Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Simpson, Associate Professor in Criminology, Macquarie University

Melbourne has been in the news in recent weeks following a string of violent, high-profile crimes.

These incidents followed Victoria’s Crime Statistics Agency (CSA) releasing new data that reveal the highest levels of crime on record across the state.

In response, Federal Opposition Leader Sussan Ley declared Melbourne the “crime capital of Australia”.

Some media outlets have claimed there is a “terrifying crime wave” in Melbourne that is leaving residents and tourists running scared.

Youth gang violence appears to be particularly concerning.

Despite Premier Jacinta Allen announcing “the toughest bail laws in Australia” in March 2025, she is continuing to face scrutiny for being perceived as “soft on crime”.

But what do these new crime statistics actually reveal? Is Victoria, specifically Melbourne, in the midst of a crime epidemic?

A crime spike, with a twist

As part of the CSA’s quarterly and annual reports, it publishes a range of recorded incidents across five categories, such as “crimes against a person” and “drug offences”.

These are then broken down into further sub-categories. For example, under “crimes against a person”, there are sexual offences and robbery, among others.

Together, these data give a snapshot of reported crimes across the state by offence type, offender and location.

The headline figures from CSA are indeed concerning.

In the 12 months before June 30 this year, Victoria Police recorded an 18.3% rise in criminal incidents from the same period last year (483,583 compared to 408,930).

The CSA said this represented the highest recorded figures since reporting started in 2004-05, and a 22% jump in criminal incidents recorded since 2017.

Melbourne is the local government area with the highest rate of crime, with a 17.4% increase since last year.

However, when measuring crime on a per capita basis, Melbourne’s crime rate is actually lower today (18,097 per 100,000) compared to 2017 (18,334 per 100,000).

This begins to show some of the challenges when examining crime data.

Delving deeper into the stats

It is important to remember crime statistics only tell us about crimes that have been reported.

This may seem like an obvious point, but different crimes have very different reporting rates.

For example, in 2024, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese declared a “national crisis” of family and gender-based violence across Australia. However, it has been estimated that less than 24% of domestic abuse crime is actually reported to police.

This matters in the context of what we are seeing in Victoria and Melbourne because other crimes – for example homicide and property-related crimes – would have a reporting rate much closer to 100%: murder because it is not that easy to make a person disappear without others noticing, and property because in order to file an insurance claim, people first need a police report.

Of all the reported incidents in Victoria last year, 59% were property-related and 39% were theft. Property offences, in particular theft, are really driving this spike in reported crime.

However, this leads to a second point.

Namely that crime statistics do not tell us why crime is going up, or indeed down.

Looking at theft, we see a dip in reported incidents from 2020-2022, years impacted by COVID restrictions, and now a rise.

The uptick has certainly continued past pre-COVID levels, but this could also be associated with the cost-of-living crisis.

Underpinning this possible explanation, retail theft rose to 41,667 offences in 2025 – a 27.6% increase on the previous year.

This could paint a picture more of families struggling in the economic climate than a state struggling with violent crime. But it is the latter that is captured by political and media discourse.

Some trends are positive

The increased politicisation of crime often leads to a perpetual state of urgency and the introduction of increasingly punitive measures, such as Victoria’s new bail laws.

However, a deeper dive into the data actually reveals plenty of positive messages.

CSA’s regional mapping tool shows:

• across Victoria, homicides are broadly stable or tracking down, with 3.2 per 100,000 last year, compared to a high of 3.7 in 2017
• in Melbourne, homicides are at a ten-year low, with just 2.6 per 100,000, compared to a high of 8 per 100,000 in 2018. This is echoed by a fall in the use of weapons, including knives and firearms, at both state level and in Melbourne.

The real success story in these data, and rarely reported on in the media, are drug offences.

Across Victoria, drug use and possession is down 16.2% since 2020, with drug dealing and trafficking at a ten-year low, down 46.7% since 2016.

There is a similar picture unfolding in Melbourne, with drug use and possession down 7.5% and drug dealing and trafficking down 20.6% since last year.

Yet we rarely hear this messaging in media and political rhetoric.

Something else to consider

Like all tools, the value of officially recorded crime rates depends on how they are used – and they can be put to many uses at once depending on the story people want to portray.

The CSA, like all crime reporting agencies, are hugely useful tools.

But they only really give us an overall snapshot of the administration of crime events, rather than a true picture of what is happening.

Overall, we can see an increase in certain recorded crimes, but the broader picture is much more nuanced.

Many of the increases in recorded crime are in line with national trends, indicating no real cause for local alarm. Meanwhile, significant recorded crimes, such as homicides and drug related offences, show drastic drops.

As always, it is important to look beyond the headlines and see what stories the data tell us.

Alex Simpson 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. Is Melbourne really the ‘crime capital of Australia’? – https://theconversation.com/is-melbourne-really-the-crime-capital-of-australia-267861

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Howe, Senior Lecturer in Epidemiology, University of Canterbury

The recent confirmation of new measles cases unconnected to international travel suggests the highly contagious disease has likely started spreading through communities, according to Health New Zealand.

This is a stark reminder of the pending danger of a larger measles outbreak.
To prevent transmission once the measles virus has been introduced, a population immunity of around 95%, evenly distributed throughout communities, is necessary.

New Zealand does not have this level of vaccination coverage and the main way to prevent an outbreak now is to focus on increasing the immunity of children and on closing the “immunity gap” in the population.

While New Zealand has used the measles vaccine since 1969, a national immunisation register was only introduced in 2005. Without a national register to provide the historical immunisation record, estimates are that only around 80% of people born in the 1980s and 1990s are protected against measles.

Although vaccination rates of children have at times reached more than 90% since the introduction of the register, the total has never reached the required 95%. Immunisation coverage has consistently remained lower among Māori children and more recently also Pacific children.

To stem further spread, we must build on the lessons from New Zealand’s last major measles outbreak in 2019.

That year, Auckland experienced a large and serious measles outbreak – the largest since 1997 – affecting babies, young children and adults. There were more than 2,000 cases and about 35% required hospital care, despite the fact most people who contracted measles were previously fit and healthy.

Some of the serious and lasting complications included encephalitis (brain inflammation), pregnant women losing babies, and children needing lengthy life-saving intensive care.

While acute measles can be severe, our subsequent research shows that measles infection is associated with a long-term increased risk of other infections.

We found that people who had measles in the 2019 outbreak had more hospital admissions not related to measles and more antibiotic prescriptions in the four years following the outbreak, compared to healthy controls.

While the effect was more pronounced for people whose measles infection was severe and needed hospital care, we also saw a lasting effect for those with milder infections.

The severity of this outbreak could have been prevented if more people had been protected with the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine.

Immunisation coverage is lacking

Immunisation coverage for the MMR vaccine (given at 12 and 15 months of age) shows New Zealand’s vaccination rates are not enough to prevent an outbreak in children under five.

Data from June 2025 shows only 82% of two-year-olds are fully immunised with two doses of the vaccine. This leaves at least one in five unprotected.

Babies under one year of age are not protected because the first MMR dose is only given at 12 months. This is particularly worrying as young babies have very high rates of hospitalisation and complications from measles. In the 2019 outbreak, there were more than 250 cases in babies and more than half of them were hospitalised.

Data also show the burden of the 2019 outbreak was not equitable and these inequities persist in immunisation coverage today. Gaps in coverage create pools of susceptible individuals, rife for measles to take hold and spread.

What is also clear from the recent measles cases is that our history of inadequate measles vaccination has left young adults vulnerable to infection.

This happens at an age when they are able to travel overseas, with the unintentional consequences of bringing measles home to their whānau (family), including unimmunised pēpi (babies).

This would be particularly concerning if a measles outbreak were to take hold before the summer holidays. Even a few cases in New Zealand could make us the source of outbreaks for other Pacific nations.

In late 2019, measles imported from New Zealand resulted in 5,700 cases in Samoa, including 1,800 hospitalisations and 83 deaths from measles (87% of these deaths were children under five).

Awareness and prevention

Anyone under 50 years of age who is experiencing a fever, rash, cough and runny nose should think measles, particularly if they returned from travel in the past three weeks, are unimmunised or a contact of a recent case. They should call HealthLine (0800 611 116) for advice before visiting a GP or hospital, unless severely unwell.

If in doubt vaccinate. The health-sector response to the 2019 outbreak recommended GPs continue to actively recall unvaccinated children after checking the national immunisation register.

For anyone unsure if they have had two doses of the measles vaccine, it is safe to get a dose according to the Immunisation Advisory Centre if they are not immune-compromised or pregnant. MMR vaccines are free and available from GPs, pharmacies and community health providers. Vaccinators are listed on Book My Vaccine.

Measles infection is scary but vaccination can be scary for people, too. The World Health Organization recommends listening with empathy and acknowledging how people who are hesitant are feeling.

It also suggests asking open-ended questions to help understand concerns and sharing evidence-based information from trusted sources, including Health New Zealand or the Immunisation Advisory Centre. It can help to share your own motivations for getting vaccinated and what helped you to overcome concerns.

With a stretched health system and long-term consequences for individuals following measles infection, prevention is essential.

Anna Howe receives funding from the Health Research Council and Arthritis NZ. She has been involved in research funded by GSK and was the first KPS Research Fellow. She has previously worked for the Immunisation Advisory Centre as their research and policy analyst.

Emma Best receives funding from the Health Research Council and Starship Foundation for measles-related research.

Rachel Webb 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. NZ may be on the cusp of another measles outbreak – what happened in 2019 should be a warning – https://theconversation.com/nz-may-be-on-the-cusp-of-another-measles-outbreak-what-happened-in-2019-should-be-a-warning-268086

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alistair Evans, Professor, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University

For more than 60 million years, venomous snakes have slithered across Earth.

These ancient, chemical weapon-wielding reptiles owe their evolutionary success in part to the effectiveness of their bite, which they deliver at an astonishing speed before their prey can escape.

Now, a study I coauthored reveals, in astonishing detail, exactly how these bites work. Published today in the Journal of Experimental Biology, it is the largest study of its kind to-date, and uses advanced video techniques to show how various snake species have evolved very different strategies to deliver their deadly bites.

Thousands of snakes on Earth

There are approximately 4,000 species of snake on Earth – about 600 of which are venomous.

Scientists started visually recording the strikes of these snakes to better understand them in the 1950s, when high-speed photography and cinematography were first developed.

Since then, these technologies have improved dramatically, allowing scientists to capture and study the action of venomous snake bites in much greater detail. For example, past research has shown there are clear differences between strikes to capture prey, versus those used for defence.

But most recent studies that have examined snake bites have been limited by a number of factors.

Firstly, they have captured the bites using only one camera. This means we only get a side-on view, whereas the snakes can slither in all directions. Secondly, the recordings have been of a relatively low resolution – in large part because they were made in the field with low lighting conditions. Thirdly, they have often focused on a single snake species or a limited number of species. This means we miss out on seeing how many other species may behave differently, or strike faster.

Welcome to Venomworld

For our new study, my colleagues and I studied the bites of 36 different species of venomous snakes. These species were from the three main families of venomous snakes: vipers, elapids and colubrids. They included western diamondback rattlesnakes (Crotalus atrox), blunt-nosed vipers (Macrovipera lebetinus) and the rough-scaled death adder (Acanthophis rugosus).

All the snakes we studied were housed at an institution in Paris, France, called Venomworld. There, we built a small experimental arena consisting of plexiglass panels lined with a cardboard floor, in which we placed the individual snakes.

We presented the snakes with a simulated food source – a cylindrical hunk of medical gel, heated to 38 degrees so it resembled prey for those that can detect heat.

Two high-speed cameras, placed nearby at different angles, automatically captured the snakes striking the gel at 1,000 frames per second.

Using the footage from these two different views, we recreated the strike in 3D to investigate, in detail, its various components such as its duration, acceleration, angle, and how fast the snake’s jaw opened.

In total, we captured 108 videos of successful strikes – three for each of the species included in the study.

Striking and slashing

There were major differences between the strikes of the snakes we studied.

Vipers struck the fastest, moving at speeds of more than 4.5 metres per second before sinking their needle-like fangs into the fake prey. Sometimes they would quickly remove and reinsert their fangs at a better angle. Only when the fangs were comfortably in place did the snakes shut their jaws and inject venom.

Some 84% of the vipers included in the study reached their prey in less than 90 milliseconds. This is faster than the average response time for a startled mammal – the preferred prey of many vipers in the wild.

On the other hand, elapid snakes, such as the Cape coral cobra (Aspidelaps lubricus), crept towards the fake prey before lunging and biting it repeatedly. Their jaw muscles would tense, releasing venom.

Colubrid snakes, such as the mangrove snake (Boiga dendrophila), which have fangs farther back in their mouths, lunged towards the prey from further away. With their jaws clamped over it, they’d make a sweeping motion from side to side. In doing so, they tore a gash in the gel to inject the maximum amount of venom.

Our previous research highlighted how the shape of snakes’ fangs is closely tied to prey preference. We can now show how they use these deadly weapons in the blink of an eye – and why they have been able to survive for so long on Earth.

Alistair Evans receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University, and is an Honorary Research Affiliate with Museums Victoria.

– ref. High-tech cameras capture the secrets of venomous snake bites – https://theconversation.com/high-tech-cameras-capture-the-secrets-of-venomous-snake-bites-267738

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Ward, Lecturer, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University

The Queensland government celebrated the creation of new national parks this year, with Premier David Crisafulli saying it is time to “get serious” and be “ambitious” in protecting nature.

