Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Fitzpatrick, Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Social Sciences, UNSW Sydney

They knew we had separated. Why did they let him cancel the policy and refund him the money without giving me a call to let me know the house and contents were no longer insured, or not do it before speaking to me first?

These are the words of Maddy (not her real name). Her experience of domestic and family violence was compounded by the acts of the insurance company she thought would give her financial protection.

Maddy’s former partner cancelled their home and contents insurance with a simple phone call. He received a refund of the premiums she had paid just a few months earlier. She didn’t know – not until well after he threatened to burn down the house with Maddy and the children in it.

If he had followed through with his threat I would have been punished too and made to pay the mortgage for a house that we couldn’t live in and not be able to rebuild because insurance wouldn’t cover it.

Maddy is one of the women who described how insurance is being misused as a weapon of financial abuse, for my second Designed to Disrupt report. Their personal accounts highlight the need for systemic change.

Read more:
Banks put family violence perpetrators on notice. Stop using accounts to commit abuse or risk being ‘debanked’

Insurance as a weapon

General insurance is designed to provide financial protection from unexpected events. It’s supposed to be an affordable way to repair or replace an asset that is lost, stolen, damaged or destroyed.

But too often, victim-survivors of domestic and family violence find they don’t have the coverage they thought. They may be left without a car, or a home, and with no or limited means to pay to restore their financial safety and economic security.

There is limited data about the extent of the problem. But through desktop research and consultation with those with who’ve experienced it, and with consumer advocates and industry, we found the biggest issue is with joint policies.

Financial abusers exploit general insurance policies and procedures to deny access to information, cancel policies, interfere with the claims process, and to steal, limit or withhold payouts to the victim-survivor.

They aim to exert control by leaving their partner with no money, damaged or irreparable property and assets, and the accompanying emotional toll.

Differing policies and procedures

While some insurers have specialist teams to deal with these sorts of cases, there is a lack of standardised practices across the industry.

Results of our survey reveal wild variations in data between companies, with the number of domestic violence and financial abuse cases reported ranging from 11 to more than 2,000 in the 2021–22 financial year.

This means some victim-survivors will receive support that is empathetic and understands the affects of trauma, with flexibility for individual solutions. Others continue to struggle with dismissive or judgemental staff, risks to their safety, or compounding financial hardship.

Read more:
Higher unemployment and less income: how domestic violence costs women financially

We asked whether any insurance company used modelling to estimate the risk or extent of property damage related to domestic and family violence. None did.

Yet it has been estimated that “consumption costs” (such as replacing damaged property, defaulting on bad debts, and the cost of moving) of partner violence against women and their children in 2021–22 could be $3.5 billion, including $202 million in damaged and destroyed property. Most of these costs are borne by victim-survivors and family and friends.

What needs to happen?

To address these issues with joint policies, three changes are needed:

• close the loopholes that enable perpetrators to cancel insurance policies without the knowledge or consent of victim-survivors

• introduce a “conduct of others” clause as a standard part of every insurance contract, enabling victim-survivors to make a claim when perpetrators deliberately damage property

• modernise the law so insurance products can be redesigned with features that protect against financial abuse.

As a starting point, every general insurer should denounce financial abuse in their terms and conditions – following the lead of the Australian banking industry. So far, 14 banks have adopted this recommendation and are refusing to tolerate misuse of their products as a tactic of coercive control.

These changes would build on the significant progress the general insurance industry has made to support victim-survivors and drive greater consistency. The General Insurance Code of Practice sets a benchmark for self-regulation, and detailed guidance outlines better customer service practices for those experiencing domestic and family violence. All insurers are required to have a domestic and family violence policy, and some insurers have set up specialist teams and provided extra training.

The law also needs to be modernised because it’s stifling changes that would give victim-survivors better protection.

Read more:
When care becomes control – financial abuse cuts across cultures

The Insurance Contracts Act was written in 1984, just ten years after the first modern women’s refuge was established in Australia and well before domestic and family violence became an urgent national conversation.

Despite calls in 2004 and 2021 for the law to address cases in which a victim-survivor was denied a claim because of a wilful act or other breach by the perpetrator, legislation remains unchanged. Yet this type of behaviour is one of the most common ways insurance is used in family violence.

Two insurers, AAMI and Suncorp, have introduced a “conduct of others” clause to provide flexibility to pay a claim in these cases, even where there is no legal requirement to do so.

While these are positive moves, it’s slow progress. It’s time Australian insurers and regulators addressed this gap.

Catherine Fitzpatrick is Founder and Director of Flequity Ventures, a social enterprise which aims to disrupt financial abuse and gender bias through more flexible, safe and equitable product and service design. She received funding from the Centre for Women’s Economic Safety to write the Designed to Disrupt report and continues to be affiliated. She is a former bank executive with roles managing customer complaints including those related to general insurance, domestic violence support and government relations. She has previously been engaged by the Insurance Council of Australia to provide guidance on safety by design in insurance.

– ref. Insurance is the latest weapon financial abusers use against their partners. Here’s how we fix it – https://theconversation.com/insurance-is-the-latest-weapon-financial-abusers-use-against-their-partners-heres-how-we-fix-it-224632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Coates, Program Director, Economic Policy, Grattan Institute

This article is part of The Conversation’s series examining the housing crisis. Read the other articles in the series here.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers is leading a push to get private investors to help build more social and affordable housing. But we shouldn’t kid ourselves about where the money will come from.

The defining feature of social and affordable housing is a big rental subsidy for the tenant, which no private investor will ever volunteer to pay. In the end, government – that is, taxpayers – will always foot the bill.

The sooner we accept this, the better. Wishful thinking that private investors will wear the cost of rental discounts risks making the limited government subsidies available for housing less effective.

We need more social housing

Social housing – where rents are typically capped at 30% of tenants’ incomes – makes a big difference to the lives of many vulnerable Australians.

Yet Australia’s stock of social housing – currently about 430,000 dwellings – has barely grown in 20 years, during which time the population has increased by 33%.

A stagnant stock means there is little “flow” of available housing to catch people going through hardship, who then face prolonged, agonising waits while struggling to afford to keep a roof over their head.

But it’s expensive

The main reason our social housing stock has stagnated is the expense.

Social housing offers a big rental discount, or subsidy, to tenants.

In Australia, the gap between the subsidised rent and the private market rent is about $15,000 per rental per year.

Because the subsidy to tenants is ongoing, the cost to governments is ongoing. That means that every extra 100,000 social housing dwellings costs an extra $1.5 billion every year.

The same goes for subsidised “affordable” housing, where rents are typically set at 20-25% below the market rate, and which are available to many low- and some middle-income earners.

If the tenant is getting a discount on the market rate, the government will pay for that somewhere along the line.

Private investors won’t wear the subsidy gap

Australia has $3.5 trillion of superannuation savings – the fourth-largest retirement savings pool in the world – but practically none of it is invested in Australian housing. The Treasurer wants to change that.

He’s talked a big game about encouraging private capital, including super funds, to invest specifically in social and affordable housing.

But no super fund should forego returns for its members by paying the subsidy gap for social or affordable housing out of members’ pockets.

It would be incompatible with superannuation funds’ core objective – maximising returns for their members – which funds are obligated by law to prioritise.

Private investors prefer affordable to social housing

If we make encouraging private investment in social and affordable housing the goal, we risk misallocating the scarce government subsidies we have.

Most super funds, and other investors, would typically prefer to invest in affordable, rather than social housing.

Doing so lets investors finance more homes for any given quantity of government housing subsidies that are available, while taking on less-disadvantaged tenants who are seen as less risky.

We’ve been here before: the National Rental Affordability Scheme spent $3.1 billion channelling subsidies to private investors for affordable housing.

Grattan Institute estimates suggest the scheme paid an extra $1 billion in windfall gains to investors, above and beyond the cost of the discounted rents offered to tenants, who typically weren’t the most needy.

Super funds could make social housing more expensive

Super funds can help finance the construction of new social housing via loans to community housing providers – as four major funds have recently agreed to do.

But these loans are likely to be on fully commercial terms.

They are deals attractive to federal and state governments worried about taking on more debt.

But they are also likely to make social housing more expensive to deliver because governments can borrow at lower rates than the returns sought by funds.

Governments can’t avoid their responsibility

Ultimately, governments have to foot the bill for social and affordable housing. And our priority should be social, rather than affordable housing, since its targeted at people at serious risk of becoming homeless.

The sooner that truth is acknowledged, the sooner we can get on with funding subsidies and the less time we will waste on trying to coax private investors into being something they’re not.

The best way to boost funding for social housing would be to double the size of the Housing Australia Future Fund from $10 billion to $20 billion

Read more:
The Greens were right to pass Australia’s Housing Future Fund bill – the case for further delay was weak

The government-owned fund uses borrowed money to invest in stocks and bonds and uses the income to cover the social housing subsidy gap.

It makes use of the higher return the government can get from investing than from retiring debt, in the same way as the government’s Future Fund.

Doubling the size of the Housing Australia Future Fund could support the building of up to an extra 30,000 social dwellings over the next five years.

Coupled with a further big boost to Commonwealth Rent Assistance, it could really help low-income renters.

Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute’s activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities, as disclosed on its website.

Joey Moloney 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. Let’s not kid ourselves that private investors or super funds will build the social housing we need – https://theconversation.com/lets-not-kid-ourselves-that-private-investors-or-super-funds-will-build-the-social-housing-we-need-224635

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Noetel, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, The University of Queensland

A new nationally representative survey has revealed Australians are deeply concerned about the risks posed by artificial intelligence (AI). They want the government to take stronger action to ensure its safe development and use.

We conducted the survey in early 2024 and found 80% of Australians believe preventing catastrophic risks from advanced AI systems should be a global priority on par with pandemics and nuclear war.

As AI systems become more capable, decisions about how we develop, deploy and use AI are now critical. The promise of powerful technology may tempt companies – and countries – to race ahead without heeding the risks.

Our findings also reveal a gap between the AI risks that media and government tend to focus on, and the risks Australians think are most important.

Read more:
Demand for computer chips fuelled by AI could reshape global politics and security

Public concern about AI risks is growing

The development and use of increasingly powerful AI is still on the rise. Recent releases such as Google’s Gemini and Anthropic’s Claude 3 have seemingly near-human level capabilities in professional, medical and legal domains.

But the hype has been tempered by rising levels of public and expert concern. Last year, more than 500 people and organisations made submissions to the Australian government’s Safe and Responsible AI discussion paper.

They described AI-related risks such as biased decision making, erosion of trust in democratic institutions through misinformation, and increasing inequality from AI-caused unemployment.

Some are even worried about a particularly powerful AI causing a global catastrophe or human extinction. While this idea is heavily contested, across a series of three large surveys, most AI researchers judged there to be at least a 5% chance of superhuman AI being “extremely bad (e.g., human extinction)”.

The potential benefits of AI are considerable. AI is already leading to breakthroughs in biology and medicine, and it’s used to control fusion reactors, which could one day provide zero-carbon energy. Generative AI improves productivity, particularly for learners and students.

However, the speed of progress is raising alarm bells. People worry we aren’t prepared to handle powerful AI systems that could be misused or behave in unintended and harmful ways.

In response to such concerns, the world’s governments are attempting regulation. The European Union has approved a draft AI law, the United Kingdom has established an AI safety institute, while US President Joe Biden recently signed an executive order to promote safer development and governance of advanced AI.

Read more:
Who will write the rules for AI? How nations are racing to regulate artificial intelligence

Australians want action to prevent dangerous outcomes from AI

To understand how Australians feel about AI risks and ways to address them, we surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,141 Australians in January and February 2024.

We found Australians ranked the prevention of “dangerous and catastrophic outcomes from AI” as the number one priority for government action.

Australians are most concerned about AI systems that are unsafe, untrustworthy and misaligned with human values.

Other top worries include AI being used in cyber attacks and autonomous weapons, AI-related unemployment and AI failures causing damage to critical infrastructure.

Strong public support for a new AI regulatory body

Australians expect the government to take decisive action on their behalf. An overwhelming majority (86%) want a new government body dedicated to AI regulation and governance, akin to the Therapeutic Goods Administration for medicines.

Nine in ten Australians also believe the country should play a leading role in international efforts to regulate AI development.

Perhaps most strikingly, two-thirds of Australians would support hitting pause on AI development for six months to allow regulators to catch up.

Read more:
I used to work at Google and now I’m an AI researcher. Here’s why slowing down AI development is wise

Government plans should meet public expectations

In January 2024, the Australian government published an interim plan for addressing AI risks. It includes strengthening existing laws on privacy, online safety and disinformation. It also acknowledges our currently regulatory frameworks aren’t sufficient.

The interim plan outlines the development of voluntary AI safety standards, voluntary labels on AI materials, and the establishment of an advisory body.

Our survey shows Australians support a more safety-focused, regulation-first approach. This contrasts with the targeted and voluntary approach outlined in the interim plan.

It is challenging to encourage innovation while preventing accidents or misuse. But Australians would prefer the government prioritise preventing dangerous and catastrophic outcomes over “bringing the benefits of AI to everyone”.

Some ways to do this include:

• establishing an AI safety lab with the technical capacity to audit and/or monitor the most advanced AI systems

• establishing a dedicated AI regulator

• defining robust standards and guidelines for responsible AI development

• requiring independent auditing of high-risk AI systems

• ensuring corporate liability and redress for AI harms

• increasing public investment in AI safety research

• actively engaging the public in shaping the future of AI governance.

Figuring out how to effectively govern AI is one of humanity’s great challenges. Australians are keenly aware of the risks of failure, and want our government to address this challenge without delay.

Michael Noetel has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Medical Research Future Fund, Sport Australia, Open Philanthropy, and the National Health and Medical Research Council. He is a director of Effective Altruism Australia.

Alexander Saeri has received funding from the Effective Altruism Infrastructure Fund and the FTX Future Fund. He is affiliated with Good Ancestors Policy.

Jess Graham 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. 80% of Australians think AI risk is a global priority. The government needs to step up – https://theconversation.com/80-of-australians-think-ai-risk-is-a-global-priority-the-government-needs-to-step-up-225175

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katey Thom, Associate professor, Auckland University of Technology

New Zealand’s justice system is failing. The country has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the OECD, and over 56% of people with prior convictions are reconvicted within two years.

Some 52% of people in prison identify as Māori, while 91% of people in prison have experienced mental distress, and over 50% addiction. Many are affected by poverty and have been victims of sexual and physical violence.

Recent moves by the government to abolish funding for cultural reports at court sentencing further threaten the most vulnerable by removing information from judges to help create an appropriate rehabilitation pathway.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.

Our new research shows a “trauma-informed” justice system can better support people and their families to move from experiences of incarceration, mental distress and addiction into recovery and wellbeing.

This approach would mean taking into account the impacts of trauma across a wide spectrum that includes neurological, biological, psychological, spiritual, social and cultural wellbeing.

Simply put, a trauma-informed approach acknowledges what has happened to someone rather than identify what is wrong with them.

Read more:
Changes to NZ’s parole laws to improve rehabilitation could lead to even longer prison times

Our study, He Ture Kia Tika (Let the law Be Right), aimed to identify how New Zealand can improve outcomes for people experiencing mental distress and/or addiction while in the criminal justice system.

Our team interviewed 45 individuals who had been in the system. They were now thriving in the community and free of criminal behaviour. We looked at what factors contributed to their success.

We also talked with six kaupapa Māori community and peer-led providers who help support people on their recovery journeys.

What a trauma-informed system would look like

For Māori, a trauma-informed approach considers the importance of the wider community, acknowledges inter-generational and historical trauma, and incorporates te ao Māori (a Māori world view) to heal.

It also respects the autonomy of individuals and their families, and creates opportunities for them to feel empowered to make decisions about their own lives and livelihoods.

While the research included people across a number of ethnicities, most of the participants appreciated the healing they received from tikanga-led (customs and traditional values) approaches.

Time and again, participants shared how hapori (community) are already delivering what they need – localised, culturally safe, trauma-informed services that aim to support people to find their recovery pathway.

By prioritising kaupapa Māori and lived experience, grassroots community initiatives are making a real and lasting difference to people coming out of the justice system.

Read more:
Ending legal aid for cultural reports at sentencing may only make court hearings longer and costlier

New Zealand’s Matariki Court allows an offender who has pleaded guilty to participate in a culturally appropriate rehabilitation programme. Ngahau Davis, head of Te Mana o Ngapuhi Kowhao Rau, which supports adults going through the Matariki court, explained it this way:

Everybody wants to punish people – you’ve done wrong – but nobody is asking the question why.

This approach does not mean ignoring the offending behaviour. In fact, our research underscores that the road to recovery and wellbeing is hard. It involves deep work to heal and restore balance from harms that have occurred.

Another research participant, Carly, shared how she tried and failed over many years to get support through official channels – either justice or health – for ongoing addiction and mental distress. Finally, she took drastic action.

I woke up one morning, and I just wanted to die. I had a knife on me, so I walked into a dairy and held up the dairy worker at knifepoint. I climbed over the counter and said, “I’m coming over. I don’t want anything from you.” I took a packet of cigarettes, left the dairy, walked around the corner, and waited for the police to come. Then, I asked them to take me to prison.

During the sentencing, Carly revealed, she and the judge were “both crying”. The judge acknowledged she had been trying to get help for a long time. But from a legal perspective, the only option was to send her back to prison.

Change at every level

As a starting point, the government needs to meet its responsibilities to te Tiriti o Waitangi-Treaty of Waitangi. Both the legal and health systems have failed to provide justice or equity for Māori.

Our research shows the impact of people being deprived of access to the basic needs of housing, food, school and connection to their culture and communities. If we took eradicating poverty seriously, we would undoubtedly see more whānau and communities thriving.

There is also a lack of recognition of tikanga, as well as other ways of knowing and being, that are important to Māori.

Shane White, operations manager at Hoani Waititi Marae told us:

The government chased us hard to run a tikanga programme. Their want is for them not to re-offend. Our want is for them to be good Māori – to be part of their whānau, to be part of their hapū, to be down on the marae, and to have belonging, love and laughter. He won’t bother reoffending because he has a life now.

The comment illustrates the power of a trauma-informed justice system – to move the goalposts from simply “stopping offending” to supporting people realise their full potential, with the capacity to connect with whānau and contribute meaningfully to their communities.

A trauma informed approach has the power to transform not just the way our justice system understands and responds to clients, but to imbue people with agency and self-determination as they move into well-resourced pathways of recovery and wellbeing.

By reframing the justice system’s approach to its most vulnerable clients, and acknowledging the power of trauma and poverty in their lives, the courts and associated agencies can offer meaningful and sustained support to those who need it most.

Katey Thom and Stella Black, alongside our wider rōpū, received funding from the Michael and Suzanne Borrin Foundation for this research.

Stella Black received funding from the Michael and Suzanne Borrin Foundation for this research project.

– ref. Personal trauma and criminal offending are closely linked – real rehabilitation is only possible with justice system reform – https://theconversation.com/personal-trauma-and-criminal-offending-are-closely-linked-real-rehabilitation-is-only-possible-with-justice-system-reform-224627

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katie Lee, PhD Candidate, Dermatology Research Centre, The University of Queensland

About one in four people regret at least one of their tattoos. Almost half of those go on to have their unwanted tattoo removed or camouflaged with a new one.

So it’s no wonder people are searching for laser tattoo removal services.

Here’s what to consider when choosing the best clinic and what to expect when you get there.

Read more:
Thinking of a(nother) tattoo this summer? What you need to know about sunburn, sweating and fading

Why are tattoos permanent?

You can still see tattoos on the 5,300-year-old ice mummy Ötzi. That’s because tattoo artists use needles to deposit ink in the dermis, the layer of skin under the outer layer (or epidermis).

When this happens, the body recognises ink particles as “foreign”. So immune cells in the dermis, such as macrophages, take them up.

But the particles are too large for these specialised cells to break down and remove via the lymphatic system. Instead, the particles remain “locked” permanently in macrophages in the dermis.

Read more:
What Ötzi the prehistoric iceman can teach us about the use of tattoos in ceremonial healing or religious rites

How do lasers remove tattoos?

To remove a tattoo, a laser device delivers high-intensity laser pulses to the ink. These incredibly short pulses are delivered in a billionth or trillionth of a second (nanosecond or picosecond pulses), confining the laser energy to the tiny ink particles, minimising damage to the surrounding skin.

Once the ink particles absorb the laser energy, a thermal reaction takes place, increasing the particles’ internal pressure and causing them to expand, then fragment.

The macrophages can now remove these smaller particles via the lymphatic system. That’s when your tattoo starts to fade.

Read more:
Thinking of laser hair removal? Here’s what you need to know

Can all inks be removed?

Most inks can be removed, but several factors affect the result.

Colours

Each colour absorbs a different wavelength of light, so each colour requires a specific laser to be removed effectively. This may require using several different machines over the course of the treatment.

Some colours are much more challenging to remove than others. For instance, black ink is much easier to remove than yellow, which is easier to remove than white. This is because different pigments (such as black) are more likely to absorb the laser’s energy than others (yellow or white).

