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

It’s not breaking news that Scott Morrison has trouble with women. His “woman problem” was one factor in his election defeat.

But really, his treatment this week of Karen Andrews, his former home affairs minister, was particularly gratuitous.

By Tuesday Morrison had contacted Mathias Cormann and Josh Frydenberg (both now out of parliament) to apologise personally for failing to tell them he was wading into their portfolios, unannounced.

It took until Thursday morning, after Andrews had said on TV that she hadn’t heard from him and Peter Dutton had publicly told him to contact her, for Morrison to finally get in touch.

Didn’t he think Andrews, who is shadow home affairs minister, deserved the same courtesy as the former finance minister and former treasurer?

If Morrison had called on Tuesday he certainly could have received an earful. Andrews was declaring he should quit parliament.

The Morrison affair might be about events in the past, but controversy around him will continue to flare, burning the opposition.

The former PM affirmed at his train-wreck Wednesday news conference that he would remain in parliament as “a quiet Australian […] doing my job as a local member”.

He’ll be a pariah in the party room, and a lightning rod for trouble for the Liberals. Fast forward and another book will be published in December, Bulldozed by journalist Niki Savva, a trenchant critic of Morrison. It will bring more stories and bad publicity.

Coalition members are acutely aware of the harm his continuing presence will do them. While most may be shy of saying publicly that he should leave, their blunt criticisms indicate the mood. Anger has deepened during the week.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Morrison reverts to type in an unconvincing defence

But Morrison doesn’t have an alternative job. And there’s the question of a byelection.

Maybe his friends could help with the job search. The byelection is a weighing of downsides. Which would be worse: Morrison remaining in full target range or the hazards and cost of a Cook contest?

If he could be persuaded to go soon – as he is expected to do at some stage in the term – it would benefit the Dutton opposition.

There was a substantial swing against him in Cook at the election but he ended with a hefty 62.44% of the two-party vote.

We see some huge swings in byelections these days, as when former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian resigned (although her seat was retained). But Cook would be hard for Labor or a high-profile independent to win, and Liberal sources believe it would be held. The Liberals could benefit if they ran a credible local female candidate. (She could campaign on “Solving the woman problem” – just joking.)

The NSW Liberals, facing a March election, wouldn’t welcome an expensive federal byelection. But they’ve got bigger problems and the horror publicity around Morrison is unhelpful to the Liberal brand generally.

Having enjoyed days of political free kicks, the Albanese government is mulling its next steps as it awaits advice, due on Monday, from the Solicitor-General on the legality of Morrison’s actions.

Read more:
Word from The Hill: On Scott Morrison’s bizarre power grab

Separately, Morrison’s failure to inform parliament he’d had himself appointed to multiple ministries could be referred to the privileges committee.

It might also be (though this isn’t clear yet) that the present House of Representatives practice needs clarifying or strengthening on disclosure.

If Morrison’s conduct becomes an issue on the floor of the house, opposition members will have a delicate dance, between defending their former leader and distancing themselves from him.

Albanese has been heavily milking the story. On Thursday he said: “The issue isn’t whether an apology has been given to Mr Frydenberg or Karen Andrews or others. The issue is that the apology is owed to the Australian people.”

But the government knows it must be careful not to overstep the mark – that it must follow the proper procedures, especially in parliament.

Also, it will want the public’s attention on its own agenda. The next parliamentary sitting comes only a couple of days after the jobs summit.

The government will need focus on the positives out of that gathering. Many voters might be appalled about Morrison, but for most there are more immediate preoccupations, especially the rising cost of living.

Former ministers weren’t the only ones in for a nasty surprise with the revelations that flowed from the publication of Plagued, by Simon Benson and Geoff Chambers. Governor-General David Hurley has taken a degree of pillorying this week that has probably shocked him.

Obviously Hurley knew about the appointments because he formally made them. In doing so, he was acting quite properly, following government advice.

But the issue around him has become, did he do enough? Critics say no – that he should have questioned this unusual course and warned that the appointments should be disclosed.

Read more:
Politics with Michelle Grattan: Crossbencher Helen Haines on Morrison and integrity

Hurley is clearly feeling sensitive. He has issued two statements explaining his conduct, the second saying he had “no reason to believe that appointments would not be communicated”.

We don’t know precisely, but quite likely what happened was that Hurley got the paperwork – the process was administrative, Morrison was not sworn in face to face – and regarded it as routine, not giving it further thought. Remember also, the process was strung out, with a maximum of two ministries involved at one time.

Hurley said: “It is not uncommon for ministers to be appointed to administer departments other than their portfolio responsibility”. True, but the Prime Minister is not just any minister. Hurley didn’t twig that he was in fact dealing with something very uncommon.

Governor-generals vary in how they operate in the more informal part of their role, which is to question and counsel.

Paul Hasluck, who held the office during 1969-1974, said in his 1972 lecture, “The Office of Governor-General”, that “the personality and qualifications” of the occupant may affect how they do the job. (Hurley is a former chief of the defence force and a former NSW governor.)

Hasluck went on to say the Governors-General’s “dominant role is as one who uses his influence to ensure that there is care and deliberation, a close regard both for the requirements of the law and the conventions of the Constitution and for the continuing interests of the whole nation”.

The influence of Governors-general will vary according to how they are respected, in terms of wisdom, experience, discretion and the like, Hasluck observed. But the governor-general’s “influence would disappear altogether if he were thought of as one who would do whatever he was told without asking the reasons why”.

Albanese is backing Hurley. As he should, even if Hurley fell short of what he might have done to curb Morrison. But it is clear Hurley’s reputation has been damaged by what he – apparently – didn’t do.

Scott Morrison leaves casualties all over the place. His own legacy is, of course, the biggest casualty of all.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: The Scott Morrison horror show has a way to run yet – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-the-scott-morrison-horror-show-has-a-way-to-run-yet-188985

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Renae Barker, Senior Lecturer, The University of Western Australia

In the opening address of this year’s Global Anglican Futures Conference (GAFCON) Australasia, Bishop Richard Condie announced the creation of the Diocese of the Southern Cross. In Bishop Condie’s words:

the Diocese of the Southern Cross is a new structure for Anglicans in Australia who can no longer sit under the authority of their bishop.

What lead to this rupture and what does it mean for the future of the Anglican Church in Australia?

Anglicans in Australia

Anglicans are the second largest Christian denomination in Australia, making up 9.8% of the population. They suffered the greatest decline in numbers of any Christian denomination between the 2016 and 2021 census, losing 604,900 members.

Read more:
Anglican disunity on same-sex marriage threatens to tear the church apart

The Australian Anglican Church is divided into 23 independent diocese and is a part of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The Diocese of the Southern Cross is a new religious denomination that was first incorporated in September 2021, although it was not formally launched until this week. Its first bishop will be the former Anglican archbishop of Sydney, Glen Davies.

The new diocese describes itself as a parallel Anglican structure following key Anglican documents such as the 39 articles, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal. However, it is not part of the Australian Anglican Church nor will it be part of the Anglican Communion. In other words, it is not the 24th diocese of the Anglican Church of Australia.

Why has the Diocese of the Southern Cross been created?

The reasons behind the creation of the Diocese of the Southern Cross are complex. On its web page, GAFCON Australia states:

At the recent General Synod (the church’s triennial meeting), a majority of bishops were unable to uphold the Bible’s ancient teaching on marriage and sexual ethics.

However, in his response to the announcement of the creation of the Diocese of the Southern Cross, the Primate of the Australian Anglican Church Archbishop Geoff Smith noted:

The meeting of the General Synod held in May this year clearly affirmed the view that marriage is between a man and a woman, and declined to affirm same sex marriage. It is perplexing therefore that the leaders of this breakaway movement cite the reason for this new denomination as the failure of General Synod to explicitly express an opinion against the blessing of same sex marriages.

In 2020, the Anglican Church’s Appellate Tribunal ruled that blessings of same-sex couples were permitted under church law. The Bishops of the church met in response to this ruling, and noted “with pain we recognise that there is not a common mind on these issues within the House of Bishops.”

Read more:
Is the Anglican Church about to split? It is facing the gravest threat to its unity in more than 200 years

The 2022 General Synod did not pass any resolutions specifically affirming that marriage is between a man and a woman. However, a resolution on Exemptions Clauses for Religious Bodies included this statement that the Anglican Church:

Continues to affirm that marriage according to the rites and ceremonies of the Anglican Church of Australia is the voluntary union of one man and one woman arising from mutual promises of lifelong faithfulness. The doctrines, tenets, beliefs and teachings of our Church are expressed in the authorised liturgies of our church and there is currently no liturgy for the solemnisation of a same-sex marriage.

However, the House of Bishops also voted against a specific motion “that sought to affirm that marriage is only between a man and a woman and the blessing of same sex marriages was not in accordance with the teaching of Christ.”

What is the future of the Australian Anglican Church?

While much has already been said about the split in the press and elsewhere, the future is very much unknown. Parallel Anglican organisations have previously been set up in other parts of the world including New Zealand, the United States and Canada with varying degrees of success.

The Diocese of the Southern Cross is not even the first parallel Anglican denomination to be set up in Australia. For example, the Anglican Catholic Church was established in 1987 and describes itself as the “traditional Anglican Church in that we preserve the Historic Beliefs, Holy Tradition, Creeds, and Liturgies used by the Church in England prior to their latest reformation”.

Australian Anglicans are used to a church that does things a bit differently. For example, while the Anglican Diocese of Sydney will only ordain women as deacons, the Diocese of Perth is headed by Archbishop Kay Goldsworthy, one of the first women to be ordained to the Anglican priesthood in Australia.

Read more:
Why Anglican women can be bishops in Australia but not England

While things may be uncertain at the moment, the words of Archbishop Smith sum up the current position of the church well:

It is always easier to gather with those we agree with. But in a tragically divided world God’s call and therefore the church’s role includes showing how to live together with difference. Not merely showing tolerance but receiving the other as a gift from God.

My conviction is that the Anglican Church of Australia can find a way to stay together, graciously reflecting God’s great love, with our differences held sincerely. This week’s announcement makes achieving that end more difficult but not impossible.

Renae Barker is the Advocate of the Anglican Diocese of Bunbury and a member of General Synod.

– ref. Behind the split of the Anglican church in Australia over gay marriage – https://theconversation.com/behind-the-split-of-the-anglican-church-in-australia-over-gay-marriage-188893

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Unfathomably, Australia’s unemployment rate has sunk to 3.5%. Even harder to believe is that it will soon sink lower – perhaps even this week, when the update is released on Thursday – and after that, if the ANZ’s forecasts are correct, dip below the next threshold to two-point-something for the first time since 1974.

That this can be happening at a time when interest rates are soaring and households are tightening their belts belies standard analysis.

So what’s driving this new ultra-low unemployment? It’s been harder for employers to get workers, because borders were closed, and because of unusually high rates of people off sick.

But digging further into the economic data reveals something we haven’t seen before – which has already changed the lives of almost 100,000 Australians.

Time lost to illness has almost doubled

Even now, an awful lot of workers on whom employers normally depend are sick, or on reduced hours, caring for someone who is sick.

In the years before COVID (and in the first two years of COVID itself), typically 3% of the workforce worked less than usual hours in any given week as a result of illness or injury. Calculations by the University of Melbourne’s Jeff Borland suggest so far this year it’s been 5.2%.

The effect isn’t quite as dramatic when you examine the number of hours lost. Pre-COVID (and in the first two years of COVID) 2% of working hours were lost to illness. So far this year, with so many of us ill, it’s been 3.8%.

As a sign at a doctor’s surgery I visited the other day read:

The whole world is short-staffed, be KIND to those who show up.

Borland illustrates what sickness is doing to employment by talking about a café with five staff. He says if one is away one day per week on average, the cafe might have to put on a sixth to cover – if it can. Unfilled vacancies are higher than ever.

It’s also true (at least until now) we’ve been spending big-time, spurred on by pent-up demand from when we were all in lockdown, as well as ultra-low interest rates and generous government support.

We escaped the jobless ‘escalator’

But there’s something else explaining our new ultra-low unemployment, something that flows from the nature of the labour market – and how it’s different from the market for goods in shops.

You can see it most clearly when unemployment climbs.

In the half century we have been collecting modern employment statistics, unemployment has shot up dramatically three times:

• in the mid 1970s, when it jumped from 2.1% to 5.4% in a matter of months and never came back down

• in the early 1980s, when it jumped from 5.3% to 10.3%, and took six years to come back down

• in the early 1990s, when it jumped from 5.8% to 11.2%, and took seven years to come back down.

Each time, unemployment went up by the escalator, and down by the stairs.

Remarkably, as the graph shows, that’s not what happened during the global financial crisis or COVID. Instead, both times the government and Reserve Bank went hard and early with as much support as it took to prevent unemployment climbing too far.

If unemployment had shot up as it had in earlier crises, it might have taken the best part of a decade to get down.

The long-lasting scars of unemployment

Economists use an ugly word to describe the reasons why unemployment stays high long after the reason for high unemployment has passed. It’s “scarring”.

Each person who loses their job or who is unable to get a first job when unemployment shoots up can lose confidence and up-to-date work experience.

Then, as things improve and employers begin hiring again, people who have been out of work for longer get pushed back in the queue. Employers find it safer to take on new graduates or people with more recent experience.

Read more:
Forget the election gaffes: Australia’s unemployment rate is good news – and set to get even better by polling day

The more those who were unlucky during a crisis get pushed to the back of the queue, the less employable they seem – and the less employable they become.

This puts a new higher “floor” under the unemployment rate, because it gets to the point where employers would rather not fill a vacancy than put on someone who’s been continually passed over.

It’s a phenomenon well known to the Treasury and Reserve Bank. What’s less well known, and is only now becoming apparent, is that it can work in reverse.

Almost 100,000 lives already transformed

If employers are forced to hire people they wouldn’t have in other circumstances, because they’ve run out of every other conceivable option, those people become employable. They either develop the right skills, or employers discover they are not so bad after all. The floor under the unemployment rate drops.

We haven’t seen this before – at least, not in the past half century – because employers have never before been given no other option but to employ people they would really rather not.

People are regarded as long-term unemployed (and harder to employ) if they’ve been out of work for one year or more. In the year to June 2022, the number of long-term unemployed fell from 218,200 to 130,100.

Read more:
How we invented ‘unemployment’ – and why we’re outgrowing it

That fall is far more important than the fall in the total number of unemployed from 682,400 to 493,900.

