Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Shields, Professor of Education and Head of School, The University of Queensland

Australian teachers are more likely to be using artificial intelligence than their counterparts around the world, according to a new international survey.

The OECD’s latest Teaching and Learning International Survey also shows Australian teachers are reporting high levels of stress and not enough training to manage student behaviour.

What is this survey? And what else does it tell us about Australian teachers?

What is the survey?

The Teaching and Learning Survey (also known as “TALIS”) is a large-scale survey of 280,000 teachers in 55 education systems around the world, including Australia.

Most of the teachers surveyed came from primary schools and lower secondary schools (typically up to Year 10 in Australia).

This is the fourth round of TALIS since it began in 2008 and the first since 2018.

Use of AI

Amid ongoing debate about the use of AI in education, many Australian teachers report they are using this emerging technology in their work.

About two thirds (66%) of lower secondary teachers reported using AI in the past year. This puts Australia as the fourth highest country within the OECD, and far above the OECD average of 36%.

Of Australian teachers who used AI, the most common purposes were brainstorming lesson plans and learning about and summarising content. This was happening for 71% of Australian teachers who used AI.

Australian teachers were unlikely to use AI to review data on student performance (9% of those who use AI, compared to 28% across the OECD) and to assess student work (15%, compared to 30% across the OECD).

These results suggest many Australian teachers are using AI to improve their approach to teaching. But their hesitancy to use it in certain situations suggests there is awareness of concerns around privacy (if student data is uploaded to large language models) and the need to keep using professional judgement (such as when assessing work).

Teacher stress

In Australia, these survey results also arrive at a time of continued concerns about teacher shortages, burnout and dissatisfaction.

Results show a marked increase in reported stress among Australian teachers, who reported the third highest levels of stress among all OECD countries, up from a ranking of 15th in 2018.

Among lower secondary teachers, Australia ranked highest among all countries where teachers reported experiencing stress frequently at work (34% in Australia compared to 19% across the OECD).

The top sources of stress were “too much administrative work,” “too much marking,” and “keeping up with curriculum changes”.

These results support research showing a drastic decrease in Australian teachers’ professional satisfaction since 2015, particularly in the first ten years of their careers.

Teacher education

In recent years, Australian policy makers have increasingly focused on teacher education programs – the university degrees that train teachers for the classroom. Following a 2023 report, teacher education programs are required to include topics such the brain and learning, teaching methods and classroom management.

Australian teachers in the TALIS survey appeared, on the whole, happy with their university education. Some 70% of respondents indicated that overall the quality of their teacher education was high, on par with 75% of teachers across the OECD.

While Australian teachers say their training provided sufficient curriculum knowledge, they were less positive about preparation for managing classroom behaviour.

According to my analysis of the survey data, approximately 50% of Australian teachers were positive about their behaviour training, compared to 63% across the OECD. This matches media reports of teachers struggling with poor student behaviour in their classrooms.

What now?

This survey provides high-quality data to understand our education system at a time of rapid change.

It suggests Australian teachers are global leaders in their use of AI. However, much work needs to be done to improve teachers’ wellbeing at work.

Sustaining the teaching profession and the quality of teachers’ work is a key national priority, more careful analysis of these results can help guide this work.

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

– ref. Australian teachers are some of the highest users of AI in classrooms around the world – new survey – https://theconversation.com/australian-teachers-are-some-of-the-highest-users-of-ai-in-classrooms-around-the-world-new-survey-266894

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jason Weismueller, Lecturer, UWA Business School, The University of Western Australia

There’s been a striking decline in public confidence in social media platforms, according to the 2025 Ethics Index published by the Governance Institute of Australia. One in four Australians now rate social media as “very unethical”.

This is consistent with other reports on Australian attitudes towards social media. For example, the Digital News Report 2025 similarly identified widespread concern about misinformation and distrust in news shared on social media.

And such distrust isn’t limited to Australia. The sentiment is evident worldwide. The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, based on an annual global survey of more than 30,000 people across 28 countries, reports a decline in trust in social media companies.

So where does this negativity come from? And are other ways of consuming information online, such as podcasts, any better? Podcasts are booming in Australia and around the world, and are often perceived much more positively than social media.

Let’s look at what the evidence says about the impacts of social media, what it does and doesn’t yet tell us about podcasts, and what this reveals about the need for accountability across digital platforms.

Where does this distrust stem from?

While social media has enabled connection, creativity and civic participation, research also highlights its downsides.

Studies have shown that, on certain social media platforms, false and sensational information can often spread faster than truth. Such information can also fuel negativity and political polarisation.

Beyond civic harms, heavy social media use has also been linked to mental health challenges. The causes are difficult to establish, but studies report associations between social media use and higher levels of depression, anxiety and psychological distress, particularly among adolescents and young adults.

In 2021, Frances Haugen, a former Facebook product manager, made public thousands of internal documents that revealed Instagram’s negative impact on teen mental health. The revelations triggered global scrutiny and intensified debate about social media accountability.

Whistleblowers such as Haugen suggest social media companies are aware of potential harms, but don’t always act.

Read more:
Facebook data reveal the devastating real-world harms caused by the spread of misinformation

Podcasts have a much better reputation

In contrast to social media, podcasts appear to enjoy a very different reputation. Not only do Australians view them far more positively, but podcast consumption has significantly increased over the years.

More than half of Australians over the age of ten engage with audio or video podcasts on a monthly basis. It’s not surprising that the 2025 Australian election saw political leaders feature on podcasts as part of their campaign strategy.

Why are podcasts so popular and trusted? Several features may help explain this.

Consumption is often more deliberate. Listeners choose specific shows and episodes instead of scrolling through endless feeds. Podcasts typically provide longer and more nuanced discussions compared with the short snippets served by social media algorithms.

Given these features, research suggests podcasts foster a sense of intimacy and authenticity. Listeners develop ongoing “relationships” with hosts and view them as credible, authentic and trustworthy.

Yet this trust can be misplaced. A Brookings Institution study analysing more than 36,000 political podcast episodes found nearly 70% contained at least one unverified or false claim. Research also shows political podcasts often rely on toxic or hostile language.

This shows that podcasts, while often perceived as more “ethical” than social media, are not automatically safer or more trustworthy spaces.

Rethinking trust in a complex media environment

What’s clear is that we shouldn’t blindly trust or dismiss any online platform, whether it’s a social media feed or a podcast. We must think critically about all the information we encounter.

We all need better tools to navigate a complex media environment. Digital literacy efforts must expand beyond social media to help people assess any information, from a TikTok clip to a long-form podcast episode.

Read more:
Critical thinking is more important than ever. How can I improve my skills?

To regain public trust, social media platforms will have to behave more ethically. They should be transparent about advertising, sponsorships and moderation policies, and should make clear how content is recommended.

This expectation should also apply to podcasts, streaming services and other digital media, which can all be misused by people who want to mislead or harm others.

Governments can reinforce accountability through fair oversight, but rules will only work if they are paired with platforms acting responsibly.

Earlier this year, the Australian government released a report that argued social media platforms have a “duty of care” towards their users. They should proactively limit the spread of harmful content, for example.

A healthier information environment depends on sceptical but engaged citizens, stronger ethical standards across platforms, and systems of accountability that reward transparency and reliability.

The lesson is straightforward: trust or distrust alone doesn’t change whether the information you receive is actually truthful – particularly in an online environment where anyone can say anything. It’s best to keep that in mind.

Jason Weismueller 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. People trust podcasts more than social media. But is the trust warranted? – https://theconversation.com/people-trust-podcasts-more-than-social-media-but-is-the-trust-warranted-266791

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Johanna Nalau, Associate Professor in Climate Adaptation, Griffith University

Today’s release of the Insurance Council of Australia’s report puts Australia on the spot: we rank second in the world in extreme weather-related losses. As the Insurance Council puts it, this is not the silver medal we want to win.

Why is this a problem? According to the Resilient Building Council of Australia, a collaboration of independent experts, close to 90% of Australian homes are not actually fit for a changing climate.

Many renters, low income groups, and people living in high-risk areas are especially vulnerable and often unable to even get insurance. In the 2020s, Australia has spent around A$4.5 billion a year on extreme weather costs, while insurance affordability and access are plummeting in regions that need it the most.

The report found almost eight in ten of the homes that face severe to extreme flood risk do not have flood insurance.

Australia’s first National Climate Risk Assessment, released last month, predicted a staggering 444% increase in heat-related deaths in Sydney as heatwaves become more severe under the most extreme scenario of 3°C degree warming by 2050. Other very dire numbers are outlined for climate risks across the country.

The insurance industry says we need to rethink how we can keep our communities safe and thriving in the face of escalating disasters. How do we make sure these safety nets actually work for people – especially when costs and losses are escalating?

Insurance in a changing climate

The federal government’s 2025 National Adaptation Plan makes it clear we need to act now in reducing these risks.

The changing climate will bring new types of risks to new areas. This is problematic as insurance is often based on existing trends and known risks. The industry also relies on current categorisations, such as cyclone strengths and wind speeds, in estimating losses and damages.

There are alternative insurance options already in use. For example, parametric insurance provides an automatic payout by the insurer when a particular event takes place, such as a storm at a specified wind speed or storm surge at a particular water height.

This way, the insured businesses or households do not need to wait for months of damage investigations, assessments and filling in claims. This form of coverage is used in the Pacific, where many islands face increasing climate-related disasters.

However, some analysts caution this approach can leave people worse off, as it might not cover everything needed for long-term recovery.

Other strategies include inclusive insurance delivered through cooperatives. These are often set up in low-income communities in developing countries, such as the Philippines, where insurance may not be available. They provide a community-based safety net to recover from disasters or other risks.

So how can we adapt?

We have a good understanding by now about the risks we are facing and what we need to do. Building more resilient new homes and retrofitting existing homes are among the first steps in protecting all Australians. Other strategies include:

Rethinking insurance: Some insurance companies, such as US commercial property insurer FM Global, have launched “climate resilience credits”, which support their clients to invest in climate adaptation options. If people can demonstrate they have taken direct actions to adapt their properties to climate risks – such as building flood levies, raising floor heights, or installing additional insulation against extreme heat – they pay less in premiums.