As a result, tattoos with white ink particles often need extra therapies. These include ablative laser treatments, which vaporise the tissue containing the tattoo ink, and tattooing over the original tattoo with a saline solution, which helps to draw the tattoo out of the skin.

Combination of colours

Tattoo inks can also be made up of many colours to achieve the desired shade.

For example, a red ink may have touches of yellow ink to create a poppy red. As the red particles are broken down, the yellow appears and must be treated with a different wavelength, sometimes requiring a different machine and extra sessions.

Your skin colour

Any laser that can target and destroy an ink particle can also target natural skin pigment and the cells that produce them. This can result in overheating of the skin, and in severe cases, damage or destruction of the cells that produce pigment. This causes the skin to either darken or lighten in response to the injury, sometimes permanently.

So it’s important to choose a tattoo removalist who not only knows how to operate the laser, but how to choose the right wavelengths and modify the treatment plan as the tattoo changes.

Read more:
Thinking of getting a minor cosmetic procedure like botox or fillers? Here’s what to consider first

Choosing a tattoo removalist

Laser tattoo removal creates a controlled wound in your skin, so it’s important to choose the right service to get the result you want, without increasing your risk of complications.

But in Australia, there is no national regulation for laser tattoo removal services, so standardising practitioners’ education and the treatments they offer is an ongoing challenge. Instead, each state and territory either licenses its own practitioners, or has no licensing at all.

As there are no licensing requirements in Victoria, New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory, South Australia and the Northern Territory, anyone can legally own and operate laser devices to remove tattoos there.

But in Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia, tattoo removal providers need a licence to operate and must have studied infection control, laser safety and tattoo removal. They also need to have many hours of supervised practical experience.

In unregulated states and territories, look for a practitioner with similar education and extensive practical experience, such as a bachelor-qualified dermal clinician.

Read more:
More than skin deep, beauty salons are places of sharing and caring

How long will it take and how much will it cost?

Most tattoos require multiple sessions to be effectively removed. The inks and art style, as well as the tattoo size, play a big role in how many sessions it will take – and how much it will cost.

An experienced practitioner will use the Kirby-Desai scale – which includes noting your skin colour, body site, scarring, ink colour and density, and layering of ink – to estimate how many sessions your specific tattoo will need.

Typically, black fine-line tattoos are easier to remove than coloured high-density tattoos, such as a portrait or sleeve.

You’ll also need to allow time between sessions for your tattoo to recover, since the wound needs to heal before the next treatment.

After your laser treatment, your practitioner will advise you on how to manage the health of your skin. In many circumstances you will be asked to keep the area cool, and depending on the tissue response, you may need topical aftercare products (such as emollient creams and a protective hydrogel dressing) to keep the area clean and hydrated.

There are many variables that influence how quickly your tattoo will heal after treatment. This includes where the tattoo is (for instance, a chest tattoo heals faster than an ankle tattoo), the devices used, and your general health. The more compromised your health, the longer it will take to heal.

Read more:
Tattoos have a long history going back to the ancient world – and also to colonialism

Watch out for allergies

Depositing tattoo ink in the dermis can cause acute and chronic skin reactions, including allergic or inflammatory reactions, infections, and hypersensitivity responses. So it’s important to tell your practitioner how your skin responded to the initial tattoo. That’s because you might be at risk of the same response again when the laser breaks down the tattoo ink.

An experienced practitioner will conduct a thorough consultation to ensure they identify any treatment risks. If necessary, they will work with your GP or dermatologist to ensure the safe removal of your tattoo.

Katie Lee receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Claire Coulstock and Samantha Reeve 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. Tattoo regret? How to choose a removal service – https://theconversation.com/tattoo-regret-how-to-choose-a-removal-service-222595

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Dosseto, Professor, University of Wollongong

Imagine a landscape shaped by fire, not as a destructive force but as a life-giving tool. That’s the reality in Australia, where Indigenous communities have long understood the intricate relationship between fire, soil and life. Cultural burning
has been used for millennia to care for landscapes and nurture biodiversity. In contrast, government agencies conduct “prescribed burning” mainly to reduce fuel loads.

In our new research, we compared cultural burning to agency-led prescribed burning or no burning. We studied the effects on soil properties such as moisture content, density and nutrient levels.

Both fire treatments increased soil moisture and organic matter, while reducing soil density. That means burning improved soil health overall. But cultural burning was the best way to boost soil carbon and nitrogen while also reducing soil density, which improves the soil’s ability to nurture plants.

Understanding the effects of different fire management techniques is crucial for developing more sustainable land management practices. By studying what happens to the soil, we can work out how best to promote healthy, resilient ecosystems while also reducing risks of uncontrolled bushfires.

Read more:
Before the colonists came, we burned small and burned often to avoid big fires. It’s time to relearn cultural burning

The vital role of fire

Fire has shaped Australian landscapes for millions of years, transforming ecosystems and influencing biodiversity.

For Indigenous Australians, fire is not just a tool but a way of life. Fire is used to care for Country, for cultural purposes including ceremonies, to promote new plant growth and food resources, and to facilitate hunting and gathering.

Cultural burning is only ever conducted when it will benefit the health of Country. It is a practice deeply rooted in Indigenous knowledge and traditions. Fires are small, slow and cool. Practitioners read signs in the environment in relation to the local flora and fauna that provide guidance on the right time to burn.

In comparison, prescribed burning, conducted by government agencies, is principally conducted to reduce fuel loads and minimise the risk of wildfires. Fires are often larger and burn hotter than cultural burning.

In recent times, bushfires have become more frequent and severe in parts of Australia. So understanding and supporting Indigenous-led fire management practices is becoming increasingly important for sustainable land management.

Read more:
How 1970s conservation laws turned this ‘paradise on Earth’ into a tinderbox

Unlocking the secrets of soil health

Our new research sheds light on the impact of fire management techniques on soil properties. The study was conducted on the south coast of New South Wales, on land managed by the Ulladulla Local Aboriginal Land Council. At this plot, one area of land experienced no burn, another was burnt by NSW Rural Fire Service and another experienced a cultural burn.

While the area burnt was relatively small, about 5,000 square metres for each plot, it can still help shed a light on the effect of fire treatments on soil properties.

We found both agency-led prescribed burning and cultural burning increased soil moisture levels. There may be different reasons for this. For soils that experienced the cultural burn, the extra moisture could be explained by the reduction in soil density, which promotes water flow. For soils that experienced the agency-led prescribed burn, where density didn’t decrease much, it’s possible the hotter fire removed the water-repellant layer of soil that sometimes develops following a fire, allowing more moisture to soak in.

Cultural burning had a more pronounced effect on reducing soil density and increasing organic matter content. Having more organic matter in the soil means more nutrients such as carbon and nitrogen are available to plants. Lower density improves soil structure. Both improve the capacity of ecosystems to withstand environmental stress such as drought and wildfire.

These findings suggest cultural burning not only benefits soil health but also helps make ecosystems more resilient, by providing more water and nutrients that native plants need.

Embracing Indigenous wisdom

Indigenous communities use cultural land management practices, of which cultural burning is one tool, to care for Country as kin. They do not see themselves as separate to the environment. Instead their practices are guided by place-based knowledge that weaves human, spiritual and ecological needs together in a symbiotic relationship where one cannot thrive without the other.

Supporting Indigenous-led fire practices is not just about what it can do for the environment. It’s also a recognition of the deep cultural and spiritual connections Indigenous communities have with the land.

By learning from and working with Indigenous communities, we can foster a more harmonious relationship with Country, one that benefits both people and the environment.

Rekindling our relationships

Indigenous fire management practices offer invaluable wisdom and the potential to transform our approach to land stewardship.

By embracing these practices, we can nurture healthier soils, promote biodiversity, and foster more resilient ecosystems.

Practically, to make this possible, ongoing investment is required to build the capacity of Indigenous communities to fulfil their obligations to care for Country. Policies must be updated to allow greater access to Country and to reduce red tape and bureaucracy.

There is a danger here. Government agencies often want to incorporate or take on some of the principles of cool burns themselves, forgetting the cultural aspects and the need for this to be Indigenous-led. We must understand this is not just about managing fires, it’s about rekindling our relationship with the land and learning from those who have lived in harmony with it for thousands of years.

Read more:
New research in Arnhem Land reveals why institutional fire management is inferior to cultural burning

Anthony Dosseto receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Katharine Haynes, Leanne Brook, and Victor Channell 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. Cultural burning is better for Australian soils than prescribed burning, or no burning at all – https://theconversation.com/cultural-burning-is-better-for-australian-soils-than-prescribed-burning-or-no-burning-at-all-224337

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marnee Shay, Associate Professor, Principal Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

Australian politicians and major government reports keep emphasising the importance of STEM (or science, technology, engineering and maths) skills for our economy and society.

As the Universities Accord report noted last month, engineering and and science are experiencing “significant skill shortages”. Then there is a federal goal to have 1.2 million tech-related jobs by 2030.

This comes amid a growing discussion about how the current STEM workforce tends to be white and male.

Last month’s Diversity in STEM Review noted how in 2021, only 36% of STEM university students identified as female, while only 5% were living with a disability. In the same year, 0.5% of Indigenous peoples held a university STEM qualification, compared to 4.9% of the Australian population.

We recently conducted research for the diversity review about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ views on STEM. This included how we can increase the use of Indigenous STEM knowledge, as well as grow the number of Indigenous peoples in STEM.

Indigenous STEM knowledge is vast and includes many things such as astronomy, weather knowledge, medicinal plant knowledge and animal classification systems.

Read more:
First Peoples’ knowledge of ‘mysterious fairy circles’ in Australian deserts has upended a long-standing science debate

Mob have a lot to say about STEM

In 2023, we did an online survey of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults’ views on STEM. This is the largest survey of its kind.

We asked both multiple choice and open-ended questions and received 204 responses from diverse Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, representing 98 different mobs across the nation.

We did this as part of a broader body of work for the Diversity in STEM review. We also did literature reviews, case studies and interviews on Indigenous contributions to STEM and barriers to participating.

Mob perspectives on STEM

Almost one quarter (23%) of our respondents had not heard the term “STEM”. This needs to change if we want to increase Indigenous participation in STEM. It is difficult to promote STEM opportunities to our communities if terminology and language aren’t relatable or understood well.

Of those surveyed, 83.3% saw a connection between STEM and Indigenous culture. This also came up in the literature reviews and qualitative interviews we did: western ideas of STEM and Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing should not be seen as separate, but as complimentary.

Almost everyone surveyed (98%) believed it was important to have Indigenous people represented in STEM fields. Having Indigenous role models in STEM is critical if we hope more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples will pursue these careers: we must be able to see a place for ourselves in these fields.

As one participant shared:

I think it’s important that as an Indigenous person growing up you can see other people in STEM fields so you are aware of the opportunities you have.

Almost all (97.5%) of respondents either strongly agreed or agreed STEM could benefit community. Many mob have strong motivations to give back and this finding can be used in designing policies and programs that incorporate the connections between STEM and community.

Indigenous people are not being supported

Only one in three participants felt Indigenous people are being supported to pursue STEM careers.

They said racism, discrimination and individual and financial challenges are all barriers. Some of the individual barriers identified are a lack of support, opportunities or confidence.

As one participant shared:

We are often told we are not good enough or smart enough to pursue STEM because we don’t fit certain moulds of what people think should be STEM people.

One participant observed the way STEM is talked about and defined is also an issue:

Definitions of STEM are often very western. This excludes us.

There is a lot of positivity

We know there are Indigenous people who are thriving in their STEM careers, despite the challenges. There is also enormous positivity about the possibilities of STEM for individual careers and for Indigenous communities more broadly. As one survey respondent told us:

I believe STEM can provide more opportunities for our future generations in education, cultural equality and industry advancement.

One person elaborated on the possibilities for sustaining Country and communities:

Protecting Country and community both require STEM skills and are necessary in supporting our future generations.

But our respondents noted it was essential to listen to Indigenous peoples. Our voices need to be at the centre of decision making moving forward. As one participant said:

the more involvement and engagement we have, the more it opens the door for future generations.

Read more:
Universities Accord: there’s a push to increase Indigenous students and voices in higher education. But we need more detail and funding

How can we increase Indigenous participation in STEM?

Our final report outlines 22 key findings and 15 recommendations based on our research. This is both evidence-based and Indigenous-informed. This is important, as our research found most published research to date on Indigenous participation in STEM and Indigenous STEM knowledge has been undertaken by non-Indigenous researchers.

Some of our recommendations include:

• A place to advance Indigenous STEM knowledges: This should include a platform for schools and universities to access quality sources on Indigenous STEM knowledges and knowledge holders, as well as investment to grow the Indigenous STEM research workforce.

• A campaign to increase Indigenous peoples’ awareness about STEM: This should include what STEM is, as well as opportunities to be involved. It should also break down language barriers (by being published in multiple languages) and be Indigenous-led.

• Establish an Office for Indigenous STEM: This would coordinate and promote policy initiatives from governments to increase Indigenous participation in STEM and would be similar to the existing Office for Women in STEM.

• Community-based STEM programs: To date, governments have invested in many programs but few of these are community based or use existing STEM knowledge within communities.

• Align Indigenous STEM goals with broader Indigenous education policies: Unless education outcomes improve for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, increasing Indigenous participation in STEM will be challenging.

• Include STEM perspectives in early childhood programs: this will provide opportunities to experience STEM from an early age, including Indigenous perspectives on STEM.

The authors acknowledge the rest of the Big Mob: STEM It Up research team: Suraiya Abdul Hameed, Pedram Rashidi, Zoe Ockerby, Amanda Hurley, Lisa Harvey-Smith and Lisa Williams.

Marnee Shay receives funding from the Australian Government, the Australian Research Council and AIATSIS. She is a member of QATSIETAC with the Department of Education Queensland. The new research in this article was supported by a grant to UNSW Sydney as part of the federal government’s Women in STEM Ambassador initiative via the Department of Industry, Science and Resources.

Amy Thomson receives funding from the Australian Government.

Antoinette Cole receives funding from the Australian Government. She is appointed as the Chair of the Queensland Catholic Education Commission’s First Nations Education Committee and the Deputy Chair and member of the CQUniversity First Nations Council of Elders and Leaders.

Jodie Miller receives funding from the Australian Government and the Australian Research Council.

Ren Perkins 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. ‘Definitions are often very western. This excludes us.’ Our research shows how to boost Indigenous participation in STEM – https://theconversation.com/definitions-are-often-very-western-this-excludes-us-our-research-shows-how-to-boost-indigenous-participation-in-stem-223465

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Draffin, Adjunct Professor, University of Canberra

Public interest journalism was already under significant stress in Australia. And now the pressure is ratcheting up even further.

While still experiencing the pandemic’s aftershocks, the industry has simultaneously been hit with the increasing cost of doing business, rising costs of living and declining advertising spend. All of this has made it harder to report the news that matters, educates and informs.

With Meta announcing last week it will not renew its commercial agreements with news outlets in Australia – worth an estimated A$70 million per year – it’s not an understatement to say it’s been a bad time for journalism.

Read more:
Facebook won’t keep paying Australian media outlets for their content. Are we about to get another news ban?

Where news in Australia is vanishing

Public interest journalism is a vital service in a healthy democratic society. It creates social cohesion, informs decision making and strengthens democracy.

The funding provided by tech giants under the agreements made as part of the landmark News Media Bargaining Code in 2021 provided a significant source of revenue for media companies.

One regional news company estimated in its submission to the Regional Newspapers Inquiry that once the agreements were fully implemented, the revenue would fund up to 30% of its editorial wages.

But as that money dries up, it’s clear Australia’s public interest journalism sector must find a new way to survive and thrive. And that method must be supported by data that clearly identifies the areas of Australia most lacking in comprehensive, accurate journalism.

The Public Interest Journalism Initiative (PIJI) has been tracking public interest news production in Australia since 2019, and our research reveals a clear divide across metropolitan and regional audiences and markets. Regional and remote areas of Australia have fewer news outlets generally, compared to areas along the east coast and around capital cities.

Density of print, digital and radio local news producers by local government area

Overall, PIJI has identified almost 500 changes in news production around Australia since 2019, with the majority of these being contractions. This includes media outlets closing, shrinking their services or ending their print editions.

But the decline is not limited to rural and regional areas. Our data also identify thinning in metropolitan markets, with 135 contractions compared to 61 expansions. However, the data also suggest the nature of the changes in metropolitan markets is different from that of regional markets.

Fifty-three percent of contractions in major cities were local suburban newspapers ending their print editions and shifting to digital-only delivery. And just over a third of contractions were outlets that ceased operations altogether, a share that has been steadily increasing.

In regional areas, we’ve seen more substantial changes with outlets closing (51% of regional contractions) or decreasing their service by cutting the frequency of publications or the level of output (21%). The shifting of content from print to digital represented just 16% of the changes seen in the regions.

Concerningly, we have also identified areas where news is completely lacking – so-called “news deserts”. According to our latest quarterly data, there are no print, digital or radio local news producers in five Australian local government areas.

Excluding radio, we could not identify any print or digital local news outlets in 29 local government areas.

Many of those areas are regional and remote areas – highlighting once again the discrepancy between metropolitan and regional news coverage.

Net change in local news producers by local government area

More data on the industry is vital

This data also underscores where future support should be directed.

Local and especially regional news urgently needs support in the face of significant industry upheaval and transformation. There is a clear need for long-term engagement and collaboration between government and researchers – both independent and government-based – given the complexity of issues facing the industry.

Longitudinal data and independent analysis will be of the utmost importance in this. Analysis must be at arms length from both government and industry, but should engage with each side, informed by daily practice and policy.

Impartial, third-party research will also assist with understanding and assessing the impact of any policy interventions, as well as tracking and informing industry transformation, whether that be changing business models or new start-ups.

We have known this for some time. In April 2022, the Regional Newspapers Inquiry pointed to the need for core, longitudinal industry data.

This is why PIJI has gathered timely data on market changes in news production across Australia, the location of these outlets and how they are connected with one another. This assists communities, researchers, industry leaders and policymakers to better understand the health of Australia’s news media landscape.

Such data can provide the impetus for policy decisions that will support news businesses and producers. Innovation is sorely needed in this area to address journalism’s broken business model.

Read more:
How will Meta’s refusal to pay for news affect Australian journalism – and our democracy?

What could help?

One potential new avenue of revenue would be the development of a not-for-profit journalism sector in Australia.

This has been repeatedly recommended in parliamentary and regulatory inquiries over the past decade. There is evidence from overseas, particularly the United States, to suggest a not-for-profit news sector would increase media diversity and address the lack of commercially viable options in investigative journalism or less-represented geographical, cultural and linguistic markets.

The Productivity Commission’s inquiry into philanthropy appears to be giving this option some consideration; its draft report, released last year, proposed extending deductible gift recipient status to public interest journalism. PIJI would welcome the support this could offer news producers and outlets.

There is also potential in commercial measures like research and development tax rebates for public interest journalism. Again, we can be guided by success overseas – Canada implemented a similar rebate system a few years ago.

Evidence and a clear focus on the role of news as a public good must lead the way in identifying paths forward to service our communities.

Maia Germano, a research coordinator at the Public Interest Journalism Initiative, contributed to this report.

Anna Draffin is the chief executive of the Public Interest Journalism Initiative, a neutral, independent think tank focused on the diversity and sustainability of public interest journalism in Australia. PIJI’s activities are funded by philanthropy. Its news mapping work is also currently supported by the federal government through the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts.

Gary Dickson works for the Public Interest Journalism Initiative, which has received funding from the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts for news data research.

– ref. Meta’s lost revenue is a huge hit for public interest journalism, which was already reeling from cutbacks – https://theconversation.com/metas-lost-revenue-is-a-huge-hit-for-public-interest-journalism-which-was-already-reeling-from-cutbacks-225349

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lily O’Neill, Senior Research Fellow, Melbourne Climate Futures, The University of Melbourne

In a significant win for the Gomeroi People, the Federal Court has ruled climate change impacts must be properly considered when determining whether a fossil fuel project can go ahead on native title land.

This is the latest in a series of disputes involving First Nations people fighting to prevent coal, oil and gas projects on their land. It’s part of the growing trend of First Nations people spearheading climate litigation. For example, cases involving Raelene Cooper, Dennis Tipakalippa, and Pabai Pabai.

So this week’s legal decision is the first-of-its-kind because the Court ruled climate change must be part of the public interest test before the Native Title Tribunal can allow a project to proceed on native title land.

The decision puts native title holders in a stronger position when fighting to prevent future fossil fuel projects. There’s no guarantee of success, but it’s clear climate impacts can no longer be dismissed.

Read more:
We should use Australia’s environment laws to protect our ‘living wonders’ from new coal and gas projects

An uphill battle for Traditional Owners

The win for the Gomeroi People was about a dispute relating to native title approvals made by the National Native Title Tribunal in 2022. This gave the Australian oil and gas company Santos permission to proceed with plans to extract gas from forest and farmland around Narrabri, in northern New South Wales.

Up to 850 gas wells would be drilled over 20 years to extract coal seam gas. The wells and infrastructure, including gas processing and water treatment facilities, would be located within 1,000 hectares of the 95,000ha project area.