It means those Australians are more likely to be employed than shunned for years to come. It means future employments rates are more likely to start with a “2”, a “3” or a “4” than a “5”.

It means we’ve bought ourselves long-lasting lower unemployment, whatever happens from here on.

It also means the best part of 100,000 lives have been transformed. It means the best part of 100,000 people no longer face years on JobSeeker.

Read more:
Technically unemployment now begins with a ‘3’. How to keep it there?

And it means we’ve discovered something really useful.

Just as a crisis that renders people near unemployable can lift the floor under unemployment for years to come, a crisis that forces employers to take on people rendered near unemployable can cut it, perhaps for a very long time.

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

– ref. Why unemployment is set to stay below 5% for years to come – https://theconversation.com/why-unemployment-is-set-to-stay-below-5-for-years-to-come-188705

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Hunter, Lecturer in Art and Performance, Deakin University

Review: Laurinda, directed by Petra Kalive.

The Melbourne Theatre Company’s Laurinda is a smart re-framing of Alice Pung’s classic coming-of-age novel about the racism inherent in the privileged world of private school culture.

In a bizarre twist of magical-realist fate, jaded school principal Lucy Lam (confidently and energetically played by Ngoc Phan) journeys back in time to inhabit her 15-year-old schoolgirl self, newly arrived at an elite private girls school.

Lucy must navigate the challenges of being one of the few Vietnamese students in an environment riddled with confusing new rules and systemic barriers, reigned over by a truly ghastly trio of entitled white girls called “The Cabinet”.

This strongly grounded ensemble piece is the brainchild of playwright Diana Nguyen and director Petra Kalive, who share a history of improvisational story-telling through their prior work with Melbourne Playback Theatre.

Laurinda was workshopped with the cast throughout COVID lockdowns. This focussed period of development provides a robust foundation for the work.

The show’s framing device enables Lucy to relive her school experience with an adult’s perspective. As she journeys through her teenage past, she is simultaneously participant in and witness to the key moments that shape her.

Read more:
Friday essay: Alice Pung — how reading changed my life

A play of power-plays

Lucy is the recipient of a scholarship which brings her to the private school Laurinda from her state school.

Excited at first to leave her working-class suburb, Lucy’s evolution from naïve newbie to empowered valedictorian drives the action.

As she negotiates the veiled insults and power-plays conducted by the members of The Cabinet (and their obnoxious mothers), the complexities of class, racism, privilege and language are laid bare.

Xanthe Beesley’s stylish movement direction creates satisfying moments of synchronised gesture, wild dancing and ensemble choreography.

White girls and teachers are all played by an all Asian-Australian cast in purposeful disruption of racial stereotypes. In particular, Gemma Chua-Tran, Chi Nguyen and Jenny Zhou as Cabinet members Brodie, Amber and Chelsea deliver a petulant and incisive caricature of entitled white girls, complete with matching stockings and Alice headbands.

Phan switches between guileless teen and disheartened adult with great facility.

Linh (Chua-Tran) is the standout: joyful, subversive, questioning, she’s Lucy’s nemesis, friend and provocateur.

Laurinda brings the story of migrant workers and their aspirations into stark relief. Lucy’s mum (Chi Nguyen) is a gently sensitive portrait of the hard-working and no-nonsense mother, speaking rapidly in Vietnamese and English as she labours over the sewing machine.

Exchanges between mother and daughter are sometimes comic, sometimes heated, but always poignant as they grapple with clashing cultures, expectations and the echoes of intergenerational trauma.

Set in the late 90s, Nguyen’s snappy dialogue is underpinned by darkly comic overtones referencing important events of the time including John Howard’s disturbing “children overboard” affair and Hanson’s “swamped by Asians” rhetoric.

Read more:
From Tampa to now: how reporting on asylum seekers has been a triumph of spin over substance

But the show works on several levels. It is also an indictment on the small-minded and entitled culture of private schools where the politics of exclusion are alive and well.

The private school setting uncomfortably resonated for me. A product of that privileged culture, I squirmed in my seat as I was reminded of the desperate gentility that pervaded my school experience: the imperious teachers, the cliquey girl groups, the sensible shoes, the social hierarchies, the recitation of the school motto.

Here, the pretentious civilities belie the glaring injustices just beneath the surface.

Witty and relevant

Eugyeene Teh’s audio-visual design is a delight. Glitchy and fractured animations vie with video closeups and swirling animated vortexes to shift us from present day to past; to manifest a plummy-voiced school marm; to transport us to a 90s dance club.

His set design, employing large elevated columns and roll-away rest-rooms, is suitably minimal, modular and stylised.

Composer Marco Cher-Gibard’s sound design includes the use of microphone reverb to build sonic depth.

As stories are told and retold through generations, they are transformed but not reduced. Witty and relevant, Laurinda successfully intersects engaging personal story and driving social commentary with intelligence and humour.

The politics of power and prejudice is explored in a perceptive work that exposes the pomposity of private school culture and reminds us systemic racism is complex and deeply embedded.

Laurinda is at Melbourne Theatre Company until September 10.

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

– ref. Witty and relevant, a stage adaptation of Alice Pung’s Laurinda is filled with intelligence and humour – https://theconversation.com/witty-and-relevant-a-stage-adaptation-of-alice-pungs-laurinda-is-filled-with-intelligence-and-humour-187619

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

The revelation that Scott Morrison secretly had himself appointed to five separate portfolios has triggered widespread outrage, just when the broader question of integrity has been a big political issue.

In this podcast, Michelle Grattan speaks with Independent member for Indi Helen Haines, who has pushed for a national integrity commission. Such a body will soon be legislated by the Albanese government.

Haines strongly condemns Morrison’s behaviour, although she doesn’t see it as the sort of matter that would go to an integrity commission. “It doesn’t appear apparent to me that there are questions here of corruption. But we don’t know really what motivated the prime minister to keep all of this a secret.”

Haines says an Anti-Corruption Commission needs to have the capacity to investigate what has been dubbed “grey” corruption, such as jobs for the boys and pork barrelling.

She argues that “public money being spent for political gain through so-called rorting or pork barrelling is potentially corruption.”

“These bodies are seeking to stamp out corruption and they are seeking to shine a light in dark places. Now, in shining that light, they may well determine that there’s nothing to be seen.

“But on the other hand, they may well find that there are practices which have been accepted as kind of matey and okay that in fact lead to poor governance, that lead to poor public policy, that lead to an erosion of trust in our leaders.”

“There needs to be a pathway that communities can see is fair and just. [So] that if you need a hospital in your electorate (as indeed I do), if you need new roads or a bridge or whatever it might be, that there’s a clear pathway to applying for those funds, putting forward a case, and a legitimate system that shows where you are in the queue to achieving the infrastructure that you need in your community.”

In her maxim for integrity in politics, Haines says politicians need to “be what you want to see.”

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Crossbencher Helen Haines on Morrison and integrity – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-crossbencher-helen-haines-on-morrison-and-integrity-188986

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jinhyun Cho, Senior Lecturer in Translation and Interpreting at Macquarie University, Macquarie University

Is Australia an English-speaking country? The answer seems obvious.

Although Australia does not have an official language, English is so pervasive that a full life in Australia is virtually impossible if you’re unable to speak English.

However, census data show more than 20% of Australiansspeak languages other than English at home and over 300 languages are spoken in Australia.

Many of those who speak other languages are not proficient in English and need translators and interpreters to manage their day-to-day lives. Translators and interpreters play an important role in promoting social harmony in Australia, yet so little is known about this group of people.

In fact, many people do not even know the difference between translation and interpreting. The biggest difference between interpretation and translation is that interpreters translate spoken language orally, while translators translate the written word. Both groups possess expert knowledge of a foreign language as well as clear communication skills.

Read more:
Squid Game and the ‘untranslatable’: the debate around subtitles explained

It is perhaps not an exaggeration to say that translators and interpreters are invisible in Australia. Considering their low public profile here, it may surprise some to learn that in some other parts of the world, interpreting is perceived as glamorous and very high profile.

Interpreters as celebrities in Korea

In South Korea, some interpreters, particularly English-Korean interpreters, enjoy celebrity status. They appear frequently in local media as role models for their mastery of English, an extremely popular language in Korea.

One example is Ahn Hyun-Mo, an interpreter who has risen to stardom after interpreting for a series of high-profile events, including the 2018 US-North Korea Summit, the Grammy Awards, and the Oscars. She is a regular guest on various television programs and even models in advertising.

Another example is Sharon Choi, known as the interpreter for Bong Joon-Ho, the director of the Oscar-winning movie, Parasite. Choi’s flawless and eloquent interpreting attracted high praise, with fans across Korea and beyond giving her the title “perfect translator in the world”.

Being an interpreter in Korea usually means that the person has mastered the language “to perfection” through dedication and hard work, hence the high levels of praise. In bookstores, it is not uncommon to find books written by interpreters as well as autobiographies of famous interpreters where they spill their secrets on how to master a foreign language. What a contrast to Australia.

Popularity of interpreting in China

The interpreting profession is also highly regarded in China. Some high-profile interpreters have achieved fame for their excellent interpreting and desirable English accents amid the popularity of English language learning among Chinese people.

A good example is Zhang Jing, known as “China’s most beautiful interpreter”. Zhang’s excellent interpreting and aesthetics became hot news during a bilateral meeting between China and the US in Alaska in 2021. Following the summit, her name became one of the most searched topics on Weibo, China’s social media platform.

Another celebrity interpreter is Zhang Lu, an English-speaking career diplomat who has served a number of Chinese leaders and has attracted dedicated followers thanks to her flawless interpreting. There was also popular television drama The Interpreter, featuring Chinese-French interpreters, which attracted 100 million views in one week after its release in 2016.

Why are translators and interpreters invisible in Australia?

Considering the popularity of interpreters in other countries, it is natural to ask why so little attention is paid to translation and interpreting in Australia. A major factor may be the lack of interest in foreign language learning in Australian society.

Public interest in language learning is dishearteningly low in Australia. A 2018 report showed that only 8% of Australian students say they are learning two or more foreign languages, compared to 50% of students across OECD countries.

Additionally, because English is so prevalent here, fluency in another language is often not appreciated. Under these circumstances, translation and interpreting is usually reserved for people from migrant backgrounds. The dominance of migrants in the translating and interpreting profession may also be another reason why the professions are seldom acknowledged.

Read more:
Australian students say they understand global issues, but few are learning another language compared to the OECD average

Why do we need to care?

The invisibility of translators and interpreters in Australia is not a problem limited to the profession but a social issue. People with little or no English rely on translators and interpreters to manage their day-to-day lives. The profession needs to attract good people to help maintain social harmony in multicultural Australia, but this is a challenge when there is little social awareness or acknowledgement of the important work done by interpreters and translators.

Language is a valuable resource that migrants bring to Australia, and Australia should use its linguistic diversity wisely to build a truly multicultural society. A successful multicultural society is one where value is accorded to all its residents, and translation and interpreting are an ideal place from which to build a more resilient and united Australia.

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

– ref. Hidden gems: Translators and interpreters in Australia play a critical if seldom seen role – https://theconversation.com/hidden-gems-translators-and-interpreters-in-australia-play-a-critical-if-seldom-seen-role-188603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michaela Lang, Postdoctoral Researcher, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University

Cold weather and rising energy costs, combined with poor-quality housing, have left many renters struggling to keep warm this winter. The Cold and Costly report released this week by Better Renting shows how cold, mouldy homes and high energy bills take a toll on the physical and mental health of renters who live in homes that have often been likened to “glorified tents”.

Landlords are responsible for maintaining and improving rental properties. We interviewed landlords in Victoria about how they make decisions that affect the energy efficiency of their rental properties. Some might be surprised by what our research revealed: landlords who retrofit homes generally do it to improve renters’ comfort, rather than being motivated by increased rents.

However, a major issue is that many landlords who use property managers are unaware of tenants’ discomfort.

Read more:
People are shivering in cold and mouldy homes in a country that pioneered housing comfort research – how did that happen?

Many rented homes are dangerously cold

Renters are more likely than home owners to live in cold houses. The cold is typically due to substandard insulation and a lack of energy-saving features and solar panels to keep energy costs down.

The World Health Organisation recommends that homes be kept at or above 18℃. By that standard, about one in five renters live in homes that are dangerously cold. Low-income renters are especially likely to live in homes they can’t keep warm.

Cold homes contribute to respiratory illnesses and even deaths. In fact, cold plays a role in almost 7% of deaths in Australia.

Read more:
Forget heatwaves, our cold houses are much more likely to kill us

Improving rented homes is landlords’ responsibility

While there are some things renters can do to keep warm in a cold home, they don’t have much power to make property improvements. Tenancy rules vary across Australia, but generally tenants are not allowed to make permanent changes to the house.

However, landlords do not benefit directly from improving the comfort or energy efficiency of their rental properties. So why do some landlords retrofit?

Our interviewees included landlords who had retrofitted improvements and those who had not, as well as landlords who owned high-cost and low-cost rental properties.

Our research shows that, in general, landlords are not motivated to retrofit for increased rent. Nor are they motivated by environmental benefits. However, they are motivated to retrofit to improve renters’ comfort, particularly thermal comfort.

Read more:
If you’re renting, chances are your home is cold. With power prices soaring, here’s what you can do to keep warm

What did landlords tell us?

Improving renters’ comfort can benefit the landlord financially if renters stay longer in the property because this avoids vacancies and advertising costs. One landlord explained:

“I get loyalty out of them. It’s difficult always to find new tenants. It’s time. It’s money involved. I prefer that I have tenants who stay for the long run.”

Landlords also said they felt a responsibility to meet renters’ needs. For example, one landlord told us:

“I think you have to be attentive to your tenants’ needs. It’s pretty much as simple as that.”

However, landlords can only make changes to improve renters’ comfort if they are aware of renters’ discomfort. We found landlords who used a professional property manager – as about three-quarters of landlords do – generally knew very little about the conditions in their property and the people living in it. As one landlord said:

“I know their name and that’s about it. I’ve never actually met them.”

Landlords who use property managers are generally unaware of problems until renters submit a formal complaint or ask for improvements. Renters are often reluctant to request improvements because they worry about eviction or rental increases, or because their previous requests have not been met.

We also found some landlords are not concerned about renters’ comfort. These landlords are unlikely to make improvements unless governments require rental properties to meet a prescribed standard.

