place for New Zealand. But it would be naive to believe the US has played no part in this and that salvation lies in aligning with AUKUS, which lacks a coherent strategy for addressing multifaceted challenges.
There are alternatives to pillar two of AUKUS more consistent with a principled, independent foreign policy, centred in the Pacific, and which deserve to be seriously considered.
On balance, New Zealand involvement in pillar two of AUKUS would represent a seismic shift in the country’s geopolitical stance. The current government seems bullish about this prospect, which has fuelled concerns membership may be almost a done deal.
If true, it would be the government facing questions about transparency.
Marco de Jong is affiliated with Te Kuaka, an independent foreign policy group advocating a progressive role for Aotearoa in the world.
Robert G. Patman 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.
India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, is favoured to win reelection when India’s 970 million voters start heading to the polls on April 19 in the country’s massive, six-week general election.
However, recent polling indicates significant voter discontent over inflation and unemployment. While 44% of respondents want the Modi government to return to power, a sizeable 39% do not want his Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) to be reelected.
Moreover, Modi’s election campaign has been tainted by several events in recent weeks:
the arrest of a major opposition leader in what his party says was a “conspiracy” by Modi’s government
These incidents have raised concerns about how free and fair India’s election will actually be.
India’s democratic decline
For much of its history as an independent state, India has been an electoral democracy, defying political sociologist Seymour Lipset’s theory that democratic institutions and cultures usually only thrive in affluent societies.
Barring a period of emergency rule in the 1970s when elections were suspended, India has met the threshold for free and fair elections throughout its history.
Voter turnout in elections has typically been high, at around 70%. A complex electoral structure has also been put in place to ensure electoral integrity, involving:
phased voting over a number of weeks
a model code of conduct governing how parties and candidates must behave in elections
travelling electoral and security officials to oversee the voting process and reach all voters
Since 2018, however, there has been a steep decline in the quality of India’s electoral democracy. The V-Dem Institute, which tracks democratic freedom around the globe, now considers India to be an electoral autocracy, which means it still holds regular elections but its government is increasingly autocratic.
V-Dem also says India does not have sufficient safeguards in place to ensure free and fair elections.
What makes elections free and fair?
To safeguard electoral integrity, governments must ensure the free participation of all parties and voters in elections and maintain an independent election commission. All candidates must have equal access to the media, which should act as a watchdog. Incumbents should not have a large financial advantage over opponents.
Of particular concern is long-term electoral manipulation that results in the lack of a level playing field. This involves political financing that favours one party over others, the political persecution of opposition politicians and journalists, media dominance by incumbents and the erosion of independent electoral institutions.
On February 15, an opaque system of political financing introduced under the Modi government in 2017 was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In this “electoral bonds” system, individuals and companies were permitted to make unlimited and anonymous donations to political parties through the purchase of bonds from the State Bank of India.
The Supreme Court ordered the release of the names of donors and recipients despite resistance from the bank.
These data revealed Modi’s BJP as the prime beneficiary of hundreds of millions of dollars of donations by corporations and individuals since 2019.
Thirty-three corporations donated electoral bonds worth more than their profits, raising questions about the true source of these funds. And three-quarters of these donations went to the BJP.
Thirty corporate donors were also found to have purchased electoral bonds after India’s Enforcement Directorate, which investigates economic crimes, and the Tax Department launched investigations against them for money laundering and tax violations.
In addition, Indian media reported that companies donating large amounts to the BJP were later awarded major government contracts.
Targeting the opposition
Opposition leaders allege the Modi government is also misusing state agencies to target them.
For instance, a media report revealed that 95% of investigations by the Enforcement Directorate since the BJP came into power in 2014 have focused on the opposition. There has also been a five-fold increase in the number of money laundering investigations by the body since 2014.
The Enforcement Directorate has been unable to prove most of these cases. In fact, it has a less than a 0.5% conviction rate dating back to 2005.
