Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Singh, Research Fellow, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia

You’ve seen them in every gym: tight black leggings, neon sleeves and even knee-length socks.

Compression gear is everywhere, worn by weekend joggers, elite athletes and influencers striking poses mid-squat.

But do compression garments actually improve your performance, or is the benefit mostly in your head?

Let’s dive into the history, the science and whether they are worth your money.

From hospitals to hashtags

Compression garments didn’t start in sport. They were originally used in medical settings to improve blood flow in patients recovering from surgery or with circulation issues such as varicose veins.

Doctors found tight garments that applied gentle pressure to limbs could help move blood and reduce swelling.

But in the late 1990s and early 2000s, athletes, scientists and sports brands began experimenting with compression wear in training and competition.

Companies such as SKINS, 2XU, and Under Armour entered the scene with bold promises: improved performance, reduced fatigue and faster recovery.

Then, by the 2010s, compression wear wasn’t just for athletes – it had become a fashion statement.

Social media helped drive the trend: influencers wore these items in gym selfies, TikTokers praised the sleek, sculpted look. And with the rise of athleisure, compression garments became everyday apparel, blending fitness with fashion.

What are these garments supposed to do?

Compression gear is designed to fit tightly against the skin and apply gentle, consistent pressure to muscles. The big claims made by manufacturers include:

• improved blood flow, helping oxygen get to muscles faster

• reduced muscle vibration, potentially lowering fatigue and soreness

• reduced muscle soreness through improvements in circulation and reduced inflammation

• quicker recovery by boosting blood flow and reducing muscle stiffness

• enhanced performance, including running faster, lifting heavier and improved endurance.

You’ll hear gym-goers say they feel “more supported” or “less sore” after using compression gear.

Some even report improved posture or a mental boost – like stepping into a superhero suit.

What the science says

Research into compression garments has been growing steadily and the results are mixed – but interesting.

A 2013 major meta-analysis reported moderate benefits across several recovery markers, including lower levels of creatine kinase (a sign of muscle damage) and less delayed-onset muscle soreness up to 72 hours after exercise.

A 2016 review found compression garments reduced muscle soreness and swelling and boosted muscle power and strength. These improvements were up to 1.5 times greater (compared to people who didn’t wear compression garments) in some cases.

Building on this, a 2017 review found people who wore compression gear recovered strength more quickly, with noticeable improvements within eight to 24 hours after a workout. Strength recovery scores were around 60% higher in those wearing compression gear compared to those who didn’t.

But the findings are not consistent. A 2022 review of 19 trials found little effect on strength during the first few days post-exercise.

And when it comes to actual performance, a comprehensive 2025 review of 51 studies concluded compression garments do not enhance race time or endurance performance in runners. And while they may reduce soft tissue vibration (which might feel more comfortable), they offered no meaningful edge in speed, stamina or oxygen use.

Overall, in simpler terms: compression gear may help you recover faster but don’t expect it to turn you into an Olympic sprinter.

When compression gear might help (and when it won’t)

Here are some situations when compression garments can be genuinely useful:

• helping reduce muscle soreness and support quicker recovery after exercise

• preventing swelling during long flights, especially for athletes travelling to competitions, and

• improving circulation for people with medical conditions such as poor blood flow in the legs (chronic venous insufficiency) or long-term swelling (lymphedema), especially when recommended by a health-care provider.

But don’t count on them to:

• improve your times: there’s no strong evidence they boost speed or endurance

• make you stronger: while some research has noted improvements in strength and power, this won’t necessarily have a noticeable effect on your athletic performance

• replace training or good sleep: recovery still depends on the basics – rest, hydration and nutrition.

So, should you wear them?

Compression outfits won’t magically transform your body or training results. But they aren’t a waste of money either.

If they make you feel more comfortable, confident or supported, that’s a valid reason to wear them. The psychological boost alone can be enough to enhance motivation or focus.

And when it comes to post-exercise recovery, the evidence is solid enough to justify keeping a pair in your gym bag.

Think of them like a good pair of shoes. They won’t run the race for you, but they might make the journey a little smoother.

And if you’re just wearing them for the outfit photo on Instagram? That’s fine, too. Sometimes, confidence is the best workout gear of all.

Ben Singh 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. Compression tights and tops: do they actually benefit you during (or after) exercise? – https://theconversation.com/compression-tights-and-tops-do-they-actually-benefit-you-during-or-after-exercise-255719

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon Richardson, Visiting Fellow, Centre for European Studies, Australian National University

Russia’s possible interest in basing long-range aircraft at an Indonesian airbase not far from Australian shores shook up a relatively staid election campaign last month.

The news, which Jakarta immediately dismissed, caught many by surprise in Australia. It shouldn’t have. While Indonesia’s non-aligned stance makes granting such a request highly unlikely, Russia’s defence and political ties with Southeast Asia have actually been deepening over the last decade, at least.

All of this has gone largely unnoticed in Australia. And this highlights a significant problem: Australia has something of a knowledge deficit when it comes to Russia. This is in part due to the fact our expertise on the country has been hollowed out since the Cold War ended.

Russia’s power plays are expanding globally

The Soviet Union loomed large in Australia’s consciousness during the Cold War, if not high on its list of priorities.

Today, Russia remains a major, albeit slightly diminished, power. It is a nuclear weapons state (it has more than 5,500 nuclear warheads, the most of any nation) and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. It is also active in other forums of importance to Australia, such as the G20 and APEC, as well as in issues like arms control and climate change.

Most worryingly, under President Vladimir Putin, Russia will no doubt continue to be a disruptor on the international stage.

Russia’s political and security elite perceive the country to be a great power with interests and a right to influence in every part of the world. Just to drive that message home, a giant sign quoting Putin last year read: “Russia’s borders do not end anywhere”.

Even before its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Moscow perpetuated an ideology that it is at war with the West. This idea is a key source of legitimacy for Putin’s regime. Russia’s hostile actions against Western democracies continue to proliferate. These include disinformation campaigns, cyber attacks, election interference and, in some regions, sabotage and assassinations.

This isn’t focused entirely on Europe and the US, either. Russia has an active – and expanding – military presence in the Asia-Pacific. Russia’s Pacific Fleet, based in Vladivostok, now has more than 20 nuclear and conventional submarines and frequently engages in training exercises with the Chinese navy.

More “normal” relations with Russia will not return soon. A lasting peace in Ukraine seems unlikely if any interim ceasefire deal leaves large swathes of the country under a brutal Russian occupation regime. Putin is unlikely to let go of his ambitions to subjugate Ukraine and limit its independence.

While sanctions have made it harder for Moscow to conduct the war, the Russian economy also does not appear in danger of imminent collapse.

Meanwhile, Southeast Asia has proven susceptible to Russia’s anti-Western narratives, particularly when it comes to the claim that the Russian invasion was provoked by Western policies and threats. Most regional governments have been loathe to criticise the invasion and the leaders of Indonesia and Malaysia have made state visits to Moscow despite it.

Russia has had similar success in pushing disinformation through orchestrated social media campaigns across the Global South, including in parts of Africa where Australian companies have made significant investments in the mining sector.

Reviving Russia literacy

All these trends point to the need to enhance Australia’s modest level of Russia literacy, both in language skills and broader country expertise.

This was the key message of a recent conference on “Russian activities and Australian interests in the Indo-Pacific”, hosted by the ANU’s Centre for European Studies. It was attended by a wide range of government officials, academics, analysts and foreign diplomats.

Australia once had strong Russian-language departments at several universities. It also boasted numerous Russian and Soviet scholars of global repute, such as Harry Rigby, Sheila Fitzpatrick, Graeme Gill, Stephen Wheatcroft, Geoffrey Jukes and Stephen Fortescue.

Today, the number of university departments teaching Russian language, history or politics has dwindled, with only the University of Melbourne offering a major in Russian language and literature. That university has also added a much-welcomed fellowship in Ukrainian studies.

And Australia has few lecturers or researchers in international relations, history or social sciences with Russia expertise, including language skills.

We can – and should – return our university Russian offerings to the levels we had 30 years ago. This can be done without cutting back on the existing expansive focus on other countries and regions. There is also scope for greater focus on Russia and the former Soviet countries in government.

It will hard for Russia to shake off the pattern of failed government reform efforts defaulting to strong, centralised rule with imperial ambitions and an anti-Western posture.

But moves towards reform could eventually bear fruit (again) when Putin leaves the stage. If this were to happen, Russia would remain a major power with a rich cultural legacy and many common interests with Australia in areas such as natural resources. There is also a significant Russian diaspora in Australia.

For Australia, it is a mistake to think of Russia as somewhere far away. Both in simple geography – all state capitals except Perth are closer to Vladivostok than to New Delhi – and in terms of the interplay of global interests.

Or, as British commentator Keir Giles puts it: “You may not be interested in Russia, but Russia is interested in you.”

Jon Richardson 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. Australia’s knowledge of Russia is dwindling. We need to start training our future experts now – https://theconversation.com/australias-knowledge-of-russia-is-dwindling-we-need-to-start-training-our-future-experts-now-256445

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julia Coffey, Associate Professor in Sociology, University of Newcastle

Like many of her peers, Abigail (21) takes a lot of selfies, tweaks them with purpose-made apps, and posts them on social media. But, she says, the selfie-editing apps do more than they were designed for:

You look at that idealised version of yourself and you just want it – you just want it to be real […] the more you do it, the better you get at it and the more subtle your editing is the easier it is to actually see yourself as that version.

Abigail was one of nearly 80 young people my colleagues and I interviewed as part of research into selfie-editing technologies. The findings, recently published in New Media & Society, are cause for alarm. They show selfie-editing technologies have significant impacts for young people’s body image and wellbeing.

Carefully curating an online image

Many young people carefully curate how they appear online. One reason for this is to negotiate the intense pressures of visibility in a digitally-networked world.

Selfie-editing technologies enable this careful curation.

The most popular selfie-editing apps include Facetune, Faceapp, and Meitu. They offer in-phone editing tools from lighting, colour and photo adjustments to “touch ups” such as removing blemishes.

These apps also offer “structural” edits. These mimic cosmetic surgery procedures such as rhinoplasty (more commonly known as nose jobs) and facelifts. They also offer filters including an “ageing” filter, “gender swap” tool, and “make up” and hairstyle try-ons.

The range of editing options and incredible attention to details and correction of so-called “flaws” these apps offer encourage the user to forensically analyse their face and body, making a series of micro changes with the tap of a finger.

A wide range of editing practices

The research team I led included Amy Dobson (Curtin University), Akane Kanai (Monash University), Rosalind Gill (University of London) and Niamh White (Monash University). We wanted to understand how image-altering technologies were experienced by young people, and whether these tools impacted how they viewed themselves.

We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 33 young people aged between 18-24. We also ran 13 “selfie-editing” group workshops with 56 young people aged 18–24 who take selfies, and who use editing apps in Melbourne and Newcastle, Australia.

Most participants identified as either “female” or “cis woman” (56). There were 12 who identified as either “non-binary”, “genderfluid” or “questioning”, and 11 who identified as “male” or “cis man”. They identified as from a range of ethnic, racial and cultural backgrounds.

Facetune was the most widely-used facial-editing app. Participants also used Snapseed, Meitu, VSCO, Lightroom and the built-in beauty filters which are now standard in newer Apple or Samsung smartphones.

Editing practices varied from those who irregularly made only minor edits such as lighting and cropping, to those who regularly used beauty apps and altered their faces and bodies in forensic detail, mimicking cosmetic surgical interventions.

Approximately one third of participants described currently or previously making dramatic or “structural” edits through changing the dimensions of facial features. These edits included reshaping noses, cheeks, head size, shoulders or waist “cinching”.

Showcasing your ‘best self’

Young people told us that selfie taking and editing was an important way of showing “who they are” to the world.

As one participant told us, it’s a way of saying “I’m here, I exist”. But they also said the price of being online, and posting photos of themselves, meant they were aware of being seen alongside a set of images showing “perfect bodies and perfect lives”.

Participants told us they assume “everyone’s photos have been edited”. To keep up with this high standard, they needed to also be adept at editing photos to display their “best self” – aligning with gendered and racialised beauty ideals.

Photo-editing apps and filters were seen as a normal and expected way to achieve this. However, using these apps was described as a “slippery slope”, or a “Pandora’s box”, where “once you start editing it’s hard to stop”.

Young women in particular described feeling that the “baseline standard to just feel normal” feels higher than ever, and that appearance pressures are intensifying.

Many felt image-altering technologies such as beauty filters and editing apps are encouraging them to want to change their appearance “in real life” through cosmetic non-surgical procedures such as fillers and Botox.

As one participant, Amber (19), told us:

I feel like a lot of plastic surgeries are now one step further than a filter.

Another participant, Freya (20), described a direct link between editing photos and cosmetic enhancement procedures.

Ever since I started [editing my body in photos], I wanted to change it in real life […] That’s why I decided to start getting lip and cheek filler.

Altering the relationship between technology and the human experience

These findings suggest image-editing technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI) filters and selfie-editing apps, have significant impacts for young people’s body image and wellbeing.

The rapid expansion of generative AI in “beauty cam” technologies in the cosmetic and beauty retail industries makes it imperative to study these impacts, as well as how young people experience these new technologies.

These cameras are able to visualise “before and after” on a user’s face with minute forensic detail.