Read more:
Chilly house? Mouldy rooms? Here’s how to improve low-income renters’ access to decent housing

What can governments do?

Governments across Australia are looking at ways to improve the energy efficiency of rental properties. Specifically, governments are considering requiring that energy performance be disclosed to prospective tenants and for rental properties to meet minimum energy efficiency standards.

While energy performance disclosure may allow landlords to charge higher rents for efficient properties, our research suggests this will not motivate them to retrofit. This is consistent with findings from Europe that energy disclosure requirements are not a strong driver of retrofitting.

To improve the poorest-performing rental properties, energy efficiency disclosure must be combined with enforceable minimum standards. Some standards have been introduced in recent years. For example, rental homes in Victoria are required to have a fixed heater and those heaters will be required to meet energy efficiency standards by 2023.

Governments can also encourage landlords to do more than the bare minimum. Comprehensive retrofitting is needed to create healthy, low-energy homes. Government programs should aim to:

• educate landlords about conditions in their properties

• support property managers to organise retrofits

• protect renters from eviction or rent increases if they speak out about uncomfortable, inefficient rental properties.

When introducing new energy-efficiency policies and incentives, governments should emphasise comfort and other benefits for tenants. Change is urgently needed to ensure Australians from all walks of life can live in comfortable, healthy and climate-resilient homes.

Michaela Lang undertook this research as part of a PhD that was supported by the Australian Government Research Training Program and the Victorian Government Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

Ruth Lane receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Environmental Science Program

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

– ref. ‘I’ve never actually met them’: what will motivate landlords to fix cold and costly homes for renters? – https://theconversation.com/ive-never-actually-met-them-what-will-motivate-landlords-to-fix-cold-and-costly-homes-for-renters-188827

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frédérik Saltré, Research Fellow in Ecology for the ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, Flinders University

The world’s oceans are absorbing more than 90% of the excess heat and energy generated by rising greenhouse gas emissions.

But, as the oceans keep warming, rising sea temperatures generate unprecedented cascading effects that include the melting of polar ice, rising seas, marine heatwaves and ocean acidification.

This in turn has profound impacts on marine biodiversity and the lives and livelihoods of coastal communities, especially in island nations such as New Zealand.

In our latest research, we focused on great whales – sperm and blue whales in particular. They are crucial for maintaining healthy marine ecosystems, but have limited options to respond to climate change: either adapt, die, or move to stay within optimal habitats.

We used mathematical models to predict how they are likely to respond to warming seas by the end of the century. Our results show a clear southward shift for both species, mostly driven by rising temperatures at the sea surface.

Computing the fate of whales

Data on the local abundance of both whales species are deficient, but modelling provides a powerful tool to predict how their range is likely to shift.

We used a combination of mathematical models (known as correlative species distribution models) to predict the future range shifts of these whale species as a response to three future climate change scenarios of differing severity, as outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

We applied these models, using the whales’ present distributions, to build a set of environmental “rules” that dictate where each species can live. Using climate-dependent data such as sea-surface temperature and chlorophyll A (a measure of phytoplankton growth), as well as static data such as water depth and distance to shore, we applied these rules to forecast future habitat suitability.

We chose a scenario of “modest” response to cutting greenhouse gas emissions (the IPCC’s mitigation strategy RCP4.5), which is the most likely given the current policies, and a worst-case scenario (no policy to cut emissions, RCP8.5), assuming the reality will likely be somewhere between the two.

Our projections suggest current habitats in the ocean around the North Island may become unsuitable if sea-surface temperatures continue to rise.

These range shifts become even stronger with increasing severity of climate change. For sperm whales, which are currently abundant off Kaikōura where they support eco-tourism businesses, the predicted distribution changes are even more evident than for blue whales, depending on the climate change scenario.

While our results do not predict an overall reduction in suitable habitat that would lead to local extinctions, the latitudinal range shifts are nevertheless bound to have important ecological consequences for New Zealand’s marine ecosystems and the people who depend on them.

Read more:
Sea creatures store carbon in the ocean – could protecting them help slow climate change?

How whales maintain ecosystems

Great whales are marine ecosystem engineers. They modify their habitats (or create new ones), to suit their needs. In fact, these activities create conditions that other species rely on to survive.

They engineer their environment on several fronts. By feeding in one place and releasing their faeces in another, whales convey minerals and other nutrients such as nitrogen and iron from the deep water to the surface, as well as across regions. This process, known as a “whale pump”, makes these nutrients available for phytoplankton and other organisms to grow.

This is very important because phytoplankton contributes about half of all oxygen to the atmosphere and also captures about 40% of all released carbon dioxide. By helping the growth of phytoplankton, whales indirectly contribute to the natural ocean carbon sink.

On top of this, each great whale accumulates about 33 tonnes of carbon dioxide in their body, which they take to the ocean floor when they die and their carcass sinks.

Read more:
Bottoms up: how whale poop helps feed the ocean

Ultimately, the impact of warming oceans on whale distribution is an additional stress factor on ecosystems already under pressure from wider threats, including acidification, pollution and over-exploitation.

A way forward to help whales

Sperm whales are the largest toothed whales (odontocetes) and deep-diving apex predators. They primarily feed on squid and fish that live near the bottom of the sea.

Blue whales are baleen whales (mysticetes) and filter small organisms from the water. They feed at the surface on zooplankton, particularly dense krill schools along coastlines where cold water from the deep ocean rises toward the surface (so-called upwelling areas).

These differences in feeding habits lead to divergent responses to ocean warming. Blue whales show a more distinct southerly shift than sperm whales, particularly in the worst-case scenario, likely because they feed at the surface where ocean warming will be more exacerbated than in the deep sea.

Both species have important foraging grounds off New Zealand which may be compromised in the future. Sperm whales are currently occurring regularly off Kaikōura, while blue whales forage in the South Taranaki Bight.

Despite these ecological differences, our results show that some future suitable areas around the South Island and offshore islands are common to both species. These regions could be considered sanctuaries for both species to retreat to or expand their habitat in a warming world. This should warrant increased protection of these areas.

Frédérik Saltré receives funding from the Australian Research Council

Karen Stockin is a Professor of Marine Ecology at Massey University (New Zealand) and a Rutherford Discovery Fellow (Royal Society Te Aparangi). Karen is further professionally affiliated with the International Whaling Commission (United Kingdom) and the Society for Marine Mammalogy (USA)

Katharina J. Peters is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Canterbury (New Zealand). She is also professionally affiliated with Massey University (New Zealand), the University of Zurich (Switzerland), and Flinders University (Australia).

– ref. Warming oceans may force New Zealand’s sperm and blue whales to shift to cooler southern waters – https://theconversation.com/warming-oceans-may-force-new-zealands-sperm-and-blue-whales-to-shift-to-cooler-southern-waters-188522

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian A. MacKenzie, Associate Professor in Economics, The University of Queensland

Could Australia soon have a form of emissions trading? Yes, if Labor’s much-anticipated paper on fixing Australia’s mediocre emissions-reduction framework, released today, is any guide.

At present, Australia relies on the controversial safeguard mechanism to encourage big emitters such as fossil fuel power plants and manufacturers to reduce their pollution. This framework – alongside the Emissions Reduction Fund – was introduced during the Coalition years to reduce carbon dioxide pollution at low cost.

The problem is, it didn’t work. Emissions from large polluters have remained high since it was introduced in 2016. As the discussion paper states:

Emissions limits, known as baselines, have allowed business-as-usual operations and aggregate emissions from Safeguard facilities to grow.

Labor’s discussion paper flags ways to make the mechanism work as intended – most significantly by letting companies sell credits created by cutting emissions by more than they are required to. Companies finding it harder to slash emissions can buy these. Creating this market would effectively create a very useful carbon currency.

You might think this sounds abstract. It’s not. Fixing this mechanism would have a major impact on our future emissions – and the likelihood of reaching our committed emission goals. Getting this right matters.

So what is the safeguard mechanism and why does it matter?

The safeguard mechanism is a framework to control emissions from large polluters – defined as those emitting more than 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent annually.

This includes industries such as electricity generation, mining, and oil and gas extraction.

It works by giving each facility a benchmark level of emissions they are not allowed to exceed.

If a facility does exceed their benchmark, the regulator gives them a few easy options: reduce emissions, ask for their benchmark to increase, or buy and surrender Australian Carbon Credit Units. These credits come from someone else’s emissions reductions, which the original polluter has to pay for.

The problem is the current safeguard mechanism is not fit for purpose.

As I’ve previously pointed out, the system is easily gamed. Many high-polluting firms have simply asked for larger benchmarks – and often got them. You can see the incentive – asking for a larger, “better fitting” benchmark is the cheapest option of all, requiring absolutely no change on the company’s part.

This is the fundamental flaw: there is no economic incentive for large polluters to cut their emissions.

Better systems already exist in other countries. For instance, large polluters in the United States and European Union are targeted using pollution markets that have robust economic incentives.

In such schemes, companies that find it very expensive to reduce pollution can buy pollution credits from the market. Alternatively, companies that find it cheap to reduce emissions can sell their credits and make money. Labor’s new discussion paper draws heavily on these successful schemes.

Even better, the government can raise serious revenue from this market by initially auctioning off pollution credits. It’s a win-win: polluters pay and gain a strong incentive to reduce emissions, and the government obtains much-needed revenue at a time when budgets are stretched from the pandemic.

The public funds raised can be significant: the carbon market set up by 12 states in the eastern US has auctioned off pollution allowances since 2008, raising A$5.45 billion to date.

If we want to reach Labor’s target of cutting emissions by 43% (relative to 2005 levels) over the coming eight years, we need a fully functional market-based approach.

So what are the proposed changes?

The paper sets out the main proposals for developing the safeguard mechanism, including how to set a baseline of emissions for polluters (and how this should decline over time), the use of offsets, and the introduction of trading.

Trading would be the most significant change. Some companies will pursue emissions reduction with greater vigour – or may find it easier to do so than those in harder-to-abate sectors such as aluminium smelting or steel-making. The ability to sell these avoided emissions rewards these companies. The companies buying the credits have an incentive to cut emissions over time to avoid this cost.

Another proposal is to allow banking and borrowing of these credits over time. This would allow firms reducing emissions today to save credits for the future or, if needed, borrow some from the future.

The big question: will it work?

From an economist’s perspective, this is good news.

Allowing firms to trade credits will make the safeguard mechanism more cost-effective and create incentives to actually cut emissions – something lacking in the old version.

But it could work even better.

Under the current proposal, companies in the scheme cannot trade with firms outside it. This cuts the number of market participants and could limit the cost-effectiveness of the scheme. Labor should look at widening the scope and creating a fully fledged market.

And while banking and borrowing pollution credits has been shown to work reasonably well in other countries, we know it has to be managed well.

If the scheme isn’t properly managed, companies could borrow credits and simply never pay them back. Banked carbon credits could actually lead to higher emissions in the future, when companies draw down on them.

In the EU this became a real concern when the stockpile of banked allowances grew too large. In response, the European scheme’s regulator had to remove them from the market. The Australian government must learn from this and design the scheme carefully.

But overall? Take this as good news. It is a step towards a goal that has long been out of reach: a well-functioning pollution market.

Ian A. MacKenzie has received funding from Australian Research Council focusing on managing
carbon offsets to improve Australian climate policy effectiveness..

– ref. Australia may be heading for emissions trading between big polluters – https://theconversation.com/australia-may-be-heading-for-emissions-trading-between-big-polluters-188799

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Bessell, Professor of Public Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

An eight-year-old boy is often hungry, but knows if he tells his mum, she will eat less herself and go hungry. He hates the thought, so he stays quiet.

An 11-year-old girl knows once rent is paid, there is almost nothing left over, so she tries not to ask for too much. She never takes school excursion notes home in case the cost is too much.

A 10-year-old boy’s dad has been angry since he was injured at work; he can no longer support his family, and awaits compensation. It makes this boy feel sad, but he understands and tries not to add to his dad’s stress.

This is how children have described their experiences of poverty in research I have done over several years.

Children have also told us relationships are essential. They talk about the importance of family, the strength of community, and people helping one another.

These help buffer children from the effects of poverty – but none can address its structural drivers, or the ways systems fail many people.

Decades after then prime minister Bob Hawke declared that by 1990, “no Australian child will live in poverty”, the problem remains very real in Australia.

So what is that experience like for children, and what needs to be done?

Read more:
Richer schools’ students run faster: how the inequality in sport flows through to health

Three key themes

My research shows that when we listen to children about their experiences of poverty, three themes almost always emerge.

First, not having the material basics – enough food, a safe and secure home, transport – is a near-constant problem for far too many children.

Some of these things can be bought if money is sufficient, but some – like secure housing and transport – require investment in public infrastructure and equal distribution of resources. These are structural problems, not individual ones.

My colleagues and I have found children are more likely to talk about the importance of food than toys or electronic devices. Hunger shapes priorities powerfully.

Second, poverty limits children’s ability to participate in activities and services (such as sport, public library time and health care).

This can be due to families not having the money – but often the barriers are, once again, structural. Schools in low-income areas are often under-resourced, playgrounds are less likely to be maintained, services are limited, and public transport is inadequate.

Third, relationships are deeply affected by the pressures poverty creates. This is exacerbated by factors such as:

• low income
• punitive conditions placed on welfare recipients (such as needing to attend playgroups and parenting classes or job interviews)
• insecure work
• housing stress
• unaffordable costs of living.

For children, time with the people they love – particularly parents – is always a priority. Poverty eats away at that time.

A culture of shame

Another, perhaps even more harmful, theme has emerged in Australia over recent decades – the discourse around poverty often attaches blame and stigma to individuals.

Anyone deemed to be part of the “undeserving poor” is shamed. Children experience this in the names targeted at them, their families and communities. Policy settings around welfare can be unbelievably punitive.

As a society, we are diminished by this blaming and shaming rhetoric. It undermines our ability to care for others, and to recognise the value of care.

6 changes needed now

There is no quick fix, but here are six changes that would help immediately.

1. Boost welfare benefits

Children in families dependent on working-age benefits will grow up in income poverty. Children in single-parent (usually single mum) families dependent on income support are most likely to be in poverty. The policy response is clear – we must raise the rate of working age benefits and reform the child support system.

2. Recognise the importance of strong and supportive relationships

Relationships are crucial to children but undue pressure on parents – through welfare conditions or child-unfriendly, insecure working conditions – undermines those relationships.