Modi has denied accusations he has used the body to target the opposition. However, Indian media have found corruption investigations involving 23 of 25 opposition politicians were shelved after they defected to the BJP.
In recent days, a popular opposition leader and anti-corruption campaigner, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, was also jailed on allegations he received kickbacks from the Delhi government’s attempt to privatise the liquor industry. The Enforcement Directorate has yet to provide evidence of his guilt.
Monitoring the election
Once considered a robustly independent institution, the Indian Election Commission’s reputation has been tarnished by questions about its impartiality.
It has failed to adequately address criticisms of its weakening of verification processes in the electronic voting system, as well as allegations of voter suppression of Muslims, Dalits and women.
Indian democracy is not, however, dying in darkness. While the Supreme Court’s independence has been questioned, its persistence in challenging the government on the issue of electoral bonds provides some reassurance that it has not yet become an “executive court”.
Despite being subjected to tax investigations, censorship and arrests, independent journalists and media organisations continue to hold the government to account. They have pooled their resources to investigate the electoral bonds scandal and provide critical election coverage in the recent Karnataka election, which the BJP lost.
The electoral bonds scandal also came to light thanks to the dogged efforts of “right to information” (RTI) activists in the face of efforts by the government to weaken the RTI Act.
And though YouTube has emerged as source of disinformation and hate speech, it has also been a venue for journalists and influencers to provide fact checking and critical commentary on the government. A video by a popular young influencer, Dhruv Rathee, accusing Modi of cultivating a dictatorship recently went viral with 25 million views.
Meanwhile, a new citizens’ initiative, the Independent Panel for Monitoring Elections is issuing weekly bulletins documenting violations of the Model Code of Conduct, media bias and voter exclusion.
If India is the “mother of democracy”, as Modi likes to claim, it is this unbowed civil society that will ensure its survival.
Priya Chacko receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide are taking drugs like Ozempic to lose weight. But what do we actually know about them? This month, The Conversation’s experts explore their rise, impact and potential consequences.
Drugs like Ozempic are very effective at helping most people who take them lose weight. Semaglutide (sold as Wegovy and Ozempic) and tirzepatide (sold as Zepbound and Mounjaro) are the most well known in the class of drugs that mimic hormones to reduce feelings of hunger.
But does weight come back when you stop using it?
The short answer is yes. Stopping tirzepatide and semaglutide will result in weight regain in most people.
So are these medications simply another (expensive) form of yo-yo dieting? Let’s look at what the evidence shows so far.
If you have a bacterial infection, antibiotics will help your body fight off the germs causing your illness. You take the full course of medication, and the infection is gone.
For obesity, taking tirzepatide or semaglutide can help your body get rid of fat. However it doesn’t fix the reasons you gained weight in the first place because obesity is a chronic, complex condition. When you stop the medications, the weight returns.
Perhaps a more useful comparison is with high blood pressure, also known as hypertension. Treatment for hypertension is lifelong. It’s the same with obesity. Medications work, but only while you are taking them. (Though obesity is more complicated than hypertension, as many different factors both cause and perpetuate it.)
Therefore, several concurrent approaches are needed; taking medication can be an important part of effective management but on its own, it’s often insufficient. And in an unwanted knock-on effect, stopping medication can undermine other strategies to lose weight, like eating less.
Why do people stop?
Research trials show anywhere from 6% to 13.5% of participants stop taking these drugs, primarily because of side effects.
But these studies don’t account for those forced to stop because of cost or widespread supply issues. We don’t know how many people have needed to stop this medication over the past few years for these reasons.
Understanding what stopping does to the body is therefore important.
So what happens when you stop?
When you stop using tirzepatide or semaglutide, it takes several days (or even a couple of weeks) to move out of your system. As it does, a number of things happen:
you start feeling hungry again, because both your brain and your gut no longer have the medication working to make you feel full
blood sugars increase, because the medication is no longer acting on the pancreas to help control this. If you have diabetes as well as obesity you may need to take other medications to keep these in an acceptable range. Whether you have diabetes or not, you may need to eat foods with a low glycemic index to stabilise your blood sugars
weight regain will mostly be in the form of fat, because it will be gained faster than skeletal muscle.