These technologies, through their potential to alter relationship between technology and the human experience at the deepest level, may have devastating impacts on key youth mental health concerns such as body image.

Julia Coffey receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. ‘Perfect bodies and perfect lives’: how selfie-editing tools are distorting how young people see themselves – https://theconversation.com/perfect-bodies-and-perfect-lives-how-selfie-editing-tools-are-distorting-how-young-people-see-themselves-257134

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sandra Peter, Director of Sydney Executive Plus, University of Sydney

What if we could design a machine that could read your emotions and intentions, write thoughtful, empathetic, perfectly timed responses — and seemingly know exactly what you need to hear? A machine so seductive, you wouldn’t even realise it’s artificial. What if we already have?

In a comprehensive meta-analysis, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, we show that the latest generation of large language model-powered chatbots match and exceed most humans in their ability to communicate. A growing body of research shows these systems now reliably pass the Turing test, fooling humans into thinking they are interacting with another human.

None of us was expecting the arrival of super communicators. Science fiction taught us that artificial intelligence (AI) would be highly rational and all-knowing, but lack humanity.

Yet here we are. Recent experiments have shown that models such as GPT-4 outperform humans in writing persuasively and also empathetically. Another study found that large language models (LLMs) excel at assessing nuanced sentiment in human-written messages.

LLMs are also masters at roleplay, assuming a wide range of personas and mimicking nuanced linguistic character styles. This is amplified by their ability to infer human beliefs and intentions from text. Of course, LLMs do not possess true empathy or social understanding – but they are highly effective mimicking machines.

We call these systems “anthropomorphic agents”. Traditionally, anthropomorphism refers to ascribing human traits to non-human entities. However, LLMs genuinely display highly human-like qualities, so calls to avoid anthropomorphising LLMs will fall flat.

This is a landmark moment: when you cannot tell the difference between talking to a human or an AI chatbot online.

On the internet, nobody knows you’re an AI

What does this mean? On the one hand, LLMs promise to make complex information more widely accessible via chat interfaces, tailoring messages to individual comprehension levels. This has applications across many domains, such as legal services or public health. In education, the roleplay abilities can be used to create Socratic tutors that ask personalised questions and help students learn.

At the same time, these systems are seductive. Millions of users already interact with AI companion apps daily. Much has been said about the negative effects of companion apps, but anthropomorphic seduction comes with far wider implications.

Users are ready to trust AI chatbots so much that they disclose highly personal information. Pair this with the bots’ highly persuasive qualities, and genuine concerns emerge.

Recent research by AI company Anthropic further shows that its Claude 3 chatbot was at its most persuasive when allowed to fabricate information and engage in deception. Given AI chatbots have no moral inhibitions, they are poised to be much better at deception than humans.

This opens the door to manipulation at scale, to spread disinformation, or create highly effective sales tactics. What could be more effective than a trusted companion casually recommending a product in conversation? ChatGPT has already begun to provide product recommendations in response to user questions. It’s only a short step to subtly weaving product recommendations into conversations – without you ever asking.

What can be done?

It is easy to call for regulation, but harder to work out the details.

The first step is to raise awareness of these abilities. Regulation should prescribe disclosure – users need to always know that they interact with an AI, like the EU AI Act mandates. But this will not be enough, given the AI systems’ seductive qualities.

The second step must be to better understand anthropomorphic qualities. So far, LLM tests measure “intelligence” and knowledge recall, but none so far measures the degree of “human likeness”. With a test like this, AI companies could be required to disclose anthropomorphic abilities with a rating system, and legislators could determine acceptable risk levels for certain contexts and age groups.

The cautionary tale of social media, which was largely unregulated until much harm had been done, suggests there is some urgency. If governments take a hands-off approach, AI is likely to amplify existing problems with spreading of mis- and disinformation, or the loneliness epidemic. In fact, Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has already signalled that he would like to fill the void of real human contact with “AI friends”.

Relying on AI companies to refrain from further humanising their systems seems ill-advised. All developments point in the opposite direction. OpenAI is working on making their systems more engaging and personable, with the ability to give your version of ChatGPT a specific “personality”. ChatGPT has generally become more chatty, often asking followup questions to keep the conversation going, and its voice mode adds even more seductive appeal.

Much good can be done with anthropomorphic agents. Their persuasive abilities can be used for ill causes and for good ones, from fighting conspiracy theories to enticing users into donating and other prosocial behaviours.

Yet we need a comprehensive agenda across the spectrum of design and development, deployment and use, and policy and regulation of conversational agents. When AI can inherently push our buttons, we shouldn’t let it change our systems.

Jevin West receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the Knight Foundation, and others. The full list of funders and affiliated organizations can be found here: https://jevinwest.org/cv.html

Kai Riemer and Sandra Peter 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. Evidence shows AI systems are already too much like humans. Will that be a problem? – https://theconversation.com/evidence-shows-ai-systems-are-already-too-much-like-humans-will-that-be-a-problem-256980

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chloe Keel, Lecturer in Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University

Crime and public safety are usually the domain of state politics. But the Coalition tried to elevate them as key issues for voters in the recent federal election.

Claiming crime had been “allowed to fester” under Labor, the opposition promised a A$750 million Operation Safer Communities plan, which included police strike teams targeting drugs, a national child sex offender register, and more money for Neighbourhood Watch.

A Coalition government would also have given grants to community groups to install public lighting, bollards and CCTV cameras.

But in the end, crime did not appear to be a deciding factor in the election, which was easily won by Labor.

What does that tell us about leveraging public fear – either existing crime fears and general anxieties, or latent concerns that can be triggered – for political gain in Australia? Can it be a successful strategy?

Stoking anxiety

In culturally diverse countries, such as Australia and the United States, law and order rhetoric sometimes calls for supporting aggressive crime policies at the expense of racial and ethnic minorities, many of whom are immigrants.

These policies can be effective in stoking public fear to win votes. US President Donald Trump’s exhortations on immigration and crime were a significant part of his election campaigns in 2016 and 2024.

However, what experts call “protective factors”, such as strong communities and social cohesion, are important. They can reduce the influence of political narratives that try to define crime in narrowly punitive or racialised terms.

Australia is not America

Our peer-reviewed research, which will be published in the Journal of Criminology, investigated how public concerns about crime and safety in Australia and the US were associated with demographic factors that evolved over time. The study drew on data from the World Values Survey and indicated key differences in what makes Australians and Americans feel unsafe.

We have found that in Australia in 2018, supporters of left-leaning parties (Labor/Green) reported feeling significantly safer than other voters. However, this gap disappeared when researchers took into account attitudes that blame crime problems on immigrants. This suggests immigrant-blaming in Australia can drive feelings of community fear and insecurity.

The World Values Survey uncovered a different pattern in the US.

Between 2011 and 2017, Republican voters reported feeling safer than other Americans – the opposite of Australia’s trend. The political divide in the US couldn’t be explained by immigrant-blaming attitudes. Rather, it was attributed to the “self-isolation” of American conservatives in more culturally homogeneous communities.

Our study indicated that while immigration continued to influence safety perceptions in the US, it appeared to operate through different mechanisms than in Australia. Racial and ethnic minorities reported greater fear as the 2010s unfolded.

Social connectedness also plays differently in each country. In Australia, trust in others and confidence in public institutions consistently influences safety perceptions. In the US, these factors have little impact.

Social scientists have observed that in modern societies, responsibility for personal safety has increasingly shifted from the government to individuals. This trend is strong in the US, where market-focused, neoliberal economic and social policies dominate policies.

By contrast, European research suggests stronger social welfare systems can reduce safety concerns by addressing underlying economic anxieties. Australia’s more robust social support appears to foster greater feelings of safety.

Our research indicates social cohesion further helps reduce fear.

Crime fears are not a vote winner

Electoral strategies that seek to leverage public insecurities need to be understood in the context of these fear-mitigating factors. Media diversity can also counter fear-based messaging.

In the 2018 Victorian election, crime became a prominent political issue through racialised commentary targeting “African gangs”. However, it failed to gain decisive political traction.

Research found fear of crime was relatively rare in Victoria. Media reports of crime and comments by political leaders were distant from their own experiences

With more diverse news sources and online platforms, political actors can no longer promote narratives unopposed. Fear-based messaging can backfire, especially when it overreaches.

Outdated strategy

Perceptions of crime are often shaped by a combination of actual crime rates and broader anxieties about social change, cultural difference, and uncertainty. This is frequently expressed as unease about the increasing presence of culturally diverse groups.

While the coalition’s pivot to law-and-order rhetoric represented a familiar strategy, Labor positioned itself as the party of unity. This was underscored by Foreign Minister Penny Wong’s declaration after Labor won the election, in which she acknowledged

[…] the power in our 26 million people from more than 300 ancestries […] from the oldest continuing civilisation on the planet and I acknowledge the traditional owners. Friends, we love this country.

While harnessing fears of crime and cultural diversity was not effective in this election cycle, this is not the end of law and order politics. But the unique characteristics of this election appear to have rendered the formula less potent.

Trump’s threat to democracy and the constitutional rule of law in the US may have fostered a sense of solidarity and social cohesion among Australian voters. Our research suggests this helped to mitigate fears about crime.

The temptation to capitalise on law and order may continue to appeal to politicians. But in Australia, at least, there is no guarantee it will work.

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. Playing the crime card: do law and order campaigns win votes in Australia? – https://theconversation.com/playing-the-crime-card-do-law-and-order-campaigns-win-votes-in-australia-256780

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mary Anne Kenny, Associate Professor, School of Law, Murdoch University

Australia’s policy towards refugees and asylum seekers stands at a critical juncture.

Global displacement is at record highs and many countries are retreating from their responsibilities. At this moment, Australia can lead by example.

As Australia’s prime minister, Anthony Albanese, said on election night:

We do not need to beg or borrow or copy from anywhere else. We do not need to seek our inspiration overseas. We find it right here in our values – and in our people.

Those values should guide a principled and evidence-based response to the global refugee crisis. This response should be grounded in fairness, humanity and respect for Australia’s international human rights obligations.

A principled reset

Australia is a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, which defines a refugee as a person who has a well-founded fear of persecution based on:

• race
• religion
• nationality
• membership of a particular social group
• political opinion.

However, aspects of Australia’s current approach to refugees have drawn criticism from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi.

The new Labor government could use its strength in parliament to initiate a principled and evidence-based reset. This could include:

• creating a new emergency visa for humanitarian crises to assist people fleeing conflict

• improving the efficiency and fairness of the asylum seeker process

• ending offshore processing of refugees

• streamlining the family reunification process

• making immigration detention an option that could be used at the discretion of the Department of Home Affairs, instead of being mandatory

• giving people access to independent review of their detention

• improving systems for LGBTQ+ asylum seekers (many of whom face heightened risks, are not always believed about their sexuality, and lack culturally sensitive support).

There are four key areas in particular need of reform.

1. Ending the legal limbo

A crucial priority is resolving the status of some 7,000 people who are part of what’s known as the “legacy caseload”.

These people were refused refugee status under a problematic and now-defunct process known as the “fast track assessment”. They are now on bridging visas and in legal limbo.

A solution is also needed for the roughly 1,000 people who were detained in offshore processing centres in Manus Island and Nauru but are now living in Australia. They are also on bridging visas, also in a state of legal uncertainty.

People in both these groups have endured 13 years in legal and policy limbo. Reform is long overdue.

One option is to allow people in both groups who were previously refused protection to apply for a permanent visa without requiring yet another drawn-out assessment of their protection claims.

Community organisations, legal experts and mental health professionals could help the government develop clear, trauma-informed and evidence-based processes for reviewing their cases.

2. Expanding the numbers

Australia’s main way of accepting refugees is via what’s known as the humanitarian program. But the number of refugees accepted under this program doesn’t currently reflect the scale of global displacement.

Labor has proposed expanding the number of refugees Australia takes.

It has suggested Australia take 27,000 through the core Refugee and Humanitarian Program and an additional 10,000 through two pathways:

• community sponsorship (which is where refugees are sponsored by Australians in the community)

• complementary pathways (which include refugees who arrive, for instance, via a skilled worker program).

At the UN’s 2023 Global Refugee Forum, the Australian government committed to gradually implementing this increase, beginning in 2023–24.

A dedicated advisory and coordination body could help with planning and implementation.

It’s also worth noting current policy prohibits asylum seekers registered with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Indonesia after June 2014 from being resettled to Australia.

The new government could also consider lifting this arbitrary restriction to give these vulnerable refugees access to durable solutions.

3. Strengthening the rights of children and young people

Immigration systems are largely designed around adults. Children and young people are too often overlooked.

As a result, children have been:

• placed in immigration detention

• transferred to offshore processing centres, or

• separated from their families.

Children (including those born in Australia) can’t sponsor their parents via family sponsorship processes. They’re denied a say in decisions that deeply affect their lives.

The Migration Act should be amended to require that all decisions affecting children give primary consideration to the best interests and views of the child. This would be in line with Australia’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Similar principles are already embedded in Australian family law and child protection policy, providing a clear model for reform.

4. Reviewing Australia’s boat turnback policy

Since 2013, Australia has intercepted boats under Operation Sovereign Borders, using turnbacks and takebacks with little independent oversight.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has raised concerns about this policy.