Reflect climate adaptation investments in property valuations: Currently, there are few legally required adaptation options for homes. Homeowners who invest in better drainage against excess rainfall or install additional insulation against extreme heat are not necessarily rewarded when it comes to higher property values or lower insurance costs. Having these investments reflected in higher property values could be an incentive for increased climate adaptation.

Climate adaptation and resilience loans: Some lenders, such as Westpac, already offer lower interest loans, such as a sustainable upgrades home loan that specifically support these types of upgrades, as well as energy efficiency. Bank Australia offers a clean energy home loan for building new greener homes. The insurer Suncorp offers lower premiums for households that have upgraded their cyclone resilience to prepare for storms.

There is also a need to rethink land use planning and whether we allow new developments to go on in high-risk areas both under current risks and future projections. This is not a new problem or solution, but one we need to take seriously now.

No silver bullet, but many options

These options are not available for everyone. Not everyone is able to take additional loans or make investments. This is where we need a scaled-up national approach in how insurance and lending can support Australians, especially those most vulnerable to climate change.

While the policy recommendations from Insurance Council of Australia are clear on the role they see for the government, there are also key roles for the private sector, communities, and organisations in fast-tracking national climate adaptation.

There is no one silver bullet for what we need to do. But we have an array of opportunities and options that can significantly strengthen how Australia adapts to climate change. The trick will be knowing what to scale up, and how.

Johanna Nalau has received funding from Australian Research Council. She is Coordinating Lead Author for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 7th Assessment Report (Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability), and Co-Chair of the Science Committee at World Adaptation Science Programme, UNEP.

– ref. Extreme weather now costs Australians $4.5b a year. Better insurance options and loans would help us adapt – https://theconversation.com/extreme-weather-now-costs-australians-4-5b-a-year-better-insurance-options-and-loans-would-help-us-adapt-266886

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

You’ve turned up at the doctor’s clinic on time. But you’re scrolling on your phone, watching the clock tick past your appointment time. By the time you’re called in, you’re running late for work or school pick-up, and you’re getting stressed.

Yes, it can be frustrating. It might seem like your doctor’s always running late.

But your doctor isn’t delayed because they disrespect your time. There are many reasons for running late, some unrelated to your doctor or the clinic.

Let’s unpack what’s happening in your average GP clinic.

‘Spanners in the works’

You might expect appointments to run like a well-oiled machine. You turn up, and are seen at your allotted time. In reality, patients can easily wait 20 minutes to see the doctor.

There are many factors why. We’ll call these “spanners in the works”, events or reasons why things don’t always go to plan.

There are reasons related to individual patients. These include a patient mixing up the time of the appointment or running late themselves. A patient can ask if another family member can fit into the same appointment, or they may suddenly want to discuss extra concerns.

On the clinic’s side, hold-ups can arise due to medical emergencies, technology hiccups, or managing complicated cases or paperwork.

Apart from seeing patients, GPs need to perform a range of other tasks including: completing consultation notes; organising referrals, care plans or family meetings; checking daily pathology and imaging results; and liaising with specialists, pharmacists and hospitals.

GPs need time to complete these tasks, which they normally squeeze into the slim space between each patient. So it’s easy to see how an unexpected urgent issue can quickly derail a doctor’s schedule.

All these issues add up over the course of the day and can cause significant delays.

A symptom of bigger issues

Running late is also a symptom of wider health-related issues. Australians are living longer with multiple, chronic conditions such as diabetes, heart disease and mental health issues. So patients need more time with the doctor to manage these often complex, long-term conditions.

Australians are also seeing GPs more often – on average 6.2 times a year in 2024, up from 3.8 when Medicare started in 1984. This is due to a variety of factors, including an ageing population and higher rates of chronic disease.

Running late can be a symptom of bigger health system issues. Australia’s health department projects a shortfall of about 2,600 GPs by 2028, growing to 8,600 by 2048.

An ageing GP workforce, more GPs working part time, and not enough new doctors entering general practice to replace those retiring are all contributors.

All this means GPs will likely become busier, harder to book and yes, more likely to run late.

The hidden impacts of running late

Running late isn’t just inconvenient. GPs can feel pressured to shorten consultations to catch up.

This can have multiple consequences: less history taking or examination time, over-ordering tests, less patient-centred care, and reduced shared decision-making. A late-running GP might also miss opportunities for preventative care.

But longer consultations are linked to positives such as less antibiotic misuse, lower referral rates to specialists for issues they could manage themselves, and fewer consultations for issues that could have been covered in an earlier appointment.

What might help?

Some practices are using pre-consultation questionnaires, which patients can complete online before their appointment. These include questions about their medical history, changes in symptoms and the reason for the appointment.

These questionnaires can also encourage patients to disclose relevant information in a safe and secure manner, address what the patient hopes to cover in a consultation, and allow the doctor to plan their consultation before the visit begins.

Studies show about 90% of patients find these helpful, and doctors report completing their appointments faster while still being thorough.

Clinics could also:

• inform patients in advance if their doctor is running late, which can improve patient satisfaction

• book patients with their regular GP wherever possible, rather than an unfamiliar one

• keep a few appointment slots free for urgent matters that may arise on the day.

What you can do

To help the day run smoothly you can:

• Book the right length appointment if you have a tricky issue or multiple things to discuss. Ask for a long consultation, or consider returning for a follow-up visit.

• Write down any questions in advance to make sure nothing is missed. Better still, give this list to your GP at the start of your visit so they can help prioritise your needs.

• Consider telehealth for issues such as test result follow-ups or script renewals. This may also allow both you and the clinic to be more flexible with the timing of the appointment.

• Try to attend without your kids if you can if discussing complex or sensitive issues. If you want to discuss your child’s health, book a separate appointment before or after yours.

• Try to build a working relationship with one regular GP. Visits tend to be more efficient and you will receive better overall care.

Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Health and Wellbeing Queensland, Heart Foundation, Gallipoli Medical Research and Mater Health, Springfield City Group. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, 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.

David Chua’s position at the UQ Centre for Community Health and Wellbeing is partially funded by Mater Research Foundation and the National Health and Medical Research Council. He also works at two other workplaces: Metro South Health as a research officer and Inala Primary Care, a not-for-profit general practice clinic as a research collaborations officer and data analyst.

Stephanie Chua is a GP at two clinics: Inala Primary Care, a not-for-profit general practice, and Watersprings Health Centre.

– ref. Why do doctors run late? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-doctors-run-late-264977

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sheila Skeaff, Professor of Human Nutrition, University of Otago

A long-awaited expert update on the dietary changes needed to support both human and planetary health comes out clearly in favour of a plant-based approach.

The EAT-Lancet Commission says a shift towards its planetary health diet, released last week, could prevent 40,000 early deaths a day across the world and cut agricultural methane emissions by 15% by 2050.

The diet promotes more vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes and nuts, with only modest amounts of meat, fish, poultry and dairy.

If you imagine a plate, half would be filled with vegetables and fruit (with more vegetables than fruit). Most of the remaining half would be whole grains and plant proteins. There’s room for small amounts of animal products and healthy fats, but very little added sugar. Notably, butter doesn’t get a mention.

The most contentious aspect is the commission’s recommendation on meat: just 14 grams per day of red meat and 29 grams per day of poultry – that’s roughly one small steak, one lamb chop, or two chicken drumsticks per week.

New Zealand’s traditional diet is a long way off this recommendation. But my recent study of teenage girls across the country suggests a shift is underway, with most embracing a predominantly plant-based diet.

How we know what’s best to eat

Many factors influence food choices – hunger, emotions, health, culture, media, taste, habits and family traditions.

Evidence-based dietary guidance, such as national food and nutrition guidelines, also plays a role.

In New Zealand, people may be familiar with the “5+ a day” message promoting fruit and vegetable consumption. That recommendation has since shifted to “7+ a day” as new evidence has emerged.

Over the past decade, nutritional guidelines have increasingly incorporated environmental sustainability, acknowledging that around 30% of global emissions come from growing, processing and transporting food.

The EAT-Lancet Commission took this sustainability focus further in its first release of the planetary health diet in 2019. It argued that by changing what we eat, reducing food waste and improving food production systems, we could feed a growing global population while minimising environmental damage.

Less meat is a win-win

This approach is a significant departure from traditional diets in Aotearoa New Zealand. The British-influenced “meat and three veg” (often with potatoes as one of the vegetables) and the Māori hāngi of pork, seafood, kumara and local greens don’t align neatly with the EAT-Lancet recommendations.

One criticism of the original report was its limited consideration of indigenous food systems. In my view, the minimal inclusion of starchy vegetables such as potatoes, cassava, kumara, maize and millet is hard to justify. These are staple foods – affordable, widely available and important sources of energy for many communities.

But most New Zealand adults consume nearly twice the recommended amount of protein. Reducing meat is therefore unlikely to lead to inadequate protein intakes.

Currently, about 40% of New Zealanders’ protein comes from animal sources (meat, dairy, fish). The remaining 60% comes from plants.

The belief that only animal proteins are of high quality – due to their amino acid profile and digestibility – is outdated. It’s a common misconception that some amino acid are only available through meat. Plants contain all essential amino acids, albeit in varying proportions.

For most adults, a diet with smaller amounts of meat would be a win-win: better for their health and better for the planet.

So, should New Zealand embrace the planetary health diet?

In many ways, we already are. My study of teenage girls found those following an omnivorous diet got 69% of their energy from plant-based foods (ranging from 43% to 92%), while vegetarians averaged 83% (ranging from 51% to 100%).

However, New Zealanders still consume more saturated fat than recommended and not enough dietary fibre. Shifting further toward the planetary health diet could help address these imbalances and reduce the risk of premature death from heart disease and cancer, our leading causes of mortality.

