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

Crossbench independents Allegra Spender, Helen Haines and Kate Chaney have declared they are pulling out of the elite lounges run by Qantas and Virgin, amid the ongoing spotlight on privileges politicians receive from the airlines.

Allegra Spender, the member for the Sydney seat of Wentworth, also said she’d write to ask Qantas and Virgin not to give free upgrades to parliamentarians. It was “time to end the upgrades”.

She said all sides of politics enjoyed the perks, and both major parties had blocked greater competition from Qatar Airways.

Airlines operated under government policy and ministerial decisions, she said. “The public is understandably losing trust in politicians to make those decisions impartially when they’re being given free upgrades from the companies they’re supposed to regulate.”

Spender urged a review of the ministerial code of conduct. Tighter rules were needed about what politicians could accept. The code should also be extended to shadow ministers. There should as well be much more transparency over the diaries of ministers, she said.

“This is the only way to deal with the perception – and potential reality – of decisions being influenced by perks.”

But Labor MP Luke Gosling, from the Darwin seat of Solomon, accused her of grandstanding. “It’s a bit rich from the people with harbour views who either drive or have less than a one-hour flight,” he told the ABC.

Haines, from the Victorian regional seat of Indi, said she was quitting the lounges because she wanted “to remove any possibility of an actual or perceived conflict of interest” in her work as an MP.

“The reality that airlines offer these kinds of perks because ultimately they want to get something in return does not sit well with me and I want to continue to contribute to creating a culture of transparency and accountability through my actions as well as my words.”

Haines said she wanted “to see more rigorous rules around MP disclosures of upgrades and I think a ban on soliciting free flight upgrades is more than reasonable”.

Chaney, who holds the Western Australian seat of Curtin, said with the media attention on the issue “we need to do everything we can to rebuild trust in politicians making decisions in the public interest”.

Another crossbencher, Monique Ryan, from the Melbourne seat of Kooyong, who dropped her Qantas chairman’s lounge membership last year on integrity grounds, said she welcomed the discussion about the impact of corporate largesse on MPs’ decision-making.

“I am deeply concerned about lobbying and its potential to impact government decision making. Free upgrades and airline hospitality are lobbying practices that we have taken for granted for a long time, and it is important that we re-examine them — especially given public concerns about conflicts of interest.”

Meanwhile there is no indication of when opposition transport spokeswoman Bridget McKenzie, who was leading the charge against the prime minister over his upgrades, will produce a list of her own. She has said she has written to three airlines to check what upgrades she has had.

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. Crossbenchers cancel their membership of airlines’ elite lounges – https://theconversation.com/crossbenchers-cancel-their-membership-of-airlines-elite-lounges-242782

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kerrie Sadiq, Professor of Taxation, QUT Business School, and ARC Future Fellow, Queensland University of Technology

Large companies paid the Australian government a record A$100 billion in tax in the last year, a 17% increase on the previous year. But, over the same period, there were still 31% of large companies, operating here but not paying any tax.

The Australian Taxation Office’s annual corporate tax transparency report released last week includes data on nearly 4,000 of Australia’s largest corporations.

In its tenth year, the report is lauded by the government and ATO as a way to increase corporate accountability and reduce tax avoidance. But there is no detail on the tax practices of multinational entities, including how they interact with their offices around the world.

In particular, there is little information about how 1,200 companies paid no tax.

What the report tells us

The transparency report provides data on corporations with income of $100 million or more and businesses which pay the petroleum resource rent tax (PRRT). This includes Australian public and foreign-owned corporate tax entities, as well as Australian-owned resident private companies.

The report details the total income, taxable income, tax payable, and PRRT payable for all entities that meet the reporting threshold. Taxable income is simply assessable income minus deductions. Tax payable as a percentage of taxable income, can then be used to calculate an effective tax rate. The statutory corporate tax rate is 30%.

A variation between an effective tax rate and the statutory tax rate is not evidence of tax avoidance. However, questions need to be asked about how profitable companies reduce their tax liability to zero.

Zero liability can be achieved by deducting offsets and credits. For example, companies that conduct significant research and development are given tax breaks which reduce the amount of tax payable.

Where a company has accounting losses or a tax loss because it has incurred more expenses than income, tax will be zero. These are legitimate reasons for paying no tax.

But the limited information provided simply tells us how profitable a company is, the amount of tax deductions claimed against that profit, and the tax payable.

What the report doesn’t tell us

The transparency report reveals little about tax practices of multinational entities.

The question remains what deductions are being claimed by corporations and tax entities. The ATO has this information but can only publish what the law allows them, which is limited.

For multinationals, deductions will include dealings with overseas parts of the global entity, such as subsidiaries or the parent entity. These transactions create legitimate tax deductions.

Common transactions include payments to overseas subsidiaries for services, royalty payments for intellectual property, and interest on overseas borrowings.

In the case of petrol company Chevron, money was borrowed in the United States at around 1.2% and on lent to a related Australian entity at 9%.

After a long court battle, about 5% of interest was allowed as a deduction, an amount significantly above the original interest rate. This gave Chevron in Australia a large tax deduction.

It is through these types of transactions profits earned in Australia are shifted overseas. Current tax law allows this but requires the transaction, known as the transfer price, to be at arm’s length – that is, the price is agreed to between independent parties entering the same transaction.

What is transfer pricing?

Multinationals are global by nature and therefore logically maximise worldwide profits. Tax systems do not operate in the same way.

Tax comes under domestic law which means transactions between parts of a global entity are recognised for tax purposes.

If goods or services are sold by one part of the entity to another, an internal transaction occurs. For tax purposes the transaction is recognised as a deduction in one location and income in another. An Australian entity would pay a foreign party for things like marketing, and get a deduction for the expense.

In recent years the ATO has settled marketing disputes with large multinationals including Google, BHP, Apple, Rio Tinto, ResMed and Microsoft.

Where a deduction is allowed in a high tax jurisdiction, such as Australia, and income is included in the profits of a low tax jurisdiction, such as Singapore, the result is larger overall global profits.

The tax system recognises the incentive for multinational entities to shift profits this way and requires transactions to be at a commercial or negotiated price. Determining the price however can be fraught and has led to numerous court cases and tax disputes.

The tax transparency report reveals nothing about these types of transactions.

Taxing multinationals in Australia

In the last decade there have been moves to tax income in the location of the economic activity. The OECD has tried to stop profit shifting by companies, which erodes the tax base of high taxing jurisdictions, through its tax reform agenda.

Further complicating the issue of transfer pricing is the question of whether there is any real activity in the countries where different parts of a multinational are located.

Singapore is recognised for what are known as service hubs. These are places where various services such as sales negotiations are conducted and marketing occurs. Singapore also happens to have a headline corporate tax rate of 17%. This is often reduced to single digits after deals are entered into between taxpayers and the Singapore revenue authority.

Intellectual property poses similar problems.

These are increasingly valuable assets for multinational entities as they provide a unique edge in the market. We only need to think of Apple, Microsoft and Google to understand how valuable names, logos and designs are.

By its very nature intellectual property has no physical location and can be owned anywhere in the world. Often, intellectual property is held in low or no tax countries.

The transparency report includes no details about how much is transferred to these locations. This is where Australia’s proposed public country-by-country reporting may assist.

Is the ATO’s corporate tax transparency report worthwhile?

Australia should continue to strive to be a leader in corporate tax transparency.

A two-step approach is required to eliminate corporate tax avoidance. Information is valuable and public transparency measures are an important first step.

A second step, however, is to reform substantive tax laws to tax profits where they are genuinely being generated.

Kerrie Sadiq is the recipient of a four year Australian Research Council Future Fellowship Grant.

– ref. 31% of companies are not paying tax in Australia. How do they do it? – https://theconversation.com/31-of-companies-are-not-paying-tax-in-australia-how-do-they-do-it-242695

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hafsa Ahmed, Senior lecturer, Department of Global Value Chains and Trade, Lincoln University, New Zealand

The Asian markets have long been seen as a linchpin for New Zealand’s economic success. And the key to future growth could be the cultural similarities between Māori and communities across the Asian region.

These shared values include mana (honour/prestige), manaakitanga (reciprocity/hospitality), karakia (prayer), whakapapa (genealogy) and veneration of kaumatua (elders).

My ongoing research has found embracing the cultural values of tikanga Māori could give New Zealand an edge in these competitive Asian markets.

Growth potential

Asia was projected to drive 60% of global GDP growth in 2024, led by India and China.

Seven of New Zealand’s top ten export destinations are in the Asian region. Exports to China alone amounted to NZ$20 billion last year. Exports to India amount to $520 million.

Asia’s projected growth presents a unique opportunity for any country trying to increase its trade in the region. New Zealand holds a unique advantage when engaging with Asia which relates to cultural distance – the extent to which shared values and norms differ from nation to nation.

Research has shown cultural distance is an important factor in international trade and management.

Cultural distance is what sets a country’s culture apart, including differences in language, societal values and family structures. It’s not static, and there could be clusters within countries where diversity exists.

European Australia, for example, is less distant to the European New Zealand than other countries due to shared colonial origins. But these British-based cultures are considered to have a greater distance from their own indigenous populations.

Similarly, Asian countries can be considered as having a bigger cultural distance from Anglo-American cultures. Individualism, for example, is a core value of Western cultures, whereas collectivism is key in Asian cultures.

Building connections

My research has found there are certain shared values between Māori and Asian cultures that mean the cultural distance is less than it is with Anglo-American cultures.

Similar to many Asian cultures, the Māori worldview is deeply rooted in the intricate relationships between humans, ancestors, and the natural world.

This can be seen through whakapapa and mana, both intrinsically linked to one’s connection to the natural environment and human beings.

This has similarities with spiritual practices in Asia, including Hinduism and Buddhism. The concept of bumitama in Balinese culture, for example, translates to “humanity-land-god”, reflecting a holistic view where humans are interconnected with nature and the divine.

The Māori concept of manaakitanga – the principle of reciprocity, where an individual is recognised and respected for not just who they are but as a representative of everyone who has gone before – is an acknowledgement that individuals are all connected through their ancestors.

Read more:
Cultural differences impede trade for most countries — but not China

Manaakitanga has parallels in many Asian cultures. For example, the ancient Sanskrit adage atithi devo bhava is the cornerstone of Indian hospitality.

Kaumātua – an elder in Māori society – holds a position of immense significance. As the custodians of knowledge, tradition and spiritual wisdom, kaumātua is pivotal in guiding the community, particularly the youth.

This approach of transmission of knowledge, values and cultural heritage from elders to younger generations is a core function of many Asian societies.

New Zealand’s advantage

This comparison simplifies complex cultural systems. It’s important to acknowledge that the nuances and complexities of each culture are vast and multifaceted.

But examining shared similarities can help foster a deeper appreciation for the resonance between Māori and Asian cultures.

The government needs to consider the cultural distance between Māori and Asian cultures as it works to promote trade with its Asian partners.

Incorporating tikanga Māori in international policy and engagement can enable authentic relationships with Asia.

In addition, New Zealand could further include Māori representation in diplomacy with specific Māori diplomatic roles for Asia.

Strategies can include adopting Māori values in decision-making – such as focusing on manaakitanga and kaitiakitanga. The government needs to also support Māori businesses to enter Asian markets and encourage training focused on Asian and Māori cross-cultural exchanges that include opportunities to learn Asian languages to bolster communication.

But this would require a thorough alignment of the New Zealand government towards Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles – a move that is unlikely with the current centre-right coalition.

It is clear embracing tikanga Māori could provide an edge to New Zealand when it comes to engagement with Asia to foster stronger economic, trade, investment and tourism relationships.

Hafsa Ahmed 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. Authentically embracing tikanga Māori can help New Zealand in the growing Asian markets – https://theconversation.com/authentically-embracing-tikanga-maori-can-help-new-zealand-in-the-growing-asian-markets-242005

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milad Haghani, Senior Lecturer of Urban Analytics & Resilience, UNSW Sydney

In recent months, Australian concertgoers have witnessed plenty of unexpected onstage drama.

The latest example came from Coldplay’s sold-out Sunday show in Melbourne. Lead singer Chris Martin took a sudden plunge through a trapdoor, catching fans off guard, before reemerging with a laugh and reassuring wave.

Just weeks prior, also in Melbourne, singer Olivia Rodrigo abruptly fell into an unexpected opening mid-performance.

While such slips may seem like isolated moments of bad luck, they signal at one aspect of live shows that often goes unnoticed: performer safety.

As stages become increasingly elaborate – with intricate set designs and high-tech moving parts – the line between awe-inspiring production and potential hazard grows thin.