Sometimes during these interactions Australian officials detain and interview people on boats about their reason for trying to enter Australia, but details about what happens during such encounters are kept largely secret. Most of these encounters end with the boat and people on it being returned to the country from which they came.

A recent document published by the Commonwealth Ombudsman reported on conditions aboard vessels used for maritime detention.

It found serious problems, including no private spaces for sensitive interviews and no interpreters on board.

The Department of Home Affairs responded by saying formal interviews use accredited interpreters. However, the report highlights many crucial interactions do not.

There is also no time limit on detention at sea, and no independent monitoring of how protection claims are assessed.

A more comprehensive review is urgently needed.

Mary Anne Kenny is a member of the Migration Institute of Australia and the Law Council of Australia and an affiliate of the UNSW Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law. She was on the Ministerial Council on Asylum Seekers and Detention (an independent advisory body) between 2012 and 2018.

– ref. Labor now has the political clout to reset Australia’s refugee policy. Here’s where to start – https://theconversation.com/labor-now-has-the-political-clout-to-reset-australias-refugee-policy-heres-where-to-start-255971

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Moira Junge, Adjunct Clincal Associate Professor (Psychologist), Monash University

You might have heard of people using tape to literally keep their mouths shut while they sleep. Mouth taping has become a popular trend on social media, with many fans claiming it helps improve sleep and overall health.

The purported benefits of mouth taping during sleep are largely anecdotal, and include claims of better airflow, less snoring, improved asthma symptoms, less of a dry mouth, being less likely to have bad breath, and better sleep quality.

As the trend has gained momentum in recent years the claims have also come to include improved skin, mood and digestion – and even a sharper jawline.

The rationale for mouth taping during sleep is to encourage breathing through the nose rather than through the mouth. When a person’s nasal passages are blocked, breathing switches from the nose to the mouth. Mouth breathing has been linked to conditions such as obstructive sleep apnoea.

But is mouth taping an effective way to address these issues, and is it safe? A new review suggests taping your mouth shut while you sleep offers limited benefits – and could pose risks.

What did the review find?

In a new paper, Canadian researchers reviewed the scientific literature on mouth taping, searching for studies that mentioned terms such as “mouth breathing”, “mouth taping” and “sleep”.

They searched specifically for studies looking at people with known mouth breathing and breathing-related sleeping problems such as obstructive sleep apnoea to understand the potential benefits and harms of mouth taping for this group.

Obstructive sleep apnoea is a condition where your airway is partly or completely blocked at times while you’re asleep. This can cause you to stop breathing for short periods, called “apnoeas”. Apnoeas can happen many times a night, resulting in lowered oxygen levels in the blood as well as sleep disruption.

The researchers found ten eligible studies published between 1999 and 2024, with a total of 213 participants. Eight studies looked at mouth taping, and two studies involved using a chin strap to keep the mouth shut.

Only two studies identified any benefits of mouth taping for mild obstructive sleep apnoea. The observed improvements – to measures such as oxygen levels in the blood and number of apnoeas per hour – were modest.

And although they were statistically significant, they were probably not clinically significant. This means these changes likely wouldn’t make much difference to symptoms or treatment decisions.

The remainder of studies found no evidence mouth taping helps to treat mouth breathing or related conditions.

What’s more, four studies warned about potential serious harms. In particular, covering the mouth could pose a risk of asphyxiation (lack of oxygen that can lead to unconsciousness or death) for people whose mouth breathing is caused by significant blockage of the nasal airways. This kind of nasal obstruction could be a result of conditions such as hay fever, deviated septum, or enlarged tonsils.

In other words, mouth taping is definitely not a good idea if you have a blocked nose, as it’s unsafe to have both the nose and the mouth obstructed at the same time during sleep.

What’s the take-home message?

The authors concluded there are very few benefits and some potential serious risks associated with mouth taping in people who are mouth breathers or have obstructive sleep apnoea.

They did however note we need further high-quality evidence to better understand if mouth taping is safe and works.

This review didn’t focus on any research relating to mouth taping for proposed improvements to mood, skin, digestion, sharper jaw lines and other things, so the researchers could not draw conclusions about the efficacy and safety of mouth taping for those purposes.

Internationally, qualified sleep health professionals do not recommend mouth taping.

If you have concerns about your sleep, the best thing to do is to consult trusted scientific sources or a health-care professional who will be able to guide you to address the underlying causes of your sleep challenges.

Trying social media trends such as mouth taping before you seek expert advice could lead to delays in diagnosing serious conditions for which there are evidence-based treatments available.

Mouth taping should definitely not be attempted in children.

It’s possible that in some healthy adults, without respiratory conditions, without significant sleep disorders, and who don’t have tape allergies, that mouth taping could pose little harm and produce some modest benefits. But we don’t have enough evidence yet to know one way or the other.

Moira Junge is CEO of The Sleep Health Foundation. She is also affiliated with the Healthylife Health Advisory Board and is a psychologist and clinic director at Yarraville Health Group.

– ref. Please don’t tape your mouth at night, whatever TikTok says. A new study shows why this viral trend can be risky – https://theconversation.com/please-dont-tape-your-mouth-at-night-whatever-tiktok-says-a-new-study-shows-why-this-viral-trend-can-be-risky-256901

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caroline Shaw, Associate Professor in Public Health, University of Otago

Anyone who uses city roads will know e-bikes have become increasingly popular in Aotearoa New Zealand. But we also know rising e-bike sales have been predominantly driven by financially well-off households.

The question now is, can e-biking be accepted and embraced by people and communities where it is currently not happening? Three pilot programmes from around the country have now given us cause for optimism.

Understanding more about the barriers to e-bike access – especially in communities with low cycling levels or where income levels mean bikes are prohibitively expensive – has been one of the main gaps in our knowledge.

But over the past few years, we have been involved in projects designed to examine how e-bikes might work in such places. The three pilots were based in Mangere (South Auckland), Wainuiomata (Lower Hutt) and Sydenham (Christchurch).

These are all areas or communities with lower relative incomes and lower levels of cycling. The majority of individuals involved did not routinely cycle, and some hadn’t been on a bike for decades.

In all three pilots, the results were positive. In some cases, participants reported long-term, life-changing benefits.

What the pilot schemes showed

Each pilot was different. The Mangere programme loaned e-bikes to people for two to three months between 2022 and 2023 through a community bikehub. The Wainuiomata programme involved a longer loan period of one year over 2023, and was run through a health provider at a local marae.

The Christchurch programme, which ran between 2021 and 2024, was a free e-bike share scheme for tenants in a specific social housing complex, organised through a partnership with a shared e-bike provider.

Where needed, participants in all pilots were supported as they gained riding confidence and knowledge of safe cycling routes.

Participants in all the pilot programmes found e-biking acceptable, and they used and enjoyed the bikes. While these pilots were not set up to measure distance travelled, we know from other research that participants in e-bike access schemes ride on average 5km per day, half of which replaces car trips.

Individuals reported practical benefits such as being able to travel to their jobs, mental and physical health improvements, and not having to pay for petrol each week.

In the Wainuiomata pilot there were wider ripple effects, with participants reporting whānau members also started cycling as a result of the loan scheme. In one case, ten members of the wider whānau got involved.

3 policy actions needed now

These results mirror what we know already about how e-bikes can improve physical and mental health, reduce transport greenhouse gas emissions, and make cities nicer places by reducing car use.

Compared to conventional bikes, e-bikes also allow people to bike further and in hillier places. They are also great for groups with traditionally lower levels of cycling, such as people with health conditions, disabilities, older people and women.

It also seems concerns about increased rates of injury may be less significant than initially thought. Overall, the broad benefits of e-bikes have seen hundreds of access schemes developed globally, including many in New Zealand.

Combining international evidence and experience with the information from the three local pilot programmes, we see three main policy areas that will increase e-bike uptake and use in New Zealand.

1. Physical infrastructure: this is needed to support cycling in all our cities and larger towns, and would involve a combination of cycle lanes and low-traffic neighbourhoods, alongside expanded bike parking and storage.

The Climate Change Commission has recommended these networks be constructed, and experience from Wellington shows rapid construction is possible.

2. Targeted access schemes: these help people who can’t afford e-bikes. Without targeting, such schemes tend to be mainly used by the well-off. It’s likely we will need a range of options, such as short-term and long-term low-cost (or free) loans, rent-to-buy schemes or subsidies.

People should be able to access these schemes through a variety of organisations so as to target different motivations: saving money, improving health, commuting for work, ferrying children, environmental concern.

3. Local organisation networks: these support individuals and communities to access bikes, maintain them, provide rider training, run bike libraries, route finding and community events to support and encourage people to ride.

This wider support was a key factor to the success of the all pilots. Local organisations, champions and leaders are essential to help overcome some of the practical and cultural barriers that exist because we have such low levels of cycling.

Change is achievable

What we have outlined constitutes a different way of doing business for the transport sector. But there are already organisations doing a lot of this work, including bike hubs and cycling community organisations.

Others have infrastructure in place that could expand to encompass e-bike programmes, such as marae and community health centres. What is needed is a commitment to support these activities as part of core transport business policy.

We don’t need to wait for more research. The three things required – building infrastructure, increasing access and providing support programmes – are all understood and achievable.

E-bikes can and should play an important role in expanding New Zealand’s transport options and improving the wellbeing of its people.

Caroline Shaw receives funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand, University of Otago and Waka Kotahi/New Zealand Transport Agency.

Karen Witten receives funding from the Health Research Council of NZ, Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment,
Waka Kotahi/NZTA and Auckland Council.

Simon Kingham receives funding from Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment.

– ref. E-bikes for everyone: 3 NZ trials show people will make the switch – with the right support – https://theconversation.com/e-bikes-for-everyone-3-nz-trials-show-people-will-make-the-switch-with-the-right-support-255956

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milad Haghani, Associate Professor & Principal Fellow in Urban Risk & Resilience, The University of Melbourne

In the year 2000, almost 70% of all new cars sold in Australia were small passenger vehicles – mainly sedans and hatchbacks. But over 25 years, their share has dropped dramatically to just 17%, as a car “size race” took hold.

Now, SUVs and light commercial vehicles comprise almost 80% of the market. Four in five new vehicles sold in Australia today are an SUV, ute, van or light truck.

As larger vehicles become the new norm, they bring more road wear, urban congestion and demands on infrastructure such as parking.

It’s time to ask: should drivers of larger vehicles pay for the damage and disruption they cause, through higher registration charges? Generally, yes. Bigger cars mean bigger costs for everyone else. It’s only fair those costs are reflected in how we price their use of public roads.

Reasons for going big

There are several reasons for the shift to larger passenger vehicles in Australia. They include perceptions that bigger cars are safer and more prestigious, as well as lifestyle preferences.

A loophole in the luxury car tax also encourages car buyers to go big. The tax was introduced on imports in 2000 and this financial year applies to vehicles worth more than A$80,576.

Many utes and SUVs are exempt because they’re classified as light commercial vehicles. The exemption applies regardless of whether the car is used privately or for business.

Counting the costs on our roads

Larger vehicles – no matter how they are powered – generally impose bigger costs on society than smaller cars.

Large SUVs and utes (if powered by fossil fuels) have a far greater climate impact. On average, a small car emits 2,040 kilograms less carbon dioxide (CO₂) a year than a pickup truck.

But even big electric vehicles can cause climate harm. The substantial resources required to manufacture a large EV creates emissions, which may undermine the climate benefits electrification promises.

Large passenger vehicles also create health system costs. In road crashes, for example, they may better protect their occupants, but pose greater risks to others – especially pedestrians and those in smaller vehicles.

Research suggests for each fatal crash that occupants of large vehicles avoid, at least 4.3 fatal crashes involving others occur.

Bigger vehicles also need more space. Standards Australia has proposed making car-parking spaces larger to accommodate the trend to larger cars. Cities such as Paris have introduced higher parking fees for SUVs on these grounds.

Larger vehicles also slow overall traffic flow. For example, they have longer braking distances and other motorists tend to drive further behind them than smaller cars.

And at signalised intersections, a large SUV’s impact on traffic flows is equal to 1.41 passenger cars.

In real-world terms, these differences add up. In the United States in 2011, the annual cost of light-duty trucks on congestion and lost productivity was estimated at more than US$2 billion.

Then there’s the cost of road wear. You might think heavier vehicles just wear roads a bit faster than smaller ones. But in reality, the relationship is far more dramatic.

Let’s compare a vehicle with an axle weight of 500 kg and a vehicle with an axle weight of 1,000 kg. The second vehicle doesn’t produce double the road damage – it produces 16 times the damage. This phenomenon is known as the “fourth power rule”.

It means heavier vehicles cost far more in road maintenance. Curious to test it? The Road Damage Calculator lets you compare the relative impact of vehicles of different weights.

What does car rego pay for?

Vehicle registration offers a way to recoup the societal costs caused by large vehicles.

Part of car registration fees go toward administration, but they also help governments pay for the broader cost of vehicles on public infrastructure and shared spaces.

In Australia, car registration systems vary widely between states. Not all reflect the impact of the vehicles on the road.

In Victoria, fees are based mostly on location – whether the car is registered in a metropolitan, outer-metro or rural area. In the Australian Capital Territory, fees are calculated on a vehicle’s emissions.

Queensland and Tasmania use the number of engine cylinders to set fees – a rough proxy for vehicle size, but not a precise one.