But this claim doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Despite decades of conservation promises, Queensland remains a globally significant hotspot for destroying forests and native vegetation.

Our new study finds Queensland has lost at least 21% of its original woody vegetation since European colonisation. One-fifth of that loss has happened since 2000, even as the area of land being protected in state or national parks more than doubled.

By 2018, nearly two-thirds of subregions (areas that have similar patterns of climate, geology, vegetation and wildlife) still had less than 10% of their woody vegetation protected. Half were considered at “high” or “very high” risk of further loss.

Despite the creation of new national parks in some areas, bulldozers have kept working across vast parts of the state. Threatened animals, plants and precious landscapes are hanging on by a thread.

Parks in the wrong places

Our analysis compared the loss of forests with the growth of protected areas across all Queensland regions with significant woody vegetation cover, using government data from 2000 to 2018.

This conservation “balance sheet” approach shows not only where protection is growing, but whether it’s keeping pace with ongoing clearing.

We found a dangerous imbalance: for the 20% of vegetation cleared, only about 10% has been protected. And this mismatch was more stark when we looked at different parts of the state.

Most of Queensland’s newly protected areas were in subregions within areas such as Cape York (northernmost point of mainland Australia) and the wet tropics (northeast coast), which already had the highest protection and not under land clearing pressure.

Meanwhile, areas that have historically been heavily cleared kept losing vegetation at some of the fastest rates in the country, with very little new protection added.

These included the Brigalow Belt – a wide band of acacia-wooded grassland between the coast and the semi-arid interior – the New England tablelands in the south of the state, and parts of the Mulga Lands in the south-west.

The illusion of progress

Governments often report the growth of protected areas as evidence of progress toward global targets, such as protecting 30% of land by 2030 under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

But focusing only on the creation of new parks paints a very misleading picture. If the bulldozing in Queensland continues at current rates, the net outcome for nature is negative, even when more parks are created.

We identified regions of Queensland that are ecological crisis zones and need targeted protection now.

The Brigalow Belt – home to species such as the northern hairy-nosed wombat, bridled nail-tail wallaby, golden-tailed gecko and Brigalow scaly-foot legless lizard – has lost almost half of its original woodland vegetation.

And areas across heavily-populated southeast Queensland continue to be cleared for grazing and infrastructure. These are the landscapes most in need of urgent intervention — not just remote places that look good on international scorecards.

Tougher protection

Stricter limits or moratoriums on clearing in fragile environments could ensure their protection. This will only happen with tougher compliance.

And expanding protection to capture depleted environments, rather than just photogenic or politically-palatable ones, is another way both state and federal governments can act.

Our research also shows an urgent need for a bold restoration agenda. Many of Queensland’s ecosystems are in a perilous state. Incentives and funding are needed for both protecting and restoring habitats where losses are already severe.

From accounting to action

Signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity, which include Australia, have agreed to halt and reverse biodiversity loss this decade. But as Queensland’s example shows, success depends not just on how much land is protected but on how effectively we prevent nature from being destroyed.

Queensland’s nature protection strategy must move beyond counting hectares of parks. Instead, it should focus on a four tier approach: stopping the destruction of native vegetation, restoring degraded land in areas that provide a biodiversity benefit, ensuring protection targets important areas for biodiversity, and an accounting system that is transparent and captures both losses and gains.

Otherwise, we can only expect more of the same: a small jump in the number of protected areas in politically palatable locations and far less protection for the animals and plants that looking down the barrel of extinction.

Michelle Ward has received funding from the Australian Research Council, National Environmental Science Program, Queensland’s Department of Environment, Science and Innovation, Queensland Conservation Council, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society, and WWF Australia.

James Watson has received funding from the Australian Research Council, National Environmental Science Program, South Australia’s Department of Environment and Water, Queensland’s Department of Environment, Science and Innovation as well as from Bush Heritage Australia, Queensland Conservation Council, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society and Birdlife Australia. He serves on the scientific committee of BirdLife Australia and has a long-term scientific relationship with Bush Heritage Australia and Wildlife Conservation Society. He serves on the Queensland government’s Land Restoration Fund’s Investment Panel as the Deputy Chair.

Ruben Venegas Li has received funding from South Australia’s Department of Environment and Water, Queensland’s Department of Environment, Science and Innovation as well as from Wildlife Conservation Society, Queensland Conservation Council, and The Wilderness Society.

– ref. Queensland’s forests are still being bulldozed — and new parks alone won’t save them – https://theconversation.com/queenslands-forests-are-still-being-bulldozed-and-new-parks-alone-wont-save-them-267328

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vibhu Arya, PhD Student, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

Buying and selling online with e-commerce is old news. We’re entering the age of A-commerce, where artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly able to shop for us.

At the end of September, OpenAI launched its “Buy it in ChatGPT” trial in the United States, using AI agents built to interact with us to do more of people’s browsing and shopping. The technology is known as “agentic commerce”, sometimes shortened to A-commerce.

American shoppers can now ask for shopping suggestions from US Etsy sellers within a ChatGPT chat – then buy a product immediately, without having to navigate away to look at individual shop pages.

Looking ahead, big companies are now spruiking the next phase of “autonomous A-commerce”, which experts predict could see AI checking out for some shoppers within the next few years.

But is handing over more of our shopping decisions to AI a good thing for us as shoppers, for most businesses or for the planet?

What’s possible right now?

For most people using AI to help them shop, the AI agent is still mostly just searching and recommending products. It still has to shift the customer to the retailer’s website to complete the checkout.

For instance, AI can do most steps to order a pizza – though sometimes slower than doing it yourself – apart from paying at the end.

That’s when we step in: we still need to sign in if we’re part of a loyalty program, enter our personal and delivery details, then finally pay.

With the “Buy it in ChatGPT” trial now underway in the US, the customer never leaves the chat, where the checkout is completed.

Shopify has said more than 1 million of its merchants will soon be able to check out within ChatGPT too. Major US retailer Walmart has similar plans.

What’s next?

In May 2025, Google launched “AI mode shopping”. Some features, like using a full body photo of yourself to virtually “try-on” clothes, are still only available for US shoppers, with limited brands.

At the time, Google said its next step will be a new “agentic checkout […] in coming months” for products sold in the US. It would give shoppers the option of tracking a product until its price drops to within a set budget – then automatically prompting them to buy it, using Google Pay. That checkout option is yet to launch.

Credit card giants Visa and Mastercard are also working on ways to make it easier for AI agents to shop for us.

Both the current and coming forms of A-commerce have the potential to spread fast worldwide, because they run largely on the same global digital infrastructure powering today’s e-commerce: identity, payments, data and compliance.

Consultants McKinsey forecast: “We’re entering an era where AI agents won’t just assist – they’ll decide.”

What are the risks and benefits?

Overspending is a big risk.

A-commerce removes many steps of the shopping journey found in e-commerce or physical commerce, leading to fewer abandoned carts and potentially higher spending.

People would need to trust AI systems with their private data and preferences, and ensure they’re not misused. Permitting AI to shop on your behalf means you are responsible for the purchase and can’t easily demand a refund.

Read more:
OpenAI slipped shopping into 800 million ChatGPT users’ chats − here’s why that matters

AI systems might focus on price or speed, but not always for what you value most: from how sustainable a product is, to the ethics of how it was made.

Fraud could be a real issue. Scammers could set up AI storefronts to trick the AI, collect the money and never deliver.

Banks will need to figure out how to spot fraud, process refunds, and manage consent when it’s not a person pressing “buy”, but an algorithm doing it on their behalf.

Regulators will need to consider A-commerce in their competition, privacy, data, and consumer protection rules.

A-commerce could offer some limited environmental benefits compared to today’s way of shopping, such as fewer missed deliveries – if you’re happy to share your calendar so your AI agent knows your availability.

But greater consumption would also mean greater environmental impacts: from AI’s voracious energy and water use, to the damage done by fast fashion, more deliveries and indirect pollution.

Changing how we shop and do business

If you have even a small business, the way you make your products and services discoverable online will have to change.

Instead of just having websites built for customers and search engines, all businesses will need to build AI accessible online stores. Those will not look like the websites we see today. It will be more like a data-soaked digital catalogue, filled with everything an AI agent needs to place orders: product specifications, price, stock, ratings, reviews, through to delivery options.

All those years of bigger brands buying attention and dominating search results might start to matter less, if you’re able to build a good AI accessible online store. It could be a quiet but massive shift in how trade works.

However, each business’s visibility will depend on how AI systems read and rank sellers. If a business’s data isn’t formatted for AI, it may disappear from view. That could give larger players an edge and once again make it harder for smaller businesses to compete.

How much are we happy to delegate our shopping to AI agents? Our individual and collective choices over the next few years will shape how radically shopping is about to change for years to come.

Vibhu Arya 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. After OpenAI’s new ‘buy it in ChatGPT’ trial, how soon will AI be online shopping for us? – https://theconversation.com/after-openais-new-buy-it-in-chatgpt-trial-how-soon-will-ai-be-online-shopping-for-us-267637

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Blake Lawrence, PhD Candidate (Design) and Performance Artist, University of Technology Sydney

Three frogs, a shark, a unicorn and a Tyrannosaurus rex dance in front of a line of heavily armoured police in riot gear.

Over the past few weeks, activists taking part in protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) across the United States have donned inflatable animal costumes. The aim is to disrupt the Trump administration’s claim that the protests are violent “hate America” rallies.

The result is a sight to behold, with many encounters between police abd protestors going viral.

Whether they know it or not, these costumed activists are contributing to a rich history of using humour and dress to mobilise against and challenge power.

The ICE crackdowns

Since its creation in 2003, ICE has enforced immigration laws on the ground, arresting, detaining and deporting undocumented immigrants convicted of criminal activity.

During Donald Trump’s first term as president (2017–2021), the agency expanded its operations to target and deport many people with no criminal record.

This expansion sparked the June 2018 Occupy ICE protests, inspired by the broader global Occupy movement challenging corporate power and economic inequality.

The first major Occupy ICE action in 2018 occurred in Portland – a city known for its creativity and dissent. It grew from a rally organised by the Direct Action Alliance into what federal officials called a “very, very peaceful” encampment with kitchen tents, kids’ spaces and media hubs.

The protesters forced the temporary closure of the facility for about eight days, before federal officers cleared the site and erected a fence around its perimeter.

Following Trump’s re-election this year, ICE operations have intensified again, with the repealing of policies that prevented enforcement operations in sensitive areas such as schools and hospitals. Protests have followed.

In Portland, tensions escalated again this September, when Trump described the city as “burning to the ground” and “overrun with domestic terrorists,” announcing his plans to deploy the National Guard.

A federal judge has so far blocked Trump from doing so, saying the protests don’t meet the requirements for rebellion. He will likely keep trying.

Operation inflation

Protesters in Portland and across the US have long used humour and costume in their demonstrations. In October, a TikTok video showing an ICE agent spraying pepper spray into the air vent of an activist’s inflatable frog costume amassed more than two million views.

The clip exposes the absurd levels of police force against peaceful demonstrators. The protester, Seth Todd, said his intention was to contradict the “violent extremists” narrative, and “make the president and the feds look dumb”.

The Portland frog has quickly became emblematic of resistance, appearing on shirts, signs and street art, including parodies of artist Shepard Fairey’s iconic OBEY design – the authoritarian face replaced by a cartoon amphibian surrounded by the words DON’T OBEY.

And the frog costume has spawned imitators, with creatures multiplying in protests across the country, including at the recent No Kings rallies. One group of activists launched Operation Inflation, a website that crowdfunds inflatable suits for protesters, aiming to make resistance more visible, playful and safe.

Strategic silliness

One example that echoes Portland’s blow-up menagerie is London’s Clandestine Insurgent Rebel Clown Army (CIRCA). Members of CIRCA dressed as clowns during anti-war protests in the early 2000s. They played tag around police lines, hugged officers, and marched in absurd choreography.

As scholar Eve Kalyva notes, such actions employ “strategic frivolity”: silliness or absurdity in a way that disrupts the scripts between police and protester. By appearing playful rather than menacing, costumed activists directly counter narratives that paint them as violent threats.

The Portland frog and its friends work with the same strategies of silliness. Their dancing and cartoon-like actions make it impossible to frame them as thugs. Their soft forms bounce in contrast to the hard utility of riot gear.

From suffragette sashes to handmaids

Beyond frivolity, activists throughout history have also used dress and costume to more serious effect. In Britain in the early 20th century, suffragettes wore coordinated purple, white and green sashes to project unity in the fight for women’s voting rights.

In the US, dress and costume have played important roles in successive movements for African American liberation. During the 50s and 60s Civil Rights Movements, many marched in their best suits and dresses to assert their dignity against dehumanising racism.

The Black Panther Party had an unofficial uniform of sunglasses, berets and black leather jackets, embodying a more defiant style.

More recently, demonstrators in the US, Northern Ireland and Argentina have donned the red cloaks and white bonnets of The Handmaid’s Tale to protest abortion bans.

Similarly, The Extinction Rebellion–affiliated group Red Rebel Brigade stages actions in flowing red robes to mourn environmental loss.

And the wearing of the fishnet-patterned keffiyeh has now become a global symbol of Palestinian support.

