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

Tuesday’s national accounts show Australia ending 2021-22 on a strong note.

Gross domestic product grew by a historically robust 0.9% in the three months to June, and by an unusually-high 3.6% over the year.

Australia’s economy is now more than 5% bigger than it was before COVID, a better performance than most comparable economies.

The main drivers of the 0.9% jump in activity were household spending and exports.

Household spending grew 2.2% in the quarter, exports grew 5.5%.

Each contributed about one percentage point to the growth in GDP. Working the other way was a smaller build-up of inventories (unsold stock) that lowers the amount of production needed to meet the increased demand.

Households have been saving less in order to spend more. Since the start of this year, household saving has slipped from 13.5% to a more normal 8.7%.

Spending has also been supported by the fall of unemployment, now down to a near half-century low of 3.4%, a low that might be sustained for quite a while.

In good news for government tax revenue, the value of Australia’s mineral exports also climbed due to higher commodity prices.

Price isn’t taken into account in compiling the most-widely quoted GDP measure, which is “real” GDP, a measure of volumes rather than prices.

Australia’s terms of trade (the ratio of export prices to import prices) reached an all-time high.

Investment spending by companies continued to remain flat, after rebounding from COVID last year.

As highlighted by ACTU secretary Sally McManus, the share of national income accruing to labour remains at a near 60-year low.

In the June quarter profits again grew faster than wages. It remains to be seen whether initiatives from the Jobs and Skills Summit will do much to change this.

Today’s good-looking news may not be a good guide to the future.

The three months to June were barely affected by the Reserve Bank’s five successive interest rate rises that began in May.

Monetary policy is famously said to have “long and variable lags”.

The Reserve Bank is almost certainly not done with interest rate increases. On Tuesday it said it expected to increase rates “further over the months ahead”.

But it also said it was “not on a pre-set path”.

Economic management is about to get harder

The Bank has to navigate between the Scylla of the inflation it would get from not lifting interest rates enough and the Charybdis of the recession it would get from lifting them too much. It is trying to find a Goldilocks path of “just right”.

As it happens, there’s a piece of news that should gladden its heart in the national accounts. Last year, it was giving the impression it wouldn’t lift rates until wage growth took off. This year in May it lost patience and lifted rates anyway, saying its business liaison program suggested companies were starting to pay more.

The national accounts show the compensation of employees (wages plus super) grew 7% over 2021-22, well above the official wage growth figure of 2.6%.

It might be beginning to get what it wanted.

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

– ref. Australia’s June quarter national accounts show GDP doing well – for now – https://theconversation.com/australias-june-quarter-national-accounts-show-gdp-doing-well-for-now-189951

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Qamar Schuyler, Research Scientist, Oceans and Atmospheres, CSIRO

If you flip over a plastic food container, you’ll see tiny writing on it – something like “AS 2070”. This means the product meets the Australian standard for plastics safe to use for food.

These often unrecognised standards are a part of daily life. Australia has a set of exacting standards which set quality benchmarks for many products. They act as guidelines for design and manufacture of plastic items, shaping the specific polymers used, the ability to use recycled content, and compostability.

There’s a real opportunity to do more here. The issues of plastic waste in our seas and the effects on wildlife are catalysing major public concern. Part of the problem of plastic waste is the difficulty of reusing many types of plastics as the feedstock for new products. We also need stronger incentives to reduce plastic in manufacturing and design.

That’s where standards can come in. The European Union has used standards and legislation to nudge the plastics industry towards a true circular economy. This means minimising the use of plastic where possible, while ensuring old plastics can be turned into new products rather than turning into waste which could end up in our seas. We can do the same, harnessing standards to reduce plastic waste. How? By requiring companies to minimise plastic packaging and setting guidelines for products to be made of specific polymers while avoiding others.

Our new research found a total of 95 standards. Nine of these are Australian. This means there is a great opportunity for Australian experts to get involved in the national and international standards development process.

Why do standards matter?

Think of standards as guidelines and codes of practice. Standards give product manufacturers a framework for the minimum quality and safety required to be able to sell them in Australia. They also help to provide a common language and enhance compatibility and efficiency across markets.

Globally, standards affect an estimated 80% of the world trade. They have real impact. If a product cannot meet the applicable standard in the country or jurisdiction it is intended for, it won’t be accepted.

Plastic recyclers can use standards to ensure their products meet specific requirements, and so provide quality assurance for manufacturers who buy the recycled plastics to make other products.

Standards for plastic reuse can ensure certain products can be used over and over. Labelling standards can also help us as consumers know which items we can and can’t recycle.

Both industry and government may choose to introduce standards. Standards can also increase consumer confidence, promote social acceptance of recycled products and maintain or increase the value of recycled plastics – a vital step towards a circular economy.

Read more:
Here’s how the new global treaty on plastic pollution can help solve this crisis

By bringing in new standards for other stages of the plastics supply chain, we could leverage this powerful tool and help standardise parts of the emerging international circular economy in plastics.

Standards could help us reduce waste at all stages of a product’s lifecycle, from design to manufacture to recycling to reuse.

What did we find?

We worked with Standards Australia to map existing plastics standards around the world. We also went looking for missing links which, if filled, could help to better manage plastic waste.

The majority of existing plastic standards – both Australian and international – are focused on recycling and recovery or waste disposal parts of plastic’s lifecycle.

To create a true circular economy for plastics, we’ll need to update existing standards and develop more which specifically focus on the early stages of plastic production, such as design or creation of the basic building blocks of plastics.

Think of nurdles, the pea-sized plastic beads produced in their trillions as a key first step to making many plastics. When nurdles spill into the sea, they’re very bad news for wildlife. If we create standards focused on these steps, we can help reduce their impact.

Adding more standards could also help us tackle the challenges around making products reusable and recyclable, as well as cutting how much packaging is needed for products.

We can also use them to help assess biodegradable products, to ensure they don’t make existing waste or recycling streams harder to process.

And importantly, standardising the labelling of products could help us as consumers. Imagine if labels on plastic products included the amount of recycled plastics, as well as a rating of how recyclable or compostable the product was.

This would give manufacturers incentives to make simpler products better able to be recycled. It would also avoid specific problems such as multi-layer plastics which are not cost effective to recycle.

In short, plastic standards are an often overlooked way for us to improve how we use and reuse these extraordinarily versatile modern materials.

Plastics don’t have to become environmentally destructive waste. They can be almost endlessly useful – if we require it.

Read more:
Local efforts have cut plastic waste on Australia’s beaches by almost 30% in 6 years

Qamar Schuyler 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. With better standards, we could make plastics endlessly useful – and slash waste. Here’s how – https://theconversation.com/with-better-standards-we-could-make-plastics-endlessly-useful-and-slash-waste-heres-how-189985

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Murphy, Associate Professor of Nutrition & Dietetics and Accredited Practicing Dietitian, University of South Australia

Soy is common in many Asian cuisines, and is growing more popular in Western countries as many people aim for predominantly plant-based diets. It offers many potential health benefits and is generally cheaper than meat.

However, you might have heard soy is linked to cancer risk, or that it can have a “feminising” effect on men.

But what does the research actually say on this?

In fact, most research finds eating a moderate amount of soy is unlikely to cause problems and may even provide benefits. All said, you can safely include moderate amounts of soy foods in your daily diet.

Read more:
Why Australian dietary recommendations on fat need to change

Does soy ‘feminise’ men? Not likely

Soy is rich in high quality protein, and contains B vitamins, fibre, minerals and the isoflavones daidzein, genistein and glycitein.

Isoflavones have a similar structure to natural estrogen and are sometimes called “phytoestrogens” (phyto means plant). Soy isoflavones can bind to estrogen receptors in the body. They can act in a way similar to natural estrogen but with a much, much weaker effect.

Some studies have flagged concerns but these tend to be related to people consuming extremely high amounts of soy – such as one unusual case report about a man with gynecomastia (enlarged breast tissue in men) who, it turned out, was drinking almost three litres of soy milk a day.

As one literature review noted, many of the other studies highlighting concerns in this area are are based on animals trials or rare one-off cases (case reports).

The same literature review noted that while more long term data in Western countries is needed, moderate amounts of soy in “traditional soy preparations offer modest health benefits with very limited risk for potential adverse health effects.”

What about soy and cancer risk?

One study of 73,223 Chinese women over more than seven years found:

Women who consumed a high amount of soy foods consistently during adolescence and adulthood had a substantially reduced risk of breast cancer. No significant association with soy food consumption was found for postmenopausal breast cancer.

This could be due to different types and amounts of soy eaten (as well as genetics).

Some animal trials and studies in cells show very high doses of isoflavones or isolated soy protein may stimulate breast cancer growth, but this is not evident in human trials.

A study in Japanese males reported high intake of miso soup (1-5 cups per day), might increase the risk of gastric cancer.

But the authors also said:

We thought that some other ingredients in miso soup might also play a role […] For example, high concentrations of salt in miso soup could also increase the risk of gastric cancer.

What about heart health?

Soy contains isoflavones, healthy fats like polyunsaturated fats, fibre, vitamins and minerals, and is also low in saturated fat.

Swapping meat in the diet with soy products is going to reduce the amount of saturated fat you eat while also boosting intake of important nutrients.

A study with nearly half a million Chinese adults free of cardiovascular disease, showed those who consumed soy four or more days a week had significantly lower risk of death from a heart attack compared with those who never ate soy.

Replacing red meat with plant proteins including soy products has been associated with a lower risk of developing heart disease.

A moderate intake is fine

If you want to include soy in your diet, choose whole soy foods like calcium-enriched soy beverages, tempeh, soy bread, tofu and soybeans over highly processed options high in salt and saturated fat.

Research on soy is ongoing and we still need more long-term data on intakes in Australia and health benefits.

Overall, however, moderate amounts of soy foods can be consumed as part of a healthy diet and may even help with some symptoms of menopause.

According to the Victorian government’s Better Health Channel:

one or two daily serves of soy products can be beneficial to our health.

Harvard University’s School of Public Health says soy:

can safely be consumed several times a week, and probably more often, and is likely to provide health benefits – especially when eaten as an alternative to red and processed meat.

So don’t stress too much about the soy milk in your coffee and tea or the tofu burger for lunch.

Read more:
Soy, oat, almond, rice, coconut, dairy: which ‘milk’ is best for our health?

Karen Murphy receives funding and/or support from the National Health Medical Research Council. In the last 10 years she has had funding from Dairy Australia and the Pork CRC.

– ref. Have you heard soy is linked to cancer risk or can ‘feminise’ men? Here’s what the science really says – https://theconversation.com/have-you-heard-soy-is-linked-to-cancer-risk-or-can-feminise-men-heres-what-the-science-really-says-186813

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

What does a “fair go” look like for Australian children? We asked 130 children aged between seven and 13 years what makes communities strong, supportive, and fair.

Many felt communities are about care and connection. As one ten-year-old girl said, “a community is really just a group of people that help you and always look out for you”.

The children in our research identified five themes that matter in determining whether they have a fair go – or not.

1) Good relationships are essential to children’s experiences of community. An 11-year-old boy said “I love my community, because I know people and everyone is friendly”.

When children know their neighbours and are treated with respect by caring people, they feel included, safe, and supported. But too many children mentioned adults who are rude or dismissive towards them – and they usually felt it was because they were young.

2) Feeling safe is very important to children – but many described the frightening ways some adults behave in their communities, most often because of excessive alcohol or drug use. Aggressive and dangerous driving also makes children feel unsafe and vulnerable in their neighbourhoods.

3) Inclusive places ensure children can actively participate in their communities, but many described feeling unwelcome in public places. Some talked about places designed for very young children and places for teenagers to hang out – but said there was very little for those in middle childhood. Children wanted a say in how public places were designed. As one nine-year-old girl said, “We – us kids – should decide what playground we get, because the adults who design it don’t play on it. It’s our equipment”.

Often, children described parks that are littered with broken glass or dog poo, making them unpleasant places to play. A common concern for children is a lack of footpaths, making it hard for them to safely move around their neighbourhoods.

4) Household resources make an enormous difference to whether children can make the most of their communities. Some children said their family had to move regularly because rent is so expensive. As a result, they never feel part of any place they live. Many could not afford to take part in activities in their communities.

5) Children also spoke about public good and infrastructure – things that also matter to adults. Health care is high on children’s list of what is most important. This is not what we might expect young children to focus on, but many described long waits in emergency rooms when they or their families were ill or injured. Homelessness was also an issue that worried children.

A small number of those involved in the research had experienced homelessness directly – but many more observed it, and said it was deeply unfair. An eight-year-old boy said, when people are homeless “they don’t have stuff, and some people think they are not the same as us. But they are, and it’s not right”.

Read more:
We asked children how they experienced poverty. Here are 6 changes needed now

Children described the complexities of communities and the many factors that determine whether they have a fair go or not. Analysing the themes children identified, and the detail within each, was challenging – until a nine-year-old girl said “communities are like a jigsaw puzzle. You need to have all the pieces in place to make them work”.

And so, the community jigsaw was born. The jigsaw presents the five major themes children identified, and the most important pieces within each. When all the pieces are in place, communities are strong and supportive – not only for children, but for people of all ages. As the pieces fall away, communities become less fair and children feel more vulnerable.

Our research was across communities with different socioeconomic profiles. While children in all communities raised similar issues – chidlren’s experiences varied greatly and reflected inequalities in Australia. Those in more disadvantaged communities were far more likely to experience challenges.

Children living in less advantaged communities often talked about caring, friendly people who helped each other, but also described deep structural problems: a lack of public transport, poor services, few parks and playgrounds. Children from lower-income communities were more likely to describe not being able to participate in activities or visit places (such as movies or the local pool) due to the cost.

There are lessons from this research for how we can ensure every child, in every community really does have a fair go.

First, the way adults treat children, even in small, everyday encounters, matters. For many children, the words and gestures used by adults make them feel vulnerable and excluded.

Second, there are structural and systemic issues that mean some children do not get a fair go. From policies that fail to address poverty and disadvantage to planning that is not child inclusive, too many children are being left behind.

Two initiatives would begin to address this immediately: the adoption of child rights impact statements (already in place in some parts of Australia) and child-friendly planning.

Our research shows is it time for us to listen to children – and to act to ensure they are all safe and supported. In the process, we might make communities fairer for everyone.

Sharon Bessell receives funding from:
The Australian Research Council
The Norwegian Research Council
The Paul Ramsay Foundation
The Australian Government through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

– ref. We asked Australian children what they needed from their communities. Here’s what they said – https://theconversation.com/we-asked-australian-children-what-they-needed-from-their-communities-heres-what-they-said-189772

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Geoff Hanmer, Adjunct professor of architecture, University of Adelaide

If COVID-19 had taught us anything it surely must be that poorly ventilated buildings can be a health hazard. Yet due to a weakness in current rules they continue to be built.

Under Australia’s National Construction Code it is possible to build a nightclub for 1,000 people with no ventilation. And it is possible to build a school for 600 people with no ventilation, or an aged care centre for 300 people with no ventilation.

This is because the Code requires windows that can be opened for natural ventilation, but nothing requires them to be opened in service.

And where the Code requires mechanical ventilation (fans or air conditioning) it is possible to build a hospital where the air that is supplied to patient rooms travels back to the air conditioning unit via corridors. A recent design in Footscray is typical.

This means that visitors, patients and health care workers have to travel through airborne effluent from unwell people to reach them.

Rules for water, few for air

The Code has rules for ensuring the purity of water delivered through plumbing, but no rules for ensuring the purity of air, or requirement to deliver a minimum standard of ventilation in buildings accessed by the public.

The Code’s revised Indoor Air Quality Handbook is now out for consultation.

The handbook is a guide for practice that is meant to go beyond the bare bones of the Code.

The revisions include nothing that would ensure indoor air was free from particulates, carcinogenic gases such as nitrogen oxide and benzine, pathogens such as bacteria, mould and fungal spores, or viruses – such as COVID-19.

Read more:
Poorly ventilated schools are a super-spreader event waiting to happen. It may be as simple as opening windows

The Code and Handbook say buildings can be “deemed to satisfy” air quality requirements if they provide one of two things:

• “natural ventilation” using openable windows measuring 5% of the floor area

• “mechanical ventilation” complying with Australian Standard 1668.2

But no law or regulation prevents the construction of a naturally-ventilated building that can be operated with its windows shut.

In a home, opening and shutting windows is within the control of the occupant.

But in a publicly accessible building, occupants normally are unable to control windows, and in winter or summer they are often shut to control the temperature.

Airborne particles kill millions

Worldwide, pre-COVID, acute respiratory illnesses such as colds and influenza caused an estimated 18 billion upper airway infections and 340 million lower respiratory infections every year, resulting in more than 2.7 million deaths and economic losses in the billions.

More broadly, tiny particles with widths as small as small as 2.5 microns (PM 2.5) were responsible for more than four million deaths each year.

Read more:
I live in an apartment. How can I cut my risk of getting COVID?

One single airborne viral disease, COVID-19, has now claimed between 17 million and 25 million lives worldwide. Most transmission occurred indoors.

Good ventilation and high-efficiency particulate absorbing filtration could have prevented much of it.

This ought to be fixed at the top, with national indoor air quality standards that progressively apply to all buildings accessed by the public.

No parts-per-million standard

Ideally, the standards would include upper limits for all contaminants, down to and including a width of 2.5 microns.

These contaminants include bacteria, viruses, pollen and spores as well as particulates from bushfire smoke, vehicles and combustion processes.

Ventilation should also be sufficient to ensure that gaseous contaminants generated by building contents and indoor activities stay at safe levels.

Relatively inexpensive and reasonably accurate handheld devices are now available to measure contaminants and could be used to monitor compliance.

Schools ought to be the first priority.

Many schools operated by state and Catholic education systems suffer from a massive shortfall in capital spending, contrasting with Rolls-Royce provisions at many high-fee private schools.

Nearly all state and low-fee schools operate in buildings in which heating, ventilation and air conditioning is an overlay on a natural ventilation.

Usually, these systems just recirculate air, or worse, in the case of unflued gas heaters, pollute it. Teachers ought not to be placed in the position of having to choose between thermal comfort and good ventilation.

This should not mean windows are set so they are always open. It should mean the building is safe even if the windows are shut.