In New South Wales and Western Australia, heavier vehicles pay more.

South Australia and the Northern Territory apply different models again, using a combination of settings not directly based on weight.

A fairer system

Larger vehicles take up more road space, contribute more to congestion, and cause exponentially more damage to road surfaces. These are exactly the kinds of impacts a vehicle registration system should help account for.

So, what would a truly equitable registration fee model look like? Based on the evidence, it would not only account for vehicle size and weight, but also how often the vehicle is driven. After all, a heavy car parked in a garage all year causes less impact than one on the road every day.

Several countries, including New Zealand, have adopted distance-based or road-use charging schemes for certain types of vehicles, which uses a combination of vehicle weight and distance travelled.

As our vehicle fleet continues to evolve, Australia should follow suit, with a smarter and more equitable registration fee system.

Milad Haghani 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. Drivers of SUVs and pick-ups should pay more to be on our roads. Here’s how to make the system fairer – https://theconversation.com/drivers-of-suvs-and-pick-ups-should-pay-more-to-be-on-our-roads-heres-how-to-make-the-system-fairer-252381

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jason Hoeksema, Professor of Ecology, University of Mississippi

When wood thrushes arrive in northern Mississippi on their spring migration and begin to serenade my neighborhood with their ethereal, harmonized song, it’s one of the great joys of the season. It’s also a minor miracle. These small creatures have just flown more than 1,850 miles (3,000 kilometers), all the way from Central America.

Other birds undertake even longer journeys — the Swainson’s thrush, for example, nests as far north as the boreal forests of Alaska and spends the nonbreeding season in northern South America, traveling up to 5,600 miles (9,000 kilometers) each way.

These stunning feats of travel are awe-inspiring, making it that much more tragic when they are cut short by a deadly collision with a glass window.

This happens with alarming regularity. Two recent scientific studies estimate that more than 1 billion birds – and as many as 5.19 billion – die from collisions with sheet glass each year in the United States alone, sometimes immediately but often from their injuries.

In fact, window collisions are now considered the top human cause of bird deaths. Due to window collisions and other causes, bird populations across North America have declined more than 29% from their 1970 levels, likely with major consequences for the world’s ecosystems.

These collisions occur on every type of building, from homes to skyscrapers. At the University of Mississippi campus, where I teach and conduct research as an ecologist, my colleagues and I have been testing some creative solutions.

Why glass is so often deadly for birds

Most frequently, glass acts as a mirror, reflecting clear sky or habitat. There is no reason for a bird to slow down when there appears to be a welcoming tree or shrub ahead.

These head-on collisions frequently result in brain injuries, to which birds often succumb immediately.

In other cases, birds are stunned by the collision and eventually fly off, but many of those individuals also eventually perish from brain swelling.

Other injuries, to wings or legs, for example, can leave birds unable to fly and vulnerable to cats or other predators. If you find an injured bird, contact a local wildlife rehabilitator.

Which windows are riskiest

Some windows are much worse than others, depending on their proximity to bushes and other bird habitats, what is reflected in them, and how interior lighting exacerbates or diminishes the mirror effect.

On our campus, some buildings with a great deal of glass surface area kill surprisingly few birds, while other small sets of windows are disproportionately deadly.

One particular elevated walkway with glass on both sides between the chemistry and pharmacy buildings is a notoriously dangerous spot. The glass kills migratory birds each spring and fall as they try to pass between the two buildings on their way to The Grove, the university’s central-campus park area with large old oak trees.

During the pandemic in 2020, student Emma Counce did the heart-heavy work of performing a survey of 11 campus buildings almost daily during spring migration. She found 72 bird fatalities in seven weeks. Five years later, my ornithology students completed a new survey and found 62 mortalities over the course of five weeks in 2025, demonstrating that we still have a lot of work to do to make our campus safe for migratory birds.

Thrushes, perhaps due to their propensity for whizzing through tight spaces in the shady forest understory, have been disproportionately represented among the victims. Others include colorful songbirds – northern parulas, black-and-white warblers, prothonotary warblers, Kentucky warblers, buntings, vireos and tanagers.

How to make windows less dangerous

The good thing is that everyone can do something to lower the risk.

Films, stickers or strings can be added on the exterior of windows, creating dots or lines, 2 to 4 inches apart, that break up reflections to give the appearance of a barrier.

Exterior screens and blinds work great too. Just adding a few predator silhouette stickers is not effective, by the way – the treatment needs to span the whole window.

When applied properly, window treatments can make a huge difference. An inspiring example is McCormick Place in Chicago, the country’s largest convention center, which notoriously killed nearly 1,000 birds in a single night in 2023. After workers applied dot film to an area of the building’s windows equivalent to two football fields, bird mortality at the lakeside building has been reduced by 95%.

The Bird Collision Prevention Alliance provides information on options for retrofitting home or office windows to make them more bird friendly.

Options for new windows are also becoming more common. For example, the new Center for Science & Technology Innovation on my campus, which features many windows, mostly used bird-friendly glass with subtle polka dots built into it. This spring, we found that it killed only four birds, despite a very high surface area of glass.

How you can help

When trying to make a difference on your home turf, I suggest starting small. Make note of which specific windows have killed birds in the past, and treat them first.

Use it as an opportunity to learn what approach might work best for you and your building. Either order a product or make something yourself and get it installed.

Then do another, and tell a friend. At the office, talk to people, find others who care and build a team to make gradual change.

With some creative solutions, anyone can help reduce at least this major risk.

Jason Hoeksema is affiliated with the University of Mississippi, Delta Wind Birds, and the Mississippi Ornithological Society.

– ref. Windows are the No. 1 human threat to birds – an ecologist shares some simple steps to reduce collisions – https://theconversation.com/windows-are-the-no-1-human-threat-to-birds-an-ecologist-shares-some-simple-steps-to-reduce-collisions-255838

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

This week, the Reserve Bank delivered welcome news for mortgage holders, with another 25 basis points rate cut.

With this cut, some are hoping that the cost-of-living pain will start to finally ease. Economists, however, are still wary of celebrating too early, with Trump’s tariffs still creating uncertainty on where the global economy will end up.

Back at home, a re-elected Anthony Albanese and his treasurer, Jim Chalmers, are pushing on with Labor’s second term agenda, with Chalmers flagging the need to fix Australia’s lagging productivity. When the new parliament meets, Labor’s controversial tax changes on superannuation, which failed to pass last term, will be an early test for the government.

Speaking with The Conversation’s Politics podcast, Treasurer Jim Chalmers outlines some of his priorities when Parliament resumes in July.

One of the things we’re really excited about legislating is the cut to student debt. That will take some of the burden off graduates, but it will also provide some cost-of-living help to students or graduates repaying a student debt. So that’s going to be a big priority.

In my own portfolio, obviously we’ve got the changes to the super arrangements, we’ve got the standard deduction we announced during the campaign, we’ve got some payments reforms that we need to legislate. So it will be a really busy agenda.

On increasing the superannuation tax on those with $3 million from 15% to 30%, with unrealised capital gains taxed, Chalmers defends the move, despite widespread criticism, including from former prime minister Paul Keating.

This is a modest change that we announced almost two and a half years ago now. We announced it at the beginning of 2023. We’re now in the middle of 2025. And what this change is about [is] making concessional treatment for people with very large superannuation balances, still concessional, but a little bit less so. And that will help us fund our priorities, whether it’s Medicare, the tax cuts, and other priorities in budget repair.

[…] I know that people have views about it. I know there’s a campaign in a couple of our newspapers about it. But this is all about making sure that it’s still concessional treatment. It only impacts about half a percent of people in the super system, with very large superannuation balances. It makes the system a bit fairer and it’s important in terms of the sustainability of the budget.

Despite Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock saying on Tuesday that due to global uncertainty there’s a small possibility of Australia falling into recession, Chalmers outlines the case for optimism.

I think first of all the Reserve Bank is doing diligent work looking at a range of scenarios from best case to worst case and central case. Just like the Treasury does […] And I think it’s helpful to remember, if you look at the Reserve Bank’s forecasts and the Treasury’s forecasts, neither the bank nor the Treasury is expecting our economy to shrink. In fact, in both instances the forecasts say that the economy will grow more strongly next year compared to the financial year that we’re about to finish.

[…] The international environment is casting a dark shadow over the global economy and our own economy. And that why it’s so important that the Australian economy has got the characteristics that you would want going into this volatility and unpredictability. You know, the lower inflation, the higher wages, the low unemployment, the budget’s in better nick than most countries around the world. We’re starting to see interest rates come down. The market’s expecting further interest rate cuts. And so we’re well placed and well prepared.

On a lighter note, Chalmers tells us what’s on his reading list over the winter break:

I just finished that Ezra Klein book called Abundance, which goes right to the core of some of these things you’re talking about, you know, how do we think in a progressive way about making our economy more efficient and more productive.

[…] I confess I’ve started the book about Joe Biden, the Jake Tapper book [Original Sin] […] And like everyone, I send my best wishes to the Bidens after that news that we got earlier in the week about his health.

[…] But I’m really excited about a new term, a new opportunity, working closely with [Finance Minister] Katy [Gallagher] to make sure we finish the fight on inflation, we make our economy more productive, we think more expansively about the big opportunities from AI and energy and some of these things that we’ve been talking about today. And I have been finding inspiration in trying to do a bit more reading this term so far than what I managed last term.

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Jim Chalmers on keeping Australia out of recession amid the ‘dark shadow’ of global instability – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-jim-chalmers-on-keeping-australia-out-of-recession-amid-the-dark-shadow-of-global-instability-257228

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

The Victorian and NSW Nationals senators due to face the voters at the 2028 election will struggle to hold their seats if the former partners do not re-form the Coalition before then.

Under usual Coalition arrangements, Bridget McKenzie, from Victoria, who is Nationals Senate leader, and Ross Cadell, from NSW, would have been set to be number two on the joint Senate ticket in their respective states. This would have assured them of re-election.

But if they have to run on separate Nationals Senate tickets, it will be hard for them to garner enough votes to be re-elected. One reason is the Nationals would not have candidates in urban lower house seats, and so their Senate how-to-vote tickets wouldn’t be handed out in those areas.

As Liberals reeled after the Nationals’ sudden desertion of the Coalition on Tuesday, Opposition Leader Sussan Ley is working on her all-Liberal opposition frontbench, to be announced Thursday or Friday.

Senior Victorian Liberal Dan Tehan said: “We’re all still in a state of shock of the outcome. I don’t think people have really come to terms with it.”

Nationals MP Darren Chester, from Victoria, urged negotiations between the parties to continue. He warned “if we go to the next sitting of parliament being two divided party rooms we are giving a free pass to the prime minister”.

Nationals leader David Littleproud continued to defend his party’s shock decision to split the Coalition.

He told the ABC “plenty of political commentators” were taking potshots.

“Well, good luck, they don’t understand what it is to be a Nat. What it is to live and to know and to hear the stories of people who are in danger because of mobile phone towers. Young families that can’t afford their mortgage because they can’t go back to work, because they can’t find a childcare place, because there are none.”

Asked if the Nationals were prepared to stay on the backbench indefinitely if the Liberals didn’t meet their demands, Littleproud said, “Well, if we get to a juncture after the next election where we can form a government with the Liberal Party, then obviously we’re going to support the Liberal Party. But there will be conditions, and the conditions are about those things that are core to making the lives of those people that we represent better”.

Former prime minister Tony Abbott joined John Howard in urging an early rapprochement. Abbott said, “I deeply regret the Coalition split and hope that it can be re-formed as soon as possible. History shows that the Liberals and the Nationals win together and fail separately.” On Tuesday  Howard warned of the negative consequences of the split.

Liberal deputy leader Ted O’Brien said the Nationals’ decision was “more than disappointing”.

He said the parties were “stronger together” and he hoped over time the Nationals will “draw the same conclusion that we are better together than we are apart”.

With three-cornered contests one issue now the parties are not in coalition, McKenzie was asked whether she would be relaxed about the Liberals running in all Nationals seats.

“This is one of the serious risks of the decision we took yesterday,” she said, adding it had been “part of our thinking as went forward”.

“We also see it as an opportunity to put a very strong proposition for rural and regional Australia to those communities.

“At the end of the day, though, Coalition arrangements are matters for our state parties – so the LNP in Queensland, the NSW state Nationals and also the Victorian Nationals.”

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: Coalition split puts Victorian and NSW Nationals Senate seats at high risk – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-coalition-split-puts-victorian-and-nsw-nationals-senate-seats-at-high-risk-256456

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew King, Associate Professor in Climate Science, ARC Centre of Excellence for 21st Century Weather, The University of Melbourne

Emergency crews were scrambling to rescue residents trapped by floodwaters on Wednesday as heavy rain pummelled the Mid North Coast of New South Wales.

In some areas, more than 200 mm of rain has fallen in 24 hours. At the town of Taree, low-lying areas are flooded as the Manning River reached record levels, passing the 1929 record of six metres.

At the same time, South Australia, Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia are in drought amid some of the lowest rainfall on record.

So what is going on, and when will the wet weather end?

Why is NSW so wet?

The wet weather in NSW is due to a combination of factors.

A trough is sitting over the Mid North Coast and stretching offshore. Troughs are areas of low pressure and can bring rain and unstable conditions. This trough is bringing extensive cloud and rain to the affected region.