Naked solidarity

On October 12, Portland’s anti-ICE demonstrators – many in their inflatable suits — were joined by thousands of naked cyclists in the Emergency World Naked Bike Ride. As costume designer and historian Camille Benda writes in Dressing The Resistance: The Visual Language of Protest (2021), nakedness in protest lays bare the body’s vulnerability to state violence.

In Portland, the mix of bare skin and soft blow-up animals heightens both the absurdity and tenderness of the scene. These protesters offer new avenues for direct action at a time when many people’s rights and freedoms are at stake.

At the time of writing, ICE was reported to have increased its weapons budget by 700% from last year.

Whether Trump will ultimately deploy the National Guard remains unclear. But across the US, the frogs (and their friends) keep multiplying. Their placards declaring “frogs together strong” remind us of the strength to be forged in unity and laughter.

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

– ref. Why US activists are wearing inflatable frog costumes at protests against Trump – https://theconversation.com/why-us-activists-are-wearing-inflatable-frog-costumes-at-protests-against-trump-267975

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachelle Kernen, Research Fellow, Geology, University of Adelaide

Salt is an essential nutrient for the human body. But hundreds of millions of years before the first humans, salt minerals once shaped entire landscapes. They even determined where early life on Earth could thrive.

Deep in Earth’s past, over millions of years, ancient seas evaporated, leaving behind thick layers of salt. These were eventually buried and turned into rock. These enormous layers of buried rock salt move slowly over time, deforming other layers of rock around them and creating “salt mountains” at Earth’s surface.

Our new research, published in the Geological Society of America Bulletin, investigates one of these ancient salt mountains – called salt diapirs – which formed beneath a shallow sea in the Precambrian period, about 640 million years ago.

Our study reveals this diapir in southern Australia was actively rising while reef ecosystems were developing in the waters above it. The Precambrian was a critical period for increasing complexity of life on Earth, and our research suggests these salt mountains played an important role.

A geological lava lamp

Salt diapirs are like slow-motion geological lava lamps. In a lava lamp, the warm, soft blobs at the bottom slowly rise through the liquid, bending and stretching as they move.

Underground, rock salt behaves a bit like those blobs – it moves upward over millions of years, forming complex shapes. Thick layers of buried rock salt rise because they’re less dense and more flexible than the overlying rocks.

When the salt rises upward, it forms a structure geologists call a diapir. It’s a kind of dome of salt surrounded by distorted rock layers. These structures can be many kilometres tall and wide.

In present day environments, salt diapirs are found both on land and beneath the ocean floor. They often host vibrant communities of living things – from unique soils to deep-sea organisms that survive without sunlight.

Signs of early life

Geologists studying ancient environments have found preserved evidence of salt diapir structures in the rock record. These are well known from the spectacular Flinders Ranges in South Australia, which formed at a time of major changes in climate and life on Earth during the Neoproterozoic era 1 billion to 541 million years ago.

Our location for this study was the Enorama diapir, in the Ikara-Flinders Ranges National Park, Adnyamathanha Yarta Country.

We found evidence that the formation of this underwater salt mountain provided the right conditions for early life to thrive in the environments right above it. We propose that diapir movement formed the right topography for these ecosystems to develop.

In Earth’s history – especially before complex animals evolved – life often faced long stretches of global hardship: ice ages, extreme heat and major changes in ocean chemistry.

During these times, specialised environments like those around salt diapirs may have acted as refuges, providing shelter when the wider world was inhospitable. When conditions improved, the survivors from these refuges could spread out again, helping repopulate the oceans.

In this way, salt diapirs may have quietly played a role in life’s persistence through mass extinctions and other crises.

Reefs, but not like the ones we know today

In the Precambrian, the sea hosted carbonate reefs, ecosystems that were much less complex than coral reefs are today.

These reefs were formed from stromatolites, colonies of cyanobacteria microorganisms, which precipitated carbonate minerals in-between grains of sand and mud, slowly building rock layers.

Stromatolites have been on Earth for more than 3 billion years, making them one of the planet’s oldest life forms. Over geologic time, carbonate reefs have evolved from simple stromatolites to increasingly complex ecosystems and their connected environments.

While we studied just one salt diapir, there is widespread evidence for salt diapirs in the Precambrian globally. Our research concludes salt diapirs may have played a critical role in the development of stromatolite reefs during this time.

Diapirs are still relevant today

Understanding how salt diapirs grew and shaped ecosystems in the past helps scientists make sense of rock properties deep beneath the surface today. These are directly relevant for modern water, mineral and energy resources.

Buried salt diapirs influence how fluids move through rocks, affecting the flow of water and other materials such as petroleum, copper, carbon dioxide and hydrogen.

Geologists studying ancient salt-related environments are helping design hydrogen storage projects. An alternative to natural gas for energy, hydrogen can be injected deep underground during times of abundant hydrogen production. Then, it can be retrieved when needed.

Lessons from the past, including how life adapted to salty settings, are contributing directly into strategies for a more sustainable future.

The next time you see a grain of table salt, imagine it buried deep beneath the seabed as part of a thick salt layer, slowly rising. As it rises, it reshapes the sea floor and creates environments that support the development of an ecosystem.

Beneath the ocean waves, sunlight filters over stromatolite reefs, tiny creatures shelter in their crevices, and life thrives.

Rachelle Kernen receives funding from the Australian Research Council, bp, Woodside, and NT and SA state governments. She is a member of the Hydrogen Society of Australia, the Geological Society of Australia, the SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology, and the International Association of Sedimentologists.

Kathryn Amos receives funding from the Australian Research Council, bp, Chevron Australia and the SA state government. She is a member of the Geological Society of Australia, SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology, and the International Association of Sedimentologists.

– ref. Ancient ‘salt mountains’ in southern Australia once created refuges for early life – https://theconversation.com/ancient-salt-mountains-in-southern-australia-once-created-refuges-for-early-life-268106

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sora Park, Professor of Communication, News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra

Misinformation has become a routine part of daily life, shaping public discourse and distorting perceptions. A new report reveals that in the two weeks prior to the 2025 federal election, almost two-thirds (60%) of adults reported coming across election misinformation. Only 19% didn’t come across it and 21% were unsure.

Many Australians are frustrated and overwhelmed by misinformation. They also lack the time and skills to fact-check, and feel governments and platforms should be doing more to combat it.

Only 41% of adults are confident they can check whether online information is true, and 40% say they can check whether a social media post can be trusted. Low confidence leads to higher concern. Almost three-quarters (73%) say they are concerned about the spread of false election information.

This low confidence and heightened anxiety can lead to disengagement from news and politics. When people see something they suspect is election misinformation, they are more likely to ignore it (44%) than check the facts (25%). The pervasive nature of election misinformation could be turning people away from democratic institutions and processes.

Many people don’t investigate dubious information because they experience political burnout. Even if someone does have the ability to verify misinformation, they may choose not to apply the skill or knowledge. Instead, audiences who are bothered by information uncertainty disengage altogether.

Our study

We asked people to identify misinformation by giving them five examples of false information on social media that were circulated during the election campaign. These examples were provided by a professional fact-checker. For political balance, two were misinformation about the Labor Party, two were misinformation about the Liberal-National coalition, and one was politically neutral.

Many participants were unsure or said “no”, these weren’t misinformation. This suggests ordinary people differ from fact-checkers in their perceptions of election misinformation. The proportion who correctly identified the misinformation ranged from 43% to 58% across the five examples. The misinformation targeting Labor had higher percentages of accurate responses (48% and 58%). The non-partisan example had the lowest score, with only 43% of respondents identifying it as misinformation.

It is important to note that 16–34% of respondents in this study replied “unsure”. This confirms the indifference and disengagement with politics among many Australian voters.

There are stark differences between left, centre and right-leaning respondents in their responses. Those who identify as left-wing were much more likely to identify misinformation in the two posts that were about Labor (67% and 80%) than the two posts about the coalition (30% and 51%) or the non-partisan example (53%).

Similarly, those who identified right-wing were more likely to identify the two posts that were about the coalition (61% and 55%) than when the content concerned Labor (39% and 45%) or was non-partisan (43%).

Perceptions of misinformation are strongly tied to one’s beliefs and identity. People can still believe false information even if it contradicts factual knowledge. This is because acceptance is a mentally easier process than rejection.

Rejection of information as false involves an additional cognitive process that requires motivation and resources. When information does not align with people’s beliefs, they tend to determine it to be false.

Quality news matters

We found an important link between having access to quality news and people’s ability to verify information. Those who regularly access news and are informed are much less likely to be vulnerable to misinformation. They also feel more empowered to participate in politics.

Those who have received media literacy education are also more likely to be able to discern misinformation and react responsibly to misinformation. The findings suggest that media literacy education, combined with improved access to quality news, can be an effective way to help people navigate the online environment and discern misinformation.

Misinformation will likely be a problem no matter how much we try to reduce or remove it from our information ecosystem. It is timely that the federal government is developing a National Media Literacy Strategy.

There are some steps that can be taken to combat misinformation.

First, the legal and regulatory environment must enable proactive measures to reduce misinformation. Digital platforms must be transparent about how they target particular groups of people.

Second, factual, quality information that can counteract misinformation should be amplified. People need to have trusted sources of news and information they can turn to.

Finally, we can improve people’s media literacy level so that they can discern misinformation and know how to respond with confidence. Our data show more than half of the respondents (51%) have never received media literacy education.

The Australian public expressed strong views and a clear desire for intervention regarding the regulation of the online environment, particularly concerning election misinformation.

The majority of respondents – 70% – support the view that the government should take steps to restrict false information on social media, even if it limits freedom to publish and access information.

Moreover, 83% support truth in advertising laws to be implemented at a national level.

Sora Park receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Creative Australia, and Boundless Earth.

Jee Young Lee receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Creative Australia and Boundless Earth.

Kieran McGuinness has received funding from Google News Initiative and the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

– ref. Misinformation was rife during the 2025 election. New research shows many people were unable to identify it – https://theconversation.com/misinformation-was-rife-during-the-2025-election-new-research-shows-many-people-were-unable-to-identify-it-267852

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dale Boccabella, Associate Professor of Taxation Law, UNSW Sydney

Back in May, the parent companies of private hospital operator Healthscope fell into receivership, burdened by A$1.6 billion in debt.

Since then, Healthscope’s hospitals have been kept open while receivers have worked to find buyers for the business. But now, the groundwork has also been laid for a potential restructuring of Healthscope as a charity.

This would allow the new entity to access a number of tax benefits – including tax exemptions on “fringe benefits” provided to employees.

On its own, this might not appear all that controversial. However, Healthscope reportedly wants to access a substantial proportion of the tax break that would normally accrue to the employee. Employees have been asked to vote on the proposal.

What are fringe benefits?

A fringe benefit is a form of compensation provided to an employee by an employer, in addition to salary or wages.

Salary packaging is essentially breaking the employee compensation into salary and fringe benefits. For example, an employer pays certain costs for an employee – such as rent and mortgage payments, or their children’s school fees – and in return the employee agrees to have their salary reduced.

Any employer can provide fringe benefits to employees. But some organisations, including not-for-profit hospitals, are eligible for exemptions from the fringe benefits tax, up to a cap.

For not-for-profit and public hospitals, the tax-free benefit to each employee is capped at a “grossed-up” value of the benefit of $17,000, which works out to be roughly $9,000 in value of benefits per year.

For current purposes, the thinking behind the grossed-up value of a benefit need not be explored; our focus should be on the $9,000 figure, the economic value of a benefit.

The main justification for this tax exemption is that not-for-profit hospitals cannot pay the same sort of salaries as the for-profit sector to attract staff. This concession helps balance things out a bit.

An example of salary packaging

Let’s illustrate salary packaging with an example relevant to the Healthscope proposed scenario.

Say an employee is on a taxable income of $80,000 (wages). The top part of this (every dollar over $45,000) attracts the 30% marginal tax rate. For simplicity, ignore the 2% Medicare levy.

A not-for-profit hospital employer could ask this employee to “give up” the top $10,000 of their pre-tax wages. In return, the hospital could agree to pay $9,000 of the worker’s private expenses, such as rent or mortgage payments.

The employee is not taxed on receipt of this $9,000 in benefits. And because of the concession, the not-for-profit hospital wouldn’t have to pay employer fringe benefits tax on it either.

The employee is better off by $2,000 ($9,000 compared to the $7,000 of after-tax income where cash salary is paid). The employer (a charity) has also reduced its costs from $10,000 (wages) to $9,000 (benefit). The only “loser” would be the public purse.

Administration fee

An administration fee for a salary packaging arrangement is standard, either a fixed fee or small percentage of the tax saving made and accruing to the employee.

However, the Healthscope proposal would reportedly require the employee to “hand over” a large portion of the tax saving – as much as 90% in certain circumstances.

The Healthscope “fee” seems too high to just recoup the employer’s administrative costs for the salary packaging.

Legal considerations

Would the proposed compensation switch be legally effective? The answer is unclear.

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) may be concerned with this. That’s because the salary packaging would be done in a different environment to the ordinary type of packaging, because the employer changed from a taxable entity into an tax-exempt entity.

This is unusual, especially when the taxable entity is in financial distress, like Healthscope.

The counterargument is that Healthscope would be accessing a specific concession – provided to a not-for-profit hospital in the fringe benefits tax legislation – for the “benefit” of employees in a certain sector.

What about ethics?

