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

A national Newspoll, conducted March 3–7 from a sample of 1,255, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead, unchanged since the previous Newspoll, three weeks ago. Primary votes were 39% Coalition (up one), 32% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (steady), 7% One Nation (steady) and 10% for all Others (down two).

Newspoll is using a stronger One Nation preference flow to the Coalition than occurred at the 2022 election. By 2022 preference flows, this poll would be near a 50–50 tie.

Anthony Albanese’s net approval jumped nine points to -12, with 53% dissatisfied and 41% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval dropped four points to -14. Albanese extended his better PM lead over Dutton to 47–38 (45–40 previously).

This is the first time Albanese has had a better net approval than Dutton since September 2024, and also his biggest better PM lead since then. It’s not always the case, but sometimes movements in leaders’ ratings come before a gain in voting intentions.

In the other polls released in the last week, Labor gained a 51–49 lead in a YouGov poll, but the Coalition regained a narrow lead in both the Essential and Morgan polls.

The graph below shows Labor’s two-party vote in national polls. While still narrowly behind, Labor is doing better than they were two weeks ago.

This is the graph of Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll this term. The plus signs are the data points and a trend line has been fitted. The trend line will need a sustained improvement for Albanese before it turns up.

In an additional Newspoll question, by 55–45 respondents said they were not confident that the Dutton Coalition is ready to govern Australia.

Labor gains lead in a YouGov poll

A national YouGov poll, conducted February 28 to March 6 from a sample of 1,504, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, a two-point gain for Labor since the February 21–27 YouGov poll. This is the first Labor lead in YouGov since July 2024. YouGov will be releasing weekly voting intentions until the election.

Primary votes were 36% Coalition (down one), 31% Labor (up three), 13% Greens (down one), 7% One Nation (down one), 1% for Clive Palmer’s Trumpet of Patriots (steady) 10% independents (steady) and 2% others (steady). YouGov is using preference flows that are weaker for Labor than at the 2022 election, and by 2022 election flows Labor would lead by more than 52–48.

Anthony Albanese’s net approval improved three points to -9, with 51% dissatisfied and 42% satisfied. Dutton’s net approval slid two points to -4. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 45–39 (42–40 previously).

Essential poll: Coalition takes narrow lead

A national Essential poll, conducted February 26 to March 2 from a sample of 1,150, gave the Coalition a 48–47 lead including undecided using respondent preferences (a 48–48 tie in mid-February). The Coalition has been narrowly ahead since early December except for the previous poll.

Primary votes were 35% Coalition (steady), 29% Labor (down one), 13% Greens (up one), 8% One Nation (down one), 1% UAP (steady), 10% for all Others (up one) and 5% undecided (up one). By 2022 election preference flows, Labor would lead by about an unchanged 51–49. Essential should have replaced UAP with Clive Palmer’s new Trumpet of Patriots party.

Albanese’s net approval was down three points to -8, with 49% disapproving and 41% approving. Dutton’s net approval was up one to -3. By 49–34, voters thought Australia was on the wrong track (51–31 previously).

Essential’s party trusted to handle issues were better for Labor than other issue polls by Resolve and Freshwater. Labor led the Coalition by 33–27 on addressing cost of living pressures and only trailed by 30–29 on managing the economy.

Overall, 52% said they were committed to their vote, including 65% of Coalition supporters and 52% of Labor supporters.

Morgan poll: Coalition retakes narrow lead

A national Morgan poll, conducted February 24 to March 2 from a sample of 1,673, gave the Coalition a 50.5–49.5 lead, a 1.5-point gain for the Coalition since the February 17–23 Morgan poll that was probably a pro-Labor outlier.

Primary votes were 40% Coalition (up 3.5), 28.5% Labor (down three), 13.5% Greens (steady), 4% One Nation (down one), 10.5% independents (up 0.5) and 3.5% others (steady). By 2022 election flows, there was a 50–50 tie, a three-point gain for the Coalition.

By 52–31.5, respondents thought the country is going in the wrong direction (49.5–34.5 previously). Morgan’s consumer confidence index fell 2.1 points to 87.7.

Economy has best quarterly growth for two years

The Australian Bureau of Statistics released the December quarter GDP report last Wednesday. The economy grew 0.6% in December, up from 0.3% in the September quarter. This was the best growth since December 2022, when the economy grew 0.7%.

There was much media attention on the 0.8% annual growth rate after the September quarter GDP was released in December. The annual growth for the year to December was 1.3%, after the weak December 2023 quarter (0.1% growth) was replaced with this stronger quarter.

GDP per capita rose 0.1% in the December quarter, after dropping in the seven quarters from March 2023 to September 2024.

Carney wins Canadian Liberal leadership

Mark Carney has been elected Canadian federal Liberal leader today and will replace Justin Trudeau as prime minister. I covered this for The Poll Bludger. The Liberals have surged back from way behind the Conservatives in the Canadian polls.

I also wrote about US, Austrian and German electoral developments.

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 gains in some opinion polls, but the race remains neck-and-neck – https://theconversation.com/labor-gains-in-some-opinion-polls-but-the-race-remains-neck-and-neck-251352

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shaun Eaves, Senior Lecturer in Physical Geography, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

New Zealand ranks third globally in the proportion of ice lost from glaciers. Almost 30% of ice volume has melted during the past 24 years and what remains is disappearing at an accelerating pace, according to a recent global assessment.

Almost 300 glaciers have now vanished completely from New Zealand’s mountains.

As warming temperatures melt glaciers, the ice loss has repercussions for climate and water cycles. This in turn has significant impacts on landscapes, rivers, ecosystems and, ultimately, people and economies.

New Zealand is tracking glacial ice loss closely, thanks to a long-running monitoring programme going back to 1977.

Each year, a team of scientists carries out aerial surveys of the end-of-summer snowline to determine how much of the previous winter snowpack has survived the summer melt season.

Winter snow supplies new mass to glaciers and must balance summer melt if glaciers are to maintain their size. Recent surveys have shown that summer melt far exceeds winter inputs.

During extremely warm years, the winter snow pack is almost entirely removed from some glaciers and the underlying ice has thinned by several metres.

Like a bank account where expenses continually exceed income, the glaciers are out of balance. If left unchecked, eventually the bank account runs dry.

What we lose when glaciers melt

New Zealand is home to just under 3,000 glaciers, covering about 794 square kilometres – equivalent to about 75% of Auckland’s urban area.

Many of these ice bodies are small. Most of the ice is contained in just a few larger glaciers situated close to Aoraki Mt Cook.

We don’t have accurate measurements of glacier thickness but estimate they hold as much water as Lake Te Anau. If all of the ice in New Zealand melted – a possibility under some climate scenarios for the coming centuries – the impact on global sea levels would be barely perceptible, but we would be affected in many other ways.

Physically, snow and ice have a cooling effect on their surrounding environment. The highly reflective surface of snow and ice means a high proportion of solar radiation (up to 90% on fresh snow) is reflected back to space.

A reduction in seasonal snow cover and glacial ice due to warming increases the absorption of solar radiation. This further warms the surface and adjacent air and sets off a feedback loop that accelerates further ice loss.

The same effect applies to the loss of sea ice in both the Arctic and Antarctica and is a key reason why alpine and polar regions warm faster than other parts of the globe.

Loss of glacial ice also destabilises the surrounding landscape, with potentially hazardous impacts. Glacial retreat is causing weakening and collapse of steep valley sides that were once supported by ice. The lowering and flattening of ice surfaces means rain and meltwater form ponds that can drain without notice.

Biologically, seasonal snow plays an important role in maintaining ecological diversity. Snow insulates and protects alpine insects during winter and regulates flowering times and seed production of alpine flora.

Glacial meltwater cools stream water, supporting cold-water fish populations. Furthermore, the fine silt produced by the slow grinding of rock under the weight of flowing glacial ice is redistributed by wind and rivers and can maintain productive arable land and help regulate atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

Snow and ice are also culturally and economically important in New Zealand. Winter snow draws skiers and alpinists to the mountains, while the glaciers of the central Southern Alps are internationally recognised icons that provide the economic backbone to entire regional communities.

The science of glacier loss is clear: in a warming world, less snow will be retained and more ice will melt. This is why the United Nations has designated 2025 the International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation and March 21 as the World Day for Glaciers.

The only way to sustainably arrest the current global retreat of glacial ice is to tackle the root cause: global heating. Achieving this requires international coordination to move energy generation away from fossil fuels quickly.

Failing this, we may soon only remember our glaciers from stories, paintings and photographs.

Shaun Eaves receives funding from the Antarctic Science Platform and previously from the Marsden Fund.

Andrew Lorrey receives funding from NIWA’s Strategic Science Investment Fund for the project CAOA2501 Alpine Climate.

Brian Anderson receives funding from the Marsden Fund and NIWA.

Heather Purdie receives funding from NIWA and the Antarctic Science Platform, and previously from the Marsden Fund. She previously worked as a glacier guide for Fox Glacier Guiding.

Lauren Vargo receives funding from the Marsden Fund.

– ref. NZ’s glaciers have already lost nearly a third of their ice – as more vanishes, landscapes and lives change – https://theconversation.com/nzs-glaciers-have-already-lost-nearly-a-third-of-their-ice-as-more-vanishes-landscapes-and-lives-change-250617

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Carlson, Senior Research Officer, Infectious Diseases Epidemiology Team, The Kids Research Institute Australia

It’s now been five years since the World Health Organization declared COVID a pandemic.

In Australia, as in many other countries around this time, federal and state governments implemented a range of public health measures to slow the spread of disease. These included travel bans, quarantine and limits on social gatherings.

Western Australia was largely untouched by COVID during the early years of the pandemic due to strict border closures and snap lockdowns. Many WA residents said they were thankful for such measures as life seemed almost normal.

However, our recent research shows this was not the case for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in WA. The COVID pandemic hampered their ability to connect with their community and practise traditional culture.

A close collaboration

Between 2020 and 2024, we consulted with members of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community in Noongar Whadjuk Boodja (Perth metropolitan region, WA).

We held meetings with various committees and organisations to design the project, five yarning workshops with 38 participants, and a forum to interpret the data and support the publication of our findings.

We wanted to understand the impact of the COVID pandemic on this community, and their perceptions of COVID vaccination.

We collaborated closely because historically, Indigenous peoples across the globe have been disproportionately impacted by pandemics. What’s more, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices were omitted from previous pandemic responses, such as during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic.

Negative effects on community and culture

Our results indicate the policies and programs implemented to slow the spread of disease (such as travel bans and capacity limits at funerals) ultimately had a negative impact among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

These interventions impaired people’s ability to connect with community and practise traditional culture. As described by a yarning participant in March 2023:

Isolating, that caused a lot of damage towards communication between community. That caused a lot of mental health issues. And not just through domestic violence and all that stuff. It’s more like not understanding, confusion, and then all those other stuff came into it. Now we’re all trying to fix ourselves and the community, but it’s like hitting brick walls.