Under the Native Title Act companies like Santos are required to negotiate with the land’s Traditional Owners for at least six months with a view to reaching an agreement.

But an obligation to negotiate does not mean there is an obligation to reach an agreement. Traditional Owners cannot veto the project. And even without an agreement the company can apply to the tribunal to grant native title approvals.

Companies know they are likely to win once they get to the tribunal. The tribunal has only ever sided with native title holders trying to prevent resource extraction project on their Country three times, most recently back in 2011. In comparison, it has sided with the developer 149 times.

The tribunal must look at a range of factors when reaching its decision. This includes the public interest.

The Gomeroi People argued greenhouse gas emissions from the Santos project would cause unacceptable damage to their Country, and also contribute to global climate change, and therefore the project was not in the public interest.

They enlisted an expert witness, the late and highly respected climate scientist Professor Will Steffen, who told the tribunal in 2021 that the project was expected to result in between 109.75 million and 120.55 million tonnes of extra carbon dioxide (or equivalent) into the atmosphere.

The continued expansion of the fossil fuel industry, Steffen said, would result in the Narrabri region experiencing “more extreme heat, further and more intense droughts, harsher fire danger weather, and heavier rainfall when it occurs, all of which will continue to increase in frequency and intensity”.

The tribunal’s then president, John Dowsett, concluded that while he accepted greenhouse gas emissions were warming the planet, it was not in his remit to consider climate change when looking at the public interest. Rather, he said, he had to consider factors such as whether the project was of “economic significance to Australia, the State and the region, as well as Aboriginal people”.

He ruled that it was, and also opined that Steffen should have been more deferential to the NSW Independent Planning Commission’s views that the project would have an acceptable impact on climate. Steffen was just “one scientist”, Dowsett said, and it was “disturbing” that he should dismiss the authority’s view.

Dowsett even referenced the classic climate fallacy about there being two sides to the argument: “there are conflicting views concerning climate change and knowledge is rapidly expanding”.

Read more:
Groundwater: the natural wonder that needs protecting from coal seam gas

A groundbreaking win

The Federal Court was clearly not impressed, this week delivering the tribunal a judicial slap. The court said the definition of what was in the public interest was wide, and in this case, consideration of climate change impacts clearly fell within that definition.

In her judgement, Federal Court Chief Justice Debra Mortimer pointed out that Steffen was not just one scientist, but rather was on a panel of experts of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, representing the world’s leading climate scientists.

Gomeroi Traditional Owners reacted to the decision with happiness, pride and celebration.

Gomeroi Elder Maria (Polly) Cutmore released a statement saying:

Santos now have to decide what they are going to do, we strongly encourage them to withdraw their operations from the Pilliga forest and our floodplains for good. That would respect our culture and law and Santos would be better off for it.

Santos responded to the case by saying it has “at all times negotiated with the Gomeroi people in good faith”.

This is not the first time First Nations people have led the way in holding decision makers accountable for the climate consequences of their actions. Indeed, Australia has been a particularly active jurisdiction for climate litigation, the jurisdiction with the second-highest number of cases worldwide. The Australian and Pacific Climate Litigation database we run at the University of Melbourne records these cases.

We expect more of these disputes to arise in the future.

What comes next?

For the Gomeroi People, the matter will likely be sent back to the tribunal with instructions to revisit the decision. This time, we hope, climate change will be forefront in the decision-making process.

The broader implications of this latest ruling are still unclear. It is conceivable the tribunal will reconsider the climate impacts and yet still arrive at the same conclusion.

Alternatively, this case could be the start of more significant engagement with climate issues in Australian courts, led by First Nations people.

Read more:
Beyond Juukan Gorge: how First Nations people are taking charge of clean energy projects on their land

Rebekkah Markey-Towler receives funding for a PhD at the Melbourne Law School from Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship and the British Institute of International and Comparative Law on corporate climate litigation.

Lily O’Neill 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. The Gomeroi win puts native title holders in a stronger position to fight fossil fuel projects on their land – https://theconversation.com/the-gomeroi-win-puts-native-title-holders-in-a-stronger-position-to-fight-fossil-fuel-projects-on-their-land-225284

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Natasha Szuhan, Lecturer, History and Sociology, Australian National University

In 2022, a social network was formed in New York for women to share warnings about their interactions with men on dating apps. These were men who had allegedly lied, manipulated, cheated on, ghosted, used or abused them.

Since then, “Are we dating the same guy?” (AWDTSG) groups have exploded online across Facebook and other social platforms, attracting anywhere from hundreds to more than 150,000 members depending on the city they serve.

These groups are trying to improve women’s online safety where dating app developers are failing. In doing so, they’re tapping into a long history of feminist initiatives aimed at protecting women from allegedly hostile or predatory men.

How it works

Globally, millions of women gather in AWDTSG groups. The majority of these private digital spaces are explicit about their intent. The first group to emerge had the unofficial motto: “it’s about protecting women, not judging men”. This has been widely adopted by offshoots.

Posts follow two main themes: unprompted “red flag” warnings about men women have dated, and prompts for “tea or red flags” about potential dates. The men in these posts are identified by name and location, and at least one dating profile screenshot.

Posts can be made anonymously so women don’t risk retaliation, but are vetted by moderators to ensure they comply with group rules.

Safety is never guaranteed

Online dating apps are often framed as a necessary evil in the 2020s. They conform to the same conventions as early chatrooms such as AOL, MSN Messenger and IRC (internet relay chat), and digital classifieds such as Craigslist and Gumtree.

These sites enabled random connections with strangers without any vetting; the onus of safety was on the user. They have become the source of both heartwarming success stories, as well as tales of murder and revenge rape offences.

Dating app developers admit there are safety risks inherent to their business model – and they’ve yet to adequately address them. Many apps have an optional verification feature, but this merely weeds out catfishes: people using a fake online identity. It doesn’t guarantee safety.

Bumble advertises itself as a feminist app that’s focused on safety, as women must initiate the conversations with their matches. However, as posts on AWDTSG groups demonstrate, this puts the onus on women to be particularly discerning.

Dating app users have to open themselves to random interactions with strangers (and therefore to unqualified risk) just to be able to use the service. One 2022 survey found three in four people experienced abuse while using these apps.

Read more:
49 women have been killed in Australia so far in 2023 as a result of violence. Are we actually making any progress?

A history of women supporting women

Historically, governments and communities have been reticent to take responsibility for family and domestic violence. In the 1970s, those in the women’s liberation movement understood they had very limited protections from sexual and physical abuse that came at the hands of boyfriends or husbands.

This prompted the liberationists to form consciousness raising groups. These groups aimed to spread knowledge about the many facets of women’s oppression, and implement solutions such as providing refuge for women and children escaping family violence.

Into the 1990s, women and girls started to embrace new kinds of feminism that aggressively prioritised the sisterhood over men, including “girl power” and “grrrl power” feminism.

These branches built on the gains of second wave feminism which taught women they could, and should, embrace power and step up to solve their problems. That same decade, do-it-yourself feminism spawned from the merger of these ideas, teaching women the way to solve societal sexism was to solve it themselves.

AWDTSG groups follow in these footsteps. By providing a space where women can support and empower each other, they fulfil the consciousness raising and DIY aspirations of previous generations of feminists.

They also demonstrate how, even now, there are limited societal protections for women who have faced, or may face, violence or harassment by men.

The counterargument

Both the admins and members of AWDTSG groups face risks in the process of facilitating these spaces. While group posts mainly remain private, there can be retaliation or even legal repercussions when someone “snitches” and leaks a post.

In cases where men have discovered posts about them and wish to have them removed, the admins tend to only do this if the man is willing to “rat out” the snitch (which they usually are). This ensures women undermining the group’s aims of sisterhood and safety are named, shamed and removed.

Several counter group such as r/AWDTSGisToxic, End AWDTSG, and victims of AWDTSG have emerged to rail against the movement. They claim AWDTSG groups enable the bullying and shaming of men just for being bad dates.

The goals of both the pro- and counter-AWDTSG groups give rise to spurious claims. Each side can end up facilitating forms of “bullying”, “toxicity” and even serious violence against individuals.

Grey areas

Anti-AWDTSG groups claim they support protecting women from truly violent men, but a lack of verification means there are more false accusations than true ones.

Last month, a man from Chicago launched a lawsuit against the city’s AWDTSG group and several social media sites, including Meta, for defamation. The case seeks to force the host platforms, primarily Facebook, to regulate these private groups to protect men.

Off the back of that, a new group AWDTSG Lawsuits was formed. It aims to bring men together to potentially sue Facebook and the groups it hosts for defamation.

It’ll be interesting to see how the case plays out, and whether platforms profiting from women’s engagement in AWDTSG groups are willing to take sides in this supposed battle of the sexes.

Either way, one thing is certain: the patriarchy’s influence is diminished in a generation of tech-savvy women who wholeheartedly believe the “personal is political”.

Read more:
Tinder fails to protect women from abuse. But when we brush off ‘dick pics’ as a laugh, so do we

Natasha Szuhan 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. ‘Are we dating the same guy?’ These women-run groups are accused of being toxic, but they carry a feminist legacy – https://theconversation.com/are-we-dating-the-same-guy-these-women-run-groups-are-accused-of-being-toxic-but-they-carry-a-feminist-legacy-223649

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

A national YouGov poll, conducted February 24 to March 5 from a sample of 1,539, gave Labor a 52–48 lead, unchanged since an early February YouGov poll. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (up one), 32% Labor (steady), 15% Greens (up two), 6% One Nation (down two) and 10% for all Others (down one).

Anthony Albanese’s net approval jumped ten points to -6, with 50% dissatisfied and 44% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval was down two points to -10. For the first time since the Voice referendum, Albanese’s net approval is higher than Dutton’s. Albanese led Dutton by 48–34 as preferred PM (45–38 in February).

By 86–14, respondents supported Australians having a right to disconnect from work outside outside of hours. Dutton has said he would overturn Labor’s right to disconnect legislation if elected.

On this pledge, 35% said they were less likely to vote for the Coalition, 17% more likely and 48% no difference. These “more likely/less likely” to support a party given X questions usually exaggerate the issue’s salience.

In another encouraging national poll for Labor, the Morgan poll gave them a 53.5–46.5 lead, a 3.5-point gain for Labor since last week. Primary votes were 36.5% Coalition (down 1.5), 34% Labor (up 2.5), 13.5% Greens (up 1.5), 3.5% One Nation (down 1.5) and 12.5% for all Others (down one). This poll was conducted February 26 to March 3 from a sample of 1,679.

The large majority of both the YouGov and Morgan polls’ fieldwork was before the Dunkley byelection. If this byelection had an effect on voting intentions, it won’t be part of these polls.

Dunkley byelection near-final result

With almost all votes counted in the federal March 2 Dunkley byelection, Labor won by 52.7–47.3, a 3.6% swing to the Liberals since the 2022 election. Primary votes were 41.1% Labor (up 0.8%), 39.3% Liberals (up 6.8%), 6.3% Greens (down 4.0%), 4.7% for independent Darren Bergwerf (up 0.9%) and 3.1% Animal Justice (up 1.0%).

The primary votes of both major parties, but especially the Liberals, benefited from the absence of the UAP and One Nation, who had a combined 7.9% in 2022. The Greens’ result was poor.

The swing to the Liberals was below the 6.1% average swing against the government in a government-held seat at a byelection. Owing to the loss of the sitting MP’s personal vote, government-held seats swing much more than opposition-held seats.

An early February uComms poll for The Australia Institute had given Labor a 52–48 lead in Dunkley. A mid-February YouGov poll had given the Liberals a 51–49 lead.

Tasmanian Redbridge poll: difficult to form a government

The Tasmanian state election is on March 23. A Redbridge poll for The Financial Review, conducted February 16–28 from a sample of 753, gave the Liberals 33% of the vote, Labor 29%, the Greens 14%, the Jacqui Lambie Network 10% and independents 14%.

Tasmania uses the Hare Clark proportional representation system, with 35 total lower house seats elected in five seven-member electorates. A quota for election is one-eighth of the vote or 12.5%.

Analyst Kevin Bonham’s seat estimate from the Redbridge poll is 13–14 Liberals, 10–12 Labor, 4–5 Greens, 2–3 JLN and 2–6 independents. While the Liberals would be the largest party, it would be difficult for either major party to reach the 18 votes needed for a majority.

There were two polls taken in the first week of the election campaign that had the Liberals much better placed to form a minority government.

NSW Resolve poll: Coalition support surges

A NSW state Resolve poll for The Sydney Morning Herald, presumably conducted with the federal Resolve polls in December and February from a sample of 1,035, gave the Coalition 38% of the primary vote (up six since November), Labor 34% (down two), the Greens 12% (down one), independents 12% (steady) and others 5% (down two).

Resolve doesn’t give a two party estimate until close to elections. The SMH article says “Labor is trailing the Coalition”, but the likely effect of preferences would give Labor about a 51.5–48.5 lead according to The Poll Bludger. Resolve’s polls have usually been much better for Labor than other polls, but the February federal Resolve poll had a slump for Labor.

Labor Premier Chris Minns had a 35–16 lead over the Liberals’ Mark Speakman as preferred premier (35–13 in November).

NSW Secularists’ national YouGov poll

The Secular Association of New South Wales has sent me details of a national YouGov poll conducted for them. This poll was conducted February 15–21 from a sample of 1,087.

By 55–45, respondents said they were not aware that their state has its own constitution separate from the federal constitution. Those who said they were aware of their state’s constitution were asked if they had seen or read it. Just 13% said they had read their state’s constitution, which is 6% of the overall sample.

For the third and final question, voters were told that Australia has no formal recognition of separation of government and religion, then asked if they would approve or disapprove of a constitutional amendment to formally separate government and religion in their state.

Voters approved of this proposition nationally by 51–20. Smaller subsamples in the eastern seaboard states had approve leading by 48–21 in NSW, 48–22 in Victoria and 50–21 in Queensland. The history of referendums suggests caution, as often big poll leads for a proposal collapse before referendum day.

US Super Tuesday confirms it’s Trump vs Biden

I covered the March 5 United States Super Tuesday primaries for The Poll Bludger. Donald Trump had big wins, and will win the Republican nomination after Nikki Haley withdrew. Joe Biden also dominated the Democratic primaries. In national general election polls, Trump is usually ahead by low single-digit margins.

I also covered the February 29 United Kingdom Rochdale byelection for The Poll Bludger. George Galloway, who has attacked Labour from the left for a long time, won after Labour’s candidate was disendorsed but still appeared on the ballot paper as the disendorsement was after the close of nominations.

I have done paid work in the past for the NSW Secularists.

– ref. Albanese’s ratings surge in YouGov poll; Tasmanian poll suggests difficult to form government – https://theconversation.com/albaneses-ratings-surge-in-yougov-poll-tasmanian-poll-suggests-difficult-to-form-government-225083

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan W. Marshall, Associate Professor & Postgraduate Research Coordinator, Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts, Edith Cowan University

During last October’s launch event for the 2024 Perth Festival of the arts, the presentation offered by artistic director Iain Grandage implied that the festival would touch on various timely global political issues.

Across the program, which wrapped up on Sunday, I was struck by how it was often more in the act of putting on and performing the work, rather than their spoken content, that expressed political responses to our times – a few good trick-style shows aside.

The magic of performance

Belgian theatre collective Ontroerend Goed and performance artist Geoff Sobelle both focused on theatrical illusion.

Ontroerend Goed’s Are we not drawn onward to new erA was promoted as an “inventive palindromic eco-drama”, while one critic reflected on how Sobelle’s Food alluded to “the consequences for the environment” of global human food consumption, but “without drawing any clear conclusions”.

Act one of Are we not drawn reworked the idea that underpins Christopher Nolan’s Tenet (2020) to run a scene backwards before a filmed recording was then projected in reverse – in the “right” order.

Sobelle spent much of his show producing food out of nowhere, or disappearing remnants of a gargantuan meal down his throat, before offering a familiar narrative of colonial development. He dug toy bison out of a massive sand box, before burying them again as he unearthed farms, stations and skyscrapers.

Are we not drawn and Food were entrancing magic tricks, but beyond witnessing Ontroerend Goed’s performers make a mess and topple a statue, not much was learned. (The improvised removal of Edward Colston’s statue was more dynamic.)

Read more:
Edward Colston museum display: what happens next for the fallen statue

A wonderfully weird opera

The opera Wundig wer Wilura presented a different approach. Composed, conducted and sung in Noongar by 30 First Nations artists, the staging itself was a statement.

The piece charted tensions between Noongar groups from what is now York, Western Australia, and two lovers – one from each group – were forbidden to marry but eloped, starting a war. A clever man, or sorcerer, intervened, turning combatants into grass trees and the lovers into hills.

Wundig wer Wilura shares characteristics with Wagner’s famous ring cycle: epic figures from a mythic era express passion and violence in the face of otherworldly forces.

Composed in a sweeping yet low-key orchestral mode by Gina Williams and Guy Ghouse, passages reminded me of fragments from popular sources such as The Divinyls’ Pleasure and Pain, the lightly musicalised speech patterns of 10CC’s Dreadlock Holiday, and Kate Bush’s dramatic pop-meets-classical style.

Ian Wilkes’ choreography had the cast in near constant motion, but none seemed overwrought. Where Wagner’s characters scream or plummet earthwards, Wundig wer Wilura’s were melancholy rather than epic.

As a settler-descent critic with a liking for Wagner and the avant garde, I found the production best at its weirdest. David Leha as the clever man was strikingly attired in a puffy costume swelling his shoulders, pointing a staff as he sang in staggered bursts. He was a compellingly otherworldly presence in an otherwise sympathetically human drama.

Read more:
Yhonnie Scarce’s glass works are a glistening, poignant exploration of how nuclear testing affected First Nations people

Lyricism and commentary

Entrancing for different reasons was the formal exactness of Joan Jonas’ performance Mirror Piece I and II (1969-70/2024). Originally documented through still images, the choreography performed between tableaux for the Perth Festival production was essentially new.

Jonas’ video art often explored issues of voyeurism, surveillance and narcissism. In Mirror Piece, the audience is positioned partly as narcissistic voyeurs, invited to gaze at themselves and their peers in the mirrors while also watching staggered, linear configurations of these rectangles of glass manipulated by focused, fashionable performers.

The unadorned precision of the movements and variety of arrangements had its own lyricism, quite apart from any social commentary.

Wilder in structure was the politicised jazz-fusion ensemble Irreversible Entanglements. The quintet recalled Sun Ra’s free jazz fantasies, the Africanist stylings of Idris Ackamoor and the verbal potency of Gil Scott Heron.

Five artists performed independent jazzy scribbles and meandering blurts, before coming together for sometimes funky sections (think Herbie Hancock) or harmonious stepped chords. The performers supplemented vocals, drums, bass, saxophone and trumpet with electronics and other instruments, drifting into Jah Wobble territory.

Vocalist Moor Mother urgently repeated her concise phrases, the use of voice musical and percussive more than poetic.

The din offered by the group was at once tense and flowing, epitomising how people of different backgrounds can produce a unified collective without surrendering their identities: anarcho-syndicalism as musical performance.

Soul legends Cymande were another standout, with complex funky song structures, often featuring different arrangements in the same piece.

They powered through their best-known song Bra two-thirds in, but later brought the crowd to an exultant conclusion. A well-oiled soul machine of a three-piece brass section, drums, congas, keyboards, bass and guitar, it was fantastic performance by what is now an exemplar for orchestrated creolised soul.

Politics and art

Marrugeku’s Mutiara was the supreme example of politics melding with artistic form.

Marrugeku excels at taking cultural memories of oppression and turning them into conflicted yet energised choreography.

Mutiara is framed around the experience of First Nations, Malay and creole workers in the Australian pearling industry of the early 20th century. The dancers fight impulses from within, generating empowered choreographic expressions.

The choreography is co-devised by performers Soultari Amin
Farid, Dalisa Pigram and Zee Zunnur, together with Ahmat Bin Fadal. It draws on Malay martial arts (silat), First Nations and Malay dance and European dance theatre. Sequences are often marked by abrupt redirections of velocity. Although weaving and flowing, the movement often pauses or pops, before finding new ways out of each temporary arrest. The dancers break through barriers with almost every gesture.

In one eerie sequence, the dancers enter not quite staggering, with black wicker baskets over their heads, hands flailing in slow motion or pointing in awkward poses. Only later did I realise this sequence represented the dancers dreaming of being dressed in diving helmets while finding their way on the bottom of the ocean.

For many festival shows, just the act of putting on the show could be political, but Marrugeku focused on that most complex tool of political expression: the body.

Read more:
A theatre production … in the pool? This new play in Perth leaves the audience buoyed

Jonathan W. Marshall 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. The magic tricks and the deep souls of theatre, dance and music at the 2024 Perth Festival – https://theconversation.com/the-magic-tricks-and-the-deep-souls-of-theatre-dance-and-music-at-the-2024-perth-festival-225343

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Marriott, Professor of Taxation, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Ahead of the 2023 election, it was clear there was not a lot in National’s tax policies to benefit the least well off. Nothing has happened over the first 100 days of government to change this assessment.