Some countries, such as New Zealand, are undertaking child impact assessments, which aim to work out whether a given policy proposal will improve the wellbeing of children and young people.

Australia should do similar assessments of all policies, particularly those linked to social security and labour markets.

3. Build child-friendly communities

As governments respond to the housing crisis through greater numbers of social housing it is critical we adhere to principles of child-friendly communities.

This means providing safe, welcoming places for children to play, building footpaths so children can easily and safely get around, creating communal, child-inclusive spaces to bring people together across generations, and creating child-friendly services close to home.

4. Reform education funding

Education funding must be more equitable, and ensure all children can access and enjoy high-quality schooling.

5. Change the narratives and language around poverty

We must recognise poverty is not the fault of the individual. Debates and policies should be based on empathy, not blame.

6. Put children at the centre of policy

This could include approaches like the European Child Guarantee, which aims to guarantee every child access to essential services.

Read more:
Attending school every day counts – but kids in out-of-home care are missing out

Sharon Bessell receives funding from The Australian Research Council; Paul Ramsay Foundation. This article is part of The Conversation’s Breaking the Cycle series, which is supported by a philanthropic grant from the Paul Ramsay Foundation.

– ref. We asked children how they experienced poverty. Here are 6 changes needed now – https://theconversation.com/we-asked-children-how-they-experienced-poverty-here-are-6-changes-needed-now-180567

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julianne Schultz AM, FAHA, Emeritus Professor of Media and Culture, Griffith University, Griffith University

As the cut-off for the government’s consultation on a National Cultural Policy (NCP) approaches, thousands in the sector are putting the finishing touches to their three-page submissions. These are directed around “five pillars” drawn from Creative Australia, the national cultural policy announced in the last months of the Gillard regime, but ignored by the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments thereafter.

Coalition arts ministers showed little interest in cultural policy. Over the last nine years, national cultural institutions lost funding, the Australia Council’s budget was diverted to programs under ministerial control, and key board appointments reflected a lack of sector expertise.

As Gideon Haigh wrote in The Australian,

The pattern of the past 30 years in arts and culture is for Labor to initiate and the Coalition to dismantle.

The new government’s consultation process has been a long time coming and it is welcome.

Creative Nation to Creative Australia

Creative Australia built on Creative Nation, Paul Keating’s National Cultural Policy, which launched in 1994. It emerged from Kevin Rudd’s 2020 Summit, two major inquiries and a reference group of several dozen people from all parts of the sector. It was designed to enable systematic engagement with culture in all its manifestations.

But much has happened in the nation, the economy and society since 2013. And while the recently announced 15-member NCP advisory panel includes people with deep knowledge, there are some gaps.

Creative Australia drew together a range of competing perspectives and had a broad enough base to start giving culture the clout it needed to be taken seriously as an object of policy. After it was adopted, more money flowed to the Australia Council and other cultural agencies and institutions.

Read more:
Australia should have a universal basic income for artists. Here’s what that could look like

In a fraught world a new national cultural policy needs an even wider framework. Culture touches every part of our public and private lives.

A cultural policy should include an arts policy, but also policies addressing national institutions, heritage, the commercial cultural industries, soft power diplomacy, education, community groups and charities, as well as areas of public administration like First Nations, health, welfare, and education where cultural activity is a valued tool.

It must be able to align with state and local governments as active partners in this domain.

A robust arts policy is a first step in developing an expansive, nationally-appropriate cultural policy. Art for its own sake, yes. But art that binds, stretches, and challenges contemporary society.

Above all, a new national cultural policy needs conceptual depth. Culture was once seen as a public good, but has been hollowed out. The Australia Council’s consultation framing document defines its benefits largely in instrumental terms (mental health, social cohesion, education, tourism, the creative economy). Meanwhile, the substance of culture’s intrinsic value remains unaddressed.

A ministry of culture?

One of the key insights from the Creative Australia consultation process was the need for a federal ministry of culture.

Over the past two decades the arts has been tacked on to many other ministerial portfolios: communications, transport, environment, local government, the attorney general’s, and now employment. They should be at the heart of a culture portfolio that draws together elements scattered across the cabinet.

Currently, the arts are buried at the bottom of a drop-down menu, while media and communications (including public and commercial broadcasting) is the responsibility of another minister.

A culture ministry would allow effective aggregation of the significant expenditure made in culture across government. They exist in most comparable countries. A properly constituted ministry could assess the cultural impact of new policy proposals from any department.

Read more:
It is time for Australia to establish a national Ministry for Culture

In the 1990s, Australia was ahead of the global curve in redefining art and culture for a new democratic, multicultural era. The 2020s present different problems: climate change, digitisation, globalisation, inequality and a growing distrust in democratic institutions. A dedicated cultural ministry is the best way of addressing them with a perspective that touches lives and builds strong institutions.

This is not just a challenge for Australia. As Professor Hans Mommaas, Director of The Netherland’s Environmental Assessment Agency, put it to us recently:

In the midst of our various problem agendas… there is no clear place… any longer for the role of culture in the sense of creating and celebrating collective forms of imagination (and) communication… We must have a rich cultural sphere… for culture to be instrumental to these other agendas… Why not start with redeveloping the story-line that in the midst of the crises we find ourselves in, we urgently need a revival of a cultural sphere and that the current lack of this… is producing (a) distrust in the future and (a) lack of collective imagination.

Breathing new life into a decade-old national cultural policy is a useful beginning. But as Arts Minister Tony Burke has said of the current consultation process, “it is a trajectory, not a destination”. What is required now is an in-depth gestation period to position culture as a public good in the life of the nation.

The right of citizens to participate in, and contribute to, the cultural activities of the community is accepted in a number of the international agreements to which Australia is signatory. In an age of streaming platforms, public funding cuts and rising inequality, these cultural rights must be revisited and reasserted.

A new national cultural policy is an opportunity for a radical rethinking of the importance of culture to a troubled age. More than ever, we need creativity and an understanding of cultural heritage to imagine our collective future.

Julianne Schultz AM, FAHA chaired the reference group for the 2013 NCP, Creative Australia.

Justin O’Connor receives funding from the Australian Research Council

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

– ref. A new national cultural policy is an opportunity for a radical rethinking of the importance of culture in Australia – https://theconversation.com/a-new-national-cultural-policy-is-an-opportunity-for-a-radical-rethinking-of-the-importance-of-culture-in-australia-188720

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Arrow, Professor of History, Macquarie University

Alongside much else that is being revised, reimagined or recast by the Albanese government, Australia is to have a new cultural policy. Consultation has involved town hall meetings and a call for submissions. The arts minister, Tony Burke, has established five review panels to consider feedback.

First Nations artists and culture are at the centre of Burke’s invitation. The emphasis on the artist not just as creator but as worker responds to the pandemic’s devastating impact on the already-parlous circumstances in which artists and writers often live and work.

The other pillars of this cultural-policy-in-the-making highlight the diversity of stories and artists, building audiences and the strengthening of cultural institutions.

The review panels are brimming with respected and innovative creators and producers, with decades of collective experience.

But their coverage of the sector is patchy. Our concern as historians is with history, publishers and the “GLAM” sector – galleries, libraries, archives and museums.

While there is representation from galleries and collecting institutions on the panels, there is not a single historian, publisher or archivist whose feedback will help shape Australia’s cultural policy.

Given the importance of history in defining our sense of national selfhood, and the role publishers, libraries, archives and museums play in preserving, collecting and presenting Australian histories and stories, these fields being absent from the national cultural policy panels is a disappointing oversight.

A sense of belonging

History and historians play a crucial role in Australian culture. They are foundational to other fields in the arts, with historical research often underpinning film, theatre, literature and even, on occasion, dance.

A government serious about implementing a cultural policy for the future must make space for history and historians in the formulation of that policy.

History is both a scholarly pursuit and a widely shared leisure activity. Millions of Australians visit museums, archives, libraries and galleries each year, both in person and online.

Family history has become much more than just a popular hobby. It is integral to people’s sense of self and belonging, with First Nations people and migrant communities increasingly active.

Australians are involved in history and heritage in their communities. These activities are integral to identities of people and places, and especially regional places. They keep people active and connected with one another.

Community history and heritage needs to be at the heart of a democratic and inclusive cultural policy.

Read more:
When it comes to heritage, family history trumps museums

The place of history

Historians feature in our media as expert commentators. They speak at writers’ festivals and in documentaries.

They publish histories and biographies that attract readers outside the circle of their colleagues and students. Some make podcasts and television programs.

Historians provide policy advice to government. They judge literary prizes and contribute to the making of the school curriculum. Historians work with community groups, including with Indigenous communities in native title cases, and they advise on cultural heritage.

The Prime Minister’s Literary Awards include a dedicated prize for Australian history. History is one of five subjects mandated in the national curriculum. Days of national commemoration, from Sorry Day to Anzac Day, mark significant events in Australia’s collective national memory.

Both state and Commonwealth governments fund institutions which collect and preserve Australian history. At the federal level, the national cultural institutions perform this work. Together with the public broadcasters the ABC and SBS, they represent a priceless possession of the nation.

Writing and knowing Australian history would be impossible without them, and we would be a different – and lesser – people without such places.

Struggling institutions

Governments from both sides of politics have subjected these institutions to humiliating funding cuts. Labor first created “efficiency dividends” to reduce expenditure on our national cultural institutions in the late 1980s.

This initiative meant that every year, they received less funding, which a 2019 parliamentary business committee found had a “significant and compounding effect”.

It got worse in 2015-16, when the Turnbull government disastrously imposed an additional 3% “efficiency target” on these cultural institutions.

Such funding cuts no longer drive “efficiencies”. They diminish the quality of the user experience. Researchers at the National Archives report long delays – sometimes years – in gaining access to records that under the law of the land are supposed to be made available within 90 business days.

Our national cultural institutions no longer have sufficient funds to preserve the collections they maintain on our behalf.

The Archives only received an urgent injection of funds to preserve unique audio-visual records after a public campaign in 2021.

In June, it was reported the maintenance backlog at the National Gallery of Australia is estimated to be A$67 million. The ABC recently announced plans to slash specialist archives and librarians.

Cuts to funding came with the leaching of historical expertise from the boards and councils established to advise the national cultural institutions.

In the past, many distinguished historians have served on these bodies. Today, they are more likely to be defined by political appointees.

As Tony Burke commented recently:

I don’t see how you have a national museum with a board that does not include a single historian.

Neither do we. We further urge a stronger presence for history in cultural policy generally – and right now for the presence of historians in the constructing of a new policy document.

History is the very kind of creative and democratic practice that must be central to any reimagining of Australia in an age of anxiety and of promise.

Read more:
Our history up in flames? Why the crisis at the National Archives must be urgently addressed

Michelle Arrow receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is the Vice-President of the Australian Historical Association.

Frank Bongiorno is President of the Australian Historical Association.

– ref. What good is a new national cultural policy without history? – https://theconversation.com/what-good-is-a-new-national-cultural-policy-without-history-188741

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elise Schubert, Pharmacist and PhD Candidate, University of Sydney

When pharmacists dispense tablets or capsules they commonly advise when and how often to take them, and if this needs to be with or without food.

You generally don’t hear them tell you to lean to one side when swallowing. But preliminary research from Johns Hopkins University in the United States suggests this might improve how fast your medicine is absorbed and gets to work.

The results are based on a computer simulation, rather than in actual patients, and may not equate to the real world. So it’s too early to suggest you strike a yoga pose when taking your medicine.

But your posture can be important when taking pills or capsules, for comfort or safety.

Read more:
What time of day should I take my medicine?

What happens when you swallow your medicine?

Once you swallow a tablet or capsule, it moves down the throat to the stomach. There, a tablet swells and disintegrates, or a capsule breaks open. The drug can then dissolve and your body can absorb it.

Most drugs do not start being absorbed until they reach the small intestine. However, some drugs, such as aspirin, are likely to be absorbed in the stomach because of its acidic environment.

A number of other factors can also affect where and how a drug is absorbed.

These include how fast the tablet disintegrates to release the drug, how fast the swallowed contents move from the stomach to the small intestine, the amount of food and drink consumed before taking the medicine, and how easily the drug is absorbed across the gut lining.

How about this latest study?

The US researchers used computer simulations to investigate how posture affects how drugs are absorbed.

The researchers used software they developed to simulate several ways of taking a pill: staying upright, leaning to the left or right, or leaning backwards.

They showed leaning 45 degrees to the right favoured a faster movement of stomach contents into the duodenum (the first part of the small intestine). This would allow the pill to be absorbed more quickly and start to take effect.

The results could be important for medicines that you’d want to act quickly, such as pain medicines, or ones used to treat a heart attack.

There is already some earlier evidence from real patients suggesting posture may influence how medicines are absorbed. This includes the option of leaning to the right. But the authors acknowledge many factors influence absorption, not just posture.

Read more:
Health Check: is it OK to chew or crush your medicine?

When is it best to sit or stand?

Sometimes your pharmacist may advise you to swallow your medicine sitting, standing, or lying down for reasons other than speeding up absorption.

For example, certain drugs are more likely to cause side effects such as heartburn, where stomach acid leaks from the stomach and moves up into the oesophagus (food pipe).

These include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, such as ibuprofen (Nurofen), diclofenac (Voltaren), and iron supplements.

So if this is a problem for you, it may help to take these medicines sitting or standing, and not lying down straight away afterwards. That’s because your stomach acid is less likely to leak back up into your oesophagus.

Some medicines can irritate the throat if they become stuck. This is because they damage the protective mucosal barrier that lines your oesophagus and stomach, causing irritation and inflammation.

For these medicines it is important to take these sitting up or standing, and remaining upright for 30 minutes afterwards.

These include the antibiotic doxycycline, and drugs known as bisphosphonates (for osteoporosis), such as risedronate (Actonel) and alendronate (Fosamax).

Read more:
Why older people get osteoporosis and have falls

How about lying down?

Glyceryl trinitrate (Nitrolingual) is an under-the-tongue spray. It’s prescribed to people with angina, a type of chest pain caused by an underlying heart problem.

Pharmacists advise patients to sit or lie down before using this spray as it can cause a sudden drop in blood pressure, making you feel very dizzy.

Other heart medicines, such as diuretics, are also known to cause dizziness. Although you don’t usually need to take these medications lying down, if you do become dizzy it is best to sit or lie down, and ensure you stand up slowly afterwards.