Most participants were very wary of government and medical institutions (including Aboriginal-led services that shared government messages). Participants told us this made it hard to trust any COVID policies and programs:

The government just expects Aboriginal people […] to believe them and trust them when there are so many issues to this day with the government and how Aboriginal people are treated.

Any government efforts to build trust were undermined once the WA government introduced COVID vaccine mandates for most workers in WA. This policy had unique impacts on peoples living in the shadow of colonisation. It deeply affected those who identified a lack of agency in their lives, as described to us in a yarn in October 2023:

I was really frustrated that it became compulsory to be vaccinated in order to keep your job […] I feel like the only thing we really do choose is where we work and what work we choose to go into, and then for the government to take control of that, what voice do we have?

Read more:
Friday essay: voices from the bush – how lockdown affects remote Indigenous communities differently

Attitudes towards COVID vaccines

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were among the first to be offered COVID vaccines. Despite this, after 12 months of the vaccination program, there was a 30% gap in uptake between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and non-Indigenous people in WA. It’s important to understand why.

Some participants we spoke to had taken the vaccines voluntarily and enthusiastically. They trusted that the vaccine would protect them and their loved ones, and wanted to be role models in their communities.

However, many held deep concerns about the safety of the vaccine, and were only vaccinated due to the mandates.

This vaccine hesitancy among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is not uniform across all vaccines. Our preliminary research with parents and carers from the same community shows high acceptance of childhood vaccines and the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunisation for infants. So this hesitancy appears to be specific to certain vaccines, notably COVID.

As described to us in a yarn about RSV infant immunisation, childhood vaccines and diseases such as RSV are well known, whereas everything about COVID was new.

What now?

Over the course of the pandemic, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been more likely to get very sick with and die from COVID. Data released in 2023 showed the mortality rate from COVID was 1.6 times higher in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people than non-Indigenous Australians.

Such disparities, which we’ve seen in previous pandemics too, cannot continue into the next pandemic.

Genuine collaboration is essential. We must ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices lead pandemic preparedness and response efforts for their communities.

We can learn from the incredible efforts made by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations during COVID.

Some of the people we yarned with in our research were involved in the response, including setting up vaccine clinics where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people had the opportunity to also yarn, create art (weaving and painting), learn, and enjoy a meal while at the clinic for the vaccine.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities need disease prevention policies that support community and culture. Stronger efforts are required now to start building up the trust between the government, non-Indigenous health authorities, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

These efforts include collaborating with and equipping community leaders and Aboriginal health workers with evidence-based information about vaccination and disease prevention to share among their communities.

Global pandemics are becoming more frequent. This network must be ready when (not if) the next pandemic happens.

At our data interpretation workshop, we were encouraged by the local Elder who welcomed us to their Country to have “courageous conversations” about this topic. We similarly encourage all those working in this space to start now.

Samantha Carlson is a recipient of the WA Early-Career Child Health Researcher Fellowship Program, funded by the BrightSpark Foundation and Western Australia Future Health Research and Innovation Fund (FHRI). Dr Carlson receives or has received funds for her research from the FHRI, New South Wales Ministry of Health, Stan Perron Charitable Foundation Health Research Funding, Western Australia Country Health Services and Western Australian Department of Health.

Christopher Blyth receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. He is on the board of the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases. He has previously been a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation.

Katie Attwell is a past recipient of a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award funded by the Australian Research Council of the Australian Government. She led the “Coronavax” project, funded by the Government of Western Australia. She leads “MandEval: Effectiveness and Consequences of Australia’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates” funded by the Medical Research Future Fund of the Australian Government. All funds were paid to her institution. Funders are not involved in the conceptualisation, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of manuscripts.

Carla Puca, Justin Kickett, and Valerie Swift 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. ‘What voice do we have?’ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people faced unique challenges during the COVID pandemic – https://theconversation.com/what-voice-do-we-have-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people-faced-unique-challenges-during-the-covid-pandemic-249155

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Narelle Miragliotta, Associate Professor in Politics, Murdoch University

The Roger Cook Labor government has been returned comfortably to government in Western Australia, securing a commanding, even if reduced, majority in the Legislative Assembly.

On election night, ABC election analyst Antony Green projected Labor had secured at least 40 of the 59 lower house seats. Even Labor’s deputy premier and treasurer, Rita Saffioti, expressed her surprise at the size of the party’s victory.

The Liberals also made ground, despite conceding Labor’s “emphatic” victory. They achieved a more than +7% swing in the state-wide share of the primary vote and, by late on Saturday night, had gained double-digit swings on a two-party basis in 33 electorates. At at least two seats had registered swings of more than 20%.

The Liberals retained the two lower house seats they held coming into this election – Vasse and Cottesloe – and regained the seats of Carine, Churchlands and Nedlands. The victory in Nedlands was achieved with an almost +12% swing. The Liberals are also ahead in the count in the seats of Albany, Kalgoorlie, Murray-Wellington. The Liberals will enter the 42nd parliament as the official opposition party.

The Nationals also have reason to celebrate. The party retained its three lower seats, and have gained a fourth seat, winning Geraldton, which was previously held by Labor and the Liberals at different periods. The party is also ahead in the count in the seat of Warren-Blackwood, a seat Labor won from the Nationals in 2021. Interestingly, the Poll Bludger’s, William Bowe has the Nationals ahead in Albany.

The Greens’ share of the state-wide primary vote rebounded to double digits, registering a swing of +3.5%. The Greens’ representation in the Legislative Council has also quadrupled from one councillor to four. And at least one of the teal independents, Kate Hulett, might just wrestle the inner metropolitan seat of Fremantle from Labor.

Losing amid the winning

While the parties will be able to claim their share of success, all lost ground in some way.

The vote correction Labor was expecting was emphatically delivered. The state-wide swing against Labor was around 18%, its primary vote likely to land somewhere in the low 40% range. The party will also lose its majority in the Legislative Council, with the party securing 15 seats (compared to 22 in 2021) in the 37 seat chamber. Even though Labor strategists were anticipating decline in its vote share given the fantastical swings the party enjoyed in 2021, they will be smarting from the outcome.

The swing against Labor did not break decisively in the Liberals’ direction. The Liberals barely regained two of their traditional blue-ribbon seats. The party narrowly won the seat of Churchlands (+1.8% swing), the most marginal Labor-held seat coming into this election. Cottesloe, a seat the Liberals have occupied uninterrupted since its creation in 1950, managed a swing of just under +5%. This is despite the Liberals’ candidate, Sandra Brewer, campaigning full time for 12 months.

In the Legislative Council, the party’s primary vote did strengthen but was a subdued 27.79%, which has delivered the Liberals three additional council members on their 2021 numbers.

The Liberals’ traditional inner metropolitan electorates are not in a hurry to return to the party. This may reflect the difficulties for the Liberals in straddling the policy and, perhaps, cultural divides between their traditional inner metropolitan seats, and outer metropolitan and rural and regional seats.

The Nationals increased their lower house contingent, but their statewide primary vote grew by just over 1%, despite fielding four more candidates than they did in 2021. Specifically, the Nationals ran candidates in the (traditionally safe Liberal) inner metropolitan seats of Bateman, Darling Range, Kalamunda and South Perth, ostensibly in response to the Liberals’ pre-election refusal to not run candidates against the Nationals.

However, the Nationals’ primary vote in these inner metropolitan seats averaged around 6.5%, confirming the party’s appeal in metropolitan seats is thin. The Nationals representation in the Legislative Council declined from three to two councillors.

And while the Greens managed to improve their primary vote, it is hard to know whether it is a positive vote for the Greens or a vote against the major parties. The Greens (15.8%) were also out polled by the Teal independent (28.8%) in the inner metropolitan electorate of Fremantle. The Greens might have been expected to have finished in second place behind Labor, not third, in this seat.

What next?

Labor will now have to get on with the business of governing, and hope to be able to do enough in the intervening four years to remain competitive for a fourth term, especially among their own supporters. As expert Ben Raue has pointed out, some of the largest swings against Labor were “in their safer seats”.

The Liberals will have to make a decision about who will lead the parliamentary party. It is unclear whether Libby Mettam will remain the leader. Well before the results were in on election night, her colleague, Steve Thomas, was not prepared to offer his full-throated endorsement.

However, Mettam’s putative successor, Basil Zemplias, did not emerge from this election unscathed, barely scraping a victory in Churchlands despite his high-profile status. Realistically, however, Mettam is the only person with the experience to lead the party in the lower house.

The other relationship to watch is between the Nationals and the Liberals. The two parties are not on great terms, and with the federal seat of Bullwinkel to be fiercely contested, one might expect things between them to get worse before they get better.

Certainly, Nationals leader Shane Love was quick to point out on election night that the Liberals had not been responsive to cooperation. Former Liberal Premier Colin Barnett has suggested the two parties should again entertain a merger. However, given the history between them, it is unlikely.

The election is over, but the reverberation for all parties will be felt for months and years to come.

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. Another decisive Labor win in WA, but much remains at stake – https://theconversation.com/another-decisive-labor-win-in-wa-but-much-remains-at-stake-249693

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jodie Bailie, Senior Research Fellow, The University Centre for Rural Health and The Centre for Disability Research and Policy, University of Sydney

Ex-cyclone Alfred is bringing significant rainfall to southeast Queensland and the Northern Rivers of New South Wales. Flooding has hit Lismore, Ballina, Grafton, Brisbane and Hervey Bay, which received 150 mm of rainfall in two hours this morning.

Tragically, a 61-year-old man died after being swept away in floodwaters near Dorrigo in northern New South Wales.

More heavy rain and flash flooding is expected in the coming days as the weather system moves inland and weakens.

Climate change is making these weather events more intense and frequent. Earlier this year, far north Queensland experienced major flooding. As residents of the Northern Rivers, this latest disaster is especially tough because only three years ago we faced the catastrophic 2022 floods.

We’ve studied the impact of floods on human health and wellbeing, and found floods are linked to a range of physical and mental health effects in both the short- and long-term.

So what might you experience if you live in an area affected by these floods?

We reviewed the evidence

We recently reviewed research on the physical and mental health impacts of floods across mainland Australia. We included 69 studies in our review, published over 70 years. The majority were from the past ten years, examining the effects of floods in Queensland and NSW.

These studies suggest people can expect a range of health impacts. Immediate physical health effects of floods include drowning, falls and injuries.

Chronic diseases such as diabetes or renal disease can also worsen due to factors such as reduced access to transport, health-care services, medications and hospitals.

Exposure to contaminated floodwaters can lead to skin infections, while respiratory problems can occur due to mould and damp housing in the aftermath of floods.

Floods also create ideal conditions for mosquito borne infections such as Ross River virus and Murray Valley encephalitis, while also spreading infectious diseases including leptospirosis, a bacterial infection from contaminated soil.

Read more:
Don’t go wading in flood water if you can help it. It’s a health risk for humans – and dogs too

U

There are mental health consequences too

Our review showed floods also affect mental health. The more you’re exposed to floodwaters in your home or business, the worse the mental health impacts are likely to be.