Whether Healthscope’s proposal is ethical is another question and brings in subjective considerations. It is fair to say that Healthscope’s charity option is drawing on the tax system to help implement a lower cost structure to its operations.

It could reignite the long-standing debate about the appropriateness of allowing tax-exempt charities and other not-for-profits to operate large businesses (and obtain/retain tax exemption) in competition with taxable, for-profit companies.

Many other tax concessions could also become available on the switch to a charity, such as exemption from company income tax and exemption from state taxes, including payroll tax – a state tax on wages paid by employers.

The potential for lost income tax revenue is not clear-cut because Healthscope may not have paid much income tax lately anyway. Given the number of employees (around 19,000), the loss of payroll tax to the states could be significant on the switch to a registered charity.

The business is still for sale

It’s important to note that Healthscope’s receivers are still inviting offers for the sale of its hospital businesses. The charity option is just one option the receivers want to lay the groundwork for.

It is highly advisable for employees of Healthscope to obtain independent advice on the proposal’s possible financial impacts – such as whether employer superannuation contributions are required on fringe benefits – before voting on what appears to be an amendment to the enterprise agreement.

Dale Boccabella 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. Here’s why a plan to turn private hospital giant Healthscope into a charity is stirring debate – https://theconversation.com/heres-why-a-plan-to-turn-private-hospital-giant-healthscope-into-a-charity-is-stirring-debate-267855

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan Mordaunt, Research Fellow, Faculty of Education, Health, and Psychological Sciences, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

It might seem counter-intuitive in a sport built around speed, but the world governing body for competitive cycling wants to slow elite riders down.

Worried about high-speed crashes during pro-racing events, the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) has proposed a cap on the gear size riders can use. The idea is to lower the possible top speed bikes can achieve.

The risks are real, too. At the recent Tour Down Under Men’s Classic in Australia, a high-speed multi-rider crash on the final corner sent bikes into the barriers and into the crowd, badly injuring a spectator.

In August this year, champion British rider Chris Froome crashed while training in France, suffering a collapsed lung, broken ribs and a spinal fracture.

But would restricting gear size prevent these kinds of high-speed crashes? Certainly, not everyone thinks so.

Earlier this month, a Belgian court paused the rule change after teams and a major cycle component maker argued the safety case was not proven. While slower bikes might sound safer, they argue, the evidence tells a different story.

What the evidence tells us

The proposed rule would limit the largest gear size to 54 teeth on the front chainring and 11 on the rear sprocket. The idea is simple: lower the top gear to reduce top speed and, in theory, cut risk.

But while speed clearly matters when it comes to crashes, it is only one part of how they happen in a tightly packed peloton (the main pack of riders in a road race).

Our recent review of 18 studies of race speed and crash risk found two clear patterns:

• higher speed makes injuries worse once a crash occurs
• but the link between speed and the chance of crashing is weaker and depends on context.

Injury rates in the UCI WorldTour have climbed even though average race speeds have been steady. So, something else is at work.

We also examined the proposed gear cap itself. Based on our analysis, we argue any rule change should be evidence-based rather than simply a reaction to pressure after high-profile incidents.

Understanding why crashes occur is central to this. Essentially, they are about people and space, and happen for a number of reasons:

• when riders fight for position as they enter a narrowing corner
• when sprint “trains” (riders in the same team lining up for aerodynamic efficiency) cross wheels
• or when road “furniture” appears too late to be avoided.

In this year’s Paris–Nice race, for example, Mattias Skjelmose struck a traffic island at speed and abandoned the race. Reports described it as a poorly marked obstacle.

Course design, peloton density and inconsistent rule enforcement often play a bigger role than a few extra kilometres per hour.

Why a gear limit won’t help much

On hill descents, where many serious injuries occur, riders freewheel in a tucked body position. Gravity and aerodynamics set the speed – gearing does not.

When riders are actually pedalling in a sprint, a 54×11 gear at high “cadence” (around 110–120 revolutions per minute) gives a speed of roughly 65 kilometres per hour (km/h). The very fastest finishes in elite men’s races reach about 75 km/h – the absolute peak speed.

A cap on gearing would trim roughly 5–10 km/h from the top-end, bringing the fastest sprints down to around 65–70 km/h. But most sprint pileups start below those speeds and are triggered by contact or line changes.

Lowering everyone’s top speed could even bunch the field more tightly and raise the risk of contact. The pro-cycling world already knows what helps:

• smarter course design that removes blind corners and tight bottlenecks
• standard barriers and better planning for road furniture
• consistent enforcement of dangerous riding and sprint deviations
• open incident data so researchers can calculate risk-to-speed ratios and target hazards.

These steps match what other high-speed sports have done to reduce injuries. Motor sports redesign the environment rather than just limit speed, with NASCAR and IndyCar having adopted energy-absorbing barriers to cut wall-impact forces.

And alpine skiing manages risk with course design, as well as nets and airbag protection to control speed and crash severity.

Similar approaches to safety are used in aviation, mining and healthcare. The aim is to focus on the environment and behaviour, measure exposure, fix the hotspots and share what works to keep improving safety.

Dylan Mordaunt is a physician and health economist who has cycled competitively and recreationally for almost 40 years.

– ref. Pro-cycling crashes can be bad, but evidence suggests slower bikes aren’t the answer – https://theconversation.com/pro-cycling-crashes-can-be-bad-but-evidence-suggests-slower-bikes-arent-the-answer-267524

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Spies-Butcher, Associate professor of economy and society, Macquarie University

Housing was a key issue during the 2025 federal election. In a campaign fought on the cost of living, rising housing costs – rents, mortgage repayments and house prices – were issues that that all parties had to address.

Major housing announcements were key to the campaign launches of both the Albanese government and the Peter Dutton-led opposition.

While all parties agreed housing needed urgent attention, they were divided over how to fix it. Labor and the Coalition focused on first homebuyers and housing supply. The Greens emphasised rent control and social housing, and One Nation campaigned on cutting immigration and taxes on building materials for new houses.

The Australian Cooperative Election Survey (ACES) collected responses from over 4,000 voters during the campaign in April 2025. Over 1,000 of these voters were then asked about their views on housing. The results offer a detailed insight about the impact of housing on the election outcome.

A new report by the Macquarie University Housing and Urban Research Centre analyses the ACES results, revealing the importance of housing to politics on the left and right.

It is clear from our data that Australian society is still coming to terms with the fading promise of homeownership. They are also struggling to agree on the reasons why housing is such a huge problem, and how it can be addressed.

Everyone agrees on housing: it’s a crisis

Voters left us in no doubt about their feelings on the importance and urgency of the housing problem. An overwhelming share of respondents – 89% – agreed Australia is currently facing a housing crisis, with just 2% disagreeing.

Renters and young voters were more likely to “strongly agree” that housing is in crisis than homeowners, property investors and older people. Greens voters and voters on the populist right (One Nation and Trumpet of Patriots) were more likely to agree than Labor or Coalition voters.

But the differences were minor: the near-universal agreement about the extent of the housing problem is unusual in contemporary Australian politics.

Despite the landslide, Labor’s housing performance was marked down

Despite Labor’s landslide victory, voters did not endorse the Albanese government’s performance on housing policy. Only 16% were in any way satisfied, while a total of 34% were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Half were “neither satisfied nor dissatisfied” or “unsure”. This suggests many voters were either unaware of or ambivalent about the government’s policies.

Dissatisfaction was widespread, found in roughly equal measure regardless of age and housing tenure. Investors were just as dissatisfied as renters, and both just slightly more than owners.

Labor’s electoral advantage on housing, however slight, appears to have come from offering voters modest, incremental policy responses that did not alienate voter groups. But they did not excite anyone either: even Labor voters were not particularly enthused, with only 37% expressing satisfaction.

So what do voters think is causing the crisis?

Many voters identified immigration playing a key role, along with high house prices, interest rates, and a lack of supply. These findings are consistent with the recent resurgence of anti-immigration populism.

While Australia’s economy and ageing population increasingly depend on immigration, the housing and cost of living crises are being successfully exploited by far-right political parties and movements.

However, looking deeper, we found voter reactions varied considerably depending on where they were situated in the crisis.

When it comes to causes of the housing crisis, immigration dominates responses from older voters (65 years and over) as well as outright homeowners. But for younger voters, aged 18-34 years, high interest rates and low wage growth are the top drivers.

What’s more, younger voters who are most affected by the housing crisis are less likely to see immigration as either cause or solution. Instead, they are looking to government for a new social contract on housing.

Despite the overall popularity of cutting immigration, there is a strong partisan divide on this approach, with very strong support among both Coalition and populist right voters, but more qualified, lower support among Labor and Greens voters.

For those most affected by housing, such as younger renters, direct intervention into housing markets is the priority. We asked respondents what three policies would help most in reducing housing costs.

For voters aged 18-34 years, limits on rent increases (44%) ranks first, followed by higher rent assistance (39%) and more investment in public housing (37%). Limiting rent increases also tops the list of priorities for private renters, and for Greens voters. For these voters, immigration is not the key – and nor is one of the government’s primary policy responses, which is to increase supply.

Our research found that most voters want an increase in the housing supply, and most see supply problems as playing a role in this crisis.

However, few voters prioritised supply measures as a solution. Asked about their top priorities for reform, planning faded as an option. Among young voters and private renters, allowing greater density and simplifying planning rules ranked 7th and 8th from a list of nine options.

Responsive housing policies may re-engage disaffected voters

For those troubled about a rising anti-migration mood, the findings hold potential lessons. Rent controls give tenants more security by protecting them from large rent increases. “Limiting rent increases for private renters” is not only favoured by young people and Greens voters, but it was the second most favoured policy among voters on the populist right. Asked if they supported limits on rent increases, a solid 58% of a small sample of those voters said they would.

Alongside generational and partisan divides, there is an insider-outsider divide in Australia’s housing debate. As Zohran Mamdani’s growing support in the New York mayoral race suggests, economic populism – where government plays a more direct role protecting voters from economic risk – enjoys support beyond the left. New or bolder thinking might be key to bridging this divide, reaching younger people left out of Australia’s housing system.

Ben Spies-Butcher has a current industry partnership with the Tenants Union NSW and receives funding from the Australian Public Policy Institute and Australian Research Council. He has previously been a board member of Shelter NSW and office bearer of the Australian Greens, but no longer holds these positions.

Adam Stebbing has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

Alistair Sisson has received funding from the Tenants’ Union of NSW, Shelter NSW, QShelter, National Shelter, Australian Council of Social Service, Mission Australia, City of Sydney and Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute. He is a member of Shelter NSW.

Kristian Ruming receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Shaun Wilson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Most Australians agree there’s a housing crisis. But they differ on what’s causing it – and how to fix it – https://theconversation.com/most-australians-agree-theres-a-housing-crisis-but-they-differ-on-whats-causing-it-and-how-to-fix-it-267963

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Steell, Research Fellow in Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge

Most of our knowledge of New Zealand’s prehistoric bird diversity comes from long-lost species with bones large enough to be studied by eye. But many bird bones are so tiny we can barely see their features without a microscope.

Some 14 to 19 million years ago, in the Miocene epoch, the remains of thousands of birds were preserved in and around the vast Lake Manuherikia, located in present-day Central Otago.

We know a lot about some of the lake’s larger birds such as ducks. But we have less information on smaller birds such as the highly diverse passerines, which include songbirds. Modern species in this group include the tūī and tauhou/silvereyes.

The minute bones of passerines are difficult to find in the field, and only come to light after many hours of painstaking sorting under a microscope. But technologies such as micro-CT scanning are now helping to reveal their secrets.

Our new research adds a quirky new passerine to the fossil record of Aotearoa and shows just how unique its ancient biodiversity was. The new species appears to be in the bowerbird family of songbirds, which are not native in New Zealand today.

Made famous by Sir David Attenborough’s nature documentaries, bowerbirds are best known for their elaborate courtship behaviour and the males’ efforts to decorate bowers with coloured fruit or leaves to attract a mate. These showy males are often brightly coloured, while females are more drab – and very choosy about their mates.

Until now, bowerbirds and their fossil relatives have only been found in Australia and New Guinea.

The St Bathans bowerbird

Among all the tiny bones found in the St Bathans fossil site, a curious foot bone stood out. When we compared digital models of the fossil to a great number of other passerines, it bore all the hallmarks of a bowerbird; but this one was much smaller and more slender than living bowerbirds.

It’s name is Aevipertidus gracilis – the gracile one from a lost age.

The size of Aevipertidus gracilis would make it the smallest known bowerbird. Most living bowerbirds are chunky, weighing anywhere from 62 to 265 grams and spending time both on the ground and in the forest canopy.

New Zealand’s bowerbird weighed around 33 grams, similar to a korimako/bellbird but with longer feet.

Our analysis suggests the St Bathans bowerbird foot was most similar in shape to a group known to construct walk-through avenue bowers, such as the brightly coloured flame bowerbird.

We can only speculate about its plumage and behaviour, but Aevipertidus gracilis may also have performed elaborate displays to attract a mate.

The St Bathans bowerbird joins other New Zealand passerines with an ancient history – including huia, kōkako, piopio and mohua – whose ancestors flew across the ocean to Zealandia millions of years ago.

The St Bathans bowerbird lived far from its relatives in warm Australia and New Guinea. If it was a fruit eater, it may have been poorly equipped for temperatures that began dropping dramatically around 14 million years ago and caused a reduction in plant diversity. Ultimately, it may have become a victim of climate change.