There are also medications that can cause drowsiness or make you feel “woozy”. These can include strong pain killers (such as opiates), sleeping tablets, some epilepsy medications, or drugs for certain mental health conditions, such as anxiety or schizophrenia.

These don’t need to be swallowed while lying down, but lying down can help if you become dizzy or drowsy.

What if I’m not sure?

Next time your pharmacist dispenses your medicine, unless they provide specific guidance about sitting, standing or lying down, you are generally safe to take it whichever way is most comfortable.

So how about this latest evidence suggesting leaning to the right might help? At this stage, you likely won’t hear your doctor or pharmacist recommend you should lean over to take your medicines until further research is done.

But next time you need to take a medicine for pain, as long as it is not uncomfortable, feel free to try this to see if your pain is relieved faster.

Elise Schubert is a registered pharmacist and a PhD Candidate receiving scholarship from the University of Sydney and Canngea Pty Ltd.

Associate Professor Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a Fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association, and member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Nial is the science director of Canngea Pty Ltd, chief scientific officer of Vairea Skincare LLC, and a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents.

Associate Professor Tina Hinton has previously received funding from the Schizophrenia Research Institute (formerly Neuroscience Institute of Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders). She is currently a Board member of the Australasian Society of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacologists and Toxicologists.

– ref. Lying down, sitting, leaning over? What science says about the best way to take your medicine – https://theconversation.com/lying-down-sitting-leaning-over-what-science-says-about-the-best-way-to-take-your-medicine-188601

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Wroe, Associate Professor, University of New England

In a new 3D modelling study published this week in Science Advances, we show that the giant extinct shark, Otodus megalodon, was a true globetrotting super-predator.

It was capable of covering vast distances in short order, and could eat the largest of modern living super-predators, the killer whale, in five gargantuan bites. It could have swallowed a great white shark whole.

The largest shark that ever lived

Megalodon was the largest shark that ever lived, and it was around for a long time – from around 23 million to 2.6 million years ago. At one time its range was enormous: its fossilised teeth have been found on every continent except Antarctica. These teeth are not hard to recognise if you come across them, as they can be up to 18 centimetres long.

Just why this formidable predator went extinct remains a mystery. It could have been linked to global cooling, or competition from other predators such as orcas (killer whales). This is just one of many unanswered questions.

One thing we know for sure is that the megalodon was big – but just how big has remained a point of contention among scientists, because previous estimates have been effectively based on just fragmentary remains.

And its size really matters, because it helps us to interpret its biology – the kinds of prey an animal can kill and eat, the amount of food it needs to survive and the speed at which it can travel.

The question of diet is particularly important as it determines an animal’s role and impact on its ecosystem. Historically, many thought megalodon took very big prey, including large whales.

But it has recently been argued that it may not have been quite the super-predator it had been cracked up to be, concluding that it concentrated on lesser prey such as seals, dolphins and small whales between around two and seven metres in length. If correct, this would have major implications for our understanding of how the marine ecosystems of the time functioned.

Our new model now suggests it did in fact prefer to take on much larger prey.

Read more:
Millions of years ago, the megalodon ruled the oceans – why did it disappear?

Car-crushing bite force

I’ve long had an interest in megalodon. I published a paper with colleagues back in 2007 wherein we built a computer simulation to predict its bite force.

Our estimate – a car-crushing 18 tonnes – was dependent on the assumed body mass of the animal, so I was delighted when colleagues from overseas asked me to help with an attempt to develop a more accurate model of the whole shark. From there, we could more reliably determine its size.

Previous estimates of the body mass and proportions of megalodon have largely just extrapolated on data from single fossilised vertebrae, which leaves a lot of room for error. Others were based on direct comparison with the living great white shark; however, it’s now pretty clear that the two weren’t closely related.

In our new study, we based our estimates on 3D modelling of the most complete specimen known, represented by a largely intact vertebral column held in a Belgian museum. We quantified its total length, weight, and the size of its gape from the complete digital model.

Lastly, we estimated the megalodon’s cruising speed, the volume of its stomach, its daily energetic demands and the rate at which it likely encountered prey.

We concluded that this particular megalodon was around 16 metres long and weighed in at more than 61 tonnes. This is considerably larger than recent estimates of a mere 48 tonnes.

Read more:
Making a megalodon: the evolving science behind estimating the size of the largest ever killer shark

A whale for breakfast

Based on other isolated fossil vertebrae, it’s likely the largest megalodon grew to 20 metres in length. We further determined that the Belgian specimen’s maximum gape was around 1.8 metres and that its stomach could have held 9.5 cubic metres of food.

This suggests it could have entirely consumed the largest of living killer whales (around 8 metres) in just five bites.

Hypothetically, it could have eaten another iconic super-predator, the Tyrannosaurus rex, in just three bites. As for great white sharks, a megalodon could have swallowed a large one whole.

Our results suggest megalodon could have comfortably cruised at over 5 kilometres per hour. This is much faster than the largest living fish, the filter-feeding whale shark, or even the great white shark, which cruises at around 3 kilometres per hour.

This ocean-spanning super-predator could travel vast distances in short order, increasing prey encounter rates and allowing it to quickly move to take advantage of seasonal changes in prey abundance.

Results from our analysis of energetics suggest that having eaten a big killer whale for breakfast, this megalodon could have travelled around 7,000km before needing to feed again.

In short, our results show that megalodon really was the super-predator it’s been cracked up to be, and more.

No creature, no matter its size, was safe from the jaws of this super shark. Its extinction likely sent tremendous cascading effects through marine environments of the time.

Read more:
Friday essay: The Meg is a horror story but our treatment of sharks is scarier

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

– ref. Ancient megalodon super-predators could swallow a great white shark whole, new model reveals – https://theconversation.com/ancient-megalodon-super-predators-could-swallow-a-great-white-shark-whole-new-model-reveals-188749

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samra Alispahic, PhD, Western Sydney University

This week, the South Australian government announced the appointment of Emily Bourke to the role of assistant minister for autism. It’s the first portfolio of its kind in Australia.

The appointment of a minister specifically responsible for autism matters is a landmark moment. But it also raises questions about why a government has chosen a specific focus on autism.

Read more:
Therapy for babies showing early signs of autism reduces the chance of clinical diagnosis at age 3

Autism in Australia

Autism is diagnosed in people who show differences in social communication, repetitive behaviours, intense or focused interests and/or sensory differences.

Twenty years ago, autism was a relatively rare diagnosis, identified in around one in every 2,000 people.

The turn of the 21st century saw a steep increase in the numbers of people being diagnosed with autism. The factors that drove this increase included broader diagnostic criteria, greater awareness of autism among parents and clinicians and a reduction in stigma associated with the diagnosis.

An increase in the incidence of autism was observed, and some estimates now put the prevalence of autism in Australia at one in every 50 people – a 40-fold increase in 20 years.

Today, approximately 34% of all participants within the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) have a primary diagnosis of autism. This figure increases to 55% of NDIS participants under 18 years of age.

Read more:
It’s 25 years since we redefined autism – here’s what we’ve learnt

Governance and autism

Autistic people can face significant barriers in learning, community participation and wellbeing, and often require support to maximise their quality of life. This can be because of a combination of developmental differences and societal factors, such as a lack of autism-friendly environments.

But the way governments in Australia manage and provide autism support services and funding is complex.

Support for autistic people can be provided within health, disability and education systems – or a combination of these departments – which may have different responsibilities at state, territory and federal levels. A child may be diagnosed within state health services, then receive funding for clinical services through the NDIS, and also be supported by the state education system (through federal funding).

At first glance, this cross-jurisdictional approach seems sensible and beneficial: support for autistic individuals is everyone’s business. A broad coalition of departments can reinforce that message.

But in reality, matters relating to autism can fall between the cracks, with systems uncertain about their areas of responsibilities, creating gaps in the coordination of supports.

An autism minister

The appointment of an autism minister in South Australia is designed to address two major issues.

First, the South Australian government has outlined a number of initiatives to support the increasing numbers of autistic children. This includes an investment for an autism “lead teacher” within public primary schools. Additional investment for clinical health services such as additional speech pathologists, occupational therapists, psychologists and counsellors will bolster support for autistic children in the community.

A recent article in Autism Research showed that due to social isolation and limited variety of in-person social interactions, young autistic Australian adults exhibit different perceptual patterns when processing speech. They report spending 2.7 hours per week interacting with people outside of their immediate circle of family and friends. This is in stark contrast to the 18.3 hours reported by the non-autistic individuals. The investments outlined in the South Australian announcement could address this imbalance.

Second, the autism minister will provide coordination of matters relating to autism across government systems. In theory, this means not only will administrative matters not fall between the cracks of different systems, but the minister will also be an advocate for autism at the senior levels of government.

But what about other conditions?

One question raised in response to this appointment is whether one particular disability group needs a dedicated ministry. Will a focus on autism mean a reduced focus on other disabilities, which also require support?

While some portfolios like finance, health and defence endure over time, others are chosen, added or removed based on the priorities and policies of the government of the day. Other portfolios relating to other health and disability groups may be added over time.

The selection of a minister of autism signals to the community that autism is a current priority for the state government. The appointment does not mean the portfolio won’t change over time. While the appointment has focused on announcing support relating to children and families, it is important the government broadens its focus to also include matters relating to autistic adults.

Read more:
Most adults with autism can recognise facial emotions, almost as well as those without the condition

Does SA’s autism minister provide a template?

Given the relatively high prevalence of autism, and the administrative problems that have plagued autism supports for years, the appointment of an autism minister should be welcomed.

However, this appointment must come with a note of caution. Autism is one neurodevelopmental diagnosis, and there are many other children with developmental challenges that also require support. Returning to the NDIS numbers quoted above, 45% of children receiving disability supports through the NDIS do not have a diagnosis of autism.

The appointment of an autism minister presents a wonderful opportunity for increased support and inclusion of all people. It may well provide a template for how other state, territory and federal governments can govern complex administration structures to support a large community.

The appointment must not be used as means to create a new administrative category that excludes support for other people who need it.

To make this a positive appointment, it needs to add support for everyone rather than be a “reductive” approach to manage complex humanity. Finding that balance will take constant vigilance by governments and advocates.

Samra Alispahic receives funding from the ARC.

Andrew Whitehouse receives funding from the NHMRC, ARC, Autism CRC and National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). Andrew Whitehouse is a member of the Children, Young people and Families Reference Group for the Independent Advisory Council of the National NDIA.

– ref. An autism minister may boost support and coordination. But governments that follow South Australia’s lead should be cautious – https://theconversation.com/an-autism-minister-may-boost-support-and-coordination-but-governments-that-follow-south-australias-lead-should-be-cautious-188885

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ari Mattes, Lecturer in Communications and Media, University of Notre Dame Australia

Review: Bosch & Rockit, written and directed by Tyler Atkins.

Sometimes a film comes along that simply feels right. From the opening shot, it envelops us in its world with a commitment that allows us to forgive any shortcomings.

Bosch & Rockit is such a film. Written and directed by actor Tyler Atkins – his first time helming a feature film – it’s a coming of age story following teen surfie Rockit (played by pro surfer Rasmus King) and the ups and downs of his relationship with his father, heart-of-gold pot farmer Bosch (Luke Hemsworth).

When a fire encroaches on Bosch’s crop, he’s forced to flee the law, including the corrupt cops with whom he’s in business.

With his son in tow, Bosch goes to a postcard perfect Byron Bay, where he has a fling with Deb (Isabel Lucas), daughter of the owner of the Sails Motel where they’re staying.

Meanwhile Rockit, left largely to his own devices, surfs a lot, eats fish and chips, and begins a friendship of his own with waif Ash (Savannah La Rain), also from a broken home.

As the police close in, Rockit is palmed off on his mother, Liz (Aussie screen stalwart Leeanna Walsman), but she struggles to provide the care Rockit needs – she’s an alcoholic – and she ends up dumping him back with his dad.

Angry with his parents, Rockit takes a job on a prawn trawler, Ash returns to his life, and their relationship blossoms.

A kind of simple magic

If it sounds cheesy, it’s because it is. The film is sentimental, formulaic, and unevenly paced – the first two-thirds as they dodge the police feels pleasurably compressed, occurring over a few weeks. The last third seems to merely drift along on the current with several years unfolding.

But it’s also incredibly sweet, with charming characters and stellar performances from the two key actors. The lesser-known Hemsworth is rock solid as the macho but sensitive dad, giving a full-bodied performance that convinces us of the tenderness within the egotistical facade.

Teenager King is exceptional as the naïve and goofy Rockit. Unsurprisingly, his surfing is superb, and they obviously didn’t need to use a double for him.

One of the highlights of the film is the awesome surf photography, and at times it feels like a surfing video with a plot tacked onto it. The stunning underwater images in the opening sequence alone would make the film worth watching.

Maybe it’s all a bit too perfect, a bit too clean. We’re talking about drug dealers, corrupt cops and neglectful parents, and yet the whole thing is characterised by a kind of dreamy and ethereal quality, replete with amazing drone footage of surfing, slow-motion images of waves breaking, whales, dolphins, and time-lapse galore staging the coastal terrain in all its glory against the elements. Perhaps it’s all a little too Instagrammatic.

And yet, because the film is filtered through the subjectivity of young Rockit, we buy it. As he looks at the ocean with his father and sees a kind of simple magic in it, so does the film look at these characters and scenarios with a simple sensibility.

Read more:
Friday essay: why there’s still something about Byron, beyond Insta influencers and beige linen

Sincere and earnest

Rife with nostalgia, the film embraces an Australian (east) coast aesthetic from an earlier time unspecified, though we assume it’s the late 1990s or early 2000s – there’s dial-up Internet and don’t seem to be mobile phones. Beach bums can still afford to live near the beach in this world; Byron Bay looks far different from the auctioneer’s paradise it is today.

Like the most effective coming of age and nostalgia films, Bosch & Rockit taps into the interiority of its protagonist as he looks out at the world, capturing that faintly melancholic moment when a teenager becomes thrilled with big bad life but also realises they’re in it for the most part alone.

Bosch & Rockit is a sincere and earnest coming of age film with an understated quality that makes it better than many of its ilk. Its dreamy images unfold in the context of a genuinely touching relationship between father and son.

If you like gritty films, or clever films, then you probably won’t like this. There’s nothing knowing about Bosch & Rockit. The plot is rudimentary, but the tone is totally compelling, the characters are likeable, and the surf photography first rate.