The After the Flood study examined mental health and wellbeing outcomes six months after the 2017 flood in the Northern Rivers. It found people who had floodwater in their home, yard or business, or who were displaced from their home for a more than six months, were much more likely to have probable post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety or depression, compared to those who didn’t experience flooding or weren’t displaced.

Repeated natural disasters could compound these mental health consequences. Southeast Queensland and the Northern Rivers in NSW have experienced multiple disasters over recent years. The Northern Rivers faced major flooding in 2017, bushfires in 2020, further major floods in 2022, and now Cyclone Alfred in 2025. These repeated disasters have taken a toll on our community, creating a seemingly never-ending cycle of recovery, rebuilding and preparation for the next disaster.

Our understanding of the unique challenges faced by communities which experience multiple disasters is still growing. However, a recent Australian study showed exposure to repeated disasters has a compounding effect on people’s mental health, leading to worse mental health outcomes compared to people who experience a single disaster.

Read more:
Cyclone Alfred is already retraumatising people who’ve lived through other disasters. I’m one of them

Mums and babies

The health effects of floods extend far beyond the initial emergency and beyond the infections and mental health consequences you might expect.

The Queensland Flood Study tracked pregnant women exposed to the 2011 Brisbane floods. Researchers assessed mothers’ stress related to the flood and tracked them and their children at six weeks old, six months, 16 months, 2.5 years, four and six years. It found some links between prenatal stress and developmental outcomes in children.

While the health effects after flooding are diverse, the research to date is not comprehensive. We need to learn more about how floods contribute to or exacerbate existing chronic illnesses, disability and long-term mental health issues.

The impacts are inequitable

Flooding exposes and worsens existing inequalities. Socially vulnerable groups are more likely to be exposed to flooding in their homes and have less access to resources to respond and recover from these events, putting some groups at higher risk of negative health impacts afterwards.

Some research has looked at the disproportionate impacts on people with disabilities and their carers, First Nations communities and people from disadvantaged backgrounds.

After the 2017 Northern Rivers floods, for example, people with disability and their carers were more likely than others to:

• experience disrupted access to food, support networks and essentials such as health care and social services
• continue to be distressed about the flood six months after it happened
• be at relatively high risk of post-traumatic stress disorder six months after the flood.

However, targeted flood research exploring the experiences of these vulnerable groups in Australia is limited.

Moving forward, it’s vital we examine the varied impacts of flood events for more vulnerable groups, so we can better support them in the wake of devastating events such as Cyclone Alfred.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Read more:
Returning home after a flood? Prioritise your health and take it one step at a time

Jodie Bailie is a Chief Investigator on the National Health and Medical Research Council-funded Centre of Research Excellence in Achieving Health Equity for All People with Disabilities (CRE-AHEAD, Grant #2035278).

Jo Longman has received funding from the NSW State Government Disaster Risk Reduction Fund and the Healthy Environments and Lives Innovation Fund. She is affiliated as a volunteer with Plan C’s research team.

Rebecca McNaught has received funding from the Healthy Environments and Lives Innovation Fund. She is a Board member of Plan C.

Ross Bailie is an investigator on several research projects that are supported by funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Australian Research Council.

– ref. Ex-Cyclone Alfred has left flooding in its wake. Here’s how floods affect our health – https://theconversation.com/ex-cyclone-alfred-has-left-flooding-in-its-wake-heres-how-floods-affect-our-health-251488

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

The “maybe” March 25 budget is now a definite, the government’s hand forced by cyclone Alfred.

Anthony Albanese held open his option of calling an April 12 poll this weekend until the battering winds and waves and certain flooding made totally clear on Friday what had been obvious to many people from the start. Announcing an election on the back of a cyclone would be madness.

But the prime minister couldn’t quite bring himself to admit the April poll had been in his sights, although that was widely acknowledged within the government. He told the ABC late Friday, “I have very clearly said for a long period of time that we announced last year we’d produce a budget on March 25. That certainly is my clear intention, and has been.”

Which doesn’t exactly fit with quite a few people around the government, who had been on election alert, being left discombobulated by the turn of events.

This unavoidable budget presents opportunities and risks for the government.

It will frame the campaign that follows for a May election (the options are May 3, 10 or 17), and elevate the status of measures it contains (likely to include more relief for energy bills) from campaign promises.

It will also put front and centre the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, the government’s best communicator.

On the downside, as many have said, it will highlight a string of deficits. But independent economist Chris Richardson points out these numbers would have come out anyway, either in an economic statement the government probably would have brought down if there was no budget or (compulsorily) in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook (PEFO) prepared by Treasury and Finance and released in the campaign.

Richardson also argues that, deficits notwithstanding, the government will have good news to emphasise in the budget, about falling inflation and strong employment, plus revenue improvements since the mid-year budget update in December.

The government has already been announcing big spending items this year so it can’t afford, if it is being responsible, to throw too much more money around on March 25.

The pressures on the budget will be increased by the costs imposed by Alfred. Albanese said on Saturday, “This will have an impact on the national economy – there’s no question about that. Already it’s having an impact.”

The prime minister adopted a particularly high profile in the days leading up to and during the cyclone (even though state governments carry the big loads). The message is his government is here to, and able to, support people in times of trouble and need. There is the opportunity to use the experience of the cyclone to make this a more general theme in the budget – that the government has your back. That’s assuming the aftermath of the cyclone is not filled with stories of things going wrong.

Many in the commentariat are likely to approach the budget with a mindset of scepticism, just because it will be an election budget. This means the publicity around it might be more negative than positive.

Budget week will give opposition leader Peter Dutton the traditional reply on the Thursday night. Depending on how he handles himself, this could be a useful platform for him. On the other hand, an unconvincing speech would be damaging.

Then there are the Senate estimates hearings. These can be dangerous for a government, affording the opposition a forum to pull the budget apart and in practice to range more widely in quizzing officials.

We saw last week how potent Senate hearings can be, when they exposed details around the Chinese Navy’s live-fire exercise in the Tasman Sea. The hearings revealed the extent to which Australia had been caught short.

Back in the government’s engine room at the weekend, they say most of the major decisions for the budget have been taken. The focus will turn to last minute tinkering, and the messaging and cosmetics. But before he gets to that, Chalmers on Saturday was out and about in his Brisbane community of Logan, where the preoccupation remained the aftermath of now ex-tropical cyclone Alfred.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Alfred forces Albanese into budget of risks and opportunities – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-alfred-forces-albanese-into-budget-of-risks-and-opportunities-251622

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Westrupp, Associate Professor in Psychology, Deakin University

Cyclones and floods are terrifying and unpredictable. The stress of ensuring your family’s safety, worrying about what might happen and then coping with the aftermath can feel overwhelming.

Some parents are also managing kids and young people through the crisis. You may be worrying about how these events may impact your kids going forward.

The situation is obviously very serious, but there are steps parents can take to protect their children and help them navigate the (now ex-tropical cyclone), flooding and the days that follow.

How we cope matters

Research shows the way we feel (for example, worry, fear, hope, confident) during and after traumatic events, can impact our longer-term mental health and wellbeing.

We might think distress is the most common reaction after a natural disaster. But in many cases, we can experience positive personal growth.

Research shows families do better when they actively work together, helping each other and problem-solving. Finding practical solutions together can give us a sense of control and connection.

Research also suggests if we have feelings of hope and confidence during difficult times, it can build resilience.

One way to help reduce distress is to accept the situation and acknowledge everyone’s emotions all the way through. This also helps build a sense of security and support.

Research also shows extreme reactions – such as fixating on the event/news and becoming highly distressed – or ignoring and suppressing emotions, can make it harder to cope and increase our distress.

So parents, keep calm and carry on

Parents are role models, and in stressful times, children look to us to understand the situation and how to respond.

If parents are visibly upset, fearful or anxious, it can make the situation feel out of control for children.

So while you are understandably experiencing a range of emotions, it’s helpful to process them away from young children. With older children, you can share feelings of sadness or fear, but it’s still important to remain calm to show that everything will be okay.

Sticking to familiar routines helps both you and your child feel safe. It reassures them when life continues. So, go about daily activities as best you can.

Talk things through if you need

This is not to say you should ignore the cyclone or events related to it.

Talking openly about the situation helps children understand what’s happening and gives parents the chance to reassure their kids. There’s no need to go into excessive detail – a calm, simple and factual response is usually the most effective way to comfort them.

All children are different. Some may be naturally anxious or sensitive, while others may pay less attention to what’s happening around them. In general, children are more capable of handling difficult or distressing events than we might expect.

If your child is upset or anxious, it’s important to acknowledge their emotions and listen. Empathise with your child — what has happened is frightening and their response is completely natural.

Parents may feel tempted to dismiss their child’s fears (“don’t think about it!”) to avoid making the situation worse, but emotions don’t work that way. By allowing children to express their feelings, you help them process and move through their emotions.

Read more:
How to get your kids to talk about their feelings

Restoring normal life after the storm

Once the cyclone passes, children may still feel unsettled – something big has just happened, could it happen again? It’s possible power and water are cut off, there’s flooding, or the family home is damaged, making things feel strange.

Helping them find ways to feel confident and hopeful can help speed up their recovery. Reassure your child the cyclone is over and keep offering them space to talk about what happened if they wish.

Though keep in mind, it’s important to strike a balance — while it’s helpful to let children express their emotions and connect with you, too much talk about the scary event can increase anxiety and fear.

Find things to do together to keep busy. Simple activities like arts and crafts, cooking together, or spending time outside (if it’s safe) can help restore a sense of normalcy.

If your child seems to be struggling more than expected, consider reaching out to your health professional or your child’s school for further support.

For more support and advice you can contact KidsHelpline on 1800 55 1800 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is affiliated with the Parenting and Family Research Alliance, Editor-in-Chief of Mental Health & Prevention, and is a registered clinical psychologist.

Emma Marshall was a recipient of a Fulbright Science and Innovation award

– ref. How can parents talk to their kids about Cyclone Alfred? – https://theconversation.com/how-can-parents-talk-to-their-kids-about-cyclone-alfred-251712

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steve Turton, Adjunct Professor of Environmental Geography, CQUniversity Australia

After a wet and wild night, residents of southeast Queensland and northeast New South Wales are assessing the damage wrought by Cyclone Alfred, which has been downgraded to a tropical low. While the damaging winds have dissipated, heavy rain and the potential for major flooding is the main concern now.

The low is expected to cross the mainland coast between Maroochydore and Bribie Island on Saturday morning, before moving inland and weakening later in the day.

Heavy rain and possible flash flooding is possible on Saturday and Sunday in parts of the Mid North Coast and Northern Rivers in NSW. Rivers are rising. Severe weather warnings and flood warnings are current for southeast Queensland and northeast NSW.

According to media reports, Lismore was expected to flood around noon and low-lying surrounding areas were already flooded.

Six-hourly rainfall totals between 70mm and 130mm are likely, and may reach about 200mm in Queensland’s Border Ranges. Over a 24-hour period, rainfall totals between 150mm and 200mm are likely, and may increase to between 200mm and 300mm in some areas.