A thin line between spectacle and risk

Performer safety mishaps aren’t isolated accidents. They are part of a recurring pattern in live music in both Australia and overseas, with falls and slips being one of the most common setbacks. For instance,

• in October Billie Eilish took a tumble down some stairs while onstage at New York’s Madison Square Garden

• in 2022, Post Malone fell through an open trapdoor mid-performance in St Louis. The fall resulted in a rib injury, a 15-minute interruption to the show and many concerned fans

• on a more local level, in 2022 Australian cabaret performer Hans suffered a shattered foot and slight spinal damage after falling four metres while performing on a cruise.

Beyond losing one’s footing, audience aggression and inappropriate behaviour towards artists have also been on the rise in recent years:

• in October, The Weeknd was grabbed by a Melbourne concertgoer who evaded security and rushed onto the stage and towards the artist, stunning him momentarily

• last year, Bebe Rexha was struck in the face by a phone thrown from the audience during a concert in New York City. This resulted in a laceration that required stitches

• Harry Styles was hit by various objects during his 2023 world tour. In one show in Los Angeles, a skittle struck his eye

• the same year, Ava Max was slapped in the face by a fan who rushed onto the stage in Los Angeles

• during her BST Festival performance in London, P!nk was taken aback when a fan threw a bag containing their mother’s ashes onto the stage. While no one was injured, the unusual act left P!nk visibly shocked.

What’s behind this trend?

From falls, to fans rushing onstage, to objects flying from the crowd, it’s clear artists are facing a unique set of safety challenges. These challenges are driven by two factors: audience behaviour and increasingly complex stage designs.

While audience misbehaviour poses a significant risk, it seemed to have peaked post-pandemic. This may have reflected a collective frustration – or perhaps it was audiences failing to remember proper concert etiquette after spending so much time in lockdowns.

Social media also arguably played a role, by turning disruptive actions into “viral moments” and potentially inspiring copycats. Fortunately, these incidents seem to be declining as live music crowds settle back into pre-pandemic norms.

Read more:
Chaotic scenes at Travis Scott’s Melbourne concert: what is the role of artists in crowd behaviour?

Stage-related mishaps, however, appear to be on the opposite trajectory. As artists strive to create unforgettable experiences, they’re confronted with stages that are riskier than ever before.

Delivering the “wow factor” has led to stages becoming multi-layered landscapes with high-tech trapdoors, platforms, dazzling lights and immersive visuals that may be difficult for the performer to navigate.

This raises a significant but often overlooked element in safety discussions: the human factors. Even the most seasoned performers can only process so much sensory input at once. As stage productions grow more complex, the cognitive load on artists also intensifies.

We’re seeing similar phenomenons in other high-stakes settings, such as with pilots who manage complex flight instruments, or drivers who must respond to multiple road cues. Mistakes happen when there’s too much information to process.

Artists already spend much of their mental energy on trying to engage their audience, leaving fewer resources to safely navigate a maze of lighting rigs, trapdoors and moving platforms. In this context, stage mishaps aren’t accidents; they’re byproducts of an environment where human attention is stretched to its limits.

As the demand for spectacle increases, so too does the risk of artists facing disorientation or injury.

Why does it matter? And what should be done?

Major artists are humans, too. Their safety is just as important as that of the audience – and is also an occupational safety matter.

But even beyond artists’ wellbeing, the effects of an onstage mishap can be felt by the entire audience. An accident can pause or even cut a show short, leaving fans frustrated.

While recent incidents have been limited to minor injuries or brief disruptions, these recurring patterns point to a growing issue that shoudn’t be ignored.

It’s time to bring performer safety into the spotlight – and there are a few ways we can do this. For instance:

• tour operators and production teams have a responsibility to conduct thorough safety audits to identify every possible risk element an artist may encounter on stage

• venues should prioritise security and make sure major events are adequately staffed

• fans should be reminded that a stage is a performer’s workplace – and not an interactive free-for-all.

At the end of the day, ensuring a performer’s safety is a responsibility that falls on everyone, from the tour operator, to venue staff – and yes, even to the fans.

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

– ref. Apart from Chris Martin’s fall, here are 10 other examples of onstage accidents. Can we keep performers safe? – https://theconversation.com/apart-from-chris-martins-fall-here-are-10-other-examples-of-onstage-accidents-can-we-keep-performers-safe-242757

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Tuffley, Senior Lecturer in Applied Ethics & CyberSecurity, Griffith University

In a significant blow to Australia’s defence capabilities, the federal government is cancelling what would have been the nation’s largest-ever space project: a A$7 billion military satellite communications system.

The decision was confirmed in a press statement today. It comes just 18 months after the Albanese government gave the green light to the ambitious program.

Defence industry sources quoted by The Australian newspaper indicated that insufficient funding was allocated to start the program, despite its strategic importance. According to the ABC, “defence industry figures believe there are cheaper options available”.

The project’s cancellation would mark a dramatic reversal for a program that was meant to make Australia’s military communications safer at a time when the cyber threat landscape has been steadily evolving.

The rise and fall of JP9102

The ambitious satellite program is known as JP9102. It was awarded to US defence contractor Lockheed Martin in April 2023 after a competitive tender process that included major players like Airbus, Northrop Grumman and Optus.

The project aimed to launch several large military-grade satellites. It would also involve several ground stations, new satellite communications operations centres, and a central management system. Taken together, this would create a secure communications network for Australia’s military.

Currently, the Australian Defence Force (ADF) uses a complex network of up to 89 different “capabilities” (military assets) that rely on satellite communications.

This existing system lacks the comprehensive security and coverage that JP9102 promised to deliver. Without it, Australia’s military communications are potentially left vulnerable to cyber and electronic warfare attacks.

In its statement, the Department of Defence claims its “current satellite communications capabilities support the immediate needs of the organisation”.

What can military satellites deliver?

The proposed satellite system was intended to create what experts call an “uncrackable data network” across the ADF.

These military-grade satellites would have provided secure communications for fighter jets, naval vessels and ground forces across the vast Indo-Pacific region.

Unlike commercial satellites, military satellites incorporate advanced encryption and anti-jamming capabilities. This makes them significantly more resistant to cyber attack and electronic warfare.

Military satellites face sophisticated cyber threats from both state and non-state actors.

China and Russia are widely recognised as having advanced capabilities in this domain. They have the ability to jam satellite signals, intercept communications and potentially even take control of satellite systems. North Korea has also demonstrated growing capabilities in cyber warfare, particularly in signal jamming.

In 2014, Russian forces reportedly jammed and disrupted satellite communications during their operations in Crimea. More recently, at the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, hackers disabled thousands of satellite modems that were part of the Viasat satellite network, causing disruptions to both military and civilian communications across Europe.

In the commercial sector, Iran has been accused of jamming satellite broadcasts and GPS signals.

This demonstrates how even nations with less advanced military capabilities can pose significant threats to satellite communications.

JP9102 was considered a “bleeding-edge technology project”. It included plans for machine learning capabilities to increase agility and responsiveness.

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has previously praised the project’s potential for making room for future technological improvements:

The JP9102 satellites may, if they are based on open-architecture design or software-based systems, take advantage of future on-orbit servicing technologies that could extend their operational life and enhance their capabilities over time.

A budget reality

The key takeaway here is the growing gap between Australia’s defence ambitions and its budget reality. As regional tensions continue to increase and cyber threats evolve, the decision to cancel JP9102 highlights the challenging trade-offs between needing to secure Australia’s military communications and the costs of doing so.

It raises the question of how Australia will secure its military communications in an increasingly contested Indo-Pacific region. The cancellation of JP9102 creates a significant capability gap in Australia’s military communications strategy that will need to be addressed.

Defence planners will likely need to explore alternative solutions. These might include partnerships with commercial satellite providers or joining the military satellite networks of allied nations, such as the United States.

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

– ref. Australia is axing a $7bn military satellite project, leaving defence comms potentially vulnerable – https://theconversation.com/australia-is-axing-a-7bn-military-satellite-project-leaving-defence-comms-potentially-vulnerable-242761

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jan Kreibich, PhD Candidate, Centre for Ecosystem Science & Water Research Laboratory, UNSW Sydney

The largest wetland on Australia’s second longest river, the Murrumbidgee in the southern Murray-Darling Basin, is drying up. This is bad news for the plants, animals and people who rely on the vast Lowbidgee Floodplain. So it’s important to understand what is going on, and whether we can do anything about it.

Our new research used computer modelling to study past and future river flows. We examined natural flows in the lower Murrumbidgee River between 1890 and 1927, before humans started changing the river. We compared these flows to what happened after big dams went in and more water was taken out for irrigation. Then, we modelled how climate change is likely to influence flows in future.

We found river regulation such as dams and reservoirs cut flows in half over the past three decades. It means periods between life-giving floods on the wetlands are now more than twice as long. With climate change, drying of these vital freshwater ecosystems is likely to accelerate.

Altogether, we predict the annual duration of flood events sustaining these wetlands will drop by as much as 85% by 2075 compared to natural levels, if nothing is done. But there are plenty of things we can do to turn this around, because our research shows the main reason for the decline is river regulation and overextraction.

Floods are essential for wetlands

The Lowbidgee Floodplain, in southwestern New South Wales, supports expansive river red gum and black box forests as well as one of the state’s largest lignum shrublands. Lignum’s thick mass of stems forms bushes that make great nesting platforms for waterbirds, attracting thousands of glossy ibis, straw-necked ibis and royal spoonbills. The area is also a breeding ground for Australian pelicans.

The endangered Southern bell frog and threatened native fish such as Murray cod also live here.

Floods bring wetlands to life. But human activities have disrupted the natural cycle of flood and drought. In the Murrumbidgee, 26 big dams and reservoirs now store and divert water, mainly for irrigation. These interventions have more than doubled the time between floods, causing large sections of the wetlands to dry up.

The lack of floods has devastated the floodplain, causing black box and river red gum forests to die. Waterbird numbers also plummeted.

The Lowbidgee’s cultural significance

The Nari Nari people have lived on the Lowbidgee Floodplain for tens of thousands of years. The land and water has deep cultural and spiritual value.

Evidence of Nari Nari connection to this place is seen in the scar trees cut for canoes and other wooden items, middens of discarded shell and bone, earth mounds and burial sites scattered across the landscape.

After 180 years of dispossession, 880 square kilometres of the floodplain was returned to the Nari Nari Tribal Council in 2019. This allows the original peoples of this land to repair it, reinstating cultural burning for example. But there’s a limit to how much they can do without more water.

River regulation and climate change

Few studies have effectively reconstructed such a long history of a river to see where we have come from, and just as importantly, assessed what lies ahead.

We modelled natural flows in the Murrumbidgee River, using data for rainfall and runoff upstream. The rainfall data covers more than a century, from 1890 to 2018, which allowed us to model natural flows back to 1890.

First we established a baseline for natural flows. Then we were able to work out how dams, reservoirs and and water diversions have disrupted these flows over time.

We also considered how climate change might influence river flows in the future under different greenhouse gas emission scenarios.

We found most of the decline (55%) in the Murrumbidgee River’s flows was due to river regulation. But climate change will probably make matters worse, shaving another 7–10% off river flows by 2075, based on average projections.

The average annual duration of floods reaching the floodplain wetlands has dropped from 11.3 days under natural flows to just 4.5 days currently. This could decline further to around 1.7 days as the climate becomes warmer and drier.

Now is the time to act

Australia’s rivers are at risk, but it’s not too late to act. By reducing over-allocation and returning water to the environment we can protect threatened and endangered species, reduce the impacts of climate change, and honour the cultural heritage of First Nations Peoples.

Managing water releases to mimic natural seasonal flows can also help reinstate the natural cues for native plants, animals and other organisms.

Our research underscores the urgent need to understand our past in order to explore future water management options. It’s clear much of the damage has been done by damming the river and taking out so much water. Now it’s important to restore the balance in favour of the environment, to prepare for future climate change.

The Murrumbidgee River and its major floodplain wetlands are also a warning – a canary in the coal mine so to speak – of what could happen to other river systems worldwide as water demand rises along with projected income and population growth. This is especially concerning for many arid and semi-arid regions, where climate change is increasing temperatures while reducing rainfall.

We wish to acknowledge the contribution of Nari Nari Tribal man and General Manager of Gayini wetlands, Jamie Woods, to this article and the research paper it was based on.

Jan Kreibich’s work was supported by the University of New South Wales and the Australian Research Council.

Richard Kingsford receives funding from a range of government and non-government organisations, including the Australian Research Council, the New South Wales, Victorian, South Australian and Queensland Governments and the Australian Government. He is councillor of the Biodiversity Council and a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists.