From a progressive perspective, it is clear New Zealand has elected an austerity government. The National-ACT-NZ First coalition is prepared to impose swingeing cuts in the public service and curtail welfare to meet its promises of income tax relief for some.

We won’t know what the tax cuts will be until the Budget on May 30. But early indicators are they will be squarely aimed at National’s voting base.

What did (and didn’t) survive negotiations

The foreign buyer’s tax proposal did not survive coalition negotiations with NZ First. We have also heard little more about taxing offshore gambling. Perhaps the government has realised this is easier said than done.

Cost recovery from immigrants was another proposed revenue source. Strictly speaking, this wasn’t a new idea. A review of immigration fees and levies commissioned by the Labour government in 2022 identified several ways to increase the price of some immigration services, many of which have been implemented. All is quiet on this policy as well.

Read more:
The government’s first 100 days have gone largely to plan – now comes the hard part

Another component of National’s tax proposals was removing the depreciation allowance on commercial property. This was an unusual idea for National and we suspect it will not become law.

The phased-in return of mortgage interest deductibility for residential rental property owners is included in the National-ACT coalition agreement. However, the provisions are more generous than those originally proposed by National and are now retrospective, with a 60% reduction in 2023-24, 80% in 2024-25 and 100% in 2025-26.

This will reduce government revenue and potentially result in tax refunds for residential rental property owners in 2023-24, who will be allowed a 60% interest deduction, rather than 50% under the existing legislation. The announcement in December 2023 that the bright-line test will be reduced to two years from July 1 2024 will further reduce tax revenue.

The Clean Car Standard was an initiative of the previous government to address vehicle emissions. Research suggested households that would benefit the most from vehicle and fuel efficiency standards were low-income ones. Despite strong support, the clean car discount scheme was repealed in December 2023 as well.

Read more:
‘They’re nice to me, I’m nice to them’: new research sheds light on what motivates political party donors in New Zealand

The scheme provided rebates for zero- or low-emission vehicles, and additional fees for high-emission vehicles. New Zealand was already late to the party when this policy was introduced in April 2022.

In 2022, electric and hybrid vehicles accounted for around one-third of all new car registrations, which increased to 41% in 2023 (26.5% hybrid and 14.5% electric). Sales of electric vehicles in December 2023 (before the removal of the discount) were nearly 14 times higher than those in January 2024.

Electric or hybrid vehicle owners will also start paying road user charges from April 1, 2024. While the government campaigned on no new taxes, extending the tax base does not appear to qualify as a new tax.

Likewise, the recently announced increase in car registration fees to fund a massive road-building programme is not being considered a tax increase by the government.

The government has also announced fuel tax increases – scheduled to start in 2027. National ministers have responded to criticism by saying the eventual tax increase will not be in this political term.

The Budget should provide clarity

The Taxation Principles Reporting Act 2023 mandated reporting based on specified principles. While there is never full consensus on what good tax principles are, this act would (or should) have resulted in greater transparency on at least some tax measures. However, it was repealed in December 2023.

To reiterate, until the Budget, we won’t gain a full understanding of the government’s tax objectives.

Action taken in the first 100 days of the government has given us a reduction in tax transparency, beneficial tax treatment for residential landlords, reduced incentives for consumption of low-emission vehicles, some clear areas where expenditure will be slashed, but little clarity on how tax cuts will be funded.

While we can’t yet know the full details of tax policy, the expenditure side indicates the poor and the environment will be worst affected, while residential rental property owners will benefit.

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. The first 100 days of tax policy bode well for National’s supporters – others might be worried – https://theconversation.com/the-first-100-days-of-tax-policy-bode-well-for-nationals-supporters-others-might-be-worried-225259

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elise Waghorn, Lecturer, School of Education, RMIT University

It’s Saturday afternoon and the kids are all connected to separate devices. So are the parents. Sounds familiar?

Many families want to set ground rules to help them reduce their screen time – and have time to connect with each other, without devices.

But it can be difficult to know where to start and how to make a plan that suits your family.

First, look at your own screen time

Before telling children to “hop off the tech”, it’s important parents understand how much they are using screens themselves.

Globally, the average person spends an average of six hours and 58 minutes on screens each day. This has increased by 13%, or 49 minutes, since 2013.

Parents who report high screen time use tend to see this filtering down to the children in their family too. Two-thirds of primary school-aged children in Australia have their own mobile screen-based device.

Australia’s screen time guidelines recommended children aged five to 17 years have no more than two hours of sedentary screen time (excluding homework) each day. For those aged two to five years, it’s no more than one hour a day. And the guidelines recommend no screen time at all for children under two.

Yet the majority of children, across age groups, exceed these maximums. A new Australian study released this week found the average three-year-old is exposed to two hours and 52 minutes of screen time a day.

Read more:
Development of vision in early childhood: No screens before age two

Some screen time is OK, too much increases risks

Technology has profoundly impacted children’s lives, offering both opportunities and challenges.

On one hand, it provides access to educational resources, can develop creativity, facilitates communication with peers and family members, and allows students to seek out new information.

On the other hand, excessive screen use can result in too much time being sedentary, delays in developmental milestones, disrupted sleep and daytime drowsiness.

Too much screen time can affect social skills, as it replaces time spent in face-to-face social interactions. This is where children learn verbal and non-verbal communication, develop empathy, learn patience and how to take turns.

Many families also worry about how to maintain a positive relationship with their children when so much of their time is spent glued to screens.

Read more:
3 ways to help your child transition off screens and avoid the dreaded ‘tech tantrums’

What about when we’re all on devices?

When families are all using devices simultaneously, it results in less face-to-face interactions, reducing communication and resulting in a shift in family dynamics.

The increased use of wireless technology enables families to easily tune out from each other by putting in earphones, reducing the opportunity for conversation. Family members wearing earphones during shared activities or meals creates a physical barrier and encourages people to retreat into their own digital worlds.

Wearing earphones for long periods may also reduce connection to, and closeness with, family members. Research from video gaming, for instance, found excessing gaming increases feelings of isolation, loneliness and the displacement of real-world social interactions, alongside weakened relationships with peers and family members.

Read more:
‘Mum, Dad, I’m bored!’ How to teach children to manage their own boredom these holidays

How can I set screen time limits?

Start by sitting down as a family and discussing what limits you all feel would be appropriate when using TVs, phones and gaming – and when is an appropriate time to use them.

Have set rules around family time – for example, no devices at the dinner table – so you can connect through face-to-face interactions.

Consider locking your phone or devices away at certain periods throughout the week, such as after 9pm (or within an hour of bedtime for younger children) and seek out opportunities to balance your days with physical activities, such kicking a footy at the park or going on a family bush walk.

Parents can model healthy behaviour by regulating and setting limits on their own screen time. This might mean limiting your social media scrolling to 15 or 30 minutes a day and keeping your phone in the next room when you’re not using it.

When establishing appropriate boundaries and ensuring children’s safety, it is crucial for parents and guardians to engage in open communication about technology use. This includes teaching critical thinking skills to navigate online content safely and employing parental control tools and privacy settings.

Parents can foster a supportive and trusting relationship with children from an early age so children feel comfortable discussing their online experiences and sharing their fears or concerns.

For resources to help you develop your own family’s screen time plan, visit the Raising Children Network.

Read more:
Help, I’ve just discovered my teen has watched porn! What should I do?

Elise Waghorn 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. Our family is always glued to separate devices. How can we connect again? – https://theconversation.com/our-family-is-always-glued-to-separate-devices-how-can-we-connect-again-221856

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jochen Kaempf, Associate Professor of Natural Sciences (Oceanography), Flinders University

The Great Southern Australian Coastal Upwelling System is an upward current of water over vast distances along Australia’s southern coast. It brings nutrients from deeper waters to the surface. This nutrient-rich water supports a rich ecosystem that attracts iconic species like the southern bluefin tuna (Thunnus maccoyii) and blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus brevicauda).

The environmental importance of the upwelling is one reason the federal government this week declared a much-reduced zone for offshore wind turbines in the region. The zone covers one-fifth of the area originally proposed.

This year marks the 20th anniversary of a research publication that revealed the existence of the large seasonal upwelling system along Australia’s southern coastal shelves. Based on over 20 years of scientific study, we can now answer many critical questions.

How does this upwelling work? How can it be identified? Which marine species benefit from the upwelling? Does the changing climate affect the system?

Read more:
Australia is poised to be a world leader in offshore wind, but any potential risks to marine life remain poorly regulated

Where do the nutrients come from?

Sunlight does not reach far into the sea. Only the upper 50 metres of the water column receives enough light to support the microscopic phytoplankton – single-celled organisms that depend on photosynthesis. This is the process of using light energy to make a simple sugar, which phytoplankton and plants use as their food.

As well as light, the process requires a suite of nutrients including nitrogen and phosphorus.

Normally, the sunlight zone of the oceans is low in nitrogen. Waters deeper than 100m contain high levels of it. This deep zone of high nutrient levels is due to the presence of bacteria that decompose sinking particles of dead organic matter.

Upwelling returns nutrient-rich water to the sunlight zone where it fuels rapid phytoplankton growth. Phytoplankton production is the foundation of a productive marine food web. The phytoplankton provides food for zooplankton (tiny floating animals), small fish and, in turn, predators including larger fish, marine mammals and seabirds.

The annual migration patterns of species such as tuna and whales match the timing and location of upwelling events.

Read more:
Australian endangered species: Southern Bluefin Tuna

What causes the upwelling?

In summer, north-easterly coastal winds cause the upwelling. These winds force near-surface water offshore, which draws up deeper, nutrient-enriched water to replace it in the sunlight zone.

The summer winds also produce a swift coastal current, called an upwelling jet. It flows northward along Tasmania’s west coast and then turns westward along Australia’s southern shelves.

Satellites can detect the areas of colder water brought to the sea surface. Changes in the colour of surface water as a result of phytoplankton blooms can also be detected. This change is due to the presence of chlorophyll-a, the green pigment of phytoplankton.

From satellite data, we know the upwelling occurs along the coast of South Australia and western Victoria. It’s strongest along the southern headland of the Eyre Peninsula and shallower waters of the adjacent Lincoln Shelf, the south-west coast of Kangaroo Island, and the Bonney Coast. The Bonney upwelling, now specifically excluded from the new wind farm zone, was first described in the early 1980s.

Coastal upwelling driven by southerly winds also forms occasionally along Tasmania’s west coast.

Coastal wind events favourable for upwelling occur regularly during summer. However, their timing and intensity is highly variable.

On average, most upwelling events along Australia’s southern shelves occur in February and March. In some years strong upwelling can begin as early as November.

Recent research suggests the overall upwelling intensity has not dramatically changed in the past 20 years. The findings indicate global climate changes of the past 20 years had little or no impact on the ecosystem functioning.

Read more:
Torrents of Antarctic meltwater are slowing the currents that drive our vital ocean ‘overturning’ – and threaten its collapse

What are the links between upwelling, tuna and whales?

The Great Southern Australian Coastal Upwelling System features two keystone species – the ecosystem depends on them. They are the Australian sardine (Sardinops sagax) and the Australian krill (Nyctiphanes australis), a small, shrimp-like creature that’s common in the seas around Tasmania.

Sardines are the key diet of larger fish, including the southern bluefin tuna, and various marine mammals including the Australian sea lion (Neophoca cinerea). Phytoplankton and krill are the key food source for baleen whales. They include the blue whales that come to Australia’s southern shelves to feed during the upwelling season.

Read more:
Why scientists need your help to spot blue whales off Australia’s east coast

Unlike phytoplankton and many zooplankton species that live for only weeks to months, krill has a lifespan of several years. It does not reach maturity during a single upwelling season. It’s most likely the coastal upwelling jet transports swarms of mature krill from the waters west of Tasmania north-westward into the upwelling region.

So the whales seem to benefit from two distinct features of the upwelling: its phytoplankton production and the krill load imported by the upwelling jet.

Seasonal phytoplankton blooms along Australia’s southern shelves are much weaker than other large coastal upwelling systems such as the California current. Nonetheless, their timing and location appear to fit perfectly into the annual migration patterns of southern bluefin tuna and blue whales, creating a natural wonder in the southern hemisphere.

Jochen Kaempf 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. The Southern Ocean upwelling is a mecca for whales and tuna that’s worth celebrating and protecting – https://theconversation.com/the-southern-ocean-upwelling-is-a-mecca-for-whales-and-tuna-thats-worth-celebrating-and-protecting-223338

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shelagh K. Mooney, Associate Professor, School of Hospitality & Tourism, Faculty of Culture and Society, Auckland University of Technology

Chefs are in hot demand. “Chefs, chefs, chefs! Virtually impossible to find anyone,” lamented one Auckland restaurant owner recently. Australia is seeing a similar gap, with chefs ranked the eighth most in-demand occupation. Given this culinary skills shortage, we might expect such sought-after employees to be highly valued.

Apparently not. Our new report on chef wellbeing and working conditions shows chefs in Australia and New Zealand experience significant financial hardship and mental health issues, with many wishing to leave their jobs.

This has major implications for tourism, too, as jobs such as cheffing are “keystone occupations” in major destinations. When jobs can’t be filled, these places lose money.

Tourism revenue is booming, with visitors reportedly seeking more scenery, history and culture. The food chefs prepare in cafés and restaurants forms an integral part of the tourist experience. But despite the laws of supply and demand, the situation for chefs is unlikely to improve without radical changes to work practices.

Our study is the first quantitative survey to examine working conditions and mental health issues among chefs in both Australia and New Zealand. The survey was distributed through professional culinary associations, and final responses were captured as Australasia emerged from COVID restrictions.

The survey also followed up previous Australian studies, which indicated exploitation was an industry norm, with chefs experiencing burnout and wage theft.

‘Banter, bollockings and beatings’

The kitchen environment is well documented to be particularly harsh. As one British study titled “Banter, bollockings and beatings” made clear, an often macho culture can prevail, including bizarre induction rituals.

An Australian study published in 2022 showed chefs were significantly more likely than the general population to commit suicide. And even before the pandemic, the industry’s “toxic” workplace culture was blamed for mental health issues and high suicide rates among employees.

Most of our chef respondents were men, with an average age of 37. They had been chefs for 16 years on average. Of these, 42% originally came from outside Australia and New Zealand, underlining the profession’s high mobility.

Read more:
The Bear gets the suffering and self-sacrifice of a top-flight kitchen just right

The results reveal disturbing insights into chefs’ working conditions. It was surprising to find nearly half (44%) of our sample were in precarious employment, given the skills shortage.

Two-thirds (67%) of respondents worked more than 38 hours weekly, but a fifth of the chefs worked 52-61 hours. Of these, 6.33% worked 62 hours or more – well above New Zealand’s still commonplace 40-hour work week, and Australia’s legally prescribed 38 hours. Despite the fast-paced environment, a quarter did not get their legally entitled breaks.

Economic insecurity was very evident. Financial hardship was reported by almost one in five chefs (15-20%), and a quarter of respondents went without meals due to financial pressure. That those who feed others struggle to feed themselves seems a dark irony.

Two-thirds also reported working when sick, an average of nine days each a year. Post-COVID, this should concern health professionals, policy makers and the broader community.

Read more:
Toxic work cultures start with incivility and mediocre leadership. What can you do about it?

Leaving the industry

The 2023 Umbrella Wellbeing report, which recorded New Zealanders’ perceptions of their workplaces and wellbeing, warns that long working hours and poor workplace cultures have adverse health outcomes, with New Zealand faring worse than Australia.

Nearly one in ten of the chefs surveyed suffered mental distress. Results showed high levels of physical and mental fatigue (“exhausted at work”, “emotionally drained”, “becoming disconnected”).

Respondents reported disrupted sleep and unhealthy lifestyles. Almost 15% of the sample consumed alcohol five or more days weekly, with 11.4% saying they had consumed hard drugs (LSD, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine or ecstasy) in the past year.

One in five hospitality professionals experiences depression according to charity The Burnt Chef Project. In a spoken-word performance for the project, poet and writer Joe Bellman describes “defeated faces and lifeless eyes” behind the kitchen door, where “breaking the human spirit is just company policy”.

The majority of respondents said they were likely (with 20% extremely likely) to look for a new employer during the next year. Many of these new jobs will be outside hospitality (which is classified within the overall tourism sector).

Another report commissioned last year by the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) found a third of hospitality and tourism workers had high intentions of completely quitting the industries. Reasons included low pay and conditions, stress and toxic work environments.

Read more:
All these celebrity restaurant wage-theft scandals point to an industry norm

Mental health and healthy hospo

Maybe not surprisingly, our survey showed intention to quit a job declines with better management support. Failure to improve working conditions for chefs, however, will have lasting consequences for the industry.

The Better Work Action Plan, the first phase of New Zealand’s Tourism Industry Transformation Plan, was launched by MBIE in 2023 under the previous government. It followed extensive consultation with representatives from hospitality and tourism, Māori, unions, workers and government.

Its aim was to develop a sustainable tourism workforce by addressing longstanding issues of low pay and poor conditions across the sector.

Read more:
How did abuse get baked into the restaurant industry?

The first step involved hospitality and tourism workers receiving government approval to negotiate an industry-wide fair pay agreement. However, the current coalition government immediately scrapped fair pay legislation.

The Australian government’s post-COVID tourism recovery strategy, THRIVE 2030, has committed to “promote employment standards” regarding compliance obligations and fair work. If effective, these would address the breaches evident in our study.

The hospitality industry relies on young people actively choosing a culinary career. But MBIE forecasts show students are less likely to seek hospitality jobs given these problems in the sector.

By chance, however, New Zealand’s new minister for mental health, Matt Doocey, is also tourism and hospitality minister. It is now up to him to make the connection between his portfolios, and work to reduce the heat in the nation’s commercial kitchens.

The authors acknowledge the assistance of the AUT Hospitable Futures Research Fund.

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. Too much heat in the kitchen: survey shows toxic work conditions mean many chefs are getting out – https://theconversation.com/too-much-heat-in-the-kitchen-survey-shows-toxic-work-conditions-mean-many-chefs-are-getting-out-224862

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Lewi, Professor, Architecture, The University of Melbourne

Long before COVID shone a spotlight on working from home, the realms of home and work have always been blurred – particularly for women as “housewives”, working mothers and caregivers, and those employed as servants or “home help”.

Historic Australian houses with conserved kitchens and associated service and servant rooms are an evocative source to turn to to experience places of domestic labour.

I recently visited four historic houses in Victoria that are open to the public to get a better understanding of these women who worked from home.

Spanning the mid-19th century to the early 1950s, these houses tell us much about the history of paid and unpaid domestic work, overwhelmingly carried out by women. They vividly show how home work shifts from being totally segregated and seemingly invisible towards becoming the visible heart of the modern house.

Read more:
Dream homes of the future still stuck in the past

Como House and Garden

Como House, built from the 1840s onwards in the south-east suburbs of Melbourne, is a substantial home and garden, its longest residents being the Armytage family.

The traditional English upstairs and downstairs segregation here occurs all on one level, with a separate outbuilding wing constructed sometime between 1846–1855.

This separation between servant and served spaces ensured the smells and noise of cooking and cleaning could be contained. There were less opportunities for chance interactions between staff and the family.

It certainly wasn’t designed for convenience.

Around the well-scrubbed wooden kitchen table, all sorts of domestic tasks were carried out, including the making of candles, the salting down of vegetables, the boiling up of soap, and the preserving of fruits. Walls were simply whitewashed for hygiene and high windows only modestly aided ventilation from the smoke of the ovens.

Historical records of servant labour in Australia are relatively scarce, but we can start to imagine their lives through the domestic technologies and spaces that remain intact.

Change was slow. Rudimentary fire boxes and bread ovens from the early colonial days were gradually replaced with cast iron ranges imported from England in the 19th century, depending on household wealth. The existing Pullinger range at Como dates from 1880. Gas was mistrusted by many house mistresses and cooks but became a necessity in the face of domestic labour shortages.

Como House didn’t have a gas stove until the early 20th century. And although Melbourne was an early adopter of electrification since 1867, electricity was only installed at Como in the 1890s. This was not typical of all households until as late as 1950. Visitors can appreciate the labour-saving innovation of plumbed-in enamelled sinks and brass taps that alleviated the burden of fetching water manually.

Rippon Lea Estate

Although the presence of employed home help feels very absent in empty heritage houses today, visitors can get glimpses into the evolving relationships between home labour and domestic technologies, and about the conditions of female servants whose employment declined rapidly in the early 20th century from 150,000 in 1911 to 42,000 in 1947.

Rippon Lea, also in south-east Melbourne, is one of Australia’s largest and most intact heritage homes, built from the 1860s. Here, domestic work goes back underground with extensive kitchen, pantry and cellar rooms in the basement. It was originally designed by Reed and Barnes for the Sargoods, and then sold to the Nathan family. Louisa Nathan extensively remodelled the kitchens and added a glamorous swimming pool in the 1930s.

The now abandoned original service rooms are overwhelmingly dark: the slate floors and low levels of daylight maintained relatively constant temperatures. Servants were on call 24-hours-a-day until more regulation of working conditions in Australia was gradually achieved.