As of Saturday morning, authorities had asked Queensland residents in the storm’s path to take shelter. The State Emergency Service says northern NSW is facing “three natural disasters in one”, with gale-force winds, heavy rain and widespread flooding expected over the coming days.

In short: the danger is not over. Residents in affected areas should remain cautious and heed official advice, to keep themselves safe.

High alert for heavy rain

Intense rain bands are forming between converging (or colliding) winds: warm, moist winds from the northeast, and southeast winds from the Coral Sea. As the winds converge, they push saturated air into cooler parts of the atmosphere where it condenses and may fall as torrential rain.

These rain bands can be very slow-moving, sometimes sitting almost stationary for hours. This means they can dump huge amounts of water.

That’s what we need to watch for now. If a slow-moving rain band forms over a catchment area, it could lead to dangerous flash flooding.

At the moment, a convergence zone seems to be forming over the south Sunshine Coast and north Brisbane. This may mean northern NSW may not bear the worst of the rain. However, that region has received solid rain over the past few days and is certainly not off the hook yet.

Northern NSW has already been hit by devastating flooding in recent years, most recently in February 2022. Many of its settlements, including Lismore, are along or close to major river courses. Residents are understandably anxious about what the next few days of rain may bring.

Heavy rainfall in the Brisbane catchments remains a major concern. In Brisbane, some 20,000 properties have been warned of impacts ranging from minor inundation in yards to significant flooding inside homes. Areas most at risk include Nudgee Beach, Brighton, Windsor, Ashgrove, Morningside and Rocklea.

The below flood maps were produced by Brisbane City Council earlier this week. Note, they include the potential for storm surge risk which is all but dissipated now.

Watching the winds and beach erosion

Overnight, high winds caused quite a lot of damage, including trees coming down on houses.

While the cyclonic winds have dissipated, there’s a risk that thunderstorms will drag down stronger winds from higher in the atmosphere on Saturday. Thunderstorm activity is possible from Brisbane’s south down to northern NSW. Some areas may experience damaging wind gusts as rain squalls come through.

Coastal erosion will continue for a while yet. Cyclone Alfred released a lot of energy into the ocean and that will take a while to release as damaging swells.

Swells remain high from the northern Sunshine Coast down to northern NSW, and beaches remain closed.

Beaches have been pummelled over the past few days, eating into the sand and creating cliff faces in dunes. Much work will be needed over the next few weeks and months to restore that sand.

Widespread power outages

According to the ABC, more than 200,000 homes were without power on Friday across south-east Queensland and northern NSW. The problem was set to worsen on Saturday.

Emergency officials have warned residents not to approach downed powerlines because they may be live.

What next?

The below map released by the bureau on Saturday predicts the weather system’s future movement and intensity. The grey zone indicates the range of tracks the centre of the ex-cyclone centre may follow.

It shows the system tracking west on Saturday, out to near the town of Dalby, then heading to the southwest.

This movement will take moisture with it, bringing rain to some inland catchments from Saturday evening and into Sunday.

The rainfall predictions are dependent on the movement and position of this erratic weather system.

If it slows down inland near the coast on Saturday, the ex-cyclone will keep feeding itself with moisture from the ocean.

This cyclone has already tricked scientists a few times over the past fortnight. We will continue to watch it closely.

Steve Turton has previously received funding from the federal government.

– ref. After the winds, now comes the rain and floods. Here’s what you need to know about ex-Cyclone Alfred – https://theconversation.com/after-the-winds-now-comes-the-rain-and-floods-heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-ex-cyclone-alfred-251793

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Genauer, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Flinders University

On March 3, US President Donald Trump paused all US military aid to Ukraine. This move was apparently triggered by a heated exchange a few days earlier between Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office.

In response, European Union leaders have now committed to rearm Europe by mobilising €800 billion (about A$1.4 trillion) in defence spending.

26 of the EU leaders (excluding Hungary) signed an agreement that peace for Ukraine must be accompanied by “robust and credible” security guarantees.

They agreed there can be no negotiations on Ukraine without Ukraine’s participation. It was also agreed the EU will continue to provide regular military and non-military support to Ukraine.

This jump in defence spending is unprecedented for the EU, with 2024 spending hitting a previous record high of €326 billion (A$558 billion).

At the same time, the United Kingdom has committed to the biggest increase in defence spending since the Cold War.

The EU’s united front will create strong defences and deter a direct attack on EU nations.

However, for Ukraine, it will not lead to a military victory in its war with Russia. While Europe has stepped up funding, this is not sufficient for Ukraine to defeat Russian forces currently occupying about 20% of the country.

For Ukraine, the withdrawal of US support will severely strain their ability to keep fighting. Ukraine will likely need to find a way to freeze the conflict this year. This may mean a temporary truce that does not formally cede Ukrainian territory to Russia.

A Trumpian worldview

The vastly different approaches of the US under Trump and the EU point to a deeper ideological divide.

While the Trump administration has acted more quickly and assertively in foreign affairs than many expected, its approach is not surprising.

Since Trump won the US presidential election in November last year, Europe and Ukraine have known that a shift in US policy would be on the cards.

Trump’s approach to Ukraine is not only about economic concerns and withdrawing US military aid. It is about a deeper, more significant clash of worldviews.

Trump (and, it appears, his core support base) hold a “great power politics” approach to world affairs.

This approach assumes we live in a competitive world where countries are motivated to maximise gains and dominate. Outcomes can be achieved through punishments or rewards.

Countries with greater military or economic strength “count” more. They are expected to impose their will on weaker countries. This viewpoint underpinned much of the colonial activity of the 19th and 20th centuries.

This worldview expects conflict – and it expects stronger countries to “win”.

Consistent with Trump’s outlook, Russia is a regional power that has the “right” to control smaller countries in its neighbourhood.

Trump’s approach to Ukraine is not an anomaly. Nor is it a temporary and spontaneous measure to grab the global spotlight.

Trump’s worldview leads to the logical and consistent conclusion that Russia will seek to control countries within its sphere of influence.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine represented an attempt to impose its will on a militarily weaker country that it considered to be in its rightful domain of control.

The EU alternative

Contrary to this view, the EU is founded on the premise that countries can work together for mutual gains through collaboration and consensus. This approach underpins the operation of what are called the Bretton Woods Institutions created in the aftermath of World War II.

This worldview expects collaboration rather than conflict. Mutually beneficial and cooperative solutions are found through dialogue and negotiation.

According to this perspective, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is about a conflict between the values of a liberal democracy and those of an oppressive authoritarian regime.

Zelensky has himself consistently framed the conflict as being about a clash of values: freedom and democracy versus authoritarianism and control.

A mix of both?

Since Trump’s second inauguration, European leaders have presented a united front, motivated by facing a world where US military backing cannot be guaranteed.

However, there is internal division within European countries. Recent years has seen a sharp rise in anti-EU sentiment within EU member states. The UK’s exit from the EU is an example of this phenomenon.

EU leaders previously followed a path of cooperation with Russia, with limited success. Following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, France and Germany helped mediate the Minsk Agreements. These agreements, signed in 2014 and 2015, were designed to prevent further incursions by Russian-backed groups into Ukrainian sovereign territory.

This did not prevent Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

In an emerging new world order, leadership might require going beyond the seeming contradiction of a focus on military strength or cooperation. Leaders may need to integrate both.

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

– ref. The EU will spend billions more on defence. It’s a powerful statement – but won’t do much for Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/the-eu-will-spend-billions-more-on-defence-its-a-powerful-statement-but-wont-do-much-for-ukraine-251710

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amy Peden, NHMRC Research Fellow, School of Population Health & co-founder UNSW Beach Safety Research Group, UNSW Sydney

Social media is awash with images of surfers chasing waves as Cyclone Alfred whips up seas off Australia’s east coast.

Queensland Premier David Crisafulli has branded beachgoers as “idiots”. On Friday morning, he said those going to the beach as the cyclone approaches put themselves and emergency services at risk, adding:

I plead to the people who might think that now is a great time to go out on the surf – it’s not. It’s not just for you I’m concerned, but for the innocent person who has to go in after you.

Sightseers have been caught in storm surges, and rescuers have been forced into the surf to help others. Up and down the coast, beaches are closed.

In Queensland, surfers have been warned they may face fines up to $16,000 for reckless behaviour.

Despite all this, surfers and others continue to enter the water. It’s important to ask why – and what will it take to get them to stop?

Only a surfer knows the feeling

I research injury prevention with a focus on drowning and safety in the water. As cofounder of the UNSW Beach Safety Research Group, I have also led research into surfing.

Surfers frequently chase waves in big surf. Research by my colleagues and I shows under normal conditions, surfers have a lower risk of dying during this activity than people taking part in other water-related activities such as swimming, wading, snorkelling and scuba diving.

Although drowning is the leading cause of death while surfing, other severe injuries are relatively rare.

Of course, injuries can occur. These include cervical spine fractures and other spinal cord injuries, head injuries and lacerations. These can be due to collision with a surfboard, a fin, or the ocean floor.

Yet most surfers usually manage to avoid serious injury. Throw some mega waves into the mix, however, and things can turn deadly, fast.

Research shows the risk of injury is almost 2.5 times higher when surfing in waves that were over head height or bigger, relative to other waves.

Despite this, the lure of experiencing record-breaking waves can be hard to ignore.

Research shows surfers are motivated by what’s known as “sensation seeking”. In other words, they are more likely to seek out intense experiences than those who participate in other, less extreme sports.

The desire to “master nature” – or go into battle with a big wave and come out on top – has been documented in analyses of surfing motivation.

For big wave surfers, the reward – and the risk – can can be even greater. The physical and mental preparation needed to take on such extremes are immense. Tragically, deaths do occur even when attempts are made to improve safety.

This desire to take risks in the water contributes to the over-representation of males in drowning statistics.

Such risk-taking behaviour often plays out on social media in aquatic locations and during extreme weather events.

Other hazards, above and below the surface

Beyond the waves, other hazards can cause increased risk of ill health and injury in stormy seas. Debris can increase the risk of blunt-force trauma, while fecal and other bacteria in stormwater can cause illness.

Sea foam should not be considered harmless either, having been implicated in rescues and tragic cases of drowning in the past.

In the long term, coastal erosion due to storm surges and powerful surf can create permanent changes, impacting infrastructure and changing the location and strength of rip currents – the number-one coastal drowning hazard.

Read more:
Can you spot a rip current? Test your knowledge with our interactive quiz

Don’t be that idiot

Having a cyclone this far south is a rare event, so it’s only natural for people to want to take a look. But sometimes there’s no safe viewing distance, and the safest place to be is at home.

Unsafe behaviours in and around the surf are rife on social media. Mainstream media outlets often model unsafe behaviours too, with reporters delivering their “piece to camera” about the importance of staying away from the beach while themselves standing on the shore.

Conditions are unpredictable. These include powerful waves and storm surges that can knock you off your feet and sweep you out to sea.