While you were on the medication, you will have lost proportionally less skeletal muscle than fat, muscle loss is inevitable when you lose weight, no matter whether you use medications or not. The problem is, when you stop the medication, your body preferentially puts on fat.
Is stopping and starting the medications a problem?
People whose weight fluctuates with tirzepatide or semaglutide may experience some of the downsides of yo-yo dieting.
When you keep going on and off diets, it’s like a rollercoaster ride for your body. Each time you regain weight, your body has to deal with spikes in blood pressure, heart rate, and how your body handles sugars and fats. This can stress your heart and overall cardiovascular system, as it has to respond to greater fluctuations than usual.
Interestingly, the risk to the body from weight fluctuations is greater for people who are not obese. This should be a caution to those who are not obese but still using tirzepatide or semaglutide to try to lose unwanted weight.
Fear of regaining weight when stopping these medications is valid, and needs to be addressed directly. As obesity has many causes and perpetuating factors, many evidence-based approaches are needed to reduce weight regain. This might include:
exercising in a way that builds and maintains muscle. While on the medication, you will likely have lost muscle as well as fat, although this is not inevitable, especially if you exercise regularly while taking it
addressing emotional and cultural aspects of life that contribute to over-eating and/or eating unhealthy foods, and how you view your body. Stigma and shame around body shape and size is not cured by taking this medication. Even if you have a healthy relationship with food, we live in a culture that is fat-phobic and discriminates against people in larger bodies
eating in a healthy way, hopefully continuing with habits that were formed while on the medication. Eating meals that have high nutrition and fibre, for example, and lower overall portion sizes.
Many people will stop taking tirzepatide or semaglutide at some point, given it is expensive and in short supply. When you do, it is important to understand what will happen and what you can do to help avoid the consequences. Regular reviews with your GP are also important.
Read the other articles in The Conversation’s Ozempic series here.
Natasha Yates 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 effects of ocean warming are profound and well-documented. But sometimes changes in the patterns of winds and ocean currents cause seawater to suddenly cool, instead.
Surface temperatures can plummet rapidly — by 10ºC or more over a day or two. When these conditions persist for several days or weeks, the area experiences a “coldwave”, which is the opposite of more familiar marine heatwaves.
When a “killer coldwave” manifested along South Africa’s southeast coast in March 2021, it killed hundreds of animals across at least 81 species. More worrying still was the fact these deaths included vulnerable manta rays and even specimens of notoriously robust migratory bull sharks. In southern Africa, bull sharks, whale sharks and manta rays have previously washed up dead following such sudden cold events, especially over the past 15 years.
As we report in Nature Climate Change, the conditions that can drive these killer coldwaves have grown increasingly common over the past four decades. Ironically, strengthening winds and currents as a result of climate change can also make these deadly localised coldwaves more likely in places such as the east coasts of South Africa and Australia, potentially putting even highly mobile species such as sharks in harm’s way.
What’s going on?
Certain wind and current conditions can cause the sea surface to cool, rather than warm. This happens when winds and currents force coastal waters to move offshore, which are then replaced from below by cold water from the deep ocean. This process is known as upwelling.
In some places, such as California on the US west coast, upwelling happens regularly along hundreds of kilometres of coastline. But localised upwelling can occur seasonally on a smaller scale, too, often at the edges of bays on the east coasts of continents due to interactions of wind, current and coastline.
Previous research had shown climate change induced changes in global wind and current patterns. So we investigated the potential consequences at particular locations, by analysing long-term wind and temperature data along the south-eastern coast of South Africa and the Australian east coast.
This revealed an increasing trend in the number of annual upwelling events over the past 40 years. We also found an increase in the intensity of such upwelling events and the extent to which temperatures dropped on the first day of each event – in other words, how severe and sudden these cold snaps were.