An intricate system of bells and, later, electrical alarms and a hydraulic powered dumbwaiter linked the downstairs with upstairs. They are all symbolic of servants’ lack of agency over their own time and bodies.

The Heights

The Heights in Geelong was built in 1854 as a prefabricated house of German origin for Charles Ibbotson. The kitchen was renovated in the 1930s into a modern, streamlined pale yellow and chrome “fitted” kitchen.

New electric appliances displayed on benchtops promised efficiency in the face of far less available home help. The kitchen also starts to include more habitable and informal spaces in which to prepare and eat simple meals by a much smaller staff, or wives and mothers. At the Heights there is a sunny eating nook with a large table and ample built-in cupboards.

Here the kitchen has become more central within the main house plan, but remains quite a discrete space with electric service bells still a feature.

Read more:
Great time to try: cleaning the house (while fitting in a workout)

Boyd House II

The innovative Boyd House in South Yarra was designed by the architect Robin Boyd in the 1950s. It captures the huge changes in home design and ways of living post-World War II.

Kitchens had now become smaller, more open and central to the main living areas. Housewives took over much, or all, of the burden of housework. The promise of electric appliances well and truly replaced servants – here, hidden away in built-in cupboards.

From a visit to these four houses, the contrasting antecedents of today’s “servantless” kitchens as places of domestic work can be traced. The traditional kitchen remains a discrete room displaying, perhaps, a porcelain “butler” sink, copper pans, white-washed timber and a free-standing stove.

By contrast, the contemporary minimalist kitchen is now located within the main living space, and is designed to conceal the multitude of appliances in an attempt to make domestic labour invisible.

Hannah Lewi 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. From invisible segregation to the visible heart: what 100 years of kitchens can tell us about domestic labour – https://theconversation.com/from-invisible-segregation-to-the-visible-heart-what-100-years-of-kitchens-can-tell-us-about-domestic-labour-220661

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Intifar Chowdhury, Lecturer in Government, Flinders University

It’s 2024, but power still looks like a man. Despite Australia’s claim to egalitarianism, achieving equal political participation and representation remains a formidable challenge for women. Concerningly, the persistent and ingrained obstacles in women’s way are affecting the aspirations of the next generation of female leaders.

According to 2022 research spanning 29 countries, including Australia, satisfaction among young females aged 15-24 with their leaders’ decisions on issues they care about stands at a mere 11%. An overwhelming 97% acknowledged the importance of political participation. Yet, only 24% of those aspiring to engage in politics could see themselves running for office.

Worse still, 20% have been personally discouraged from political involvement. This is often because they’re either considered to be less qualified or that they will inevitably face discrimination and gendered violence.

I crunched the numbers to assess the situation in Australia. While much has been said about the mistreatment of female leaders, how does this play into the psyche of female constituents?

I found gender gaps have persisted in almost every political measure over the past 20 years. But there’s a glimmer of hope, mostly found online.

Read more:
What’s the secret to attracting more women into politics? Give them more resources

Politics still unwelcoming and unrepresentative

Using the Australian Election Study, I examined the gender gaps in political attitudes and behaviours across generations between 2001 and 2022.

The pathway to power for women in politics has never been easy, and it doesn’t get easier once elected. The prevalent discrimination, gender deafness, sexism and overt abuse not only force women to abandon their leadership aspirations, but also act as signals that discourage young women from corridors of power.

It is therefore not surprising younger generations of Australian women display a diminished interest in politics, more so than older generations.

I found they’re less represented than men in traditional participatory practices, such as discussing politics or attending political meetings. They’re also less likely to contribute money to a party or campaign. Girls in various Western democracies reported similar disinterest.

Young Australian women are also less satisfied with democracy than men. They report lower trust in government than their male counterparts and are more likely to believe government is run for few big interests rather than for all.

Discouragement is everywhere

Politics continues to be off-putting because sexism is normalised in the media.

Numerous studies show young Australian women think female leaders receive unfair treatment from the media. The gendered media coverage is often characterised by negative portrayals of “power-seeking” ambitions, scrutiny of fashion choices, judgement based on reproductive decisions, and a failure to recognise the mistreatment of female leaders (gender blindness). It all serves as a stark reminder of entrenched sexism in our national mindset.

Moreover, there’s scepticism in the personal circles of women aspiring to political roles. Friends and family can express concerns about their loved one’s safety working in parliament or for a political party. This undermines the progress of women in political leadership.

Women also hesitate to encourage others to pursue political careers due to the potential for facing abuse.

Read more:
Online abuse could drive women out of political life – the time to act is now

If the political landscape discourages the pool of potential female leaders, it’s understandable gender quotas have had mixed success. Labor’s quotas have not been a panacea for attracting young women to politics.

The reality is women pay too high a personal price in leadership positions. Competing work and family roles create high levels of stress and burn-out. This particularly deters young women from running for local government, for example – more so than older women and men of all ages.

Bottom-up quest for parity

Despite these challenges, the 2022 federal election emerged as a pivotal moment in Australian politics, highlighting a significant shift in the engagement of women and young people. These two social bases turned away from major parties, signalling a growing disenchantment with the established political order.

Young women are actively challenging traditional power structures, leveraging their access to higher education and social media to redefine the political narrative. They are not hesitant to explore political alternatives to the two major parties.

Young women have also been challenging the established political order through getting involved in politics online. They are participating in political discussions, sharing and blogging political information, accessing election information and creating and joining political groups on social media platforms.

Read more:
Jacinda Ardern’s resignation shows that women still face an uphill battle in politics – an expert on female leaders answers 5 key questions

This has ushered in younger generations of Australian women who are unwilling to accept abuse and harassment as the inevitable costs of political engagement. With increasing education levels and a more progressive, issue-based mindset, young women are raising their demands and expectations.

This is heartening. We’re starting to see a generation of women who refuse to accept the limitations imposed on them. This development signals a promising shift towards a more inclusive and representative political landscape.

Intifar Chowdhury 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. Political power in Australia is still overwhelmingly male. But beneath the despair, there’s reason for hope – https://theconversation.com/political-power-in-australia-is-still-overwhelmingly-male-but-beneath-the-despair-theres-reason-for-hope-224370

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ty Ferguson, Research Associate, University of South Australia

Some of us used to imagine a world where the morning commute was a short stroll from your bedroom, the dress code included comfy slippers, and the closest coffee shop was your kitchen. Then working from home became a reality for many during the COVID pandemic, reshaping our work-life balance.

During the early days of the pandemic in 2020, our team was partway through a year-long study examining lifestyle and wellbeing in Australian adults. Our findings, captured during the early COVID period, revealed that people working from home slept nearly half an hour more and drank slightly more alcohol. Dietary habits and mental health indicators were unchanged.

Fast forward to today. Many employees still work from home and many more want to. The Fair Work Commission is reviewing whether it needs to create basic rights for flexibility, allowing people to work from home.

While some of the health evidence about working from home is mixed, overall it shows giving workers the flexibility to choose to work from home can be good for their physical and mental health.

It saves time commuting

Before the pandemic, the typical Australian spent 4.5 hours commuting each week, a grind linked with poorer mental health and lower scores of how we rate our own health.

Read more:
Australian city workers’ average commute has blown out to 66 minutes a day. How does yours compare?

In Australia, the transition to home offices has given us about an hour and 18 minutes a week of extra time.

Yet, intriguingly, 43% of this newfound time is channelled into more work, with a fraction (9%) to caregiving activities and leisure pursuits (33%). So are we optimising this shift?

We move and snack more when working from home

With extra time dedicated to leisure when working from home, there is more opportunity to be physically active and less sedentary.

In a study from the United States of 108,000 people, work-from-home days were more likely to include significant bouts of walking or cycling.

By having more time available, slower yet active transport options become viable for short trips, such as cycling to the supermarket or walking to pick up children from care.

However, this silver lining is clouded by findings from Japan, where remote workers reported less movement and more sitting during office hours, hinting at a complex trade-off between work and leisure-time physical activity.

Dietary habits, too, are evolving with working from home. The convenience of proximity to our kitchen pantries has led to an increase in snacking.

However, as we snack more and see a rise in our overall energy intake at home, there’s also a noticeable shift towards a broader selection of healthier food options. Consumption of vegetables, fruits and dairy has gone up, complemented by a surge in preparing meals at home.

In the office, limited by the constraints of a packed communal fridge or the wait to use the microwave, opting for a less nutritious but quicker takeaway lunch often seems the better choice.

What about mental health and wellbeing?

When considering mental health and wellbeing, the results are nuanced.

Generally, when working from home is compulsory, as was common during the early pandemic lockdowns, mental health and wellbeing tend to decline.

Read more:
Most of us will recover our mental health after lockdown. But some will find it harder to bounce back

Conversely, when people choose to work from home, their mental health and wellbeing often improve. This is especially the case when they’re well supported by colleagues and their organisation, and can manage their isolation level, meaning they have flexibility in their work-from-home arrangements.

There are concerns working from home can negatively impact team cohesion and collaboration, feelings of attachment and social ties within the workplace, and opportunities for promotion.

While connecting with colleagues is difficult to replicate remotely, it’s important to note job performance and productivity appear to be stable or, in most cases, improved when working from home.

Additionally, those working full time at home or in a hybrid model report job satisfaction and wellbeing to be stable or improved. They also report a reduction in work-family conflict – this is particularly so for women.

Some people need more flexibility than others

For some people, the flexibility to work from home alleviates some of the structural barriers to working.

Women, especially mothers and caregivers, report improved wellbeing with the option to work from home. The added flexibility helps to balance paid employment with unpaid caregiving and household duties, which disproportionately fall on women’s shoulders.

Similarly, workers with disabilities tend to favour working from home, as a solution to overcoming transportation and accessibility challenges posed by traditional workplaces. Providing alternative working arrangements allows a greater number of people living with disabilities to engage in paid employment, which is linked to improvements in mental health.

Read more:
Working from home has worked for people with disability. The back-to-the-office push could wind back gains

Working from home is not a one-size-fits-all approach and appears best positioned as one choice among many to support a better, more inclusive, and flexible work environment. Just as our homes transformed into makeshift offices overnight, our approach to work must evolve, embracing the diversity of needs and lifestyles.

Let’s hope a legacy of COVID will be a healthier, more balanced workforce.

Carol Maher receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the National Heart Foundation, the SA Department for Education, Preventive Health SA, the SA Department for Innovation and Skills, Healthway, Hunter New England Local Health District, the Central Adelaide Local Health Network, LeapForward.

Rachel Curtis receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, National Health and Medical Research Council, SA Department for Education, Healthway, Hunter New England Local Health District, and SA Department for Innovation and Skills.

Ty Ferguson 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. Working from home can make us healthier and happier. Employers benefit too. Here’s the evidence if you need any convincing – https://theconversation.com/working-from-home-can-make-us-healthier-and-happier-employers-benefit-too-heres-the-evidence-if-you-need-any-convincing-224510

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Heap, Doctoral Researcher RMIT University; Senior Researcher Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute, RMIT University

This International Women’s Day, it is time to call on Australia’s workplace umpire, the Fair Work Commission, to finally close the gender pay gap.

Half a century after the commission’s predecessor granted women “equal pay for equal work” in a landmark case in 1969, the gap remains between 12% and 21%.

Amendments to the Fair Work Act by the incoming Labor government in 2022 gave it new tools to close the gap by addressing the undervaluation of work in traditionally female-dominated occupations.

If it uses these tools to their full potential, 2024 will be a landmark year in the genuine achievement of equal pay for equal work.

What we’ve been doing hasn’t much worked

Traditionally in Australia, addressing gender-based undervaluation has relied on two approaches.

The first has been to argue the business case for gender equality – convincing employers they’ll be rewarded for “doing the right thing”.

The second has been to bring equal pay cases to tribunals.

Unfortunately, neither approach has been successful. In particular, pushing for equal remuneration through tribunals has been time-consuming and expensive.

These tribunals, historically working on models of male full-time wage earners, have struggled to understand the undervaluation of work performed predominantly by women.

The commission’s new tools

The commission’s act has been rewritten to require it to

promote job security and gender equality.

It also has the power to make equal remuneration orders either on its own initiative or on application in order to bring about equal pay for work of equal or comparable value.

A further new development is the establishment of expert panels to assist in gender-related cases. Advice from gender experts should assist in overcoming historical gender biases in commission decisions.

Perhaps the most promising tool is the change to the commission’s modern awards objective, which requires it to eliminate gender-based undervaluation of work and provide workplace conditions that facilitate women’s full economic participation each time it reviews an award.

Among other things, this requirement is likely to result in provisions that ensure part-time work is treated equally to full-time work and ensure a better balance between work and caring responsibilities.

Read more:
QANTAS pays women 37% less, Telstra and BHP 20%. Fifty years after equal pay laws, we still have a long way to go

Amending awards is likely to be particularly important for women given that almost three in five of the workers on awards are women. Men are mainly on negotiated agreements.

If the commission wanted to, it could hold a wide-ranging inquiry into the many factors that have contributed to gender-based undervaluation of women’s work.

It could also review entire industries and occupations that are female-dominated, upgrading multiple awards at the same time. This would avoid lengthy and costly reviews of individual awards.

What’s likely in 2024

The Fair Work Commission’s resolve to make lasting change will be tested by several matters currently before it.

The commission is due to issue its final decision in the case lodged by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, the Health Services Union, and the United Workers Union on the value of the work done by workers in aged care.

An initial interim decision delivered in 2022 awarded some – but not all – of these workers a 15% increase, finding that work in feminised industries had been historically undervalued and the reason for that undervaluation is likely to be gender-based”.

Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke backed the decision, saying it was merely the “first step”.

Another application, for nurses and midwives outside of aged care, was lodged by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation in February this year.

Read more:
It’ll take more than 15% to beat the stigmas turning people off aged care

The commission has already started the process of grappling with gender-based undervaluation in modern awards, commissioning research that documents the segregation of women and men into different occupations and industries.

Further research documenting the history of a select group of female-dominated modern awards and identifying the extent to which common elements indicate gender-based undervaluation, is due to be released in April.

It will feed into the annual wage review due by the middle of the year.

How to be bold

Gender-based undervaluation of women’s work won’t be eradicated by incremental adjustments.

Here are three bold steps the commission could take:

• grant a minimum interim 12% increase (one estimate of Australia’s national gender pay gap) across the board for female-dominated awards in this year’s annual wage review

• develop new systems for classifying work and ascribing work value, breaking with the previous standards built around skills and qualifications in male dominated occupations

• better consider the uneven bargaining power in industries such as nursing where governments fund care work and try to restrain costs.

The changes to the Fair Work Act that allow multi-employer bargaining are a start, but unlikely alone to correct the undervaluation of women’s work.

In female-dominated industries where collective bargaining is non-existent or ineffective, the commission should step in and further increase wages.

The Fair Work Commission has been given the tools. This should be the year it applies them.

Lisa Heap is affiliated with the Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute and is Secretary of the Association of Industrial Relations Academics Australia and New Zealand.

– ref. 2024 could be the year the Fair Work umpire properly values women’s work – here’s how – https://theconversation.com/2024-could-be-the-year-the-fair-work-umpire-properly-values-womens-work-heres-how-224949

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Sigler, Associate Professor of Human Geography, The University of Queensland

This article is part of The Conversation’s series examining the housing crisis. Read the other articles in the series here.

Further restrictions on short-term rental properties listed on platforms such as Airbnb and Stayz are on the table in Australia. Public pressure to ease the housing crisis is mounting. This makes quick-fix solutions to make housing more affordable increasingly attractive to governments.

But any policy should be evidence-based. So what can we learn from the latest data on short-term rentals? The findings of our analysis might surprise you:

• short-stay listings in Australia are down more than 15% on pre-pandemic numbers
• the number of active short-term rentals is a small fraction of the total number of dwellings in Australia and roughly equivalent to the number of new dwellings built each year
• there has been a shift in listings to regional areas, as major city numbers have dropped sharply.

It appears higher rents and property prices in our big cities could be making short-term rentals less attractive for owners and investors. Because housing market conditions and short-term rental impacts vary from place to place, there is no one-size-fits-all solution.

Read more:
Urbanisation and tax have driven the housing crisis. It’s hard to see a way back but COVID provides an important lesson

How have the numbers changed?

Short-term rental numbers have fallen significantly in Australia since December 2019. Numbers in Australia haven’t returned to pre-pandemic levels, despite a global rebound.

Our latest data show 278,788 unique short-term rentals were listed in Australia in December 2023. That’s well down from roughly 330,000 on the eve of the pandemic.

Of these listings, 191,123 (69%) were “active” rentals (available or booked at least one night a month). That’s down 13% from roughly 220,000 before the pandemic.

Of the active rentals in December 2023, 167,955 (88%) were “entire home” listings. These are rented without a host present.

The proportion of such listings has risen steadily since Airbnb emerged as a “sharing economy” phenomenon. However, many of these already existed as purpose-built, short-term accommodation. An example would be holiday lettings on Queensland’s Gold Coast.

All up, active unhosted short-term rentals comprise about 1.5% of Australia’s 11.1 million dwellings at any given time. This is roughly equivalent to the number of new dwellings built each year.

Read more:
The government’s Help to Buy scheme will help but it won’t solve the housing crisis

How have locations shifted?

Our research team has observed significant shifts in the short-term property market since the eve of the pandemic.

The most obvious was the pandemic’s impact on the geography of short-term rentals.

As mobility restrictions and the loss of tourists affected cities the most, short-term tenants flocked to the regions. We saw a sharp drop in listings in many metropolitan areas. Short-term listings grew in “sea change” and “tree change” regions.

It’s unclear whether the balance of short-term rentals in major cities compared to regions will return to pre-pandemic levels. What we can see is that property owners have begun to respond to policy and price signals, especially in New South Wales.

Our research indicates the price difference between short-term and long-term rentals is highly localised. This suggests short-term listings are only lucrative for hosts under certain conditions. Location, size and property type all have an effect.

Both rents and dwelling prices are up by 48% nationwide since the pandemic began. The increases have been greatest on the urban fringes and in high-amenity coastal regions.

Logically, many dwellings in these areas have been “reconverted” to long-term rentals. High rents encourage owners to avoid the bother of having to clean properties and change the sheets and soap after each stay.

Read more:
What is negative gearing and what is it doing to housing affordability?

Regulations must reflect local conditions

Much of the debate about short-term rentals has become polemic. Both communities and policymakers have been divided on the appropriate level of regulation and what the actual impacts would be.

Some blame short-term rentals for contributing to a lack of longer-term rental housing, or for local price increases. Others conclude short-term rental restrictions aren’t effective for resolving structural issues of housing supply and affordability. It’s also suggested restrictions may have unintended consequences, such as allowing hotels to charge more.

What is clear from our analysis is that different regions need different regulations.

New South Wales has the most stringent short-term rental regulation in Australia. The state has brought in several varieties of place-based caps, adapted to the needs of the local council area.

In Greater Sydney, unhosted short-term rentals can be occupied up to 180 days per year. (This limit excludes stays of 21 days or more.) In the Clarence Valley (North Coast) and Muswellbrook (Hunter Valley) council areas, the cap applies mainly in neighbourhoods characterised by low-density housing. In Byron Bay, a forthcoming measure to restrict certain areas to 60 days a year may be the final straw for some short-term rental hosts.

While such restrictions might ensure peace and quiet for residents of areas like Byron Bay’s exclusive hinterland estates, we are unconvinced at this stage that caps and levies significantly move the needle on housing supply or affordability in Australia. What’s more, such measures may reflect thinly veiled NIMBY efforts by residents of affluent suburbs to restrict access to their neighbourhoods by non-locals.

Read more:
Will taxing short stays boost long-term rental supply? Other policies would achieve more

Thomas Sigler receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Zhenpeng (Frank) Zou 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. Think short-stay rentals like Airbnb are out of control? Numbers are down, especially in our biggest cities – https://theconversation.com/think-short-stay-rentals-like-airbnb-are-out-of-control-numbers-are-down-especially-in-our-biggest-cities-223191

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brittany Finucci, Fisheries Scientist, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research

The deep ocean, beyond 200 metres of depth, is the largest and one of the most complex environments on the planet. It covers 84% of the world’s ocean area and 98% of its volume – and it is home to a great diversity of species.

Yet it remains among the least studied places on Earth, with no comprehensive assessments of the state of deep-water biodiversity and no policy-relevant indicators to guide the taking of species targeted by fisheries.

This also applies specifically to deep-water sharks and rays, even though these species make up nearly half of the recognised diversity of all cartilaginous fishes (sharks, rays, and chimaeras) we know today.

Our research highlights how our growing impact on the deep ocean raises the threat to these species.

Using the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species, we show that the number of threatened deep-water sharks and rays has more than doubled between 1980 and 2005, following the emergence and expansion of deep-water fishing.

We estimate one in seven species (14%) are threatened with extinction.

Read more:
Sharks and rays are in free fall: More than one-third are threatened with extinction from overfishing

Fishing for meat and oil

Deep-water sharks and rays are in a group of marine vertebrates that are most sensitive to overexploitation. This is because of their long lifespans (possibly up to 450 years for the Greenland shark, Somniosus microcephalus) and low reproduction rate (only 12 pups in a lifetime for the gulper shark, Centrophorus granulosus).