This will cost money, but the benefits to children are likely to outweigh the costs.

The revision of the Indoor Air Quality Handbook is an opportunity for the Building Codes Board to start reforming the code so it takes health into proper account, rather than continuing to kick the can down the road.

Geoff Hanmer 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. Poorly ventilated buildings are allowed under Australia rules – it’s time to fix it – https://theconversation.com/poorly-ventilated-buildings-are-allowed-under-australia-rules-its-time-to-fix-it-189229

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gail Iles, Senior Lecturer in Physics, RMIT University

Earlier this week, the Artemis I Moon mission was scrubbed again; now we have to wait for a new launch window.

Just 40 minutes before the Space Launch System rocket was set to take off from Kennedy Space Centre in Florida on September 3, a leaking fuel line caused engineers to scrub the launch.

So what is a launch window, and why can’t a rocket go up at any time? And what does it mean to “scrub” it?

Waiting for the right alignment

A launch window is like waiting for the stars to align. The rocket will be “thrown” off the surface of Earth. This toss must be timed perfectly so the craft’s resulting path through space sends it – and everything it’s carrying – towards the intended location at the right time.

For Artemis I – a mission to send the Orion capsule into orbit around the Moon – the “right time” means waiting for the Moon to be as close to Earth as possible (known as “perigee”) during its 28-day cycle. Hence why we’ll now be waiting roughly four weeks for the next moonshot.

With much of the flight path relying on gravity assists (a “swing-by” that uses the momentum of a large body to increase or decrease the speed of a passing craft) from both Earth and the Moon, and because we want the Orion capsule to come back safely, the timing is crucial.

Orion must slingshot past the Moon, not crash into it, so the positions of the rocket launcher, Earth, Moon and lunar capsule must all be known precisely at all times.

It was a similar story with the launch of the James Webb Space Telescope. In this case, mission controllers were making sure it didn’t hit the Moon on its way to Lagrange Point 2 – a gravitationally balanced spot between Earth and the Sun. The launch of the telescope was scrubbed a couple of times to avoid bad weather; it eventually launched from French Guiana on an Ariane 5 rocket on Christmas Day 2021.

Read more:
The Webb telescope has released its very first exoplanet image – here’s what we can learn from it

‘Weird’ mission lingo

So why is it called “scrubbing” the launch and not cancelling it? Turns out there’s some fairly specific lingo for space missions.

There are actually five different words used for abandoned space missions. “Scrubbed”, “cancelled”, “scrapped”, “retired” and “terminated” all sound alike, but to mission planners they mean different things.

A mission that is “cancelled” will not be launched. For example, the International X-ray Laboratory was planned to be launched in 2021 as a joint effort by NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), but due to budget cuts it was cancelled. Planning had gone into it, research had been done, but nothing was built. This is a mission cancellation, which usually happens in the developmental stages.

If the mission is part of a program that is axed, this is “termination”. So if Russia leaves the International Space Station program, its participation will be terminated, even though the ISS mission continues. This is the same as when NASA terminated participation in the ESA ExoMars mission.

On the other hand, the last Saturn V rockets were “scrapped” when the last three Apollo missions were “cancelled”. Two Saturn V rockets are on display at Johnson and Kennedy Space Centers, made up of “scraps” from several older rockets and missions.

Finally, we’re used to seeing astronauts retire, but the same happens to space missions too. The Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and STS (space shuttle) programs have all been “retired”. This means no further missions of that type will occur.

Read more:
We need to protect the heritage of the Apollo missions

Scrubbed

So, why was the Artemis I launch scrubbed? The expression “scrubbed” is a leftover from the days when mission details were handwritten on a chalk board. If bad weather or equipment failure happened, the mission start time information was wiped off the chalkboard with a damp cloth – scrubbed.

It’s still assumed the mission will happen, but it will be rescheduled for a different time.

This is good news for all those eagerly waiting to see Moon missions happen again for the first time in 50 years. The Artemis I launch has merely been postponed to the next available launch window.

Read more:
NASA is launching the 1st stage of the Artemis mission – here’s why humans are going back to the Moon

Gail Iles 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 we always need to wait for ‘launch windows’ to get a rocket to space? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-we-always-need-to-wait-for-launch-windows-to-get-a-rocket-to-space-189971

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mirella Atherton, Lecturer in Law, University of Newcastle

The Albanese government will keep its election commitment to abolish the cashless debit card. Cashless cards limited the financial autonomy of over 17,000 participants, a disproportionate number of whom are First Nations people.

The cashless debit card represents a payment partnership that has linked the welfare system with the banking and financial services sector. The aim of the card has been to police how welfare recipients spend social security benefits.

The card emerged from prior policies of compulsory income management and reduces access to discretionary cash by permitting spending only on certain items.

The new government is right to abolish the cashless debit card. The card is incompatible with the fundamental principle of informed choice in financial services. Even worse, this system imposes financial control that is inescapable, dehumanising and discriminatory.

Read more:
There’s mounting evidence against cashless debit cards, but the government is ploughing on regardless

History of financial discrimination

The Senate stolen wages inquiry of 2006 noted a history of discrimination against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workers and wage appropriation that spanned the 19th and 20th centuries.

Multiple submissions to that inquiry attributed poverty experienced by First Nations people to this history of stolen wages and other monies, where governments sought to control the lives of Aboriginal people by making them wards of the state or otherwise placing them under the power of “protectors”, Aboriginal Protection Boards or similar government institutions.

These institutions nominally held the wages and other entitlements of Aboriginal workers in trust (as Aboriginal people were not considered capable of managing money). But the moneys were frequently not paid, used for other state purposes, or stolen by “protectors”.

The inquiry noted evidence that governments were negligent in their administration of the misappropriated wages of First Nations people.

Despite this history, governments in recent years have implemented policies with clear links to wage control programs of the past. Compulsory income management and cashless debit card systems have been implemented with the justification that these systems reduce violence and harm associated with alcohol, gambling and drug use.

Read more:
Has Labor learnt from the failure of the cashless debit card?

The cashless debit card is introduced

A trial of the cashless debit card commenced in 2016. By 2021, it had extended to multiple sites, as identified by the Department of Social Services. This latest form of income management has been applied disproportionately to First Nations people and has gendered outcomes for women.

Research into the experiences of Aboriginal women subject to income management in the Northern Territory revealed that it was stigmatising. It also restricted women’s freedom of consumer choice and did not improve women’s capacity to care for their children.

The cashless debit card scheme echoes the overtly paternalistic motivations of earlier government efforts to control the incomes of Aboriginal people.

For example, the 1912 Maternity Allowance Act declared “Aboriginal natives of Australia” were ineligible to receive benefits. Aboriginal women were often expressly excluded from receiving such payments when they were introduced, and later subject to the appropriation of those benefits by government or missions.

Read more:
Why is the government trying to make the cashless debit card permanent? Research shows it does not work

The use of a cashless debit card system – as with similar historical examples – is a compounding factor that intersects with other sources of disadvantage and vulnerability. First Nations women need financial autonomy to manage social impacts in their communities.

UK use of a similar system for asylum seekers

Restricted debit cards are used in other countries for vulnerable groups. For example, refused asylum seekers in the UK receive temporary support through restricted debit cards that can be used to buy food and toiletries at specified stores.

Asylum seekers living on this support reported that the system curtailed their freedoms, privacy and ability to make financial decisions. The UK scheme, like those used in Australia, reinforced the exclusion of people living in poverty.

Financial decision making is critical to an individual’s ability to make informed choices. Cashless debit card systems undermine the fundamental principle of informed choice, and would clearly be unacceptable to demographic groups with greater social and political capital than those subject to them.

Read more:
Australia has been stigmatising unemployed people for almost 100 years. COVID-19 is our big chance to change this

Abolish the system mindfully

We welcome the government’s decision to abolish the cashless debit card. However, careful consultation is called for in the process.

Typically, debit cards are only issued with the prior consent of the consumer. The cashless debit card is an exception to this requirement, with cards issued to people without their consent.

It is incumbent on governments to ensure the free, prior and informed consent of First Nations people in welfare and financial services initiatives. Programs initiated without the informed consent of participants have seldom been looked on well throughout history.

It is known that financial institutions can collect huge volumes of data, and the cashless debit card system has not been subject to disclosure requirements. There is a risk that data collected from the cards could be shared without the card holders’ knowledge or permission. We would like the government to carefully consider what will be done with this data; where it will be housed, who will have access to it, how long will it be stored and what will happen to it afterwards.

Read more:
‘I don’t want anybody to see me using it’: cashless welfare cards do more harm than good

Another consideration for the government should be what support is offered to former card holders when the system is abolished. The cashless debit card has not encouraged saving and instead has debilitated people and entrenched poverty.

Use of the card was not supported by financial literacy or wellbeing programs. In future, information and financial assistance could be implemented in consultation with First Nations communities and organisations.

The government should be mindful that the financial needs of First Nations people, particularly women, are complex. Restrictions on financial autonomy can have an amplified effect for some communities. This is especially true for communities routinely subject to income controls.

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

– ref. Eliminating cashless debit cards is great, but the government must be careful about what it does next – https://theconversation.com/eliminating-cashless-debit-cards-is-great-but-the-government-must-be-careful-about-what-it-does-next-189304

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christine McCarthy, Senior lecturer in Interior Architecture, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Almost everyone who’s moved house has a story to tell – the truck was too small, the power got cut off too soon, the cat got lost on the day. Moving house can be stressful, but the better prepared you are, the higher the chances you’ll enjoy the result.

But this is unlikely if you’re moving to prison.

When you are arrested and detained in custody – or when your court hearing ends with unexpected imprisonment – there’s no time to sort out feeding the cat, picking kids up from school or redirecting mail.

Currently in New Zealand, only exceptional circumstances mean people get time to prepare for jail. The Sentencing Act permits a two month deferral on humanitarian grounds, such as terminal illness or suicide risk. But there’s no allowance for the normal – and often traumatic – disruption of going to prison in the first place.

Fitting your life into a suitcase

One of my specialist research areas is prison architecture, and it was looking into the issue of prisoner property that first made me think about the transition to prison life. Prisoner property is a largely invisible issue, as most of us rarely think about how prison affects people’s lives.

But prison isn’t simply the removal of someone from society. It’s an extreme example of how architecture can fit or not fit someone’s life. Almost everything we associate with being at home – the ability to control the space we live in, to make choices about how we occupy space, to have things with personal significance around us – is taken away.

Read more:
Sam Uffindell was lucky to avoid NZ’s criminal justice system as a schoolboy – but it was the right outcome

The unique power dynamics inherent to prisons make it difficult to separate their built environments from the specific demands of life behind bars. Architecture is always about the way people use buildings; even the banal issue of how much storage space there is. In prison these mundane details become – literally – inescapable.

The challenge of moving, of being in a new space, is amplified in prison. The human aspects of an environment are stripped down to what you can fit into the equivalent space of a small suitcase.

In New Zealand this “suitcase” for stored prisoner property is 500mm x 400mm x 300mm – less than your checked-in luggage for an Air New Zealand flight.

Time to prepare

Giving as many people as possible time to prepare for prison won’t increase their storage space, but it will enable them to prepare psychologically and get their affairs in order.

As Australia’s Justice Action advocacy group explains, going to prison can mean losing things that make a home:

Every item, gift, photo of loved ones and clothing. Certificates and formal documentation are lost too […] many prisoners […] lose everything except the clothes they were wearing on arrest.

Having a partner can make some things easier, but not everything.

In some countries, including Norway, Denmark, Sweden and the US federal system, a deferred prison start date is a norm for low-risk prisoners. In the US it’s called voluntary or self-surrender. In Norway it’s the “waiting list” or “call up” system.

On the face of it, this sounds positive. Norwegian research found time before prison helped prisoners prepare practically and emotionally.

Read more:
Overhaul of NZ women’s prison system highlights the risk and doubt surrounding use of force on inmates

One went on a road trip to show his son the prison where he was going to serve time. Another celebrated Christmas with family in November because he’d be in prison in December. Others worked overtime to reduce the financial cost of imprisonment.

People can also investigate what prison life will be like. Some find taking themselves to prison is less humiliating than arriving in a prison van. Importantly, this time also helped prisoners maintain positive relationships after their release.

But it’s not all positive. Waiting can be hard. One interviewee told researchers:

You get worn out mentally, have trouble sleeping and it takes so much time where you just wait and wait and wait and wait […] you live in a sort of vacuum.

In Norway, some people wait months or years – and this delay doesn’t reduce their overall sentence. This is because the waiting list is to prevent prison overcrowding. It is an alternative to building more prisons, not a way to better prepare people for prison.

Read more:
How a maximum security prison offers a pathway to academic excellence and a PhD

A better life after prison

But that’s no reason why New Zealand couldn’t take this system – in the spirit of Kiwi ingenuity – and import it for positive outcomes.

For example, we could expand the Sentencing Act so that low-risk prisoners have time to arrange power of attorney for their financial and legal matters, or spend time with whānau to better prepare them for life with a family member in prison.

It’s well understood that good reintegration into society after prison can reduce reoffending. The Norwegian research suggests time before prison also matters.

Too little attention is given to the damage caused by uprooting people from their social networks and their homes. Reducing this impact on those going to prison, and who pose no public risk, would be humane. It might also foster better outcomes when prisoners return home.

Christine McCarthy is a former president of the Wellington Howard League.

– ref. Prison turns life upside down – giving low-risk prisoners longer to prepare for their sentences would benefit everyone – https://theconversation.com/prison-turns-life-upside-down-giving-low-risk-prisoners-longer-to-prepare-for-their-sentences-would-benefit-everyone-189382

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Carah, Associate Professor in Digital Media, The University of Queensland

Once upon a time, most advertisements were public. If we wanted to see what advertisers were doing, we could easily find it – on TV, in newspapers and magazines, and on billboards around the city.

This meant governments, civil society and citizens could keep advertisers in check, especially when they advertised products that might be harmful – such as alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pharmaceuticals, financial services or unhealthy food.

However, the rise of online ads has led to a kind of “dark advertising”. Ads are often only visible to their intended targets, they disappear moments after they have been seen, and no one except the platforms knows how, when, where or why the ads appear.

In a new study conducted for the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE), we audited the advertising transparency of seven major digital platforms. The results were grim: none of the platforms are transparent enough for the public to understand what advertising they publish, and how it is targeted.

Why does transparency matter?

Dark ads on digital platforms shape public life. They have been used to spread political falsehoods, target racial groups, and perpetuate gender bias.

Dark advertising on digital platforms is also a problem when it comes to addictive and harmful products such as alcohol, gambling and unhealthy food.

Read more:
Facebook ads have enabled discrimination based on gender, race and age. We need to know how ‘dark ads’ affect Australians

In a recent study with VicHealth, we found age-restricted products such as alcohol and gambling were targeted to people under the age of 18 on digital platforms. At present, however, there is no way to systematically monitor what kinds of alcohol and gambling advertisements children are seeing.

Advertisements are optimised to drive engagement, such as through clicks or purchases, and target people who are the most likely to engage. For example, people identified as high-volume alcohol consumers will likely receive more alcohol ads.

This optimisation can have extreme results. A study by the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE) and Cancer Council WA found one user received 107 advertisements for alcohol products on Facebook and Instagram in a single hour on a Friday night in April 2020.

How transparent is advertising on digital platforms?

We evaluated the transparency of advertising on major digital platforms – Facebook, Instagram, Google search, YouTube, Twitter, Snapchat and TikTok – by asking the following nine questions:

• is there a comprehensive and permanent archive of all the ads published on the platform?
• can the archive be accessed using an application programming interface (API)?
• is there a public searchable dashboard that is updated in real time?
• are ads stored in the archive permanently?
• can we access deleted advertisements?
• can we download the ads for analysis?
• are we able to see what types of users the ad targeted?
• how much did it cost to run the advertisement?
• can we tell how many people the advertisement reached?

All platforms included in our evaluation failed to meet basic transparency criteria, meaning advertising on the platform is not observable by civil society, researchers or regulators. For the most part, advertising can only be seen by its targets.

Notably, TikTok had no transparency measures at all to allow observation of advertising on the platform.

Other platforms weren’t much better, with none offering a comprehensive or permanent advertising archive. This means that once an advertising campaign has ended, there is no way to observe what ads were disseminated.

Facebook and Instagram are the only platforms to publish a list of all currently active advertisements. However, most of these ads are deleted after the campaign becomes inactive and are no longer observable.

Platforms also fail to provide contextual information for advertisements, such as advertising spend and reach, or how advertisements are being targeted.

Read more:
‘Transparency reports’ from tech giants are vague on how they’re combating misinformation. It’s time for legislation

Without this information, it is difficult to understand who is being targeted with advertising on these platforms. For example, we can’t be sure companies selling harmful and addictive products aren’t targeting children or people recovering from addiction. Platforms and advertisers ask us to simply trust them.

We did find platforms are starting to provide some information on one narrowly defined category of advertising: “issues, elections or politics”. This shows there is no technical reason for keeping information about other kinds of advertising from the public. Rather, platforms are choosing to keep it secret.

Bringing advertising back into public view

When digital advertising can be systematically monitored, it will be possible to hold digital platforms and marketers accountable for their business practices.

Our assessment of advertising transparency on digital platforms demonstrates that they are not currently observable or accountable to the public. Consumers, civil society, regulators and even advertisers all have a stake in ensuring a stronger public understanding of how the dark advertising models of digital platforms operate.

The limited steps platforms have taken to create public archives, particularly in the case of political advertising, demonstrate that change is possible. And the detailed dashboards about ad performance they offer advertisers illustrate there are no technical barriers to accountability.

Nicholas Carah is Deputy Chair of Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education. Nicholas receives funding from the Australian Research Council, VicHealth and Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education.

Aimee Brownbill is Senior Policy and Research Advisor at the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education.

Amy Dobson receives funding from the Australian Research Council (LPLP190101051 DPDP220100152), VicHealth, and the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education.

Brady Robards receives funding from the Australian Research Council (DE190100858, LP190101051, SR200200364), VicHealth, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and the Department of Education, Skills & Employment.

Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Discovery Projects DP200100519 ‘Using machine vision to explore Instagram’s everyday promotional cultures’, DP200101317 ‘Evaluating the Challenge of ‘Fake News’ and Other Malinformation’, and Linkage Project LP190101051 ‘Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media’. He is an Associate Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society, CE200100005.