Remember, emergency services are stretched right now. If you get into trouble in the surf, there may be no one to rescue you. Or untrained bystanders may come to your aid and get into trouble themselves.

With numerous flood warnings in place and roads closed, as well as the risks present on the coast, it’s best to stay away from beaches, rock platforms and coastal areas for now. Hit the waves again when conditions have calmed down.

Read more:
Just 15 centimetres of water can float a car – but we are failing to educate drivers about the dangers of floodwaters

Amy Peden receives funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Surf Life Saving Australia and the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. She maintains an honorary (unpaid) affiliation with Royal Life Saving Society – Australia.

– ref. ‘Don’t be that idiot’: surfing in a cyclone could cost you $16,000 or your life – https://theconversation.com/dont-be-that-idiot-surfing-in-a-cyclone-could-cost-you-16-000-or-your-life-251706

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Henderson, Chief Engineer, Cyclone Testing Station, James Cook University

People in southeast Queensland and northern NSW have spent days racing to prepare their homes ahead of Tropical Cyclone Alfred, now expected to make landfall over several hours on Saturday.

It’s not possible to completely cyclone-proof a house. But there’s a lot you can do – in the short and long term – to boost the resilience of your home and reduce damage caused by future cyclones.

How winds affects pressure on and in the house

Strong winds generate pressure pushing and pulling on the outside and inside of a house.

When wind gusts hit a building, the wind is pushing on what we call the windward wall and going up and over the roof, creating a suction effect. The wind is trying very hard to peel the roof off your house, and in a cyclone is hammering the building for many hours.

If a windward window or door blows in or gets broken by debris, wind instantaneously enters the space. This almost doubles the load that the roof now has to resist.

In southeast Queensland and northern NSW, housing is not typically designed to resist that extra upward load on the roof if a door or window blows in.

Cyclone resilience is about maintaining the function of a building during severe weather, so even if there is some damage, it still can be used after the storm has passed. So it’s vital the roof stays on.

In practice, that means thinking about what’s known as the “tie down chain” – how all pieces of the house are held together to carry the wind loads from the roof to the ground.

A weak link in this tie down chain can lead to winds lifting entire roofs from homes. All the connections involved in keeping a roof on the house are exceptionally important.

Weather resistance in building codes is generally designed for rain that falls straight down and flows off the roof.

But in a cyclone, rain can come horizontally. It can get pushed under the the roof, into gutters and under sliding doors. And it’s not just a little bit – buckets and buckets of water can inundate a house.

Wind pressure can also mean water is blown into the house through gaps you may not even know existed. Wind-driven rain ingress can happen at wind speeds that don’t cause structural damage.

It comes in under doors and through windows, including holes in window sills. It can lead to buildings being unusable and a large number of insurance claims.

Dispelling major myths

You might have seen people taping a big “X” on their windows and glass doors. Unfortunately, this doesn’t really do much to improve window strength.

Some people put the tape on and then, during the cyclone, sit there watching their glass flex, falsely believing tape magically makes the window stronger. This is incredibly dangerous. If that glass shatters, the bystander would be hit by shards of glass travelling at high speed.

It is much better to tape a garbage bag or a sheet of plastic along the bottom of the window sill and tape it up about 300mm each side. It can then catch the water that seeps in the window and allows it to flow back out when the wind pressure drops.

Sometimes people open a window to reduce pressure inside the house that happens if a door or window breaks. It’s true this might reduce some pressure, but it depends which side of the house is currently being hit by wind. And given wind direction can change during a cyclone, emergency services recommend it’s better just to stay sheltered in the smallest room; they don’t want you standing in front of a window during a cyclone.

Close all internal doors so if any windows do blow in, the high pressure is restricted to just that room (not spread throughout the house).

Designing beyond the bare minimum

Building codes require buildings to build to a “wind classification” according to the “wind zone” of that area.

Buildings are often built only to the minimum standard of the Building Code. However, if we want a house to function after an extreme tropical cyclone, we should consider building beyond the minimum standard using resilience features that will keep your roof on in a cyclone and minimise the entry of rainwater.

Cyclone resilience also includes incorporating resilient building materials in your home – such as linoleum or vinyl floors instead of carpet, and ceilings from fibre-cement sheeting instead of plasterboard.

Eternal vigilance

It’s also important all elements holding your house together are well maintained through the life of the building.

That means ensuring regular inspections by a trained professional to identify any potential weaknesses such as rot, rust or UV damage.

These inspections are not something you and a mate can do yourselves. It requires a building professionals to get into the roof and look for weak spots.

Think beyond your house. What about the carport? A pergola? That shed or patio you added? Are the solar panels installed correctly with the right fixings and brackets to resist the wind forces?

If all these things are not fixed down and maintained well, strong winds can pick them up and throw them at your house or your neighbours.

Just as you get your car serviced, you should get your house checked every five to seven years. Our homes have many important parts and a failure in one can lead to disastrous and expensive problems.

David Henderson serves on committees for Standards Australia. He is a member of Engineers Australia and has done consulting work with the Resilient Building Council.

Geoffrey Boughton serves on committees for Standards Australia. He is a member of Engineers Australia and has done consulting work with the Resilient Building Council.

– ref. How cyclones rip apart houses – and how to boost the chance your home stays standing – https://theconversation.com/how-cyclones-rip-apart-houses-and-how-to-boost-the-chance-your-home-stays-standing-251709

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Smith, Associate Professor and Discipline Lead (Paramedicine), La Trobe University

In 2011, as Cyclone Yasi approached the Queensland coast, I sat in my home in the tropical far north of the state and worried what the future would hold. Would my family be OK? Would our home be destroyed? Would my workplace be damaged and my job uncertain? Would my community be devastated?

Now, as we wait for Cyclone Alfred to make landfall, I am watching on from my new home in Melbourne. I am safe. But last night, I couldn’t sleep. I’m having intrusive thoughts, remembering what it was like when Cyclone Yasi barrelled into us. I feel agitated, distracted and anxious. The news coverage of the impending cyclone makes my heart race, so I have turned off the television.

As someone who has researched the impact of disasters for more than 20 years, I recognise what I am feeling now is similar to how I felt all those years ago. Again, I am experiencing the normal range of stress reactions common after living through a disaster, even though I am not directly impacted by this one.

This is known as retraumatisation, where we re-live stress reactions experienced as a result of a traumatic event when faced with a new, similar incident.

As a researcher in emergency responses to a broad range of disasters, I understand why I am feeling like this.

However, many people may not realise the stress they are experiencing right now is related to an earlier disaster or traumatic event in their life. That earlier disaster could be another cyclone, or a different event, such as a flood or bushfire.

Some signs and symptoms of retraumatisation might be:

• intrusive thoughts (for example, I keep remembering my fear of the predicted tidal surge of water rushing up at me in the darkness as Cyclone Yasi made landfall)

• nightmares and having trouble sleeping

• hypervigilance (for example, feeling “on edge” all day)

• sensitivity to triggers (for example, the sound of intense wind and windows creaking can trigger intense feelings because they remind me of the night we lived through Cyclone Yasi passing over the top of us)

• feeling isolated

• thinking about, planning or attempting suicide

• panic atacks

• using/abusing substances, such as alcohol and other drugs

• increase in unhealthy behaviours (for example, being more prone to aggression or violence).

For many of us, Cyclone Alfred is awakening memories and feelings, and the re-emergence of those stress reactions can be confronting. It can feel like re-opening a wound that hasn’t quite healed.

Disaster upon disaster take their toll

We are now beginning to understand the effects of being exposed to multiple disasters – bushfires, cyclones, floods, and let’s not forget the COVID pandemic – that erode our resilience.

This type of multiple exposure influences our feelings of safety, security and even our hope for the future, all increasing the risk of poorer mental health.

For people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), retraumatisation may cause people to relive their past traumas in intense detail. It can feel like past traumatic events are happening all over again.

What to do now, and in the future

However, there are steps we can take to help build our resilience in the face of multiple disasters.

For now

Right now, it is useful to understand how we respond to trauma. We may notice a range of physical responses (for example, my heart has been racing), psychological reactions (for example, I am feeling more anxious than usual) and social impacts (for example, I cancelled dinner plans last night as I did not want to leave the house).

It is also important to stay connected to our usual social supports, as they can act as a great buffer to stress reactions.

So, even though I stayed home last night, I was on a group chat discussing the Real Housewives of Sydney with friends, which helped reduce both the physical and psychological stress reactions I was experiencing.

For later

In the longer term, it is useful to develop and implement a self-care plan that includes activities to support our emotional, physical and spiritual health.

Self-care means taking the time to do things that help your wellbeing and improve your physical health and mental health. This can help you manage the stress reactions that may emerge as part of retraumatisation. Even small acts of self-care in your daily life can have a big impact.

Today, I made the time to go for a short walk in the park and listened to some of my favourite music. It helped in the moment, but it also helps me in the longer term when I routinely include these small acts of self-care in my daily life.

We also need to consider the first responders and volunteers who will be preparing for Cyclone Alfred, and communities devastated by similar disasters in the past (for example, the 2022 floods in Lismore, New South Wales). With their exposure to cumulative trauma, these groups will need ongoing, focused support.

Most importantly, we need to understand that the way we are feeling is normal. Be patient with yourself and look for small opportunities to take control of your reactions.

I am keeping the television turned off (except when the Real Housewives is on).

Some resources

The website blueknot, from the National Centre of Excellence for Complex Trauma, gives more information about how we respond to trauma. The Black Dog Institute guides you through developing a self-care plan.

If you are a first responder, you can access free treatment and support through a range of providers, including: Phoenix Australia, Fortem Australia and the Black Dog Institute.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Erin Smith 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. Cyclone Alfred is already retraumatising people who’ve lived through other disasters. I’m one of them – https://theconversation.com/cyclone-alfred-is-already-retraumatising-people-whove-lived-through-other-disasters-im-one-of-them-251701

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Prema Arasu, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Minderoo-UWA Deep-Sea Research Centre, The University of Western Australia

In February, researchers from conservation organisation Condrik Tenerife were about two kilometres off the coast of Tenerife Island, looking for sharks, when they caught sight of something much stranger.

Photographer David Jara Boguñá filmed a humpback anglerfish (Melanocetus johnsonii, a species of black seadevil) swimming near the surface in sunlit waters. These fish have never before been seen alive in daylight, as they normally dwell in the “twilight zone” at depths from 200m to 600m.

The video has provoked an enormously empathetic response on social media, with some seeing the fish as a feminist icon or an Icarus-like figure who swam too close to the Sun. The reaction shows our views of the deep sea – long ignored or seen as a realm of monsters – may at last be changing.

The strange lives of anglerfish

Anglerfish are much smaller than you probably think they are. The specimen Boguñá filmed was a female, which typically grow up to 15cm long.

The creatures are named for their bioluminescent lure (or esca). This modified dorsal fin ray can produce a glow used to fish (or angle) for prey in the dim depths of the sea. The bioluminescence is produced by symbiotic bacteria that live inside the bulbous head of the esca.