During the extreme upwelling event along the southeast coast of South Africa in March 2021, at least 260 animals from 81 species died. These included tropical fish, sharks and rays.
To investigate the ramifications for marine fauna, we took a closer look at bull sharks. We tagged sharks with tracking devices that also record depth and temperature.
Bull sharks are a highly migratory, tropical species that only tend to travel to upwelling regions during the warmer months. With the onset of winter, they migrate back to warm, tropical waters.
Being mobile, they should have been able to avoid the local, cold temperatures. So why were bull sharks among the dead in this extreme upwelling event?
One of the dead bull sharks that washed up after an extreme upwelling event in South Africa. Ryan Daly
When running and hiding isn’t enough
Bull sharks survive environmental conditions that would kill most other marine life. For example, they’re often found several hundred kilometres up rivers, where other marine life would not venture.
Our shark tracking data from both South Africa and Australia showed bull sharks actively avoid areas of upwelling during their seasonal migrations up and down the coast, even when upwelling isn’t too intense. Some sharks take shelter in warm, shallow bays until the water warms again. Others stick close to the surface where the water is warmest, and swim as fast as they can to get out of the upwelling.
But if marine coldwaves continue to become more sudden and intense, fleeing or hiding may no longer be enough even for these tough beasts. For example, in the event in South Africa that caused the death of manta rays and bull sharks water temperatures dropped from 21°C to 11.8°C in under 24 hours while the overall event lasted seven days.
This sudden, severe drop paired with the long duration made this event particularly deadly. If future events will continue to become more severe, mass deaths of marine life could become a more common sight – especially along the world’s mid-latitude east coasts.
Manta rays were among the dead after the extreme upwelling event. Ryan Daly
Overall, our oceans are warming. The ranges of tropical and subtropical species are extending towards the poles. But along some major current systems, sudden short-term cooling can make life difficult for these climate migrants, or even kill them. Especially if events like the one in South Africa become more common. Tropical migrants would increasingly be living on the edge of what they are comfortable with in these areas.
Our work emphasises that climate impacts can be unexpected or even counterintuitive. Even the most resilient life forms can be vulnerable to its effects. While we do see an overall warming, changes in weather and current patterns can cause extreme cold events as well.
This really shows the complexity of climate change, as tropical species would expand into higher-latitude areas as overall warming continues, which then places them at risk of exposure to sudden extreme cold events. In this way, species such as bull sharks and whale sharks may very well be running the gauntlet on their seasonal migrations.
The need to limit our impacts on the planet by reducing greenhouse-gas emissions has never been more urgent, nor has been the need for research into what our future might hold.
David Schoeman receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Nicolas Benjamin Lubitz 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.
Many parents know it is important for their teenagers to have breakfast before they go to school. Even though young people can be reluctant to eat it, breakfast provides the energy the brain and body need to function through the day.
In our new research we looked at what impact breakfast has on students’ motivation to learn and their academic achievement at school.
We also looked at whether it matters if they have a healthy breakfast, an unhealthy breakfast or no breakfast at all.
Why did we study breakfast?
As educational psychology researchers we look at ways to improve how students learn.
Unlike factors beyond a student’s control (such as teaching quality) or those that can take time to improve (such as study skills), eating breakfast is something students may have some immediate control over.
It is also something that could be quickly addressed by schools.
Breakfast provides energy for the brain and body to function throughout the day. Ryan Pouncy/ Unsplash, CC BY
We wanted to know if eating breakfast affects students’ motivation and achievement. We also wanted to know if it mattered whether the breakfast was a healthy one.
So, as part of an Australian Research Council project, we studied 648 Australian high school students from five private schools in New South Wales. Two of these schools were single-sex boys’ schools, two were single-sex girls’ schools and one was co-educational.
Students were in Years 7 to 9, with an average age of 13–14 years.
We conducted our study during students’ science lessons. It was made up of three main components.