In addition, winds from the east are also bringing moisture to the coast.

Since Sunday, all this has been compounded by a “cut-off low” in the upper atmosphere. These low-pressure systems are separated from the main westerly flow of winds, and often move slowly.

The combination of the trough near the ground, and low pressure at higher levels in the atmosphere, can cause air to converge and rise. As air rises it cools, moisture condenses and rain occurs.

In the next few days, the cut-off low will move away but is likely to be replaced in the same region by another upper-level low-pressure system moving in from the southwest. This will likely mean heavy rain over the east coast region in the coming days and into Friday.

On top of all this, a persistent high pressure system in the Tasman Sea is also pushing cloud onto the NSW coastline.

An upper-level low with a high in the Tasman is a typical set of conditions for flooding on the NSW Mid North Coast. Those conditions are also forecast to persist for the coming days.

So why are parts of Australia in drought?

The NSW north coast was quite wet in March and April – partly due to a hangover from Tropical Cyclone Alfred.

That meant the ground was already wet and full when rain began falling this week. So instead of soaking in, the water more easily turned to runoff and became floodwater.

This is in contrast to much of Australia, which was unseasonably dry and warm in March and April.

But the differences are not unusual. Australia is a big place, and rainfall dynamics are quite localised. It’s fairly common to see very wet conditions in one area and very dry conditions in another.

Unfortunately the current heavy rain in NSW probably won’t make a huge difference to drought-stricken areas. The moist air flows are likely to dry out as they cross the Great Dividing Range. But a change in weather patterns means from Sunday, rain may fall in some areas of Victoria and South Australia suffering from drought.

Is climate change causing this?

As the planet warms, scientists are very confident that Earth’s average surface temperature will warm, and heatwaves will get worse. However, rainfall projections are much less certain.

Projecting all types of precipitation is difficult. The water cycle is complex. Climate models – while powerful – can struggle to accurately simulate local rainfall patterns. And these patterns vary considerably over time – a natural phenomena that can make the climate trend hard to identify.

So what does this mean for autumn rainfall projections for Australia in future? None of the rainfall projections show a strong signal, and so scientists do not have high confidence in the results.

Having said this, there’s a hint of a drying trend across southwest Western Australia and parts of western Victoria and southeast South Australia, where conditions are dry now.

And for the Mid North Coast of NSW, currently experiencing heavy rain and flooding, autumn rainfall projections hint at slightly at heavier extreme rainfall.

Andrew King receives funding from the ARC Centre of Excellence for 21st Century Weather and the National Environmental Science Program.

Andrew Dowdy receives funding from University of Melbourne and is supported by the Australian Research Council.

– ref. NSW is copping rain and flooding while parts of Australia are in drought. What’s going on? – https://theconversation.com/nsw-is-copping-rain-and-flooding-while-parts-of-australia-are-in-drought-whats-going-on-257235

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

Counting in several extremely close seats continues, but some results have become clearer. In Liberal-held Bradfield, Teal candidate Nicolette Boele has taken the lead, while the Calwell distribution of preferences indicates an independent is on track to pass the Liberals and benefit from their preferences against Labor. Meanwhile, Jacqui Lambie may have a problem in the Tasmanian Senate contest.

Labor has won 93 of the 150 House of Representatives seats, the Coalition 43, all Others 12 and two remain undecided (Bradfield and Calwell). After Tuesday’s split between the Liberals and Nationals, the ABC has the Liberals on 28 seats and the Nationals on 15, with the Liberals to form the official opposition.

The Australian Electoral Commission has 18 Liberals, nine Nationals and 16 seats won by Queensland’s Liberal National Party. LNP members can caucus with either the Liberals or Nationals, so they are splitting 10–6 to the Liberals.

I will continue to use Coalition in my coverage of this election, as the Liberal and National parties contested the election as the Coalition. It would be difficult to split the LNP vote into its Liberal and National components.

In the close seats, Boele leads the Liberals by 43 votes in Bradfield. She had trailed by 43 votes before the final votes were counted on Monday. The Poll Bludger said the last 181 formal postals counted favoured Boele by 125–56, giving her 69% of that batch.

Of the just over 14,000 total formal postal votes counted in Bradfield, the Liberals have won by 56.4–43.6. But late postals are often much better for the left than early ones.

What’s happening now in Bradfield is a full distribution of preferences, in which candidates are excluded from the bottom up on primary votes. If the margin after this distribution is complete is under 100 votes, there will be an automatic recount.

In Goldstein, Teal incumbent Zoe Daniel’s late surge has fallen short, as she trails Liberal Tim Wilson by 135 votes with everything counted, in from a 292-vote deficit last Thursday.

As with Bradfield, there will now be a full distribution of preferences in Goldstein. If the margin after this distribution is under 100 votes, there will be a recount. Daniel could also request a recount, but even if there is a recount, Wilson is very likely to win.

In Labor-held Calwell, which has 13 candidates, final primary votes were 30.5% Labor, 15.7% Liberals, 11.9% for independent Carly Moore, 10.7% for independent Joseph Youhana, 8.3% for the Greens and 6.9% for independent Samim Moslih.

The danger for Labor is that either Moore or Youhana overtake the Liberals on the distribution of preferences, then beat Labor at the final count on Liberal preferences. The AEC has a page that is updated with each exclusion in the preference distribution.

After six exclusions, the totals are 32.8% Labor, 17.1% Liberals, 14.7% Moore, 12.1% Youhana, 9.9% Greens, 7.9% Moslih and 5.6% One Nation (to be excluded next). Analyst Kevin Bonham says Moore needs 7.5% more than the Liberals to make the final two, and 67% of overall preferences to beat Labor. For Youhana, these figures are 13.4% and 69%.

Lambie may have a problem in the Tasmanian Senate contest

I have previously covered the Senate count. There have only been minor changes to the primary votes since that May 9 article. The Poll Bludger has modelled the state Senate contests using 2022 election preference flows.

According to this model, Labor will win the last seat in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia, but only narrowly in WA. In Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie and the Liberals would edge out Labor. As I wrote previously, this result would give Labor 30 of the 76 total senators, the Coalition 27, the Greens 11, One Nation two and others six.

For a state a quota is one-seventh of the vote or 14.3%. In Tasmania Labor has 2.48 quotas, the Liberals 1.65, the Greens 1.13, Jacqui Lambie 0.51, One Nation 0.35 and Legalise Cannabis 0.24. One Nation will be the last exclusion, and whichever of Labor, the Liberals or Lambie is last after One Nation’s preferences are distributed loses.

There’s evidence that One Nation’s preferences have become better for the Coalition at this election than in 2022. In Capricornia, which had a One Nation primary vote of 15.5%, the LNP share of overall preferences increased nine points since 2022 to 62%.

Lambie wants the salmon farming industry to stop farming in Macquarie Harbour and says they should move offshore. This stance could cost her preferences from One Nation and other right-aligned parties.

I expect One Nation and other right-wing preferences in Tasmania to go strongly enough to the Liberals to give the Liberals one of the last two undecided seats, with the final seat between Labor and Lambie.

Labor is pro-salmon farming, so perhaps Lambie could benefit from Greens and Animal Justice preferences (the Greens have a small surplus over one quota and Animal Justice has 0.09 quotas).

Tasmanian poll and upper house elections

A Tasmanian state EMRS poll, conducted May 13–17 from a sample of 1,000, gave Labor 31% of the vote (up one since February), the Liberals 29% (down five), the Greens 14% (up one), the Jacqui Lambie Network 6% (down two), independents 17% (up five) and others 4% (up one).

Tasmania uses a proportional system for its lower house elections, so a two-party estimate is not applicable. Incumbent Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff’s net favourability was down four points to +6, while Labor leader Dean Winter’s was down one to +5. Rockliff led Winter by 44–32 as preferred premier (44–34 previously).

Every May two or three of Tasmania’s 15 upper house seats are up for election for six-year terms. The Poll Bludger said Tuesday that current upper house standings are four Liberals, three Labor, one Green and seven independents. On Saturday there will be elections in Liberal-held Montgomery, Labor-held Pembroke and independent-held Nelson.

European elections wrap

I covered Sunday’s European elections in Romania, Portugal and Poland for The Poll Bludger. In Romania the centrist defeated the far-right candidate by 53.6–46.4, but the left had a dismal result in Portugal. I also covered recounts in the April 28 Canadian election and polls ahead of the June 3 South Korean presidential election.

Adrian Beaumont 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. Counts in Bradfield and Calwell become clearer, while Jacqui Lambie faces a possible problem in the Tasmanian Senate – https://theconversation.com/counts-in-bradfield-and-calwell-become-clearer-while-jacqui-lambie-faces-a-possible-problem-in-the-tasmanian-senate-257122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Houlihan, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Psychology, University of the Sunshine Coast

Can you only start a boring admin task once your house is clean? Do you leave the trickiest emails to the end of the day?

Delaying a goal or task – usually to do something less important instead – is known as procrastination and it affects many of us. Most people report procrastinating some of the time, but for others it can be chronic.

While procrastination is common, it can be frustrating and lead to feelings of shame, guilt and anxiety.

Here’s why you might be avoiding that task – and five steps to get on top of it.

Am I procrastinating?

You might find yourself putting off starting something, abandoning it before it’s finished or leaving it to the very last minute.

Thoughts such as “I can catch up later” or “I’ll turn it in late” can be telltale signs of procrastination. Maybe you’ve Googled “Why do I procrastinate?” while procrastinating and have come across this article.

Other times, you might not even be aware you’re doing it. Perhaps you look up and realise you’ve been scrolling online shopping and kitten videos for the past hour, instead of doing your assignment.

Procrastination is not a character flaw, and it doesn’t mean you’re lazy or even bad at managing time. Framing it this way can make you feel even worse about the behaviour, and stops you learning the real reasons behind it.

If you want to stop procrastinating, it’s important to understand why you do it in the first place.

Why do I procrastinate?

Procrastination can be a way of dealing with tricky emotions. Research shows we put off tasks we find boring or frustrating, as well as those we resent or that lack personal meaning.

We may avoid tasks that create stress or painful emotions, such as completing a tax return where you owe a lot of money, or packing up a parent’s house after their death.

There a few deeper reasons, too.

Procrastination can be a sign of perfectionism. This is when an intense fear of failure – of getting something wrong – creates so much pressure to be perfect that it stops us from even getting started.

People with low self-esteem also tend to procrastinate, whether or not they experience perfectionism. Here, it’s a negative self-view (“I’m not good at most things”) coupled with low confidence (“I probably won’t get it right”) that gets in the way of beginning a task.

Distraction can be a factor, too. Most of us battle constant interruptions, with pings and alerts designed to redirect our attention. But being very easily distracted can also be a sign you’re avoiding the task.

For some people, difficulty completing tasks could be a sign of an underlying issue such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. If you’re worried procrastination is affecting your day-to-day life, you can speak to your doctor to seek help.

Is procrastination ever helpful?

It depends.

Some people enjoy the pressure of a deadline. Leaving a task to the last minute can be a strategy to improve motivation or get it done in a limited time.

Procrastination can also be a coping mechanism.

Delaying unpleasant tasks may make us feel better in the moment. Avoiding the task may mean we don’t have to face the possibility of getting it wrong, or the negative emotions or consequences it involves.

But this usually only works in the short term, and in the long term it’s more likely to cause problems.

Procrastination can trigger self-criticism as well as negative emotions such as guilt and shame.

In the long term it can also lead to mental health problems including anxiety and depression. Procrastinating has even been linked to poor outcomes in education – such as being caught copying in exams – and at work, including lower salaries and higher likelihood of unemployment.

So what can we do about it?

5 steps to tackling procrastination

1. Face it – you’re procrastinating. Being able to identify and name these patterns is the first step to overcoming procrastination.

2. Explore why. Understanding the underlying causes is key. Are you afraid of getting it wrong? Is your to-do list unrealistic? Or do you just love a tight deadline? If your procrastination results from perfectionism or low self-esteem you may wish to explore evidence-based treatments such as cognitive behavioural therapy, with a therapist or through self-guided activities.

3. Start prioritising. Take a good look at your to-do list. Are the most urgent or important things at the top? Have you given yourself enough time to complete the tasks? Breaking a task into smaller chunks and taking regular breaks will help prevent you from becoming overwhelmed. If you’re not sure what’s the most important, try talking it through with someone. If you tend to leave the most boring things to the last minute and then never get around to them, set some time aside at the start of each day to get these tasks done.

4. Avoid distractions. Set your phone to “do not disturb”, hang a sign on the door, tell those around you you’ll be “offline” for a little while. Setting a clear start and end time can help you stick to this rule.

5. Build in rewards. Life is hard work – be kind to yourself. Whenever you complete a difficult task or cross something off your to-do list, balance this by doing something more enjoyable. Building in rewards can make facing the to-do list a little bit easier.

Catherine Houlihan 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 do I procrastinate? And can I do anything about it? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-procrastinate-and-can-i-do-anything-about-it-255770

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rob Cover, Professor of Digital Communication and Director of the RMIT Digital Ethnography Research Centre, RMIT University

In its most recent battle with authorities in Australia, X (formerly Twitter) has launched legal action in the Federal Court, seeking an exemption from a new safety standard aimed at preventing the spread of harmful material online.