– ref. Dams have taken half the water from Australia’s second biggest river – and climate change will make it even worse – https://theconversation.com/dams-have-taken-half-the-water-from-australias-second-biggest-river-and-climate-change-will-make-it-even-worse-242192

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bruce Wolpe, Non-resident Senior Fellow, United States Study Centre, University of Sydney

On election eve in the United States, the presidential race is deadlocked. The polls are exceptionally close across the country and in all the swing states – Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin in the industrial midwest; Nevada and Arizona in the west; and Georgia and North Carolina in the south.

The final New York Times/Siena poll shows Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris leading by a very small margin or tied with Republican former President Donald Trump in all the swing states. The exception is Arizona, where Trump leads by a few percentage points.

While there is no clear favourite to win, there are several critical factors that will driving voters’ decisions on Election Day. This is what to watch.

Read more:
Politics with Michelle Grattan: Bruce Wolpe says personal relations between Trump and Albanese would be ‘rocky’

Republicans turning against Trump

Trump’s favourability is stuck around 43% in nationwide polling. In the past two presidential elections, he fell short of taking 50% of the national popular vote. As president, he never achieved over 50% favourability. And he has never topped 50% since leaving office.

This means he has hit a ceiling in his support and is highly unlikely to win the national popular vote on Tuesday.

This also reflects what happened to Trump in the Republican primaries to win the nomination. He dominated the field, defeating Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, and several others. But in most of those primaries, 15-20% of Republican voters did not vote for Trump.

Where will these Republican voters ultimately land on Tuesday? Probably half want to vote Republican and will go with Trump. Others will not being able to bring themselves to vote for Harris and will simply not vote for president.

Others will switch their support to Harris. Indeed, there has never been such a swelling of support from members of one party to support the other party’s presidential candidate.

Harris needs those “Republicans for Harris” votes. In addition, she’ll need to replicate the coalition of young voters, voters of colour and women who backed current President Joe Biden against Trump in 2020 in those same swing states and nationally.

Her favourability ratings are higher than Trump, at around 46%. The closer a presidential candidate is to 50% approval ratings, the better their chance of winning the election.

It’s the economy, stupid

At the same time, the country is in a bad mood. There is a classic polling question asked at elections: is the country on the right track, or moving in the wrong direction? Between 60–70% of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track.

That is a signal this election is about change. Historically, that sentiment has not favoured the incumbent in the White House. As Biden’s vice president, Harris is directly facing this headwind.

There are four key issues in this election. The most important is the hip pocket issue: household budgets, cost of living pressures and voters’ concerns about their future economic security.

Since Biden and Harris took office nearly four years ago, the cost of groceries, household items, utilities and services such as insurance have risen between 10–40%. Petrol prices have gone up even more.

Though interest rates have fallen, American households are hurting. When asked who is best to manage the economy, voters in swing states say Trump by a 15-point margin.

The next-biggest issue is immigration. Since Trump first became a presidential candidate in 2015, he has relentlessly pushed the immigration button, declaring the border with Mexico is out of control, with crime and pillage rising in its wake.

The first three years of Biden’s term were also marked by big surges of immigrants crossing the border, though rates have fallen dramatically in 2024.

Voters view Trump as best placed to manage this issue, too, by nearly 15 points.

So, Trump is seen as a more effective leader on the two most important policy issues in this election.

A surge in support from women

Abortion rights and reproductive health services are the third major issue. Many women across America are repelled by the Supreme Court’s decision to take away their long-held constitutional right to an abortion. Now, this policy is decided at the state level. And several conservative Republican states – including Ohio and Kansas – have voted to restore abortion rights.

Harris is seen as the champion of these issues. Multiple polls show voters trust her more than Trump on reproductive rights, by wide margins.

As a result, polling shows Harris is leading Trump with women voters in the swing states, by 15 points or more.

Abortion rights are also on the ballot in two swing states, Nevada and Arizona, which should help Harris in both.

The future of American democracy is the fourth major issue facing voters. According to a new poll, half the country sees Trump as a profound threat to America’s democracy who will wield authoritarian power to enforce his policies and programs.

Harris has pledged to turn the page, heal divisions and get Republicans and Democrats working together again.

In these closing days, Trump continues to make provocative statements with violent imagery. At a rally in Arizona last week, for instance, he again attacked Liz Cheney, the former Republican congresswoman who advocated for the prosecution of Trump over the January 6 insurrection:

She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face.

This may have provided Harris with a final cut-through moment on Trump’s fitness for office in the final days of the campaign. She said in response:

Anyone who wants to be president of the United States who uses that kind of violent rhetoric is clearly disqualified and unqualified to be president. […] Trump is increasingly, however, someone who considers his political opponents the enemy, is permanently out for revenge and is increasingly unstable and unhinged.

So, who is going to win?

Trump’s team sees victory in all the polls. His chief pollster wrote late last week:

President Trump’s position nationally and in every single battleground state is significantly better than it was four years ago.

The polls may also be undercounting the full measure of Trump’s support, as was the case in 2016 and 2020. And the polls may not be reflecting the extent of antipathy towards Harris as a Black and south Asian woman.

Jen O’Malley Dillon, Harris’ campaign director, and who headed the 2020 Biden campaign that defeated Trump, has told her troops, meanwhile, that undecided voters are “gettable”, adding:

We have multiple pathways to victory […] Our folks are voting at levels we need them to vote in order for us to win.

Harris has built a US$1 billion (A$1.5 billion) machine designed to reach voters in the swing states – through personal contact. This machine made three million phone calls and door knocks on homes in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin alone on Saturday. If this machine delivers, it could be the boost Harris needs on election night.

Harris’ campaign also signalled over the weekend that late-deciding voters, and especially women, are breaking their way by double digits. There is a sense among Democrats that Harris is now peaking as the campaign concludes.

The final analysis

If Harris wins, it will be because she has successfully sealed the deal with those voters and made the election a referendum on Trump – that on balance the country has had enough of him after eight years. It also means her ground game delivered the votes.

If Trump wins, it will mean voters trusted him to manage inflation and the cost-of-living squeeze on households, as well as what they see as out-of-control immigration and crime. These messages would also have been further embellished by unease about Harris, a Black and south Asian woman, as president.

Bruce Wolpe receives funding from the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney. He also worked on the Democratic staff of the US House of Representatives, most recently during President Barack Obama’s first term.

– ref. Will it be Kamala Harris or Donald Trump? Here’s what each needs to win the US election – https://theconversation.com/will-it-be-kamala-harris-or-donald-trump-heres-what-each-needs-to-win-the-us-election-242756

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Cantrell, Senior Lecturer — Writing, Editing, Publishing, University of Southern Queensland

At first glance, Netflix’s Woman of the Hour is yet another true crime fictionalisation that plays to our preoccupation with American serial killers of decades past.

Directed by Anna Kendrick, who also plays the female protagonist Sheryl Bradshaw, the film reconstructs the crimes of serial rapist and murderer Rodney Alcala, aka the “dating game killer”. Alcala famously appeared on (and won) a television matchmaking show in 1978 amid a years-long killing spree.

The film examines historical sexual violence at both the individual and institutional level. It exposes the intense physical and psychological cruelty Alcala inflicted on his victims, as well as the cruelty and misogyny of the patriarchal culture that enabled such behaviour.

Woman of the Hour is a groundbreaking text: it’s the first feminist true crime film to achieve commercial success since the #MeToo movement gained momentum in 2017.

Seeing and being seen

Woman of the Hour inverts the sadistic and voyeuristic “male gaze” of traditional true crime by obliging viewers to identify with the female victim rather than the male perpetrator.

As film theorist and gender studies expert Sarah Projanksy observed in her influential book Watching Rape:

Depictions of sexual violence in most horror and crime thrillers run the risk of extending and reproducing eroticised violence against women, even when victims fight back.

But Kendrick’s directorial debut doesn’t romanticise Alcala or glorify his crimes. There are no cowering or moaning victims shown in various stages of undress.

Instead we see, through careful framing and close-up shots, the panicked discomfort of Alcala’s victims as they navigate the dangers of dating, the damaging effects of casual misogyny and the ever-present threat of male fragility.

As Margaret Atwood once said, men are afraid women will laugh at them, while women are afraid men will kill them.

“Did you feel seen?” Alcala asks Sheryl, after the aspiring actress appears with Alcala on The Dating Game in an attempt to be “seen”.

“I felt looked at,” Sheryl responds.

The tense interactions between predator and prey build an almost unbearable suspense for viewers, who have already seen through Alcala’s superficial charisma and charm.

Alcala was an amateur photographer who often exploited his victims’ desire to be understood and “seen”, and would lure them under the pretence of taking their photo.

The film’s unsettling dialogue and intelligent use of visual metaphor frames women as objects to be looked at, but with a twist: the female characters are aware they’re being tracked and entrapped (even if the realisation comes too late).

In subtle but devastating ways, Kendrick presents the horrific rape and torture committed by Alcala from the viewpoint of the victim. The camerawork underscores the victims’ feelings of shock and disorientation, but never in a voyeuristic or gratuitous way.

A game of murder and romance

Woman of The Hour implicitly suggests part of Alcala’s perverted pleasure in killing came from his gamification of this process.

In the film, Alcala strangles and then revives his victims, sometimes several times, before resubjecting them to the horror of his violence and the knowledge of their own death. His appearance on The Dating Game is the ultimate power move in his game of murder and romance.

“I always get the girl,” Alcala smirks at a fellow contestant.

His challenge extends not only to Sheryl, the blind date on the other side of the screen, but to the entire studio audience and the viewers at home.

However, the film makes clear that romance was never Alcala’s goal. Instead, he leverages the game of romance to exploit his victims’ vulnerability and trust. In this respect, the game is rigged in his favour.

When a woman in the audience recognises Alcala as the man who raped and killed her friend years prior, she attempts to report her concerns to the show’s producers, only to be fobbed off by a security guard. In another act of cruel male deception, the guard tells her to wait for a “senior executive” who he knows is actually the night janitor.

Women, it seems, are simply pawns in the patriarchal game of 1970s America – an era when women’s testimonies of sexual abuse and harassment were distrusted and their safety routinely overlooked.

Alcala after #MeToo

The women who survive Alcala’s violence in Woman of The Hour are those who perceive the artifice of his romance script, before inverting that script and presenting it, equally convincingly, back to him.

When teenage runaway Amy wakes in the remote desert after Alcala has brutally raped and assaulted her, she outwits him by coyly asking him to keep what has happened a secret.

By luring Alcala into a false sense of security, Amy convinces him to spare her. When Alcala pulls into a gas station, she flees to a nearby diner and alerts the police, who arrive and arrest him.

In the end, Kendrick’s message is explicit: “There’s no happy ending with a story like this.”

This post-#MeToo take on Alcala’s violent crimes is a commentary on the systemic misogyny – including the failings of the police and judicial systems – that allowed a serial killer who went on national television to evade detection.

Kendrick, the woman of the hour, refuses to look away.

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. Woman of the Hour: Anna Kendrick’s unflinching directorial debut reframes true crime for a post-#MeToo era – https://theconversation.com/woman-of-the-hour-anna-kendricks-unflinching-directorial-debut-reframes-true-crime-for-a-post-metoo-era-242302

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Andrew, Professor, Head of the Discipline of Accounting, Governance and Regulation, University of Sydney Business School, University of Sydney

More of our personal data is now collected and stored online than ever before in history. The rise of data breaches should unsettle us all.

At an individual level, data breaches can compromise our privacy, cause harm to our finances and mental health, and even enable identity theft.

For organisations, the repercussions can be equally severe, often resulting in major financial losses and brand damage.

Despite the increasing importance of protecting our personal information, doing so remains fraught with challenges.

As part of a comprehensive study of data breach notification practices, we interviewed 50 senior personnel working in information security and privacy. Here’s what they told us about the multifaceted challenges they face.

Read more:
The Australian government has introduced new cyber security laws. Here’s what you need to know

What does the law actually say?

Data breaches occur whenever personal information is accessed or disclosed without authorisation, or even lost altogether. Optus, Medibank and Canva have all experienced high-profile incidents in recent years.

Under Australia’s privacy laws, organisations aren’t allowed to sweep major cyber attacks under the rug.

They have to notify both the regulator – the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) – and any affected individuals of breaches that are likely to result in “serious harm”.

But according to the organisational leaders we interviewed, this poses a tricky question. How do you define serious harm?

Interpretations of what “serious harm” actually means – and how likely it is to occur – vary significantly. This inconsistency can make it impossible to predict the specific impact of a data breach on an individual.

Victims of domestic violence, for example, may be at increased risk when personal information is exposed, creating harms that are difficult to foresee or mitigate.

Enforcing the rules

Interviewees also had concerns about how well the regulator could provide guidance and enforce data protection measures.

Many expressed a belief the OAIC is underfunded and lacks the authority to impose and enforce fines properly. The consensus was that the challenge of protecting our data has now outgrown the power and resources of the regulator.