A diet for people and the planet

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the meat industry has been pushing back against the commission’s recommendations ever since the first release of the planetary health diet.

A recent report published by the Changing Markets Foundation identifies a network of influential pro-meat voices in industry, academia and governments actively working to discredit the commission’s findings.

Some nutrition academics have raised concerns about the relatively low quantity of meat and fish. Some experts argue the low amount of meat may not meet the nutritional needs of certain groups such as pregnant women and young children, who would benefit from the iron and zinc found in red meat because it is easier to absorb than from vegetable sources.

Adding to the complexity is the global obsession with protein – often associated with meat. While fat and carbohydrates have been vilified, protein enjoys a nutritional halo.

The updated guidelines place greater emphasis on environmental sustainability and, importantly, acknowledge the need to respect and empower diverse food cultures and uphold the universal human right to food.

As we face the twin challenges of climate change and rising rates of diet-related disease, I argue the planetary health diet offers a recipe for a healthier, more sustainable future.

It’s not about eliminating entire food groups or enforcing a one-size-fits-all approach. Rather, it’s about making thoughtful, evidence-based choices that nourish both people and the planet.

Sheila Skeaff receives funding from the Ministry for the Environment for research on food loss and waste. She serves as a trustee on the Otago Farmers Market Trust.

– ref. More veg, less meat: the latest global update on a diet that’s good for people and the planet – https://theconversation.com/more-veg-less-meat-the-latest-global-update-on-a-diet-thats-good-for-people-and-the-planet-266780

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rochelle Wynne, Chair in Nursing, Western Health Deakin University Partnership, Deakin University

Even a short stay in hospital produces a large amount of waste. Just picture all the disposable items designed to be used once and thrown away: face masks, gloves, packaging, intravenous tubing, and even equipment such as stainless steel scissors.

This kind of single-use medical equipment was first introduced in high-income countries in the 1960s, thanks to advances in plastic manufacturing and a growing emphasis on infection prevention and control.

About 85% of the waste single-use products create is nonhazardous and can be recycled or disposed of without special processing. But a lot of the time it’s not sorted correctly. This means it is often mixed with hazardous waste that has to be incinerated before it is sent to landfill, which increases greenhouse gas emissions.

Our new study tested replacing just one kind of item – single-use absorbent pads, known as “blueys” – with a reusable version in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Blueys are pads made of layered tissue paper, with a plastic waterproof backing. They’re placed under patients to protect bedding and absorb bodily fluids such as blood and urine during patient care and other procedures.

We wanted to know how much waste could be diverted from landfill by replacing these single-use products with reusable linen – and importantly, whether it was safe and hygienic for patients. Here’s what we found.

What our study looked at

Over two years, we examined data from 2,114 ICU patients at a Melbourne hospital – 46% of them (970 patients) before we introduced reusable linen, and 54% (1,114 patients) after.

For the first year (the “before” phase), single-use blueys were used. In the second year (the “after” phase), these were replaced with reusable pads, made from soft cotton with a breathable backing. These had a similar capacity to absorb liquids as the disposable version but – instead of being thrown away – they were washed and reused.

The study compared how many kilograms of waste were generated by single-use blueys in the first year, compared to the reusable linen.

We also explored whether reusable linen increased patients’ risk of pressure injuries, sometimes known as bed sores. These are wounds that develop when patients are immobile and spend a lot of time sitting or lying in one position, causing the skin to break down.

Patients in the ICU have a high risk of developing pressure injuries. These can delay recovery and prolong their stay in hospital.

To evaluate the change, we surveyed nurses who’d used the reusable pads. We also reviewed medical records to compare the prevalence of pressure injuries in the two groups, along with patient demographics such as age, sex and length of hospital stay.

What we found

There was no difference in pressure injuries between the two groups. This means reusable linen did not increase the risk of an ICU patient developing a pressure injury.

But it did save a lot of waste. In the year before introducing reusable pads, 21,554 disposable pads were used in this one hospital ward, generating almost half a tonne of waste from this single-use item alone.

Shifting to reusable linen effectively eliminated this waste, saving about half a tonne (496 kilograms) from going to landfill in one year alone.

Initially, some nurses expressed concerns about whether the reusable linen pads would affect patients’ skin. However, once the reusable pads were introduced and used for a few weeks, staff were highly satisfied. Many noted they were more sustainable and helped reduce waste, and recommended continuing to use them.

While our study didn’t look at infection risk specifically, 50 years of data from the United States and the United Kingdom has previously shown reusable linen does not increase the risk of infections when it is washed and sterilised properly.

For example, Australian laundry standards for infection control require reusable items to be washed at a certain temperature (above 65°C for at least ten minutes, or 71°C for at least three minutes) or treated with a chemical disinfectant when material is heat sensitive.

Why this research matters

Australia’s health-care system produces up to 7% of the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions. Hospitals are the single biggest contributor.

Given this is largely from direct patient care, making day-to-day routines more sustainable can have a big impact.

There are other benefits, too. During the early parts of the COVID pandemic, when there were often equipment shortages in supply chains, our research confirmed that using reusable personal protective equipment (PPE) was safe and could help ensure products remained available. It was also more sustainable and less costly.

One potential drawback of reusable health-care equipment is how much water is consumed cleaning and sterilising it. Our study didn’t assess this directly.

But in further research, we plan to do a life cycle assessment that compares single-use blueys and reusable linen.

This is a widely recognised way to assess the environmental impact of products from “cradle to grave”. The assessment considers the energy consumption, water use, greenhouse gas emissions and cost involved not only in the products’ manufacture, but also in their use and disposal. This includes the impact of washing and sterilising products versus sending items to landfill.

Health-care workers often face barriers to sustainable practice when caring for patients. But as frontline workers are managing the health consequences of climate change and environmental disasters, it’s vital they understand their role in promoting environmentally responsible care. Access to equipment that is safe, for both their patients and the planet, is essential.

Forbes McGain has received grant funding, including from the National Health and Medical Research Council. He receives licence fees for the McMonty Hood personal protection device.

Rochelle Wynne and Stacey Matthews 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. Reusing medical equipment is good for the planet. But is it safe? – https://theconversation.com/reusing-medical-equipment-is-good-for-the-planet-but-is-it-safe-265681

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jemimah Widdicombe, Research Associate, Museums Victoria, Museums Victoria Research Institute

When we post to a group chat or talk to an AI chatbot, we don’t think about how these technologies came to be. We take it for granted we can instantly communicate. We only notice the importance and reach of these systems when they’re not accessible.

Companies describe these systems with metaphors such as the “cloud” or “artificial intelligence”, suggesting something intangible. But they are deeply material.

The stories told about these systems centre on newness and progress. But these myths obscure the human and environmental cost of making them possible. AI and modern communication systems rely on huge data centres and submarine cables. These have large and growing environmental costs, from soaring energy use to powering data centres to water for cooling.

There’s nothing new about this, as my research shows. The first world-spanning communication system was the telegraph, which made it possible to communicate between some continents in near-real time. But it came at substantial cost to the environment and humans. Submarine telegraph cables were wrapped in gutta-percha, the rubber-like latex extracted from tropical trees by colonial labourers. Forests were felled to grow plantations of these trees.

Is it possible to design communications systems without such costs? Perhaps. But as the AI investment bubble shows, environmental and human costs are often ignored in the race for the next big thing.

From the “Victorian internet” to AI

Before the telegraph, long distance communication was painfully slow. Sending messages by ship could take months.

In the 1850s, telegraph cables made it possible to rapidly communicate between countries and across oceans. By the late 1800s, the telegraph had become ubiquitous. Later dubbed the “Victorian internet”, the telegraph was the predecessor of today’s digital networks.

Building telegraph networks was a huge undertaking. The first transatlantic cable was completed in 1858, spanning more than 4,000km between North America and Europe.

Australia followed closely behind. European colonists created the first telegraph lines in the 1850s between Melbourne and Williamstown. By 1872, the Overland Telegraph Line between Adelaide and Darwin had been completed. From Darwin, the message could reach the world.

There are clear differences between the telegraph and today’s AI systems. But there are also clear parallels.

In our time, fibre optic cables retrace many routes of the now obsolete submarine telegraph cables. Virtually all (99%) of the world’s internet traffic travels through deep sea cables. These cables carry everything from Google searches to ChatGPT interactions, transmitting data close to the speed of light from your device to faraway data centres and back.

Historical accounts describe the telegraph variously as a divine gift, a human-made wonder, and a networked global intelligence, far from the material reality. These descriptions are not far off the way AI is talked about today.

Grounded in extraction

In the 19th century, the telegraph was commonly thought of as an emblem of progress and technological innovation. But these systems had other stories embedded, such as the logic of colonialism.

One reason European powers set out to colonise the globe was to extract resources from colonies for their own use. The same extractive logic can be seen in the telegraph, a system whose self-evident technological progress won out over environmental and social costs.

If you look closely at a slice of telegraph cable in a museum or at historic sites where submarine telegraph cables made landfall, you’ll see something interesting.

Wrapped around the wires is a mixture of tarred yarn and gutta percha. Cable companies used this naturally occurring latex to insulate telegraph wires from the harsh conditions on the sea floor. To meet soaring demand, colonial powers such as Britain and the Netherlands accelerated harvesting in their colonies across Southeast Asia. Rainforests were felled for plantations and Indigenous peoples forced to harvest the latex.

Australia’s telegraph came at real cost, as First Nations truth telling projects and interdisciplinary researchers have shown.

The Overland Telegraph Line needed large amounts of water to power batteries and sustain human operators and their animals at repeater stations. The demand for water contributed to loss of life, forced dispossession and the pollution of waterways. The legacy of these effects are still experienced today.

Echoes of this colonial logic can be seen in today’s AI systems. The focus today is on technological advancement, regardless of energy and environmental costs. Within five years, the International Energy Agency estimates the world’s data centres could require more electricity than all of Japan.