These biological characteristics make them similar to formerly exploited, and now highly protected, marine mammals.

The Greenland shark and the leafscale gulper shark (Centrophorus squamosus), for example, have population growth rates comparable to the sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) and the walrus (Odobenus rosmarus), respectively. Despite their known inherent vulnerability, there are very few species-specific management actions for deep-water sharks.

Our research shows that overfishing is the primary threat to deep-water sharks and rays. They are used for their meat and liver oil, which drives targeted fisheries but also incidental capture, meaning any accidental catches are retained by fisheries targeting other species.

In many nations, deep-water sharks and rays are regarded as a welcome catch because of the high value of their liver oil and high demand for skate meat. These are not new trades, but the global expansion and diversification of use, particularly for shark liver oil, is a relatively new phenomenon.

Targeted shark liver oil fisheries are boom-and-bust fisheries. They drive shark populations down and raise the extinction risk over short periods of time (less than 20 years). There is particular interest in shark liver oil for applications in cosmetics and human health products, including vaccine adjuvants.

This is despite a lack of evaluation of possible human health risks of using liver oil for medical purposes (deep-water sharks can bioaccumulate heavy metals and contaminants at concentrations at or above regulatory thresholds).

Need for global deep-water shark action

There have been tremendous triumphs in shark conservation, including the regulation of the global trade in fins from threatened coastal and pelagic species. But deep-water sharks have been largely left out of conservation discussions.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora has yet to see a listing proposal for a deep-water shark or ray.

We call for trade and fishing regulations specific to deep-water sharks and rays to ensure legal, traceable and sustainable trade and to prevent their further endangerment.

There are presently limited ways of determining which species comprise internationally traded liver oil. It may be a byproduct of sustainable fisheries but the current lack of regulations could also be masking the trade of threatened species.

We also propose closures of areas important to deep-water sharks and rays to provide refuge from fishing and promote recovery and long-term survival. Nearly every deep-water shark is threatened by incidental capture.

Retention bans have been implemented in some regions as a mitigation strategy, including European waters managed under the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. But they don’t prevent the mortality of prohibited species that are released after being brought to the surface from great depths.

We need efforts to prevent capture in the first place. There is now a global push to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030 through the Convention on Biological Diversity, which New Zealand has ratified.

Read more:
Oceanic sharks and rays have declined by 71% since 1970 – a global solution is needed

Our work shows protecting 30% of the deep ocean (200-2000m) would provide around 80% of deep-water shark species with at least partial spatial protection across their range. If a worldwide prohibition of fishing below 800m were to be implemented, it would provide 30% vertical refuge for one third of threatened deep-water sharks and rays.

Even though the extinction risk for these species is much lower than that of their shallow-water relatives, their potential for recovery from overexploitation is much reduced because of their long lifespans and low fecundity. One study estimated it would take 63 years or more for the little gulper shark (Centrophorus uyato) to recover to just 20% of its original population size.

We know many shark populations around the world are in trouble. Threatened deep-water sharks have little chance of recovery without immediate action. Now is the time to implement effective conservation actions in the deep ocean to ensure half of the world’s sharks and rays have a refuge from the global extinction crisis.

Brittany Finucci is affiliated with the IUCN Species Survival Commission Shark Specialist Group.

Cassandra Rigby is affiliated with the IUCN Species Survival Commission Shark Specialist Group.

– ref. Fished for their meat and liver oil, many remarkable deep-water sharks and rays now face extinction – https://theconversation.com/fished-for-their-meat-and-liver-oil-many-remarkable-deep-water-sharks-and-rays-now-face-extinction-224230

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Davidson, Postdoctoral research fellow, lecturer, University of Sydney

For decades, psychology departments around the world have studied human behaviour in darkened laboratories that restrict natural movement.

Our new study, published today in Nature Communications, challenges the wisdom of this approach. With the help of virtual reality (VR), we have revealed previously hidden aspects of perception that happen during a simple everyday action – walking.

We found the rhythmic movement of walking changes how sensitive we are to the surrounding environment. With every step we take, our perception cycles through “good” and “bad” phases.

This means your smooth, continuous experience of an afternoon stroll is deceptive. Instead, it’s as if your brain takes rhythmic snapshots of the world – and they are synchronised with the rhythm of your footfall.

The next step in studies of human perception

In psychology, the study of visual perception refers to how our brains use information from our eyes to create our experience of the world.

Typical psychology experiments that investigate visual perception involve darkened laboratory rooms where participants are asked to sit motionless in front of a computer screen.

Often, their heads will be fixed in position with a chin rest, and they will be asked to respond to any changes they might see on the screen.

This approach has been invaluable in building our knowledge of human perception, and the foundations of how our brains make sense of the world. But these scenarios are a far cry from how we experience the world every day.

This means we might not be able to generalise the results we discover in these highly restricted settings to the real world. It would be a bit like trying to understand fish behaviour, but only by studying fish in an aquarium.

Instead, we went out on a limb. Motivated by the fact our brains have evolved to support action, we set out to test vision during walking – one of our most frequent and everyday behaviours.

A walk in a (virtual) forest

Our key innovation was to use a wireless VR environment to test vision continuously while walking.

Several previous studies have examined the effects of light exercise on perception, but used treadmills or exercise bikes. While these methods are better than sitting still, they don’t match the ways we naturally move through the world.

Instead, we simulated an open forest. Our participants were free to roam, yet unknown to them, we were carefully tracking their head movement with every step they took.

We tracked head movement because as you walk, your head bobs up and down. Your head is lowest when both feet are on the ground and highest when swinging your leg in-between steps. We used these changes in head height to mark the phases of each participant’s “step-cycle”.

Participants also completed our visual task while they walked, which required looking for brief visual “flashes” they needed to detect as quickly as possible.

By aligning performance on our visual task to the phases of the step-cycle, we found visual perception was not consistent.

Instead, it oscillated like the ripples of a pond, cycling through good and bad periods with every step. We found that depending on the phases of their step-cycle, participants were more likely to sense changes in their environment, had faster reaction times, and were more likely to make decisions.

Read more:
Everything we see is a mash-up of the brain’s last 15 seconds of visual information

Oscillations in nature, oscillations in vision

Oscillations in vision have been shown before, but this is the first time they have been linked to walking.

Our key new finding is these oscillations slowed or increased to match the rhythm of a person’s step-cycle. On average, perception was best when swinging between steps, but the timing of these rhythms varied between participants. This new link between the body and mind offers clues as to how our brains coordinate perception and action during everyday behaviour.

Next, we want to investigate how these rhythms impact different populations. For example, certain psychiatric disorders can lead to people having abnormalities in their gait.

There are further questions we want to answer: are slips and falls more common for those with stronger oscillations in vision? Do similar oscillations occur for our perception of sound? What is the optimal timing for presenting information and responding to it when a person is moving?

Our findings also hint at broader questions about the nature of perception itself. How does the brain stitch together these rhythms in perception to give us our seamless experience of an evening stroll?

These questions were once the domain of philosophers, but we may be able to answer them, as we combine technology with action to better understand natural behaviour.

Matthew Davidson 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. Our brains take rhythmic snapshots of the world as we walk – and we never knew – https://theconversation.com/our-brains-take-rhythmic-snapshots-of-the-world-as-we-walk-and-we-never-knew-223009

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

If Jim Chalmers were in television, he’d not just be the presenter and key producer of the show but the warm-up act as well.

May 14 – budget night – is the treasurer’s big occasion of 2024. He’s already publicly framing the script and getting out the early promos.

Chalmers gave an international audience a taste of the change in policy direction in his economic address when he was in Brazil at a G20 ministerial meeting last week. But it was in the wake of Wednesday’s December-quarter national accounts that we got a more detailed preview.

Ordinary people didn’t need the national accounts to tell them how things are in the Australian economy. Many know it through their own experience. They’ve responded, as the national accounts show, by cutting back on discretionary spending – for instance, by going to restaurants less.

Chalmers and his advisers had been holding their breath early this week, fearing the figures might show growth going negative, which could have been the first leg of a technical recession. There was a feeling of relief when encouraging export figures came out, signalling growth would fall on the positive side.

The growth figure came in at 0.2% for the quarter. Annually, it was 1.5% in the 12 months to December. That’s the lowest for more than two decades, leaving out the COVID period.

In light of minuscule growth and (on the upside) subsiding inflation, Chalmers is publicly throwing the switch to growth. In a cautious way, however, given he is (on his record so far) a conservative in budget matters.

Chalmers told his news conference: “Addressing inflation is still our primary concern, but these numbers show that the balance of risks in our economy are shifting from inflation to growth.”

That’s a green light for some more spending – but not a cash splash.

In deciding on the spending, the government is aware it does need to do more to alleviate the high cost of living. One area that it is considering is extra help for energy bills.

But Chalmers made it clear that, whatever extra is done, the reworked Stage 3 tax cuts, which don’t take effect until July 1, will be the big budget item to address cost of living. He also indicated the government isn’t contemplating additional income tax cuts.

In terms of spending generally, Chalmers nominated several areas where government spending could help growth without risking an increase in inflation.

These were the energy transformation, human capital (education, skills) and the care economy.

We’d expect the government to provide incentives to encourage investment in clean energy. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese flagged this some weeks ago.

The United States has a huge fund to attract such investment. Albanese said the government has to be a partner in attracting investment. “We don’t have to go dollar-for-dollar in our spending, but we can go toe-to-toe on the quality and impact of our policies,” he said.

The budget is likely to make an early down payment on some proposals in Education Minister Jason Clare’s recently released universities accord. Some changes in the student loans scheme HELP and/or some financial assistance for student nurses and teachers on placements would be logical initiatives.

There will be pressure for some improvements in the welfare area. In 2022, Senate crossbencher David Pocock extracted (in return for his vote on industrial relations legislation) the PM’s agreement to set up an economic inclusion advisory committee, to report prior to each budget.

Before the 2023 budget, that group put forward ambitious recommendations for improving welfare benefits; it got only some of what it sought. Another set of bids is in the pipeline this year – these will be published at least a fortnight before the budget.

One area that remains an unknown is what will happen on aged care. The government has for months been sitting on a report from a group chaired by the Minister for Aged Care, Anika Wells, on the sustainability of aged care funding. It is likely to release the report as soon as next week, with the response later. One would expect the budget would have to begin addressing some of the report’s issues.

Aiming to keep budget expectations in check, Chalmers has warned the very large revenue upgrades that have marked his earlier budgets should not be anticipated this time.

Chalmers won’t yet say confidently there will be a budget surplus, only that it is “a reasonable chance”. But there is little doubt he has his mind set on delivering his second consecutive surplus.

Although budget planning is under way, most decisions are yet to be made. Ministers have put in their wish lists and these will be whittled down by the expenditure review committee.

The ERC comprises Albanese, Chalmers, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, Senate leader Penny Wong, Finance Minister Katy Gallagher, Health Minister Mark Butler, Infrastructure Minister Catherine King, Communications Minister Michelle Rowland and Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones.

It is a committee dominated by the economic ministers but with the voice of spending ministers represented there too.

But some ministerial discontent about this year’s ERC process has leaked out.

Nine newspapers have reported some ministers were “frustrated that key spending proposals are being rejected” by the government’s inner circle. Specifically, Industry Minister Ed Husic has objected to ministers being excluded from the room while the expenditure review committee discusses their proposals.

Spending ministers railing against economic ministers’ tight grip on the money is nothing new – it happens in governments of both hues. But it is notable that in this highly disciplined, tightly controlled administration, the angst has reached the media.

For Chalmers, this is a transition budget, which has to be crafted carefully, given the uncertain economic times. It won’t be the last of the political cycle. Albanese has flagged there is likely to be another budget, next March, before the election.

If Chalmers loosens the purse strings in May, he may need to have them open wider in 2025.

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. Grattan on Friday: Treasurer Jim Chalmers prepares a new ‘growth’ script for his third budget – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-treasurer-jim-chalmers-prepares-a-new-growth-script-for-his-third-budget-225274

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Harris Rimmer, Professor and Director of the Policy Innovation Hub, Griffith Business School, Griffith University

As International Women’s Day comes around once more, the latest gender pay gap figures for Australia have made for disappointing reading, including naming those companies where the gap is widest.

Looking at full-time equivalent total remuneration, the gender pay gap in Australia is at 21.7%. Yikes.

As she launched the government’s latest gender equality strategy at the Press Club on Thursday, Finance Minister and Minister for Women Katy Gallagher called this “an eye-watering disparity”.

So what are the key points in the strategy and what actual difference is it likely to make?

As a guiding principle, one of Gallagher’s strongest quotes from the launch was that “inequality serves no-one”.

The strategy sets out that gender inequality and stereotypes also constrain men, limiting their choices, supports and opportunities. One way to redress this would be to normalise equal parenting and caring roles in Australian society.

Where the strategy is weakest is on how to preserve women’s hard-fought gains during crises and shocks such as the climate transition.

So what is the big picture for Australian gender equality?

In this context, Gallagher said she is determined to get Australia back up the international rankings on gender equality.

I know what you’re thinking: Australia didn’t have a gender equality strategy before now? The surprising answer is no.

There is a 2022–32 strategy on violence against women and girls, for example, but until now, there has been never been a plan for the broader goal of gender equality, and no plan to address human rights since 2013.

And even now, the ten-year strategy won’t start until 2025. Can you imagine defence or infrastructure going years or decades without a strategy? AUKUS has a $368 billion plan between now and the mid-2050s. But key areas of social policy such mental health, gender equality or climate adaptation lapse for years, or are built and unbuilt by electoral change.

Nonetheless, the government is at least to be given some credit for finally giving us one on gender equality.

So what’s in it?

Working for Women: A Strategy for Gender Equality has a vision of “an Australia where people are safe, treated with respect, have choices and have access to resources and equal outcomes no matter their gender”. It includes a great section on harmful gender attitudes and stereotypes, complete with narratives.

There are also five priority areas for action: gender-based violence; unpaid and paid care; economic equality and security; health; and leadership, representation and decision-making.

Some of the key points are:

• New federal procurement rules will be developed by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) so Australian businesses with 500 employees or more will be required to meet new gender equality targets if they want to win government contracts (noting federal public procurement is worth $70 billion).

These targets will focus on the gender makeup of companies’ boards and the workforce; equal pay; flexible working arrangements; workplace consultation on gender equality; and efforts to prevent and address sexual harassment.

This has been proven overseas to be an excellent lever for gender quality outcomes. My research for UK think tank Chatham House showed public procurement accounts for around one-fifth of global gross domestic product. It is estimated women-owned businesses and women entrepreneurs supplied just 1% of this market.

• The federal government will pay superannuation on paid parental leave (PPL) from July 1 2025.

• The government will work towards the goal that paid and unpaid care work must be better valued. Women currently account for 75% of disability carers, 87% of residential aged carers, and more than 90% of early childhood educators.

• The strategy will also tackle structural medical biases that lead to poorer health outcomes for women and girls, especially in relation to endometriosis and pelvic pain, and menopause.

Read more:
Government to pay super on paid parental leave, benefitting 180,000 families a year

But climate impacts could undo it all…

Where the strategy falls down badly is in the consideration of climate impacts and related disasters on Australia’s progress towards gender equality.

Literally the last page of the report notes that given the unequal impact of crises such as climate change and natural disasters on women, diverse leadership and representation are important. But the strategy doesn’t see climate adaptation as the game-changer that it is, with most current climate adaptation measures in energy, transport, disaster management, finance, climate services and technology fuelling gender inequality outcomes.

Nevertheless, as the minister said in her speech, the strategy points us to a better future for the next generation of girls and women:

To a little girl who is born today. That by the time you go to school, you won’t have preconceived ideas about “girl” jobs and “boy” jobs. That by the time you choose the subjects you study you don’t self-select out of maths or science and technology if that’s what you’re interested in. That as you grow up, you and your male peers learn about respectful relationships and enthusiastic consent rather than how women should protect themselves and their friends from the threat of violence.

That if you experience the pain of endometriosis or polycystic ovarian syndrome your diagnosis doesn’t take a decade, or that you’re told the pain is in your head and then sent away from the ED with only Nurofen as pain relief.

That you won’t be catcalled when you go for a run or look over your shoulder when you walk alone.

Susan Harris Rimmer receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Federal Government and Queensland Government. Susan is the President of UNAA Qld and on the board of youth-led NGO Foundations for Tomorrow.

– ref. ‘Inequality serves no-one’: Australia finally has a strategy to achieve gender equality – but is it any good? – https://theconversation.com/inequality-serves-no-one-australia-finally-has-a-strategy-to-achieve-gender-equality-but-is-it-any-good-225081

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Blyth, Paediatrician, Infectious Diseases Physician and Clinical Microbiologist, Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia

This week, Western Australia announced a state government-funded immunisation program against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). It’s the first Australian state or territory to do so.

All babies under eight months old and those aged eight to 19 months at increased risk of severe RSV infection will be eligible for the immunisation in WA this year.

RSV can cause serious illness in children, and news headlines have welcomed WA’s impending rollout of “vaccinations” against the virus.

But this immunisation differs from other routine childhood vaccines.

Why is RSV important?

RSV is the most common cause of respiratory infection in young children. By the age of two, almost all children show evidence they’ve been exposed to the virus.

Estimates suggest 2-3% of infants are hospitalised with RSV with infection involving the airways and lungs. Infants under three months are at highest risk. RSV can also have long-lasting effects on children – there’s a well-established link between RSV and subsequent wheezing illnesses and asthma.

RSV can also be a problem for the elderly and people with underlying health conditions such as those with weakened immune systems.

Read more:
An RSV vaccine has been approved for people over 60. But what about young children?

How do we protect children against RSV?

Antibodies are a key part of the immune system that protect people against many viral infections, including RSV. They’re usually generated in response to infection or a vaccine, and work by attaching to proteins on the surface of RSV, therefore preventing the virus from invading the cells that line the airways and lungs.

The problem in newborn babies (who are at the highest risk of severe RSV infection) is that previous vaccines have not generated sufficient antibodies to provide protection.

So, two strategies have been developed to protect young children against RSV. These strategies are both referred to as passive immunisation, because children receive protective antibodies from outside the body. This is different to active immunisation where we give a child a vaccine so they can generate their own antibodies.

Vaccination in pregnancy

One way to deliver passive immunity to young infants is by vaccinating their mothers during pregnancy. Maternal immunisation has been shown to be effective at protecting infants from other infections, including influenza, whooping cough (pertussis), tetanus and COVID.

By delivering a single RSV vaccine to pregnant women, antibodies are generated by the mother and transported across the placenta, providing passive immunity and protection to the baby for around the first six months of life. In a clinical trial, giving an RSV vaccine in late pregnancy reduced RSV in young infants by approximately 70%. But RSV vaccines for pregnant women are not yet available in Australia.

Read more:
RSV is everywhere right now. What parents need to know about respiratory syncytial virus

What are monoclonal antibodies?

The other passive immunisation strategy relies on manufactured long-acting antibodies (known as “monoclonal antibodies”), which can be delivered by injection to young children.

This is what will be offered in WA. Nirsevimab (also known as Beyfortus) is a long-acting antibody that Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) approved in November 2023.

Nirsevimab binds specifically to RSV and remains in the body for several months after injection. In a key clinical trial nirsevimab was shown to reduce RSV infections by about 75% for up to five months.

Several European countries have recently implemented infant programs with nirsevimab and are reporting significantly lower RSV hospitalisation rates in babies.

Antibody therapies in various forms have been used for more than a century for the prevention and treatment of a range of conditions, dating from “serotherapy” for tetanus, diphtheria and snake bite in the late 1800s.

Licensed antibody products are rigorously tested in clinical trials and through post-marketing surveillance to ensure their safety.

For nirsevimab specifically, the clinical trial mentioned above included over 1,400 infants. Adverse events were reported at similar rates in the nirsevimab and placebo groups, and no serious adverse events relating to treatment were reported. No significant safety concerns have been identified in the real-world rollout in the northern hemisphere either.

When does RSV occur?

RSV usually takes hold just before the flu season in southern states, and circulates year-round in tropical areas. While influenza almost disappeared during the COVID pandemic, there were ongoing cases of RSV, albeit with a disruption to the normal seasonal pattern.

Since 2022, RSV has resumed its normal seasonal pattern. The WA government says the immunisations will be available from April, which is timely in anticipation of the 2024 season.

Read more:
RSV is a common winter illness in children. Why did it see a summer surge in Australia this year?

What about other states and territories?

Free access to an immunisation against RSV should significantly benefit young children and families in WA, keeping children out of hospital this winter.

Whether other states will follow WA’s lead is uncertain at this stage, and we don’t yet know whether nirsevimab will in time become part of the National Immunisation Program, meaning it would be available for free nation-wide.

Ensuring equitable access, particularly for those at greatest risk of severe RSV infection, must be prioritised to ensure maximum benefit for all children and families.

Nirsevimab is likely to be the first of many tools to prevent RSV in children. A maternal RSV vaccine is currently under assessment by the TGA and Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC). A vaccine for older Australians, Arexvy, is registered and is also being assessed by the PBAC, with additional vaccines expected to be available in the future.