As one chief information security officer at a publicly listed company put it:

What’s the point of having speeding signs and cameras if you don’t give anyone a ticket?

A lack of enforcement can undermine the incentive for organisations to invest in robust data protection.

Only the tip of the iceberg

Data breaches are also underreported, particularly in the corporate sector.

One senior cybersecurity consultant from a major multinational company told us there is a strong incentive for companies to minimise or cover up breaches, to avoid embarrassment.

This culture means many breaches that should be reported simply aren’t. One senior public servant estimated only about 10% of reportable breaches end up actually being disclosed.

Without this basic transparency, the regulator and affected individuals can’t take necessary steps to protect themselves.

Third-party breaches

Sometimes, when we give our personal information to one organisation, it can end up in the hands of another one we might not expect. This is because key tasks – especially managing databases – are often outsourced to third parties.

Outsourcing tasks might be a more efficient option for an organisation, but it can make protecting personal data even more complicated.

Interviewees told us breaches were more likely when engaging third-party providers, because it limited the control they had over security measures.

Between July and December 2023 in Australia, there was an increase of more than 300% in third-party data breaches compared to the six months prior.

There have been some highly publicised examples.

In May this year, many Clubs NSW customers had their personal information potentially breached through an attack on third-party software provider Outabox.

Bunnings suffered a similar breach in late 2021, via an attack on scheduling software provider FlexBooker.

Getting the basics right

Some organisations are still struggling with the basics. Our research found many data breaches occur because outdated or “legacy” data systems are still in use.

These systems are old or inactive databases, often containing huge amounts of personal information about all the individuals who’ve previously interacted with them.

Organisations tend to hold onto personal data longer than is legally required. This can come down to confusion about data-retention requirements, but also the high cost and complexity of safely decommissioning old systems.

One chief privacy officer of a large financial services institution told us:

In an organisation like ours where we have over 2,000 legacy systems […] the systems don’t speak to each other. They don’t come with big red delete buttons.

Other interviewees flagged that risky data testing practices are widespread.

Software developers and tech teams often use “production data” – real customer data – to test new products. This is often quicker and cheaper than creating test datasets.

However, this practice exposes real customer information to insecure testing environments, making it more vulnerable. A senior cybersecurity specialist told us:

I’ve seen it so much in every industry […] It’s literally live, real information going into systems that are not live and real and have low security.

What needs to be done?

Drawing insights from professionals at the coalface, our study highlights just how complex data protection has become in Australia, and how quickly the landscape is evolving.

Addressing these issues will require a multi-pronged approach, including clearer legislative guidelines, better enforcement, greater transparency and robust security practices for the use of third-party providers.

As the digital world continues to evolve, so too must our strategies for protecting ourselves and our data.

Jane Andrew receives funding from The Australian Research Council – Discovery Project.

Dr Penelope Bowyer-Pont receives funding from the Australian Research Council – Discovery Project.

Max Baker receives funding from The Australian Research Council – Discovery Project.

– ref. Why do organisations still struggle to protect our data? We asked 50 professionals on the privacy front line – https://theconversation.com/why-do-organisations-still-struggle-to-protect-our-data-we-asked-50-professionals-on-the-privacy-front-line-236681

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cathrynne Henshall, Post-doctoral Fellow, School of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University

It’s the time of year when shiny horses and colourful clothing fill our screens – the Spring Racing Carnival, which includes high profile races like The Everest, Melbourne Cup and Cox Plate.

It’s also the time of year when questions are asked about the welfare of racehorses that compete in the so-called “sport of kings”.

Previously, high profile deaths during races, the use of whips and what happens to horses after racing have been the focus of community concern.

Read more:
Black Caviar’s death has prompted uncomfortable questions about how champion mares spend their retirement

But recently, as we’ve come to know more about what makes a good life for a horse, questions are being raised about the daily lives of racehorses.

Industry participants will point to the high level care that racehorses receive – comfortable stables, specially formulated diets, the latest vet treatments and added extras such as massages and swimming sessions.

But does this care translate into good welfare?

The theory of ‘telos’

Firstly, a quick primer on the difference between care and welfare.

Care includes all the things that make sure racehorses get fit, stay fit and stay healthy. This care helps maximise the chance a horse will win races.

Welfare is the animal’s subjective or individual experience of its life – how it feels – and there are a number of ways to assess this.

One way is the concept of “telos”, originally developed by Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle.

Telos is a species’ anatomical, physiological, behavioural and cognitive characteristics that have been shaped by millions of years of evolution.

Telos helps us to identify what matters to animals – their behavioural, psychological and physiological needs.

So to consider if racehorse care actually translates to good welfare, we can assess how closely it provides the animal with the things that matter to them, based on their telos.

Equine telos involves living in groups, forming long-lived social relationships, grazing fibrous plants and being on the move for up to 18 hours a day, as well as staying safe by sensing danger and then moving away.

It also involves living in variable environments to solve challenges, learn, engage in curiosity and play.

Let’s compare that to the daily life of a racehorse.

Movement and feeding

Firstly, the vast majority of racehorses live in stables – sometimes up to 23 hours a day.

Multiple studies have found continuous stabling harms horse welfare.

Stables significantly restrict opportunities for voluntary movement, and studies show stabled horses spend the majority of the time inactive.

Even though stables house horses communally, most designs limit horses’ opportunities for social interaction.

Thirdly, there’s little for a horse to do in a stable other than eat, stand, drink or lie, and they often develop abnormal behaviours that are associated with stress. These are never seen in free-ranging horses.

When racehorses do get to move, they have little say over how far, how fast and for how long they move.

The kinds of physical exercise racehorses do are both significantly shorter in duration and at much higher speeds than horses voluntarily choose. It’s those speeds that place them at risk of suffering a serious injury.

What about diet?

Although a lot of time and effort is spent ensuring racehorses enjoy high quality diets, they are mostly comprised of concentrated energy sources such as grains, rather the fibre horses evolved to eat.

Horses are trickle feeders (grazers), with small stomachs that continuously secrete digestive juices.

In the wild, grazing keeps those stomachs full, which prevents the stomach lining from being damaged by digestive acids.

In comparison, racehorses often consume their food very quickly – instead of spending up to 75% of their day eating, they spend only 33%.

This means their stomachs are empty for most of the day, which is why up to 65% will get painful gastric ulcers.

And having to wait to be fed rather than eating when hungry, as happens in free-ranging horses, can lead to frustration.

Other difficulties

Racehorses may be whipped, and more than 50% will experience some form of musculoskeletal injury during racing, of which between 7-49% are fatal.

Social relationships, in the limited form possible in a racing stable, are also frequently disrupted because horse populations are highly transient due to spelling, retirement or even just going to the races.

So even if two horses are able to form a relationship of sorts, chances are one will be taken away. Separation distress is a significant stressor for horses.

Then there’s the gear that’s used to control them.

Horses, like most animal species, escape and avoid painful stimuli.

However, in racing (and many other equestrian activties) it is mandatory to use “bits” to control horses’ behaviour during riding and handling. Bits work by causing uncomfortable pressure and pain and may lead to mouth injuries.

Studies have shown many people don’t understand how to minimise the harm they can cause. In addition, people also vary widely in their ability to read and interpret behavioural responses to stress.

So, racehorses may be repeatedly exposed to pain from bits and perform a range of behaviours to try to escape that pain, like bolting, mouth opening or head tossing.

To remedy this, additional items of restrictive equipment, such as tongue ties, nosebands, lugging bits or bit burs may be used to control the horse.

Racehorses frequently show signs of difficulty coping with the stressors of racing life, including “going off their feed”, aggression towards handlers, becoming hard to control when ridden and a range of stress behaviours and health issues, such as bleeding from the lungs.

What about welfare?

Racehorse care is often directed towards managing issues that are the direct result of the demands of the racing environment.

Fancy stables and aqua sessions are not important to horses, and may even cause harm.

What matters to horses are opportunities to make meaningful choices, such as the freedom to move, form friendships and graze for the majority of the day.

Current racing industry practices often deny horses the chance to make these choices.

There’s no doubt people in racing care deeply about their horses. But to experience good welfare during racing, racehorses need more than just good care.

Cathrynne Henshall receives funding from the Hong Kong Jockey Club Welfare Foundation

– ref. How are racehorses really treated in the ‘sport of kings’? – https://theconversation.com/how-are-racehorses-really-treated-in-the-sport-of-kings-240998

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lesley Russell, Adjunct Associate Professor, Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, University of Sydney

Stark health disparities exist across the United States. Life expectancy is lower than in other wealthy countries – and declining. The richest American men live 15 years longer than their poorest counterparts. The richest American women live ten years longer.

Political differences are an interesting and provocative way of looking at these disparities.

Differences are frequently analysed by race, a proxy for other factors that influence health, such as housing, environmental pollution, nutrition and affordable access to health care.

But there are other ways to cut the data. This includes by state – whether it is “red” (governed by the Republican party) or “blue” (by the Democrats). We can also look at individual political affiliation.

One new study from the US looks at political polarisation as a risk factor for individual and collective wellbeing. It finds polarisation – where opinions and beliefs become concentrated at opposing extremes – has a major impact on health.

The paper explores the health risks of polarisation using the COVID pandemic as a case study. COVID saw Americans die at far higher rates than people in other wealthy nations.

Australia escaped the high death toll. But there are still significant lessons we can learn – about how increasing polarisation affects our health and wellbeing, and for the effective management of pandemics and other health crises.

Political orientation and health

The relationship between important health measures, political loyalties and voting patterns in US counties and states is significant. At the state level, policy-making has become increasingly linked to political ideology. With this, differences in lifespan and health status across states have grown.

On average, life expectancy for residents in Democratic-voting states is more than two years longer than in Republican states. Political orientation is also a strong predictor of obesity rates and chronic illnesses linked to obesity, such as heart disease and diabetes.

Red states have higher gun death rates than blue states.

The chronic use of prescription opioid drugs has also been linked to socio-economic disadvantage, health behaviours and the lack of mental health and substance abuse services in red states.

Much of this is due to differences in social policies, such as Medicaid. All of the ten states yet to take up the Obamacare expansion of Medicaid – which provides health insurance for poor people – are run by Republicans.

The scale of welfare programs and firearm regulations in these states also play a role.

Stress of a polarised political climate

Large numbers of Americans also report that politics takes a significant toll on their health. This is caused by stress, loss of sleep, suicidal thoughts, an inability to stop thinking about politics and engagement with social media, for example, making posts they later regret.

A study from 2021 showed people who are more ideologically extreme than their state’s average voter have worse physical and mental health.

This political partisanship has been greatly aggravated by Donald Trump’s arrival on the American political scene. The former Republican president has stoked social division and undermined trust in government, scientific expertise and public health organisations. Disinformation and misinformation continue to spread.

All of this was on show in how the Trump administration handled the COVID pandemic. Trump and other political leaders made the situation worse by linking health behaviours (such as mask-wearing and vaccination) to partisan identity.

There was a clear impact on the rates of COVID infection and death. Red states implemented fewer political decisions to mitigate COVID than blue states. And after vaccines became available, residents of pro-Trump counties – less likely to be vaccinated – were more than twice as likely to die from COVID as those in areas that supported Biden.

It is also interesting to look at the role of education here. Low education levels were found to be a strong and independent predictor of whether you were more likely to die from COVID in the United States. This might be explained by the relationship between education and both collective culture and individual literacy.

There is also a strong link between education and political affiliation.

College graduates are more likely to vote Democratic, while those without a degree, especially white Americans, are more likely to vote Republican. This was not explored in the new US study about health and polarisation.

Erosion of trust is dangerous for health

Trust in government is another key factor not addressed in that research. But in Australia, this is top of mind following the release of the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Report, which found the federal government must work to rebuild trust after lockdowns and other mandates.

Greater trust in government is linked to increased political participation, social cohesion and collaboration in tackling societal challenges. In both Europe and the United States, social cohesion and public trust in politicians and experts have been linked to lower excess mortality from COVID.

In Australia, the Australian Cohesion Index shows the pandemic and cost-of-living crisis have eroded trust in government and affected health and well-being. At the same time, Australians see the nation as increasingly polarised.

Read more:
Inquiry warns distrustful public wouldn’t accept COVID measures in future pandemic

The presidential election this week will decide much about the future of the United States as a polarised and divided nation. In Australia, the lessons and recommendations from the COVID report provide an opportunity to avert the choices facing the United States.

Lesley Russell has worked as a policy advisor for the Democrats in the US House of Representatives, for the Obama Administration and for the Australian Labor Party in the Australian Parliament.