Male anglerfish lack the iconic lure and are much smaller, usually reaching a length of only 3cm.

A male anglerfish spends the first part of his life searching for a female to whom he will then attach himself. He will eventually fuse his circulatory system with hers, depending on her entirely for nutrients, and live out his life as a parasite or “living testicle”.

It is unknown why this fish was swimming vertically near the surface. Researchers have speculated that the behaviour may have been related to changes in water temperature, or that the fish was simply at the end of her life.

Watchers observed the fish for several hours, until it died. Its body was preserved and taken to the Museum of Nature and Archaeology in Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where it will be further studied.

Sympathy for the seadevil

The video quickly went viral, inspiring countless reaction videos, artworks, memes, a Pixar-style animation and a poem titled Icarus is the Anglerfish.

One Reddit user commented:

I like to think she is a respected old grandmother who has dreamed her entire life of seeing the sunlight and the world above the water. She knows her time is nigh so she bade farewell to her friends and family and swam up towards the light and whatever it might hold for her as her life as an anglerfish comes to a close.

One person described the fish as her “feminist Roman Empire”, in the sense of an inspirational obsession that filled the same role for her that the Roman Empire supposedly does for many men.

Boguñá and Condrik Tenerife have since commented on the public reaction. (The original post is in Spanish, but Instagram’s automated English translation is below.)

He’s become a global icon, that’s clear. But far from the romanticisation and attempt to humanise that has been given to its tragic story, I think that what this event has been for is to awaken the curiosity of the sea to PEOPLE, especially the younger ones, and perhaps, it also serves that messages about marine ecosystem conservation can reach so many more people.

From horrors to heroes

The outpouring of empathy for the anglerfish is unexpected. With their glowing lures and fang-filled mouths, the creatures have long been archetypal horrors of the abyss.

As I have written elsewhere, the anglerfish’s extreme sexual dimorphism and parasitism, along with its unsettling anatomy, have made it the “iconic ambassador of the deep sea”. Anglerfish or angler-inspired aliens have appeared as antagonists in films such as Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999), Finding Nemo (2003), The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie (2004) and Luca (2021).

The reception of “Icarus” (as some call her) in popular culture indicates a perhaps surprising capacity for empathy toward animals that aren’t conventionally cute or beautiful. It stands in stark contrast to the fate of the deep-sea blobfish Psychrolutes marcidus, which in 2013 was voted the world’s ugliest animal.

Perhaps the name is a clue: people have seen in the fish a creature striving to reach the light, who died as a result of her quest.

But does our projection of human emotions and desires onto non-human animals risk misunderstanding scientific reality? Almost certainly – but, as US environmental humanities researcher Stacy Alaimo has argued, it may also have benefits:

Deep-sea creatures are often pictured as aliens from another planet, and I think that gets people interested in them because we’re all interested in novelty and weirdness and the surreal […] I think that can be positive, but the idea of the alien can also cut us off from any responsibility.

The deep sea and its inhabitants face growing threats from seabed mining, plastic pollution, and the effects of human-induced climate change. They need all the empathy they can get.

Prema Arasu 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. ‘Icarus of the deep’: how a dying anglerfish became a social media sensation – https://theconversation.com/icarus-of-the-deep-how-a-dying-anglerfish-became-a-social-media-sensation-251603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ramona Zharfpeykan, Lecturer, Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Despite large multinational companies such as Goldman Sachs, Paramount, Google and others removing their diversity, equity and inclusion policies, the evidence is clear: having a diverse team can help businesses make better, more empathetic decisions.

At the top level, a growing body of research shows having more women on corporate boards leads to better decision-making, stronger governance and improved environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance.

Yet, progress remains slow – even in New Zealand. Though we rank highly on the Human Development Index, the country lags behind in leadership gender equality.

Women make up 50.8% of the population and hold 40.8% of parliamentary leadership roles. But they hold only 28.5% of board seats and 26.4% of executive roles in the New Zealand’s Stock Exchange (NZX) top 50 companies (the NZX50).

And while businesses are encouraged to disclose gender diversity policies by the NZX, there are no mandatory quotas, leaving progress uneven.

However, change is happening. Our new research looked at the the percentage of female directors in NZX-listed firms between 2016 and 2022.

What we found is positive. Using information from financial infrastructure and data provider LSEG’s database on global financial markets, we identified a rise in the number of female directors on corporate boards. We also saw a corresponding improvement in the firms’ ESG performance.

Boosting performance

Between 2016 and 2022, the proportion of female directors in NZX-listed firms increased from 26% to 36%. These same businesses saw an average 33% improvement in their ESG performance.

Notably, governance – one of the key ESG pillars – improved significantly, with a 31% increase on average. Governance specifically refers to the effectiveness of the firm’s management systems, board structure and capacity to protect shareholder interests.

While it’s not possible to say outright that having more women on the board directly influenced governance outcomes, we saw a positive relationship between the two. This suggests having more women in leadership strengthens corporate oversight and ethical decision making.

Gender diversity does not have the same level of importance in all contexts. While social and environmental performance also improved, this study found no significant link between a more gender-diverse board and these higher scores in social and environmental performance.

Our findings are supported by overseas research suggesting board diversity does not strongly influence sustainability outcomes when it comes to issues and groups already covered by legislation.

Therefore, New Zealand’s proactive stance on issues such as the environment, poverty and human rights, as well as encouraging private companies to improve sustainability and transparency, may explain why board diversity had no notable impact on social and environmental performance in this study.

What women bring to the business

Our findings align with studies completed overseas.

In the US, one study found women business leaders tended to prioritise transparency, fairness and stakeholder interests. This made them strong advocates for sustainable and inclusive business practices.

It’s clear that addressing the gender gap in corporate New Zealand isn’t just about fairness. It’s about economic success. Businesses that embrace diversity perform better, attract top talent and enhance their reputations.

The solution isn’t simply about enforcing quotas, but ensuring more qualified women are placed in leadership roles. Companies need to move beyond a “compliance mindset” and recognise true diversity strengthens governance, reduces risk and drives long-term success.

As the world celebrates International Women’s Day on March 8, businesses need to realise that increasing female representation at the top isn’t just the right thing to do – it’s the smart thing to do.

Ramona Zharfpeykan 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. Diversity helps: a new study shows more women on boards can improve how businesses are managed – https://theconversation.com/diversity-helps-a-new-study-shows-more-women-on-boards-can-improve-how-businesses-are-managed-251473

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Gaunson, Associate Professor in Cinema Studies, RMIT University

Some 50 years ago, on March 1 1975, Australian television stations officially moved to colour.

Networks celebrated the day, known as “C-Day”, with unique slogans such as “come to colour” (ABC TV), “Seven colours your world” (Seven Network), “living colour” (Nine Network) and “first in colour” (0-10 Network, which later became Network Ten). The ABC, Seven and Nine networks also updated their logos to incorporate colour.

For most viewers, however, nothing looked much different. The majority owned a black and white TV, while a coloured broadcast required a colour TV set.

Advertisers were initially reluctant to accept the change, which required them to re-shoot black and white commercials with colour stock at a significantly higher cost.

Many reasoned viewers were still watching the ads in black and white. And initially this assumption was correct. But by nine months later, 17% of Australian homes had a colour receiver. This rose to 31% by July 1976.

By 1978, 64% of Melbourne and 70% of Sydney households owned colour TV sets, making Australia one of the world’s fastest adopters of colour TV.

According to the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations (FACTS) annual report for 1975–76, colour TV increased overall viewership by 5%, with people watching for longer periods.

The 1976 Montreal Olympics also led to an increase in TV sales, with the colour broadcast shared between the ABC, Seven and Nine.

A late start

With the United States introducing colour TV from 1954, it’s peculiar that Australia took so long to make the transition – especially since conversations about this had been underway since the 1960s.

In 1965, a report outlining the process and economic considerations of transitioning to colour was tabled in parliament.

Feedback from the US highlighted problems around broader acceptance in the marketplace. Colour TV sets were expensive and most programs were still being shot in black and white, despite the availability of colour.

Networks were the most hesitant (even though they’d go on to become one of the most major benefactors). In 1969, it was estimated transitioning to colour would cost the ABC A$46 million (the equivalent of $265,709,944 today) over six years.

The federal government, led by then prime minister Robert Menzies, decided to take a cautious approach to the transition – allowing manufacturers, broadcasters and the public time to prepare.

The first colour “test” broadcast took place on June 15 1967, with live coverage of a Pakenham country horse racing event in Victoria (although few people would have had coloured TV sets at this point).

Other TV shows also tested broadcasting in colour between 1972 and 1974, with limited colour telecasts aired from mid-1974. It wasn’t until March 1975 that colour TV was being transmitted permanently.

The cinema industry panics

Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam War created further urgency to televise in colour. With the war ending in April 1975, Australians watched the last moments in colour.

Other significant events broadcast in colour that year included the December federal election, in which Malcolm Fraser defeated Gough Whitlam after the latter was dramatically dismissed as prime minister on November 11.

With the public’s growing interest in colour TV, local manufacturers began lobbying for higher tariffs on imports to encourage domestic colour TV production.

In the mid 1970s, a new colour set in Australia cost between $1,000 and $1,300, while the average full-time annual income was around $8,000. Still in the throes of a financial recession, customers began seeking out illegally-imported colour TV sets – which were appearing at car boot markets across the country.

The government also created an advertising campaign warning the public of scammers who would offer to convert black-and-white TVs to colour. These door-to-door “salesmen” claimed to have a special screen which, when placed over a TV, would magically turn it colourful.

By 1972, the estimated cost of upgrading broadcasting technology to colour had reached $116 million. The cinema industry, in a panic, even questioned whether colour TV could damage a viewer’s eyesight.

The industry had previously suffered huge losses in cinema attendance with the introduction of black-and-white TV from 1956. Cinemas had a monopoly on colour and were petrified over what the introduction of colour to television could do to their attendances.

Such fears were founded. In 1974 Australia had 68 million admissions to the cinema. By 1976, there were just 28.9 million admissions. Never again would yearly cinema admissions reach above 40 million.

But despite the complaints – from the cinema industry, advertisers, broadcasters and manufacturers – audiences were ready for colour. And any network that dared to program in black and white would subject itself to a barrage of annoyed viewers.

Colour TV was here to stay.

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

– ref. A late start, then a big boom: why it took until 1975 for Australians to finally watch TV in colour – https://theconversation.com/a-late-start-then-a-big-boom-why-it-took-until-1975-for-australians-to-finally-watch-tv-in-colour-251363

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Boedker, Professor, Business School, University of Newcastle

The opposition wants to call time on letting public servants work from home. In a speech to the Menzies Research Institute this week, shadow public service minister Jane Hume said, if elected, a Coalition government would require public servants in the office five days a week:

While work from home arrangements can work, in the case of the [Australian Public Service], it has become a right that is creating inefficiency.

Hume said Labor had given public servants a “blank cheque” to work from home, creating an “unsustainable” system that was no longer working.

She stressed that exceptions “can and will be made”, but only “where they work for everyone rather than be enforced on teams by an individual”.