Conservation palaeobiology

Fossils like the St Bathans bowerbird as well as genetic research are revealing New Zealand’s story of bird evolution, with extinctions and repeated colonisations across geological time.

For example, prehistoric shelducks colonised ancient Zealandia, only for them to go extinct. Around two million years ago, ancestors of the pūtangitangi/paradise shelduck recolonised New Zealand.

The same is true for the ancient passerine relatives of magpies, which went extinct after the Miocene. But unlike the native shelducks, modern makipai/Australian magpies were introduced by Europeans in the 1860s.

Some researchers suggest these long-extinct species muddy the concept of what is native or introduced in New Zealand, using magpies as an example.

Even though ancient magpie relatives once lived in Zealandia, it doesn’t mean their living cousins belong in the modern ecosystem. This thinking could undermine conservation management and lead to ecosystems being more degraded by invasive species.

The St Bathans wonderland existed in a Zealandia before the Southern Alps rose to create the South Island’s backbone. Lake Manuherikia was home to many plants and animals, including crocodilians and tortoises, making it very different from what is there today. It doesn’t make sense to consider these ancient animals as native in modern Aotearoa.

New discoveries like the St Bathans bowerbird provide wonderful insights into New Zealand’s biological heritage. Let’s celebrate these discoveries as clues to the past and not use them to undermine the ongoing fight to protect the country’s special living plants and animals.

We thank the coauthors on our paper, Daniel Field and Alex Brown, Sasha Votyakova for the artist’s reconstruction, the landowners at St Bathans for access to their land, Jean-Claude Stahl for preparation of the fossil photos, and numerous fieldworkers who helped with our excavations.

Elizabeth Steell received funding from Girton College and Newnham College, University of Cambridge, UK.

Alan Tennyson received funding from the Te Papa Collection Development Fund and the Australian Research Council.

Nic Rawlence receives funding from the Royal Society Te Apārangi Marsden Fund.

Pascale Lubbe receives funding from Royal Society Te Apārangi Marsden Fund

– ref. A tiny fossil suggests bowerbirds once lived in ancient New Zealand – new research – https://theconversation.com/a-tiny-fossil-suggests-bowerbirds-once-lived-in-ancient-new-zealand-new-research-267104

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Speck, Emerita Professor, Art History and Curatorship, University of Adelaide

The Tarnanthi Festival of Contemporary Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art began in 2015. The title of the exhibition celebrating Tarnanthi a decade on, Too Deadly, underscores the level of excellence Tarnanthi has achieved in terms of the sheer number of artists involved, new work commissioned and its reach to new audiences.

As Megan Davis said in her speech to launch the 2025 exhibition, art leads to conversations about First Nations people, their history and beliefs.

Tarnanthi is a biennial festival with a difference. It consists of a major exhibition at the Art Gallery of South Australia, satellite exhibitions in city, metropolitan and regional galleries, and an ethically run art fair.

Underpinning these exhibitions and events is the central Tarnanthi practice of empowering First Nations artists to develop new work, to bring it to light. This has been, and is, central to Tarnanthi’s success.

Under festival director Nici Cumpston, a relational curatorial model was developed with several key elements – listening to and encouraging First Nations artists, giving centrality to artist-led projects, supporting cultural continuity projects, and facilitating innovation rooted in tradition.

Work of the decade

The most compelling work of the decade is on show in Too Deadly. This includes Western Aranda artist Vincent Namatjira’s endearing Charles on Country (2022). It depicts the British King regally dressed, but looking out of place, as if he has strayed onto someone else’s Country.

Namatjira considers art a weapon, softened with humour. As he explains in the accompanying exhibition catalogue:

I like to paint with a little bit of humour, humour takes away some of their power and keeps us all equal.

On entering the exhibition space, viewers are confronted by Kokatha/Nukunu artist Yhonnie Scarce’s extraordinarily impressive recreation of an atomic mushroom cloud in Thunder raining poison (2015), made of 2,000 suspended glass yams.

Its beguiling beauty revisits the enduring tragedy wrought on Aboriginal people in central Australia by sustained atomic testing from 1952–63. Scarce grew up in Woomera, near Maralinga, and is acutely aware of the removal of Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara people from their traditional lands, which were destroyed. These events haunt her as “one of the most hidden histories within Australia”.

The mood changes with Maluyligal/Wuthathi/Dayak artist Brian Robinson, whose large-scale wall installation Empyreal: a Place and a Path in the Sky and on the Earth (2019) portrays the sky as a navigational tool and spiritual realm.

Reading his massive map in black and white, dotted with red floral motifs, is a lesson in navigating the night skies from open Country, well away from populated centres.

Gail Mabo’s Tagai (2021) similarly brings navigation of the Torres Strait islands to the fore.

Powerful work on show

The monumental three-by-five-metre collaborative canvas painting Kungkarangkalpa: Seven Sisters (2016) by 24 female Anangu artists of the APY (Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara) Lands speaks to the many ambitious projects Tarnanthi has fostered.

The Anangu songline recounted is the pursuit of the seven sisters by the antihero Nyiru. This painting is exhibited here alongside the ingenious and animated weaving Paarpakani (take flight) and Tjanpi Punu (trees) (both 2011) by the Tjanpi Desert Weavers.

Tiwi art took centre stage in Tarnanthi 2019. The display in Too Deadly of the Tutini (burial poles), paintings and works on paper with distinctive Tiwi designs is testament to the strength of culture. A small number point to cross-cultural interaction such as trading ships, and the influence of Christianity.

There are many other powerful works on show.

Kuninjku artist John Mawurndjul’s Namanjwarre, saltwater crocodile (1988) is an intricate and detailed bark painting.

The APY Art Centre Collective’s Kulata Tjuta (2017) is a confronting installation of traditional spears, surrounded by empty piti (food collecting bowls) simulating one of the disastrous atomic explosions in Central Australia and its enduring damage to Country.

Tony Albert and Alair Pambegan’s Frontier Wars Bone Fish Story Place (2014) is a bold installation merging the violence of the frontier wars with the upending of traditional life for those affected. Pambegan, a Wik-Mungkan man from Aurukun, is a custodian of the bone fish story. This work displays a line of dead fish shaped like bullets, gesturing towards the shocking history of the frontier wars.

The magnificent Ngarrindjeri weaving Eel trap (2015) by Yvonne Koolmatrie hovers, suspended in the air, its size giving gravity and importance to a functional vessel widely used for catching eels. Its considered design ensured restricted numbers of eels would be caught, preserving the eel population.

A new national art history

Close to the end of the exhibition is a moving series of black and white photographs by Pakana artist Ricky Maynard, Saddened were the hearts of many men (2015).

Each man‘s gaze confronts the viewer with their lived experience of pain, injustice and inequity.

Over 10 years, Tarnanthi has fostered many ambitious projects. Too Deadly is a distillation of a decade’s exhibits in which the diversity of the aesthetic, the depth of subject matter, the geographical range of artists and the ingenuity of medium creates a new national art history.

Too Deadly: Ten Years of Tarnanthi is on show at the Art Gallery of South Australia until January 18 2026.

Catherine Speck has in the past received ARC funding to research Australian art exhibitions..

– ref. A decade of Tarnanthi: how a festival of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art creates a new national art history – https://theconversation.com/a-decade-of-tarnanthi-how-a-festival-of-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-art-creates-a-new-national-art-history-267636

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Davis, Chair of Women’s Health, Monash University

Social media widely promotes testosterone as an essential part of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT, also known as hormone replacement therapy or HRT) to treat low mood, brain fog and loss of vitality.

As a result, some women who aren’t prescribed it as part of the MHT regimen feel they are missing out.

At menopause, when menstruation finally stops, oestrogen levels fall substantially, which can cause symptoms such as hot flushes, night sweats and vaginal dryness. Replacing this oestrogen with MHT relieves these symptoms.

But our new research, published this week in The Lancet journal eBioMedicine, shows testosterone doesn’t change like oestrogen when women reach perimenopause or menopause.

Rather, testosterone declines with age.

We’ve long suspected this – but early tests weren’t reliable

Our 2005 study of 1,400 women showed testosterone blood levels did not change at menopause but gradually declined from the age of about 20.

This followed a smaller study of 172 women in 2000 which found no change in testosterone blood levels at menopause.

But these older studies need to be interpreted with caution. Testosterone was measured with chemical tests that were not able to accurately measure testosterone at low levels in women.

Since then, we have used newer, gold-standard methods that can accurately measure small amounts of testosterone.

Using these methods in a 2019 study of 588 women, we found the average decline in testosterone between the ages of 18 to 39 years was around 25%.

Our latest study examined the blood testosterone levels of 1,104 participants aged 40 to 69 years. The participants provided extensive menstrual cycle information, so we could determine whether each woman was pre-menopausal, perimenopausal or postmenopausal.

We excluded women taking medications that might impact their natural hormone levels, or who had other identifiable factors that would impact their hormones from our hormone analysis. Having a higher body mass index (BMI) and being a cigarette smoker, for example, are each associated with higher testosterone.

What our new study found

Participants’ testosterone blood levels declined, on average, by 25% between the ages of 40 and 58–59 years.

There were no measurable differences between women who were premenopausal, perimenopausal or postmenopausal.

Postmenopausal women who had both ovaries surgically removed had lower blood testosterone levels than postmenopausal women with at least one ovary. This provides additional evidence that women’s ovaries continue to be the source of some testosterone after menopause.

Interestingly, testosterone blood levels subtly increased from the age of 58–59 years. This echoes our 2005 study which found testosterone blood levels bottomed out at around the age of 62 years, and then gradually increased.

All of these findings are changes that occur on average. Not everyone will experience the same changes we observed. Some might experience more or less change with age.

So how does testosterone change over a woman’s lifespan?

Combined with our past studies and other research, our latest study has enabled us to build a picture of testosterone across a woman’s lifespan.

Testosterone levels tend to decrease by around 50% from about age 20 through to about age 60.

Then they begin to subtly increase, with the trend for levels to increase continuing into the eight and ninth decades of life. We are yet to understand why these changes occur.

Whether low testosterone is associated with symptoms needs further exploration. However, research to date suggests women with low testosterone aren’t more likely to have lower sexual desire, poorer muscle mass or lower mood.

Nonetheless, the gradual increase in testosterone may partly explain the age-related hair thinning and bothersome facial hair growth many women in their sixties and older experienced.

What does this mean for testosterone therapy?

Researchers proposed the idea of an “testosterone deficiency syndrome” in menopausal women more than 20 years ago. This was before testosterone had been measured across women’s lifespans and before robust studies of the relationships between blood testosterone levels and specific symptoms.

Our research refutes the belief that menopause causes testosterone deficiency, and that testosterone supplementation is an essential part of MHT.

Multiple clinical trials have shown testosterone treatment can modestly improve sexual desire in postmenopausal women who have experienced a change in their sexual desire that bothers them.

However there is currently no robust or consistent evidence that testosterone therapy will improve any symptoms for women other than low sexual desire after menopause.

Therefore, the international clinical guidelines state it should only be prescribed for low sexual desire in postmenopausal women.

We are currently evaluating the effects of testosterone on women’s muscle function and bone density and will report these findings in 2026.

Read more:
Don’t believe the hype. Menopausal women don’t all need to check – or increase – their testosterone levels

Susan Davis holds an NHMRC Investigator Grant and works at Monash university. SRD has prepared and delivered educational presentations for Besins Healthcare, Abbott Laboratories, Bayer, Astellas and Theramex, has served on Advisory Boards for Astellas and Besins Healthcare, and as a consultant to Besins Healthcare, and has received institutional grant funding from Lawley Pharmaceuticals for research.

YuanYuan Wang 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. Testosterone levels decline with age, not menopause, despite what you’ve heard – https://theconversation.com/testosterone-levels-decline-with-age-not-menopause-despite-what-youve-heard-267744

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Luke Heemsbergen, Senior Lecturer in Communication, Deakin University

Over the weekend, Education Minister Jason Clare sounded the alarm about “AI chatbots bullying kids”.

As he told reporters in a press conference to launch a new anti-bullying review,

AI chatbots are now bullying kids […] humiliating them, hurting them, telling them they’re losers, telling them to kill themselves.

This sounds terrifying. However, evidence it is happening is less available.

Clare had recently emerged from a briefing of education ministers from eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant. While eSafety is worried about chatbots, it is not suggesting there is a widespread issue.

The anti-bullying review itself, by clinical psychologist Charlotte Keating and suicide prevention expert Jo Robinson, did not make recommendations about or mention of AI chatbots.

What does the evidence say about chatbots bullying kids? And what risks do these tools currently pose for kids online?

Bullying online

There’s no question human-led bullying online is serious and pervasive. The internet long ago extended cruelty beyond the school gate and into bedrooms, group chats, and endless notifications.

“Cyberbullying” reports to the eSafety Commissioner have surged by more than 450% in the past five years. A 2025 eSafety survey also showed 53% of Australian children aged 10–17 had experienced bullying online.

Now with new generative AI apps and similar AI functions embedded into common messaging platforms without customer consent (such as Meta’s Messenger), it’s reasonable for policymakers to ask what fresh dangers machine-generated content might bring.

Read more:
Our research shows how screening students for psychopathic and narcissistic traits could help prevent cyberbullying

eSafety concerns

An eSafety spokesperson told The Conversation it has been concerned about chatbots for “a while now” and has heard anecdotal reports of children spending up to five hours a day talking to bots, “at times sexually”.

eSafety added it was aware there had been a proliferation of chatbot apps and many were free, accessible, and even targeted to kids.