– ref. In the US, political division can take a significant toll on people’s health. Australia should pay attention – https://theconversation.com/in-the-us-political-division-can-take-a-significant-toll-on-peoples-health-australia-should-pay-attention-242381

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Madeline Taylor, Lecturer, School of Design, Queensland University of Technology

You might have heard about your local Buy Nothing Project group on Facebook. If not, you probably know someone who’s a member. We estimate at least one million Australians are involved as members or live in households with a member (probably their mum).

Buy Nothing groups enable people to ask for and give away unneeded stuff in their neighbourhood. Whether it’s gifting excess garden produce or an outgrown toy, or asking for winter clothes or to borrow a power tool, the groups help people help others.

Australia has more than 500 of these groups, each with 500–3,000 members. While ordinary in operation and humble in commitment to neighbourhood generosity, these groups have extraordinary potential to reduce consumption and waste. Our research also suggests they improve community wellbeing.

Homes and neighbourhoods have a big role to play in the transition to a circular economy. This kind of economy shares, reuses, repairs, repurposes and recycles materials and products for as long as possible. This circularity is crucial, because getting to net zero is a difficult ask without public buy-in on reducing consumption.

However, our research also finds Buy Nothing groups are not immune to older gendered scripts of household labour. Most group members are women, many of them mothers. It is they who are taking, or expected to take, responsibility for finding or disposing of the stuff that fills their family’s homes and lives. This has troubling implications for how we think about action and responsibility for household waste.

How do Buy Nothing groups work?

Since its founding in the United States in 2013, the Buy Nothing Project has grown quickly. There are 128,000 Buy Nothing communities around the world today.

Other online platforms also help people redistribute used goods. But several membership rules make the project unique. The two strictest rules are:

• “give where you live” by joining only one hyper-localised Facebook group

• all products must be given or asked for, for free, with “no strings attached”.

Each local group covers just a few suburbs. Volunteer admins run these groups and enforce the project’s rules and values.

Why do people join?

In our study, members cited various reasons for joining and continuing to be involved. The “free stuff” was an obvious motivation. Yet they more often mentioned wanting to help others and sustainability and environmental concerns.

The minimal barriers to participation helped to reduce any perceived financial or logistical challenges associated with sustainable consumption.

Interviewees also said their involvement helped them connect with their community. People found much joy and satisfaction in building social networks and helping others.

People are even gifting items with substantial resale value, such as laptops or bikes. This suggests they value the community connection more than the money they might have been able to get from a sale.

The data we gathered show these groups have more “gifts” than “asks”. This indicates we have many unused items in our homes. It also highlights a common hesitancy to rely on others, which the Buy Nothing Project seeks to overcome.

Operating online offers people a high degree of control over when and how they take part. Buy Nothing participation varied based on life circumstances. Parenthood, natural disasters, pandemics, evolving personal values and educational experiences all influenced people’s engagement.

Participants appreciate the platform’s user information, such as names and profile images. This fostered feelings of familiarity, reciprocity and community.

But the online environment also allows some anonymity and a relaxed or blended approach to the “buy nothing” ethos. People still feel free to buy things when they need to.

Many participants engage regularly with the group via a quick daily scroll through Facebook. Using the for-profit platform caused some concerns for the founders, who felt it conflicted with the movement’s values. But attempts to move away from Facebook to an app were largely unsuccessful.

What are the broader benefits of Buy Nothing?

Buy Nothing membership can be very educational. Via a “drip feed” of materials in their social media feed, members see others like them engage in environmentally conscious behaviours. As one member said:

The more I have been in [the group], the more I am appreciating the concept.

Such exposure normalises circular gifting and asking behaviours, encouraging members to adopt them too.

Within households, group membership fosters discussions and behaviours related to sustainability. Many members talk with their children about product reuse, charity and awareness of others’ needs.

Households can play a crucial role in adopting environmental innovations. This is because they serve as hubs for social interactions and the spread of knowledge.

But conflicts over sustainable practices also arise within households. Members reported “pulling their families along”. One recalled her struggle to convince her husband to reduce household waste. She was “dragging him kicking and screaming along” but now he was “starting to appreciate some value” in her efforts to reduce their waste.

Our participants’ domestic frustrations mirrored broader anxieties about climate change and the environmental impacts of too many belongings and waste. They linked personal anxiety about clutter with global issues such as exporting waste to poor countries and low-quality donations overwhelming charities.

But gendered roles are troubling

Group admins told us 75-80% of group members are women, as were most admins themselves. This leads us to an uncomfortable tension: a desire to recognise overlooked economic practices while resisting the perpetuation of gender stereotypes. Just as household consumption and its excesses is positioned as women’s responsibility, managing household waste has historically disproportionately consumed women’s time.

Members said they managed both their belongings and those of others, including parents and children. One said:

I feel like I’m the only person who ever takes anything out of our house.

While celebrating this sustainable activity, we should recognise women are doing most of this work.

I am a member of my local Buy Nothing group – both for personal and research purposes.

– ref. Exploring the extraordinary potential (and avoiding the pitfalls) of your local Buy Nothing group – https://theconversation.com/exploring-the-extraordinary-potential-and-avoiding-the-pitfalls-of-your-local-buy-nothing-group-221986

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

The Qantas upgrades affair has turned from a missile targeted at Anthony Albanese to a cluster bomb hitting MPs on all sides.

On Sunday, Education Minister Jason Clare took the opportunity provided by an interview on Sky about the government’s proposal to slash 20% off student debt to relate, in detail, why he requested a Qantas upgrade in 2019 for a private trip to Singapore.

He’d had an operation on his leg. He was catching up with his family already overseas. He contacted someone – he’s forgotten who – in Qantas.

On the other side of politics, the Nationals’ Bridget McKenzie, who’s been in hot pursuit of Albanese over his upgrades, is yet to produce full details of her own situation.  She’s asked the airlines for the information.

Then there’s the Liberals’ Paul Fletcher, who apparently likes to book economy on flights of under two hours. He’s had 69 upgrades over almost 15 years.

It’s important to remember what the rules are. Parliamentarians in their work are entitled to fly business class on domestic trips.  In some cases, they choose to fly economy on short hauls and business on longer ones.

In the wake of the ongoing revelations, surely it is time to fix the rules. One obvious change should be a ban on upgrades for all personal travel, domestic or overseas, by parliamentarians. If MPs do not want the discomfort of economy class on holidays or other excursions, they should pay to avoid it.

Another change should be that the minister for transport, and the shadow minister, should decline upgrades for their official travel. That avoids any suggestion of being influenced by such perks.

This parliamentary week is devoted, in the Senate, to estimates hearings, so there will be some grilling on the first day about upgrades, and also about the fabled Qantas chairman’s lounge, a networking facility which those with power are invited to join.

“The Chairman’s Lounge” is the title of the book by journalist Joe Aston that kicked off the furore a week ago.

The estimates hearings are also likely to see opposition senators probe the entrails of whether Lidia Thorpe, who demonstrated  noisily at the parliamentary reception for the King, has or has not been properly sworn in as a senator.

Thorpe substituted the word “hairs” for “heirs” when she read the oath. But she signed the paper, and constitutional expert Anne Twomey thinks she’s met the requirements.

McKenzie has been among those targeting Thorpe. But  if, when the full Senate sits later in the month, the opposition tries to have action taken against Thorpe, it will just serve her cause.

Thorpe wants publicity and that would give her plenty more. To be attempting to censure or even have disqualified an Indigenous senator would send a bad signal, at home (where some Indigenous people back her) and abroad.

The House of Representatives this week will have a heap of legislation before it, including the bill on misinformation and disinformation. There will be another to keep the NBN in public hands, as well as the aged care reforms.

But we’re still awaiting an announcement on restricting gambling advertising, and a bill to put an age limit on young people signing up to social media accounts.

We won’t be seeing before the election legislation for the prime minister’s  announcement on  cutting student debt by 20%, and other changes relating to its repayment, that he unveiled at the weekend.

Unlike the government’s earlier change to the indexation of this debt, now before the Senate, these new measures are promises – conditional on Labor winning next year’s election.

If that happens, Albanese says this will be “the first piece of legislation we bring into the next parliament”. The  20% cut would be from loan accounts that exist on June 1 next year.

The government says this is worth $16 billion, although experts point out the real figure – that is, the cost to taxpayers – is several billion dollars less because a portion of these loans would never be repaid anyway.

We do not have a precise timeline for the cost, which the government says would be borne over the life of the debt. No doubt the estimates hearings will see some delving into this promise, that is squarely directed at millennial voters and those younger and focused on the cost of living.  

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: it’s time to put some new rules around upgrades for parliamentarians – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-its-time-to-put-some-new-rules-around-upgrades-for-parliamentarians-242744

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Norton, Professor in the Practice of Higher Education Policy, Australian National University

Over the weekend, the Albanese government announced radical changes to student loans, which would kick in after the next federal election.

Three million Australians with student debt could see their balances cut by 20%. The remaining debt would be repaid under a new system, with no compulsory repayments for people earning less than A$67,000 a year. Both changes require parliamentary approval.

The changes will apply to everyone with a student debt, including all HELP (formerly HECS), vocational education and Australian apprenticeship support loans, as well as other student support loans.

People with student debt would undoubtedly benefit from the proposed changes. But they come with a hefty price tag and some disadvantages.

What are the proposed cuts to student debt?

As of June 30 this year, Australia’s higher education student debt totalled about $75.1 billion – although this is soon set to drop by about $3 billion. Legislation to partially reverse recent indexation to debts will go to the Senate later this month.

However, staying with the $75 billion, a 20% cut would be about $15 billion.

Using the government’s figures, someone with the average HELP debt of $27,600 would see around $5,520 cut from their HELP loans next year.

Vocational education students owed $8.4 billion as of June 30 2024. Their balances would reduce by about $1.7 billion under the changes.

Based on previous student support loan data, this debt is more than $3 billion. The changes would see it drop by about $600 million.

These reductions total $17.3 billion compared to the government’s estimate of $16 billion. But the upcoming indexation changes may explain this difference.

Repayments set to change

These changes have two important elements: the income at which repayments start and how repayments are calculated.

These changes come amid a cost-of-living crisis and rising fees for students.

There was a noted outcry earlier this year when the cost of an arts degree hit $50,000 for 2025.

No compulsory repayments if you earn under $67,000

With parliament’s approval, for 2025-26 compulsory repayments on student loans would not start until the debtor was earning $67,000. This is up from about $56,000.

This would help a significant number of Australians. In 2023-24 more than 400,000 debtors had incomes between $50,000 and $70,000.

Changes to how repayments are calculated

Another significant change is to how repayments are calculated. Currently, when a debtor’s income reaches one of 18 income levels they repay a higher percentage, based on all their income.

This can produce strange results. Take a graduate earning $62,850 a year. They are in the 1% of income repayment rate, so they owe the Australian Taxation Office $628.50 in HELP repayments. But if their income goes up by $1 to $62,851 they enter the 2% repayment bracket, and owe the tax office $1,257. So a $1 pay increase would reduce the graduate’s take home pay by more than $600.

Under the government’s proposal, repayments would be calculated on income above a threshold, ignoring all income below the first threshold.

The new system would start with a 15% repayment rate at incomes between $67,000 and $124,999. Income at $125,000 or above would have a 17% repayment rate.

So, take a graduate on $70,000 a year. Under the current system, they will repay 2.5% of all their income, which is $1,750. Under the proposed system their repayments will be calculated only on the $3,000 difference between $67,000 and $70,000. This means they pay 15% of $3,000 or $450.

The government says on average, repayments will drop by $680 per individual debtor.

But those earning $180,000 plus will repay more student debt each year due to the new system. This is not a large group.
Of the 1.16 million people who made a HELP repayment in 2021-22, all but 16,000 earned less than $180,000.

There are some disadvantages

The downside of reduced annual repayments is longer repayment periods and more indexation of HELP balances.

People who want to repay more quickly can make voluntary repayments, which have increased significantly in recent years. But most people take the default option of compulsory repayments only.

While people who currently hold debt will see their repayment times reduced after the 20% cut to their balance, future borrowers won’t have this benefit.

Given the pattern of recent announcements, it would not be surprising if the government also announced reduced student contributions for future borrowers.

But it is also surprising the government has been stalling for two years on the high cost of arts degrees, set to hit almost $17,000 a year next year. These high fees should have been reduced long ago.

The cost to government

The 20% reduction in student debt balances will also come at a very significant cost to government and taxpayers.

This will not be the full $16 billion they have announced, since that includes debt that is not expected to be repaid anyway.

For higher education debt, the government actuary estimates 24% of the debt outstanding as of June 30 this year will not be repaid. Even so, a 20% cut to the $57.1 billion “good” debt would still cost $11.4 billion.

Cutting vocational education debt by 20% would add around another $1 billion to the cost, after deducting debt that won’t be repaid. Debts for student income support tend to have high bad debt rates, but the 20% cut for them would also add to the government’s expenditure.