AI is far more thirsty than the telegraph. Data centres produce a great deal of heat, and water has to be used to keep the servers cool. Researchers estimate that by 2027, AI usage will require between 4.2 and 6.6 billion cubic metres of water – about the same volume used by Denmark annually.

With the rise of generative AI, both Microsoft and Google have significantly increased their water consumption.

Manufacturing the specialised processors needed to train AI models has resulted in dirty mining, deforestation and toxic waste.

As AI scholar Kate Crawford has argued, AI must be understood as a system that is:

embodied and material, made from natural resources, fuel, human labour, infrastructures, logistics, histories and classifications.

The same was true of the telegraph.

Planning for the future

Telegraph companies and the imperial networks behind them accepted environmental extraction and social exploitation as the price of technological progress.

Today’s tech giants are following a similar approach, racing to release ever more powerful models while obscuring the far reaching environmental consequences of their technologies.

As governments work to improve regulation and accountability, they must go further to enforce ethical standards, mandate transparent disclosure of energy and environmental impacts and support low impact projects.

Without decisive action, AI risks becoming another chapter in the long history of technologies trading human and environmental wellbeing for technological “progress”. The lesson from the telegraph is clear: we must refuse to accept exploitation as the cost of innovation.

Jemimah Widdicombe works for the National Communication Museum (NCM) as Senior Curator.

– ref. From the telegraph to AI, our communications systems have always had hidden environmental cost – https://theconversation.com/from-the-telegraph-to-ai-our-communications-systems-have-always-had-hidden-environmental-cost-263811

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessa Rogers, Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, The University of Melbourne

Our new report follows the lives of around 1,700 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the largest study of its kind. We wanted to understand what helps them thrive as they grow up.

For more than 15 years, the Footprints in Time study has looked at the experiences of Indigenous children growing up from early childhood. We are now able to track what this means for them later in life.

This provides powerful evidence that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are growing up strong and resilient in many aspects of life. Yet it also highlights systemic barriers that could hold them back.

Our study

Since 2008, Indigenous children, families and teachers have shared their stories and experiences each year as part of the Footprints in Time study. The information used in the latest report was collected between 2008 and 2021.

This study follows the development Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and their families living in cities, regional towns and remote communities across Australia. It seeks to identify what helps Indigenous children thrive.

The importance of culture

One of the clearest messages from the report is the centrality of culture to wellbeing.

By the time they reached school, three in four children (76%) had attended an Indigenous cultural event, about (54%) had learned arts such as painting or dance, and about half (51%) had engaged in practices like fishing or hunting.

Children who took part in these cultural activities consistently showed stronger social and emotional wellbeing than those who hadn’t. This included having a positive outlook, healthy body, strong relationships, higher confidence and greater resilience as they moved through school.

Opportunities to learn an Indigenous language

The report shows the opportunity to speak and learn an Indigenous language during early childhood and the first years of school, helps children have stronger social-emotional wellbeing. This includes stronger connections to identity and belonging into their teenage years.

In very remote areas, more than 70% of children spoke an Indigenous language, while fewer than 10% of children in cities did so.

In cities and regional centres, where cultural opportunities are fewer, parents and communities were worried children were missing out on these protective factors. So the issue is not whether children value culture, but whether systems make space for it.

The crucial role of families

Families and parents play an equally crucial role.

When parents reported high levels of wellbeing and resilience, their children were more likely to achieve in literacy and numeracy, to enjoy better health, and to experience fewer difficulties as teenagers.

Early cultural experiences, like connection to Country and speaking an Indigenous language, were also linked with stronger social and emotional wellbeing as children grow into middle childhood and adolescence.

So investing in families through financial support, cultural support, community services, and accessible health care is ultimately an investment in children’s futures.

Read more:
Indigenous students want to finish Year 12. They need equal support and resources from schools to do this

A growing digital divide

The report also highlights one of the most pressing issues facing Indigenous young people today: digital inequality.

When asked in 2011 and 2013, only 37% of children in the study were using the internet at home. In major cities, just over half (56%) had access, but in very remote areas, only 8% had access.

Children who had internet access early in life went on to show stronger reading comprehension, better problem-solving skills, and more confidence with technology in adolescence. They were also more likely to use digital tools safely and effectively.

This matters because digital access was closely tied to income and education. Children from higher income households, or where parents had completed Year 12, were far more likely to be online. Those who stood to benefit most from digital learning opportunities were often the least likely to have access.

Early experiences set the stage

The findings show us how what happens before school has lasting impacts.

Children who attended preschool or playgroup, or whose parents engaged in early learning at home, had stronger vocabularies and self control when they started school.

When we looked at children who identified with their Mob (or Mobs) before starting school, compared to those who didn’t, we found they were more likely to have:

• stronger social and emotional wellbeing during both middle childhood and adolescence

• stronger connection to culture, Country, Ancestors and spirit as they grew into middle childhood and adolescence.

These children also consistently achieved higher literacy and numeracy results in Year 5, stayed more engaged in learning during adolescence, and demonstrated stronger planning and memory skills in later years.

This confirms what many parents and educators already know, investment in the early years pays off, not just in academic results but in confidence, resilience and wellbeing.

Listening to children

Perhaps the most moving part of the report is what children themselves say about “growing up strong”. This includes a series of poems about growing up strong as an Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander young person, developed using direct quotes from parents and young people.

Being healthy and making good decisions.

Respect my Elders and culture.

Being resilient and persistent. Getting better at something.

You have learnt how to be a good person and be safe. Strong and brave

Children understand that kindness, persistence and cultural respect are the foundations of a good life. Our challenge is to ensure systems and structures reflect and support this wisdom.

Why this matters

Our report is not just about statistics. It shows what families, communities, and children are already doing to build strong futures.

It also shows where governments and education systems must do more, embedding culture and language in early learning, tackling racism in schools, supporting families, resourcing communities and bridging the digital divide.

Jessa Rogers receives funding from the Australian Research Council as a DECRA Fellow. She is the Managing Director of Baayi Consulting. The Early Childhood Report for Footprints in Time: The Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children (LSIC) was produced with research funding provided by the Australian Government Department of Social Services.

Kristin R. Laurens has received funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, and Medical Research Future Fund. The Early Childhood Report for Footprints in Time: The Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children (LSIC) was produced with research funding provided by the Australian Government Department of Social Services.

– ref. Our study followed Indigenous children for 15 years to understand what helps them thrive – https://theconversation.com/our-study-followed-indigenous-children-for-15-years-to-understand-what-helps-them-thrive-266593

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lachlan Vass, Fellow, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Governments of all stripes provide support to small businesses in the form of tax concessions, lighter-touch regulation or government grants. They’re called the “engine room” of the economy. But is small really best?

In recent research, my co-authors and I explored this question by looking at the contributions that firms of different ages and size make to the economy.

We found new and young businesses, rather than small, old businesses, are the drivers of economic growth. This matters, as the economic dynamism these young firms drive boosts productivity – the major determinant of incomes in the long run. But government policy is focused on size, which may be holding us back.

Using de-identified data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics that tracks all businesses in Australia, we analysed the economic performance of each individual business in the market sector from 2003 onward – from pubs and cafes to manufacturing.

This includes all business types and sizes, from the corner store to the major corporates. We analysed how many people they employed, their economic value-add (think of it as their contribution to the economy), and their labour productivity (how much stuff they produce for a given amount of workers and hours).

Australia has some 2.7 million small businesses, with 440,000 new businesses started in 2024-25. But our study finds it’s young firms (those aged five years or less) that punch above their weight and have an outsized positive contribution to the economy, while small, old firms (aged over five, and with fewer than 15 employees) have a net negative impact.

Engines of job creation

Our research found young businesses contribute six percentage points to overall annual headcount growth. This compares to small, old firms, which actually reduce overall annual headcount growth by 4.5 percentage points, due to these firms stagnating, shrinking and closing down.

This difference is underlined when we look separately at job creation and job destruction. Young firms contribute 59% of new jobs, while small old firms account for just 16%.

This is even more stark when comparing job losses: small old businesses account for 41% of all job destruction. Large old businesses – often the focus of announced corporate layoffs – account for 18% of job destruction.

So is young best then? As economists like to say – it depends.

We analysed the growth trajectories of young firms and found significant differences.

Of firms that survive to age five, high-performing young firms employ twice the number of workers than the average firm of the same age, and are over 40% more productive.

But the typical new business (in its first year of activity) is relatively small, employing only around two people. And it stops growing relatively quickly – on average new firms plateau after two years of operation. This highlights the vast differences in firm types among young firms.

This might not be surprising to some readers; not all new businesses are started with the goal of being the next Atlassian or Canva.

People start businesses for a range of reasons: whether you’re a lawyer who’d rather be your own boss than work for a large corporation; an IT worker who recently had a child and values control over the flexibility of your time; or a tradie who benefits from the tax implications of running your own business.

Smarter ways to support all businesses

This highlights the importance of policymakers being clear on what they’re trying to achieve when providing subsidies and support to businesses.

Our analysis suggests if the policy goal is to spur economic growth and employment, then targeting assistance to small businesses is poor policy. But this doesn’t necessarily mean we should take that assistance and give it to young firms instead.

Since a small number of high-performing young firms drive economic growth, we won’t always know which young firms these will be. Policy that subsidises young firms would potentially still be ineffective. And we know government has a chequered history with picking winners – see the more than A$30 billion provided to the car manufacturing sector.

So, what should government do?

One often overlooked and potentially counterintuitive finding from our research is the role of firm “exits” – businesses closing down or moving onto new ventures. Firms that exit are 20% less productive than the average firm in their industry five years before they close down, and their productivity declines further as they approach closure.

But the rate of business closures in Australia has been declining over time. Policies that remove impediments from orderly business closure, including supporting affected workers, would help workers and capital to be re-allocated to more productive and innovative firms.

Specific business assistance and targeting is always fraught with difficulty. Policymakers can instead focus on broader policy settings that are conducive to growth, and that apply to all firms rather than just a subset.