Few workplace issues have drawn such heated debate as whether people should be allowed to work from home. The Coalition’s latest election promise, with parallels to a similar move by Donald Trump in the United States, has brought these questions back into the spotlight.

What impact do work from home arrangements have, not only on performance and productivity but also employee wellbeing? Is it really wise to reverse course?

Our research has examined these questions in detail – and we’ve found a changing picture.

Read more:
Dutton hints he’ll sack 36,000 public servants. Voters deserve to know what services will be affected

Our research

We have examined the impacts of working from home on staff performance and productivity in Australian workplaces as part of the Australian Workplace Index, surveying 2,932 Australian employees across 2022 and 2024.

This is a research collaboration project between Australian National University and University of Newcastle.

An Australian Workplace Index 2022 working paper (which has not been peer-reviewed) actually suggested working from home was linked with a number of negative impacts.

In 2022, we saw that compared to those who didn’t, employees who worked from home three to four days a week experienced lower wellbeing, higher depression and anxiety, and higher loneliness.

They also experienced more administrative hassles, higher pressure to meet targets and increased levels of conflict with supervisors and colleagues.

We found working from home was also associated with a reduction in staff productivity, job-target performance and an increase in staff turnover intentions.

A changing picture

We have recently completed analysis for a similar study based on data from 2024, to be published in an upcoming working paper. And it paints a very different picture.

We found the negative impacts of working from home, originally found in 2022, had reversed in 2024.

In the most recent 2024 Australian Workplace Index employment data, we see no significant difference in productivity between employees who work from home and those in the office.

In fact, the latest data suggest numerous benefits.

For example, staff who worked from home one or more days a week had 9.9% more autonomy in how they carried out their work. Those with higher job autonomy were up to 16.8% more productive in their work when compared to those with low job autonomy.

We found staff who work from home also save on average 100 minutes in commuting time each day.

But on top of this, staff who worked from home one or more days a week were 10.6% less burnt out from work compared to those who never did, and had reported lower intention to quit their jobs.

Better support for employees

This positive trend likely reflects investment by employers in improving support for staff who work from home.

In 2024, we found a majority of organisations (69%) now had a work-from-home policy in place.

There was also an increase in the physical, technological and psychological infrastructure support available to staff who work from home. For example:

• Physical: 82% of staff have a dedicated workspace, 93% have their own desk, and 93% have air conditioning.
• Technological: 85% of staff have access to IT support, 94% have access to collaborative technology and 95% have internet access.
• Psychological: 80% of staff have access to psychological support from their supervisor and 72% have access to counselling services.

Importantly, employees still value the opportunity highly. Our 2024 data show 38% of Australian employees chose to work from home for 50% or more of their work hours.

32% of Australian employees would prefer to exclusively work from home, 41% prefer a hybrid option, while 27% prefer to work exclusively from the office.

Christina Boedker has received research grant funding from the University of Newcastle’s RSP Stimulus Funding Scheme and from The Australian National University for this research project.

Kieron Meagher received research grant funding from the University of Newcastle’s RSP Stimulus Funding Scheme and from The Australian National University for this research project.

Aeson Luiz Dela Cruz 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 than two-thirds of organisations have a formal work-from-home policy. Here’s how the benefits stack up – https://theconversation.com/more-than-two-thirds-of-organisations-have-a-formal-work-from-home-policy-heres-how-the-benefits-stack-up-251598

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

The Western Australian state election will be held on Saturday, with polls closing at 9pm AEDT. A Newspoll, conducted February 27 to March 5 from a sample of 1,061, gave Labor a 57.5–42.5 lead, a 1.5-point gain for Labor since an early February WA Newspoll.

Primary votes were 44% Labor (up two), 29% Liberals (down three), 5% Nationals (up two), 10% Greens (down two), 3% One Nation (down one) and 9% for all Others (up two).

Labor Premier Roger Cook’s net approval was down one point to +17, with 55% satisfied and 38% dissatisfied. Liberal leader Libby Mettam’s net approval was up three to +1. Cook led as better premier by 53–34 (54–34 previously).

The Poll Bludger reported Friday that a DemosAU poll for The West Australian, conducted March 4–5 from a sample of 1,126, gave Labor a 57–43 lead. Primary votes were 43% Labor, 30% Liberals, 5% Nationals, 11% Greens and 11% for all Others. Cook led as preferred premier over Mettam by 47–32. By 49–31, voters thought WA was headed in the right direction.

At the March 2021 WA election, Labor won 53 of the 59 lower house seats on a two-party vote of 69.7–30.3, a record high for either major party at any state or federal election. Labor won 59.9% of the primary vote.

Labor was never going to match the 2021 result at this election, but if the results on Saturday reflect the Newspoll and DemosAU polls, they will exceed their 2017 result, when Labor won 41 of the 59 seats on a two-party vote of 55.5–44.5.

Upper house reforms

Prior to this election, WA had six upper house regions that each returned six members. From the ABC’s 2021 WA election pages, there were three Perth regions and three non-metro regions. Perth had 75% of WA’s enrolled voters, but only 50% of upper house seats.

Furthermore, the Mining & Pastoral region and Agricultural region had far fewer enrolled voters than the South West region. Combined, these two regions had just 10.1% of WA’s enrolled voters, but 33.3% of upper house seats.

Labor’s huge 2021 win gave them a majority in the upper house for the first time in WA history, with 22 of the 36 seats. Labor used this opportunity to convert the upper house into a single statewide electorate that will return 37 members by proportional representation with optional voter-directed preferences.

Under these reforms, a quota for election will be 1/38 of the vote or 2.63%. Parties that win about half the quota have a reasonable chance of winning a seat, so 1.3% could be enough to win. Labor also abolished group ticket voting (GTV), leaving Victoria as the only Australian jurisdiction that still uses this discredited system.

The Poll Bludger reported on February 23 Liberal leader Libby Mettam has promised to try to revert back to the old very malapportioned system if the Liberals win the election, rejecting the principle of one vote, one value. The old system was biased towards the Liberal and National parties. Analyst Kevin Bonham has condemned the Liberals.

ABC election analyst Antony Green said there will be 13 groups on the upper house ballot paper and a total of 146 candidates. To get a group box above the line, at least five candidates for that group were required. The number of candidates has been more than halved from 2021, when there were 325 upper house candidates. Group ticket voting encouraged a proliferation of micro parties and candidates.

In the lower house, there will be a total of 398 candidates for the 59 seats, down from 463 in 2021. Labor, the Liberals and Greens will contest all seats, the Nationals will contest 20, the Australian Christians 54 and One Nation 41.

Labor has huge lead in a SA state poll

The next South Australian state election will be held in March 2026. A DemosAU poll, conducted February 18–23 from a sample of 1,004, gave Labor a 59–41 lead (54.6–45.4 to Labor at the March 2022 election). Primary votes were 43% Labor, 30% Liberals, 10% Greens and 17% for all Others.

Labor incumbent Peter Malinauskas led the Liberals’ Vincent Tarzia as preferred premier by 51–23. By 53–33, voters thought SA was headed in the right direction.

The Poll Bludger reported Monday electoral reforms have passed parliament that will allow postal and pre-poll votes to be counted on election night. At previous SA elections, only votes cast at ordinary election day booths were counted on election night, with other types of votes taking at least a few days to count.

In the federal part of this poll, Labor led by 53–47 in SA (54.0–46.0 to Labor in SA at the 2022 federal election). Primary votes were 35% Coalition, 34% Labor, 11% Greens, 6% One Nation and 14% for all Others. Anthony Albanese led Peter Dutton as preferred prime minister by 39–33, and by 46–39 voters did not think Australia was headed in the right direction.

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. Two polls predict a thumping victory for Labor in WA election, the first with a reformed upper house – https://theconversation.com/two-polls-predict-a-thumping-victory-for-labor-in-wa-election-the-first-with-a-reformed-upper-house-250264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tara Lind, PhD Candidate, La Trobe University

The 2025 AFL season is just around the corner and fans are pondering the big questions: who will play finals? Who will finish in the top four? Who’s getting the wooden spoon?

The start of a new season brings with it many unknowns, hopes, and in some cases, trepidation.

Hawthorn finished 2024 playing some of the most exciting footy in the competition – can they keep that momentum going?

Collingwood enters 2025 with the oldest and most experienced list – will that be the key to another deep finals run? Or are they over the hill?

Can Carlton finally break its premiership drought? Can West Coast, North Melbourne, or Richmond get back on track? What can Fremantle do with its young list and high expectations?

With so many unknowns, we turned to data.

Simulations and predictions

In La Trobe University’s Master of Sport Analytics, students need to build their own footy tipping algorithms and use them to simulate future matches.

We’ve seen lots of different approaches to this problem. Each comes with its own set of assumptions and blind spots.

One straightforward way to try to forecast what will happen in the upcoming season is to just look at history: how often does a team that finishes first on the ladder stay on top the next?

That’s happened seven times since 1990, so about 20% of the time.

We can model probabilities like this for every ladder position to get a gauge on how rankings typically shift from season to season, and apply this to the end-of-season 2024 ladder to predict the 2025 standings.

This approach does not take into account last year’s finals results, the different age profiles of teams, the 2025 fixture, or other team changes such as trades, retirements, or injuries.

Taking age into account

How about if we consider player ages as well? This should give us a better sense of a team’s expected change between seasons.

Research has suggested AFL players reach their peak performance levels at around 24-25.

A quick look at team median ages since 1990 agrees: teams with a median player age over 25 typically have a worse winning percentage the following year, and teams younger than 24 usually improve (with plenty of exceptions).

Combining last year’s ladder with age profiles gives a different view of the upcoming season.

There is more shuffling, with older teams like Collingwood and Melbourne expected to fall, while the younger Fremantle, Gold Coast and Adelaide lists are given higher probabilities of finishing near the top.

We’re still left with some important blind spots though: information from last year’s finals (Brisbane performed far better than a typical fifth-place finisher), and the difficulty of the upcoming fixture, have not been considered.

The Elo rating system

To take the full 2025 fixture into account, we need to simulate the entire season game by game.

That can be done if we use the Elo rating system to get a “strength” rating for each team.

Elo ratings track team strength over time: ratings go up with a win and down with a loss. The amount it changes depends on the opponent – beating a strong team boosts the rating more than beating a weak one, and the ratings update after every game played.

We’ll use the Elo ratings that each team ended up on at the end of last year (including finals) as a baseline for 2025.

With these ratings, we can calculate the probability of one team beating another in any given matchup. The method also considers home ground advantage by giving the home team a small rating boost.

Once we have probabilities for each match outcome, we can simulate the entire season. Here’s how it works:

• Each game needs a winner. To decide, we use a computer function that picks a winner based on probability, kind of like flipping a weighted coin. If a team has a 70% probability of winning, it’s more likely to be chosen, but there’s still a 30% chance they lose
• This is done for every game in the season
• We then repeat this 10,000 times – simulating 10,000 different versions of the season
• In each version, we create an end-of-season ladder, based on the simulated games results
• After all the simulations, we can see how often each team finishes in each ladder position. This gives us a prediction for their chances of finishing first, second, third and so on.