The government will also incur further costs from slowing down future repayments.

Is this the best way?

The last few years have highlighted how stressful and damaging high levels of student debt can be for younger Australians.

And as Labor looks ahead to the next federal poll, reducing individuals’ debts and repayments could be a useful election selling point.

However, the Albanese govenrment’s plan comes with a high price tag and the priorities may not be entirely right. Managing future debt, such as by reversing fee hikes under the Job-ready Graduates program, is as important as reducing old debt.

Andrew Norton 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. Albanese flags radical changes to student debt – with a 20% overall cut and drop in payment rates – https://theconversation.com/albanese-flags-radical-changes-to-student-debt-with-a-20-overall-cut-and-drop-in-payment-rates-242740

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland

Water is essential for daily functioning and health, and we can only survive a few days without it. Yet we constantly lose water through sweat, urination and even evaporation when we breathe.

This is why we have evolved a way to regulate and maintain water in our bodies. Like other animals, our survival relies on a strong biological drive that tells us to find and drink water to balance fluid loss.

This is thirst – a sensation of dryness in the mouth signalling we need to have a drink. This basic physiological mechanism is controlled mainly by part of the brain’s “control centre”, called the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus receives signals from various regions of the body and in return, releases hormones that act as a messenger to signal the thirst sensation.

What is dehydration?

Staying hydrated (having enough water in our bodies) is important for several reasons, including:

• regulating body temperature through sweat and respiration
• lubricating joints and eyes
• preventing infections
• digesting and absorbing nutrients
• flushing out waste (via the kidneys)
• preventing constipation
• brain function (including memory and concentration)
• mood and energy levels
• physical performance and recovery from exercise
• skin health.

Dehydration occurs when our body doesn’t have enough water. Even slight drops in fluid levels have noticeable consequences, such as headaches, feeling dizzy, lethargy and struggling to concentrate.

Chronic dehydration can pose more serious health risks, including urinary tract infections, constipation and kidney stones.

What does the evidence say?

Despite thirst being one of the most basic biological drivers for good hydration, science suggests our feelings of thirst and subsequent fluid intake don’t always correlate with hydration levels.

For example, a recent study explored the impact of thirst on fluid intake and hydration status. Participants attended a lab in the morning and then later in the afternoon to provide markers of hydration status (such as urine, blood samples and body weight). The relationship between levels of thirst in the morning and afternoon hydration status was negligible.

Further, thirst may be driven by environmental factors, such as access to water. For example, one study looked at whether ample access to water in a lab influenced how much people drank and how hydrated they were. The link between how thirsty they felt and how hydrated they were was weak, suggesting the availability of water influenced their fluid intake more than thirst.

Exercise can also change our thirst mechanism, though studies are limited at this stage.

Interestingly, research shows women experience thirst more strongly than men, regardless of hydration status. To understand gender differences in thirst, researchers infused men and women with fluids and then measured their thirst and how hydrated they were. They found women generally reported thirst at a lower level of fluid loss. Women have also been found to respond more to feeling thirsty by drinking more water.

Other ways to tell if you need to drink some water

While acknowledging some people will need to drink more or less, for many people, eight cups (or two litres) a day is a good amount of water to aim for.

But beyond thirst, there are many other ways to tell whether you might need to drink more water.

1. urine colour: pale yellow urine typically indicates good hydration, while darker, concentrated urine suggests dehydration

2. frequency of going to the toilet: urinating regularly (around four to six times a day) indicates good hydration. Infrequent urination can signal dehydration

3. skin turgor test: gently pinching the skin (for example, on the back of the hand) and observing how quickly the skin returns to its normal position can help assess hydration. Slow return may indicate dehydration

4. mouth and lips: a dry mouth or cracked lips can be early signs of dehydration

5. headaches and fatigue: frequent headaches, dizziness, or unexplained fatigue can be signs of inadequate hydration

6. sweating: in physically active people, monitoring how much they sweat during activity can help estimate fluid loss and hydration needs. Higher levels of sweat may predispose a person to dehydration if they are unable to replace the fluid lost through water intake

These indicators, used together, provide a more comprehensive picture of hydration without solely depending on the sensation of thirst.

Of course, if you do feel thirsty, it’s still a good idea to drink some water.

Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Queensland Health and Mater Misericordia. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, a Director of Food Standards Australia and New Zealand, a Director of the Darling Downs and West Moreton Primary Health Network and an Associate Member of the Australian Academy of Health and Medical Sciences.

Kiara Too is a PhD Candidate at The University Queensland (UQ) Centre for Community Health and Wellbeing. She receives the UQ Tuition Fee Offset and Stipend Scholarship and a King and Amy O’Malley Scholarship. Kiara is also an Accredited Practising Dietitian and a member of Dietitians Australia.

– ref. Is thirst a good predictor of dehydration? – https://theconversation.com/is-thirst-a-good-predictor-of-dehydration-242194

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexa Scarlata, Research Fellow, Media & Communication, RMIT University

As I write this, people around the country will be recovering from last night’s Halloween shenanigans, perhaps even experiencing a candy-induced comedown.

Luckily, this month’s streaming picks include a serial killer flick that’ll help keep the spooky season around a bit longer. There’s also Chimp Crazy, an audacious docuseries that’s horrific in its own way – as well as some slick new TV shows set against the idyllic scenery of the outback.

Whether you’re after funny, frightening or frivolous, there’s plenty to kick your feet up to.

Territory

Netflix

Territory takes place in the Northern Territory, on the “world’s largest cattle station”. The once-great dynasty of its owners, the Lawson family, is thrown into doubt when their heir apparent dies. The Top End’s most powerful players – billionaire miners, rival cattle barons, desert gangsters and Indigenous elders – immediately start circling.

Filmed in stunning remote locations, the show looks like the most ambitious and sophisticated Tourism Australia ad you’ve ever seen. The wildlife! The panoramic drone shots! The hat budget! The rest of the world could go from thinking we ride kangaroos to work, to assuming we’ve all got our own helicopters. While the male characters are brilliant sources of humour and violence, it’s the ladies in Territory that bring the heart.

Territory does a great job of establishing a simmering tension between the traditional owners of the land and the families and businesses that have taken possession of it – but these plotlines move at a frustratingly slow pace. Perhaps this is to cater to a global audience, which will likely lack the context that local viewers have. And maybe, for Australian viewers, the enduring subordination and struggle of the original landowners is the intended takeaway.

Territory is an ambitious and attractive series. It was wonderful to see so many resources poured into a new concept, filmed and set in a part of Australia that rarely sees the kind of spotlight it deserves.

– Alexa Scarlata

Read more:
Netflix’s Territory is a Succession-like drama packed with family rivalry and betrayal, set in Australia’s outback

Woman of the Hour

Netflix

Anna Kendrick’s directorial debut, Woman of the Hour, offers a glimpse into the horrific crimes of serial killer Rodney Alcala. Branded with the epithet “the Dating Game Killer” after his appearance on a popular 1970s dating game show, Alcala is thought to have been responsible for the rape and murder of up to 130 men, women and children.

Woman of the Hour is especially interested in the way women of the 1970s were pinned under a critical social gaze which expects them to be nurturing and compliant – resulting in their extreme psychological and physical vulnerability.

Alcala’s camera and the cameras of The Dating Game both frame and blind the women subjected to their gaze, highlighting social and gendered conventions and restrictions.

Kendrick is a compelling presence as a woman initially proud of and confident in her intelligence, before realising even she can be caught in Alcala’s web. Daniel Zovatto, as Alcala, is dangerously captivating in the predatory display of his simultaneous charisma and sadism.

Woman of the Hour departs from Kendrick’s past, lighter work; I look forward to seeing what she turns her hand to next.

– Jessica Gildersleeve

Rivals

Disney+

A “bonkbuster” needs three key things. It should be 1) full of sex (the bonking), 2) extremely popular (the -buster) and 3) wildly over-the-top (in other words, bonkers). Rivals, the new Disney+ adaptation of Dame Jilly Cooper’s 1988 novel of the same name, has 1 and 3 in spades. And if earlyreception is anything to go by, it’s well on its way to 2.

The show revels in the excesses and spectacle of its 1980s setting. It begins with Rupert Campbell-Black (Alex Hassell) having sex with a journalist in the bathroom of a Concorde – a scene which, ahem, climaxes when the plane breaks the sound barrier. The show continues much in the same vein for its eight episodes.

On the surface, the plot seems relatively dry. The titular rivals are two production companies competing for a local television franchise. Corinium is headed by villainous Tony Baddingham (David Tennant), while Venturer is run by Rupert and Declan O’Hara (Aidan Turner). Caught between them is the ruthlessly ambitious producer Cameron Cook (Nafessa Williams), who both sides are desperate to get in bed with (figuratively and literally).

However, the plot is surrounded by so much frothy fun, melodrama and naked tennis that there’s plenty of other things to become invested in. Rivals doesn’t take itself too seriously, yet it also has a lot of heart. Keep an eye out for the romance between Freddie Jones (Danny Dyer) and Lizzie Vereker (Katherine Parkinson), which is a real highlight.

– Jodi McAlister

Thou Shalt Not Steal

Stan

Thou Shalt Not Steal follows Aboriginal teen Robyn (the immensely talented Sherry-Lee Watson). She escapes juvenile detention and embarks on a defiant road trip from Alice Springs to Adelaide to uncover a long-held family secret.

Each episode begins with a tongue-in-cheek lesson from Robyn’s past. These range from the eponymous “thou shalt not steal” to “thou shalt never go to Coober Pedy”.

This deadpan humour cleverly introduces significant issues. There are the inordinate rates of incarceration of Indigenous youth, alcoholism, assault, toxic masculinity, bullying and weaponised religion, among others.

Over the first six of its eight short episodes, Thou Shalt Not Steal maintains a balance between acerbic comedy and perilous road trip. Its final episodes revel in a series of over-the-top scenarios that nevertheless tie up narrative loose ends in an enjoyable way. Indeed the shift to outright absurdity reveals the show’s gentler message: about finding a chosen family.

It is a slick, well-made series with terrific attention to detail. The gorgeous landscapes contrast with the dank, grimy spaces occupied by the antagonists and the soundtrack is its own treasure trove. Thou Shalt Not Steal is most definitely a fun ride.

– Kelly McWilliam

Read more:
Thou Shalt Not Steal: new Stan series is a perversely funny road trip through Central Australia

Fisk season 3

ABC iView

Nothing is certain but death, taxes and Fisk being hilarious – especially in relation to the first two. In season three, things are changing at small wills and probate firm Gruber & Fisk. The signature brown suit remains, but as a freshly named partner our “spiky little lawyer friend” Helen Tudor-Fisk (Kitty Flanagan) must tackle more responsibility, pressure and general idiocy than ever before.

In the office, Roz (Julia Zemiro) is giving her mediation business a red-hot go – to varying degrees of success – and scribbling ideas for an imminent hit album. Ray (Marty Sheargold) is loudly enamoured with his fashion psychologist “lady-love” Melissa (Justine Clarke), to everyone’s vexation. And probate clerk George (Aaron Chen) is in the crossfire from his usual post at the front desk while his role as The Webmaster faces competition.

The quiet hysteria of office life ramps up to a frenzy when threats are made and co-working space politics arise. There are also guffaws a-plenty to be found in Fisk’s handling of useless nepo hires, her ageing ex-judge father’s forthcoming memoir, suspicious will amendments scrawled in biro, and a scheming “grammer” (granny scammer).

Fisk’s star-studded third season doesn’t disappoint. It offers a smorgasbord of Australian comedic talent including Sam Campbell, Claudia Karvan, Tom Ballard and Rhys Nicholson, to name a few. With previous seasons given the approving title of “accurate” by law experts, I might find you in contempt if you don’t give it a watch.

– Marina Deller

Chimp Crazy

BINGE

Chimpanzees terrify me. They’re our closest genetic species; one minute they’re sweet – the next, angry and violent. Similarly, Chimp Crazy gave me the creeps. In this docuseries, hit Tiger King director Eric Goode focuses on another animal obsessive, Tonia Haddix.

Haddix entangles with great apes when she volunteers with a for-profit facility run by Connie Casey. This is where Haddix forms an attachment with a “humanzee” Tonka, who grew up performing in Hollywood films before disappearing from view.

However, Goode can’t get close to Haddix and Tonka: all bridges to the big animal community have been reduced to ashes thanks to how things went down with Joe Exotic. So Goode employs former circus clown Dwayne Cunningham as a proxy director.

While the issue of deforestation doesn’t rate a mention, Chimp Crazy comments subtly on the stratification of society in North America and on a lack of love. All the action occurs in the deep south, with “white trash” under the microscope.