It’s a film that hits the right notes, even if these aren’t exactly unexpected.

Bosch & Rockit is in cinemas from today.

Read more:
Surf music – in praise of strings, sand and the endless swell

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

– ref. Bosch & Rockit is a sincere and sweet coming of age film, with a kind of simple magic – https://theconversation.com/bosch-and-rockit-is-a-sincere-and-sweet-coming-of-age-film-with-a-kind-of-simple-magic-188146

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christian Moro, Associate Professor of Science & Medicine, Bond University

Online user reviews have come to play a crucial role in our decisions about which products to buy, what TV to watch, and what games to play.

But after initial enthusiasm, many platforms have pushed back against them. Netflix’s star ratings and written user reviews are a distant memory, and even YouTube no longer shows the number of “dislikes” a video receives.

Negativity in particular is a no-no. Instagram and Facebook will let you “like” a post, but if you dislike it they don’t want to know. Steam, the world’s largest distributor of PC games, has also struggled with negative reviews – in particular, co-ordinated negative campaigns known as “review bombing”.

However, in recent research published in The Internet and Higher Education we put a video game up for community review. After thousands of players and hundreds of written reviews we found that user feedback, properly managed, can lead to significant improvements.

Review bombing

One reason community reviews have become less popular is the rise of “review bombing”, the co-ordinated practice of leaving large numbers of negative user reviews on a game or product in order to reduce its aggregate review score.

Most review-bombing incidents appear to stem from more than just not enjoying a game. They may be driven by ideological disagreement with the content of the game or dislike of the actions of a developer.

Other times this activity is automated by bots to suppress media or send a warning to companies. To take one example, a gaming review YouTube channel called Gamer’s Nexus recently reported that one of its videos exposing a scam had received an attack of co-ordinated “dislikes”.

Read more:
Holographic teachers were supposed to be part of our future. What happened?

Is removing reviews the answer?

When community reviews work, the consumer benefits by getting real-world information from the users of a product.

On YouTube, for example, the removal of dislike counts makes it hard to quickly assess the quality of a video. This is particularly important information for DIY or crafting videos.

The removal of dislikes also makes it more likely that a viewer will be caught out by clickbait, or tricked into watching a video that does not host the content promised.

When the system works

Our new study shows the advantages of community reviews. It demonstrates how, when handled carefully and objectively, community feedback can go a long way towards helping a game develop.

We made an educational game called The King’s Request for use in a medical and health sciences program. The aim was to crowdsource more feedback than we could get from students in our classes, so we released the game for free on Steam.

Of the 16,000 players, 150 provided written reviews. We analysed this feedback, which in many cases provided ideas and methods, to improve the game.

This is one example of where feedback from the gaming community, although opinionated in many cases, can genuinely help the development process, benefiting all stakeholders involved. This is particularly important as “serious” or educational games are a growing component of modern curriculums.

Censoring community reviews, even if the aim is to prevent misinformation, does make it harder for developers and educational designers to receive feedback, for viewers to receive quick information, and for paying customers to have their voice.

Read more:
Technology and learning in the classroom: six tips to get the balance right

What is the future for community reviews?

The trend has been to remove negative community ratings. YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki defended the removal of dislike counts earlier this year, and Netflix appears to have no interest in bringing back its five-star rating system.

However, not all outlets are following this trend. TikTok has been testing a dislike button for written contributions in a way that enables the community to filter out unhelpful posts.

TikTok argues that, once released, this will foster authentic engagement in the comment sections.

And the Epic Games Store, a competitor of Steam, recently implemented a system of random user surveys to keep community feedback while avoiding review bombing. Google has also been trying new things, finding some success in tackling review bombing through artificial intelligence.

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

– ref. Review bombing is a dirty practice, but research shows games do benefit from online feedback – https://theconversation.com/review-bombing-is-a-dirty-practice-but-research-shows-games-do-benefit-from-online-feedback-188641

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Mclaughlin, Research Fellow, Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia

Think of a typical Australian shopping street: parked cars occupy the prime public space in front of the shops. But we could instead create a place that’s good for business and is beautiful too. It would attract customers while being good for our physical, mental and social health.

This isn’t a new idea. Realising they can make better use of the space next to businesses to boost sales, shopping centres design places to attract people. That’s why they provide seats, air-conditioning, music, artwork, cafes and plants outside their shops.

Online shopping is even comfier, but it lacks human contact.

We know what works to create people-friendly local shopping streets. Safer speeds, improving lighting, replacing parking with “parklets”, planting street trees and widening pavements — these are just some of the ways.

Below we’ll discuss four reasons to reallocate parking space next to shops. But first, we’ve re-imagined ten car-centric Australian streets to illustrate the benefits of reallocating space to people … to shoppers, diners, riders, children, prams and the mobility-impaired.

Read more:
Japan’s Old Enough and Australia’s Bluey remind us our kids are no longer ‘free range’ – but we can remake our neighbourhoods

Transforming 10 car-centric shopping streets

These re-imagined streets show thriving liveable communities, supporting friends and families to meet, creating local jobs and providing access to fresh food. (Click on and move the sliders to compare the actual and re-imagined streets.)

1. Chapel Street, Windsor, Melbourne, Victoria

2. Beaumont Street, Hamilton, Newcastle, New South Wales

3. Darby Street, Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW

4. Hall Street, Bondi, Sydney, NSW

5. Princes Highway, Woonona, Wollongong, NSW

6. Belvidere Street, Belmont, Perth, Western Australia

7. Oxford Street, Leederville, Perth, WA

8a. Parklet, South Terrace, Fremantle, Perth, WA

8b. South Terrace, Fremantle, Perth, WA

9. Musk Avenue, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, Queensland

The elephant in the room

Typically a car transports just one or two customers. A parked car occupies about 13 square metres. That’s about the size of an elephant lying down.

In the same space, 20 shoppers can be walking, 12 diners can sit outside a cafe, or 12 customers can park their bikes.

Before re-imagining the streets, we calculated that car parking (27%) and travel lanes (46%) took up nearly three-quarters of the street space, comparable to other research.

Reducing car parking and travel lanes allowed us to increase green space (up 18%), seating (up 17%) and footpaths (up 6%) in our re-imagined streets.

Read more:
Using valuable inner-city land for car parking? In a housing crisis, that just doesn’t add up

Creating beautiful and healthy shopping streets that provide safe and equitable access is key to attracting more business.

Encouraging motorists to park on neighbouring side streets or in off-street car parks can free up space for people. In any case, motorists rarely find parking right out the front of a shop — the (rising) number and size of cars makes that impossible.

4 reasons to redesign shopping streets

1: Local businesses benefit

Just this week, Perth’s lord mayor proposed ripping out a pedestrian mall in the CBD and opening it to cars. But this logic doesn’t stack up to get more customers.

It’s important to remember: cars don’t buy things from shops, people do. Shopping streets that prioritise people and beauty over cars will attract higher sales, higher retail rental values and reduced shop vacancy rates.

Read more:
Parking isn’t as important for restaurants as the owners think it is

But where will shoppers park? Shoppers are already used to walking short distances from parking on side streets and in off-street car parks.

Switching to other modes of transport for short journeys to the shops is another option.

2. More attractive for COVID-19 dining

We now know that COVID-19 is airborne — meaning we can inhale the virus. Improving ventilation is key to reducing the spread, but this can be a challenge indoors.

The evidence suggests gathering outdoors is safer than indoors.

Almost half of Australians have a family dog, so being able to have a coffee outside opens up further business benefits of outdoor dining space.

Trialling more people-friendly streets can be a great way to demonstrate their benefits. NSW has already run trials of “streets as shared spaces” encouraging outdoor dining.

Read more:
What next for parklets? It doesn’t have to be a permanent switch back to parking

3: For kids and families

Great streets are enjoyable and safe places for kids and their families. Streets like this make it easier to get active and have fun.

We should listen to kids’ ideas when it comes to building healthy streets — they want their local streets to be active and fun places to meet their friends.

Shopping streets should make everyone feel welcome. By this we mean streets that:

• are safe and easy to cross
• have shade and shelter
• provide rest stops and benches
• are quiet, walkable and rideable
• have interesting things to see and do
• are relaxing
• have fresh, clean air.

4: Boost our physical activity and mental health

More than half of city car journeys are shorter than 5km — and many are even shorter. Ongoing under-investment in safe walking and cycling means Australians feel forced into driving short distances, even though they might prefer to walk or cycle.

Increasing walking is a cost-effective investment to boost Australia’s physical activity levels. It would reduce the one in ten deaths and A$15.6 billion-a-year burden of inactivity.

Riding or walking to the shops can be a relaxing and enjoyable experience, and shopping streets can be destinations that people enjoy walking around, staying a while and spending more.

When Australians have better access to local destinations, they walk more.

More people on the streets builds a sense of community, essential for optimal mental health.

Take-home message

For shopping streets to compete with larger shopping centres, they need to be more beautiful places to visit, which provide safe and inclusive access for people to spend money locally.

Towns and cities around the world are realising this. Tens of thousands of on-street car parking spaces are being reallocated to people, including in Auckland, Stockholm, Paris, Amsterdam, Milan. Australia can learn from their successes.

The authors encourage the open access reuse of the re-imagined streets. They are freely available to download in multiple formats.

Matthew ‘Tepi’ Mclaughlin (preferred name: Tepi) is affiliated with the Telethon Kids Institute, the International Society for Physical Activity and Health and the Asia-Pacific Society for Physical Activity.

Hayley Christian receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council and Health Promotion Foundation of Western Australia (Healthway). Hayley Christian is supported by an Australian National Heart Foundation Future Leader Fellowship (102549).

Jasper Schipperijn has received funding from the European Union, the Danish Cancer Society, KOMPAN, RealDania and TrykFonfen. Jasper Schipperijn is affiliated with the University of Southern Denmark and the International Society for Physical Activity and Health (ISPAH).

Trevor Shilton has received grants from the NHMRC, ARC and Healthway. While working for the Heart Foundation he received grants from the Commonwealth Government and Western Australian Government. He is a member of the Board of the Australasian Society for Physical Activity, and a Member of the Advocacy Committee for the World Heart Federation.

– ref. 10 images show just how attractive Australian shopping strips can be without cars – https://theconversation.com/10-images-show-just-how-attractive-australian-shopping-strips-can-be-without-cars-186460

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Briggs, Research Director, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney

In just eight years time, the Labor government wants Australia to be 82% powered by renewable energy. That means a rapid, historic shift, given only 24% of our power was supplied by renewables as of last year.

To make this happen, we must rapidly scale up our renewable energy construction workforce. Last week’s energy ministers’ meeting calls for assessment of the “workforce, supply chain and community needs” for the energy transition. The government’s jobs and skills summit in early September will tackle the issue too. While it’s positive the government is focused on these challenges, the reality is we’re playing catch-up.

Why? Because Australia is already stretched for workers, and it takes time to give new ones the skills they will need. Our research estimates the renewable energy transition will need up to 30,000 workers in coming years to build enough solar farms, wind farms, batteries, transmission lines and pumped hydro storage to transform our energy system. Most of these jobs will be in regional areas.

Read more:
Labor’s renewable target is much more ambitious than it seems. We need the best bang-for-buck policy responses

In coming decades, Australia will invest around A$66 billion in large-scale renewables and $27 billion in rooftop solar and battery storage. This creates openings for industry development like the $7.4 billion market opportunity for an integrated battery supply chain and manufacturing which builds on our strengths, such as wind towers.

If we get this right, we can create new manufacturing and supply chain jobs and reverse the long drift of these jobs overseas. But if we get it wrong, skill shortages could derail the vision of a new energy system by 2030.

What jobs will we need and where?

Much of the debate on the energy transition to date has focused on technical challenges like integrating renewable energy into the grid.

But as a new report from Construction Skills Queensland points out: “The biggest challenge in delivering the (renewable energy) boom could be the scale of the construction workforce required.”

Across the eastern states in the National Energy Market, the construction workforce needs to scale up rapidly to build wind and solar farms, rooftop solar, battery storage and transmission lines throughout the 2020s. As the volume of renewable energy grows, our modelling finds the share of operations and maintenance jobs will increase, making up around 50% of all jobs by 2035 based on the Australian Energy Market Operator’s roadmap for the energy system.

Notably, our projections include very few jobs in manufacturing. That’s because at present, most renewables manufacturing is done offshore. But as the country which pioneered key solar technologies, we could harness these investments to build local production.

Read more:
Historic new deal puts emissions reduction at the heart of Australia’s energy sector

Skill shortages could cripple the renewables boom

While it sounds simple in theory, the hard part is making this a reality. How can we best scale up the construction workforce in regional areas? How can we best leverage public and private clean energy investment to increase local manufacturing jobs?

It’s going to be a challenge. That’s because we are already facing widespread skill shortages in key jobs such as engineers, electricians and transmission lineworkers.

Australia is in the midst of an “unprecedented” boom in infrastructure. Think of the huge transport projects like inland rail and metro projects in major cities.

Our regions are already struggling to supply workers for these projects. Infrastructure Australia has projected a shortage of 41,000 engineers and 15,000 trades in the next few years. This is a real worry for the renewables industry. Where will the new workforce come from?

As the labour market tightens, there’s a risk skill shortages will become a constraint on construction timetables. There are industry reports of bidding wars as companies vie to secure skilled workers by offering higher wages. That’s great for the workers with the skills, but it also speaks to the fact the pool of skilled people is too small – even before we launch this major transition.

People in many regional communities are concerned the renewable boom could follow the mining boom with a reliance on fly-in, fly-out workers. This approach overheats local economies and housing and ultimately leaves little benefit, as towns like Karratha have found.

What do we need to do?

Governments will need to roll out regional programs to increase the size of this workforce, by creating direct training pathways to help school leavers get into the renewables sector. This can slow the well known “youth drain” of country kids to the cities.

Specific programs could also help First Nations people in remote areas into jobs close to their communities such as in best-practice solar farms and transmission projects.

We’ll also need urgent investment in regional training facilities, courses and apprenticeships.

While the federal government has committed to fund energy apprentices, we will also need more industry-government partnerships like the pioneering Energising Tasmania initiative to train and redeploy new and existing workers backed by government support.

And we will also need skilled migration as part of the solution. That’s because the regions cannot supply the full scale of the workforce required and time is short. But regional communities will want to see programs encouraging workers and businesses to put down roots. If renewables become another FIFO-boom, we risk community backlash.