Kiah Hawker, Lauren Hayden, and Xue Ying Tan 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. How dark is ‘dark advertising’? We audited Facebook, Google and other platforms to find out – https://theconversation.com/how-dark-is-dark-advertising-we-audited-facebook-google-and-other-platforms-to-find-out-189310

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Director, Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre; Associate Professor of Criminology, Faculty of Arts, Monash University

How prevalent is young people’s use of family violence in Australia, what form does it take and how does it intersect with experiences of child abuse? These were the key questions we set out to investigate in our new study, which is the first of its kind in Australia.

Funded by Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, we surveyed 5,000 young people aged 16-20.

The results provide the most in-depth capture of the complex nature of young people’s use and experiences of family violence in Australia to date.

We found one in five young people we surveyed reported using family violence.

We also found it was very common for young people who had used family violence to have experienced family violence themselves – at least 89% of young people in our study who had used family violence reported experiencing child abuse.

Adolescent family violence in Australia

There is increasing recognition of the prevalence and harms of adolescent family violence.

This refers to the use of family violence (including physical, emotional, psychological, verbal, financial and /or sexual abuse) by a young person against their parent, carer, sibling or other family member within the home.

Family violence used by adolescents has often been recognised and responded to as a distinct form of family violence.

Our study shows why it must be understood as part of intergenerational experiences of family violence.

The nature of young people’s use of family violence

Among the respondents who reported using family violence, the most common forms of family violence reported were verbal abuse (15%), physical violence (10%) and emotional/psychological abuse (5%).

Siblings and mothers were most at risk of being victims of adolescent family violence. Around 51% of the young people who had used violence in the home had done so against their mother, while 68% had used violence against a sibling (including step-siblings).

Young people with a disability, and young people who identified as having a diverse gender and/or sexual identity, were more likely to use family violence. They were also more likely to have been subjected to violence in the home.

This finding is critical, as it demonstrates the need for a suite of tailored and individualised responses for children and young people.

‘I didn’t know how to break the cycle’

Our study shows that young people who use family violence have often experienced child abuse themselves.

As an 18-year-old female in our study reflected:

My own behaviour felt like a mirror of the behaviour I experienced which I hated but I didn’t know how to break the cycle because regardless of how I changed my behaviour, I still experienced the same abuse.

89% of young people surveyed who had used family violence at least episodically reported previous experiences of child abuse. This increased to 96% among young people who reported frequent use of family violence against one or more family members.

Read more:
Abused by our grown-up children: mothers open up about this little-understood form of domestic violence

Our study defined child abuse in two ways: witnessing violence between other family members, and being directly subjected to abuse.

Young people who had both witnessed violence between other family members, and had been directly subjected to abuse, were more than nine times more likely to use violence in the home than respondents who hadn’t experienced any child abuse.

We also found these young people were:

• 2.7 times more likely to use violence in the home than respondents who had witnessed abuse between other family members (but not been subjected to targeted abuse)
• and 2.3 times more likely to use violence in the home than respondents who had been subjected to targeted abuse perpetrated by family members (but not witnessed violence).

The survey invited young people to provide details on the factors they felt had led to their use of family violence. Our analysis found many young people attributed their use of violence to “retaliation”. For example, 93% of young people whose siblings had been violent towards them had in turn used violence against their siblings.

These findings highlight the complex nature of family violence experienced by young people. We emphasise the need to view children and young people as victim-survivors in their own right when trying to understand and respond to their use of family violence.

Significant impacts

Children and young people reported family violence had extensive impacts on all aspects of their lives.

Young people described the physical impacts of abuse, as well as the profound impacts on their emotional and social wellbeing, and their engagement with school.

One 20-year-old male explained:

My life is ruined, and I’m confused […] Nothing makes sense, I don’t know what’s going, I feel really bad, I hate everything. Sorry […] my life is pointless.

Many young people in our study struggled to make sense of their experiences of family violence along with their own use of violence in the home, often in retaliation, self-defence or as a learned pattern of behaviour.

Child-centred early interventions

Of the young people who were able to provide the age when they had started to use violence against family members (60%), 42% were ten years old or younger.

Recognising the substantial overlap with childhood experiences of family violence and other forms of abuse, these findings highlight the critical need to ensure availability of, and access to, child-centred early interventions for young Australians who experience family violence in early childhood.

Responses to these complex experiences require a trauma-informed lens, which recognises young people’s behaviours in the context of their experiences of abuse.

Trauma-informed and age appropriate supports should be integrated into schools, specialist domestic violence and family service providers, and across the health system. These supports should be designed to meet short- and long-term recovery needs.

Since 2016, when the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence described children as the “silent victims” of family violence, there have been calls to strengthen interventions and recovery support for children as victim-survivors in their own right.

Our study repeats that call, providing a significant evidence base from which Australian policymakers and service providers can better understand the complexity of children and young people’s experiences of family violence.

This research highlights the need to respond to victim-survivors of family violence holistically, ensuring recovery support to mothers and children as the primary victim-survivors of family violence.

Kate currently receives funding for family violence related research from the Australian Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Victorian Government and the Department of Social Services. This piece is written by Kate Fitz-Gibbon in her capacity as Director of the Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre and are wholly independent of Kate Fitz-Gibbon’s role as Chair of Respect Victoria.

Silke Meyer currently receives funding for family violence and child protection related research from the Australian Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Australian Institute of Criminology and the Department for Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs.

– ref. Almost 9 in 10 young Australians who use family violence experienced child abuse: new research – https://theconversation.com/almost-9-in-10-young-australians-who-use-family-violence-experienced-child-abuse-new-research-190058

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Dunn, Lecturer in Anatomy and Cell Biology, Western Sydney University

As a new parent, I’ve become acutely aware of every person in the vicinity of my daughter who has the slightest sniffle or looks vaguely unwell.

After multiple trips to emergency in her six months of life and a bout of COVID, my protective instincts are in overdrive. But I know illness is an inevitability.

A few days after a family gathering we get the call – my nephew has hand, foot and mouth disease and I should be on the look out for signs in my daughter.

So what is it?

Hand, foot and mouth disease is a highly contagious infection, most commonly caused by the coxsackie group of viruses. While highly contagious, most cases will be relatively mild.

It’s different from foot-and-mouth disease in animals which has been in the news lately.

There have also been reports of a “tomato flu” impacting children in India. Preliminary evidence suggests it’s hand, foot and mouth disease.

What are the symptoms?

The tell-tale symptoms of hand, foot and mouth disease include:

• mild fever
• small white blisters or a red rash appearing within the mouth or on the palms of the hands or the soles of the feet, which can be painful
• sore throat, often linked to the spread of blistering within the mouth and throat.

In younger children, the rash can also be apparent around the buttocks.

Fussiness, irritability and loss of appetite are often reported in children, which could be linked to the sore throat and blisters within the mouth.

Symptoms usually resolve in seven to ten days, with a low risk of complications.

How does it spread?

Hand, foot and mouth disease is highly contagious and spreads from person to person through faeces, coughing and sneezing, direct contact with blisters and contact with contaminated surfaces.

Symptoms will normally appear within three to five days of contact.

How can you prevent it?

Given the modes of transmission, the best form of prevention is good hand hygiene. Washing hands after contact with potential transmission sources greatly reduces the likelihood of contracting the disease.

Keeping children home from school and daycare is advised until the blisters have dried, the rash is gone and all other symptoms are fully resolved.

However, the virus can remain in faeces for several weeks after symptoms have cleared.

Read more:
Yes, we should be keeping the healthier hand-washing habits we developed at the start of the pandemic

Hand, foot and mouth disease is commonly reported in day care centres and schools, with the majority of cases in children ten years and under.

So, teaching children good hand hygiene is one of the most effective tools in stopping hand, foot and mouth disease.

Hand, foot and mouth disease can also transmit to adults. In most cases, adults are largely asymptomatic but are still contagious.

How is it treated?

Most cases are relatively mild, with only paracetamol needed to help alleviate discomfort.

If blistering has spread to the mouth, the associated soreness with swallowing may lead to dehydration and needs to be monitored.

As the fluid contained inside the blisters is contagious for hand, foot and mouth, it’s important to let them dry on their own and not pop them.

In extremely rare cases, the class of viruses which cause hand, foot and mouth can impact the lining of the brain and spinal cord. Persistent fever that isn’t responding to paracetamol, rapid breathing and excessive tiredness could all be signs of severe hand, foot and mouth infection. Severe hand, foot and mouth disease will require medical assistance.

It often seems like hand, foot and mouth disease is on a march through local schools and daycare centres. Practising good hand hygiene and teaching children those same practices is the best defence against contracting and transmitting this disease.

But then I look over at my six-month-old daughter and see the delight she’s taking in sucking on her hand. This is going to be an uphill battle.

James Dunn 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 is hand, foot and mouth disease? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-hand-foot-and-mouth-disease-189535

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

Fossil fuel subsidies from major economies including Australia reached close to US$700 billion in 2021, almost doubling from 2020, according to new analysis by the International Energy Agency and OECD.

These subsidies are expected to keep rising in 2022 as governments worldwide attempt to use fossil fuel subsidies to shield customers from the high energy prices caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Australia spends billions each year giving subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, despite our climate change commitments. The Australia Institute estimates that in the 2021-22 budget period, Australian federal and state governments’ total fossil fuel subsidies cost A$11.6 billion. That’s up $1.3 billion on the previous year.

Subsidies play an important role in economies like Australia. By pushing the prices of things down below the cost of producing them, subsidies make everything from schools and hospitals to the ABC and childcare much cheaper and more widely available than they would otherwise be.

But it makes absolutely no economic sense to provide subsidies to things that a government is, or should be, trying to discourage.

Read more:
Opening 10 new oil and gas sites is a win for fossil fuel companies – but a staggering loss for the rest of Australia

Australia is a top emitter

Back in 2009 Australia and the other major economies that make up the G20 all promised to phase out “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies”.

But as the new report makes clear, the policy reality of many countries doesn’t come close to matching their ambitious rhetoric of reining in public funding for the major cause of climate change.

Australia is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gasses in the world. Despite our relatively low population, we come in 15th for total emissions and 8th for per capita emissions. Only major fossil fuel-producing nations rank higher, such as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

We are even more “successful” at exporting fossil fuels than burning them, ranking third in the world behind only Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Despite Labor’s improved target to cut 43% of Australia’s emissions by 2030, Australia is still looking to open up huge new coal and gas projects.

Read more:
The ultra-polluting Scarborough-Pluto gas project could blow through Labor’s climate target – and it just got the green light

Australia is failing at transitioning away from fossil fuels. Emissions from burning fossil fuels in transport, electricity and industry are all much higher now than they were back in 1997 when Australia signed on to the Kyoto Protocol.

Our fossil fuel exports have risen strongly since then as well, with 114 new fossil fuel projects awaiting approval in Australia, many for the export market.

Subsidies play a major role in this

The federal government subsidises the cost of exploring for coal, oil and gas in Australia, the infrastructure needed to extract and transport those fossil fuels, and then subsidises the use of them as well.

Of the $11.6 billion Australian governments spent on this in 2021-2022, $10.5 billion is accounted for by the federal government alone.

By far the largest of the federal subsidy is the $8 billion Fuel Tax Credit Scheme. This refunds the cost of diesel fuel excise to select industries, with around half going to mining industries.

The cost of these diesel excise refunds is greater than the annual $7.5 billion budget for the Australian Army.

Subsidies work, but only if we are subsidising things we want more of. It’s important we subsidised vaccines to help manage the COVID crisis, and that the previous and current federal governments subsidise renewable energy.

But subsidising fossil fuels when you are trying to transition away from them is like subsidising cigarettes when you are trying to encourage people to quit.

So far, the new government hasn’t indicated it has any plans to cease subsidising fossil fuels.

Economists call subsidies for things governments are ostensibly trying to discourage, “perverse”. So why would the Albanese government continue to spend billions on fossil fuel subsidies, and delay the transition away from coal and gas that voters and climate scientists want to see the back of?

Reasoning is numerous and bizarre

The arguments for keeping Australia’s perverse subsidies are as numerous as they are bizarre.

One argument is that subsidies will help people manage rising energy costs. But direct cash payments to low income earners would be a far cheaper and more equitable solution. Subsidies lock in the status quo, while cash supports help smooth the transition away from climate-wrecking industries.

Back in 2011, after signing on to the G20 pledge to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, the Gillard government declared it had no subsidies to phase out.

But documents released under the freedom of information act showed the treasury had, in fact, identified 17 fossil fuel subsidies that should have been declared and phased out.

At the other end of the spectrum, Senator Matt Canavan argued in 2016 that because all previous coal mines in Australia have benefited from subsidies, it would have been unfair to not subsidise the Adani mine as well.

Labor’s Minister for Resources Madeleine King stated to the Guardian last month: “projects involving these traditional [fossil fuel] energy sources stack up environmentally, economically, and socially, we will support them.”

But if they need expensive subsidies to “stack up”, then they clearly aren’t economically viable. And if the fossil fuel industry doesn’t need the subsidies, then why would any government keep providing them?

Removing fossil fuel subsidies should be the first step taken by any government serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions. What the latest data makes clear is that its not just Australian governments that are yet to muster the political courage to do something so simple.

Richard Denniss is the executive director of The Australia Institute.

– ref. We pay billions to subsidise Australia’s fossil fuel industry. This makes absolutely no economic sense – https://theconversation.com/we-pay-billions-to-subsidise-australias-fossil-fuel-industry-this-makes-absolutely-no-economic-sense-189866

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Di Johnson, Lecturer in Finance, Griffith University

Australia’s appetite for home renovations remains strong, with around A$1 billion worth of alterations and additions to homes approved in July.

But rising interest rates and shortages in labour and material may have some would-be renovators wondering: is this still a good idea?

Here are five questions worth considering.

Read more:
What adds value to your house? How to decide between renovating and selling

1. What would a successful renovation look like – before, during and after?

As with any major financial decision, you need to understand how the renovation fits with your broader life goals. Why do you want to do it?

There’s a big difference between a “nice-to-have” new kitchen and a “must-have” modified bathroom for mobility needs.

Let’s say you’re choosing, rather than needing, to renovate.

Consider whether the choice is for capital gain at sale in the short term (up to five years). Flipping a property will incur transaction costs such as stamp duty and legal fees, so factor those into the overall cost. Can you still afford it?

Or are you looking to live in the house over the longer term? Will the renovation deliver lifestyle enjoyment over many years? For some, that may make a period of financial belt-tightening worth it.

It’s never just about the capital gain, increased floor space, amenity or privacy.

A renovation affects areas of life satisfaction beyond finances – including family life, relationships, work, health, and lifestyle opportunities such as being able to afford to travel.

2. Have you done the sums?

You may have quotes from designers or builders. Check the detail including allowances for budget variations. Consider whether some changes – such as solar, good insulation and energy-smart design – may reduce bills over time.

You can use the government’s online Moneysmart calculator to work out what your increased payments would be on a larger mortgage after you’ve paid for a renovation.

Say you have a 25-year mortgage and are considering a $150,000 renovation. That may cost you around $10,000 extra annually in mortgage payments, particularly if interest rates were to increase from a variable rate of 3.5% now to 5.5% over the next few years.

That $10,000 would be in addition to the increase in repayments on your existing mortgage, which (on the average new owner-occupier Australian mortgage of about $610,000) could be around $8,500 extra if rates went up by two percentage points.

3. How much risk can you stomach?

If you had a sudden shock to your income, expenses or health, how long could you cover all your expenses without having to sell major assets or go without lifestyle staples?

This may depend on a range of factors, including whether you have income protection or other insurances, and if you have a savings buffer.

One indicator of your risk is your debt-to-income ratio (total debt divided by before-tax annual income, excluding compulsory superannuation contributions).

Lenders and regulators consider a ratio above six to be high. However, 23.1% of borrowers in the March quarter 2022 had a ratio of six or more.

Your personal debt comfort zone might be much more conservative. Only you will know how much debt you can live with before it stresses you out so much it’s not worth it.

If you have determined your full project is too risky for now, you might consider doing the renovation in stages. But while this might get you a smaller mortgage in the short term, it can cost more in the long run and draw out the time frame.

What if you’ve already had an architect or designer draw up plans and get approvals, but no longer want to renovate? You might consider selling the house with the approved plans; this is still a good value-adding option.

4. What expert advice can you get?

Seeking expert advice from architects, designers, landscapers, builders or project managers before and during the renovation can get you better value, less stress and fewer mistakes overall.

Word-of-mouth recommendations can help, but check the Master Builder Association listings and ratings for builders, too.

It’s vital you do your due diligence on the quality, reliability, solvency, style, insurance and cost of experts you enlist.

That can include seeking advice from a building and construction expert lawyer to check the contract before you sign.

Choose someone who is easy to talk to, listens and understands your goals. The relationship with your build and design team will be crucial.

5. What role do my emotions play?

Almost every episode of renovation reality shows seems to feature an emotional breakdown and a massive budget blowout.

Emotions are an important consideration throughout your renovation. Financial decisions are never just about money.

If maintaining relationships and a healthy stress level is part of what a successful renovation looks like for you, plan ahead for that.

If that means moving into a rental for the renovation period, add it to the budget considerations.

Renovating can be exciting and exhausting, but beware of some of the common renovation decision-making biases.

One is the sunk cost fallacy, where the time and money you’ve sunk into the project so far can make it hard to change or abandon plans.

Even paying a small deposit can lead to an irrational reluctance to change course.

Then there’s decision fatigue, where mental energy gets depleted with each decision (and there are a lot). It gets tempting to give in to whatever seems easiest at the time.

Be prepared to take more time to contemplate high-stakes decisions, and get advice, particularly in areas where you have no experience. Getting the right advice at the right time over a renovation could be among the most important financial decisions you ever make.

Read more:
How much can I spend on my home renovation? A personal finance expert explains

Di Johnson 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. Building costs have soared. Is it time to abandon my home renovation plans? – https://theconversation.com/building-costs-have-soared-is-it-time-to-abandon-my-home-renovation-plans-188298

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

Australians on our humiliatingly-low unemployment benefit are about to get their biggest payday ever.