These efforts, such as streamlining regulation and ensuring it is fit for purpose for all businesses, would be in line with some of the principles and reform directions agreed at Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ economic reform roundtable earlier this year.

The author thanks Rachel Lee and Ewan Rankin, researchers at the e61 Institute, for their contribution to this article.

Lachlan Vass is affiliated with the e61 Institute.

– ref. Young businesses create 6 in 10 new jobs in Australia – far more than established firms – https://theconversation.com/young-businesses-create-6-in-10-new-jobs-in-australia-far-more-than-established-firms-266573

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

In a new online trend, people are scuttling, crawling, and bounding around on all fours while filming themselves – and their videos are getting a lot of attention. The practice is called quadrobics, and it’s quite the spectacle.

Quadrobics evangelists claim the movements promote fitness, strength, mobility and even spirituality, as a chance to reconnect with nature and the “primal” self.

The word quadrobics comes from quattuor (Latin for four) and aerobics (exercise that is rhythmic and repetitive, and which uses the body’s large muscle groups, such as in running).

But is this form of workout actually good for you? Is it just another fad made viral by our attention economy? Or perhaps, a bit of both?

From world records to the therian subculture

Quadrobics gained notoriety back in 2008 when Japanese sprinter Kenichi Ito set a Guinness World Record by sprinting 100 metres on all fours.

Since then, the records have been tumbling. In 2022, American Collin McClure clocked 15.66 seconds, and this year Japanese runner Ryusei Yonee smashed the mark again, with a blistering 14.55 seconds.

Yonee said he studied animal movement from childhood and trained by observing dogs, cats, and monkeys before refining his own technique on the running track.

Recently, we’ve seen a growing number of social media users, particularly young users, posting their own quadrobics content.

In some places, such as Russia, entire subcultures of “quadrobers” have emerged. They blend quadrobics with costume play, and can be seen crawling through the outdoors wearing animal masks.

Much of the online quadrobics content comes from the therian community. Therians are people, often children, who identify as a non-human animal.

Adult therians were some of the first to begin practising quadrobics. While not all therians do quadrobics, those who do often claim that moving on four limbs is an embodied expression of their identity.

Therians can also be easily be confused with the “furry” fandom, but they are different. While therians identify as animals, furries are interested in anthropomorphic animal characters (animals with human traits).

Furries create personal avatars called “fursonas” and participate in events and conventions in “fursuits”.

In Russia and other former Soviet states the sight of young people scampering around wearing fox masks and tails has sparked a moral panic among some politicians and religious leaders.

Last year in Uzbekistan, the Interior Ministry issued a warning to parents that children’s involvement in quadrobics would be treated as parental neglect. And one Russian politician, Vyacheslav Volodin, blamed the West for the trend of people dressing up as animals, calling it a “dehumanisation project”.

Fitness or performance?

Quadrobics is primarily concerned with movement rather than identity, costume or role play.

It belongs to a broader wave of “ancestral” or “primal” wellness trends. Think paleo diets, ice baths, or the Liver King’s raw meat diet. These practices promise to reconnect us to nature, while doubling as performance.

Even mainstream health and wellness sources are beginning to take note of quadrobics, with various articles listing its supposed benefits for training the major muscle groups and improving coordination.

Enthusiasts showcase moves such as bear crawls, leopard walks, leaps and balances. (Although many of these movements and exercises have been practised for years as warm ups or mobility drills).

Some quadrobics practitioners have claimed tangible benefits such as increased fitness and weight loss.

There is some research evidence suggesting quadrupedal movement can help improve balance, flexibility and core stability. And given its rhythmic nature, it can also get your heart rate up, which can have benefits for aerobic fitness and health.

However, this doesn’t mean quadrobics is without limitations.

The risks and limitations

Because quadrobics relies on body weight resistance alone, the load placed on your muscles is restricted to your body weight. This means it probably isn’t as effective as lifting weights for improving strength and bone density, wherein weight lifting allows you to progressively lift heavier.

And although quadrobics will provide aerobic stimulus, it requires quite a bit of skill, which means it is hard to do for long durations and at higher intensities. You would get better cardiovascular benefits from something like running.

Also, as with any exercise, quadrobics comes with potential injury risks – albeit likely small.

If you want to try quadrobics, your muscles and joints will need time to adapt to the load being placed upon them. This is particularly important for your hands, wrists, elbow, and shoulders, which might not be used to being used in this way. This means you should start very slow, and monitor how you feel after each session.

Overall, there’s not much evidence to suggest quadrobics is better for you than mainstream forms of exercise. While crawling and leaping can build stability and flexibility, scientific studies haven’t yet tested its long-term benefits or risks. At best, it is a supplement to established training.

The current social media success of quadrobics has less to do with exercise science and more to do with visual spectacle. The entertainment value is clear, and it will reliably attract likes, shares and commentary — making it as much about theatre and identity as about fitness.

Samuel Cornell receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Hunter Bennett 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. Experts unpack ‘quadrobics’, the fitness trend that claims leaping around on all fours will make you fit – https://theconversation.com/experts-unpack-quadrobics-the-fitness-trend-that-claims-leaping-around-on-all-fours-will-make-you-fit-266360

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeffrey McNeill, Honorary Research Associate, School of People, Environment and Planning, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

With less than a week until voting in local elections closes, it seems early voter turnout may have increased compared to 2022 – up from 10% of eligible voters to about 18% at the same stage this year.

Still, the final turnout will likely be within the expected range – around 45% across New Zealand, with maybe 35% in Auckland (where the mayoral race had attracted only 10% of eligible voters by late September).

Cue commentators diagnosing the imminent demise of local democracy, followed by their prescribed remedies: the voting system should change, there should be more or less postal voting, local and national elections should be synchronised, schools need more civics education.

But is local democracy really in such parlous straits? My research into regional council democracy suggests otherwise.

On the whole, I’ve found eligible voters who choose not to vote are sensible and not simply apathetic or antidemocratic. After all, more than three-quarters of them (77%) voted in the last general election – they are not switched off.

Rather, they are acting quite rationally. Voting involves costs as well as benefits. Voters have to find out who the candidates are and what they stand for, and then decide who is most likely to deliver on what they promise if elected.

Reading election pamphlets and attending candidate meetings, then making sense of it all, takes time and effort. Voters will therefore only engage if they think the benefits of voting will outweigh the costs, and their own welfare will improve as a result.

On the available evidence, more than half of New Zealand voters think the effort to vote in local elections is unlikely to be worth the return.

Who are we voting for?

General elections are different. Candidates’ party affiliations reduce those voting “costs” because party manifestos set out their political positions and goals.

We might not know the candidates, but we know where their political values lie and how they are likely to vote on issues. Also, we assume some sort of vetting procedure has weeded out the liabilities.

This is not the case in local elections. Historically, New Zealand has preferred to keep overt party politics out of local government – despite the known party connections or affiliations of many supposedly non-aligned candidates.

Typically, only a few national political parties front up in local elections, and then only within a few councils (typically the Greens and Labour, and now ACT in the main centres).

Without much easy political branding to rely on, how are voters to know whether their candidates’ values align with theirs?

The Electoral Commission publishes candidate profiles. But mostly these consist of broad, anodyne statements, often accompanied by a promise to keep rate increases down.

A watchdog group such as Democracy Action can provide further information for voters to compare candidates. But they, too, are limited by candidates’ willingness to provide any information about themselves.

Voters are realistic

But does this matter? It’s impossible to provide an objective measure, but the 45% of eligible voters who do turn out generally deliver credible councillors and mayors – despite some of the very fringe or prank candidates on offer.

Having worked closely with regional, city and district councillors over the years, I remain impressed by their competence and commitment to their councils and citizens.

A few mavericks can make it to the council table, yes. But we could say the same of some backbench MPs in parliament. More than a third of the country’s mayors have now served at least two terms and are seeking another, suggesting their competence is recognised.

Also, and without being cynical, voters know changing councillors is unlikely to alter local body behaviour much. Councils’ discretionary expenditure is extremely limited, with the bulk of their budgets committed to roading and water infrastructure.

The government’s Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill aims to reduce that discretionary spending even more.

Voters wanting lower taxes don’t expect much from local government, either. A two-person household on median incomes pays nearly NZ$40,000 to central government in income tax and GST, compared to just under $4,000 for an average city or district rates bill.

Real issues engage voters

Tertiary students and renters are also unlikely to engage. Most of my students laughed sheepishly when I asked them before the previous local election whether they had voted.

Neither group has skin in the game: they don’t pay rates (their landlords do), and quite possibly they will have finished a degree and left town before they can enjoy any benefits from a change in council representation.

This may help explain why smaller councils have much higher voter turnouts than large metropolitan areas, such as south Auckland, with high numbers of renters and young people.

None of this is meant as an excuse for tolerating less democracy. In fact, as my research has shown, when a local controversy or crisis emerges, voters do engage.

In the previous election, flood management on the West Coast, Wellington’s public transport problems and Canterbury’s water pollution issues all galvanised voters for the affected councils.

Here’s a prediction: when the full ratepayer bill for the central government’s “Local Water Done Well” infrastructure policy comes through, the 2029 local government elections will become more engaging contests and turnout will increase.

It’s too early to write off local democracy just yet.

Jeffrey McNeill 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. Not voting in local elections is rational. Voters need better reasons to engage – https://theconversation.com/not-voting-in-local-elections-is-rational-voters-need-better-reasons-to-engage-266463

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

When you look at Sussan Ley’s predicament, you can’t help thinking of Brendan Nelson.

Nelson, a Liberal moderate and a former minister who was a competent but not outstanding performer, won the Liberal leadership after the 2007 defeat of the Howard government. He then never had a chance. Malcolm Turnbull was determined to bring him down (only himself to be ousted by Tony Abbott before the 2010 election, which the Coalition narrowly lost).

Ley came to the leadership in worse circumstances than Nelson. The Liberals, already in opposition, suffered such a devastating defeat in May that it would be near impossible for any leader to be competitive at the 2028 election.