We’ve also seen recent reports of where AI chatbots have allegedly encouraged suicidal ideation and self-harm in conversations with kids with tragic consequences.

Last month, Inman Grant registered enforceable industry codes around companion chatbots – those designed to replicate personal relationships.

These stipulate companion chatbooks will need to have appropriate measures to prevent children accessing harmful material. As well as sexual content, this includes content featuring explicit violence, suicidal ideation, self-harm and disordered eating.

High-profile cases

There have been some tragic, high-profile cases in which AI has been implicated in the deaths of young people.

In the United States, the parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine allege that OpenAI’s ChatGPT “encouraged” their son to take his own life earlier this year.

Media reporting suggests Adam spent long periods talking to a chatbot while in distress, and the system’s safety filters failed to recognise or properly respond to his suicidal ideation.

In 2024, 14-year-old US teenager Sewell Setzer took his own life after forming a deep emotional attachment to a chatbot over months on the character.ai website, who asked him if he had ever considered suicide.

While awful, these cases do not demonstrate a trend of chatbots autonomously bullying children.

At present, no peer-reviewed research documents widespread instances of AI systems initiating bullying behaviour toward children, let alone driving them to suicide.

What’s really going on?

There are still many reasons to be concerned about AI chatbots.

A University of Cambridge study shows children often treat these bots as quasi-human companions, which can make them emotionally vulnerable when the technology responds coldly or inappropriately.

There is also a concern about AI “sychophancy” – or the tendency of a chatbot to agree with whoever is chatting to them, regardless of spiralling factual inaccuracy, inappropriateness, or absurdity.

Young people using chatbots for companionship or creative play may also come across unsettling content through poor model training (the hidden guides that influence what the bot will say) or their own attempts at adversarial prompting.

These are serious design and governance issues. But it is difficult to see them as bullying, which involves repeated acts intended to harm to a person, and so far, can only be assigned to a human (like copyright or murder charges).

The human perpetrators behind AI cruelty

Meanwhile, some of the most disturbing uses of AI tools by young people involve human perpetrators using generative systems to harass others.

This includes fabricating nude deepfakes or cloning voices for humiliation or fraud. Here, AI acts as an enabler of new forms of human cruelty, but not as an autonomous aggressor.

Inappropriate content – that happens to be made with AI – also finds children through familiar social media algorithms. These can steer kids from content such as Paw Patrol to the deeply grotesque in zero clicks.

What now?

We will need careful design and protections around chatbots that simulate empathy, surveil personal detail, and invite the kind of psychological entanglement that could make the vulnerable feel targeted, betrayed or unknowingly manipulated.

Beyond this, we also need broader, ongoing debates about how governments, tech companies and communities should sensibly respond as AI technologies advance in our world.

You can report online harm or abuse to the eSafety Commissioner.

If this article has reaised issues for you or someone you know, help is available 24/7:

– Lifeline: 13 11 14 or lifeline.org.au

– Kids Helpline (ages 5–25 and parents): 1800 55 1800 or kidshelpline.com.au

– Suicide Call Back Service (ages 15+): 1300 659 467 or suicidecallbackservice.org.au

– 13YARN (First Nations support): 13 92 76 or 13yarn.org.au.

Luke Heemsbergen 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. There is little evidence AI chatbots are ‘bullying kids’ – but this doesn’t mean these tools are safe – https://theconversation.com/there-is-little-evidence-ai-chatbots-are-bullying-kids-but-this-doesnt-mean-these-tools-are-safe-267957

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Altman, Vice Chancellor’s Fellow and Professorial Fellow, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

The latest allegations against Prince Andrew, in Virginia Giuffre’s book Nobody’s Girl, and reports that he and his wife, the Duchess of York, maintained contact with Jeffrey Epstein after his conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor, present an ongoing problem for the royal family.

Giuffre, who died by suicide earlier this year, accused Andrew of sexually assaulting her on three occasions when she was 17. He has repeatedly denied the accusations.

King Charles moved swiftly, ordering his brother to forsake both his title of royal highness and surrender the other orders of nobility that are bestowed on children of the monarch, whether deserved or not.

The removal of royal titles from Prince Andrew – still his name – is hardly the first time the royals have been ruthless in pursuit of respectability. Like other royal families who have survived into the 21st century, they combine celebrity with a keen sense of self-preservation.

History suggests that when scandal strikes, the royal instinct is to remove embarrassments from public view. This is more difficult when dealing with adults in an era of celebrity journalism. When Prince John, son of George V (who was king from 1910-1936), was found to be epileptic, he was carefully removed from public view and even from contact with his family. John died aged 14 and is largely forgotten.

More distressing was the revelation through a television documentary that two cousins of Queen Elizabeth II who had intellectual disabilities were institutionalised and ignored by the family, although the palace has denied this.

But these are minor examples compared to the scandals surrounding the abdication of Edward VIII, the refusal to allow Princess Margaret to marry Peter Townsend and the very public exile of Prince Harry to California. It seems the second in line to the throne has a peculiarly troubled life, as Prince Harry made clear in his memoir, Spare.

Those scandals all revolved around unsuitable marriages: Edward abdicated when he was forbidden to marry Wallis Simpson; Margaret finally married Tony Armstrong Jones and subsequently divorced him; Harry’s defection from Britain was the direct consequence of his marriage to Meghan Markle.

But whereas Edward could not marry a divorced woman, Charles divorced Diana while heir to the throne and after her death married his long-time mistress, Camilla. In time, Camilla has gone from being excoriated as “the other woman” to a widely accepted queen.

One has to go back a century at least to find a royal prince whose alleged behaviour is so clearly reprehensible – and presumably criminal – as that of Andrew. That he has escaped prosecution is itself troubling, although he paid Guiffre a very considerable settlement while maintaining his total innocence.

Like Harry, Andrew can only be removed from the line of succession by an act of parliament, but he is, after all, only eighth in line to the throne. The king has clearly decided Andrew will no longer be part of the official royal family, unlike his other siblings Anne and Edward.

Perhaps luckily, the prince cannot be shipped off to become a colonial governor, as was the fate of the Duke of Windsor during the second world war. Andrew will presumably be left to his own devices in the grounds of Windsor Castle, banished from family gatherings, which are always at the mercy of the paparazzi.

Hard questions may be asked about the cost to the British taxpayer of maintaining Andrew and Sarah, who live in a luxurious lodge and presumably are well cared for by servants. The British public seem largely unconcerned at the cost of maintaining even non-working members of “the firm”, rather as Australians rarely question the cost of maintaining seven vice-regal residences to maintain the fiction we are a monarchy.

Will this scandal affect the position of the royals? Almost certainly not: in Britain, as in Australia, the enthusiasm for abandoning constitutional monarchy appears to be declining. People can separate their outrage at Andrew from their respect for the monarchy, which is helped by the rise of populist autocrats such as US President Donald Trump.

When Trump visited Britain last month, he was a guest of Charles, who used his role as head of state consummately to flatter Trump with pomp and ceremony, while making clear he did not endorse all his positions.

With the popular William and Kate patiently waiting their turn, the British monarchy is likely to manage even a scandal as great as this one.

Dennis Altman is the author of God Save the Queen: the strange persistence of monarchies, Scribe 2021.

If you or someone you know is struggling, help is available. In Australia, you can contact Lifeline at 13 11 14 for confidential support.

Dennis Altman 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. How damaging to the royal family is the scandal surrounding Prince Andrew? – https://theconversation.com/how-damaging-to-the-royal-family-is-the-scandal-surrounding-prince-andrew-267983

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kinda Alsamara, Lecturer in the School of Languages and Cultures, The University of Queensland

Women’s political participation is often treated as a measure of a country’s commitment to equality and democracy.

Earlier this year, Syria’s new leader, President Ahmed al-Sharaa, described his country as moving in a “democratic direction” after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship in late 2024. He said:

If democracy means that the people decide who will rule them and who represents them in the parliament, then, yes, Syria is going in this direction.

Yet, in Syria’s recent parliamentary elections, women only won six seats in the 210-member body. Exclusion was not merely reflected in the outcome, it was engineered into the very structure of the process.

A long history of marginalisation

Assad ruled Syria with an iron fist for more than two decades through widespread repression, war crimes and systematic violence against civilians.

Parliamentary elections were highly controlled, with Assad’s Ba’ath Party and its allies dominating every vote. Women held between 6% and 13% of seats from 1981 to the end of Assad’s tenure, according to estimates from a global organisation of national parliaments.

Although the parliament had little real power, it served to legitimise Assad’s rule through the appearance of a democratic process.

In December 2024, al-Sharaa’s Islamist-led coalition took advantage of the power vacuum created by the decline of Iran’s regional influence and the collapse of its allied armed groups to oust Assad and dissolve Syria’s symbolic legislature.

Al-Sharaa’s rise was initially hailed as a potential turning point toward political reform and reconciliation. However, early signs suggest that entrenched patterns of marginalisation – especially of women – are continuing to shape Syria’s politics.

How women (and others) were sidelined

The recent parliamentary elections in early October did not factor in the people’s will, nor were they permitted to vote. They weren’t involved in the process at all.

Instead, the elections were overseen by a government body called the Supreme Judicial Committee for Elections, appointed by al-Sharaa. Its composition was revealing: nine men and only two women.

The process was complicated and deliberately exclusionary. The Supreme Judicial Committee was tasked with forming electoral subcommittees around the country, which then reviewed applicants for individuals to be appointed to electoral colleges. Only those selected were allowed to participate in the voting process or nominate candidates.

Ordinary citizens had no direct role in the election.

Under this framework, the electoral colleges selected representatives for two-thirds of the parliament seats. Al-Sharaa will appoint the remaining third.

Unsurprisingly, women’s representation in the subcommittees was minimal. Drawing on raw figures published on the official Syrian election website, women only constituted about 11% of all subcommittee members (18 out of roughly 180 nationwide).

Even where women did have decent representation, no female parliamentarians were elected. In Damascus, for example, women comprised nearly a third of the registered applicants (44 out of 145) for the electoral college and a third of the local subcommittee members. Yet, not a single woman from the capital was elected.

Minority representation was also limited. Of the 119 members elected so far, only ten belong to religious or ethnic minorities, including Kurds, Alawites and Christians (who won just two seats). Christians are believed to make up 10% of Syria’s 24 million population.

Previous research on gender and political institutions has shown that exclusionary electoral structures tend to produce exclusionary outcomes. Syria’s case fits this broader pattern.

Syrian officials have explained women’s exclusion as a cultural matter. Mohammad Taha al-Ahmad, the head of the Supreme Judicial Committee for Elections, appeared on television to express “surprise” at the low number of female candidates, attributing it a society that traditionally views politics as the domain of men. He said the results also reflected alliances (based on established male networks) that formed among members of the subcommittees.

While such attitudes undoubtedly shape gender dynamics, they cannot by themselves account for the low participation of women in the election.

Women were constrained from the outset. Invoking “culture” shifts the blame away from the institutional barriers.

Ultimately, this was not a free or fair election. When women’s involvement is reduced to symbolic inclusion under state supervision, elections cease to be instruments of representation and become performances of legitimacy.

What can be done?

Reversing this pattern requires more than rhetoric. There must be institutional reform, including:

• gender quotas that reserve a proportion of candidacies or seats for women, allowing them to gain political experience and visibility

• increased funding, training and local networking initiatives to help women build community-based constituencies

• reforming electoral processes to move toward more direct, transparent voting that limits alliances among elites and presidential control

• instituting new school curricula and civil society programs that normalise women’s participation in public life and challenge gendered perceptions of political leadership.

Until such reforms are enacted, Syria’s elections will continue to reflect not popular will, but the entrenched hierarchies of a state that governs through exclusion.

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. Syria’s new leader promised democracy. Then he excluded women from parliamentary elections – https://theconversation.com/syrias-new-leader-promised-democracy-then-he-excluded-women-from-parliamentary-elections-267625

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Blakers, Professor of Engineering, Australian National University

When Snowy 2.0 is in the news, it’s usually about money. The cost of the huge project has gone well beyond the initial A$6 billion estimate and will now cost more than $12 billion.

But cost overruns don’t affect the real value of this pumped hydro project. When it comes online – likely in 2028 – Snowy 2.0 will bring something fundamentally new to the Australian electricity system: energy storage at a scale far beyond anything else.

It will have five times more storage than all of Australia’s other pumped hydro and grid batteries combined, its capital cost is five times lower than batteries per unit of energy storage, and its lifetime is ten times longer than batteries. Our calculations show Snowy 2.0 will cost about one cent per day per Australian over its 150-year lifetime, assuming the final cost is between $15 billion and $18 billion.

Australia is aiming to have 82% of its electricity supplied by solar, wind and hydro in five years’ time, while coal generation declines rapidly. Storing variable renewable energy for later use will keep electricity supply reliable.

That’s where Snowy 2.0 and other planned large pumped hydro projects come in. Coupled with grid-scale batteries, these energy storage methods will allow us to wean ourselves off gas power.

How will Snowy 2.0 work?

Snowy 2.0 is an expansion of the original postwar Snowy Hydro Scheme. It links two existing reservoirs with a 27-kilometre tunnel and underground hydropower station. When power is cheap, water will be pumped uphill to the top reservoir. When power is expensive, water will run back downhill through the hydro station to produce electricity.