On September 20, the single rate of JobSeeker will climb A$25.70 per fortnight from $642.70 to $668.40. That’s the biggest automatic increase since the payment began at the turn of the 1990s, and twice as big as the next-biggest.

But it will still be a pitiful $17,378 a year – not even two-thirds of the way to meeting the Melbourne Institute’s poverty line of around $28,600 a year.

If the official forecasts turn out to be correct, the next increase (on March 20) will be of a similar order, meaning JobSeeker will have jumped 7.75% in a year, which ought not to be surprising, because inflation will have reached 7.75%.

Until now, pensioners have had a better deal

JobSeeker is linked to inflation, the rate of increase in prices, which has been low since the early 1990s. Wages and national income per person have climbed faster.

Pensioners, including age pensioners, have had a better deal. Since the 1990s, their incomes have been linked to male total average earnings, with a bonus clause that gives them inflation if male earnings don’t climb enough.

The difference between the growth in male earnings and inflation hasn’t amounted to much in any given year – typically 0.6 percentage points, meaning that if inflation was 2.5%, wages were likely to climb 3.1%.

But because wages nearly always grew by more than inflation, even if not by much, over time the compounding of those differences came to matter a lot.

JobSeeker (when it was called Newstart) used to be close to the age pension. In 1997 JobSeeker was A$321.50 per fortnight, and the age pension was $347.80.

But an accumulation of larger percentage increases in the pension (and a one-off increase in the pension) meant that by 2019, on the eve of COVID, the pension was 50% bigger.

Projections based on the then-prevailing rates of inflation and wages growth suggested that, unless something changed, the pension would be twice as much as JobSeeker by 2070.

So weak had JobSeeker become in relation to general living standards (well below the poverty line) that early in COVID in 2020 the Coalition effectively doubled it by adding on a $550 per fortnight coronavirus supplement.

Not enough to ‘meet the cost of groceries’

In an implicit acknowledgement that JobSeeker was no longer enough to feed and house people, then Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said the temporary bonus would allow unemployed people to “meet the costs of their groceries and other bills”.

When the temporary supplement ended, the treasurer lifted JobSeeker by only a little – $50 a fortnight, making the point that unemployment was meant to be temporary, whereas the age pension was for the remainder of a pensioner’s life.

There are two other important differences.

One is that the age pension goes to an identifiable voting bloc – the three in every five Australians aged 65 and older. Dudding them would cost votes. There aren’t as many unemployed, and many of them are just passing through unemployment.

Matching JobSeeker to the pension would cost billions

The other difference is that JobSeeker is now so low relative to the pension that boosting it from its present $642.70 per fortnight to anything like the pension rate of $901 per fortnight would cost multiples of the $2.2 billion per year the government budgeted for the $50 increase.

Unemployed Australians (and those on Youth Allowance and other payments that have only increased in line with the consumer price index) seemed condemned to live an income so low as to raise concerns even 12 years ago about:

issues about its effectiveness in providing sufficient support for those experiencing a job loss, or enabling someone to look for a suitable job

And no, those concerns about Australia’s comparatively low unemployment benefits weren’t raised from the Australian Council of Social Service – it was from the hardly radical Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in 2010. (These days the OECD is headed by former Liberal finance minister Mathias Cormann.)

Former prime minister John Howard has expressed regret about allowing JobSeeker to fall so low relative to the pension. In opposition, Anthony Albanese said it was not enough to live on.

Abbott tried to put pensions in line with jobless benefits

Just for now, the collapse in wages growth and the resurgence in inflation has frustrated what seems to have been a deliberate decision to allow JobSeeker to grow more slowly than the pension.

But it ought to be frustrated for good. Whatever the arguments for setting JobSeeker lower than the pension (the Centre for Independent Studies says pensions are for those out of work for “legitimate reasons”) there’s no defensible argument for a system that allows one to keep falling relative to the other.

Tony Abbott’s Coalition government deserves credit, sort of, for acknowledging this. In its first “horror budget” in 2014, it promised to put pension increases on the same footing as increases in the unemployment benefit.

Read more:
There are lots of poverty lines, and JobSeeker isn’t above any of them

“We promised at the last election not to change pensions in this term of government
and we won’t,” his treasurer told parliament.

But beyond the next election, from September 2017, pensions would only increase in line with inflation, in tandem with unemployment benefits.

Like much of the rest of that budget, the measure didn’t survive a change of treasurer and prime minister.

Cheaper than the Stage 3 tax cuts

In the lead-up to the 2019 election, Labor promised an independent review of JobSeeker. Albanese withdrew the promise ahead of the 2022 election, saying the budget could not withstand it.

His commitments were about priorities. The starting cost of the previous government’s legislated Stage 3 tax cuts, supported by Labor, is $17.7 billion per year, which is less than making JobSeeker match the rate of the pension.

Half of the Stage 3 benefits accrue to Australians earning $180,000 or more.

Beyond the September 20 increase, lifting JobSeeker further in future would change the lives of Australians on $17,378.

In a Radio National interview on Monday, Albanese sounded as if he was open to doing something soon.

When inflation comes down, he won’t be able to rely on unusually high price rises to do the work for him.

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

– ref. Australians on unemployment benefits are set for two record paydays – but it’s a sign of a broken system, long overdue for a fix – https://theconversation.com/australians-on-unemployment-benefits-are-set-for-two-record-paydays-but-its-a-sign-of-a-broken-system-long-overdue-for-a-fix-189954

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.

In this podcast, Politics and Society editor Amanda Dunn and Michelle discuss Tuesday’s interest rate rise of 50 basis points – the fifth increase in a row – as well as the imminent passage of Labor’s climate legislation though the senate (with minor gestures to crossbencher David Pocock), and the industrial relations negotiations coming out of last week’s summit. They also canvass Scott Morrison flagging he’s staying in parliament for the time being – just as an Essential poll finds a narrow majority of voters want him to leave.

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

– ref. Word from The Hill: More mortgage pain, Labor’s climate legislation nearly done, and Scott Morrison staying put – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-more-mortgage-pain-labors-climate-legislation-nearly-done-and-scott-morrison-staying-put-190078

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.

In this podcast, Politics and Society editor Amanda Dunn and Michelle discuss Tuesday’s interest rate rise of 50 basis points – the fifth increase in a row – as well as the imminent passage of Labor’s climate legislation though the senate (with minor gestures to crossbencher David Pocock), and the industrial relations negotiations coming out of last week’s summit. They also canvass Scott Morrison flagging he’s staying in parliament for the time being – just as an Essential poll finds a narrow majority of voters want him to leave.

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. More mortgage pain, Labor’s climate legislation nearly done, and Scott Morrison staying put – https://theconversation.com/more-mortgage-pain-labors-climate-legislation-nearly-done-and-scott-morrison-staying-put-190078

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ashleigh Barrett-Young, Postdoctoral Fellow in Psychology, University of Otago

The retina has long been poeticised as the window to the soul, but research now shows it could be a window to the brain and act as an early warning system for cognitive decline.

A growing body of research suggests the retina is thinner in people with Alzheimer’s disease, reflecting the cell loss that is a hallmark of the neurodegenerative disease.

We investigated a group of middle-aged people who are part of the Dunedin Study, a comprehensive longitudinal project that has continued for five decades. We found people with thinner retinal nerve fibre layers (one of the cell layers in the retina) had slower mental processing speed. This is one of the first cognitive processes to decline in Alzheimer’s disease.

The people in our study were 45 years old, which is young for investigating age-related neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s. But treatments and interventions are most effective when administered during the earliest stages of Alzheimer’s and it is crucial to find ways of identifying people’s risk as early as possible. Easy risk identification will also help with clinical trials for Alzheimer’s disease treatments.

Why the retina is a good biomarker for the brain

The retina (the back of your eye) is part of the central nervous system, and some of its cells connect directly to the brain.

Many of the processes that happen in the brain also occur in retinal ganglion cells, another layer of cells that make up the retina. This includes some of the abnormal processes common in Alzheimer’s disease, such as the abnormal deposition of amyloid beta protein and cell loss.

Retinal imaging has many advantages over other imaging technologies. It’s fast, with each scan taking only a few seconds, non-invasive, painless and relatively cheap.

It’s also already widely available. In Aotearoa, every hospital eye department has an optical coherence tomography (OCT) device for imaging the retina, and these devices are increasingly available in primary care clinics and retail optometrists.

Retinal imaging also lends itself to being interpreted by artificial intelligence applications. This means assessment of Alzheimer’s disease risk from the retina could be quick, easy and widely available.

For these reasons, researchers are beginning to investigate how early the retina starts to thin in Alzheimer’s disease. The disease has an insidious onset, with a gradual decline in cognitive processes such as memory, but the underlying pathology tends to be fairly far along by the time people notice the symptoms and seek medical treatment.

If we can detect retinal thinning before the symptoms become apparent, it could be possible to identify people who are in the earliest stages of Alzheimer’s disease.

Retinal thinning and cognitive decline in middle age

The people we studied are all part of the unique Dunedin Study, which tracked the development of a thousand babies born in Ōtepoti Dunedin between April 1972 and March 1973.

They’ve been assessed repeatedly every few years since, on a wide range of topics including mental health, risk-taking behaviours, respiratory and cardiovascular function, social support and dental health, among others.

They’ve also repeatedly undergone cognitive tests since they were children, each time using similar formats and standardised tests. This means we can compare their cognitive performance in middle age with their own results from childhood.

Read more:
Vaccine resistance has its roots in negative childhood experiences, a major study finds

Most cognitive tests used in Alzheimer’s studies are blunt tools designed to detect large drops in cognition. But the detailed cognitive data we have allow us to detect even small cognitive changes.

Using statistical techniques, we used each person’s cognitive scores in childhood to predict what we’d expect their cognitive score to be at age 45, and measured how far away they were from what we’d predicted.

A number of study members’ scores were substantially lower than what we’d expect, indicating they were experiencing cognitive decline, even in middle age.

Why this matters

While there are a number of potential causes of cognitive decline, papers from our research group are building up a picture of the factors associated with this outcome. We found people experiencing cognitive decline by 45 have older looking brains and more tiny bleeds and lesions, known as hyperintensities, in their white matter (measured using MRI).

Our research found people with thinner retinas had older looking brains and other structural brain abnormalities. This suggests cognitive decline, detected in its earliest stages, is associated with cell loss in the brain and the retina.

Read more:
Illuminating the brain one neuron and synapse at a time – 5 essential reads about how researchers are using new tools to map its structure and function

To investigate this question even further, we are now focusing on measuring study members’ levels of a specific type of protein (phosphorylated tau pTau181) which is abundant in neurons and deposited in cells in several neurodegenerative diseases. This is thought to be one of the earliest indicators of Alzheimer’s disease, and it will help us to understand whether the changes we are observing are specific to Alzheimer’s disease and how early they can be detected.

Developing treatments for advanced stages of Alzheimer’s disease has been ineffective so far, and it seems likely future pharmaceutical treatments will be most effective in the earliest stages of the disease.

Also, lifestyle-based interventions may help to mitigate symptomatic cognitive decline. This makes early identification of people who would benefit from these interventions extremely important.

Ashleigh Barrett-Young receives funding from the Neurological Foundation of New Zealand.

– ref. A window to the brain: the retina gives away signs of Alzheimer’s disease and could help with early detection – https://theconversation.com/a-window-to-the-brain-the-retina-gives-away-signs-of-alzheimers-disease-and-could-help-with-early-detection-188655

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Suzanne Plater, Adjunct Senior Academic, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education and Health, University of Sydney

If you’s white, you’s all right
If you’s brown, stick around

But if you’s black, oh brother
Get back, get back, get back

Big Bill Broonzy ‘Black, Brown and White Blues’

It takes a celebrity

During a recent podcast from Meghan Markle’s weekly series Archetypes, the Duchess of Sussex briefly riffed with Mariah Carey about their shared experiences of “colourism”.

Apparently, to some Markle watchers she was too black. To others, she was too white. And for many, she was neither black nor white. According to Markle, the interest in her mixed-race heritage only became weaponised against her after she married a white prince.

The hierarchy of skin shade

Markle was feeling the sting of the global phenomenon known variously as colourism, pigmentocracy or shadeism. These descriptors represent a skin shade stratification system, with deep roots in white supremacy, predicated on the racist notion that dark skin represents savagery, irrationality, and inferiority, while light skin is defined by civility, rationality, and superiority.

Colourism bias is so ingrained that it is often practised among people who share a race or ethnicity. It’s also possible for someone to practice colourism against themselves.

Read more:
Racism is different than colorism – here’s how

Skin shade discrimination, and its hierarchical roots, values, and effects, has been extensively debated in the US and other neocolonial nations, particularly in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific.

However, it is largely absent from race and racism discussions in Australia. This is likely due to our ongoing reluctance to fully face up to our history of structural violence against Aboriginal people during the protection, segregation, and forced assimilation eras of the 19th and 20th centuries.

This was the period when the so-called science of eugenics bestowed legitimacy on skin shade discrimination as a way of determining the worth of an individual. It informed the policies now infamously known as “breeding out the colour” of Aboriginal people deemed fit for assimilation, and “smoothing the dying pillow” of those perceived unviable for the White Australia project.

Shadeism is one result of this and other state-sanctioned genocidal attempts to rid the nation of its First Peoples.

Read more:
Women of color spend more than $8 billion on bleaching creams worldwide every year

Black-skins, brown-skins, and white-skins

Despite its anaemic presence in Australia’s racism debate, shadeism is an everyday burden for many black, brown, and white-skinned Aboriginal people. But it is complicated, as these interview extracts from a recent study on the workplace experiences of university-educated Aboriginal people show:

Gerard

I’m Aboriginal and Irish, and proud of my heritage. I grew up blackfella-way in a town camp near Darwin. But I’m called a yellafella, or a brown-skin, or a half-caste. Sometimes my brown skin is sought after because the white bosses need an Aboriginal person to do a job. But then that will get used against me by black people because I’m too white for that job. Or by white people because I’m too black for that job. Or by white-skinned Aboriginal people because I’m too brown and they wanted that job. Have I confused you yet?

Loretta

They think you’re the right type but they don’t know what type you are really. And if you turn out to be not what they expect they ditch you because you don’t fit the mould. They want our blackness but we can’t be too black for them, we have to act white. If you can’t act like a white person you’re inappropriate, they just won’t tolerate it.

Tone down the colour

As Gerard and Loretta suggest, being a brown-skin can sometimes mean greater acceptance by white people, provided they “tone down the colour”. In other words, they fare better in mainstream society if they can culturally mirror whiteness.

This is known as culturism, and it is used to fill the gap left behind by discredited notions of racial inferiority. It serves the same purpose as racism in that it measures the worth of other cultures against white standards and finds them wanting.

Many First Nations people, Australians of colour, and migrants of colour know all too well the racially stratified association with cultural inferiority formed by many in dominant Australian society.

Multiple whammys

The shadeism and culturism experienced by the Aboriginal study participants, and other black, brown, and white-skinned Aboriginal people, could be seen as a triple-whammy. They are too black to pass as white. Too white to pass as black. And too connected to culture, kin, and country to be what mainstream Australia prefers its minority racial groups to be – white clones sheathed in dark skin.

Add to that its quasi-hierarchical effect in workplaces and communities, which can drive a wedge between black, brown, and white-skinned Aboriginal people, and you have a shadeist and culturist quadruple-whammy.

Giving up isn’t an option

It was tempting to finish this article on a positive note by writing about hope, allyship, and how together we might ultimately defeat racism, shadeism, and culturism. But as always, a sovereign and unplacated Aboriginal person (Gerard) said it best:

I’m a survivor of racism. I have to be. I have to live and feed the kids. And yeah, sometimes I do feel like giving up battling the system. It’s not good for your health, and many more will go against you. But I know the old people, my ancestors, are watching. Giving up isn’t an option.

Postscript: Eighty-one years ago, African American blues artist, Big Bill Broonzy, wrote Black, Brown and White Blues. Needless to say, its sentiment resonates today.

Suzanne Plater 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. Meghan Markle’s podcast sparked a global discussion around colourism. What is it and how does it look in Australia? – https://theconversation.com/meghan-markles-podcast-sparked-a-global-discussion-around-colourism-what-is-it-and-how-does-it-look-in-australia-189864

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meredith Nash, Professor and Associate Dean – Diversity, Belonging, Inclusion, and Equity, Australian National University

In October 2017, Antarctic science had its own #MeToo moment. Science magazine published a piece on allegations of abuse of female geoscientists in Antarctica – the most remote environment in the world.

US geologist Jane Willenbring detailed appalling sexual harassment during periods of Antarctic fieldwork in the 1990s by her Boston University PhD supervisor David Marchant. After a lengthy investigation, Marchant was fired, and a glacier was renamed to wipe his name off the map.

Willenbring’s testimony was shocking to many in the broader public. But anecdotally, sexual harassment has been an integral part of working in Antarctica for women.

72% of women report harassment

This was confirmed in a recently released report commissioned by the National Science Foundation, which reveals that US Antarctic stations are “plagued” by sexual harassment.

Seventy-two per cent of women surveyed in the report said sexual harassment was a problem in the US Antarctic Program (USAP). Alarmingly, there was low consensus among senior USAP leadership that harassment is a serious problem. Infrastructure to prevent sexual harassment in the program is described as “virtually absent”.

The report includes stomach-churning extracts from interviews with past and current USAP expeditioners:

Every woman I knew down there had an assault or harassment experience that had occurred on ice.

Most people forget that Antarctica is not just a remote, largely empty continent – it’s also a workplace like any other. But the extreme isolation and confinement can create a permissive environment for harassment.

“What happens in Antarctica, stays in Antarctica” encapsulates a view that Antarctica is removed from home not just geographically, but in terms of ethical standards.

Why is sexual harassment rife in Antarctica?

Sexual harassment is an umbrella term. It refers to behaviour that demeans or humiliates an individual based on their sex.

It is prevalent in Antarctica due to historical, cultural and relational factors.

Historically, Antarctica has been a site for masculine feats of endurance, and women were long denied access to the continent – until the early 1980s – in the US, United Kingdom and Australia.

Although women are working in Antarctica in greater numbers now, the cultures of Antarctic science and expeditions remain dominated by men and masculinity. Most Antarctic expeditioners are men, and men dominate senior science leadership in Australia and elsewhere.