The Liberals had three leaders between 2007 and 2010; Nelson lasted less than a year. Who knows how many they will churn through between now and 2031? The odds of Ley making it to the next election are not good; her chances of leading into the 2031 election must be near nil.

Ley is an interim leader and may, like Nelson, be a short term one.

Not that she isn’t doing a fair job. She is active; her office seems well-organised; she hasn’t made serious mistakes. Critics complain the Liberals don’t have policies. This leaves a void but it is also an unreasonable attack so soon after the election. Where Ley has failed is in managing the more difficult members of her team, notably Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Andrew Hastie. Her defenders would say they have been unmanageable.

Ley has massive forces arrayed against her. Many of the conservatives in the party won’t accept a leader who wants to campaign in the political centre. In an era when right winger Nigel Farage in Britain is doing over the Tories, they insist the Liberals should go to the right, regardless of the fact that compulsory voting and other factors make Australia very different from the United Kingdom.

They are encouraged by Sky After Dark presenters who want to see the back of Ley.

The polls provide plenty of ammunition. The latest Newspoll, published at the weekend, showed Labor with a two-party lead of 57-43%. Ley’s net approval was down three points to a new low of minus 20.

Read more:
Labor retains big lead in Newspoll and all other federal polls

Two ambitious right wingers, Angus Taylor and Hastie, are waiting to pounce when the opportunity comes (which won’t be this year). Taylor, defence spokesman, is (sensibly) biding his time and behaving himself. Hastie, who was home affairs spokesman, last week spat the dummy and quit the frontbench, complaining that Ley, in the portfolio instruction she sent him, had made it clear he wouldn’t have a role in developing the immigration policy.

This was curious. Was Hastie looking for an excuse, or Ley looking to control him? Even if immigration spokesman Paul Scarr formulated the policy, as a senior member of shadow cabinet, Hastie would have had a say. On the other hand, immigration comes broadly under home affairs, so its spokesman would usually be expected to have some part in putting together the policy.

Neither Hastie nor Price, sacked from the frontbench by Ley when she wouldn’t endorse Ley’s leadership, is a comfortable team player. This is odd in Hastie’s case, given he comes from the special forces, the elite part of the military that requires maximum team discipline.

In the wake of Hastie’s resignation, a story, damaging to him, was leaked to Nine media. It reported that former leader Peter Dutton had been “scathing” about Hastie’s performance as shadow defence minister in his arguments to the Liberal Party’s election review panel.

The Liberal defence policy, which should have been a strength, amounted to only a proposed number for spending, with no substance to back it up.

Dutton did not make a formal submission to the review, but was interviewed at length by panel members Nick Minchin and Pru Goward. Minchin said on Monday that Dutton “avoided criticising his shadows”. Whatever Dutton said or did not say, party sources said it was obvious there had been tension between Dutton and Hastie. For his part Hastie – who certainly was not a top performer for the opposition last term – is known to have been critical of the fact some policy work he prepared did not see the light of day.

Hastie’s retort to the Nine story was that “the old guard is lashing out because it is losing the fight on immigration and energy”.

Apart from being stalked by aspirants, Ley is dogged by the ideological division within the party.

It is now clear Ley has to get a decision – that could involve a patched-together compromise – on the Liberals’ stand on net zero by Christmas. But it will be awkward to do this without also announcing a wider policy on energy, which would take a good deal longer to craft.

It’s not easy for Ley to deal with the wider call from critics for policies. She knows the policy process has to be deeper than last term, with releases coming much earlier ahead of the election. But excessive rush would be risky.

One strategy is embarking on “headland” speeches to signal directions at least. Ley has already given one on fiscal issues and middle class welfare (which received less attention than it deserved), and there are more to come.

Most immediately, Ley has to have yet another minor reshuffle, to fill Hastie’s home affairs post. In the interim, finance spokesman senator James Paterson, who held the job last term, is acting.

Paterson has become important to Ley’s leadership. A senior conservative, he is not a natural to be in her camp. But at the moment he has her back.

He told the Conversation’s politics podcast last week (a day before Hastie’s announcement):

My view is the overwhelming majority of the party room is behind Sussan as leader and want to give her the best chance to succeed. She won the ballot for the leadership fair and square. In the Liberal Party we respect the outcome of ballots and give leaders the opportunity to prove their worth.

Well, not all Liberals do.

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: Can Sussan Ley avoid Brendan Nelson’s fate? – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-can-sussan-ley-avoid-brendan-nelsons-fate-265855

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eyal Mayroz, Senior Lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney

Two years into the most horrific chapter in the history of Israel and Palestine, a glimmer of hope has been offered to both sides by US President Donald Trump’s plan for a permanent ceasefire and initial steps towards a faraway peace, or at least coexistence.

The plan at this stage is extremely vague, full of holes and strongly biased toward the Israeli side. However, it currently enjoys robust international support and legitimacy – arguably, stronger than any peace plan in the past two years.

It demands significant concessions from both sides, though much more so for Hamas, with punitive measures for failures to comply.

And it inches closer than any time in the past two years to halting the senseless mass killings and ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.

What are the prospects for the plan’s success? What are the obstacles? And how could the world better support the prolonged and difficult process of trying to protect countless innocent lives in this part of the world?

On a grim anniversary, and with both sides exhausted, the answers require careful consideration.

Major concessions on both sides

For Hamas, there are a few immediate benefits to the proposed agreement: Israel’s promises to end the killings in Gaza, allow humanitarian aid to flow, and release numerous Palestinian prisoners.

At the same time, without timelines for a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and for Palestinian governance in the strip, there are also major risks.

The plan doesn’t include an explicit promise for a Palestinian state that will encompass both Gaza and the West Bank. And the demand for Hamas to disarm and stay out of Palestinian politics would not only abolish the group’s remaining power and influence, but leave its members at the mercy of Israel and American goodwill.

For Israel, the return of all hostages, both alive and dead, and the chance to begin to emerge from its diplomatic isolation and pariah status offer significant gains.

However, for the country’s hardline government and its political base, these gains would come at a cost. This includes:

• the withdrawal from Gaza without fulfilling Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s promise to fully destroy Hamas

• amnesty for Hamas militants who would renounce the armed struggle

• the release of 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, including more than 250 with Israeli blood on their hands

• forgoing annexation of Gaza and the West Bank, as promised by Trump

• acknowledging, even if fuzzily, Palestinian aspirations for sovereignty and self-determination.

These concessions will be ideologically tough and politically destabilising for the current Israeli government.

Arab and Muslim support for the plan

Despite the challenges, the plan’s prospects have been enhanced by a number of factors, at least in the short term.

Key among them has been the overwhelming international support, especially among Arab and Muslim states. This has left Hamas more isolated than ever. The support by its long-time allies, Qatar and Turkey, would have been particularly hard for Hamas to swallow.

Notably, this support had been tested by last-minute Israeli changes to the draft that didn’t sit well with some of these states.

However, they grudgingly acquiesced to the changes, given the dire situation in Gaza, the exhaustion of the chief Arab mediators, Trump’s clout, and the realisation that no better plan was likely in the near future.

Also influential was the long-overdue US decision to force Netanyahu into important concessions on allowing aid into Gaza and ending the threats of ethnic cleansing and Israeli annexation of parts of the West Bank and Gaza.

The imminent October 10 deadline for a Nobel Peace Prize announcement may have contributed to Trump’s resolve to pressure both sides – especially Netanyahu – and to the tightly imposed schedule for the release of the plan.

Israeli hostages as a bargaining chip

For the past two years, Hamas’ main bargaining chip was the Israeli hostages it kidnapped on October 7 2023.

A key challenge posed by Trump’s plan is the dictate to release the remaining captives, dead and alive, within the first 72 hours of the deal coming into effect. This would be in exchange for roughly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners.

Effectively, this would not only abolish Hamas’ negotiating power, but also their threat to use the hostages as human shields against the current or a future Israeli military incursion into Gaza City.

However, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Hamas leaders in Qatar were recently persuaded to believe that keeping the hostages had become a liability because Netanyahu’s government was no longer primarily concerned about their safety and would use their likely presence in Gaza City as a pretext for their operations there.

This may have made the benefit of a hostage-prisoner swap more apparent for Hamas.

How the world can help

Beyond ending the immediate crisis in Gaza, the plan’s long-term viability depends on larger questions of Palestinian statehood and governance.

Despite being scorned early on by the US and Israel, an initiative launched in July by France and Saudi Arabia to push for wider recognition of Palestine helped lay the groundwork for the Trump peace plan.

The move extracted an explicit commitment by the Palestinian Authority (PA) to hold democratic elections and undertake other significant reforms. It also helped galvanise a unified Arab position on ending the conflict, with a consequential joint condemnation of Hamas’ October 7 attack and a demand the group disarm and relinquish power in Gaza.

Arguably, the success of Trump’s plan will depend not only on the fast-moving events in the coming days, but also on the international community’s ability to sustain its commitment to a complex peace process in the coming weeks, months and years.

Once the mass violence in Gaza has ended, international attention will wane and make it easier for either side to derail the process. This is why the efforts to recognise Palestinian statehood remain important. With support now from 157 of 193 UN member states – more than 80% of membership – this could increase the pressure on the US to avoid vetoing a full UN membership for Palestine in the future.

Agency matters

Western powers should also reconsider their demands that Hamas be barred from Palestinian politics as a condition for recognition. Genuine Palestinian sovereignty should include the fundamental right of the people to choose their own government through free and fair elections.

It’s inconsistent for these Western states to champion democratic values, independence and self-determination for the Palestinians, while simultaneously prescribing which parties can participate in their electoral process.

At the same time, third-party states have the right to articulate the potential diplomatic or economic consequences should Hamas be elected into a future Palestinian government. It would then be up to the Palestinian people to weigh the potential costs when casting their votes.

This approach could provide respect for Palestinian agency, while maintaining the principle that democratic choices carry real-world implications, both domestic and external.