While the government has many other things to juggle, this is a big one. Without skilled workers, we won’t reach the goal of transforming our energy system by 2030.

Read more:
How an Aussie invention could soon cut 5% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions

The article draws on research undertaken by the Institute for Sustainable Future which has been commissioned by the Clean Energy Council, Infrastructure Australia and the NSW Renewable Energy Sector Board. ISF is currently undertaking research on renewable and skills for the NSW Department of Education and Training and EnergyCo.

This article draws on research undertaken by the Institute for Sustainable Future which has been commissioned by the Clean Energy Council, Infrastructure Australia and the NSW Renewable Energy Sector Board. ISF is currently undertaking research on renewable energy and skills for the NSW Department of Education and Training and EnergyCo.

– ref. To hit 82% renewables in 8 years, we need skilled workers – and labour markets are already overstretched – https://theconversation.com/to-hit-82-renewables-in-8-years-we-need-skilled-workers-and-labour-markets-are-already-overstretched-188811

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Goldlust, Adjunct Research Fellow, School of Archaeology and History, La Trobe University

The poor state of Australia’s residential, and particularly rental, housing stock is attracting increasing attention. This week it has been reported many renters are living in unhealthily cold and damp housing. The head of UNSW’s School of the Built Environment, Philip Oldfield, recently described the average Australian home as “closer to a tent than an insulated eco-building”.

A joint statement by more than 100 property, community, health and environmental organisations has called on next week’s meeting of the nation’s building ministers to increase the energy efficiency of new homes. The alliance wants to lift National Construction Code standards, such as raising the minimum thermal performance to seven stars, alongside a “whole-of-home” energy budget. The statement said Australia lags far behind international energy-efficiency and building standards.

Read more:
If you’re renting, chances are your home is cold. With power prices soaring, here’s what you can do to keep warm

These concerns coincide with a growing housing shortage, rising building costs and a changing climate. But these circumstances are no reason to defer housing reforms. In the past, in a remarkably similar set of circumstances, Australia became a global innovator through a dedicated government agency focused on thermal comfort and performance.

We once led the way in building for the climate

We must go back to the second world war, though, to see Australia at the vanguard of housing built for the climate. The Ministry of Post-war Reconstruction’s substantial and alarm-raising Commonwealth Housing Report of 1944 had forecast a shortfall of 300,000 dwellings by war’s end. On top of a materials shortage and a rapidly growing population, Chifley’s Labor government was keen to tackle the housing crisis head-on and to demonstrate Australia’s scientific prowess across a range of technical industries.

As the magnitude of the looming housing shortage became clear, a group of architects established a Small House Bureau to reinvigorate the housing landscape. In Victoria, the director was celebrated architect Robin Boyd. He advocated for smaller homes, notably if the main building material could be earth.

Boyd told a growing readership desperate for cost-effective and accessible alternatives that earth walls were “cheap, strong, weatherproof, and highly insulating”. The materials are already on “your vacant building site”, he cried. Thus, it seemed reasonable to “make it of mud!”.

At the same time, the Commonwealth Experimental Building Station was set up on 16 hectares of bushland in Ryde, north of Sydney. Its mandate was to carry out experimental construction in different climatic and geographic locations. It was also to advise regulators, housing authorities and government departments.

Engineers, builders, architects and the public welcomed the innovative scientific approach to housing design across the nation’s varied and extreme weather and seasonal conditions. Post-war architects and scientists were keen to place a climatically defined framework on both the layout and construction of Australian homes.

One of the station’s main directives was to address “heating, lighting, ventilation, sound and thermal transmission, and performance generally”. The station developed an advanced thermal modelling program to enhance indoor comfort. The modelling took into account solar radiation, the value of shading, strategic ventilation and insulation.

Read more:
House hunters are rarely told the home energy rating – little wonder the average is as low as 1.8 stars

Amidst a slew of controlled experiments, the station’s chief technical officer, English architect and engineer George Middleton, championed the practical application of earth walls. Following a scoping tour of England, America, Russia and across Australia, Middleton examined the structural integrity, durability and effective function of “Pisé” or rammed earth.

A devotee of the aesthetic qualities and durability of earth, he produced several technical papers that placed earth walls “high among the accepted building methods”.

Continuing to advocate for earth over prefabricated materials, Middleton released Build Your House of Earth in 1953. It remains the authoritative text on rammed-earth building in Australia.

In just a few short years, the station researched, experimented and built dozens of prototypes. Its thermal response analysis tool (replicated 20 years later by UK building authorities) was ground-breaking.

Australia needs to make up lost ground

Despite the station’s record of achievement, its funding for such investigations was cut in 1955. Some thermal investigations were all but abandoned. Without ongoing testing and field application, the capacity to influence material and performance standards waned.

The station did continue to provide regulations and standards for building systems and materials, and it was restructured in the mid-1980s into the National Building Technology Centre. It was later absorbed into CSIRO’s Division of Building, Construction and Engineering, which still oversees the Building Code of Australia.

At the centre of building research in Australia, the station was innovative and experimental. It was created decades before the energy conservation movement began to investigate building efficiency in North America and England.

But our innovation and desire for experimentation have faded. Decades of industry lobbying, toothless enforcement, a lack of investment in and subsidies for refurbishing existing dwellings, and an outdated rating scheme (NatHERS) have left many Australians out in the cold.

Read more:
Keen to retrofit your home to lower its carbon footprint and save energy? Consider these 3 things

In a continent notorious for its extremes, it is time to invest again in thermal research and testing. Australia needs to build resilience into new and existing houses. In a rapidly changing climate, we must consider the capacity and efficiency of earth and other natural materials as a viable and proven alternative to prefabricated materials.

Rachel Goldlust is affiliated with the Renters and Housing Union.

– ref. People are shivering in cold and mouldy homes in a country that pioneered housing comfort research – how did that happen? – https://theconversation.com/people-are-shivering-in-cold-and-mouldy-homes-in-a-country-that-pioneered-housing-comfort-research-how-did-that-happen-188809

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter O’Sullivan, Professor of Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy, Curtin University

Back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Most people experience an episode of back pain in their lifetime. It often emerges during adolescence and becomes more common in adults.

For 25% of people who develop back pain, it can become persistent, disabling and distressing. It can affect a person’s ability to participate in activities of daily living, physical activity and work. Activities such as sitting, standing, bending and lifting frequently aggravate back pain.

There is a common belief that “good” posture is important to protect the spine from damage, as well as prevent and treat back pain. Good posture is commonly defined as sitting “upright”, standing “tall and aligned”, and lifting with a squat technique and “straight back”.

Conversely, “slump” sitting, “slouch” standing and lifting with a “round back” or stooped posture are frequently warned against. This view is widely held by people with and without back pain, as well as clinicians in both occupational health and primary care settings.

Surprisingly, there is a lack of evidence for a strong relationship between “good” posture and back pain. Perceptions of “good” posture originate from a combination of social desirability and unfounded presumptions.

Systematic reviews (studies looking at a number of studies in one area) have found ergonomic interventions for workers, and advice for manual workers on the best posture for lifting, have not reduced work-related back pain.

Read more:
Ouch! The drugs don’t work for back pain, but here’s what does

Sitting and standing posture

Our group has conducted several studies exploring the relationship between spine posture and back pain. We investigated whether “slump” sitting or “non-neutral” standing postures (overarching or slouching the back, for example), in a large population of adolescents, were associated with, or predicted future back pain. We found little support for this view.

These findings are consistent with systematic reviews that have found no consistent differences in sitting or standing posture between adult populations with and without back pain.

People adopt a range of different spine postures, and no single posture protects a person from back pain. People with both slumped and upright postures can experience back pain.

Lifting posture

Globally accepted occupational health practices about “good” or safe back postures during lifting also lack evidence. Our systematic review found no evidence lifting with a round-back posture is associated with or predictive of back pain.

Our recent lab study found people without back pain, employed in manual work for more than five years, were more likely to lift with a more stooped, round-back posture.

In comparison, manual workers with back pain tended to adopt more of a squat lift with a straighter back.

In other words, people with back pain tend to follow “good” posture advice, but people who don’t lift in the “good” way don’t have more back pain.

In a small study, as people with disabling back pain recovered, they became less protective and generally moved away from the “good” posture advice.

If not posture – what else?

There is no evidence for a single “good posture” to prevent or reduce back pain. People’s spines come in all shapes and sizes, so posture is highly individual. Movement is important for back health, so learning to vary and adopt different postures that are comfortable is likely to be more helpful than rigidly adhering to a specific “good” posture.

While back pain can be intense and distressing, for most people (90%) back pain is not associated with identifiable tissue damage or pathology. Back pain can be like a sprain related to awkward, sudden, heavy or unaccustomed loads on our back, but can also occur like a bad headache where there is no injury.

Importantly, people are more vulnerable to back pain when their health is compromised, such as if someone is:

• feeling stressed

• experiencing low mood

• tired or fatigued

• sleeping poorly

• being less active.

Back pain is more likely to persist if a person:

• becomes overly worried and fearful about their back pain

• overprotects their back and avoids movement, physical activity, work and social engagement.

Read more:
Put down the paracetamol, it’s just a placebo for low back pain

What can people do about back pain?

In a small group (1-5%), back pain can be caused by pathology including a fracture, malignancy, infection or nerve compression (the latter is associated with leg pain, and a loss of muscle power and sensation). In these cases, seek medical care.

For most people (90%), back pain is associated with sensitisation of the back structures, but not identifiable tissue damage.

In this situation, too much focus on maintaining “good” posture can be a distraction from other factors known to be important for spine health.

These include:

• moving and relaxing your back

• engaging in regular physical activity of your preference

• building confidence and keeping fit and strong for usual daily tasks

• maintaining healthy sleep habits and body weight

• caring for your general physical and mental health.

Sometimes this requires some support and coaching with a skilled clinician.

So if you are sitting or standing, find comfortable, relaxed postures and vary them. If you are lifting, the current evidence suggests it’s OK to lift naturally – even with a round back. But make sure you are fit and strong enough for the task, and care for your overall health.

Peter O’Sullivan is a Director at Bodylogic.physio in Perth where he reviews and treats patients with low back pain. He sometimes receives fee’s for teaching on evidence based care of people with pain.

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

– ref. Having ‘good’ posture doesn’t prevent back pain, and ‘bad’ posture doesn’t cause it – https://theconversation.com/having-good-posture-doesnt-prevent-back-pain-and-bad-posture-doesnt-cause-it-183732

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frank Bongiorno, Professor of History, ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University

The go-to defence of pretty much everyone who is entangled in the scandal of Scott Morrison’s self-appointment to five ministerial portfolios other than his own is that no laws were broken. But this alleged legality – which remains unclear – is barely relevant to any judgement that might be offered on the affair.

Australia’s system of government would cease to function without its actors being willing to observe conventions that do not have the status of law. It is no defence of one’s behaviour to say that no law was broken as a result of it.

Australia has a written constitution, but any casual reader of its text would gain little idea of how the political system actually works. Ministers hold office “during the pleasure of the Governor-General”. The document does not mention the office of prime minister. It does not speak of a cabinet.

The lifeblood of the system is convention and practice. They are not to be found in the ink of the Constitution. Many of these conventions and practices were inherited, and then adapted, from Britain. In Australia, following developments in Canada in the late 1830s and ‘40s, this agreed practice was sometimes called “responsible government”.

“Responsible government” was a colonial adaptation of a model that was also evolving in Britain. That is why we use the term “Westminster system” as a catch-all for Australia’s system of parliamentary government.

Read more:
View from The Hill: The Liberals would be better off with Morrison out of parliament

The most famous and influential account of the Westminster system appears in Walter Bagehot’s The English Constitution (1867). Its central feature, he said, distinguishing it from the more drastic separation of powers and antagonism between branches of government characteristic of the presidential system of the United States, was “the close union, the nearly complete fusion, of the executive and legislative powers”.

The lower house of a parliament, ostensibly elected to make laws, would in practice find “its principal business in making and in keeping an executive” that “should be chosen by the legislature out of persons agreeable to and trusted by the legislature”. Under Westminster convention, a cabinet required the confidence of the popularly elected chamber which, in turn, was the mechanism for the government’s accountability to the nation.

Morrison did not apparently see that in secretly having himself sworn into a range of portfolios, he was misleading parliament and preventing the accountability that Bagehot saw as the essence of the system. Instead, in seeking to justify his behaviour, he used a phrase that US President Harry S. Truman had as a sign on his desk: “The buck stops here”.

In this vein, during his press conference yesterday, Morrison referred multiple times to the popular expectations of him. He was responsible for “every drop of rain”. Morrison seems to imagine the public believed government started and ended with him.

Morrison has since apologised to cabinet colleagues for not having told them he signed up to their portfolios in secret. But it is telling that he has not apologised to the parliament for misleading it, nor to the Australian people for misleading them.

There was a time, not all that long ago, when phrases such as “individual ministerial responsibility” and “collective ministerial responsibility” were meaningful. The first was the principle that ministers were responsible to parliament and therefore to the people for what went on in their portfolios. They could not pass the buck to advisers or public servants, even if an error or misdeed had occurred in those quarters.

Collective ministerial responsibility referred to cabinet’s responsibility as a body for its own decisions. If a minister felt so strongly opposed to a decision agreed by cabinet that they could not publicly support it, the solution was clear. They would need to resign.

These were textbook concepts in high school Australian politics classes. It was widely understood that they were ideals and theories, that they would be applied differently according to context.

But they were understood as Westminster conventions with genuine force and importance, even if an abrogation of convention did not carry the same consequence as a breach of law.

Read more:
Parliament must act to ensure Australia never has ‘secret ministers’ again

In contrast, we now seem to have a system in which it is considered a legitimate defence of one’s highly unconventional behaviour to say that no law was broken. But this is not a legitimate defence in a system of parliamentary government that rests substantially on convention. It is rather a serious menace to democracy.

The electorate’s concerns with institutional integrity were manifested in this year’s federal election result. But Morrison’s highly secretive, underhanded accumulation of power would likely not be the fodder of a federal anti-corruption commission. This is all the more reason to be concerned at his “nothing to see here” attitude.

When the agreed way in which our politics is conducted is eroded, what happens then? Conventions are enforced by their usage. As the parliamentary practice guide notes, “conventions are subject to change by way of (political) interpretation or (political) circumstances and may in some instances be broken”.

But they cannot simply be set aside without serious and detrimental effects on the way we are governed.