Read more:
Finding Shackleton’s ship: why our fascination with Antarctica endures

The hierarchies at play

Making sexual harassment visible and addressing it institutionally is difficult in Antarctica.

One reason is the hierarchical nature of relationships inside Antarctic stations, in scientific research, and in the field.

For instance, PhD students in Antarctic science heavily rely on their supervisors to provide feedback, funding, fieldwork opportunities and mentorship throughout the candidature. The fear of losing this support often motivates them to stay silent about sexual harassment.

For example, Willenbring waited until she had a tenured academic position – nearly 17 years after her last Antarctic expedition with Marchant – to report her harassment claim because she was no longer worried he could ruin her career.

Women who work in Antarctica also rarely report sexual harassment because working in small teams in remote stations or field camps can make it difficult to report incidents or to leave the situation. Reporting is often not seen as viable solution when the human resources office is more than 4,000km away.

Women also often hesitate to complain because they worry it will end their Antarctic career.

Read more:
People stationed in Antarctica menstruate too – and it’s a struggle. Here’s how we can support them

It’s time for a change

Five years since the ##MeToo movement began, little has changed in Antarctica.

National Antarctic programs have done relatively little to explicitly address harassment as a primary safety issue on station and in the field.

And sexual harassment is not confined to the USAP. In 2018, I surveyed women in the Australian Antarctic Program about their experiences of harassment.

My findings are disturbingly similar to the results of the USAP report. Sixty-three per cent of women who responded to my survey reported having experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks when in the field.

Organisational leadership is vital for helping bring about cultural change. In Antarctica, this includes National Antarctic programs and international committees such as the Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research and the Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs.

These bodies play a vital role in communicating the importance of building respectful station and field environments, and fostering a culture of prevention. The onus should not be on victim–survivors to come forward.

What can we do to stop harassment?

We know what needs to be done. Here are key recommendations for positive change:

• National Antarctic programs explicitly defining sexual harassment and setting out individual and institutional responsibilities

• treating sexual harassment as a serious work health and safety issue. Providing more expansive definitions of “risk” and “danger” in training, policies and relevant field manuals

• expeditioners should have information about multiple channels through which to make a complaint and understand how the reporting process works

• regularly communicating the policies and appropriately training expeditioners in relation to their content

• not relying solely on victim-survivors formally reporting to make abuse visible. We should focus on preventing harassment from happening in the first place.

Respectful, inclusive workplace environments do not happen by accident – they are intentionally created. One consistent factor that emerges across accounts of sexual harassment in Antarctica is that many women feel they were insufficiently prepared for what they would encounter.

Sexual harassment is linked to many significant negative health outcomes. It is unethical to continue to recruit women to work in Antarctica if National Antarctic programs have few mechanisms to keep them safe.

Meredith Nash previously served as Senior Advisor – Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity at the Australian Antarctic Division (2020-22). She previously received funding from the Australian Antarctic Division.

– ref. Antarctic stations are plagued by sexual harassment – it’s time for things to change – https://theconversation.com/antarctic-stations-are-plagued-by-sexual-harassment-its-time-for-things-to-change-189984

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter McIntyre, Professor, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health (Dunedin), University of Otago

As the New Zealand government reviews mask mandates and other pandemic measures this week, we argue it’s time to reconsider the overall COVID strategy.

With the arrival of Omicron, the pandemic landscape has changed worldwide. Omicron’s latest BA.5 variant now dominates and, in the second half of 2022, most people in all countries have acquired immunity either from vaccination or infection, or both.

In countries like New Zealand, which are emerging from a “zero COVID” elimination strategy, governments must make the difficult transition to community transmission, particularly with respect to managing expectations.

On the one hand, a group of New Zealand public health experts recently advocated a sweeping package of measures in a strategy focused on minimising infection. This includes broadened eligibility for boosters, continued mask wearing in schools and funds to support better ventilation and extended isolation if infected.

At the other end of the spectrum is an “immunity-driven” strategy, which prioritises prevention of severe illness based on three considerations:

• with Omicron, even those adopting the most stringent avoidance measures can be infected

• SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is here to stay and most people will encounter it multiple times throughout their lives

• hybrid immunity from vaccination and infection is broader and more long-lived than either alone.

Given these complexities, what are the uncertainties and trade-offs governments, the experts advising them and the public must balance? We argue it is time to focus on prevention of severe disease – and here’s why.

NZ compares favourably with other countries in the region

In June 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) revised its global COVID-19 vaccination strategy. This included an aspirational goal of 100% vaccination of healthcare workers and adults over 60.

New Zealand is close to this goal. For people over 65, two-dose coverage is above 95% and first booster coverage above 80%. Fewer than 5% of those eligible for their first booster are yet to receive it. For health care workers, booster doses remain mandatory so current employees have full coverage.

For people older than 65 and living in residential aged care, New Zealand achieved 89% booster coverage by mid-February 2022. This head start pre-Omicron is likely to be the most significant contributor to New Zealand’s globally almost unique lower than expected total number of deaths from any cause in the two years before July 2022.

In stark contrast, other countries in the Asia Pacific region with similarly stringent non-pharmaceutical measures at the onset of Omicron had much higher excess mortality. This includes Australia, where booster coverage in aged care was below 10% in January 2022.

It also includes Hong Kong, where less than 50% of people over 70 had received two doses and suffered world-record death rates when Omicron hit; and Singapore, which has the world’s highest two-dose coverage among children aged five to 11 (above 75%) but 5% of people over 80 remained unvaccinated in August 2022.

More than six months into the Omicron era, more than 80% of New Zealand adults have received at least two doses of vaccine. This is among the top 25 countries worldwide. But significant coverage gaps remain for Māori adults under 50.

What about severe morbidity?

In France, during the Delta period, people with no other health conditions made up 50% overall of 28 million with two vaccine doses. But they accounted for only 10% of 5,345 hospitalisations and 2% of 996 deaths due to COVID.

The highest risk of severe disease in two-dose recipients was among people in older age groups, post transplant, on dialysis and those living with cystic fibrosis, Down syndrome, mental disability or active lung cancer. Risk increased with each additional health condition and for people in poorer areas.

Read more:
COVID: masks and free tests may not curb omicron spread – here’s what we should focus on instead

When Delta was prevalent, adults (especially people over 50) required a booster dose to maintain good protection. Post Omicron, second booster doses supplemented by early use of antivirals and prophylactic antibody therapy substantially improve protection in fully vaccinated people still vulnerable to severe disease.

What about younger, low-risk populations? In children and adolescents, the vaccine protects well against the low risk of severe disease. This direct protection should be the driver of vaccination, not transient reductions in infection in their household, school or community. We recommend regular reviews of the risk-benefit trade-offs for mask wearing in schools.

How to protect people from long COVID

Long COVID is a challenging topic, complicated by changing definitions, mixing of data from pre- and post-vaccine periods, and differences in age groups.

New research finds the risk of developing long COVID is substantially lower in the Omicron period overall. Long COVID is also substantially less common in fully vaccinated people, including healthcare workers. We do not yet have data about the risk of long COVID with hybrid immunity.

Read more:
New COVID variants could emerge from animals or from people with chronic infections – but it’s not cause for panic

As New Zealand emerges from its Omicron peak, increasing hybrid immunity, and a good – albeit not perfect – toolbox to protect people at risk of severe disease, changes the risk-benefit balance from an indirect “minimising infection” strategy towards direct “maximising immunity” approaches.

It is time to discuss whether New Zealand is ready to measure the success of its COVID strategy by how well it prevents severe disease or wants to measure success by the number of infections of any severity. Making this decision requires critical examination of the benefits, harms and cost effectiveness of each approach.

Peter McIntyre has received funding from the Otago Medical Research Foundation and the Health Research Council as a principal investigator and is a named investigator on current grants from the Health Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust. The views expressed in this piece are his own and not those of any of the bodies he is employed by or affiliated with.

Helen Petousis-Harris has been lead investigator on research funded by GSK and COIVD-19 related research funded by the MoH. She has served on Advisory Boards for GSK, Pfizer, Seqirus, and Merck. All honoraria go to institution. She has served on COVID-19 related Advisory Groups for MBIE and the MoH. She has received major grants from US CDC for COVID-19 related research.

James Ussher is Science Director of the Vaccine Alliance Aotearoa New Zealand, which has received funding from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and the Ministry of Health. The views expressed in this piece are his own and not those of any of the bodies he is employed by or affiliated with.

The views expressed in this piece are her own and not those of any of the bodies she is employed by or affiliated with.

– ref. How should New Zealand manage COVID from now – limit all infections or focus on preventing severe disease? – https://theconversation.com/how-should-new-zealand-manage-covid-from-now-limit-all-infections-or-focus-on-preventing-severe-disease-189461

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist), The Conversation

This week’s Newspoll is the second since the May federal election, after the first appeared five weeks ago. Labor led by 57-43, a one point gain for Labor. Primary votes were 37% Labor (steady), 31% Coalition (down two), 13% Greens (up one), 7% One Nation (up one), 2% UAP (steady) and 10% for all Others (steady).

61% were satisfied with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s performance (steady) while 29% were dissatisfied (up three), for a net approval of +32, down three points. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s net approval dropped four points to -8. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 61-22 (59-25 five weeks ago).

This poll was conducted August 31 to September 3 from a sample of 1,505. Newspoll figures are from The Poll Bludger.

The drop in Dutton’s ratings and the increase in Labor’s lead may be due to the revelations of former Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s secret ministries.

Analyst Kevin Bonham said this Newspoll was the biggest lead for either side since February 2015 after Tony Abbott’s Prince Philip knighthood. But honeymoon polling is not predictive of the next election.

However, Bonham said Victorian Labor will want federal Labor’s honeymoon to continue until the Victorian state election on November 26. A popular federal government will reduce the federal drag on the same state political parties.

Morgan: 52-48 to Labor

Morgan continues to show the Coalition doing much better than other polls. Their weekly update video, for polling conducted August 22-28, gave Labor a 52-48 lead, a one-point gain for the Coalition since the previous week. Primary votes were 39.5% Coalition (up one), 36% Labor (down 1.5), 10.5% Greens (down one) and 4% One Nation (up 1.5).

Morgan has usually been the best poll for Labor, but now it is easily the Coalition’s best poll. Will this skew to the Coalition in Morgan relative to other polls continue?

A Morgan poll taken in late August from a sample of 1,240, had 61% preferring to partner with the US for security issues, with the European Union on 22% and the UK on 14%. On preferred economic partner, 43% selected the EU, 25% the US and 22% the UK.

Essential poll: Albanese’s ratings rebound

In an Essential poll, conducted in the days before September 6 from a sample of 1,070, 59% approved of Albanese’s performance (up four since August), and 25% disapproved (down three), for a net approval of +34, up seven points. Albanese’s ratings had fallen from a high June peak in July and August.

Regarding Morrison’s secret ministries, by 51-25 respondents thought he should resign from federal parliament, and by 59-18 they thought he should appear at an inquiry into the issue. A federal ICAC was supported by 76-15 (78-11 in October 2021).

Respondents were asked whether they trusted various institutions. The most trusted was scientific bodies like CSIRO (71% at least some trust, 23% little or no trust). State health authorities were trusted by 62-33. Politicians were the least trusted, with state parliaments at 48-47 trust and the federal parliament at 48-46 not trusted.

Trust in health authorities peaked at 70% in May 2021, but declined to 59% by June this year. It has now rebounded a little to 62%. Federal parliament’s trust has continued to decline from 55% in August 2020. The beginning of the COVID pandemic explains the high trust ratings in 2020.

Additional Resolve federal and NSW questions

The Poll Bludger reported August 31 that additional questions from the federal Resolve poll I reported August 23 had 62% supporting the 43% cut to carbon emissions, including 27% strongly supporting. Opposition was at 19%, including 10% strongly opposed.

In a New South Wales Resolve poll, conducted with the federal survey from a sample of about 500, 56% thought former NSW Nationals leader John Barilaro’s trade commissioner appointment a case of “jobs for the boys”, with only 14% selecting the alternative that Barilaro was a worthy candidate in a fair process.

By 45-27, respondents thought Liberal Premier Dominic Perrottet had handled the Barilaro affair badly.

Liz Truss will be Britain’s next PM

The result of the UK Conservative postal membership vote was announced Monday, with Liz Truss defeating Rishi Sunak by a 57.4-42.6 margin. Truss will now replace Boris Johnson as UK prime minister after Johnson was forced to resign as Conservative leader in early July, though he remained caretaker PM.

I covered this and some upcoming international elections for The Poll Bludger on Monday. Far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro is likely to be ousted in October by a former left-wing president.

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. Labor extends big lead in Newspoll, but Morgan is much better for Coalition – https://theconversation.com/labor-extends-big-lead-in-newspoll-but-morgan-is-much-better-for-coalition-189872

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vivienne Lewis, Assistant professor – Psychology, University of Canberra

We usually think of eating as simple – a biological response to how hungry or full we feel.

But eating and enjoyment is a very complex process. Our upbringing, the influence of others such as family and friends, our emotions, media, education and our health status are all strong influences on how, what and when we eat. Then there is how food is cooked and prepared, our religious beliefs and values, and our access to food.

When I work with people with eating disorders, I frequently hear loved ones asking why sufferers don’t just eat like a “normal person”. They can’t understand why they struggle to eat. I try to explain eating is strongly influenced by the way we think about food, our bodies and ourselves.

Experimenting with taste

Sensory sensitivity can have a strong influence on our food preferences. This can be a factor for people with autism, who might be sensitive to how foods taste, feel, look or smell.

They might be hypersensitive to sensations others wouldn’t be bothered by. For example, they may not like the way a food feels in their mouth and so develop an aversion to that type of food.

Often this is called “fussy eating” where a person won’t eat certain foods. Hypersensitivity becomes a problem if it means a person is very restricted in what they will eat to the point where they may become malnourished or unhealthy as a result of their food choices. This can be annoying and concerning for families and loved ones. Specialist dietitians and psychologists may be able to work with people with aversions and sensitivities.

People who are not autistic may maintain dietary restrictions and preferences too. Our culture and familiarity with certain foods affect our eating habits and enjoyment of food. How experimental we are with foods often depends on how varied our diet has been growing up. For example, when children are exposed to a limited variety of foods they are often less inclined to try unfamiliar foods as adolescents and adults due to a fear of the unknown.

Read more:
Six ways to improve meal times with your children

Eating as a chore

Some people avoid eating and take a long time to eat foods. In extreme cases, this is associated with restrictive eating disorders and food aversions.

Food aversion is when a person doesn’t enjoy food or gets very little pleasure from eating. Meals may be seen as an inconvenience or chore. People may only eat highly processed foods such as takeaway or drive-through burgers. They might go long periods without eating if the limited food they like isn’t available. It’s like a phobia of eating.

If people lose a lot of body weight due to their reluctance to eat or become unhealthy generally, treatment revolves around eating by the clock and setting a routine as well as desensitisation to food, which can make it more of a chore. Eating more socially with friends and making the eating experience more pleasurable can help.

Sometimes when meal times have been associated with negative experiences such as arguing at dinner time, the pleasure of eating with family can be lost. Pairing eating with pleasurable interactions is important for healthy eating.

Good foods and bad foods

Food preferences can also be learnt. In eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa, people develop a lot of rules around what foods are “good” or “bad”. Usually we attach these value judgements to low calorie or “healthy” foods. Eating these foods might make a person feel more comfortable and positive about themselves. If they eat “bad” foods, typically those high in sugar and carbohydrates, they might feel guilty and negative about their body and themselves.

When these beliefs become rigid and restrictive, re-education can help people be more flexible with their eating such as being able to eat foods without guilt. I like to talk about all foods being “good” foods and focusing on their function in and for the body. For example, sugar helps give us energy, carbohydrates help us concentrate.

Read more:
Treating a child’s mental illness sometimes means getting the whole family involved

Food as reward

We also eat in response to our emotions. We might engage in “stress eating” to distract ourselves from a pressing problem, or eat treats to reward ourselves for doing something we don’t like.

When children are given lollies, ice cream or something else they really like to eat and perhaps don’t have very often for good behaviour or an achievement, food becomes a powerful reward.

The reverse action – being deprived of food, such as dessert, for poor behaviour – is also powerful.

Complex associations

So, the way we eat and what we eat is related to how we are feeling, who we are with, our experiences with food, our associations with particular types of foods, as well as our simple biological need for fuel and energy.

More than just a simple response to hunger, our relationship with food is a complex interplay of our emotions, our familiarity with food, our senses and our culture and upbringing.

Read more:
Serving up choice and dignity in aged care – how meals are enjoyed is about more than what’s on the plate

Vivienne Lewis 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. When I work with people with eating disorders, I see many rules around ‘good’ and ‘bad’ foods – but eating is never that simple – https://theconversation.com/when-i-work-with-people-with-eating-disorders-i-see-many-rules-around-good-and-bad-foods-but-eating-is-never-that-simple-188803

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Patrick Taylor, Chief Environmental Scientist, EPA Victoria; Honorary Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University

The evidence is clear: microplastics have contaminated every corner of the globe. We can’t escape exposure to these tiny bits of plastic (less than 5mm across) in the environment, which includes the homes where people spend most of their time.

Recent research has discovered microplastics in the blood of humans. However, the question of harm to humans remains unresolved. Despite concerns that some substances in microplastics could cause cancer or damage our DNA, we still have a poor grasp of the true risks of harm.

Our study of global microplastics exposure inside homes across 29 countries, published today, shows people living in lower-income countries and young children are at greater risk of exposure. But our analysis of the chemical composition of microplastics in the home shows the specific health risk is surprisingly low. The study covered all the continents, including Australia.

The current challenge in understanding health risks from microplastics is the very limited data on toxic effects of the petrochemicals used in plastics production.

A recurrent theme in the environmental health research literature is that early concerns about suspect chemicals and related compounds, including those found in plastics, were eventually justified. The effects of suspect substances only become clear after extensive toxicological and epidemiological research.

Read more:
You’re eating microplastics in ways you don’t even realise

What did the new study look at?

Our study investigated three main questions relating to exposure to microplastics inside homes:

1. what are the impacts in different countries across the world?

2. who is most at risk?

3. what are the specific health risks?