These developments highlight the future of RSV prevention and also the significant potential for monoclonal antibodies to play a greater role in preventing infections as part of public health programs.

Chris Blyth receives funding from the Australian Department of Health and Aged Care, National Health and Medical Research Council and the Perron Trust for RSV-related research. He has previously been a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation.

Allen Cheng receives funding from the Australian Department of Health and Aged Care and the National Health and Medical Research Council. He is a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation.

– ref. Babies in WA will soon be immunised against RSV – but not with a vaccine – https://theconversation.com/babies-in-wa-will-soon-be-immunised-against-rsv-but-not-with-a-vaccine-225091

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

There are many factors that determine the Oscar winners and nominees each year. Seldom does the actual “best picture” win the award, and often the year’s best films fail to be recognised at all. Perhaps they’re not topical enough, not American enough, or not moral enough.

It’s hard to argue, for example, that Robert Zemeckis’ pleasant but forgettable yarn Forrest Gump was the best film of 1994, when Quentin Tarantino’s landscape-changing masterpiece, Pulp Fiction, came out the same year.

Nonetheless, the Oscars have until recently always celebrated Movies with a capital M: motion pictures made to be seen, first and foremost, in cinemas. These productions have almost always demonstrated incredible technical accomplishment, even if their narratives have been irritating or unnotable. Forrest Gump may be sentimental schmaltz of the most ludicrous kind, but at least it’s cinematic.

This year’s picks include some good, if not great, films. But they also reflect what most cinephiles already know: streaming is the last nail in the coffin in the shift away from cinema to television. The only nominees that feel like pieces of cinema (that is, movies committed to the cinematic form) are Oppenheimer and The Holdovers.

Equally rare for the Oscars, only a couple of nominees stick out as truly awful.

The good

Killers of the Flower Moon

Though director Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon is overlong, its true story is riveting, a family crime odyssey in the tradition of James Foley’s exceptional neo-noir At Close Range.

The narrative follows the murderous attempts of a clan led by William King Hale (Robert De Niro) to rip off a family of Osage Indians who became extremely wealthy after oil was discovered on their reservation. The murders are so cruel and unjust that, in effective crime film fashion, we root for the federal police when they appear in the final third to bring the villains to order.

It’s a low-key affair, featuring excellent performances from all the main actors, including Scorsese’s current muse, Leonardo Di Caprio, his old muse, De Niro, and a newcomer to films of this scale, Lily Gladstone.

Despite this, it feels more like a television series than a movie made for cinema. This makes sense – it’s produced by Apple, and therefore designed to be watched on the small screen.

Anatomy of a Fall

The French production Anatomy of a Fall similarly works very well as a crime film. This courtroom drama follows the trial of novelist Sandra Voyter (Sandra Hüller), a powerful and uncompromising artist and mother, for the murder (or was it suicide?) of her pathetic and self-loathing husband, Samuel (Samuel Theiss).

The narrative is extremely well-drawn by director Justine Triet. The film moves skilfully between the present of the trial and re-enactments from the lead-up to the supposed murder, keeping the viewer guessing “whodunit?” beyond the final image.

The writing is razor-sharp, with precision in detail and authenticity in the dramatisation of the manipulative actions of the characters. At the same time, the film effectively negotiates one of the great problems of the 21st century: how do we justly navigate (and assess) the relationship between our public and private lives?

At the end of the day, however, Anatomy of a Fall is like an excellent episode of a good crime show. It’s formally uninteresting, and even ugly in places (with digital video artefacts present in the wide shots of the snowy environment).

Read more:
What is the role of the mother? At the heart of Anatomy of a Fall is a critique of anti-feminist backlash

The Zone of Interest

British director Jonathan Glazer has made only a few films throughout his career, and The Zone of Interest is probably the best of them.

It follows the petit-bourgeois lives of a German family living in Poland as they go about their daily life. The mum, Hedwig (Sandra Hüller), works meticulously on the garden. The dad, Rudolf (Christian Friedel), is an animal lover who rides his horse, walks his dog and tries to educate his children while keeping things together at work. The children in turn play together and torture each other, as children do.

The twist? The father is Höss, commandant of Auschwitz, and their house is next door to the camp. Underlying everything is a progressively menacing understanding of the horrors happening next door, through which the aspirations of this bourgeois family are founded.

The film embraces an ugly video-aesthetic (much like Austrian filmmaker Michael Haneke whose work is surely in the back of Glazer’s mind). Cold, detached images are captured by a mostly immobile camera. At times it feels like an observational documentary and (echoing Hannah Arendt’s famous statement about the banality of evil) this is clearly the point: ordinary life transpires for this family while, behind them, the chimneys pulse with fire and spew black smoke into the pristine air.

The nightmarish, surreal sequences that punctuate the film, matched by unsettling music and sound design, come to a climax in a stunning ending. Höss looks in horror towards the future, and the film punctures our own interest in these characters by confronting us with contemporary images from the Auschwitz museum. We see the collected shoes, for instance, from the bodies that became ash and fertilised Hedwig’s pretty garden.

In many respects, this is the most interesting of the nominees, but it also feels more like a video than a Movie.

American Fiction

The directorial debut of writer Cord Jefferson stars Jeffrey Wright (in career-best form) as novelist Thelonius “Monk” Ellison who decides to write a “black” novel when his publisher rejects his latest idea, a retelling of Aeschylus’ The Persians.

The book he writes – Fuck – is ludicrous, capitalising on white liberal sensibilities regarding what literature written by African Americans should be about (it features eye-patch-wearing, gun-touting criminals from the ’hood). It also (predictably) becomes a smash hit, with the movie rights sold almost immediately to a brash producer for $4 million.

This playing out of identity politics is interspersed with gentle drama involving Monk’s real life – a mother suffering from dementia, a sister who dies too young and a brother coming to terms with his sexuality. The material about the novel is funny, but the film’s brilliance lies in its counterpointing of the ordinary but complex stresses of middle-class life with the supposed problems of black people.

American Fiction is a sweet film, the most fun of this year’s nominees. But, as with much else on the list, it feels like it has been made – by Amazon – to be watched on television.

The average

Past Lives and Poor Things

People claimed Past Lives was the most beautiful film of the year. But I found its cross-continental and cross-temporal romance a touch trite. Celine Song’s debut feature certainly looks very nice, and the performances are all pitch perfect, but it struck me as underwhelming and uninteresting.

The same can’t be said of Yorgos Lanthimos’s Poor Things, which strained at every point to be overwhelming and formally interesting. But like a lot of artworks that try this hard, it falls flat. It comes off as a weaker, more pretentious imitation of Lanthimos’ better, earlier films. The first half hour is like something made by a student who worships Lanthimos and has unlimited resources.

That said, things pick up once the main character, Bella (Emma Stone), goes overseas to connect with her libido, leaving behind her Frankenstein-like creator, the scarred and affable Godwin (Willem Dafoe). What we’re left with is a mildly diverting romp over the seas and through the brothels of Paris.

The awful

Maestro

Conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein may have been a critical figure in 20th-century American music, and a larger-than-life character in American cultural life, but it would be hard to imagine a more self-indulgent project than Maestro from director-star Bradley Cooper.

Produced by Steven Spielberg (who has a knack for picking dull but profitable projects as a producer), there’s absolutely no drama or tension in this story. As good as Carey Mulligan is as wife Felicia Montealegre, Cooper is awful in his caricaturish imitation of Bernstein.

This is the first best-picture nominee I can think of that genuinely feels like it has been written and made by AI. Reminiscent of a slick pamphlet produced by a PR agency, this biopic demonstrates about as much colour as a Wikipedia entry. It’s astonishing anybody could consider it best-picture-worthy, and its presence in the category surely says more about Oscars politics than anything about its merits as a film.

Barbie

Maestro is joined at the bottom of the pool by the equally abysmal Barbie. The central conceit of co-writer-director Greta Gerwig’s film is fine: Barbie discovers she’s a doll, sets off for the real world, and sets about dismantling the patriarchy (does she though?). But the film repeats the same point over and over for an agonising two hours.

Indeed, the whole thing feels more like a series of short videos made for social media (some of which are funny on their own terms), strung together in a haphazard order, than a feature film. The Ken character, well-played by Ryan Gosling, is the real star, the only character with any pathos (once again this supposedly “feminist” film is made for and fetishises men).

All the female characters are seemingly mired in a world of hackneyed Instagrammatic cliches about motherhood and being “woman”, as though this category exists outside of specific, embodied experience. Maybe it’s meant to be a mess, but a good film this does not make.

The best picture?

Of the best-picture nominees, only two played like movies to be seen at the cinema.

Oppenheimer

There’s a lot to dislike about Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer. It’s too long, it’s pretentious and it seems to think it’s marking some kind of significant discussion of a fascinating moment in American military history (in other words, American history). As a serious biopic it’s not terribly effective. But as a tactile romp it’s delightful.

It’s fun watching all the brilliant actors trying to look and act like real-life people – Robert Downey junior is a hoot as always – and there’s something perfectly hypnotic about the film’s combination of image and sound. Oppenheimer is an immersive, viscerally charged film that’s willing to experiment with form, and it is formally stunning. And like that stinker Forrest Gump, it as least warrants being seen on the big screen.

The Holdovers

Because it’s better than Oppenheimer, my pick for best picture is The Holdovers. Filmmakers shooting on video (that’s almost every filmmaker now, although Nolan notably still shoots on film) often employ a panoply of tricks to try to make their images look more like film (with greater dynamic range, richer colour, visually appealing texture and so on).

Director Alexander Payne, cinematographer Eigil Bryld and colourist Joe Gawler actually pull this off in The Holdovers. The film looks like it has been shot on film stock, perfectly capturing the brown tones of an elite boys’ boarding school in America in the 1970s. And it in no way suffers from being viewed on a big screen, unlike, for example, Anatomy of a Fall.

The coming-of-age narrative follows grouchy ancient-history master Paul Hunham (Paul Giamatti) as he’s forced to stay at school over the Christmas break to oversee the “holdovers”, the boys whose parents don’t want or can’t have them home for the holiday. The material is formulaic – think Mr Chips crossed with Dead Poet’s Society crossed with The Catcher in the Rye – yet every element is so beautifully rendered, it’s a true pleasure to watch.

Giamatti is perfect in a role he was born to play, as the crotchety, pompous and physically repellent miser loathed by students and staff alike. Newcomer Dominic Sessa is remarkably self-assured as Angus Tully, the troubled boy for whom Hunham develops a genuine fondness, and Da’Vine Joy Randolph is also excellent as bereaved cook Mary Lamb.

Despite being replete with cliches, the stock characters and narrative are handled so expertly by Payne, and the actors are so good, that The Holdovers simply works – even if it’s sentimental to boot. It’s the kind of old-style film we don’t see often in an era of pontificating online moralism and disposable, interchangeable streaming “product”.

It’s also an effective cinematic work in a contest where most entries don’t feel like they were made for cinema. But was it the best film released in 2023? Come on!

Read more:
The promised big hits, sure disappointments, and hidden indie gems we’ll get from Hollywood in 2024

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. Oppenheimer? Barbie? Past Lives? An expert’s pick for the Oscars 2024 best picture winner – https://theconversation.com/oppenheimer-barbie-past-lives-an-experts-pick-for-the-oscars-2024-best-picture-winner-225264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Thompson, Associate Professor of Media Studies, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

The announcement last week that Newshub would be shut down was not the “canary in the coalmine” some suggested – it was the explosion. If it is not to be the first of many, then New Zealand needs a new model for its fourth estate.

The fate of Newshub and today’s projected newsroom cuts at TVNZ threaten to leave a significant gap in the news sector, particularly television. But beyond that, the causes and solutions are very much up for debate.

There are both specific institutional factors and deeper structural trends at play within the television and news sectors. And Newshub’s tangled financial history serves as a reminder of the dangers of foreign ownership of strategic media assets.

Beyond the shifting fortunes of one company, however, the local news ecology has faced wider structural problems. The imminent loss of so many working news producers and journalists makes finding workable solutions even more urgent.

Fragmenting audiences

Over the past 25 years, the TV sector’s share of the advertising market has roughly halved, from 34.3% in 1999 to just 17.7% by 2022.

The capture of advertising revenue by Google and Meta (the parent of Facebook and Instagram) has played a key role. Google alone now accounts for almost two-thirds of the roughly NZ$1.8 billion digital advertising spend in New Zealand.

Read more:
With the end of Newshub, the slippery slope just got steeper for NZ journalism and democracy

But the decline in TV revenues is also related to the fragmentation of audiences, as viewers shift to new on-demand services. TV3’s daily audience reach for its linear services declined by almost 50%, from 35% in 2014 to 17% in 2023.

Perhaps not surprisingly, Newshub’s demise has amplified calls from the news sector to expedite the Fair News Digital Bargaining Bill. This would require the online platforms to negotiate payments to news providers for hosting, linking and sharing news content.

Some estimates suggest this could be worth $30–50 million annually to the news sector. On the face of it, this may appear to be a logical solution – but it’s not that simple.

A flawed bill

There are a number of problems with the proposed bill. Fundamentally, it misdiagnoses the market relationship between the platforms and the news media.

The tech platforms’ capture of digital advertising stems not from its co-option of news content, but from the mass harvesting of audience data (enabling targeted advertising), and algorithmic influence over content discovery.

The bill also provides no fixed benchmarks for payments. And the arbitration process in the event of non-agreement is potentially very complex, because different media outlets will have varying relationships with each platform.

Read more:
Facebook won’t keep paying Australian media outlets for their content. Are we about to get another news ban?

Making those agreements will depend on the goodwill of the platforms. But arbitration could well determine the advantages the platforms confer on news providers (increasing their visibility and directing traffic to their websites) outweigh the commercial benefits to the platforms of hosting or sharing news content.

Indeed, Meta’s resistance to the news bargaining frameworks in Australia and Canada underlines the risk of a platform exempting itself from bargaining obligations by prohibiting the hosting and sharing of news.

News media depending on platform payments might also be motivated to provide content that maximises value to the platforms – for example, populist or controversial content more likely to be shared. Or they may be less inclined to critically investigate issues involving their benefactors.

Ultimately, there is no guarantee any platform payments will actually be reinvested in news production, let alone commercially unattractive genres such as local government or regional reporting.

A new form of funding

There is no realistic possibility of the government bailing out Newshub or any other individual news outlet.

And while the news media’s function in upholding democratic processes and holding power to account remains vital, it doesn’t follow that market competition and plurality are sufficient to sustain that.

Indeed, it was the introduction of commercial competition for eyeballs and advertising that drove measurable declines in the length and substance of television news through the 1990s.

Read more:
Breaking news: making Google and Facebook pay NZ media for content could deliver less than bargained for

Democracy cannot thrive if the fourth estate is in a commercial race to the bottom. It requires diversity of perspectives and competition for substance that treats the audience as citizens, not just fodder for advertisers.

This requires a new form of funding and a new institutional arrangement. One way to achieve this would be through a small levy on digital advertising expenditure, and potentially other commercial revenues such as internet and streaming services. The revenue would be reinvested in news content through an independent agency on a contestable basis.

There are different possible mechanisms, but an initial model could apply a levy to digital advertising spend across the media sector. This would mean the advertising spend currently going to Google and Meta would generate the majority of the revenue.

Although the spend going to other media would, in principle, also incur the levy, there could be rebates for local content producers. News operators would, in any case, be the recipients of the journalism funding which the levy makes possible.

Even a 1% levy on the $1.8 billion digital advertising spend would generate as much revenue as the (now defunct) Public Interest Journalism Fund. A 3% levy would equal the higher estimates of what the proposed Fair News Digital Bargaining Bill would deliver.

Collaborative news sharing

Being administered by an independent agency (perhaps NZ On Air) would help ensure the levy supported news based on public service principles – including investigative, local government, regional and minority coverage – and that a wide range of news operations received support.

There is also a need for some form of collaborative news-sharing model. RNZ already shares its news content, and there have been proposals for a regional news network to cover local issues often overlooked by the mainstream.

An independent, multi-platform news publisher model could underpin such an initiative. It would operate across both broadcasting, print and online media, and allow members to make use of any pooled content on their own channels or websites.

A levy mechanism and public news publisher model would be a far better basis for rescuing New Zealand’s fourth estate than throwing the news media some crumbs from Big Tech’s table.

Peter Thompson is a founding member and chair of the Better Public Media Trust. He has previously undertaken commissioned research for the Canadian Department of Heritage, the Department of Internal Affairs, the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, and NZ On Air.

– ref. First Newshub, now TVNZ: the news funding model is broken – but this would fix it – https://theconversation.com/first-newshub-now-tvnz-the-news-funding-model-is-broken-but-this-would-fix-it-224966

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martina Linnenluecke, Professor of Environmental Finance at UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

This year, large businesses in Australia will likely have to begin reporting their environmental impacts, climate risks and climate opportunities.

The final draft of Australia’s new mandatory climate disclosure laws are due any day now, following consultation.

These laws are meant to increase transparency about how exposed companies are to risks from climate change, and will require companies to look into and share what impact their activities have on the environment. This, the government hopes, will accelerate change in the corporate sector.

But will it help lower emissions? I don’t think so. We don’t have a carbon tax, which means many companies have no financial incentive to actually lower their emissions. (The strengthened Safeguard Mechanism applies to about 220 big emitters, but they can simply buy offsets and avoid harder change.)

By themselves, climate disclosures will not trigger the change we need.

Why are these laws being proposed?

In June 2023, the newly formed International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) released a set of sustainability standards and climate disclosures.

These standards have influenced Australia’s draft laws.

In planning mandatory corporate disclosures on climate and environment, Australia is following similar efforts overseas. In 2022, the United Kingdom began to roll out mandatory reporting on climate risks and opportunities for the largest UK companies (those with more than 500 employees and A$970 million in turnover).

Once the Australian legislation comes into effect, it will require large companies and asset owners to publish their climate-related risks and opportunities.

In the draft legislation, companies would have to evaluate and report on their direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions from sources they own or control and from sources such as purchased electricity.

From July this year, the laws would require disclosures from companies with 500 employees, $1 billion in assets or $500 million in revenue. Over time, this would expand to medium-sized companies. From July 2027, companies with 100 employees, $25 million in assets or $50 million in revenue would have to share this information.

Sustainability reports will be subject to external auditing and directors would be personally liable for the accuracy of the disclosures – with one major exception.

For many Australian companies, it’s already proving too hard to account for Scope 3 emissions – the greenhouse gas emissions upstream and downstream in a company’s operations, such as the emissions from gas burned after we export it.

As these emissions occur outside a company’s direct control, accounting for them is a complex task costing time and money. Only some companies have voluntarily started to report their Scope 3 emissions in anticipation of future regulatory change.

The draft legislation exempts companies from the need to report Scope 3 emissions for their first year of reporting and proposes limited liability for these disclosures for a fixed three-year period.

This means companies can simply come up with a best-guess estimate, rather than reporting their actual Scope 3 emissions, which can make up 65–95% of their overall emissions. In some sectors, such as the integrated oil and gas industry, Scope 3 emissions can comprise more than six times the sum of Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Woolworths’ Scope 3 emissions account for 94% of emissions.

What are disclosure laws meant to do?

You can see why the government is introducing these laws. To nudge corporate Australia towards a greener future, it helps to know what impact your business has – and what risks it is exposed to. It will also be useful for investors.

But it will not drive rapid decarbonisation. Critics have pointed out that reporting and disclosure alone will not lead to a shift away from carbon-intensive business operations. Disclosures give the appearance of action rather than real action. If there are no stronger policies accompanying, disclosures act as window dressing for global financial markets.

Our existing policies do not require organisations to make genuine changes in terms of their emissions. Unless organisations abandon their reliance on fossil fuels and substantially decarbonise their operations, we are simply not going to get any change.

Read more:
Climate disclosures: corporations underprepared for tighter new standards, study of 100 companies reveals

These laws also come with a cost. The regulatory burden and compliance costs for Australian companies will not be trivial, especially for companies which haven’t reported on climate or sustainability before.

We already have a shortage of trained reporting, auditing and assurance professionals able to do climate and environment work, following years of minimal action on climate change in Australia. To fix this will require substantial and rapid upskilling.

These costs should give us pause. It’s worth thinking through how much emphasis we place on disclosures to drive change versus policies that would actually drive change, such as mandating that large companies have to reduce their direct emissions 10% a year.

Australian companies can only benefit from these laws if they use the data unearthed by disclosure to rethink how they operate, invest and green their supply chains towards sustainability. This may mean investing in clean technology, shifting from polluting transport fleets to electric, or reconsidering how they produce their products.

And to do that, of course, companies will need to see supportive government policies.

These laws can be useful – but not alone

Assuming the laws pass, big companies will begin assessing and reporting their emissions and environmental impact from July this year.

In doing so, Australia will align itself with international efforts for more transparency. Requiring companies to scrutinise and disclose their environmental impact will give corporate leaders the data needed to look for greener ways to run their business. But this assumes they have the interest and time to do so.

This isn’t a quick fix for climate change. To be worth the cost, Australia will need to link climate-related financial disclosures to clear policies designed to bring down emissions.