The difficult path ahead

Ultimately, significant progress on the road to peace would require an Israeli government that’s willing to make hard choices and sacrifices. That government currently doesn’t exist.

But would the next government be more amenable? Arguably, this would depend on many interlocking factors – most importantly, American pressure and engagement, in addition to “carrots” in the form of normalisation agreements with Saudi Arabia and other Arab states. These factors could help shift domestic opinions and political calculus in Israel.

However, significant breakthroughs appear improbable before the country’s next elections, scheduled for 2026. Until then, Trump remains the only one capable of meaningfully influencing the cost-benefit calculations in Jerusalem.

Notably, a strong desire for a sense of security remains the most important consideration for Israelis, even if the means of achieving this are highly controversial.

Seen in this context, the demand in Trump’s plan that Hamas disarm and Gaza be demilitarised will be non-negotiable for any future Israeli government. Even then, extremist violence on either side would continue to pose the greatest threat to the prospects of co-existence.

On the positive side, history has shown that even in the most intractable conflicts, pathways to peace can be found when courage meets opportunity. The international community’s unprecedented unity, Trump’s new willingness to pressure both Hamas and Israel, and the sheer exhaustion on both sides can create that opportunity.

If this moment could be sustained – if the world maintains its focus beyond the initial ceasefire, if moderates on both sides find their voices – then perhaps the glimmer of hope offered today may become a light.

Eyal Mayroz served as a counterterrorism specialist with the Israeli Defence Forces in the 1980s.

– ref. On a grim anniversary, an end to Gaza’s violence is suddenly clear – if both sides can make sacrifices – https://theconversation.com/on-a-grim-anniversary-an-end-to-gazas-violence-is-suddenly-clear-if-both-sides-can-make-sacrifices-266771

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Austin, Senior Lecturer in Theatre, The University of Melbourne

Melbourne Theatre Company’s (MTC) latest offering is a striking adaptation of the 1938 gothic novel Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier.

Like Alfred Hitchcock’s 1940 film, the story follows a young woman who marries a widower, Maxim de Winter, and relocates to his grand ancestral estate of Manderley – only to be haunted by the memory of his dead first wife, Rebecca, and the dark mysteries surrounding her demise.

Though it was celebrated as a love story by many upon its release, du Maurier dismissed that interpretation. For her, Rebecca was always far more about jealousy, rage, and the fragility of relationships. Themes of class, power, sexuality and gender – radical in 1938 and still pressing today – pulse through the text.

The latest MTC production gestures toward them, but at times they feel more like lost opportunities than fully realised dimensions that might offer powerful insight into our contemporary context.

An exploration of haunting and visibility

The entire story of Rebecca is told as a flashback. In an opening scene the young, naive protagonist, simply named Woman in the program (and compellingly portrayed by Nikki Shiels) tells the audience: “Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again”.

With that evocative first line, the opening monologue situates the dream-like logic, desire and longing that lie at the heart of the text.

We are whisked to Monte Carlo, where the young Woman, practically a school girl with knee high socks and pulling at her jumper sleeves, is serving as a companion to Mrs Van Hopper (Pamela Rabe).

Here, our main characters meets and is rapidly courted by Maxim de Winter (Stephen Phillips), and eventually returns with him to Manderley as his wife.

At the estate, the new Mrs de Winter encounters the imposing housekeeper Mrs Danvers (also played by Pamela Rabe), and Rebecca’s spectre begins to dominate: her reputation for beauty, her competence in managing the household, and her lingering influence even in absence.

Visually and structurally, the staging leans into Gothic and cinematic modes. There are shifting sets, sliding doors, and blackouts that create a visual sense of abyss and emptiness. An enormous oval mirror, hung from the ceiling, also plays a central role.

The stage design allows for swift changes of locale as we move through the wings of Manderley. The mirror becomes a motif of doubling – two marriages, two wives, and two versions of Manderley, one grand and one decayed. These devices help articulate the psychological tension between past and present, seen and unseen.

The absence of Rebecca, and the house itself, almost become characters. They shape others’ behaviours, influence memory, and exert social and psychological pressure.

The set and costume design by Marg Horwell, lighting by Paul Jackson, and sound design by Grace Ferguson and Joe Paradise Lui and are among the production’s strongest features.

Where themes glimmer, and where they lack

A core tension in du Maurier’s Rebecca lies in class.

Rebecca, a women who inherited privilege, moved through Manderley with a sense of entitlement. The young Woman, by contrast, is not from the wealthy elite. She carries the mark of outsider and can’t compete.

While MTC’s adaptation acknowledges this gulf, it seldom renders it in sharp relief. The Woman’s discomfort and self‑doubt are clear, but the persistent social machinery that excludes her – the whispers, expectations and inherited status – could be more deeply excavated.

The show seems to under-emphasise the idea that to “belong” in Manderley is not only psychological, but also structural. Had it fully inhabited these tensions, it could speak powerfully to how invisibility and inherited privilege continue to shape and inform our lives.

Likewise, the themes of gender and sexuality seem under-explored in the production.

There are moments or erotically charged exploration – most notably in a bedroom scene where the seemingly sexually repressed Mrs Danvers reveals her devotion to Rebecca, and convinces the new Mrs De Winter to try on Rebecca’s old clothing. But these moments seem more atmospheric than substantive.

These thematic spaces the production seems to miss – class, sexuality, gender – are not decorative. They are integral to what makes Rebecca more than a love story, and why Du Maurier resisted the framing of a melodramatic gothic romance.

A promising show that needed more anchoring

Eventually we discover Rebecca was not all she seemed to be. In a chilling twist, we become privy to her final act of manipulation. The end scene, staged on a revolve, is a kind of operatic fever dream of luxury, despair, desire and loss.

This is where the production is at its most successful theatrically, and where the tension and energy that were so difficult to sustain through many blackouts reaches an electrifying fever pitch.

MTC’s Rebecca is not without its triumphs. The performances, especially from Shiels and Rabe, are outstanding. It is a daring adaptation that turns the novel’s internal shadows outward, striving to make the psychological physical, and to render absence as presence. In a collision of design, performance and imagery, it offers moments of genuine haunting.

Yet, those moments are without a connection to deeper possibilities and more contemporary anchors, rendering them powerful flashes in a landscape of narrative drift. The ambition is high, but coherence wavers.

Melbourne Theatre Company is a department of the University of Melbourne where I am also employed.

– ref. New adaptation of Rebecca is visually haunting, but misses the core tensions of the original story – https://theconversation.com/new-adaptation-of-rebecca-is-visually-haunting-but-misses-the-core-tensions-of-the-original-story-265746

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Guido Carim Junior, Senior Lecturer in Aviation, Griffith University

“It is the closest all of us passengers ever want to come to a plane crash,”
a Qantas flight QF1889’s passenger said after the plane suddenly descended about 20,000 feet on Monday September 22, and diverted back to Darwin.

The Embraer 190’s crew received a pressurisation warning, followed the procedures, and landed normally – but in the cabin, that rapid drop felt anything but normal.

The truth is, in-flight technical problems such as this one are part of flying. Pilots train extensively for them. Checklists contain detailed instructions on how to deal with each issue. Aircraft are built with layers of redundancy, and warning systems alert pilots to problems. It is because of these safety systems that the vast majority of flights that experience technical issues end with a safe arrival rather than tragic headlines.

Here are four scary-sounding failures you might hear about (or even experience) and how they are actually dealt with in the air.

1. Air-conditioning and pressurisation hiccups

What it is

At cruising altitudes (normally around 36,000 feet), aeroplane cabins are kept at a comfortable “cabin altitude” of 8,000 feet using air from the engines that is cooled through the air conditioner.

This artificial air pressure allows us to survive while the atmosphere outside the plane is highly hostile to human life, with temperatures around -55°C and no breathable air. However, if the system misbehaves or the cabin altitude starts to rise for whatever reason, crews treat it as a potential pressurisation problem and initiate the preventive procedures immediately.

What you might feel/see

A quick, controlled descent (it can feel dramatic), ears popping, and sometimes oxygen masks – these typically drop automatically only if the cabin altitude exceeds roughly 14,000 feet. Similar to QF1889, a rapid descent without masks being deployed is the most common outcome.

What pilots do

As soon as they notice a problem with the cabin pressurisation, the pilots put on their own oxygen masks, declare an emergency, and follow the emergency descent checklist, bringing the aircraft as quickly as possible to about 10,000 feet. This is usually followed by a diversion or return to the departure airport.

2. Most feared: engine failures

What it is

Twin-engine airliners are certified to fly safely on one engine. Yet, one-engine failures are treated seriously and thoroughly rehearsed in flight simulators at least annually.

Dual failures, however, are exceptionally rare. The 2009 “Miracle on the Hudson”, for example, was a once-in-a-generation bird strike event that led to both engines stopping. The plane safely landed on the Hudson River in New York with no casualties.

What you might feel/see

A loud bang, vibration, sparks coming out of the engine, smell of burning or a sudden quietening. This may result in a turn-back and an emergency services welcome. Recent headlines on engine failures – from a 737 in Sydney to a multiple bird-strike-related return in the United States ended with safe landings.

What pilots do

After being alerted by the warning system, pilots identify the affected engine and follow the checklist. The checklist typically requires them to shut down the problematic engine, descent to an appropriate altitude and divert if in cruise, or return to the departure airport if after takeoff.

Even when an engine failure damages other systems, crews are trained to manage cascades of warnings – as Qantas A380 flight QF32’s crew did in 2010, returning safely to Singapore.

3. Hydraulic trouble and flight controls

What it is

The many aeroplane flight controls move because of multiple hydraulic or electric systems. If one system misbehaves – for example the left wing aileron, which is used to turn the aircraft, won’t move – redundancy keeps the aeroplane flyable because the right wing aileron will still work.

Crews use specific checklists and adjust speeds, distances and landing configurations to ensure a safe return to the ground.

What you might feel/see

A longer hold while the crew troubleshoots, a return to the departure airport or a faster-than-normal landing. In July, a regional Qantas flight to Melbourne made an emergency landing at Mildura after a hydraulics issue.