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

– ref. Morrison’s multiple portfolios: why the law has nothing to do with it – https://theconversation.com/morrisons-multiple-portfolios-why-the-law-has-nothing-to-do-with-it-188892

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

One of the more bizarre things Scott Morrison said in his hour-long, sometimes combative, Wednesday news conference was that he’d had a “wonderful” conversation with Josh Frydenberg on Tuesday.

Morrison contacted Frydenberg after the revelation the former prime minister had himself sworn into the treasury portfolio in May last year and never told the treasurer. On the same day he’d inserted himself in the home affairs ministry, unbeknown to occupant Karen Andrews.

When she learned this week of his action, Andrews exploded and called for Morrison to leave parliament. Frydenberg, now in the investment banking world although retaining a hankering for politics, acted with more restraint.

But for the ex-treasurer and ex-member for Kooyong, the affair must raise the “what if” question.

What if the story of Morrison’s extraordinary power-grab had come out a few months before the election?

At that time some colleagues, fearful for their prospects, had sounded out Frydenberg about a possible move on Morrison. Frydenberg didn’t entertain the idea, staying loyal to Morrison (as he had to PMs Turnbull and Abbott).

It’s just possible the power-grab story might have toppled Morrison, the Liberals under Frydenberg might have contained their losses, and Frydenberg might have held his seat.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Morrison’s passion for control trashed conventions and accountability

Of course none of that might have happened. But if you were Frydenberg, Tuesday’s conversation would have seemed less than “wonderful”. Morrison, however, portrays the world just as he wants it to be seen.

Scott Morrison stripped of power is not so different from Scott Morrison clothed in the garb of office. On Wednesday there were elements of preacher and salesman. Except no one was buying the messages.

His news conference did nothing to counter the damage from what’s been revealed about his putting himself into five ministries, without announcement and in most cases without the occupants knowing. In many observers’ eyes, it left him worse off.

Meanwhile, Peter Dutton and even Morrison’s close mate Stuart Robert distanced themselves from the former PM’s actions. Teal independent Sophie Scamps said there should be a parliamentary inquiry.

Governor-General David Hurley, caught up in the imbroglio, indicated he’d had “no reason to believe that appointments would not be communicated”.

On the power-grab, Morrison’s explanation amounted to saying that everyone expected he was responsible for everything, so he acted accordingly. Understanding public expectations, “I believed it was necessary […] to have what were effectively emergency powers, to exercise in extreme situations that would be unforeseen”.

Read more:
Word from The Hill: On Scott Morrison’s bizarre power grab

There’s irony here. Morrison says he was responding to expectations about responsibility, but a chief criticism of him during the last term was that he dodged responsibility.

The pandemic played strongly to Morrison’s preferred command-and-control style.

“As prime minister, only I could really understand the weight of responsibility that was on my shoulders and on no one else, and as a result I took the decisions that I thought I needed to take.”

A revealing line came in his retort to one persistent journalist. “You’re standing on the shore after the fact. I was steering the ship in the middle of the tempest.”

But a ship is operated by a crew, not just a captain. Why not tell his cabinet colleagues he’d had himself put into multiple ministries?

“I did not want any of my ministers to be going about their daily business any differently”, he said. “I was concerned that these issues could have been misconstrued and misunderstood and undermine the confidence of ministers in the performance of their duties.”

This doesn’t bear scrutiny. If Morrison’s argument for his extraordinary action was so compelling, ministers would presumably have accepted the case. But it was full of holes and illogical. Indeed, he now says “in hindsight” it had been unnecessary to put himself into treasury and home affairs.

While Morrison’s behaviour can be seen as the weirdest of aberrations, looked at from another angle it is just the most extreme example of his default mode of secrecy.

Read more:
View from The Hill: The Liberals would be better off with Morrison out of parliament

There were cover-ups on everything from his Hawaii holiday to who knew what and when about the Brittany Higgins matter. The cover-ups were accompanied by lies, dissembling, and dodgy investigations.

In those cases, Morrison was trying to hide things from the media and the public. With his special ministerial arrangements, it was ministers, individually and collectively, who were to be kept in the dark (as well as media and voters). Morrison did not just think cabinet colleagues didn’t have a right to know. He apparently thought they could become flaky if they did know.

But while eschewing scrutiny, Morrison also wanted to have the story of his prime ministership told in a way that would put him in the best light.

So he gave extensive co-operation for the book Plagued, written by Simon Benson and Geoff Chambers, journalists from The Australian. Morrison had a long and close relationship with Benson.

He said at his news conference:“That book was written based on interviews that were conducted at the time, “in the middle of the tempest,” which was what made it an “interesting read”.

Plagued broke the initial story of Morrison’s secret arrangements, and then further information quickly came out. In another irony, the book Morrison hoped would put some shine on his legacy became the source of its latest tarnishing.

As for his future, Morrison said: “As a former prime minister, I intend to go on being a quiet Australian in the Shire and in St George doing my job as a local
member”.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Morrison reverts to type in an unconvincing defence – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-morrison-reverts-to-type-in-an-unconvincing-defence-188911

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Signe Dean, Science + Technology Editor, The Conversation

In a newly announced partnership with Texas biotech company Colossal Biosciences, Australian researchers are hoping their dream to bring back the extinct thylacine is a “giant leap” closer to fruition.

Scientists at University of Melbourne’s TIGRR Lab (Thylacine Integrated Genetic Restoration Research) believe the new partnership, which brings Colossal’s expertise in CRISPR gene editing on board, could result in the first baby thylacine within a decade.

The genetic engineering firm made headlines in 2021 with the announcement of an ambitious plan to bring back something akin to the woolly mammoth, by producing elephant-mammoth hybrids or “mammophants”.

But de-extinction, as this type of research is known, is a highly controversial field. It’s often criticised for attempts at “playing God” or drawing attention away from the conservation of living species. So, should we bring back the thylacine? We asked five experts.

– ref. Should we bring back the thylacine? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/should-we-bring-back-the-thylacine-we-asked-5-experts-188894

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

Australia’s consumer price index is about to go monthly, meaning Australia will join most of the developed world in getting an update on inflation at the end of every month, instead of once every three months as at present.

Until now Australia has been the only member of the Group of 20 leading industrial nations not to provide monthly updates, and one of only two members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the other being New Zealand.

It has been a particular concern for the Reserve Bank, which meets monthly to set interest rates based on its assessment of inflation, but gets the inflation figures only quarterly, and with a lag.

Laughing stock

Many of the prices are collected monthly but “not published until as much as three months later, and then only as part of a quarterly average,” the Bank complained in one of its missives to the Bureau of Statistics.

In June the governor told a Swiss audience about Australia’s “bad difference” and was met with incredulous giggles. “You may laugh”, he said.

Until now it’s been too expensive to produce monthly figures. Traditionally many of them have been collected by hand, though Bureau of Statistics “shadow shoppers” entering supermarkets and other stores and writing down the prices they see or recording them on handheld devices.

But scanner data, web scraping, and reports from service stations on petrol prices and real estate agents on rents have automated much of the process.

Tuesday’s information paper says items making up 43% of the consumer price index are already collected monthly or more frequently.

More frequent, more volatile

The new monthly index, to be published alongside the quarterly index, will include updated prices for items comprising 62-73% of the quarterly index.

It will be more volatile, and will not always provide a better guide.

A “dummy run” presented on Tuesday showed that in early 2022 a monthly index would have provided advance warning that inflation was rising.

But in late 2019/early 2020 the monthly index suggested inflation was rising sharply when the quarterly index turned out not to.

The monthly swings often reflect swings in the volatile prices such as petrol, fruit and vegetables rather than underlying trends. The prices of things such as international travel move in a saw-tooth pattern.

The Bureau of Statistics recommends against placing too much weight on month-to-month changes. The Reserve Bank avoids this when analysing inflation in other countries, averaging out monthly inflation into three-month blocks.

In the US last month, the net price increase was zero, but it didn’t portend annual inflation of zero.

The Melbourne Institute already produces a monthly Australian inflation gauge but it isn’t much quoted, perhaps for this reason.

Too much information?

One plus (or minus) with the monthly index is that it will be revised in the light of new or delayed information. The quarterly index is hardly ever revised, because it is used in contracts and the indexation of government benefits.

In a speech entitled Economic news: do we get too much of it? former Reserve Bank Governor Ian Macfarlane expressed doubt about the usefulness of monthly rather than quarterly information.

He said it enabled reporters to report how something “soared one month, then plunged the next one before soaring again” but could disguise rather than reveal what was really happening.

Read more:
Inflation hasn’t been higher for 32 years. What now?

And the monthly index might create the impression there’s more inflation than there is. Behavioural economics says people are loss averse. They pay more attention to bad news than good news. The monthly figures will present inflation news 12 times a year.

The media might amplify things. When the monthly change is high they might succumb to the temptation to “annualise” it, multiplying by 12, presenting an alarming, but misleading, picture, and not bother when monthly inflation is low.

The Reserve Bank’s task of restraining inflationary expectations might be about to become harder.

John Hawkins formerly worked as a senior economist in the Reserve Bank and Australian Treasury.

– ref. Australia’s inflation rate is about to go monthly. Be careful what you wish for – https://theconversation.com/australias-inflation-rate-is-about-to-go-monthly-be-careful-what-you-wish-for-188706

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caroline Robinson, Associate Professor Podiatry, Charles Sturt University

“Smelly” might be the first word that comes to mind when you think of feet.

Why do some people’s feet have no smell, yet other feet are so pungent they could almost knock you out?

Let’s go through what causes smelly feet, what you can do about it, and when to seek professional advice.

Sweaty feet

Sweaty feet can lead to smelly feet.

Feet can become sweaty in hot weather, especially if we wear a closed-in shoe or boot and the sweat doesn’t evaporate.

Anxiety and emotional stress also increase the activity of sweat glands due to the release of stress hormones such as adrenaline, causing sweaty hands and feet.

Sweaty feet are common, but some people have an excessive sweating condition called “hyperhidrosis”. It’s very distressing and can lead to social awkwardness, reduced self-confidence and poor mental health.

But sweat usually doesn’t have a smell by itself. It’s the bacteria that feast on sweat that cause the bad smell.

Bacteria and sweat

Humans have around 1,000 species of bacteria living on our skin. Bacteria thrive in moist environments such as our armpits, groin and also in between our toes. The bacteria living on our skin are mostly harmless (and some are even good for us), but they can also cause odour when they interact with sweat.

Foot odour is associated with several types of bacteria. When these bacteria eat the sugars and fats in sweat, they produce chemicals with a noxious smell.

The most common chemical compounds are:

• “isovaleric acid”, which has a distinctive cheesy, sweaty feet odour

• “propionic acid”, which smells sour.

Read more:
Why do my armpits smell? And would using glycolic acid on them really work?

A type of bacteria called “brevibacteria” also cause foot odour. They eat dead skin on our feet, producing a gas which has a distinctive sour smell.

Cheesemakers will often add this bacteria to the surface of cheese to develop texture and flavour. This explains why many cheeses smell like feet, and feet smell like cheese!

Biologist Bart Knols received an “Ig Nobel” Prize (for unusual scientific achivements) in 2006 for demonstrating that a type of mosquito known for transmitting malaria has an equal preference for Limburger cheese and the smell of human feet.

What else can cause smelly feet?

Foot odour is made worse by socks and shoes that don’t allow sweat to evaporate from the skin. When sweat can’t evaporate from the skin, the temperature and relative humidity rise inside footwear, particularly in shoes such as work boots.
Bacteria prefer a warm, damp environment.

A bacterial skin infection called “pitted keratolysis” may also cause bad foot odour. It typically affects the soles of the feet and in between toes, and makes the skin white and soggy, often with clusters of small punched-out craters or “pits”. These pits are caused by bacteria digesting the skin and producing sulphur compounds.

It’s more common in men than women and is associated with sweaty feet, poor foot hygiene, diabetes and immunodeficiency. Pitted keratolysis will respond to treatment with antiseptic agents and topical antibiotics.

Foot odour can also be caused by tinea, a fungal skin infection often called athlete’s foot, which a podiatrist will be able to diagnose. It can be treated with an anti-fungal cream or lotion.

What you can do to manage sweaty and smelly feet

The first things to consider if you have smelly feet are foot hygiene and footwear.

Feet don’t wash themselves in the shower. In fact, bacteria from the rest of your body are washed down to your feet. So, it’s important to wash your feet with soap – including between your toes!

Drying your feet thoroughly after bathing is also important to prevent the build-up of sweat and bacteria.

It’s ideal to alternate your footwear so that shoes and boots have a chance to dry out before you wear them again. Damp footwear is the perfect place for bacteria to thrive and create those smelly chemicals.

Regular washing and drying of anything your wear on your feet will remove bacteria and stale sweat.

Bamboo has a natural antimicrobial effect (meaning it may have some ability to slow bacteria or mould growing), and socks made from this fibre may be helpful, but it’s unclear whether the benefits translate to bamboo clothing products.

There’s conflicting views on the best material for shoes and socks to improve smelly feet, so more research is needed.

Treatments for sweaty and smelly feet

If your feet are stubbornly sweaty and smelly even with good foot hygiene and attention to footwear, you may need to consider some other options.

An expert opinion from a podiatrist will help you make an appropriate treatment choice and ensure more serious issues aren’t missed.

Most of the available treatments for body odour target sweat production:

• a strong antiperspirant containing aluminium chloride hexhydrate, which can be purchased from a pharmacy without a prescription and applied directly to your feet

• “iontophoresis” is a procedure offered at specialist clinics to reduce sweating in the hands and feet. A mild electrical current is passed through skin soaked in tap water. One study found around 75–80% of participants had reduced foot sweating after 20 days of this treatment

• Botox treatments are highly effective in reducing foot sweating. Botox works by blocking the nerves that activate sweat glands. However, injections into the sole of your foot can be very uncomfortable

• a topical cream containing a small amount of “glycopyrronium bromide” can help to control excessive sweating.

Caroline Robinson would like to thank Anna Horn from Charles Sturt podiatry, for her contribution to researching this article.

Caroline Robinson is affiliated with the Australasian Council of Podiatry Deans and the Australian Podiatry Association.
She’d like to thank Anna Horn from Charles Sturt podiatry, for her contribution to researching this article.

– ref. Why do my feet smell? And what can I do about it? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-my-feet-smell-and-what-can-i-do-about-it-184561