Disclosure policies produce disclosures. Emission reduction policies produce emission reductions.

Read more:
SEC approves first US climate disclosure rules: Why the requirements are much weaker than planned and the implications

Martina Linnenluecke receives funding from the Australian Research Council and from UTS in the form of a Strategic Research Accelerator Grant.

– ref. Big businesses will this year have to report their environmental impacts – but this alone won’t drive change – https://theconversation.com/big-businesses-will-this-year-have-to-report-their-environmental-impacts-but-this-alone-wont-drive-change-224743

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Strating, Director, La Trobe Asia and Professor, La Trobe University, La Trobe University

Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong issued a stark warning to Southeast Asian leaders this week: the region could face a “devastating” conflict over the South China Sea unless it strengthens its diplomatic and legal safeguards.

Wong said the region was already experiencing “destabilising, provocative and coercive actions”, in addition to “unsafe conduct” in the air and sea. These were not-quite-so-veiled references to China’s recent actions in the South China Sea.

Other countries in the region – especially Vietnam and the Philippines – share similar concerns about China’s maritime assertions. They question, for instance, what Beijing’s rejection of the 2016 South China Sea tribunal ruling might mean for upholding international maritime laws and keeping crucial sea trade routes open.

This week, Manila again called out China’s “dangerous manoeuvres” in the South China Sea. President Ferdinand Marcos junior vowed not to yield an “inch” to China in the contested waters.

Australia and the Philippines recently signed an agreement to deepen maritime co-operation. This may lead to more joint defence exercises and patrols in the South China Sea.

But not all regional leaders agree about the potential threat. Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim issued a warning of his own at the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit this week over the West’s “China phobia”. If the US and Australia have problems with China, he said, “they should not impose it” on Southeast Asia.

Other challenges beyond territorial disputes

There is no doubt the great power competition between the US and China sets the strategic backdrop for Australia’s engagement with Southeast Asia.

But while maritime co-operation is increasing among regional states, this doesn’t mean they all agree on the central issues that affect the stability, safety and security of the region’s waters, specifically the South China Sea.

Southeast Asian countries have diverse interests, political systems and strategic priorities. And leaders in the region – like those of many other smaller and middle powers around the world – regularly say they do not want to have choose between the US and China.

Not all countries are “hedging” to the same degree, but Australia should nevertheless focus its engagement on building genuine partnerships with Southeast Asian countries in their own right – not merely based on perceived external threats – and identifying and addressing shared issues of concern.

At this week’s ASEAN-Australia summit, for instance, Southeast Asian nations drove the idea of a dedicated maritime forum. While the forum did address security challenges such as “grey zone” activities, plenty of other challenges and opportunities were discussed. These included:

• the importance of the “blue economy” concept, focused on the sustainable use of maritime resources for development and prosperity

• improving maritime connectivity by ensuring free and open sea lanes of communication

• bolstering law enforcement and governance to ensure maritime order across the region

• better addressing environmental and climate change issues.

There was also a strong focus on understanding the local issues facing coastal and Indigenous communities in the region. An estimated 70% of Southeast Asia’s population lives by the coast, where they face increasing livability challenges due to climate change, economic uncertainty and the degradation of fishing stocks and natural resources.

This is not entirely new: ASEAN countries and Australia have been paying closer attention to shared maritime challenges beyond the sovereignty and maritime disputes in the South China Sea.

For example, ASEAN recently released its maritime outlook. In particular, it noted the importance of the region for “global trade, food and energy security and marine biodiversity”.

Read more:
Albanese to announce $2 billion financing facility to boost economic relations with Southeast Asia

Opportunities for cooperation

It is no surprise maritime security has reached this level of importance on a shared diplomatic agenda.

While the concerns over China’s activities are real, it’s important Australia and its neighbours to the north focus more attention on the vast range of other ocean-based issues that don’t get as much attention.

These priorities include:

• protecting open ocean supply chains

• reducing pollution, in particular plastics, and preventing coral bleaching

• supporting sustainable, legal and regulated fishing

• mitigating human, arms and drug trafficking

• addressing the very real challenges that climate change and rising sea levels present to maritime Asia.

Read more:
What we don’t understand about China’s actions and ambitions in the South China Sea

These challenges are often less politically sensitive than strategic concerns, which enhances the prospects of co-operation. This is where science, research and development, knowledge sharing and expert networks can contribute to solving knotty problems. And many of these challenges are transnational, meaning they do not affect one state unilaterally, but often require collective responses.

The challenges are significant. So, too, are the opportunities for collaboration. Getting maritime co-operation right can support the human rights and livelihoods of millions of people across the region.

Rebecca Strating receives funding from Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and was the Convenor of the 2024 Australia-ASEAN Special Summit Maritime Cooperation Forum: Conference.

– ref. While the China threat grabs the headlines, these are the maritime issues Southeast Asians want to talk about – https://theconversation.com/while-the-china-threat-grabs-the-headlines-these-are-the-maritime-issues-southeast-asians-want-to-talk-about-225076

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Johnstone, PhD Candidate in Criminal Justice, University of Canterbury

ACT’s recently proposed amendment to parole legislation fits with the party’s “restoring law and order and personal responsibility” platform enshrined in last year’s coalition agreement. But the rule changes could cause more harm than good.

If passed into law, the Parole (Mandatory Completion of Rehabilitative Programmes) Amendment Bill would amend the Parole Act 2002. The changes would mean someone in prison could not get parole without completing a rehabilitative programme chosen for them by their case manager.

Introducing the bill to parliament, ACT MP Todd Stephenson said its goal was to “provide hope for those incarcerated to rehabilitate themselves and actually reintegrate back into society”.

By making rehabilitation programme completion compulsory to be eligible for parole, the hope is people in prison will be incentivised to finish the programmes. Stephenson said introducing compulsory completion will have a positive impact on Aotearoa New Zealand’s high rates of recidivism and reincarceration.

It’s true, recidivism rates in Aotearoa New Zealand are extremely high. But it’s also clear there are deeper problems with the rehabilitation system that legislation alone won’t solve.

Personal motivation is not enough

The Parole Board already considers completion (or not) of rehab programmes when assessing parole eligibility.

But the reasons for people not completing such programmes go far deeper than a lack of personal motivation. Instead, there are systemic causes within the justice system.

Ara Poutama Aotearoa-Department of Corrections faces endemic operational and capacity issues.

Read more:
Prison is expensive – worth remembering when we oppose parole

The legislative amendment fails to recognise resourcing and access issues relating to prison rehab programmes, let alone the relatively low success rates of these programmes in preventing reoffending generally.

The situation is likely to get worse. The government has asked all departments, including Corrections, to cut spending by 6.5%. These cuts come at a time that Corrections has been struggling to recruit and retain staff.

A near impossible hurdle

The lack of adequate funding for rehab programmes will likely lead to some people being unable to get parole.

Concerns over these delays were already being raised by formerly incarcerated men who participated in a 2021 study.

One of the participants reported waiting eight years before being able to enter his first rehabilitation programme. Another of his programmes was set to start after his parole hearing, despite not being able to get parole without completing the programme.

Read more:
Prison turns life upside down – giving low-risk prisoners longer to prepare for their sentences would benefit everyone

In some cases, the programmes inmates were encouraged to do were not even available in the prisons they were housed in.

The men in our study were not failing to complete programmes because they did not want to do them or lacked incentive. They were failing to complete programmes because of Corrections’ resourcing issues.

As one explained:

If you’re trying to change someone, change … my opinion is change it from the beginning. Don’t wait … By the time I became eligible for these programmes it was too late. I’d clocked up charges. I’d clocked up assault charges.

I learnt nothing … I failed the programme twice … I didn’t have tools to deal with what I, what I accumulated over the years was embedded in me. I had no tools to try and help myself get out of it until later. I couldn’t comprehend what the programme was trying to teach me.

Parole Board chair Sir Ron Young and Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier have both openly criticised Corrections’ inability to support people onto rehabilitation programmes in a timely manner.

Time to pause the ammendment

Finally, Māori are disproportionately represented in the prison population and are already less likely to complete rehabilitation programmes.

There is a risk that ACT’s amendment will have a disproportionately negative impact on Māori communities and do little to change already dire prison statistics.

The bill has now been referred to the Justice Committee and is open for public submissions.

The government should push pause on this amendment, at least until it can resolve Corrections’ resourcing issues and provide sufficient access to rehabilitative programmes in prisons.

Laura Johnstone is a member of People Against Prisons Aotearoa and a Board Member of Just Speak.

– ref. Changes to NZ’s parole laws to improve rehabilitation could lead to even longer prison times – https://theconversation.com/changes-to-nzs-parole-laws-to-improve-rehabilitation-could-lead-to-even-longer-prison-times-224846

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Louisa Smith, Senior lecturer, Deakin University

Readers are advised this article includes an offensive and outdated disability term in a quote from the film.

Poor Things is a spectacular film that has garnered critical praise, scooped up awards and has 11 Oscar nominations. That might be the problem. Audiences become absorbed in another world, so much so our usual frames of reference disappear.

There has been much discussion about the film’s feminist potential (or betrayal). What’s not being talked about in mainstream reviews is disability. This seems strange when two of the film’s main characters are disabled.

Set in a fantasy version of Victorian London, unorthodox Dr Godwin Baxter (William Dafoe) finds the just-dead body of a heavily pregnant woman in the Thames River. In keeping with his menagerie of hybrid animals, Godwin removes the unborn baby’s brain and puts it into the skull of its mother, who becomes Bella Baxter (Emma Stone).

Read more:
Poor Things: meet the radical Scottish visionary behind the new hit film

Is Bella really disabled?

Stone has been praised for her ability to embody a small child who rapidly matures into a hypersexual person – one who has not had time to absorb the restrictive rules of gender or patriarchy.

But we also see a woman using her behaviour to express herself because she has complex communication barriers. We see a woman who is highly sensitive and responsive to the sensory world around her. A woman moving through and seeing the world differently – just like the fish-eye lens used in many scenes.

Women like this exist and they have historically been confined, studied and monitored like Bella. When medical student Max McCandless (Ramy Youssef) first meets Bella, he offensively exclaims “what a very pretty retard!” before being told the truth and promptly declared her future husband.

Even if Bella is not coded as disabled through her movements, speech and behaviour, her onscreen creator and guardian is. Godwin Baxter has facial differences and other impairments which require assistive technology.

So ignoring disability as a theme of the film seems determined and overt. The absurd humour for which the film is being lauded is often at Bella’s “primitive”, “monstrous” or “damaged” actions: words which aren’t usually used to describe children, but have been used to describe disabled people throughout history.

In reviews, Bella’s walk and speech are compared to characters like the Scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz, rather than a disabled woman. So why the resistance?

Read more:
By naming ‘Pennhurst’, Stranger Things uses disability trauma for entertainment. Dark tourism and asylum tours do too

Freak shows and displays

Disability studies scholar Rosemarie Gardland-Thomson writes “the history of disabled people in the Western world is in part the history of being on display”.

In the 19th century, when Poor Things is set, “freak shows” featuring disabled people, Indigenous people and others with bodily differences were extremely popular.

Doctors used freak shows to find specimens – like Joseph Merrick (also known as the Elephant Man and later depicted on screen) who was used for entertainment before he was exhibited in lecture halls. In the mid-1800s, as medicine became a profession, observing the disabled body shifted from a public spectacle to a private medical gaze that labelled disability as “sick” and pathologised it.

Poor Things doesn’t just circle around these discourses of disability. Bella’s body is a medical experiment, kept locked away for the private viewing of male doctors who take notes about her every move in small pads. While there is something glorious, intimate and familiar about Bella’s discovery of her own sexual pleasure, she immediately recognises it as worth recording in the third person:

I’ve discovered something that I must share […] Bella discover happy when she want!

The film’s narrative arc ends with Bella herself training to be a doctor but one whose more visible disabilities have disappeared.

Framing charity and sexual abuse

Even the film’s title is an expression often used to describe disabled people. The charity model of disability sees disabled people as needing pity and support from others. Financial poverty is briefly shown at a far-off port in the film and Bella initially becomes a sex worker in Paris for money – but her more pressing concern is sexual pleasure.

Disabled women’s sexuality is usually seen as something that needs to be controlled. It is frequently assumed disabled women are either hypersexual or de-gendered and sexually innocent.

In the real world disabled people experience much higher rates of abuse, including sexual assault, than others. Last year’s Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability found women with disability are nearly twice as likely as women without disability to have been assaulted. Almost a third of women with disability have experienced sexual assault by the age of 15. Bella’s hypersexual curiosity appears to give her some layer of protection – but that portrayal denies the lived experience of many.

Watch but don’t ignore

Poor Things is a stunning film. But ignoring disability in the production ignores the ways in which the representation of disabled bodies play into deep and historical stereotypes about disabled people.

These representations continue to shape lives.

Read more:
The shame and pleasure of masturbation: Poor Things gets girls’ early sexual feelings right

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. Oscar contender Poor Things is a film about disability. Why won’t more people say so? – https://theconversation.com/oscar-contender-poor-things-is-a-film-about-disability-why-wont-more-people-say-so-224150

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Wingrove, PhD Candidate at the Sustainable Buildings Research Centre, University of Wollongong

New Australian homes are being designed bigger and so require more energy for heating and cooling, wiping out potential gains in energy efficiency, according to our new research. The increasing energy demand is inconsistent with global efforts to tackle climate change and suggests Australia’s housing energy policy requires a radical rethink.

For more than 20 years, Australia’s building energy regulations have focused on energy efficiency. This reflects policy trends around the world.

In building regulations, energy efficiency is measured as the energy required to heat or cool one square metre of floorspace. Energy efficiency can be improved with features such as good orientation, insulation and double-glazing on windows. Homes designed to a higher energy efficiency standard do indeed require less energy for heating and cooling.

But what happens if we build a bigger house, or more houses: does energy efficiency policy still encourage less energy use in homes? Our research shows in Australia, the answer is no. A policy focus on energy efficiency has not led to falls in the predicted energy requirements for heating and cooling – either for individual homes or the new home sector as a whole.

Increasing floor areas

Around the world, apartment living is becoming more common. But detached homes remain the dominant housing type in many developed nations, including Australia, the United States and Canada.

House size differs markedly around the world, ranging from 9m² per person in India, to about 84m² per person in Australia. Globally, floor area per person is increasing.

Our study set out to examine the significance of this increase when it comes to home heating and cooling energy requirements in Australia.

Read more:
Future home havens: Australians likely to use more energy to stay in and save money

What we found

Our study involved more than 580,000 new homes in Australia designed between 2018 and 2022.

First, we looked at official dwelling approval data. We then examined certificates issued under the Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme or NatHERS. This gave us the thermal performance star-ratings of the new homes, their energy efficiency for heating and cooling and their conditioned floor areas – that is, floor areas typically heated and cooled, excluding spaces such as laundries and garages.

From this, we calculated the predicted energy each home would require each year for heating and cooling.

We found a home designed in 2022 had a 7.6% larger conditioned floor area than a home designed in 2018. And a home designed in 2022 was predicted to require 10% more energy for heating and cooling than a home designed four years earlier.

This differed between jurisdictions. For example, predicted energy requirements for a new home in Western Australia fell by 11% over the period, while in Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory it increased by 17%.

Collectively, we found the predicted energy requirement for heating and cooling of all new homes in Australia was 5.6% more in 2022 than in 2018. This figure ranged from a fall of 21% in the Northern Territory to an increase of 34% in South Australia.

These increases occurred despite 97.5% of new homes meeting the state-based minimum energy efficiency regulations.

Understanding the star-rating system

Between 2018 and 2022, new homes had to be designed to a minimum 6-star energy rating under the NatHERs scheme. However, the policy is implemented by state-based regulations, which in some jurisdictions allows homes to be designed below 6-stars.

In the study period, 18% of new homes in Australia were designed to a 5-5.9 star rating, as permitted within the jurisdictions of Queensland, the Northern Territory and New South Wales. In all other states and territories, the majority of new homes were designed at 6-star or above.

Nationally, just 11% of new homes were designed at a higher standard of 7-10 stars. This ranged from 35% in the Australian Capital Territory to just 5% of new homes in Victoria.

Improvements to Australia’s housing energy efficiency policy came into effect in 2023. However these do not directly address the impact of floor area on heating and cooling energy requirements, and state-based regulations remain inconsistent.

Aussie homes are getting bigger

Our analysis showed new Australian homes continue to get bigger. New homes in Victoria and NSW had the largest conditioned floor areas, while Tasmania had the smallest.

New homes with lower a star-rating tended to be bigger: the average 5-star home in NSW had more than double the conditioned floor area of the average 7-star home in Tasmania.

Larger homes also inherently require more materials to build than smaller homes – and these materials require energy to produce. However this concept, known as embodied energy, was beyond the scope of our study.

Time for a rethink

Our research showed at a household, state and national scale, the emission reduction benefits of improving a home’s energy efficiency may be undermined if policy does not consider floor area.

Demand for new housing in Australia will continue to rise as the population grows. So it’s even more important to ensure we get the settings right on home energy policy. Such an overhaul will be complex, involving building regulations, urban planning and social policies.

Renewable energy can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions from energy used by new homes. However, to make our net-zero goals feasible, achieving reductions in the energy required by each home is a crucial first step.

Work is also needed on how to encourage people to build smaller homes – a home sufficient for their needs, but no larger. Unless Australia re-examines the scale of its new homes, energy efficiency policy will fail to deliver genuine reductions in energy use.

Read more:
All-electric homes are better for your hip pocket and the planet. Here’s how governments can help us get off gas

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. Australian homes are getting bigger and bigger, and it’s wiping out gains in energy efficiency – https://theconversation.com/australian-homes-are-getting-bigger-and-bigger-and-its-wiping-out-gains-in-energy-efficiency-224741

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Leslie, Lecturer in Curriculum and Pedagogy with a focus on Educational Psychology, University of Southern Queensland

From March 13, NAPLAN testing for 2024 will begin. Over the following two weeks, all Australian students in years 3,5,7 and 9 are expected to sit tests in literacy and numeracy.

Results are then aggregated for schools and other demographics and made public. Students also get their individual results.

For students in Year 3, this will be their first experience of a formal test. For others, they will be sitting the test among school and media hype about the “importance of NAPLAN”.

Read more:
How to avoid annoying your kids and getting ‘stressed by proxy’ during exam season

The NAPLAN debate

Since it was introduced in 2008, NAPLAN has polarised the community. Some education experts see it as counterproductive (with too much emphasis on test performance rather than learning). Others emphasise the importance of the data collected, and how this informs teaching practice and school funding.

One of the prevailing concerns relates to the impact on student wellbeing.

While many students do not feel any anxiety, one 2022 study of more than 200 high school students found 48% felt worried about what the test would be like and how they would perform. A 2017 study of more than 100 primary students revealed up to 20% of children had a physical response to the test, such as feeling sick, not sleeping well, headaches or crying.

For parents, the stress and anxiety their child experiences in the lead up to NAPLAN can cause them to worry and even withdraw their child from the assessment.

But test anxiety is not inevitable. Here are some simple things parents and teachers can do to support students, not just for this assessment, but into the future.

Read more:
NAPLAN results inform schools, parents and policy. But too many kids miss the tests altogether

1. Talk about the purpose of the test

NAPLAN is not just about individual student results and whether you are a “good” at maths or “bad” at reading. It’s about informing teaching and learning.

The results help teachers do their jobs by identifying areas of reading, writing and maths that need more attention. This can help individual students, classes or entire schools.

When the results are collected at state and national levels, they also help tell governments where to put more efforts and funding to help support students.

Read more:
Are Australian students really falling behind? It depends which test you look at

2. Talk about how the test is a journey (not a destination)

Children learn from experience. This enables them to predict what might happen in similar future events.

Talk about NAPLAN as “practice” for future tests. So if you sit NAPLAN test in your younger school years this will help you handle other tests in senior school or maybe even university.

Emphasise that sitting the test is not about a particular outcome or result. It’s about embarking on an experience and learning what it is like to do a standardised tests. In this way, NAPLAN can help students build resilience.

3. Teach your child to manage anxiety

Mindfulness-based interventions have been shown to be successful in addressing anxiety symptoms in children.

Mindfulness can teach children to recognise anxiety symptoms such as a fast heart beat, shortness of breath or racing thoughts. By encouraging children to focus on the present moment, mindfulness can help children through improved concentration, better emotional regulation and fostering a sense of calm.

Smiling Mind is an Australian app designed to teach children to be mindful in a developmentally appropriate and guided way. The app is free to download and use. You could sit or lie down with your child and do a “body scan” (where you scan your entire body and notice how it feels) or a listening practice (where you pay attention to the sounds around you).

If your child is experiencing significant test anxiety, such as headaches, tummy pains or a racing heart, there may be more to it than just concerns about NAPLAN. For children aged 12–18, Headspace – Australia’s mental health foundation for young people – offers a range of services.

For younger children, or if you are still concerned, speak to your child’s teacher, the school counsellor or your GP.

Rachel Leslie 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. NAPLAN testing is about to start. How can you support an anxious child? – https://theconversation.com/naplan-testing-is-about-to-start-how-can-you-support-an-anxious-child-225085