The project will be able to store 350 gigawatt-hours of energy – the equivalent of 7 million electric vehicle batteries, or 350 large grid batteries.

There has been scepticism over whether Snowy 2.0 will be able to perform as intended due to constraints in how much water can be moved around the system.

In fact, the Tumut River system, around which Snowy 2.0 is constructed, has plenty of flexibility, including five interconnected reservoirs with a total capacity 30 times larger than required for Snowy 2.0, and six hydropower stations.

Pumped hydro and batteries solve the energy storage problem

For years, Australia’s grid operators have relied on gas-fired power stations to meet sudden demand. Unlike coal, gas can fire up within minutes. The problem is, gas is no longer cheap, and now generates only 5% of east coast electricity. East coast gas prices have tripled since LNG exports began in 2015, inflating household power bills.

Gas has been a necessary evil to keep the grid reliable. But it’s now possible to begin displacing it using a combination of short-term storage in batteries and long-duration storage in large pumped hydro such as Snowy 2.0.

Batteries and pumped hydro are already replacing gas and coal generators in stabilising the grid. Energy storage now keeps Australians powered during increasingly common sudden failures of ageing coal power stations, or when transmission lines are damaged.

On sunny and windy days, Australia now regularly produces more electricity than it can use. As a result, wholesale electricity prices can become negative. This means energy storage companies are being paid to take and store excess electricity.

It’s hard for coal stations to shut down and restart quickly. As a result, they now scale back as far as possible when prices are low or negative. Their inability to shut off entirely means some cheap, clean wind and solar can’t be used. Coal is still dominant in overnight generation.

Grid batteries do a superb job of discharging stored electricity at high power to cover regular peak-demand periods in mornings and evenings when solar energy isn’t flowing and energy prices are high. These periods are usually brief, meaning the amount of battery energy needed is relatively small.

But batteries are an expensive way to store enough energy to cover electricity demand for longer periods. That’s because very large quantities of battery chemicals and metals are required. At these times, fossil fuel generators make a lot of money as there’s currently no alternative.

This is where large-scale pumped hydro comes in. Snowy 2.0 and other pumped hydro projects can help meet regular morning and evening peak demand and can also provide much of the electricity required overnight. Pumped hydro uses stored water, which is extremely cheap.

Snowy 2.0 is large enough to generate flat-out for a whole week if needed. This means it can do two useful things at once: meet demand from the grid, and help recharge grid batteries when solar and wind are scarce.

Pumped hydro can act as insurance against high prices. A third of Snowy 2.0’s revenue is expected to come from long-term contracts with retailers, renewable generators and large industrial users.

Snowy 2.0 could snatch a substantial portion of the energy market currently occupied by coal and gas. Building several more large pumped hydro systems would make it possible to get rid of coal and gas altogether.

Fewer new transmission lines

Interstate transmission lines are essential. If one state is wet and windless, power can be imported along transmission lines from neighbouring states with better weather. But many planned transmission lines have run into issues with rural pushback and slow construction speeds.

Large pumped hydro systems make it possible to avoid building some expensive and politically fraught new transmission lines.

If each state or territory had one large pumped hydro scheme, it would reduce the need for more transmission lines by using low- or negative-cost electricity on sunny and windy days to pump water uphill. This would reduce import requirements.

Australia has 23,000 potential pumped hydro sites, far more than we would ever need. Of these, we have identified 315 as premium sites in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania. South Australia and Western Australia also have good options, albeit at higher cost.

A good option for energy storage is to build pumped hydro in hilly country and grid batteries near cities to reduce grid congestion and avoid the need for more transmission lines.

For example, Tasmania’s pumped hydro allows the state’s wind energy to be exported to Victoria continuously, maximising the usage of expensive undersea cables. Used in conjunction with batteries near Melbourne, Tasmanian wind can meet high-value morning and evening peak loads in Victoria.

Big project – but big benefit

When Snowy 2.0 comes online, it won’t be long before it proves its worth. Operating alongside grid batteries, it will help push expensive gas generation out of the grid.

Andrew Blakers receives funding from ARENA and DFAT. The latter is to help uptake of solar and pumped hydro in south-east Asia.

Harry Armstrong-Thawley currently receives funding from ACAP and an Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) stipend.

Timothy Weber currently receives funding from ACAP and an Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) stipend, and has previously received funding from DFAT. He is a member of ACT Labor.

– ref. White elephant? Hardly – Snowy 2.0 will last 150 years and work with batteries to push out gas – https://theconversation.com/white-elephant-hardly-snowy-2-0-will-last-150-years-and-work-with-batteries-to-push-out-gas-267413

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mary-Anne Williams, Michael J Crouch Chair in Innovation, School of Management and Governance, UNSW Sydney

I have worked in AI for more than three decades, including with pioneers such as John McCarthy, who coined the term “artificial intelligence” in 1955.

In the past few years, scientific breakthroughs have produced AI tools that promise unprecedented advances in medicine, science, business and education.

At the same time, leading AI companies have the stated goal to create superintelligence: not merely smarter tools, but AI systems that significantly outperform all humans on essentially all cognitive tasks.

Superintelligence isn’t just hype. It’s a strategic goal determined by a privileged few, and backed by hundreds of billions of dollars in investment, business incentives, frontier AI technology, and some of the world’s best researchers.

What was once science fiction has become a concrete engineering goal for the coming decade. In response, I and hundreds of other scientists, global leaders and public figures have put our names to a public statement calling for superintelligence research to stop.

What the statement says

The new statement, released today by the AI safety nonprofit Future of Life Institute, is not a call for a temporary pause, as we saw in 2023. It is a short, unequivocal call for a global ban:

We call for a prohibition on the development of superintelligence, not lifted before there is broad scientific consensus that it will be done safely and controllably, and strong public buy-in.

The list of signatories represents a remarkably broad coalition, bridging divides that few other issues can. The “godfathers” of modern AI are present, such as Yoshua Bengio and Geoff Hinton. So are leading safety researchers such as UC Berkeley’s Stuart Russell.

But the concern has broken free of academic circles. The list includes tech and business leaders such as Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak and Virgin’s Richard Branson. It includes high-level political and military figures from both sides of US politics, such as former National Security Advisor Susan Rice and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen. It also includes prominent media figures such as Glenn Beck and former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, together with artists such as Will.I.am and respected historians such as Yuval Noah Harari.

Why superintelligence poses a unique challenge

Human intelligence has reshaped the planet in profound ways. We have rerouted rivers to generate electricity and irrigate farmland, transforming entire ecosystems. We have webbed the globe with financial markets, supply chains, air traffic systems: enormous feats of coordination that depend on our ability to reason, predict, plan, innovate and build technology.

Superintelligence could extend this trajectory, but with a crucial difference. People will no longer be in control.

The danger is not so much a machine that wants to destroy us, but one that pursues its goals with superhuman competence and indifference to our needs.

Imagine a superintelligent agent tasked with ending climate change. It might logically decide to eliminate the species that’s producing greenhouse gases.

Instruct it to maximise human happiness, and it might find a way to trap every human brain in a perpetual dopamine loop. Or, in Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom’s famous example, a superintelligence tasked with producing as many paperclips as possible might try to convert all of Earth’s matter, including us, into raw material for its factories.

The issue is not malice but mismatch: a system that understands its instructions too literally, with the power to act cleverly and swiftly.

History shows what can go wrong when our systems grow beyond our capacity to predict, contain or control them.

The 2008 financial crisis began with financial instruments so intricate that even their creators could not foresee how they would interact until the entire system collapsed. Cane toads introduced in Australia to fight pests have instead devastated native species. The COVID pandemic exposed how global travel networks can turn local outbreaks into worldwide crises.

Now we stand on the verge of creating something far more complex: a mind that can rewrite its own code, redesign and achieve its goals, and out-think every human combined.

A history of inadequate governance

For years, efforts to manage AI have focused on risks such as algorithmic bias, data privacy, and the impact of automation on jobs.

These are important issues. But they fail to address the systemic risks of creating superintelligent autonomous agents. The focus has been on applications, not the ultimate stated goal of AI companies to create superintelligence.

The new statement on superintelligence aims to start a global conversation not just on specific AI tools, but on the very destination AI developers are steering us toward.

The goal of AI should be about creating powerful tools to serve humanity. This does not mean autonomous superintelligent agents that can operate beyond human control without aligning with human well-being.

We can have a future of AI-powered medical breakthroughs, scientific discovery, and personalised education. None of these require us to build an uncontrollable superintelligence that could unilaterally decide the fate of humanity.

Mary-Anne Williams 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. AI heavyweights call for end to ‘superintelligence’ research – https://theconversation.com/ai-heavyweights-call-for-end-to-superintelligence-research-267961

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mike Archer, Professor, Earth and Sustainability Science Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

Tens of thousands of years ago, Australia was still home to enigmatic megafauna – large land animals such as giant marsupial wombats, flightless birds, and short-faced giant kangaroos known as sthenurines.

Then they gradually went extinct. What killed them?

There has long been vigorous debate about whether Australia’s First Peoples were responsible for the extinction of Australia’s megafaunal animals, or whether the primary cause was climate change.

In other places, such as the Americas, Aotearoa New Zealand and Madagascar, humans have been linked to such extinctions. This led some researchers to presume humans may also have hunted megafauna to extinction in Australia.

However, hard evidence for this has been hard to find. With new methods, we have re-examined fossil bones that seemingly supported this idea in the 1970s, and have arrived at a new conclusion. Our results are published today in Royal Society Open Science.

A long-standing debate

Humans appear to have first entered Australia during the late Pleistocene epoch perhaps 65,000 years ago. At the same time, Australia was also experiencing a fluctuating climate.

So, when much of the local megafauna went extinct tens of thousands of years ago, which factor was responsible? Debate rages on over whether it was human activity or climate change, or perhaps something else entirely.

Australia doesn’t have any “kill sites” or other incontrovertible hard evidence that people were killing and butchering the local megafauna. This is in contrast to sites found in North America, such as Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump World Heritage Site in Canada where people hunted vast numbers of buffalo.

So, in Australia, researchers have focused on individual fossils instead. Over time, most of the scant evidence for human involvement in megafaunal extinction has been discounted. Only a few notable finds remain.

The first is a single incisor from a giant marsupial, Diprotodon optatum. The tooth was found in Spring Creek, Victoria, with a series of small cuts suggested to have been made by humans. Reappraisal now suggests tiger quolls may have been to blame.

A piece of a juvenile diprotodon bone, from the Warratyi Shelter in the Flinders Ranges of South Australia, has also been put forward as evidence for killing and butchering. However, a 2016 study argues the marks on the bone can’t be ascribed to human activity.

Burnt eggshell fragments found at several sites in Australia have been attributed to people predating on the giant Genyornis newtoni bird, although others argue the shell fragments were from a much smaller bird.

Finally, a cut bone from an extinct sthenurine kangaroo from Mammoth Cave in southwestern Western Australia has been suggested as evidence of human butchering. One of us, Mike Archer, co-authored that study in 1980.

Revisiting the past

With technologies not available in the 1970s, we sought to investigate the same bone from Mammoth Cave in more detail. Close analysis of the surface supported the original conclusion that the cut was indeed caused by human activity, not by animals or falling rocks.

But a micro-CT scan revealed a surprise.

Internally, the bone has seven deep cracks running the length of the shaft. These happened due to taphonomic desiccation, a drying-out process that happens long after the animal has died.

Investigating the site of the cut, we found a separate transverse crack precisely in the base of the cut area. This had almost certainly been caused by pressure from the cutting process.

Importantly, the crack was truncated at both ends where it intersected the longer cracks. This means the bone would have already been desiccated when the cut was made.

In short, the bone was not from a fresh carcass when it was cut. In all probability, it was already a fossil.

Fossil gifts

This poses an even more intriguing question. Did the First Peoples who inflicted this cut collect this bone because it was an interesting fossil, rather than a source of nutrients?

The idea led us to analyse an artefact containing a fossil that had been gifted by First Nations people. In the 1960s, local First Peoples in the Kimberley region of northern Western Australia gifted the late anthropologist Kim Akerman a “charm” containing the tooth of a giant extinct marsupial, Zygomaturus trilobus. He was also given an emu feather parcel with teeth which turned out to be from an extinct sthenurine kangaroo, Procoptodon browneorum.

These animals are only known from fossil deposits in southern Australia, far from where these items were gifted. When we analysed the elemental composition of the Z. trilobus tooth, we found it likely came from Mammoth Cave, 2,000 kilometres to the south.

Collectors, not hunters

First Nations people in Australia have long collected and traded various kinds of fossils like trilobites, ammonites and mammal jaws.

This interest in fossils may be the best explanation for the cut in the desiccated bone found in Mammoth Cave, and the fact that fossil teeth from thousands of kilometres away ended up in the Kimberley.

It may also explain the Diprotodon optatum bone found in the Warratyi Shelter deposit in the Flinders Ranges. There’s a conspicuous mass of skeletal remains of this megafaunal species exposed and available for collection on the surface of Lake Callabonna, a relatively short distance from the shelter.

Gerard Krefft and Ludwig Glauert are often cited as the first “Australian” palaeontologists. We would argue that First Nations peoples beat them to the punch, likely by many thousands of years.

There is currently no hard evidence that extinct megafaunal animals in Australia were butchered by First Peoples in Australia. That’s not to say it didn’t happen. However, despite many investigations, we still have no proof that it did.