Goode explores an alternative angle with representatives from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), who hound Haddix tooth and manicured nail. Their take is that chimps don’t need us and deserve “humane” conditions.

Ultimately, the docuseries erects another streaming era icon: Haddix is plastic, unapologetic, flawed and reminiscent of a mother who’s about to be separated from her offspring. It just so happens her kid is a 32-year-old chimpanzee.

– Phoebe Hart

The Office

Prime

The new Australian remake of The Office mirrors closely the American version: a romance storyline, tensions between office and warehouse, an old-school boss who loves, craves and needs camaraderie, and a staff for whom work life comes second to what they’d rather be doing.

Hannah Howard (Felicity Ward) is the devoted office manager who loves her job too much and runs an underperforming, dysfunctional workplace of uninterested staff. Like David Brent and Michael Scott before her, Hannah is optimistic, naive, relentless and terrible at staff management. She forces pyjama days and bus trips on her employees, who are clearly unwilling yet never actively rebel. There is plenty of comedy in the awkwardness and small moments.

The first Australian season of The Office might not be anything new, but I kept watching. It felt safe, even comforting. Perhaps in a similar way going to someone else’s family for Christmas lunch can feel familiar: recognisable foods, decorations, known characters – but with the frisson that maybe something different will happen this time.

This remake knows what it is. It’s been made to satisfy an audience wanting to be in a world that reflects their own experiences, but takes it just that bit too far. It’s not setting out to break moulds, but to bring the mould up to date and give it an Australian voice for the world to hear.

– Philippa Burne

Read more:
A decade after the US version ended, Australia remakes The Office. It’s not new, but it’s funny

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. Naked tennis, outback feuds and a chimp named Tonka: what we’re streaming in November – https://theconversation.com/naked-tennis-outback-feuds-and-a-chimp-named-tonka-what-were-streaming-in-november-242587

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

On July 13, shortly after Donald Trump was targeted by an assassination attempt, Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of X (formerly Twitter), tweeted to his more than 200 million followers:

I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery.

Musk’s efforts to influence who wins next week’s US presidential election have continued. For example, over the past three months, he has donated more than US$100 million to a political action committee called America PAC that’s promoting Trump.

But our new research (currently available in preprint form) indicates Musk may be wielding influence in other more subtle ways as well. However, the platform’s increasing opacity to researchers makes this difficult to say for certain.

Shortly after Musk endorsed Trump’s presidential campaign, there was a statistically anomalous boost in engagement with his X account. Suddenly, his posts were getting much higher views, retweets and likes in comparison to other prominent political accounts on the platform.

This raises suspicions as to whether Musk has tweaked the platform’s algorithm to increase the reach of his posts in advance of the US presidential election. It also demonstrates the problems with how social media platforms like X are currently regulated around the world.

Not the first time

Musk has history when it comes to tweaking X’s algorithms so his own content reaches more people.

Last year, he reportedly mobilised a team of around 80 engineers to algorithmically boost his posts. This came after his tweet supporting the Philadelphia Eagles during the Super Bowl was outperformed by a similar one from President Joe Biden. Musk seemed to confirm this happened, posting a picture depicting one woman labelled “Elon’s tweets” forcibly bottle feeding another woman labelled “Twitter”.

To see whether Musk has done this again in the leadup to the US election, we compared Musk’s engagement metrics – such as the number of views, retweets and likes – with a set of other prominent political accounts on the social media platform. The data spans the period from January 1 2024 to October 25 2024.

Other political accounts that served as a basis of comparison include those of right-wing commentators Jack Posobiec, Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump Jr. Our study also examined accounts at the other end of the political spectrum, including those of US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, US Senator Bernie Sanders and Vice-President Kamala Harris.

A sudden and significant increase

Since July, engagement with Musk’s X account has seen a sudden and significant increase.

The view counts for his posts increased by 138%, retweets by 238%, and likes by 186%.

In contrast, other prominent political accounts on X saw more moderate increases: 57% in view counts, 152% in retweets, and 130% in likes.

This suggests that while engagement went up for all accounts after July, Musk’s metrics saw a particularly large boost, particularly in retweets and likes.

The research further found that since July, other conservative and right-wing X accounts have performed better in terms of visibility of posts compared to progressive and left-wing accounts.

The Conversation sought comment from X about the research, but did not receive a reply before deadline.

Without backstage access to the workings of the company, it is impossible to know for sure whether changes to its curation system are boosting its owner’s posts. The platform has limited the access it provides to researchers since Musk took over. This means there are restrictions on the amount of data we were able to collect for this study.

However, the Washington Post recently found that tweets from Republicans are far more likely to go viral, receiving billions more views than those from Democrats. Similarly, an investigation by the Wall Street Journal revealed that new users to the platform “are being blanketed with political content” that disproportionately favours Trump.

Since Musk’s purchase of the platform, it has become more congenial to figures on the right, including people who were previously banned for spreading harmful and false information.

The myth of neutrality

The findings raise the question of the extent to which Musk’s influential social media platform is reinforcing its owner’s political agenda.

Musk, whose businesses have extensive government contracts, has made a public and financial spectacle of his unabashed support of Trump. The billionaire tech tycoon is reportedly Trump’s second-biggest financial donor. He also promoted Trump in a glitchy live interview on X and authored a stream of tweets promoting Trump’s campaign.

Musk is also handing out $1 million a day to selected registered voters. This plan (which has met with questions over its legality) apparently aims to boost voter registration among sympathisers in swing states.

Musk’s actions have torpedoed the fantasy that social media platforms such as X are neutral. Given he has previously tweaked X’s algorithm to amplify the reach of his posts, it would be surprising if he were not tilting the platform in favour of Trump, whom he believes is “the path to prosperity”.

For too long, social media platforms have enjoyed immunity for the information they selectively inject into users’ feeds. It’s time for governments to reconsider their approach to regulating the oligopolistic power over our information environment wielded by a handful of tech billionaires.

Timothy Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) for his Discovery Early Career Researcher Award, ‘Combatting Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour on Social Media’. He also receives ARC funding for the Discovery Project, ‘Understanding and combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘ (2024–2027).

Mark Andrejevic receives funding from the Australian Research Council through the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making and Society and through the ARC Discovery Program for two projects (‘When Your Face is Your ID,’ 2020-2025; and “Mapping Australians’ Media Use and Civic Attitudes,’ 2023-2025).

– ref. Tech billionaire Elon Musk’s social media posts have had a ‘sudden boost’ since July, new research reveals – https://theconversation.com/tech-billionaire-elon-musks-social-media-posts-have-had-a-sudden-boost-since-july-new-research-reveals-242490

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

In recent months, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been pushing hard for the United States and European countries to double down on military support for his country until he can achieve his “victory plan” against Russia.

In September, Ukraine undertook a risky incursion into Russian territory for the first time, capturing a chunk of land in the Kursk region. At the same time, Ukraine renewed requests to use longer-range Western weapons to strike targets deep into Russian territory.

Driving these actions seems to be Zelensky’s desire to position Ukraine as strongly as possible before the US presidential election. Whoever wins, the new president has the potential to drastically change the shape of the war.

What would a Harris presidency mean?

If Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris wins, this would likely mean more continuity in US foreign policy and US military support for Ukraine.

A game-changer for Ukraine would be gaining membership to NATO. While Zelensky has publicly ruled out ceding territory in exchange for Russia accepting its membership in the military bloc, this is at least a conceivable possibility.

After more than two and a half years of full-scale war, polling data from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology shows a steady increase in the percentage of Ukrainians willing to make some territorial concessions for peace (now at 32%). However, just over half remain opposed to any territorial concessions.

In addition, Zelensky has said joining NATO is a top priority.

However, Harris has stopped short of committing to supporting Ukraine’s membership in NATO, and Russian President Vladimir Putin has flatly refused to make this a part of negotiations.

Without NATO membership for Ukraine, a Harris presidency would likely result in a protracted war of attrition with Russia.

This will only end when both Russia and Ukraine view a settlement to be preferable to continued fighting. Unfortunately, the history of conflicts shows this can take many years to occur.

What would a Trump presidency mean?

Trump claims he would be able to end the war quickly with a negotiated settlement. There’s no evidence to suggest this is feasible.

In Trump’s first presidency, his foreign policy followed a populist style. Populist diplomacy tends to disregard the existing architecture of the international system and is more centralised and personalised in approach.

As such, Trump’s diplomacy relied heavily on personal relationships with his counterparts to drive outcomes. He was also focused on achieving rapid and easy solutions to complex problems – with limited success.

If elected, Trump would likely focus on his personal relationship with Putin, as well as his somewhat rocky relationship with Zelensky, to try to push a swift and decisive conclusion to the war.

The problem is, Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, has already suggested a possible peace plan that would give Putin what he wants: the Ukrainian territory Russia already holds and a neutral Ukraine not part of NATO.

Putin would likely agree to such a deal. Claiming a large chunk of Ukrainian territory could be presented as a victory to the Russian people, who are tired of the war and unnerved by Ukraine’s incursion into Kursk. Putin desperately needs a political win.

Until a majority of Ukrainians support territorial concessions, however, it would be political suicide for Zelensky to trade “land for peace”.

Yet, Zelensky may be forced into negotiations under pressure from Trump and the threat of US military aid being cut off. Ukraine is already struggling to hold off Russian advances due to a critical shortage in military equipment. Though European military aid has remained steady since the war began, it cannot fill the gap if the US cuts off Ukraine completely.

Trump has already depicted Zelensky as “the greatest salesman of all time” and vowed to have Ukrainian military aid “settled” quickly, if elected. It’s unclear if this means pressuring Zelensky to agree to a political settlement.

Ukraine may continue to fight without US support, but Russia could capture further territory from weakened and ill-equipped Ukrainian forces.

Another possibility, floated by a former Trump adviser in recent days, is the fighting stops without a declaration of a permanent ceasefire or political settlement.

This could lead to a frozen conflict similar to the end of the Korean War, with a demilitarised zone like the one that separates North and South Korea today. This would leave Ukraine in perpetual territorial limbo with no security assurance for the future.

What does all this mean for Zelensky’s leadership?

Zelensky’s popularity increased dramatically after the 2022 full-scale Russian invasion. Since then, however, his domestic support has gradually declined. Polling shows Ukrainians’ trust in Zelensky decreased from a high of 90% directly after the invasion to 59% in September 2024.

This year, Zelensky also postponed expected presidential elections due to Ukraine being under martial law. Ukrainians supported the decision at the time, but as trust in Zelensky declines, this may shift.

Zelensky’s domestic support depends on the perception at home that he can continue to deliver on Western support in the war with Russia.

If it looks like Zelensky will compromise on Ukrainian territory in a way that is unacceptable to the Ukrainian people or can no longer deliver material support from Western allies, his popularity may drop quickly and severely.

If that happens, Zelensky may be nudged by Western allies to hold presidential elections despite the ongoing war. Some conservative US politicians have already started calling for elections. Zelensky’s political rival, former President Petro Poroshenko, has said he will run for president in the next elections, too.

Much of this depends on who wins in Washington in a week. A Harris victory will give Zelensky more time, a continued stream of aid and even the possibility of future NATO membership.

If Trump wins, Zelensky may lose his aid and international support – and perhaps even his presidency. This outcome is far more uncertain for Ukraine and undoubtedly makes the country – and Zelensky – far more nervous.

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. Could Ukraine be heading toward a frozen conflict? Why so much is hinging on the US election – https://theconversation.com/could-ukraine-be-heading-toward-a-frozen-conflict-why-so-much-is-hinging-on-the-us-election-241130

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vaughan Cruickshank, Senior Lecturer in Health and Physical Education, University of Tasmania

Sport and physical activity are an important part of Australian culture and society.

But how do we know which sports have the highest participation rates in Australia? And does this change depend on factors such as age, gender and location?

Since 2015, the Australian Sports Commission has been conducting the AusPlay survey to answer questions like these.

The data suggests those who are more physically active are generally younger, employed, highly educated, and earn a higher household income.

What is AusPlay?

AusPlay is a large national survey that focuses on how much sport and physical activity Australians participate in. It collects national, state and territory data on more than 600 different activities and who participates in them.

These activities include popular pursuits such as bushwalking and cycling, as well as less mainstream sports such as bobsledding and wheelchair rugby.

Other questions in the survey are about things like sports injuries, motivations for participating, barriers to participating, and use of technology like smart watches.

The data collected in the survey is used to do things like:

• inform government investment, policy and programs

• help sports organisations better understand participation and track it over time

• explore the links between participation and other factors (such as age, injuries as household income).

In 2023, AusPlay changed to an online survey instead of telephone interviewing. As such, this year’s results cannot be directly compared to earlier figures because the data have been collected differently.