The standard in question is known as the Relevant Electronic Services Standard. It came into effect in December 2024, but won’t start being enforced by Australia’s online regulator, eSafety, until June this year.

Compared with the social media ban for under-16s, this standard has been a side issue in the broader topic of online safety. So what exactly is it? And will it be effective at preventing the spread of harmful material online?

What is the standard?

The Relevant Electronic Services Standard contains criteria to help address the pervasiveness of harmful and illegal material distributed online. It is particularly focused on child sexual exploitation content, depictions of extreme violence, illegal drug material, and pro-terror content.

Relevant electronic services (RES) are digital services that enable user-to-user content. This includes instant messaging, email and chat platforms. The legal definition also includes some online gaming services.

Under Australia’s Online Safety Act 2021, the communications minister may exempt some services or platforms from being defined as an RES. The minister can also set conditions on the service for exemption, such as having a robust moderation service, or being a messaging service for internal employees of a company.

Some social media platforms, such as Facebook and X, may be defined as RES. That’s because they also offer user-to-user messaging services. It is sensible, then, for the Federal Court to determine whether they fall under social media codes or RES standards, or both.

The standards require RES to implement systems, processes and technologies to detect and remove child sexual abuse and pro-terror material from their services, and to actively deter end-users from distributing this material.

There are consequences for services that fail to comply. The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, can issue a formal warning or infringement notice, or have the courts apply a civil penalty.

What does the standard do?

The Online Safety Act 2021 imposes obligations on RES providers, particularly regarding the handling of harmful material. This material is categorised into several classes, including Class 1A and Class 1B content.

Class 1A material typically means child exploitation and pro-terror content. Class 1B material refers to extreme violence, promotion of crime, and illegal drug-related content.

The class of content is determined by referring to the National Classification Scheme. This scheme sets standards for the ratings of films.

Class 1A and 1B material is content, texts and images that would be “refused classification” under the scheme. That is, it would be material that is usually not allowed to be distributed at all. Class 2 material is what we usually consider X-rated or 18+ material.

At the moment, the eSafety commissioner can ask a RES to remove Class 1 or Class 2 content, or the service can be penalised. However, the next step has been to work with industry to develop codes that require service providers to be more proactive in preventing Class 1 content being shared between their users.

Will the standard be effective?

X wants its platform to be treated as exempt, and governed by the similar but less stringent Social Media Code instead. Whatever the Federal Court decides, however, there are other issues to consider.

Part of the difficulty with the scheme is that it relies on harmful content coming to the attention of the eSafety commissioner. This usually happens when an end-user makes a complaint.

But our recent research, which surveyed 2,520 representative Australians and will be published later this year, found that only about 10% of users who were the target of digital harms reported them to the eSafety commissioner. Among those who had witnessed harmful content or behaviour, only 6% reported. About 40% of Australians don’t believe reporting will make any difference.

Another issue with the industry standards raised by digital rights activists is that it may require services to investigate user messages even when end-to-end encryption of messages is used. That may have serious privacy implications.

A global treaty could help

This ties into broader problems with the online safety framework.

Much of the focus has been on managing platforms and getting platforms to police users and content – a necessary approach to avoid penalising individuals and overwhelming courts.

However, service provider policing often fails to meet the norms of due process, such as transparency and the right to appeal decisions.

It also makes platforms and messaging providers the “arbiters” of free speech and censorship, instead of governments, courts and communities.

While setting standards on platforms is one part of the solution, we need to continue developing remedies to protect users. This may include global agreements and multilateral treaties, similar to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, so all countries can share the burden locally for digital harms that occur across jurisdictions, and ensure due process and the protection of privacy.

Rob Cover receives funding from the Australian Research Council

– ref. What’s the obscure Australian online safety standard Elon Musk’s X is trying to dodge in court? An expert explains – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-obscure-australian-online-safety-standard-elon-musks-x-is-trying-to-dodge-in-court-an-expert-explains-257222

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ama Samarasinghe, Lecturer, Financial Planning and Tax, RMIT University

On Tuesday, the Reserve Bank of Australia cut the target cash rate by 0.25 percentage points. It now sits at 3.85% – the lowest since May 2023.

Australia’s big four banks were all quick to announce they would be passing the cuts on to borrowers. If you’ve got a mortgage, you might be wondering if this is your cue to act.

Refinancing your home loan – whether by negotiating a better deal with your current lender or switching to a new one – could save you thousands over the life of your loan.

However, it won’t be the right decision for everyone. And there are some important things to know about how the process works – including hidden costs and risks.

What is refinancing?

Refinancing simply means replacing your existing home loan with a new one – either from your current lender or a different one. The goal? To take advantage of better loan terms.

If you’re on a “variable rate” loan, your lender may already be passing on some or all of the recent rate cut (though you may have had to opt in).

Read more:
RBA cuts interest rates, ready to respond again if the economy weakens further

But if you’re on a “fixed rate” loan, your repayments will stay the same until your fixed term ends – meaning you might not benefit from the cut unless you refinance (though break costs could apply).

Switching to a loan with a lower rate can mean smaller monthly repayments. Or, by keeping repayments the same size but with a lower interest rate, you could potentially pay off a loan faster and save in the long term.

Refinancing activity has been trending up since 2021, with external refinancing (switching banks) rising significantly among both owner-occupiers and investors. That’s a clear sign many borrowers are chasing better deals.

Can refinancing save you money?

Yes – if it’s right for you and you do it right. Switching to a lower interest rate could slash thousands off your yearly repayments.

If you’ve built up equity, you might be able to release funds to reinvest or improve your property. Some lenders also offer refinancing cashback deals – one-off payments to attract new customers.

There are some important things to consider – including some traps to avoid – if you’re thinking about refinancing your home loan.

1. Be mindful of your loan-to-value ratio

Loan-to-value ratio (LVR) is the amount you borrowed as a percentage of the property’s value or purchase price.

If your LVR is above 80%, you probably paid lenders mortgage insurance (LMI) on your original loan, designed to protect the lender in case you default.

If your current loan still exceeds 80% of your home’s value (based on the new lender’s valuation), you might need to pay LMI again. That cost could wipe out any benefit from a lower rate.

2. Careful how you compare

When comparing rates and repayments, make sure you’re comparing apples with apples.

If you’ve already paid five years on a 30-year loan, you have 25 years left. But when you ask a new lender for a quote, they may show repayments based on a full 30-year term – which could make the monthly repayment look much lower.

To make a fair comparison, ask for quotes based on your remaining loan term. If you decide to switch, aiming for a loan with the same term can help you avoid paying more interest in the long run.

3. Factor in all associated costs

Refinancing comes with costs. These may include:

• break fees if you’re leaving a fixed-term loan early
• settlement fees for your current lender to close out the loan
• application and valuation fees with the new lender
• ongoing monthly fees that might not seem large but can add up over time.

Also, if you’re applying to multiple lenders to compare offers, be aware requesting multiple credit checks in a short space of time can negatively impact your credit score.

4. Consider renegotiating with your existing lender first

Lenders rarely offer their best deals to existing customers – unless you ask. In fact, they often reserve the most attractive deals for new customers.

Consider picking up the phone and asking for a rate review. If you have a better offer from another bank, you may be able to use that as leverage.

Staying with your current lender can have advantages. It may be quicker and easier than refinancing with another lender. But don’t let loyalty cost you – especially if better rates are on the table elsewhere.

5. Don’t assume your repayments will drop automatically

For borrowers on variable loans, some banks don’t automatically reduce your repayments after a rate cut. You may need to manually adjust them through your bank’s app or website, or “opt in”.

Alternatively, keeping your repayment amount the same could help you pay off your loan faster and reduce interest costs.

6. Check your credit score before applying

Your credit score can play a key role in refinancing. Lenders use it to assess how risky it is to lend to you – and it can affect the interest rate you’re offered.

If your score has dropped since you first took out your loan, you may not qualify for the best deals.

Check your score through your bank or a free online service before you apply. If it’s low, take time to improve it before refinancing to boost your chances of approval and better rates.

For an estimate of your potential savings from refinancing, try the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)’s MoneySmart mortgage switching calculator.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation, or needs. It is not intended as financial advice. Before acting on any information, consider whether it is appropriate for your circumstances.

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. Interest rates are coming down. Here’s what homeowners should know about refinancing – https://theconversation.com/interest-rates-are-coming-down-heres-what-homeowners-should-know-about-refinancing-257116

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Raw, Lecturer, Sport Management, Swinburne University of Technology

Australia’s underwhelming performance at the 2024 Paris Paralympics has raised serious questions about how well our adaptive sport system is working. The Paris games returned our lowest medal tally since 1988, from our smallest team since 2004.

This result hasn’t gone unnoticed.

Ahead of the 2032 Brisbane games, now is the time to rebuild and strengthen grassroots disability sport across the country.

To do this, we must focus on inclusive, sustainable and community-driven approaches that truly support people with disabilities from the very start.

Issues at grassroots level

Grassroots disability clubs are vital to the health of para sports in Australia.

These local clubs give people with disabilities the chance to be active, which supports both physical and mental wellbeing.

Just as importantly, they provide places where people can build friendships, feel included and develop a sense of belonging.

Many paralympians start their journey in these environments; they’re not just places to play sport, they’re key to developing future talent.

Current and former athletes have called for more and better participation opportunities in adaptive sport.

Paralympian Leanne Del Toso called for more support for women’s wheelchair basketball after Australia missed qualification for the Rio and Paris Olympics.

It shouldn’t be about funding, it shouldn’t be about access, it should be about equality.

The message is clear: we need to rebuild from the ground up, starting with a stronger and more supportive grassroots system.

Read more:
If we truly want our Paralympic athletes to shine, their coaches need more support

What are the main problems?

Australia’s para sports system is often fragmented and inconsistent, especially compared to mainstream sports such as swimming or athletics, which usually have national pathways, structured support and a clear line from beginner to elite.

But adaptive sports are often run in disconnected ways across different states, clubs or organisations.

This system is often difficult to navigate for aspiring athletes.

Another big part of the problem is the “mainstreaming” of adaptive sport: instead of creating separate systems designed specifically for people with disabilities, many sports fold disability sport into their existing structures.

While this can sound inclusive, it often creates problems.

Research shows this approach can actually narrow who gets to participate.

Many organisations and leagues tend to follow a standard competitive model that doesn’t work for everyone, especially those with more complex needs.

Even well-meaning attempts at inclusion can backfire if they don’t involve people with disability.

That’s why researchers now believe adaptive sport only works when paired with real disability-specific knowledge, community consultation and strong systems of accountability.

Without that, we risk reinforcing the very inequalities we’re trying to fix.

Another problem is the lack of participation data.

One of the main sources of sports participation data in Australia is the AusPlay survey.

This gives some insight into who is playing sport and being active, but it doesn’t give enough detail when it comes to disability sport.

For instance, while the AusPlay survey indicates 51% of adults with a disability engage in physical activity once per week, it lacks specificity regarding the activities these people participate in.

This makes it hard for policymakers, funders and sport organisations to make smart decisions, as they don’t have enough information about who is participating, where the gaps are or how things are changing over time.

With better data, we could target resources where they’re needed most, especially in communities that currently miss out.

Some possible solutions

If we want to fix these problems, we need a different approach.

That starts with co-design: involving people with disabilities in designing the systems, programs and policies that affect them.

It’s not just about asking for feedback, it’s about giving real decision-making power.

A great example of this is Wheelchair Sports NSW/ACT, which has embraced co-design and made it a core part of its programs.

This has led to a 380% increase in membership over five years, and a record number of affiliated clubs across their network.

This success shows what’s possible when sport organisations stop designing systems for people with disabilities and start designing with them.

When people feel valued and heard, they are more likely to get involved and stay involved.

Recent initiatives, such as the new para unit launched by the Western Australian Institute of Sport (the original home of Australia’s Paralympic movement), demonstrate promising steps towards a more cohesive para sport system.

But grassroots sport isn’t about medals. While we all love to celebrate paralympic success, local sport has a much bigger role to play.

It helps people with disabilities stay healthy, feel included and connect with their communities. It can change lives on and off the field.

As we look to Brisbane 2032, it’s clear paralympic success doesn’t start at the top. It starts in the community and on local fields.

If we invest now in grassroots sport and centre people with disabilities in the design and delivery of programs, we can create a stronger and more inclusive future for para sport in Australia.

The author would like to acknowledge the contributions of Mick Garnett to discussions on the future of adaptive sport in Australia.

Katherine Raw 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. Australian para sport has issues everywhere – here’s what must be fixed ahead of the Brisbane Paralympics – https://theconversation.com/australian-para-sport-has-issues-everywhere-heres-what-must-be-fixed-ahead-of-the-brisbane-paralympics-256450

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Margaret Murray, Senior Lecturer, Nutrition, Swinburne University of Technology

If you’re browsing the supermarket fridge for reduced-fat milk, it’s easy to be confused by the many different types.

You can find options labelled skim, skimmed, skinny, no fat, extra light, lite, light, low fat, reduced fat, semi skim and HiLo (high calcium, low fat).

So what’s the difference between two of these common milks – skim milk and light milk? How are they made? And which one’s healthier?

What do they contain?

Skim milk

In Australia and New Zealand, skim milk is defined as milk that contains no more than 1.5% milk fat and has at least 3% protein. On the nutrition information panel this looks like less than 1.5 grams of fat and at least 3g protein per 100 millilitres of milk.