The Elo approach favours Brisbane much more and is less kind to West Coast (35% chance of finishing last).

It does not predict the decline of Collingwood and Melbourne because, although it takes into account the finals and fixture, it doesn’t have an age component.

The ‘wisdom of the crowd’

If each approach comes with its own set of limitations, then we might expect to get a better forecast by combining lots of predictions from different sources because of the “wisdom of the crowd”.

The idea is that you get more accurate predictions if you combine multiple independent sources.

Luckily for us, each season, several AFL stats experts build models to estimate the probability of each match outcome and generously post them online.

What goes into each model is not always known, but they consider a mixture of different factors such as attacking and defending strengths, in-game statistics, home ground advantage, player lists and trades, last season’s performance and more.

For our analysis, we’ll combine the Elo model with the average of all these expert tips to get a “wisdom of the crowd” prediction for each game’s probability. The ladder can then be simulated using the same method as above.

Four groups emerge from the wisdom of the crowd:

• Brisbane, Hawthorn, Geelong and the Western Bulldogs are predicted to lead the pack, surpassing last year’s top three
• Sydney, Port Adelaide, GWS, Carlton, Fremantle, Collingwood and Adelaide have a wide spread of predicted finishes, skewed more towards finishing in the top eight – but there won’t be enough room for all of them
• Essendon, Melbourne, St Kilda and Gold Coast might challenge for a spot in the finals, but the models are less confident in their chances
• West Coast, North Melbourne and Richmond are hard to separate from each other, a cut below the rest.

Uncertainty and excitement

Each table tells a potentially different story but the most universal theme is uncertainty.

Team sports are hard to predict, especially before we’ve had a chance to observe any games, and even the most confident predictions are under 40% (meaning they are more likely not to happen).

Uncertainty leads to excitement, and this data only makes us more excited to see what will play out this season.

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. We simulated the upcoming AFL season four different ways – here’s what was predicted – https://theconversation.com/we-simulated-the-upcoming-afl-season-four-different-ways-heres-what-was-predicted-249475

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexandra Allen-Franks, Senior Lecturer; Co-director of the New Zealand Centre for Human Rights Law, Policy and Practice and Co-director of the New Zealand Centre for Intellectual Property Law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Journalist Paddy Gower’s attempts to trademark his brand have highlighted what is still considered offensive in New Zealand when it comes to trademarks. But should a government agency be the arbiter of what might offend?

In March 2024, Gower applied to trademark the name of his news entity “This Is The Fucking News”.

The application stalled at the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ), likely because the Trade Marks Act 2002 doesn’t allow people to register trademarks which are “likely to offend a significant section of the community”.

“THIS IS THE F#$%ING NEWS” however, was apparently okay. Gower applied for that mark in June last year and it was registered in December. He now has exclusive rights to use this phrase for specified goods and services.

A changing definition

New Zealand law first prohibited the registration of “scandalous” marks in 1889. The language used in the trademark statute has been “likely to offend” since 2002.

The current rules cover swear words, as in Gower’s case, but also hate speech and material which is culturally offensive.

IPONZ’s current guidance says a “distinction should be drawn between marks that are offensive and marks that would be considered by some to be in poor taste”. Offensive trademarks are said to be those that would create “justifiable censure or outrage”.

But the standards of offensiveness can and do change.

In 1999, Red Bull applied to register “BULLSHIT”. Registration was rejected on the basis that it contained scandalous matter and was contrary to morality (under the wording in the older law).

Perhaps Red Bull wouldn’t face the same difficulty if it tried again today. There is now a registration for “Shit You Should Care About”. It appears that the word shit is not considered one that’s “likely to offend a significant section of the community” anymore.

From a review of the register, it seems reasonable to conclude that IPONZ thinks that certain swear words do remain likely to offend, though. Several applications have been abandoned, including for “THE FUCKING GOOD BOOK” and “no fucks given”.

Whether a mark is offensive is supposed to be determined objectively from the perspective of the “right-thinking” member of the public. But outcomes can appear inconsistent and perhaps arbitrary — why is “F#$%ING” ok, but the proper spelling not?

Limits on freedom of expression?

Some applicants may also decry that their freedom of expression is being curtailed by a refusal to register.

The common justification for protecting freedom of expression is that we should have an open marketplace of ideas, where both good and bad ideas are shared with the public.

New Zealand is not alone in considering these issues.

In the United States, for example, Simon Tam was refused registration for “THE SLANTS” (the name of his rock band) because the law at the time prohibited registration of marks which may be disparaging. Slant is considered a racist term by some and Tam had wanted to reclaim the slur as an anti-racist statement.

In another case, designer Erik Brunetti was refused registration of “FUCT” for clothing, because the law said that immoral or scandalous marks couldn’t be registered.

Both marks have since been registered for reasons related to the fact that the US Constitution’s First Amendment allows for the right to freedom of speech.

The US trademarks register now contains a pending application for “NAZI KAZI” and a pending application for a symbol described as “roughly resembling a swastika”, as well as two pending applications for marks containing the word “N*GGER”.

These marks may not ever be registered, but the barriers against their registration aren’t what they once were.

Limiting offence or limiting rights?

New Zealand obviously has a different constitutional context than the US, but there are similarities in the underlying question about what is, and isn’t offensive – and the role of the government in determining the rules.

One big difference between the US cases and those in New Zealand, however, is that New Zealand’s Bill of Rights allows for limits on rights, if those limits are reasonable, set out in law (like the Trade Marks Act) and justifiable in a free and democratic society.

So, is there a compelling justification for the prohibition on registering offensive marks?

One argument for the prohibition is to protect the public from exposure to these kinds of marks. However, the denial of registration doesn’t prevent the marks from being used in the marketplace.

Refusal means that an applicant misses out on the benefits of a formal trademark registration (such as being able to sue others for trademark infringement). But there’s nothing stopping a person using an unregistered mark. And, refusing registration may actually free up the mark for more people to use it as it doesn’t belong to just one person or business.

Perhaps a more compelling argument for prohibition is that registration should be refused to avoid giving an official (governmental) seal of approval to offensive marks. This may be a very high bar, but it seems important that a registrar consider the likelihood of deep offence, even if the standard is not often reached.

Putting justifications for any bar aside, it remains hard to draw a line as to what is and isn’t okay. It seems in relation to “THIS IS THE F#$%ING NEWS”, that line is razor thin.

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. What the f#$%? The surprising legal rules about brand trademarks of sweary phrases – https://theconversation.com/what-the-f-the-surprising-legal-rules-about-brand-trademarks-of-sweary-phrases-251474

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Naomi Lightman, Associate Professor of Sociology, Toronto Metropolitan University

As Canada prepares to close the book on the Justin Trudeau era, some will be happy to watch him go. But in Canada’s haste to see him out the door, let’s not forget his government’s significant achievements.

His strong performance in the ongoing showdown with United States President Donald Trump, for example, may have led Canadians to view him in a distinctly more positive light.

But what’s undoubtedly been his single greatest achievement — prodded in no small part by the NDP — was the introduction of a national child-care program: The Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) system, colloquially known as $10-a-day child care.

As scholars of social policy — as well as a mother and grandfather — we believe this program is the biggest improvement to Canada’s welfare state since the initial implementation of medicare in 1966-67, updated via the Canada Health Act in 1984.

Somehow, however, amid all the negative Trudeau headlines, this major contribution has been seemingly forgotten.

Gender equality

Trudeau’s child-care program is a massive advancement for gender equality and should be celebrated by all women, parents and — more broadly — people who care about reducing social inequalities.

By freeing parents — mostly women — from the need to stay home with their children or from having to rely on ageing and often frail grandparents, evidence suggests Canada will experience substantial benefits to children, parents and society as a whole.

The program allows highly skilled and motivated workers to join the paid labour force and could also affect fertility decisions in some cases if, for example, families decide to have more children due to reduced child-care costs.

Just as importantly, formal child care benefits children developmentally, particularly in the case of disadvantaged and single-parent households.

In purely fiscal terms, study after study shows that a dollar invested in child care yields a greater financial return over a lifetime than any other expenditure of public funds.

Massive uptake rates

The CWELCC program committed more than $30 billion federally to support early learning and child care, with specific funds dedicated to Indigenous child care.

To date, it has created 150,000 new spaces, with a goal of creating an additional 100,000 new spaces by March 2026. All provinces and territories have participated, with uptake rates among child-care centres starting at 92 per cent in Ontario and rising higher elsewhere across the country.

Notably, the road to implementing national child care in Canada has neither been short or easy.

In 2004, Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin was unable to bring national child care to fruition, despite gaining bilateral child-care agreements with all 10 provinces.

When Stephen Harper replaced Martin in 2006, among the first acts of his Conservative government was to cancel these agreements. Instead, he offered the Universal Childcare Benefit that delivered $100 per child to parents monthly, but did nothing to address the lack of available child-care spaces.

It did, however, ensure that a rhetoric of “choice” and cash in hand for in-home care for children was prioritized over women’s equal participation in the labour market. Internationally, there is consistent evidence that care allowances offered in lieu of a publicly funded child-care services reinforce traditional gendered divisions of labour and reduce female employment rates.

All provinces/territories signed up

By contrast — and no small feat in terms of negotiation skills — Trudeau’s team was able to persuade each and every province and territory to sign an Early Learning and Child Care Agreement.

Major reductions in child-care fees for eligible families followed, with all territories and four provinces at $10-a-day as of 2024 (with New Brunswick and Alberta only slightly higher, while Nova Scotia] will be at $10-a-day as of March 1, 2026.)

Even in Ontario, where rates are higher, costs now average about $23 a day.

Trudeau managed to carry out this program by starting his efforts early in his tenure, unlike with the dental and pharmacare initiatives, and building consensus across a diverse and often contentious Canadian landscape.

Supply issues

It’s not all roses, of course. Some Canadians are frustrated about the slow expansion of subsidized child-care spaces. And the program remains plagued by serious supply (availability) issues, especially in rural and remote communities.

Early childhood educators still do not receive fair pay for the essential work they do, and staff retention is a serious issue.

But as we look towards the next federal election, Conservative Leader Pierre Polievre has had little to say about the national child-care program except for vague references to “flexibility” and a suggestion about replacing it with tax credits. This should set alarm bells ringing across the country.

Read more:
The baffling indifference of Canadian voters to child-care proposals

Fortunately, Trudeau has set up a framework that will be difficult to dismantle in the future. There has been massive buy-in from users, providers, funders and much of the general public.

We urge whoever replaces Trudeau as prime minister to highlight what’s been accomplished in child care over the last few years, and to prioritize the further expansion of the program in the years ahead.

This would be Trudeau’s proudest legacy.

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. Trudeau’s record may be spotty, but his biggest accomplishment was a national child-care program – https://theconversation.com/trudeaus-record-may-be-spotty-but-his-biggest-accomplishment-was-a-national-child-care-program-251318