Helen Ryan works for the WA Musem.

Julien Louys receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Kenny Travouillon works for the Western Australian Museum.

Blake Dickson and Mike Archer 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. Hunters or collectors? New evidence challenges claim Australia’s First Peoples sent large animals extinct – https://theconversation.com/hunters-or-collectors-new-evidence-challenges-claim-australias-first-peoples-sent-large-animals-extinct-267116

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

The Liberals’ ability to find things to fight about among themselves has no bounds. Now they are squabbling over Kevin Rudd.

On Tuesday, Opposition Leader Sussan Ley suggested Rudd shouldn’t continue as Australia’s ambassador to Washington after Donald Trump’s put down of him at the White House during the president’s meeting with Anthony Albanese.

“I don’t believe he should stay in that role. And to see the prime minister actually laughing at his own ambassador in the room when the president made a joke, I think it’s untenable,” she told Sky News.

Various opposition members, inevitably asked to comment, backed Ley, with or without conviction.

But on Wednesday, Victorian Liberal senator Jane Hume flatly disagreed with her leader. “There is no doubt that the president made a bit of a goose of Kevin Rudd, and perhaps so he should, for those ill-advised, ill-considered tweets that he made,” Hume said on Sky.

“I think, though, that the call for Kevin Rudd to resign or stand down, the call for his position to be untenable now, is probably a little bit churlish.”

Since being relegated by Ley to the backbench Hume, who spends a lot of time on Sky, feels free to be “off message”.

Occasionally it’s more a matter of being off key.

Recently an attempt at humour went badly awry. Asked, after Nationals Leader David Littleproud said he’d welcome any Liberal defectors, whether she might jump parties, Hume joked, “I’d have to speak a lot slower and talk about the regions more often down in cocky’s corner”.

“To be honest, I am too fond of good coffee and free markets to join the National Party.”

Oops. Talk about reinforcing stereotypes about (now endangered) latte-drinking city Liberals!

In the Rudd instance, Hume is right – but unhelpful to Ley.

In the last term, Ley was criticised for going over the top from time to time. Towards the end of the term she reined herself in (or was reined in). As leader, she has been mainly measured.

But she tries to keep herself perpetually in the news cycle, and that can be a trap. Rushing out with her call for Rudd to go showed bad judgement, a desire for a quick headline.

It was a moment just to be gracious over what had been a good result for the government from the Albanese-Trump meeting, and to dismiss the Rudd moment with a well-turned
quip.

Questioned at a Wednesday news conference about Hume’s remarks, Ley said she welcomed “comments from my talented backbench”, but avoided repeating her Tuesday call for Rudd to be moved on.

The Rudd incident has brought out many of the former prime minister’s critics in force, in what is a total over-reaction.

Yes, it was an embarrassment, but mainly for Rudd. There is no convincing evidence Rudd is a negative for Australia, despite his litany of past derogatory comments about Trump. As the president said, he’ll never be a fan of the ambassador – but he probably won’t give Rudd much of a thought in the future.

Rudd worked tremendously hard in the run up to the Albanese-Trump meeting and contributed to its success. (He drove a lot of people mad, in Canberra and no doubt in the US, along the way with his hyperactivity, but that’s Rudd.)

There is no case for Rudd to be replaced. He just needs to make sure he keeps his (undoubted) fury at his Tuesday humiliation strictly to himself. In the past he has been his own worst enemy, leaving an expletive-laden trail of public and private outbursts. Remember, Kevin, even the embassy walls have ears.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Liberals are now squabbling among themselves over Kevin Rudd – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-liberals-are-now-squabbling-among-themselves-over-kevin-rudd-267825

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Visiting Scholar at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University; Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

Sanae Takaichi has made history by becoming Japan’s first female prime minister. However, this was hardly a win for feminist or progressive politics.

Takaichi is a right-wing ultraconservative whose policy positions derive from traditionalist perspectives on the role of women, Japanese history and society more broadly.

She has the same anti-immigrant positions as conservatives and right-wing populists the world over, defending “national identity and traditional values”, while emphasising the importance of strong economic growth.

Far from solving Japan’s economic problems, however, policies that restrict immigration tend to cause labour shortages and inflation.

Japan is the canary in the coalmine for many developed countries suffering a
demographic crisis due to falling birth rates. Japan’s population has declined for 16 consecutive years.

Unless Takaichi adopts a more pragmatic approach on immigration, her tenure could be one of economic stasis and relative decline.

How did Takaichi become prime minister?

Takaichi was elected leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party earlier this month. Her rise to prime minister was delayed, however, when the LDP’s junior partner, the Komeito party, withdrew from the governing coalition over the LDP’s handling of a political funding scandal.

The LDP has minorities in both the upper and lower houses of Japan’s Diet, or parliament, and requires coalition partners to govern.

After extensive negotiations that will require compromises from all sides, the right-wing Japan Innovation Party, known as Ishin, agreed to support Takaichi and her LDP-led government.

However, the new coalition is still two seats short of a majority in the lower house and will require additional parliamentary support. This means Takaichi’s minority government will be more precarious and constrained than previous governments.

Japan’s demographic crisis

Japan’s population peaked at around 128 million in 2008 and has steadily declined ever since. It’s around 124 million today.

Last year, the fertility rate (the average number of children a woman has in her lifetime) fell to a record low of 1.15.

Under current projections, Japan’s population is expected to fall to 87 million by 2070 and 63 million by 2100, when only half the population will be of working age.

The issue is therefore not simply one of a declining population, but also an ageing population, with rising pension and medical costs. Many professions in Japan, such as teachers, doctors and caregivers, are already facing acute labour shortages.

Immigration as a political lightning rod

While previous governments have acknowledged the declining population is a significant problem, they have done little to address the issue. Various initiatives have brought foreign residents or workers into the country, but there has been a reluctance under LDP governments to introduce programs with the scale and commitment – in terms of integrating immigrants into Japanese society – to make a significant difference.

This means these programs have had only modest success. Japan’s number of foreign-born residents reached a record high of 3.6 million this year, representing around 3% of the population. But this is far lower than many other developed economies.

This increased foreign population has resulted in a record number of “foreign” babies being born in Japan, with Chinese, Filipino and Brazilian mothers topping the list. This has somewhat offset the
declining figures for newborns from Japanese parents.

Japan’s tourism industry is also booming, with almost 37 million visitors coming last year.

Taken together, this increasing number of foreigners in Japan has resulted in the rise of anti-immigrant parties and policies, including the far-right Sanseito party. This, in turn, prompted the LDP to move further to the right to avoid losing votes to Sanseito and other populist parties.

This partly explains why Takaichi’s nationalist rhetoric has resonated with the ageing conservative LDP base.

Takaichi advocates for foreign workers in specified fields where the country has labour shortages, albeit under strict criteria (such as Japanese language ability, training and oversight). And she opposes the mass settlement of immigrants, or the large-scale granting of political rights to foreign residents.

While her policies have so far been short on detail, she has framed foreigners as a danger to national cohesion that needs to be strictly controlled.

Pro-natalist policies pushed instead

Across the world, older populations tend to be more susceptible to anti-immigrant scare campaigns from right-wing conservative media and politicians.

Japan is no exception. Politicians such as Takaichi, therefore, see electoral benefits in colouring immigration and foreigners as a threat to social harmony or cultural heritage.

Unfortunately, as a result, ageing countries like Japan that are most in need of immigration are often the most resistant to it.

Instead, many right-wing conservatives in these countries promote pro-natalist policies – encouraging women from the dominant racial or ethnic group to have more babies – as a solution that boosts populations and maintains cultural and racial homogeneity.

Hungary is one such example. The right-wing nationalist government of Viktor Orban has provided generous financial benefits to parents at a cost of around 5% of Hungary’s GDP. Though Hungary’s birth rate was above the European average in 2023, it has fallen since then.

Conservatives are pushing Japan to take a similar pro-natalist approach rather than rely on increased immigration.

With Takaichi as prime minister, Japan is unlikely to see an improvement in women’s independence and status in society, a significant rise in birth rates, or increased immigration. Japan’s demographic crisis is therefore set to continue, and probably worsen, in the foreseeable future.

Adam Simpson 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. Japan’s economy needs foreign workers, not the nationalist approach pushed by its new leader – https://theconversation.com/japans-economy-needs-foreign-workers-not-the-nationalist-approach-pushed-by-its-new-leader-267417

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Manning, Lecturer in Dietetics and Human Nutrition, La Trobe University

For a while, the “hot girls have stomach problems” trend on social media has been a way for women to destigmatise irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

By sharing content about bloating, farting, diarrhoea and constipation, users normalise talking about some of the condition’s unpleasant symptoms.

But why does IBS affect women more than men?

Studies show women are twice as likely as men to have this condition and symptoms are most common among those aged 18 to 39.

The reasons are complex, but sex hormones seem to play an important role. Here’s what we know.

What is irritable bowel syndrome?

IBS is more than just stomach pain – it’s a complex disorder affecting messages sent by the nerve network known as the gut-brain axis.

IBS is considered a syndrome because it is characterised by a collection of symptoms, rather than a structural abnormality in the gut or a particular disease.

People with this condition experience unpredictable and uncomfortable bowel motions such as diarrhoea and constipation. Other symptoms can include pelvic pain, headaches and fatigue and significantly affect quality of life.

There is also significant overlap between IBS and depression and anxiety.

The definitive reason people develop IBS remains unclear. But we do know messaging between the brain and gut is thrown off track.

In both men and women, everyday factors – including stress, exercise, diet, socialising and thought patterns, such as the anxiety someone may develop about symptoms – can speed up or slow down the messages sent via the gut-brain axis.

The result is heightened reactivity: the gut becomes very sensitive to food, stress and anxiety, leading to unpredictable bowel motions.

The role of hormones

Differences in men and women’s IBS symptoms – and how bad they are – may be due to differences in hormones.

Men have more testosterone than women, and this hormone is thought to help protect against developing IBS.

But for women, fluctuations in oestrogen and progesterone – which they have more of – can worsen symptoms.

These hormones influence how quickly food moves through the gut, speeding up or slowing down the number of times the gut contracts, leading to pain and other symptoms like constipation and diarrhoea.

Women are more likely to have worse symptoms during their reproductive years. Symptoms are also often worse during a women’s period, which is when oestrogen and progesterone decrease.

There is also emerging evidence about the overlap between IBS and conditions such as endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome.

Recent studies suggest people with endometriosis are three times more likely to have IBS, while those with polycystic ovary syndrome are twice as likely to have it.

These conditions seem to be connected by hormone fluctuations and pain, although we don’t know what causes what. Factors such as mild inflammation from an overactive immune system, a weak gut lining, unbalanced gut bacteria and sensitive nerves in the gut may explain why these conditions happen together.

Women are also more likely to seek support for IBS than men, which may explain why we have better reporting on their diagnosis and the overlap of other conditions that affect women.

Managing IBS

There is no cure for IBS. But the syndrome can be managed with lifestyle changes and medication.

Evidence suggests reducing gut irritants in your diet can reduce discomfort. These include caffeine, spicy food, alcohol, fizzy drinks and high-fat food.

For some people with ongoing symptoms, a dietitian may prescribe restricting and then reintroducing certain food groups known as fermentable carbohydrates, or FODMAPs.

FODMAPs are found in common foods such as dairy products (lactose), grain and cereals (fructans) and certain fruits such as apples, watermelon and stone fruit (polyols).

The purpose of this diet is to first relieve symptoms and then systematically identify irritants, so that if they’re reintroduced it’s at a level that the gut can tolerate.

Read more:
The FODMAP diet is everywhere, but researchers warn it’s not for weight loss

For some people, cognitive behavioural therapy also helps. This talk therapy – which focuses on reframing unhelpful thinking and behaviour – is used to get messages between the gut-brain axis back on track. For example, by reducing emotional stress (the “fight or flight” response), improving how your brain interprets pain, and addressing negative thoughts about symptoms, such as shame and anxiety.

Others may benefit from hypnotherapy, which helps reduce gut sensitivity and promotes deep relaxation. This teaches the body to respond more calmly to stress, which helps to regulate the gut-brain messaging system.

Doctors can also recommend medications that act on receptors in the gut and regulate the speed of digestion which can reduce diarrhoea and constipation.

Otherwise, low-dose antidepressants (prescribed at a much lower dose than what would be used to treat clinical depression) can help to reduce sensitivity to pain in the gut.

So, can social media help?

People living with IBS often feel their condition isn’t taken seriously.

Research shows they face dismissive attitudes – including from doctors – which suggest the symptoms are just in their head, and are more likely to experience shame about their condition.

For some women, sharing experiences online can help them shed the shame and find out more about IBS. But social media communities, and influencers trying to sell products, can also encourage women to try expensive strategies that don’t have evidence to back them.

Given the complexity of IBS, individual, tailored care is key.

Your symptoms are not just a “vibe”. If you’re concerned, you should speak to a trained health-care professional, such as a GP, psychologist or dietitian, who can help you find the right treatment for you.

Lauren Manning has received an internal ECR grant from La Trobe University to explore the role of treatment expectations in IBS.

– ref. ‘Hot girl’ stomach problems? Yes, IBS affects women more than men – here’s why – https://theconversation.com/hot-girl-stomach-problems-yes-ibs-affects-women-more-than-men-heres-why-264693