But the fat content of skim milk can be as low as 0.1% or 0.1g per 100mL.

Light milk

Light milk is sometimes spelled “lite” but they’re essentially the same thing.

While light milk is not specifically defined in Australia and New Zealand, the term “light” is defined for food generally. If we apply the rules to milk, we can say light milk must contain no more than 2.4% fat (2.4g fat per 100mL).

In other words, light milk contains more fat than skim milk.

You can find the fat content by reading the “total fat per 100mL” on the label’s nutrition information panel.

How about other nutrients?

The main nutritional difference between skim milk and light milk, apart from the fat content, is the energy content.

Skim milk provides about 150 kilojoules of energy per 100mL whereas light milk provides about 220kJ per 100mL.

Any milk sold as cow’s milk must contain at least 3% protein (3g protein per 100mL of milk). That includes skim or light milk. So there’s typically not much difference there.

Likewise, the calcium content doesn’t differ much between skim milk and light milk. It is typically about 114 milligrams to 120mg per 100mL.

You can check these and other details on the label’s nutrition information panel.

How are they made?

Skim milk and light milk are not made by watering down full-cream milk.

Instead, full-cream milk is spun at high speeds in a device called a centrifuge. This causes the fat to separate and be removed, leaving behind milk containing less fat.

Who should be drinking what?

Australian Dietary Guidelines recommend we drink mostly reduced-fat milk – that is, milk containing no more than 2.4g fat per 100mL. Skim milk and light milk are both included in that category.

The exception is for children under two years old, who are recommended full-cream milk to meet their growing needs.

The reason our current guidelines recommend reduced-fat milk is that, since the 1970s, reduced-fat milk has been thought to help with reducing body weight and reducing the risk of heart disease. That’s because of its lower content of saturated fat and energy (kilojoules/calories) than full cream milk.

However, more recent evidence has shown drinking full-cream milk is not associated with weight gain or health risks. In fact, eating or drinking dairy products of any type may help reduce the risk of obesity and other metabolic disorders (such as heart disease and type 2 diabetes), especially in children and adolescents.

The science in this area continues to evolve. So the debate around whether there are health benefits to choosing reduced-fat milk over full cream milk is ongoing.

Whether or not there any individual health benefits from choosing skim milk or light milk over full cream will vary depending on your current health status and broader dietary habits.

For personalised health and dietary advice, speak to a health professional.

Margaret Murray 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. What’s the difference between skim milk and light milk? – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-difference-between-skim-milk-and-light-milk-255608

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathryn Locke, Associate Researcher in Digital Disability, Centre for Culture and Technology, Curtin University

Since the recent explosion of widely available generative artificial intelligence (AI), it now seems that a new AI tool emerges every week.

With varying success, AI offers solutions for productivity, creativity, research, and also accessibility: making products, services and other content more usable for people with disability.

The award-winning 2024 Super Bowl ad for Google Pixel 8 is a poignant example of how the latest AI tech can intersect with disability.

Directed by blind director Adam Morse, it showcases an AI-powered feature that uses audio cues, haptic feedback (where vibrating sensations communicate information to the user) and animations to assist blind and low-vision users in capturing photos and videos.

The ad was applauded for being disability inclusive and representative. It also demonstrated a growing capacity for – and interest in – AI to generate more accessible technology.

AI is also poised to challenge how audio description is created and what it may sound like. This is the focus of our research team.

Audio description is a track of narration that describes important visual elements of visual media, including television shows, movies and live performances. Synthetic voices and quick, automated visual descriptions might result in more audio description on our screens. But will users lose out in other ways?

AI as people’s eyes

AI-powered accessibility tools are proliferating. Among them is Microsoft’s Seeing AI, an app that turns your smartphone into a talking camera by reading text and identifying objects. The app Be My AI uses virtual assistants to describe photos taken by blind users; it’s an AI version of the original app Be My Eyes, where the same task was done by human volunteers.

There are increasingly more AI software options for text-to-speech and document reading, as well as for producing audio description.

Audio description is an essential feature to make visual media accessible to blind or vision impaired audiences. But its benefits go beyond that.

Increasingly, research shows audio description benefits other disability groups and mainstream audiences without disability. Audio description can also be a creative way to further develop or enhance a visual text.

Traditionally, audio description has been created using human voices, script writers and production teams. However, in the last year several international streaming services including Netflix and Amazon Prime have begun offering audio description that’s at least partially generated with AI.

Yet there are a number of issues with the current AI technologies, including their ability to generate false information. These tools need to be critically appraised and improved.

Is AI coming for audio description jobs?

There are multiple ways in which AI might impact the creation – and end result – of audio description.

With AI tools, streaming services can get synthetic voices to “read” an audio description script. There’s potential for various levels of automation, while giving users the chance to customise audio description to suit their specific needs and preferences. Want your cooking show to be narrated in a British accent? With AI, you could change that with the press of a button.

However, in the audio description industry many are worried AI could undermine the quality, creativity and professionalism humans bring to the equation.

The language-learning app Duolingo, for example, recently announced it was moving forward with “AI first” development. As a result, many contractors lost jobs that can now purportedly be done by algorithms.

On the one hand, AI could help broaden the range of audio descriptions available for a range of media and live experiences.

But AI audio description may also cost jobs rather than create them. The worst outcome would be a huge amount of lower-quality audio description, which would undermine the value of creating it at all.

Can we trust AI to describe things well?

Industry impact and the technical details of how AI can be used in audio description are one thing.

What’s currently lacking is research that centres the perspectives of users and takes into consideration their experiences and needs for future audio description.

Accuracy – and trust in this accuracy – is vitally important for blind and low-vision audiences.

Cheap and often free, AI tools are now widely used to summarise, transcribe and translate. But it’s a well-known problem that generative AI struggles to stay factual. Known as “hallucinations”, these plausible fabrications proliferate even when the AI tools are not asked to create anything new – like doing a simple audio transcription.

If AI tools simply fabricate content rather than make existing material accessible, it would even further distance and disadvantage blind and low-vision consumers.

We can use AI for accessibility – with care

AI is a relatively new technology, and for it to be a true benefit in terms of accessibility, its accuracy and reliability need to be absolute. Blind and low-vision users need to be able to turn on AI tools with confidence.

In the current “AI rush” to make audio description cheaper, quicker and more available, it’s vital that the people who need it the most are closely involved in how the tech is deployed.

Kathryn Locke is employed as a researcher on the Australian Research Council’s discovery grant, “Diversifying audio description in the Australian digital landscape”.

Tama Leaver receives funding from the Australian Research Council. This work is supported by the discovery grant, “Diversifying audio description in the Australian digital landscape”. He is a chief investigator in the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child.

– ref. AI is now used for audio description. But it should be accurate and actually useful for people with low vision – https://theconversation.com/ai-is-now-used-for-audio-description-but-it-should-be-accurate-and-actually-useful-for-people-with-low-vision-256808

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicola Gaston, Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

A lack of strategy and research funding – by both the current and previous governments – has been well documented, most comprehensively in the first report by the Science System Advisory Group (SSAG), released late last year.

If there is one word that sums up the current state of New Zealan’s research sector, it is scarcity. As the report summarises:

We have an underfunded system by any international comparison. This parsimony has led to harmful inter-institutional competition in a manner that is both wastefully expensive in terms of process and scarce researcher time, and is known to inhibit the most intellectually innovative ideas coming forward, and of course it is these that can drive a productive innovation economy.

The government expects research to contribute to economic growth, but policy and action undermine the sector’s capacity to do so.

The latest example is last week’s cancellation of the 2026 grant application round of the NZ$55 million Endeavour Fund “as we transition to the science, innovation and technology system of the future”. Interrupting New Zealand’s largest contestable source of science funding limits opportunities for researchers looking for support for new and emerging ideas.

Changes to the Marsden Fund, set up 30 years ago to support fundamental research, removed all funding for social science and the humanities and shifted focus to applied research. This is despite fundamental research in all fields underpinning innovation and the international ranking of our universities.

New Zealand has an opportunity to change its economy based on the potential of emerging sectors such as artificial intelligence, cleantech and quantum technologies. Other countries, including Australia and the United Kingdom, already consider quantum technologies a priority and fund them accordingly.

But when it comes to strategy, the composition of the boards of new Public Research Organisations, set up as part of the government’s science sector reform, are skewed towards business experience. Where there is scientific expertise, it tends to be in established industries. The governance of the proposed new entity to focus on emerging and advanced technologies is yet to be announced.

Critical mass requires funding and strategy

Scientists have been calling for a science investment target of 2% of GDP for a long time. It was once – roughly a decade ago – the average expenditure within the OECD; this has since increased to 2.7% of GDP, while New Zealand’s investment remains at 1.5%.

The SSAG report repeatedly refers to the lack of funding, and it would be the obvious thing to see addressed in this year’s budget. But expectations have already been lowered by the government’s insistence there will be no new money.

The report’s second high-level theme is the engagement of government with scientific strategy. Government announcements to date seem focused on attracting international investment through changes to tax settings and regulation. I would argue this is a matter of focusing on the wrapping rather than the present: the system itself needs to be attractive to investors.

Creating a thriving research sector is also a matter of scale. International cooperation is one way for New Zealand to access efficiencies of scale. And work on building international partnerships is one area of positive intent. But we need to look at our connectivity nationally as well, and use investment to build this further.

Countries with greater GDPs than New Zealand’s invest much more in research as a proportion of GDP. It means the size of these other countries’ scientific ecosystems – if measured by total expenditure – is three to four times New Zealand’s on a per capita basis.

A matter of scale

Per-capita scale matters because it tells us how easy it is for researchers to find someone else with the right skillset or necessary equipment. It tells us how likely it is for a student to find an expert in New Zealand to teach them, rather than needing to go overseas.

And it tells us how quickly start-up companies in emerging technologies will be able to find the skilled employees they need. A thriving university system that attracts young people to develop the research skills needed by advanced technology companies is a key part of this challenge.

The government’s science sector reform aims to increase its contribution to economic growth. But research contributes to economic growth when scientists can really “lean in” with confidence to commercialising and translating their science.

That can’t happen if budgets don’t fund the critical mass, connectivity and resources to stimulate the transition to a thriving science system.

Nicola Gaston receives funding from the Tertiary Education Commission as the Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology. She also receives funding from the Marsden Fund. All research funding goes to the University of Auckland to pay the costs of the research she is employed to do.

– ref. NZ Budget 2025: science investment must increase as a proportion of GDP for NZ to innovate and compete – https://theconversation.com/nz-budget-2025-science-investment-must-increase-as-a-proportion-of-gdp-for-nz-to-innovate-and-compete-255591

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leonora Risse, Associate Professor in Economics, University of Canberra

After two years of publishing the gender pay gaps of Australia’s private-sector companies, the Workplace Gender Equality Agency has released public-sector employer data for the first time.

The report shows a stark contrast between the private and public sectors. The Commonwealth public sector has a gender pay gap of 6.4%, far less than the equivalent gap of 21.1% in the private sector.

The agency attributes a big part of the “substantially better” outcome in the public sector to the achievement of gender balance at managerial and board levels.

Women’s representation in senior and governance roles doesn’t just narrow the pay gap at the top. It can also change workplace cultures and embed more gender-equitable practices that ripple through to all occupational levels.

The agency says public-sector employers have achieved this outcome by “long-term and deliberate actions that address gender equality”. These include conducting a gender pay gap analysis and formulating a gender-equality strategy.

The public sector’s results also illustrate the power of setting targets. The Australian government has set – and now achieved – targets for women to hold 50% of all Australian government board positions.

Who’s performing well?

Of the 120 public-sector employers in the Workplace Gender Equality Agency’s dataset, 55 have a gender pay gap that falls into the target range of between –5% and +5%.

Several have a gender pay gap in total remuneration at or very close to zero. These include the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Department of Treasury, Department of Social Services and the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman.

A handful have a slight positive gender pay gap in favour of women, including the Productivity Commission.

Where is there room for improvement?

To support greater transparency, the Workplace Gender Equality Agency has published a searchable database of Commonwealth public sector employers. This is broken down by each department and agency.

The largest gender gaps in median total remuneration are reported by the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (50.4%) and Coal Mining Industry Corporation (31.7%).

Closer to the middle of the pack, the Australian Federal Police reports a gender pay gap of 12.2%. The Reserve Bank of Australia has a gap of 11.5%, and Australia Post 8.6%.

The data does not include elected officials such as members of parliament.

All up, half of Commonwealth public-sector employers have a gender pay gap larger than 5%, which the agency deems the acceptable maximum.

But this is still a better performance than in the private sector, where 60% of companies exceeded the 5% threshold.

Read more:
Women’s annual salaries are narrowing the gap. But men still out-earn women by an average $547 a week

How much less are women earning?

Women working in Australia’s public sector earn on average A$8,200 less per year than their male colleagues.

The data cover both the Australian Public Service (APS) (which is directly responsible for the delivery of government services) and non-APS organisations (which deliver services on behalf of the government).

Within the APS workforce, men’s average total remuneration of $128,503 compares to women’s $121,146. This equates to a 5.7% gap.

In public-sector agencies outside the APS, this gender pay gap widens to 8.8%. Men’s average salary of $127,354 compares to women’s $116,157.