AusPlay 2024 participation findings

The latest results include data collected from July 2023 to June 2024. Forty thousand adults (aged 15 and older) completed the survey. Some respondents are also parents, so data were also collected for around 8,800 children aged 14 and under.

The activities with the highest participation by Australians over 15 years old are walking, fitness/gym, bushwalking, running/jogging and swimming.

The top activities for children are swimming, soccer, dance, basketball and gymnastics.

While all these activities are popular for many Australians, there are some obvious differences between age groups.

Younger Australians participate in more team-based activities that require speed and agility, whereas older Australians prefer to participate in less intense aerobic activities.

Many of these sports are popular across genders. However, there are some differences: some examples of activities more popular with women include pilates, walking and yoga, whereas basketball, soccer and golf are more popular with men.

Some 84% of Australian adults and 71% of children are considered active, which is defined as participating in sport and physical activity at least once per year.

However, only 66% of adults and 40% of children are active at least once per week. Just 48% of adults and 14% of children are active at least three times per week.

These figures indicate the majority of Australians may not be meeting the national physical activity and exercise guidelines.

For example, these guidelines recommend adults be active most days, preferably every day.

The most popular activities for adults were non-organised – not run by an organisation or club, but likely to be organised by the adults themselves (66%) or with friends (50%) in a public place.

This finding supports the trend towards flexible, informal sport and physical activity that has been noticed by researchers in recent years.

About 40% of adults participated in an organised activity, which was most likely to occur in a sports club or association (13%) or gym/fitness centre (11%).

Sports club or association (27%) and gym/fitness club (19%) were also the most popular locations for children’s organised participation.

The ACT reported the highest rates of participation of any state or territory.

What else did AusPlay find?

More physically active adult Australians tended to be younger, employed, more highly educated, and earning a higher household income.

For example, 94% of adults with household incomes more than $200,000 participated in sport and physical activity, compared with 79% of adults with a household income of less than $70,000.

This finding may be related to the current cost of living crisis.

Read more:
No cash, no play? Have cost-of-living pressures impacted sports participation in Australia?

In terms of cost to participate in sport, adults paid an average of $1,238 each year; with men spending more ($1,377) than women ($1,074). Children paid an average of $944 each year to participate in sport. However, girls ($1,048) paid more than boys ($843).

The top reasons for Australian adults to be active are to improve fitness, for fun/enjoyment, to lose weight, to be outdoors and for social reasons.

Key barriers for adults include poor health/injury, increasing age, disability, laziness and lack of time. The main barriers for children are being too young, not liking physical activity, and cost.

The most common technology used were headphones, tracking apps and wearable technology.

New survey questions

Adding more questions to the online survey this year has meant there are new findings that will allow for better understanding of the participation behaviours of Australia’s diverse population.

These new findings include insights on volunteering, injuries, diversity and inclusion.

Volunteers contribute more than 145 million hours to sport in Australia each year, most commonly in roles such as umpiring and coaching.

The most common disabilities reported by participants aged 18+ were musculoskeletal conditions, mental health issues and cardiovascular conditions.

The most common types of injuries were soft-tissue injuries such as torn muscles and tendinitis.

In line with the Australian sport participation strategy “Play Well” and its motto “everyone has a place in sport,” additional demographic questions were included focused on sex at birth and sexual orientation for adults over the age of 18.

These questions will continue to be included in future AusPlay surveys.

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. Australians love sport, but which ones do they actually play? National survey results paint a surprising picture – https://theconversation.com/australians-love-sport-but-which-ones-do-they-actually-play-national-survey-results-paint-a-surprising-picture-242593

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Verity Truelove, Senior Research Fellow in Road Safety Research, University of the Sunshine Coast

Apps such as Google Maps, Apple Maps and Waze can tell drivers when they are approaching speed cameras or random breath testing stations. Countries such as Germany, France and Switzerland have banned apps from displaying these enforcement locations.

But what effect are these apps having in Australia – are they helping drivers break road rules?

Our new paper, published in the journal Safety Science, examined this question.

We found this technology can, in some cases, contribute to people thinking they are invincible on the roads. However, we also found they can sometimes help people drive more safely.

Being made aware of enforcement can help road safety

We conducted focus groups and interviews with a total of 58 drivers from Queensland, to understand how the use of this technology influences perceptions of being caught for breaking road rules.

One driver told us:

If I know it’s coming up, I’ll put my phone down. If I was, say, texting or checking something, but then like once a good few 100 metres away, I sort of pick it up again, depending though.

Another said:

It sort of depends where I am driving, I guess. Like, if I am driving on a country road and there is a speed camera there I would probably slow down for the speed camera and then sort of speed up again once I am sort of past that; it sort of depends on the circumstances.

We also found that, for some people, being made aware of enforcement locations can help drivers better regulate their speed. This helped them comply with road rules more consistently.

Waze also shows the speed limit in the area, which further assisted some drivers to stick to the speed limit. One driver told us:

I’m a bit careful if I just look at the speedo and just double check that I’m on the right amount of speed.

Another said:

It just gives you a warning like, ‘OK, you need to check your speed.’ Just to double-check you’re going on the right speed perhaps or when it’s a camera coming up.

Concerning behaviours

Concerningly, we also found some drivers who use these apps are looking at and touching their screens more than they otherwise would. This can distract drivers and increase their risk of crashing.

One driver told us they post traffic updates on the app they use while driving, “which I know is wrong.”

Another said:

Just hit the button on the phone. Just two steps after I go past the camera.

Another driver told us:

It’s so helpful […] Especially if it’s, say, late night and I’m coming home from a party, and I don’t want to end up getting arrested.

One driver said:

I probably feel slightly more invincible, which is probably not a good thing.

When asked why these apps are used, one driver said:

I guess the drug and the drink-driving.

Apps can help and hinder road safety

We know breaking road rules significantly contributes to crashes and road fatalities, with deaths on Australian roads continuing to increase over time.

On the one hand, when drivers are aware of enforcement measures like cameras and police, they are more likely to stop breaking the rules in those areas. That’s particularly true for behaviours such as speeding and using a phone while driving, we found.

Using apps that flag where cameras and police are located also means drivers would be more exposed to enforcement activities than they otherwise would be on a normal drive.

On the other hand, our results suggest some drivers are using these applications to break road rules more often in places where they think they won’t be caught.

These apps are also not always completely accurate.

For instance, even though Waze can display some police operation locations such as roadside breath testing, it can’t capture all on-road police activities. Further, camera locations are not always up to date or accurate.

Weighing benefits against risks

While these apps do have some benefits, it’s important to weigh these against the risks.

It’s also important to recognise traffic enforcement isn’t just there to make you comply with road rules at a specific point; it is meant to remind you of the constant risk of being caught and to encourage consistent rule compliance.

The goal is to ensure that drivers are following the traffic rules across the entire network, not just in isolated spots.

With road fatalities at some of the highest rates we’ve seen in recent years, we need everyone to work together to stop more preventable deaths and injuries.

Verity Truelove has received funding from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission (MAIC)/University of the Sunshine Coast (UniSC) Road Safety Research Collaboration Grant.

Michelle Nicolls has received funding from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission (MAIC)/University of the Sunshine Coast (UniSC) Road Safety Research Collaboration Grant.

Oscar Oviedo-Trespalacios was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award Fellowship.

– ref. ‘I’m coming home from a party, and I don’t want to end up getting arrested’: do driving apps help people break road rules? – https://theconversation.com/im-coming-home-from-a-party-and-i-dont-want-to-end-up-getting-arrested-do-driving-apps-help-people-break-road-rules-237664

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Blair Williams, Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash University

Abortion became a key issue at the recent Queensland election, despite its decriminalisation in 2018.

Voting against the motion at the time, LNP leader David Crisafulli fumbled questions throughout the election campaign about whether LNP members would be allowed a conscience vote.

This debate has likewise reappeared in South Australian politics, but the bill was narrowly defeated in the Upper House.

Women’s under-representation in parliaments and the lack of gender equality policies, or more hostile policies such as winding back abortion rights, are related.

Read more:
Abortion is back in the headlines in Australia. The debates in the United States tell us why

How do the states and territories fare on gender equality?

In our forthcoming book chapter, we rank all Australian states and territories on their performance in achieving gender equality. This is based on three categories:

1. Representation – how many women get elected and what leadership positions they occupy

2. Infrastructure – how parliaments accommodate gender differences

3. Policy-making and policy adoption – how parliaments make policy and whether gender equality policies are adopted.

Here’s how the states measure up:

The ACT and Victoria clearly lead the way. Both states have reached gender parity, and include women and gender in all aspects of policy-making.

Representation

In 2024, women account for 44.2% of overall positions in state and territory parliaments in Australia. However, women are still underrepresented in six of eight state and territory parliaments.

The ACT is the exception, boasting a higher number of women than men. Victoria has achieved gender parity, with 64 women and 64 men legislators. The Northern Territory, Western Australia and Tasmania are nearing parity. Conversely, in Queensland and South Australia, women are outnumbered by men almost two to one.

Only the ACT unicameral Legislative Assembly has ever exceeded gender parity, breaking the record in 2016. Research shows proportional voting and multi-member electorates, used in the ACT’s Hare-Clark system, results in a greater number of women elected. But this is not the only factor.

Australia’s party system is crucial in either electing or gate-keeping women. Through adopting gender quotas, most Labor parties around the country have now achieved parity.

The Liberal and National parties continue to refuse affirmative action measures. Women make up only one-third of Liberal/National politicians across states and territories. Their resistance against quotas is a key barrier to achieving parliamentary gender parity.

Electing more women is linked to a greater number of women in positions of power. The ACT and Victoria have high percentages of women in cabinet (55.6% for ACT and 65.2% for Victoria in 2023) and in positions of power, such as speaker and committee chairs. Women can use these positions to further advance gender equality.

The Northern Territory has performed well in terms of representation. Since the recent election they have fallen across all three gender equality categories, even eliminating the minister for women portfolio.

Infrastructure

Parliaments have historically been designed by and for men. As such, the parliamentary infrastructure can serve as a barrier to the full participation of elected women.

While some progress has been made in all states and territories, the ACT and Victoria yet again come out on top. They both provide parliamentary infrastructure that accommodate gender differences in caring responsibility. There is no night sitting in either the ACT and Victoria, and both parliaments allow videoconferencing to help legislators perform their committee work.

The ACT is the only territory or state that provides gender affirmation leave and to have some form of a childcare policy.

These accommodations improves accessibility and helps all legislators combine their caring and work responsibilities.

What about policy?

How do states and territories fare when it comes to considering the interests of women and marginalised groups in the policy-making progress?

At the top of the pack, the ACT and Victoria mandate the use of gender-sensitive tools when public servants develop policy. They have also adopted gender responsive budgeting and a women’s budget statement. This shows a greater commitment and a legislative framework that includes the perspective of women.

The ACT also decriminalised abortion and male homosexuality earlier than the other states and territories.

Bottom of the pack

We rank Queensland as the worst for gender equality. Despite boasting a woman premier for most of the past two decades, it has the lowest proportion of women politicians, and the fewest women members in parliamentary bodies. The sunshine state also lags behind the rest in gender equality policy-making.

Despite South Australia’s historic leadership on issues of gender equality, the state has yet to see a woman lead its government. It also performs relatively poorly across all gender equality indicators. Notably, both South Australia and Queensland report the lowest proportion of women within their Liberal parties.

Both Queensland and South Australian governments have also failed to adopt the tools used by other states to include gender in the formulation of their policies and budget.

Having fewer women elected to parliament means fewer women in positions of power in the Cabinet or chairing committees. It means fewer opportunities for these states to address gender equality in their day-to-day business and the policies they prioritise.

So it’s not entirely surprising that abortion politics resurfaced in Queensland and South Australia over the past few weeks. Both states were late to decriminalise abortion — at least 10 years after Victoria and 16 years after the ACT.

While the poor performance of Queensland and South Australia can in part be explained by their lower percentages of elected women, another crucial factor might be ideology. Research shows that left-wing political parties fare better when it comes to women’s representation and the adoption of gender equality policy.

As the “Florida of Australia”, Queensland’s conservative traditions likely influence attitudes toward women in politics. It may also determine the types and scope of gender equality policy adopted.

Australian parliaments are becoming more inclusive, marked by rising women’s representation at all levels. We are also seeing a growing emphasis on gender equality evident in infrastructure, policies, and mechanisms.

However, as our analysis points out, there are notable disparities among states and territories, with clear winners and losers.

Katrine Beauregard received funding from Australian Research Council.

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

– ref. Which Australian states and territories perform best on gender representation in parliament? We crunched the numbers – https://theconversation.com/which-australian-states-and-territories-perform-best-on-gender-representation-in-parliament-we-crunched-the-numbers-241920