First, students completed an online survey of their breakfast habits. We asked if they had eaten breakfast that morning and what types of food they usually eat for breakfast.
Drawing on national dietary guidelines, we created a score for how often students consumed healthy foods for breakfast, such as fruit and vegetables, dairy and protein, wholegrains and cereals and water. We also asked how often they had an unhealthy breakfast, with items such as sugary soft drinks, processed meat, fast food, unhealthy bakery goods and unhealthy snacks. A higher score reflected typically eating a healthier breakfast.
Second, they rated their motivation in science lessons, including how confident they were in doing science schoolwork, how much they valued the subject and were focused on learning.
Third, students did a test based on content in the NSW science syllabus.
In this way, our study was a snapshot of one day in the life of students.
We also asked questions about their personal background, how well they usually perform in science, and also features of the classroom (including the time of the lesson in the day) so we could account for these in our findings.
Students in our study were asked what they ate for breakfast, their motivation to learn and then tested on their academic achievement in science. Lisa Fotion/Pexels, CC BY
We found students who ate a healthy breakfast on the morning of the study demonstrated higher levels of motivation and achievement.
This means, for example, they were more confident about and focused on their science lessons. And they scored higher results in the test of their science knowledge.
In comparison, students who ate no breakfast had lower levels of motivation and achievement.
This was not unexpected. But what did surprise us was students who had no breakfast had similarly low levels of motivation and achievement to those students who had an unhealthy breakfast.
This suggests eating an unhealthy breakfast could be as disruptive to motivation and achievement as not eating breakfast at all.
Because we also looked at students’ previous science results, the study showed that even if they had previously performed well in science, they could still score low in motivation and achievement if they had not had breakfast or had eaten an unhealthy one.
Although our study could not dig into specific reasons for this, it is likely because eating the wrong kinds of foods does not properly fuel the mind or body for what is needed to optimally “switch on” academically.
It is also important to note the students in our study were from private schools. Although we took a student’s family background into account, the socioeconomic aspect of eating breakfast requires further investigation. It could be that the benefits of a healthy breakfast are larger in a more diverse sample of students.
What does this mean?
Our findings emphasise the importance of students eating a healthy breakfast each and every morning.
Schools can help ensure this by
offering a healthy breakfast to students
offering a healthy morning snack
teaching students about the importance of a healthy breakfast (for example, as part of health and wellbeing syllabus units)
giving parents information about the importance of healthy breakfasts, meal ideas and strategies for giving this to their children.
Students who ate unhealthy breakfasts performed similarly poorly in terms of motivation and achievement as those who had skipped the meal. Leigh Patrick/ Pexels, CC BY
Barriers to breakfast
But schools will need to be mindful of and address barriers to a healthy breakfast. For example, there will be situations where school-provided breakfasts and morning snacks will need to be free. In such cases, it is also possible some students may not want a free breakfast if there is a stigma attached to it (if it is seen as only being for kids from disadvantaged backgrounds).
It is also worth recognising some students may have body image concerns and not want to eat a snack or breakfast at school. In addition, cultural and dietary differences may mean some foods are not appropriate for some students.
If these barriers are effectively managed, our study shows a small and relatively achievable change in a student’s life – a healthy breakfast each day – can have a positive academic impact.
Andrew J. Martin has received funding from Australian Research Council in partnership with the Future Project at The King’s School, the International Boys’ Schools Coalition, and NSW Department of Education.
Emma Burns was employed as a postdoctoral researcher from funding by Australian Research Council in partnership with The Future Project at The King’s School
Joel Pearson receives funding from ARC & NHMRC, including from the ARC in partnership with the Future Project at The King’s School.
Keiko C.P. Bostwick was employed as a postdoctoral researcher from funding by Australian Research Council in partnership with The Future Project at The King’s School.
Roger Kennett received a doctoral scholarship from funding by Australian Research Council in partnership with The Future Project at The King’s School