Read more:
Women’s annual salaries are narrowing the gap. But men still out-earn women by an average $547 a week

In agencies outside the APS, more of this gender gap – 5.6 percentage points – is due to men being paid more in bonuses, overtime and superannuation. Within the APS, these above-base payments contribute only 1.1 percentage points to the overall gap.

The role of discretionary above-base payments in widening the gap in total remuneration is similar to the dynamics of the private sector, where there is also greater scope for individual negotiation.

Research shows negotiation practices are laced with gender biases.

More standardised recruitment, promotion and wage-setting practices in the public sector, compared with private companies, mean there’s less scope for personal subjectivity and implicit biases in hiring, promotion and salary decisions.

Turning data into action

This is the first year the Commonwealth public sector’s performance on gender equality has been published at employer level. It follows changes to legislation in 2022 requiring public sector employers to report their gender equality indicators to WGEA from 2023, similar to the obligations of large private companies.

The point of publishing gender pay gaps is to spark awareness and motivate employer action.

Three in four public sector employers report they have taken action after conducting a gender pay gap analysis. Of these actions, one in four employers have corrected instances of unequal pay.

With a heightened awareness of the benefits of flexible work, almost all public-sector employers (96%) reported “flexible working is promoted throughout the organisation”.

But there is scope to improve the practical implementation of flexible work policies.

Only 56% of public-sector employers offer an online option for all team meetings. Only 43% provide support to managers to ensure performance evaluations are not unfairly biased against staff who work remotely or hybrid. And only 5% report that management positions can be designed as part-time.

With this greater transparency, there will be opportunity to monitor changes in future to look for ongoing improvements in gender-equality practices and outcomes.

It’s in the interests of fostering a more equitable, productive and effective public sector for all.

Read more:
Working from home is producing economic benefits return-to-office rules would quash

Leonora Risse receives research funding from the Trawalla Foundation and the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia. She has previously undertaken commissioned research for the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. She is a member of the Economic Society of Australia and the Women in Economics Network. She serves as an Expert Panel Member on gender pay equity for the Fair Work Commission.

– ref. The public service has a much smaller gender pay gap than the private sector. It’s a big achievement – https://theconversation.com/the-public-service-has-a-much-smaller-gender-pay-gap-than-the-private-sector-its-a-big-achievement-256810

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Barbara Catinella, Professor and Senior Principal Research Fellow, International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research (ICRAR), The University of Western Australia

Galaxies are often described as vast star factories, churning out new suns from clouds of gas. For decades, astronomers have assumed that the more raw material a galaxy holds, the more stars it should be able to make.

But our latest study, published this month in the Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (PASA), challenges that assumption. We found that when it comes to forming stars, it’s not just the amount of gas in a galaxy that matters – it’s where that gas is located.

Getting the ingredients in the right place

Our research is part of one of the largest efforts to map atomic hydrogen gas in nearby galaxies. This huge project is called the WALLABY survey (or the Widefield ASKAP L-band Legacy All-sky Blind Survey).

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe and the basic building block of stars. But surprisingly, a large fraction of this gas in galaxies lies far from where stars actually form – out in the faint outer regions, well beyond the bright stellar disk.

Think of atomic hydrogen as the flour in a cake recipe. It’s the essential ingredient for making stars. But what really matters for the recipe is not how much flour there is in the bag, but how much ends up in the mixing bowl.

In the same way, to understand how stars form, we need to focus on the gas that’s in the right place. In a galaxy, that means within the stellar disk, where it can actually be used.

A closer look

Until now, most measurements of atomic hydrogen in galaxies have focused on their total gas content, without showing where that gas is located. That’s because earlier observations – especially those made with single-dish radio telescopes – couldn’t detect where in a galaxy hydrogen gas was located.

However, the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) telescope in Western Australia has a very wide field of view and moderate resolution. This means astronomers can use it to efficiently map the hydrogen gas across large areas of the sky and within individual galaxies.

Using the ASKAP telescope, the WALLABY survey should eventually detect more than 200,000 galaxies and provide detailed hydrogen maps for many thousands of them.

A puzzle resolved

Our study, led by PhD student Seona Lee, draws on hydrogen maps for around 1,000 galaxies. This is an unprecedented sample size for this kind of analysis.

The results reveal a clear trend. The amount of star formation is much more closely linked to the amount of hydrogen gas within the stellar disk than the gas farther out. That outer gas, even when it is plentiful, appears to play little immediate role in fuelling new stars.

This helps explain a long-standing puzzle – why some galaxies with large gas reservoirs form relatively few stars. It turns out much of their gas may be sitting idle in the galactic outskirts, too far from the regions where stars actually form.

In short, measuring the total gas content of a galaxy doesn’t give the full picture. To understand star formation, we need to zoom in – not just total up the ingredients, but see where they’re actually being used.

Parts of this research were supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All Sky Astrophysics in 3 Dimensions (ASTRO 3D), through project number CE170100013.

– ref. For making stars, it’s not just how much gas a galaxy has that matters – it’s where it’s hiding – https://theconversation.com/for-making-stars-its-not-just-how-much-gas-a-galaxy-has-that-matters-its-where-its-hiding-257011

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Jeffries, Senior Lecturer in Microbiology, Western Sydney University

The outbreak of the deadly “mud bug” melioidosis in north Queensland has not yet abated since it began at the start of this year.

So far there have been 221 cases and 31 deaths from the disease in 2025. This encompasses a 400% increase in cases in Cairns and a 600% increase in Townsville compared to the average over previous years.

Fortunately, case numbers have begun to drop. Queensland Health reports new cases weekly, and in the most recent reporting period – up to May 6 – seven new cases were recorded, down from a peak of 29 cases in the week to February 16.

However, people are still contracting and dying from this disease. So what’s keeping it active in Queensland, and are there any promising vaccines on the horizon?

What is melioidosis?

Melioidosis is caused by the bacterium Burkholderia pseudomallei which lives in soil, mud and groundwater, usually not causing any harm. But B. pseudomallei can cause disease in humans and animals if it enters the skin via a cut. Or it can be inhaled in water droplets and enter the lungs.

The disease generally takes one to four weeks to establish itself, meaning people don’t develop symptoms immediately after they’ve been exposed.

Melioidosis most commonly presents as pneumonia. However chronic skin infections, called cutaneous infections, occur in 10–20% of cases. Melioidosis can also lead to blood infections.

Symptoms of the pneumonia form include fever, headache, difficulty breathing, muscle pain, chest pain and confusion.

We don’t understand cutaneous infections as well as we do lung infections with melioidosis. Cutaneous infections are also less responsive to standard antibiotic treatments due to the nature of the chronic wound. For example, the bacteria can form a slimy layer called a biofilm. This can help the bacteria produce proteins which can block the antibiotics from working.

Melioidosis occurs most commonly in tropical areas, such as Thailand. But it’s also regarded as endemic in northern Australia, occurring in Queensland and the Northern Territory. Nonetheless, the scale of the current outbreak in north Queensland is highly unusual.

Anyone can contract melioidosis, but certain medical conditions can increase a person’s risk. These include diabetes, liver, kidney or lung disease, cancer, or other conditions which might compromise the patient’s immune system.

During the current Queensland outbreak 95% of cases have been in people with risk factors such as diabetes or lung disease.

How is melioidosis spreading in Queensland?

Melioidosis increases during periods of high rainfall and flooding, and this has been the case in the current outbreak. However, patterns have begun to emerge suggesting the bacterium may now be spreading in other ways.

Experts have suggested that while the Townsville cases can be explained by flooding and correlate to high levels of rainfall, the Cairns cases do not match with this explanation.

One suggestion is that the construction of the Bruce Highway upgrade south of Cairns has caused an increase in cases due to clay soil particles becoming airborne during construction.

It’s not an entirely new idea. The movement of soil during highway construction and urban expansion has been investigated as a potential mode of transmission during previous spikes of melioidosis cases in far north Queensland.

The infrastructure body responsible for the upgrade has pledged to follow expert health advice as investigations continue.

Could B. pseudomallei be evolving and becoming more deadly?

This potential change in how the disease is spreading, and the increased number of cases and deaths, might indicate the organism is evolving to spread more easily and become more deadly. Genome analysis is ongoing to determine this.

Notably, bacteria found in the environment can acquire genes from other bacteria in soil and water. This may give them enhanced abilities to survive in unfavourable conditions and be more resilient to changes in their natural habitat, as well as potentially infect human hosts more effectively.

In a warming climate with increased rainfall, the bacterium behind melioidosis is likely to be a prime candidate for this kind of change.

How about treatments and protection?

There’s currently only one way to treat melioidosis, which involves receiving intravenous antibiotics in hospital for several weeks, followed by up to six months of oral antibiotics.

Against a backdrop of urgent calls for more research and increased public awareness around melioidosis, there may be hope on the horizon.

Researchers at the University of California have developed a vaccine which produces a protein that mimics the proteins in B. pseudomallei, leading to an immune response against this bacterium. The vaccine has been successful in mouse models and will continue to a further animal trial, which, if successful, will lead to human trials.

It seems melioidosis is a problem that’s not going away.

If you live in an affected region such as tropical Queensland or the NT, limit exposure to mud and water as much as possible. If you’re spending time in muddy areas, use appropriate personal protective equipment such as gloves and boots. You can also protect yourself by covering any open wounds and wearing a respirator if you’re working closely with water.

Monitor for symptoms and see a doctor if you feel unwell. More information is also available from Queensland Health.

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

– ref. The Queensland melioidosis outbreak is still growing. What’s keeping this deadly mud bug active? – https://theconversation.com/the-queensland-melioidosis-outbreak-is-still-growing-whats-keeping-this-deadly-mud-bug-active-256794

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jun Eric Fu, Senior Research Fellow, Youth Research Collective, The University of Melbourne

Australia’s school system – and whether it is doing its job – is often under the microscope from politicians, experts and parents.

The most recent NAPLAN results in 2024 triggered a wave of heated discussions after about one in three students were not meeting literacy and numeracy benchmarks.

Education Minister Jason Clare is among those who also have serious concerns about rates of students who complete Year 12. In 2024, the retention rate of students between Year 7 and Year 12 was 79.9%. For government school students, it was 74%.

But what do students themselves think about their schooling? Our new study asked recent school leavers about their experiences.

Our research

Our study draws on a 2023 survey as part of the Life Patterns research program, which follows different generations of young Australians after school.

We surveyed more than 4,000 young people recruited from a diverse sample of 100 government, Catholic and independent schools in urban and regional areas of Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania.

These young people completed high school in 2023 and were asked to comment on their school experiences.

Students are mostly satisfied, but …

The participants rated their overall impression of school on a five-point scale, from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. About 60% of them were “quite satisfied” or “very satisfied”.

Despite this broadly positive picture, many of them also expressed concerns about their education, feeling its current content did not prepare them for life after school.

As one female student from a capital city told us:

I feel like school doesn’t prepare us for the real world at all and it freaks me out.

This sentiment was echoed by another female student from a regional city:

School seems extremely disconnected from either knowledge or experience that will help with jobs, or life skills that will assist in becoming a good, productive, happy person.

For many, this disconnect between the education on offer and the education they wanted contributed to a disengagement from school. A male student from a regional city said:

I am committed to my education and a dedicated student, but find it hard to connect with some of the information we are learning as it seems outdated and irrelevant. I want to learn things that are going to improve my life.

This follows researchers’ longstanding concerns the education system is not adequately setting students up for life outside school – and the complex social, political and economic changes they will confront.

Don’t focus on uniforms

Students also spoke about schools focusing on issues that do not matter to young people, such as students wearing the “correct” uniform or whether or not they have their phone at school.

As one female student commented:

Focus on more real issues. The debates about phones allowed at school or uniforms at school seem almost irrelevant when you compare them to the everyday common hardships and problems young people face.

Too much stress

A strong theme in young people’s responses was the amount of stress they faced with their studies. These feelings were often linked to heavy workloads (particularly in Year 11 and 12) and the pressure they felt to achieve certain grades.

A male student from a country town said:

[…] the pressure and the expectations to do well in school is so high and caused a lot of stress and anxiety.

Another male student from a capital city also felt:

There is so much pressure on high school and how one exam can change the course of your future which isn’t true.

This echoes other studies that query the focus on a single score (the ATAR) and supports alternative approaches to measuring education outcomes at the end of Year 12.

More mental health support

Amid ongoing reports of young people struggling with their mental health, mental health also emerged as a major concern in students’ responses.

A male student from a capital city told us young people were “battling every day” and they needed more free, accessible resources and support from school staff.

They also saw a connection between the pressures of schooling and mental health concerns. As one female student told us:

There is too much expected from students at school, leading to burn out and mental illnesses.

What next?

Our study shows many young people care deeply about their education. But they also feel it isn’t working for them or preparing them for life beyond school.

This suggests government institutions and schools need to be doing more to include young people’s perspectives as they design and implement curricula.

By recognising young people as active stakeholders in schools,
education shifts from something happening to them to something happening with them. This approach can foster a stronger sense of belonging, ownership and engagement with learning.

Jun Eric Fu works on the Life Patterns research program, which is funded by the Australian Research Council.

Julia Cook receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. ‘Outdated and irrelevant’: what do young Australians think of their schooling? – https://theconversation.com/outdated-and-irrelevant-what-do-young-australians-think-of-their-schooling-256889