We reached out to residents across 29 countries to collect their indoor atmospheric dust over a one-month period. At 108 homes sampled across these countries, we also collected information about households and behaviours. This helped us to better understand possible sources and causes of microplastics in dust. These data included:

• how often floors were cleaned

• flooring type

• presence or absence of children

• number of people living in each home

• percentage of full-time workers.

In each home, atmospheric dust particles were collected in specially cleaned and prepared glass Petri dishes. We measured the levels of microplastics in the collected dust using a suite of microscopic techniques and instruments. We used infrared spectroscopy – which identifies substances by how they interact with light – to determine the chemical composition of these microplastics.

Read more:
House dust from 35 countries reveals our global toxic contaminant exposure and health risk

What did the study find?

The household dust contained a wide variety of synthetic polymer fibres. The most common were:

• polyester (as polyethylene terephthalate) at 9.1%, which is used in clothing fabrics

• polyamide (7.7%), which is mainly used in textiles

• polyvinyls (5.8%), which are used in floor varnishes

• polyurethane (4.4%), which is used in surface coatings of furniture and in bedding

• polyethylene (3.6%), a common polymer used in food containers and reusable bags.

We examined the prevalence and risk of microplastics according to the gross national income of each country, grouped as low, medium and high-income (such as Australia). Overall, we found lower-income countries have higher loads of microplastics, which were deposited at an average daily rate of 3,518 fibres per square metre. The rates for medium-income and high-income countries were 1,268 and 1,257 fibres/m²/day.

In low-income countries, the most prevalent synthetic polymer fibres were made of polyurethane (11.1% of all fibres in samples). In high-income countries, polyamide and polyester were the most prevalent microplastic types (11.2% and 9.8% respectively).

So what are the health risks?

For the first time we could attribute the health risk across countries according to incomes. Our analyses showed lower-income countries are at higher risk from microplastic pollution. This aligns with research findings on other toxic exposures – poorer countries and people are most at risk from pollution.

Nevertheless, we found the overall risk from microplastics exposure was low. We used the US Environmental Protection Agency’s toxicity information on polymers in the microplastics to calculate health risk based on the types and levels we detected.

Low-income countries had a higher lifetime risk of cancers due to indoor microplastic exposure at 4.7 people per million. High-income countries were next at 1.9 per million, with medium-income countries at 1.2 per million.

We attributed these differences in cancer risk to the different percentages of carcinogenic substances in the microplastics found in household dust.

We calculated the sum of the carcinogenic risk from inhalation and ingestion of the following chemicals in the microplastic fibres: vinyl chloride (polyvinyl chloride), acrylonitrile (polyacrylics) and propylene oxide (polyurethane). Because toxicity data for polymers are limited, the assessment was a minimum estimate of true risk.

Children are at greater risk irrespective of income, which is true for many types of environmental exposures. This is because of their smaller size and weight, and tendency to have more contact with the floor and to put their hands in their mouths more often than adults.

Our analysis indicated that the microplastics came mainly from sources inside the home, and not from outside. Synthetic polymer-based materials are used widely in high-income countries in products such as carpets, furniture, clothing and food containers. We anticipated levels of microplastic shedding in the home might be greater in these countries.

However, analysis of the data showed the only factor obviously linked with levels of microplastics in deposited dust was how often they were vacuumed. Frequent vacuuming reduces microplastic levels.

Vacuuming was more frequent in higher-income countries. Factors that influence the type of cleaning include people’s preference for sweeping and mopping versus vacuuming, as well as their access to and capacity to afford electronic vacuum cleaners.

Read more:
We’re all ingesting microplastics at home, and these might be toxic for our health. Here are some tips to reduce your risk

What can we do to reduce the risks?

Based on this and our previous study data, it is clear vacuuming regularly, instead of sweeping, is associated with less airborne microplastics indoors. Other obvious actions – such as choosing natural fibres for clothing, carpets and furnishings instead of petrochemical-based polymer fibres – can reduce the shedding of microplastics indoors.

Future research needs to focus on developing more complete profiles of the harmful effects of each of the toxic petrochemical-based synthetic polymers that can produce microplastics. This will give us a better understanding of the risks of exposure to these ubiquitous pollutants.

Mark Patrick Taylor received funding via an Australian Government Citizen Science Grant (2017-2020), CSG55984 ‘Citizen insights to the composition and risks of household dust’ (the DustSafe project). The VegeSafe and DustSafe programs are supported by publication donations to Macquarie University. He is a full-time employee of EPA Victoria, appointed to the statutory role of Chief Environmental Scientist.

Neda Sharifi Soltani works for Macquarie University. She receives funding from Macquarie University.

Scott P. Wilson has received funding from state and federal grants, corporate entities and philanthropic and charitable organisations to undertake his research . He undertook this work while employed by Macquarie University but is currently employed by Earthwatch Australia.

– ref. Microplastics are common in homes across 29 countries. New research shows who’s most at risk – https://theconversation.com/microplastics-are-common-in-homes-across-29-countries-new-research-shows-whos-most-at-risk-189051

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tess Newton Cain, Associate professor, Griffith University

There has been a flurry of international media and commentary attention on Solomon Islands in recent months. Since the news broke of Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare’s intention to sign a security agreement with the People’s Republic of China, scrutiny of his every move and word has been intense.

There have been two recent developments that have caused yet more scrutiny of the Sogavare government – the government’s intention to delay next year’s federal election and moratorium on some international ships from its ports.

Once again, too much of the reporting and commentary casts these events through the overly narrow lens of geo-strategic competition. The interplay of domestic political dynamics is overlooked or oversimplified, yet it is only by understanding these dynamics that a full picture of what is happening in Solomon Islands can be drawn.

Read more:
In the Solomon Islands, Wong takes first tentative steps in repairing a strained relationship

Efforts to delay next year’s election

This week, the government will seek to suspend standing orders of the parliament to allow for a fast-track of a controversial bill to amend the Constitution. The effect of this legislation is to defer the general elections that are due next year until 2024.

The actions of the government to push through the bill during the coming week mean the normal process of taking public submissions will not take place. The government’s reason for this amendment to the Constitution is that because Solomon Islands will host the Pacific Games in 2023, and holding elections the same year puts too great a strain on finances and logistics.

This argument has been poorly received by the parliamentary opposition and civil society groups. Opposition Leader Mathew Wale said Sogavare was demonstrating he was not interested in good parliamentary practice or good governance. He has described the attempt to push back the election as an abuse of process that sets a bad precedent for the future.

Wale has advised members of the public who are concerned about this issue to speak to their elected representatives and seek to influence them to vote against the bill. He has also expressed concern that Sogavare’s actions run the risk of triggering public protests given the level of concern in the community.

Ban on international ships

During the past week, it was reported the Solomon Islands government had issued a moratorium on port visits by foreign naval vessels. The news followed an incident involving the USGS Oliver Henry, which diverted to Port Moresby after failing to obtain clearance to call at Honiara to refuel and replenish.

The US government subsequently confirmed it had received written advice from the government of Solomon Islands that all visits by foreign naval vessels are suspended until further notice. The Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement explaining that the rationale for the moratorium was to review the processes and protocols associated with ship visits.

In Parliament on Monday morning, PM Sogavare advised that the ban did not apply to Australian or New Zealand vessels. Regarding the USGS Oliver Henry, the government has said there was a delay in communication and that when the clearance to call at was given, the ship had already departed for Papua New Guinea (PNG).

Read more:
Australia should not overstate the threat of China in the Pacific, and mend relationships in the region

Regional impact and response

It is unlikely this action is indicative of any particular strategic intention on the part of Sogavare, though it will probably have strategic implications. The newly installed PNG foreign minister, Justin Tkatchenko, cautioned the moratorium may have adverse “repercussions” on regional relationships in the future.

The moratorium is complicated by the fact that Honiara is home to the Forum Fisheries Agency, whose mandate is to coordinate surveillance of Pacific waters to guard against illegal fishing. This is a significant security concern for the region and partners such as Australia and the US have been working to increase the amount of support they provide, including the deployment of their own ships.

Domestic impression

Many Solomon Islanders have been sceptical of claims that the election needs to be pushed back due to the Pacific Games. Some have wondered why the government can’t call on its international partners to provide electoral assistance if money and logistics are such an issue.

Questioned earlier this year on their thoughts about their current government and its policies, more than 90% of residents across the island nation did not want their fortunes tied to China, and believed corruption in government was high and rising. With these numbers, it is little surprise the actions of the Sogavare government have caused both national and international concern.

Read more:
As China flexes its muscles in the Indo-Pacific, Canada and Australia must step up

‘Charm offensive’

For the US, amid a concerted programme of re-engagement in the region, these two recent developments are too easily seen as a “win” for China. Despite their importance and significance, they divert focus and energy from issues that merit as much if not more attention.

Making a meaningful commitment to clearing the huge amounts of unexploded ordnance that litter the country is an example. It’s a security issue that is very important to the people of Solomon Islands and is recognised as a priority by the US administration.

The US and its allies have been advised to continue their “charm offensive” with Honiara in order to improve current tensions. By committing meaningful resources to address unexploded ordnance and other domestic issues, the US and other members of the international community can elevate relationships with the Solomon Islands beyond geopolitics and into ones of genuine partnership.

Tess Newton Cain 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. Solomon Islands’ election postponement plans ensure global scrutiny will continue – https://theconversation.com/solomon-islands-election-postponement-plans-ensure-global-scrutiny-will-continue-189865

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roland Crocker, Associate Professor of Astronomy, Australian National University

A glowing blob known as “the cocoon”, which appears to be inside one of the enormous gamma-ray emanations from the centre of our galaxy dubbed the “Fermi bubbles”, has puzzled astronomers since it was discovered in 2012.

In new research published in Nature Astronomy, we show the cocoon is caused by gamma rays emitted by fast-spinning extreme stars called “millisecond pulsars” located in the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy, which orbits the Milky Way. While our results clear up the mystery of the cocoon, they also cast a pall over attempts to search for dark matter in any gamma-ray glow it may emit.

Seeing with gamma rays

Thankfully for life on Earth, our atmosphere blocks gamma rays. These are particles of light with energies more than a million times higher than the photons we detect with our eyes.

Because our ground-level view is obscured, scientists had no idea of the richness of the gamma-ray sky until instruments were lofted into space. But, starting with the serendipitous discoveries made by the Vela satellites (put into orbit in the 1960s to monitor the Nuclear Test Ban), more and more of this richness has been revealed.

The state-of-the-art gamma-ray instrument operating today is the Fermi Gamma Ray Space Telescope, a large NASA mission in orbit for more than a decade. Fermi’s ability to resolve fine detail and detect faint sources has uncovered a number of surprises about our Milky Way and the wider cosmos.

Mysterious bubbles

One of these surprises emerged in 2010, soon after Fermi’s launch: something in the Milky Way’s centre is blowing what look like a pair of giant, gamma-ray-emitting bubbles. These completely unanticipated “Fermi bubbles” cover fully 10% of the sky.

A prime suspect for the source of the bubbles is the Galaxy’s resident supermassive black hole. This behemoth, 4 million times more massive than the Sun, lurks in the galactic nucleus, the region from which the bubbles emanate.

Most galaxies host such giant black holes in their centres. In some, these black holes are actively gulping down matter. Thus fed, they simultaneously spew out giant, outflowing “jets” visible across the electromagnetic spectrum.

Thus a question researchers asked after the discovery of the bubbles: can we find a smoking gun tying them to our Galaxy’s supermassive black hole? Soon, tentative evidence did emerge: there was a hint, inside each bubble, of a thin gamma-ray jet pointing back towards the galactic centre.

With time and further data, this picture became muddied, however. While the jet-like feature in one of the bubbles was confirmed, the apparent jet in the other seemed to evaporate under scrutiny.

The bubbles looked strangely lopsided: one contained an elongated bright spot – the “cocoon” – with no counterpart in the other bubble.

Read more:
Astronomers have detected one of the biggest black hole jets in the sky

The cocoon and where it comes from

Our recent work in Nature Astronomy is a deep examination of the nature of the “cocoon”. Remarkably, we found this structure has nothing to do with the Fermi bubbles or, indeed, the Galaxy’s supermassive black hole.

Rather, we found the cocoon is actually something else entirely: gamma rays from the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy, which happens to be behind the southern bubble as seen from the position of Earth.

The Sagittarius dwarf, so called because its sky position is in the constellation of Sagittarius, is a “satellite” galaxy orbiting the Milky Way. It is the remnant of a much larger galaxy that the Milky Way’s strong gravitational field has literally ripped apart. Indeed, stars pulled out of the Sagittarius dwarf can be found in “tails” that wrap around the entire sky.

What’s making the gamma rays?

In the Milky Way, the main source of gamma rays is when high-energy particles, called cosmic rays, collide with the very tenuous gas between the stars.

However, this process cannot explain the gamma rays emitted from the Sagittarius dwarf. It long ago lost its gas to the same gravitational harassment that pulled away so many of its stars.

So where do the gamma rays come from?

We considered several possibilities, including the exciting prospect they are a signature of dark matter, the invisible substance known only by its gravitational effects which astronomers believe makes up much of the universe. Unfortunately, the shape of the cocoon closely matches the distribution of visible stars, which rules out dark matter as the origin.

One way or another, the stars were responsible for the gamma rays. And yet: the stars of the Saggitarius dwarf are old and quiescent. What type of source amongst such a population produces gamma rays?

Millisecond pulsars

We are satisfied there is only one possibility: rapidly spinning objects called “millisecond pulsars”. These are the remnants of particular stars, significantly more massive than the Sun, that are also closely orbiting another star.

Under just the right circumstances, such binary systems produce a neutron star – an object about as heavy as the Sun but only about 20km across – that rotates hundreds of times per second.

Because of their rapid rotation and strong magnetic field, these neutron stars act as natural particle accelerators: they launch particles at extremely high energy into space.

These particles then emit gamma rays. Millisecond pulsars in the Sagittarius dwarf were the ultimate source of the mysterious cocoon, we found.

Read more:
This newly discovered neutron star might light the way for a whole new class of stellar object

The hunt for dark matter

Our findings shed new light – pun intended – on millisecond pulsars as sources of gamma rays in other old stellar systems.

At the same time, they also cast a pall over efforts to find evidence for dark matter via observations of other satellite galaxies of the Milky Way; unfortunately, there is a stronger “background” of gamma rays from millisecond pulsars in these systems than previously realised.

Thus, any signal they produce might not be unambiguously interpreted as due to dark matter.

The hunt for dark matter signals goes on.

Read more:
We don’t know if dark matter exists. So why do astronomers keep looking?

Roland Crocker receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Gamma rays from a dwarf galaxy solve an astronomical puzzle – https://theconversation.com/gamma-rays-from-a-dwarf-galaxy-solve-an-astronomical-puzzle-189784

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allen Cheng, Professor in Infectious Diseases Epidemiology, Monash University

The CSIRO has delivered a comprehensive report on how we should prepare for future pandemics.

The report identifies six key science and technology areas such as faster development of vaccines and onshore vaccine manufacturing to ensure supply, new antivirals and ways of using the medicines we already have, better ways of diagnosing cases early, genome analysis, and data sharing.

It also recommends we learn more about viruses and their hosts across the five most concerning virus families. These causes of disease could fuel the next pandemic.

We asked leading experts about the diseases they can cause and why authorities should prepare well:

1. Coronaviridae

COVID-19, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), severe acquired respiratory syndrome (SARS)

The first human Coronaviruses (229E and OC43) were found in 1965 and 1967 respectively. They were low-grade pathogens causing only mild cold-like symptoms and gastroenteritis. Initial understanding of this family came from study of related strains that commonly infect livestock or laboratory mice that also caused non-fatal disease. The HKU-1 strain in 1995 again did not demonstrate an ability to generate high levels of disease. As such, coronaviridae were not considered a major concern until severe acquired respiratory syndrome (SARS-1) first appeared in 2002 in China.

Coronaviridae have a very long RNA genome, coding up to 30 viral proteins. Only four or five genes make infectious virus particles, but many others support diseases from this family by modifying immune responses. The viruses in this family mutate at a steady low rate, selecting changes in the outer spike to allow virus entry into new host cells.

Coronaviridae viruses are widespread in many ecological niches and common in bat species that make up 20% of all mammals. Mutations spread in their roosts can spillover into other mammals, such as the civet cat, then into humans.

Coronaviridae genome surveillance shows an array of previously unknown virus strains circulating in different ecological niches. Climate change threatens intersections of these viral transmission networks. Furthermore, pandemic human spread of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID) has now seeded new transmissions back into other species, such as mink, cats, dogs and white-tailed deer.

Ongoing viral evolution in new animal hosts and also in immune-compromised HIV patients in under-resourced settings, presents an ongoing source of new variants of concern.

– Damian Purcell

Read more:
Long COVID: How researchers are zeroing in on the self-targeted immune attacks that may lurk behind it

2. Flaviviridae

Dengue fever, Japanese encephalitis, Zika, West Nile fever

The flaviviridae family causes several diseases, including dengue, Japanese encephalitis, Zika, West Nile disease and others. These diseases are often not life-threatening, causing fever, sometimes with rash or painful joints. A small proportion of those infected get severe or complicated infection. Japanese encephalitis can cause inflammation of the brain, and Zika virus can cause birth defects.

While all these viruses may be spread by mosquito bites, when it comes to each individual virus, not all mosquitoes bring equal risk. There are key mosquito species involved in transmission cycles of dengue and Zika virus, such as Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus, that may be found in close to where people live. These mosquitoes are found in water-holding containers (such as potted plant saucers, rainwater tanks), water-filled plants, and tree holes. They also like to bite people.

The mosquitoes that spread these viruses are not currently widespread in Australia; they’re generally limited to central and far north Queensland. They are routinely detected through biosecurity surveillance at Australia’s major airports and seaports. With a rapid return to international travel, movement of people and their belongings may become an ever-increasing pathway of introduction of the diseases and mosquitoes back into Australia.

Different mosquitoes are involved in the transmission of West Nile virus and Japanese encephalitis. These mosquitoes are more likely to be found in wetlands and bushland areas than backyards. They bite people but they also like to bite the animals most likely to be carrying these viruses.

The emergence of Japanese encephalitis, a virus spread by mosquitoes between waterbirds, pigs, and people, is a perfect example. Extensive rains and flooding that provide idea conditions for mosquitoes and these animals create a “perfect storm” for disease emergence.

– Cameron Webb & Andrew van den Hurk

Read more:
Japanese encephalitis virus has been detected in Australian pigs. Can mozzies now spread it to humans?

3. Orthomyxoviridae

Influenza

Before COVID-19, influenza was the infection most well-known for causing pandemics.

Influenza virus is subdivided into types (A, B, and rarely C and D). Influenza A is further classified into subtypes based on haemagglutinin (H) and neuraminidase (N) protein variants on the surface of the virus. Currently, the most common influenza strains in humans are A/H1N1 and A/H3N2.

Zoonotic infection occurs when influenza strains that primarily affect animals “spill over” to humans.

Major changes in the influenza virus usually result from new combinations of influenza viruses that affect birds, pigs and humans. New strains have the potential to cause pandemics as there is little pre-existing immunity.

Since the beginning of the 20th century, there have been four influenza pandemics, in 1918, 1957, 1968, and 2009. In between pandemics, seasonal influenza circulates throughout the world.

Although influenza is not as infectious as many other respiratory infections, the very short incubation period of around 1.4 days means outbreaks can spread quickly.

Vaccines are available to prevent influenza, but are only partially protective. Antiviral treatments are available, including oseltamivir, zanamivir, peramivir and baloxavir. Oseltamivir decreases the duration of illness by around 24 hours if started early, but whether it reduces the risk of severe influenza and its complications is controversial.

– Allen Cheng

Read more:
My year as Victoria’s deputy chief health officer: on the pandemic, press conferences and our COVID future

4. Paramyxoviridae

Nipah virus, Hendra virus

Paramyxoviridae are a large group of viruses that affect humans and animals. The most well known are measles and mumps, as well as parainfluenza virus (a common cause of croup in children).

Globally, measles is a dangerous disease for young children, particularly those who are malnourished. Vaccines are highly effective with the measles vaccine alone estimated to have saved 17 million lives between 2000 and 2014.

One group of paramyxoviruses is of particular importance for pandemic planning – henipaviruses. This includes Hendra virus, Nipah virus and the new Langya virus (as well as the fictional MEV-1 in the film Contagion). These are all zoonoses (diseases that spill over from animals to humans)

Hendra virus was first discovered in Queensland in 1994, when it caused the deaths of 14 horses and their horse trainer. Infected flying foxes have since spread the virus to horses in Queensland and northern New South Wales. There have been seven reported human cases of Hendra virus in Australia, including four deaths.

Nipah virus is more significant globally. Infection may be mild, but some people develop encephalitis (inflammation of the brain). Outbreaks frequently occur in Bangladesh, where the first outbreak was reported in 1998. Significantly, Nipah virus appears to be able to be transmitted from person-to-person though close contact.

– Allen Cheng

Read more:
What is this new Langya virus? Do we need to be worried?

5. Togaviridae (alphaviruses)

Chikungunya fever, Ross River fever, Eastern equine encephalitis, Western equine encephalitis, Venezuelan equine encephalitis

The most common disease symptoms caused by infection with alphaviruses like chikungunya and Ross River viruses are fever, rash and painful joints.

Like some flaviviruses, chikungunya virus is thought to be only spread by Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in Australia. This limits risks, for now, to central and far north Queensland.

Many different mosquitoes play a role in transmission of alphaviruses, including dozens of mosquito species suspected as playing a role in the spread of Ross River fever. Many of these mosquitoes are commonly found across Australia.

But what role may these local mosquitoes play should diseases such as eastern equine encephalitis or western equine encephalitis make their way to Australia? Given the capacity of our home-grown mosquitoes to spread other alphaviruses, it is reasonable to assume they would be effective at transmitting these as well. That’s why the CSIRO report notes future pandemic preparation should work alongside Australia’s established biosecurity measures.

– Cameron Webb & Andrew van den Hurk

Read more:
How can the bite of a backyard mozzie in Australia make you sick?

Allen Cheng receives funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and the Australian government for research, including in influenza. He is Chair of the Advisory Committee for Vaccines and a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation.

Andrew van den Hurk has received funding from local, state and federal agencies to study the ecology of mosquito-borne pathogens, and their surveillance and control. He is an employee of the Department of Health, Queensland Government.

Cameron Webb and the Department of Medical Entomology, NSW Health Pathology, have been engaged by a wide range of insect repellent and insecticide manufacturers to provide testing of products and provide expert advice on mosquito biology. Cameron has also received funding from local, state and federal agencies to undertake research into mosquito-borne disease surveillance and management.

Damian Purcell consults for Moderna on mRNA vaccine education and receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Victorian Government grants. He is Past Presidents’ advisor for the Australasian Virology Society, and Committee member of the RNA Network of Australia.

– ref. 5 virus families that could cause the next pandemic, according to the experts – https://theconversation.com/5-virus-families-that-could-cause-the-next-pandemic-according-to-the-experts-189622

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

At last, there’s action on climate change. The United States recently passed its largest climate bill ever. And Australia is set to usher a 43% emissions target into law this week, although the Greens will try to amend the bill so the climate impacts of new gas and coal projects are considered.

Good news, right? There’s one issue – these laws, packages and amendments conspicuously avoid the “T” word. Economists have long argued the best option to cut emissions is a tax or, failing that, a type of carbon market known as “cap-and-trade”. But nowhere do the Australian or US bills mention taxing carbon dioxide to discourage dumping it into the atmosphere.

Why? The answer is basically politics. The Gillard Labor government introduced a carbon tax that, although it worked, turned out to be political kryptonite. So Labor’s climate policies now rely not on a tax, but on incentives for clean energy, carbon farming and electric transport.

This is not ideal. For decades, economists have pointed out carbon taxes and pollution allowance markets are the simplest and best way to reduce emissions at the lowest possible cost. But it seems taxes are out and stimulus is in.

A long history of tax avoidance

This isn’t new, of course. For decades, politicians – particularly in Anglophone countries – have avoided carbon taxes or market-based ways of cutting planet-heating pollutants.

Every attempt to price carbon on a national level in the US has failed. The first was in 1990. Presidential candidate turned climate campaigner Al Gore called for a carbon tax in his influential 1992 book, Earth in the Balance. But it was politically unappealing.

Read more:
The US has finally passed a huge climate bill. Australia needs to keep up

Why? Concerns over “federal overreach”, increasing cost of power, and, of course, lobbying from fossil fuel industries.

Australia has the sad title of the first country in the world to introduce and remove a price on carbon – a sign of how fraught the idea has been. Labor’s Rudd-Gillard government lost the 2013 election with the “carbon tax” issue front-and-centre in the campaign.

Policy and politics has evolved

Since Australia repealed its carbon tax, we’ve seen significant change in climate policies towards what is politically possible.

In the US, federal inaction on climate change spawned stronger environmental regulation by some states. Coalitions of American states now operate some of the world’s best pollution markets, such as that covering 12 eastern states and California’s own market.

The EU avoided taxes in favour of a cannier approach. They created a pollution market but allowed each state to determine how many allowances domestic firms could obtain. This made the policy more politically appetising and the EU carbon market has since expanded substantially.

The world’s largest emitter, China, last year followed suit and launched the world’s largest carbon trading scheme.

But Australia didn’t follow the emissions trading model pursued by the EU and many US states. Instead, the Abbott Coalition government brought in an emissions reduction fund to subsidise pollution reduction.

Companies can use pollution reduction to gain carbon credits, which can be sold to government or on the private market. The policy has proven thoroughly underwhelming.

What trends are we seeing?

So tax and markets seem to be off the table when it comes to climate bills.

Last month, the US passed a sweeping A$530 billion bill aimed at boosting health care funding and tackling climate change.

It’s aimed at speeding up the shift to clean energy and electric transport, through rebates and tax credits for electric cars, efficient appliances and rooftop solar. Conspicuously absent was any mention of a carbon tax or pollution allowance market.

Australia’s climate bill requires us to reduce emissions by 43% by 2030 – but there’s very little information on the crucial question of how.

Labor’s bill envisages a type of market, regulating large polluters by allowing them to trade credits created by emissions reduction.

But both Australia and the US have shied away from the principle of “polluter pays”.

This is disappointing. Yes, subsiding pollution reduction can create incentives for behaviour change. But subsidies are often wasteful and inefficient. Taxes and markets are better options. We now know countries with a price on carbon have emissions growth rates around 2% lower than those without. Longer term, this is often enough to see overall emissions begin to fall.

While the direct costs of subsidies are not immediately seen by citizens and companies, these subsidies have to be paid for through increases in general taxation. Carbon taxes, by contrast, are more explicit. A polluter will clearly notice having to pay the tax and be motivated to avoid it.

We’ll still need taxes and market approaches, even with the subsidies

Instead of splashing out on subsidies, governments could still introduce a carbon tax to raise much-needed revenue while offering assistance to low-income households, cutting taxes elsewhere, or even reduce the deficit.

In Australia, there’s surprising support for a return of the carbon tax. But Labor may well be wary, given how their last carbon tax was easily defeated with a political scare campaign. One alternative could be to follow the EU and China and begin auctioning off pollution permits.

We could also borrow from America’s approach. Deep in the bill is a fee on methane emissions. This, some environmentalists believe, could be the crucial first step towards wider pricing of pollution.

Even though subsidies and rebates are politically popular, by themselves they cannot end greenhouse gas emissions. While carrots are popular, we will still need a stick – taxes or markets – to actually encourage polluters to cut emissions.

Read more:
Carbon pricing works: the largest-ever study puts it beyond doubt

Ian A. MacKenzie 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. Taxes out, subsidies in: Australia and the US are passing major climate bills – without taxing carbon – https://theconversation.com/taxes-out-subsidies-in-australia-and-the-us-are-passing-major-climate-bills-without-taxing-carbon-189555

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Lowe, Emeritus Professor, School of Science, Griffith University

An increase in the permanent migrant intake to 195,000 this year is one of the jobs summit outcomes announced by the federal government on Friday. The business community pushed for this change, saying shortages of skilled employees are holding back the economy.

The downsides of increasing migration, which will almost certainly worsen our environmental problems, weren’t mentioned. We can expect public debate about lifting migration to pre-pandemic levels. It’s essential for this debate to consider the whole picture: the economic, social and environmental issues.

Migration has environmental impacts because it increases our population, with proportional increases in resource use and waste products. Our population has grown by 50% since 1990, from 17 million to almost 26 million today. Our energy use has risen from 4,000 petajoules a year to 6,200, increasing our greenhouse gas emissions by around 50%.

The demands of the human population are causing, directly or indirectly, all of Australia’s serious environmental problems.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Summit triggers immediate action and elevates gender equality

Pressures on the environment are growing

Since 1996, there have seen six independent State of the Environment reports to the Australian government. I chaired the advisory council that produced the first.

This 1996 report found much of Australia’s environment was in good condition by international standards. But we also had serious problems: loss of biodiversity, the state of inland rivers, degradation of productive land, pressures on the coastal zone, and increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

The five reports since then have documented the worsening of those problems. The most recent report said our environment is in poor condition and deteriorating. It found “many species and ecosystems are increasingly threatened” and noted “abrupt changes in ecological systems” in recent years.

As the 1996 report said, no single government or commercial sector is to blame for our environmental problems. In a sense, we are all indirectly responsible. The issues are the cumulative consequences of the growth and distribution of our population, our lifestyle choices, the technologies we use and the demands we make on our natural resources.

The latest report observes:

“Humans drive many of the pressures on our environment. Our activities, settlements and use of resources all affect the environment and its assets in different ways.”

The report notes the particular pressures of population growth on the coastal zone, where most Australians live. Australian cities are growing faster than those in most other affluent countries, it says.

That growth has increased demand for resources such as water and energy as well as increasing impacts such as “urban heat, congestion, pollution and waste”. The demands of a growing population have led to land clearing, reduced green space, more pollution and the loss of biodiversity.

Read more:
State of the Environment report shows our growing cities are under pressure – but we’re seeing positive signs too

Today’s decisions shape tomorrow’s Australia

The decisions being made now have a substantial effect on what Australia will look like in the future. As a report I wrote with Jane O’Sullivan and Peter Cook in February this year said, with net migration below 60,000 a year the population would stabilise around 30-35 million by 2050. The newly announced 195,000 a year could lift it to about 40 million.

It is sometimes claimed migration simply shifts environmental impacts from one country to another and so does no extra damage to the planet. This would be true if migrants all came from countries with the same resource demands as us. But most economic migrants come to Australia precisely because our material standard of living is higher and they want to enjoy those benefits.

Pre-pandemic figures from 2016-17, for example, showed about 170,000 migrants coming from countries with much lower resource use. About 50,000 came from affluent countries in which resource use is typically about half that in Australia. Only about 5,000 were from places where material demand is similar to ours.

Read more:
Chinese migrants follow and add to Australian city dwellers’ giant ecological footprints

No doubt we could do many things to reduce the impacts of our growing population. We could, for instance, improve urban planning. We could also shift more rapidly to cleaner energy systems that embrace efficiency improvements recommended nearly 20 years ago to the Howard government. And we could adopt legally enforceable national environmental standards, as recommended by the 2020 Samuel review, which found our environmental laws are ineffective.

The fundamental need, though, is to upgrade our decision-making so environmental issues are always part of the calculus. Current thinking seems to presume the economy has over-riding importance and the environment just has to cope with the impacts.

Even the economic benefits are debated

Even the view that increasing migration produces economic benefits is not universal among economists. A 2016 Lowy Institute report, citing published research and a Productivity Commission report, claimed “a sustained high rate of net immigration […] appears to be necessary to stave off long-term population decline and is likely to result in higher GDP per capita and labour productivity”. On the other hand, economics professor John Quiggin points to “the net costs imposed on the community as a whole by increased migration”.

A 2014 OECD review referred to a study of impacts of migration to OECD countries. It concluded “the impact of the cumulative waves of migration that arrived over the past 50 years […] is on average close to zero”. It was positive in some cases, negative in others, “rarely exceeding 0.5 per cent of GDP”.

Read more:
Is education or immigration the answer to our skills shortage? We asked 50 economists

Even those who believe increasing migration has economic benefits, such as the Lowy Institute report authors, concede that “accompanying policies are necessary to ensure that these net benefits are distributed fairly and that the social and environmental effects of increased population are managed properly”.

Increasing public hostility to high levels of migration is a direct consequence of failure to manage the social impacts. Urban infrastructure has not kept pace with increasing demands. As a result, the three in four Australians who live in our major cities see their quality of life getting worse.

We can’t ignore the big picture

Unless we reduce our demands per person, our growing population inevitably increases pressures on our environment. We need to look beyond simplistic economic assumptions and consider the whole picture.

As the latest State of the Environment report concludes:

“Our health, living standards, cultural and spiritual fulfilment and connection to country are all interconnected and are negatively impacted by our deteriorating environment.”

Ian Lowe was president of the Australian Conservation Foundation from 2004 to 2014.

– ref. Migration boost is bad news for Australia’s environment – we mustn’t ignore that – https://theconversation.com/migration-boost-is-bad-news-for-australias-environment-we-mustnt-ignore-that-189948

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Holloway, Senior Research DECRA Fellow, Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University

It’s that time of year again when parents and students anxiously await their NAPLAN results.

NAPLAN is a nationwide test of literacy and numeracy that all students in years 3, 5, 7 and 9 are expected to take. It doesn’t impact entrance to high school or university, but is a measure of how a child is performing at school.

Just like every year, some students will bring home results that are lower than what they hoped for. If this happens to your child, you can play an important role in helping them overcome some of the disappointment and limit any impact on their wellbeing.

What should you say – and what shouldn’t you say – when discussing NAPLAN results with your child?

Do talk about the context

One thing parents can do for their student is help them understand the broader context of NAPLAN.

For one thing, the purpose of NAPLAN is for the government and public to get a broad understanding of how schools are performing.

This provides important information about where to allocate more resources to support schools in need. While individual families also receive information about how their student performed, this was not the original purpose of the test.

Another key aspect is the impact of COVID cannot be overstated when it comes to interpreting this year’s NAPLAN results. Countries around the world are reporting that annual test scores are significantly down this year, and it shouldn’t be a surprise.

School disruptions might explain some of these drops, but we can’t forget the levels of fear, loss and trauma that many families have experienced due to the pandemic and floods. NAPLAN participation rates were historically low this year, which says a lot about the challenging circumstances students have faced.

Do talk about life beyond NAPLAN

Without fail, NAPLAN attracts national attention every year. To a student, it is hard to believe that NAPLAN could be anything but a very big deal.

Unfortunately, research has shown students’ self esteem can be negatively impacted by lower-than-expected test results.

Parents can help students understand NAPLAN is only one indication of their learning progress. They can encourage their child to focus on their strengths and other indicators of achievement. These may be achievements in subjects not tested by NAPLAN, or involvement in extra curricular activities.

Parents may also like to note that some experts say the test should be abandoned or changed, arguing it it is too narrowly focused and hampers creativity.

Read more:
‘It hurt my heart and my wallet’: the unnecessary test stressing teachers before they even make it to the classroom

Do talk to your child’s teacher

Most importantly, if you have any questions about your student’s NAPLAN results, discuss these questions with your child’s teacher.

Teachers have the most valuable information about how your student is progressing through school.

Regardless of what NAPLAN results say, teachers are the ones who spend every day watching your student grow. They are constantly assessing learning, and they will be able to explain how your student is doing and how to interpret NAPLAN scores more holistically.

Don’t compare your child’s results

Please resist the urge to compare your student’s NAPLAN results to their peers’ or even their own previous scores.

I would say this every year, but it’s even more important now. The last few years have been extremely disruptive, and families have been impacted in very different ways.

It is impossible to know exactly how the effects of the pandemic influenced each student’s NAPLAN performance. Because of this, comparisons across students, classrooms or years can be misleading.

Don’t focus on what NAPLAN ‘means’ for the future

It is critical that students and parents understand that NAPLAN is only one narrow measure of learning.

NAPLAN only provides a small snapshot of how they performed on one day. NAPLAN will never be able to capture everything a student has learned or the progress they have made.

It is also true that NAPLAN doesn’t tell us much about what a student might do in the future. Most importantly, students should be reminded that NAPLAN does not define who they are, or what they are capable of achieving.

And don’t panic!

Regardless of how your student performs on NAPLAN this year, do not panic or get overly excited.

Remaining calm and encouraging your student to see NAPLAN as but one measure of achievement is crucial for supporting students’ wellbeing and future prospects.

Overreactions can have multiple consequences. They can lead to unnecessary pressure to perform better next time, which will likely have the opposite effect.

They can also lead to the incorrect belief that NAPLAN scores are true predictors of what students will be capable of doing in the future. It is not worth jeopardising a student’s sense of worth simply because of one test score.

Read more:
Parents and screen time: are you a ‘contract maker’ or an ‘access denier’ with your child?

Jessica Holloway receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. What parents should and shouldn’t say when talking to their child about NAPLAN results – https://theconversation.com/what-parents-should-and-shouldnt-say-when-talking-to-their-child-about-naplan-results-189636

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

The federal government’s decision to lift Australia’s permanent migrant intake from 160,000 to 195,000 this financial year, which it announced at the jobs summit, has been applauded by business leaders and premiers.

But by itself, lifting migration will do little to fill widespread skills shortages, partly because three in every four migrants granted permanent visas are already in Australia.

Even if the larger intake succeeds in bringing in more people from overseas, more migrants will mean a bigger economy, which will itself increase the demand for workers. And it will mean having to build more homes.

But it should boost the budget’s bottom line. Grattan Institute modelling suggests an ongoing increase in the annual permanent intake of 195,000 would boost federal and state budgets by up to A$33 billion over the next decade, depending on exactly which streams the extra visas are allocated to.

The decision to commit $36 million to help work through the backlog of 900,000 outstanding visa applications is welcome – although it is likely even more resources will be needed to get the program back on track.

Sensible easy calls

The government has also extended by two years the period international students studying in-demand degrees can remain in Australia after graduation: from three years to five years for masters graduates, and from four years to six years for PhD graduates.

But the bigger challenge is improving the poor employment outcomes of the international graduates who are already here.

Despite their qualifications, a quarter of recent graduates are either unemployed or not looking for work. A further 17% work in low-skilled occupations in retail, wholesale and hospitality. Most earn no more than working holiday makers.

The government also extended the relaxation of work rights for international students – traditionally capped at 40 hours a fortnight – until 30 June next year.

But having made these easy calls on areas where consensus emerged at the summit, the government faces two tough choices.

Challenge 1: lifting the income threshold

The immediate challenge will be settling the debate over raising the Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT), which puts a floor under the wage at which employers can sponsor workers via the temporary skills shortage visa.

The threshold hasn’t been increased since 2013, and at $53,900 a year, has fallen in relative terms to the point where it is lower than the wages earned by 80% of Australian full-time workers.

Unions want the threshold raised to $90,000.

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry wants it lifted to just $60,000.

The Grattan Institute has suggested a threshold of $70,000 – roughly where it would have been if it had been indexed to wages over the past decade.

Our research suggests skilled migrants who earn $70,000 on arrival get few or no pay rises, whereas those who start out on more than $70,000 tend to get big pay rises – more than 5% a year on average – over the course of their stay in Australia.

Lifting the threshold to $90,000, as the unions propose, could cut out many of the younger skilled workers who form the bedrock of permanent skilled migration.

Temporary skills shortage visa-holders are, on average, much younger than the typical Australian worker, and start out earning less.

A $90,000 threshold would knock out about 60% of recent temporary skills shortage visas granted, compared to 35% for a $70,000 threshold.

Challenge 2: better pathways to permanent residency

The second big challenge is to provide better pathways to permanent residency for temporary migrants, including temporary skilled workers and international students, as the federal government has signalled it wants.

Australia offers only a fixed number of permanent visas each year. In contrast, Australia’s temporary migrant intake is largely uncapped, except for limits on working holiday visa grants for some countries.

Simply put, it’s not possible to run an uncapped temporary migration program and a capped permanent program, and offer temporary visa-holders a pathway to permanent residency. Something has to give.

Resolving these two challenges will loom large in the review of the Australia’s immigration system announced by Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil during the summit, which is due to report by the end of February 2023.

Read more:
An idea for the jobs summit: axing the ‘business investment’ visa would save Australia $119 billion over three decades

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

Tyler Reysenbach 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. Lifting migration was easy – now Australia faces two tougher choices on migrant income and residency – https://theconversation.com/lifting-migration-was-easy-now-australia-faces-two-tougher-choices-on-migrant-income-and-residency-189952

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Greg Stratton, Lecturer – Criminology and Justice Studies, RMIT University

Listeners of the true crime podcast Teacher’s Pet were vindicated last Tuesday when 74-year-old Chris Dawson was found guilty of murdering his wife Lynette in Sydney nearly 40 years ago.

Dawson was convicted based on overwhelming circumstantial evidence in a judge-only trial.

The publicity brought about by the podcast is widely seen as the catalyst to Dawson’s conviction. While Dawson’s conviction may seem like a win for investigative journalism, it remains unclear whether true crime entertainment – from podcasts to Netflix specials – can regularly play a tangible role in achieving justice.

Prosecutions aren’t easy

While pop culture can shift public perceptions, often flipping the original heroes and villains of criminal cases on their head, true crime content can reflect naivety about how the public can assist investigations and influence the outcomes of criminal cases.

Criminal investigations are slow, complex processes focused on identifying suspects and building a brief of evidence, hopefully proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt in the courtroom. While most criminal cases in Australia resolve with a finding of guilt, this is largely because most defendants plead guilty.

Even when a matter makes it to trial, prosecutors are constrained by rules of evidence, the availability of witnesses and the (justifiably) high standard of proof for a finding of guilt – beyond reasonable doubt.

Read more:
‘A clear victory for dogged investigative journalism’: Chris Dawson found guilty of murdering wife Lynette in 1982

True crime entertainment has the luxury of ignoring the hearsay rule, the restrictions placed on mentioning criminal history and the heavy scrutiny of “experts” who assert they have specialised knowledge to assist the case. They also don’t need to meet the evidentiary and legal thresholds of a criminal trial.

Fans of the podcast Up and Vanished experienced this disconnect firsthand when the main suspect in the show’s first season, Ryan Duke, was found not guilty for the cold-case murder of Tara Grinstead. Podcast host Payne Lyndsey expressed shock and disappointment when Duke was found not guilty of five of six counts related to the death, describing the state’s case as “weak as shit” likely because it couldn’t follow the narrative form of his podcast.

But podcasters and television producers should have some humility regarding criminal prosecutions, and accept that a compelling narrative is not the same as a solid case.

Read more:
The Gabby Petito case has been exploited by the media. We need to stop treating human tragedy as entertainment

Highlighting injustice, but not much else

A subset of true crime entertainment is focused on shining a spotlight on possible wrongful convictions where an innocent person has been imprisoned for a crime they didn’t commit.

These narratives often revolve around a “whodunit” – where audiences are encouraged to guess the real culprit. They do so by framing wrongful convictions as an anomaly of criminal justice processes, rather than as an inherent risk of even ideal police investigations.

True crime shows can win over public sentiment, but the process of overturning a wrongful conviction is a slow and difficult one.

In the United States, wrongfully convicted people are imprisoned for 11 years on average before proving their innocence.

The hit Netflix show Making a Murderer is a prime example of this. Despite being one of the most popular true crime shows ever made, the two focal points of the series, Steven Avery and Brandon Dassey, remain in prison after multiple failed appeals.

Even high-profile true crime cases which result in their subjects walking free, frequently do so because of less-than-ideal outcomes.

The West Memphis Three were three teens convicted of murder who were the subject of an HBO documentary film series highlighting their innocence. Following public outrage, the three (now) men were eventually set free – but only by utilising an oddity of the US criminal justice system known as an Alford plea – allowing them to assert their innocence while admitting there was enough evidence to find them guilty.

While true crime stories are great at winning over public sympathies, the actual mechanics of the criminal justice system are far less forgiving.

Heating up cold cases

One of the key advantages of true crime entertainment is that it can bring public attention to cases that have gone cold, and assist in sparking new leads.

There are often a variety of reasons why a cold case is reactivated, including pressure from politicians and victims’ families, technological advances allowing for better analysis of evidence, the emergence of new information or witnesses, or a proactive effort by police to revisit unresolved cases.

True crime can often spark new leads and evidence as part of an investigation, increase public pressure on authorities or even peak the interest of police investigators themselves.

Professor Jeremy Gans from Melbourne University has argued that Teachers Pet provided no new and admissible information regarding the murder of Lynette Dawson, but did provide a narrative of “unwavering certainty that a single theory about an unsolved disappearance is the absolute truth”. Consequently, it placed strong public pressure on prosecutors to review the case.

Read more:
How crime fiction went global, embracing themes from decolonisation to climate change

True crime also allows for the spotlighting of cases previously ignored because the victims were from vulnerable or marginalised communities.

Recent examples include Bowraville, which highlights the unsolved murder of three Aboriginal teens in NSW in 1991, and Bondi Badlands, which looks into the murders and disappearances of gay men at Bondi Beach in the 1980s and ‘90s.

True crime can certainly play a role in reigniting investigations into cold cases as well as miscarriages of justice, but it’s important to emphasise that police and lawyers remain the gatekeepers to achieving justice.

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. True crime entertainment like The Teacher’s Pet can shine a light on cold cases – but does it help or hinder justice being served? – https://theconversation.com/true-crime-entertainment-like-the-teachers-pet-can-shine-a-light-on-cold-cases-but-does-it-help-or-hinder-justice-being-served-189787

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Wellings, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, Monash University

The United Kingdom now has its third ever female prime minister. Liz Truss was elected as leader by grassroots members of the Conservatives to lead the party – and hence the nation – on a platform that positioned her as the continuity candidate from Boris Johnson.

This result will be celebrated on all sides of British politics.

Members of the Conservative party – the approximately 180,000 people who elected the new leader – will be delighted that the continuity candidate got over the line. Similarly, strategists for the opposition parties – Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party – will also be delighted that the continuity candidate got over the line. In electing Truss as leader, Conservative members have increased their party’s chances of losing the next general election.

This is because Truss essentially offers more of the same. She steps into 10 Downing Street at a moment when the views of the Conservative party and the experience of the wider electorate are diverging. As Britons find themselves in the throes of a cost-of-living crisis, the leadership debates between Truss and her main opponent, Rishi Sunak, were focused on the extent of tax cuts, weakening the public purse when it is needed most. This was music to the ears of the older and wealthier Conservative members, but a case of “same world, different planet” for the wider electorate.

Read more:
Boris Johnson: four ways this controversial prime minister tested the British parliament to its limits

To add insult to injury, Truss disparaged the idea of support for struggling Britons as “handouts”. Furthermore, her views on British workers as “lazy” resurfaced during the leadership contest. This is unlikely to endear her to those one-time Labour voters in the 45 so-called “Red Wall” seats in northern England that switched to the Johnson-led Conservatives at the 2019 election.

Newly-minted Conservative MPs in such seats fear that, faced with this disdain, their new supporters may switch back to Labour.

Additionally, as someone who symbolises continuity with the Johnson government, Truss may struggle in the 20 so-called “Blue Wall” seats in southern England. Former Conservative voters switched to the Liberal Democrats in three recent by-elections in such seats, heaping pressure on Johnson to resign earlier this year.

Conservative MPs in this part of England fear that voters who were switched off by Johnson’s political tone and governing style, may not warm to Truss’s embrace of the same tactics: hostility to the EU, goading the French, and waging a “war on woke”.

North of the border, Truss’s embrace of all things British, from her famous support for British cheese to the self-conscious adoption of Thatcherite imagery, will consolidate support for Scottish independence. There are only six Conservative MPs in Scotland, but having Truss as leader won’t make the job of retaining seats at the next election any easier.

Given these strategic perils, why was she elected? A YouGov opinion poll found a plurality of Conservative members did not want to see Johnson ousted from Number 10, despite his record in government. A gulf has emerged between grassroots Conservatives and the wider electorate. If Truss emulates Johnson too closely – as the party seems to want – it is the party that will pay the price.

Read more:
Boris Johnson says his time as UK PM was ‘mission largely accomplished’. How does that actually stack up?

What does this mean for Australia?

Truss will find a series of pressing yet complex issues in her in-tray. The foremost of these will be the cost-of-living crisis. This will intensify as winter approaches and energy price caps are lifted, leaving many struggling to heat their homes and buy food. The industrial action witnessed during the summer, will intensify.

The next issue is the war in Ukraine. Part of the Russian global strategy is to hope that western states, not least the UK, tire in their support for Ukraine. This will not happen under Truss. She is a firm supporter of Ukraine and can be expected to retain the UK’s current posture of support.

Truss is also the continuity candidate as far as Anglo-Australian relations are concerned. Like Johnson, Truss is a big fan of Australia (Dan Teehan’s uncomfortable chair during free trade negotiations notwithstanding). As the British author of the free trade agreement (FTA) between Australia and the UK, this form of bilateral relationship will only strengthen. Being very favourably disposed to Australia means the commitment to AUKUS – the strategic alliance between Australia, the UK and the US – will remain.

Of course, Johnson had an ideological confrère in Scott Morrison as his Australian counterpart. Truss will not enjoy such an ideological affinity with Anthony Albanese or Foreign Minister Penny Wong.

Nevertheless, the ALP view of the Australia-UK FTA is broadly favourable, with perhaps some stronger provisions for workers’ rights built in. Less is known about ALP views towards AUKUS, or whether the Australian government will choose British over US submarine designs (or whatever there might be on offer in the interim).

Questions remain about whether, like her predecessor, Truss believes in herself more than in Britain. Given her ability to hold more than one political position with great conviction (she started out as a Liberal Democrat and voted to remain in the EU) it might be that we have a new leader more interested in their own CV than the common good.

Boris Johnson damaged trust in politics, but Truss may not be equipped to address that particular issue. Her advisers will be tempted to consider a quick election – giving her a spurious “mandate” that the Westminster system doesn’t require – and there are lessons in what happened to Theresa May when that temptation arose.

Yet for all his faults, Johnson bequeaths Truss an imposing 73-seat majority. But Truss must tread carefully: she’s the best hope of ousting the Conservatives that the opposition has had in many years.

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

– ref. Who is Liz Truss, the new UK prime minister? – https://theconversation.com/who-is-liz-truss-the-new-uk-prime-minister-189774

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Galvin, Professor of Strategic Management, Edith Cowan University

Unlike many airlines, Australia’s flag carrier Qantas has survived the pandemic. But its return to normal service – and profitability – is proving to be a bumpy ride. It could well get worse before it gets better.

As domestic and international travel picks up, the airline is struggling to keep up – having laid off thousands of staff whose experience, it turns out, was quite valuable for running such a complex business. Cancelled flights, lost luggage, long delays at airports and low staff morale are pummelling its carefully cultivated reputation.

Qantas engineers took industrial action last month. This week there’s a strike by baggage handlers employed by the contractor used since the airline retrenched almost 2,000 ground crew workers in 2020. (The Fair Work Commission has since ruled this outsourcing was unlawful.)

Read more:
Qantas fights on against court ruling it unlawfully sacked 2,000 workers

Former staff have told the ABC’s 4 Corners program they fear the cutbacks will undermine the airline’s safety record.

There is no quick or easy fix. These issues are tied to the airline’s profitability – or lack of it. Last financial year it reported an underlying loss before tax of A$1.89 billion. Since 2020, total losses have been A$7 billion, with the shutdown of travel costing about A$25 billion in revenue, according to chief executive Alan Joyce.

A challenging industry

Qantas is by no means alone when it comes to the challenges of rebuilding after COVID. Even in normal times, airlines are notoriously hard businesses to keep in the black.

The products they sell – seats – are highly perishable. Once a flight takes off, any empty seat becomes worthless. It is tempting to fill seats by discounting, but this can lead to competitors doing the same, and create a perception that leads customers to undervalue the product.

There’s a reason so many national carriers are fully or partly government-owned – including Air New Zealand, Emirates, Etihad, Garuda Indonesia, Malaysia Airlines and Singapore Airlines.

It’s debatable how many of these airlines would be viable as standalone commercial operations. An airline regulated by a government with a vested interest in its prosperity may be assisted in a variety of ways, from bailouts and tax subsidies to policies that help protect it from competition on domestic routes.

How to cut costs?

Adding to these difficulties in 2022 are fuel prices, inflated since Russia invaded Ukraine in February. Fuel costs typically account for about a quarter of airline costs.

Hedging contracts have protected Qantas from the full impact of these increases. Like other airlines, it has few options to cut fuel costs besides cutting routes or buying more fuel-efficient aircraft. (It is buying 12 new Airbus planes, but with the plan to offer long-haul flights without stopovers, which will increase fuel consumption.)

Read more:
Bucking the trend: Is there a future for ultra long-haul flights in a net zero carbon world?

So cutting staff costs has become the default option.

Qantas has never shied away from this under Joyce, who was appointed chief executive in 2008.

In 2011 he notoriously grounded the fleet and locked out staff during “hardball” collective bargaining with three unions (the Australian and International Pilots Association, Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association, and Transport Workers Union).

But this combative stance on wages and conditions, and outsourcing so many key activities, has thinned corporate knowledge. Qantas’ problems with lost luggage are clearly linked to sacking so many experienced staff and replacing them with contract workers who don’t necessarily understand how the airline’s complex systems work.

A difficult outlook

It’s easy to look for scapegoats – there are mounting calls for Joyce to go, for example – but there are no easy solutions to the problems Qantas faces.

In the short term it must to balance the cost-cutting required with the reality that further aggravating its workforce will lower customer service – and ultimately its reputation.

Australian domestic airlines by market share, January 2019 to April 2022

Domestically it has the advantage of its major competitor, Virgin Australia, being in an even worse position. Virgin only survived the pandemic by being sold to US private equity giant Bain Capital. This should save Qantas from a domestic discounting war for the foreseeable future.

But even with subdued domestic competition, the airline industry remains unattractive. For the flying kangaroo, the path back to profitability looks set to be one of many ups and downs.

Read more:
Why COVID-19 means the era of ever cheaper air travel could be over

Peter Galvin 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. Qantas, the trying kangaroo: why things won’t get better any time soon – https://theconversation.com/qantas-the-trying-kangaroo-why-things-wont-get-better-any-time-soon-189558