What pilots do

After the warning system’s detection, pilots run through a checklist, decide on the landing configuration, request the longest suitable runway and emergency services just in case.

All these resources are available because lessons learned from extreme events – such as United 232’s 1989 loss of all hydraulic systems – were brought into the design of modern aeroplanes and training programs.

4. Landing gear and brake system drama

What it is

Airliners have retractable landing gears that remain inside a compartment for most of the flight. Those are the wheels that come out of the aeroplane belly before landing. Assembled in the wheels are the brakes. They aim to reduce the aircraft speed after touchdown, like in a car.

With so many moving parts, sometimes the landing gear doesn’t extend or retract properly, or the braking system loses some effectiveness, such as the loss of a hydraulic system.

What you might feel/see

A precautionary return, cabin preparation for potential forced landing, or “brace for impact” instruction from the cabin crew right before landing can happen.

While scary, these are preventive measures if something doesn’t go as planned. Earlier this year, a Qantas flight returned to Brisbane after experiencing a problem with its landing gear; passengers were told to keep “heads down” while the aircraft landed safely.

What pilots do

They’ll use long checklists and eventually contact maintenance engineers to troubleshoot the problem. There are also redundancies available to lower the landing gear and to deploy the brakes.

In extreme cases, they may be required to land at the longest runway available (in case of brake problems) or land on the belly (if the landing gear can’t be lowered).

The big picture

Most in-flight failures trigger a chain of defences aimed at keeping the flight safe. Checklists, extensive training and decades of expertise are backed by multiple redundancies and robust design. And these flights typically end like QF1889 did: safely on the ground, with passengers a little shaken.

A dramatic descent or an urgent landing doesn’t mean disaster. It usually means the safety system (aircraft + crew + checklist + training + redundancy) is doing exactly what it’s supposed to do.

Guido Carim Junior 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. These 4 aeroplane failures are more common than you think – and not as scary as they sound – https://theconversation.com/these-4-aeroplane-failures-are-more-common-than-you-think-and-not-as-scary-as-they-sound-265866

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marcelo Feitosa de Paula Dias, PhD candidate in Environmental Law, Queensland University of Technology

Have you noticed more QR codes or country-of-origin labels on the meat at the supermarket or timber decking from the hardware shop? You’re not imagining it.

We’re in a new era of “traceability”. Labels – often with a QR code – will show shoppers where a product came from, who handled it and how it was checked to ensure it was not linked to illegal logging or deforestation.

Shoppers will also be able to see the country or region of origin, the product type, a certification ID (for timber, for example) and a code that links to more information, such as the locations of farms or forests.

These tighter labelling laws overseas in the European Union and Brazil are expected to change what’s available on Australian shop shelves, now and over the next few years. For example, stock levels of products might fluctuate as suppliers drop cheap but ecologically-damaging items and replace them with more responsible alternatives.

Already in Australia, most food products have to carry country-of-origin labels to help compare provenance at a glance. Many timber products in major retailers are Forest Stewardship Council-certified to show they are responsibly sourced or recycled. Other Australian businesses, such as fruit growers, are introducing QR-enabled traceability to let consumers scan their fruit to see where it was grown, and even who picked and packed it.

The trend towards traceability

Two forces are responsible for this push towards tracking produce.

The first is tougher regulation. Australia tightened timber import rules in March this year, requiring importers to know the country, area of harvest and species the wood came from. Many companies share this information via on-pack labels or QR codes. In Europe, anti-deforestation laws will come into force at the end of this year for large companies, prompting exporters to collect similar data and share it with customers.

The second is technology. Retailers are shifting to scannable barcodes linking products to information about their origins. By 2027, point-of-sale systems worldwide are expected to be able to read 2D codes, which are similar to QR codes.

Beefing up cattle IDs

In Brazil, the primary cause of deforestation is the expansion of agriculture and cattle ranches.

To combat this, a national system is being introduced to link each animal to its farm of origin, which means exporters or regulators can reject cattle from deforested areas.

The Brazilian state of Pará, which is the leading native timber producer in Brazil, has already mandated this individual animal traceability. Combined with audits and enforcement, this is designed to choke off “cattle laundering”, as it is known, where meat producers try to hide the illegal origins of their cattle and sell meat from cattle farmed on deforested areas.

As exporters and multinationals adjust to these rules, some imported lines could face temporary changes in supply. Most public warnings focus on EU-bound supply chains rather than Australian, so the local effect remains uncertain and will vary by supplier.

Illegal logging reforms

In March 2025, Australia updated its illegal-logging regime. This means importers and processors have legal responsibilities to make sure the products they bring to Australia or process here do not contain illegally logged timber.

In short, the reforms aim to prevent trade in illegal timber, protect forests and create a level playing field for lawful suppliers. So, what does that mean on the shop floor at Bunnings, for instance?

More timber and wood-containing products will be certified. This means some lines of timber may go in and out of stock as suppliers switch to better-traced products. Prices on certain tropical hardwoods could increase as low-cost, higher-risk supply is squeezed out.

Deforestation-free Europe

The European Union has grown increasingly concerned about logging pressure on biodiversity and forests. While full implementation of its flagship Deforestation Regulation has been postponed to 2026, the purpose of the regulations remains clear: keep deforestation-linked commodities such as cattle, wood and cocoa out of the market.

Over time, clearer labels and even digital passports are expected to encourage consumers to choose certified or recycled options. This passport is a standardised digital file linked to a product via a scannable label.

This matters to Australians, too. Large multinationals typically design their compliance systems to satisfy the market with the toughest rules. If Europe requires farm-level geolocation for beef or cocoa, suppliers will record the farm’s coordinates for every lot at the point of origin, regardless of the final destination. This means Australian buyers will also get this information.

The bottom line

Next month, the COP30 global climate summit will be held in Belem, the gateway to the Brazilian Amazon. Deforestation will be a key focus. The summit will explore ways to align commodity trade with the goal of zero-deforestation. The ability to trace and verify origins will be essential to make this possible.

It’s not just timber and beef that will be traced to their origin. Cocoa, coffee, palm oil, soy, rubber and leather are already being considered for EU due-diligence rules. And batteries will need digital passports recording their origins and compliance.

There may be short-term friction as these changes come into effect. Consumers may see this through occasional shortages or slower restocks. But the dividends are lasting: clearer information for shoppers, a level playing field for compliant businesses and tangible progress towards stopping deforestation and ecosystem harm.

Marcelo Feitosa de Paula Dias 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. From beef to timber, a new era of labels will reveal where your shopping comes from – https://theconversation.com/from-beef-to-timber-a-new-era-of-labels-will-reveal-where-your-shopping-comes-from-265083

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Aaron J. Snoswell, Senior Research Fellow in AI Accountability, Queensland University of Technology

There are many claims to sort through in the current era of ubiquitous artificial intelligence (AI) products, especially generative AI ones based on large language models or LLMs, such as ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and many, many others.

AI will change the world. AI will bring “astounding triumphs”. AI is overhyped, and the bubble is about to burst. AI will soon surpass human capabilities, and this “superintelligent” AI will kill us all.

If that last statement made you sit up and take notice, you’re not alone. The “godfather of AI”, computer scientist and Nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton, has said there’s a 10–20% chance AI will lead to human extinction within the next three decades. An unsettling thought – but there’s no consensus if and how that might happen.

So we asked five experts: does AI pose an existential risk?

Three out of five said no. Here are their detailed answers.

Aaron J. Snoswell was previously part of a research team that competitively won a grant to receive research project funding from OpenAI in 2024–2025 to develop new evaluation frameworks for measuring moral competence in AI agents. The project has now completed and I no longer receive funding from OpenAI.

Niusha Shafiabady, Sarah Vivienne Bentley, Seyedali Mirjalili, and Simon Coghlan 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. Does AI pose an existential risk? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/does-ai-pose-an-existential-risk-we-asked-5-experts-266345

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kristy Hess, Professor (Communication), Deakin University

Australians and people the world over rely on local journalism to keep them informed, but the sector is in a lot of trouble. More than 200 local newspapers in regional Australia significantly cut their services or closed during the COVID pandemic.

Many other newspaper businesses have centralised operations or made cuts to save money. Publications are increasingly filled with syndicated and homogenised content, meaning news is not always relevant to their audiences.

As it’s a complex problem, solutions have been challenging for media companies and governments alike. Our ongoing research project is looking for collaborative solutions, both here and overseas.

One potential answer lies in partnerships between local media outlets and public broadcasters.

As part of this work, we’ve released a report compiling evidence from across the globe to see how these partnerships can and should be done. We found compelling case studies that show how the ABC could work with local media outlets to ensure more Australians get the news they need and deserve.

A sector in crisis

The crisis facing local journalism is a national and international problem.

This has led to terms such a “zombie” and “ghost” newspapers, where news brands are local in name only. There are also “pink slime” outlets: ideologically driven publications of dubious quality masquerading as local news.

Read more:
Pink slime and ‘truthpapers’: why more local news publications is not necessarily better

This has prompted a lot of discussion about the challenges facing public interest journalism. In 2022, a parliamentary inquiry into rural and regional newspapers in Australia outlined 12 recommendations to address some of these issues.

One recommendation included support for Australia’s public broadcaster, the ABC, to facilitate partnerships with small regional publishers. This could be modelled on a similar scheme in the United Kingdom: the BBC’s Local News Partnerships program.

The most well-known aspect of the BBC’s scheme is the Local Democracy Reporting Service. This involves the public broadcaster funding journalist positions in host local news organisations (mostly newspapers) to fill a gap in local reporting.

There has also been substantial federal government spending in Australia. More than A$75 million since 2017 has been allocated to trying to address the issue. This was first in the form of digital innovation grants, then support for cadet journalists and funds (among others) to bolster new associations working to support digital startups.

In late 2024, the federal government committed another $100 million to support news in Australia through its News Media Assistance Program initiative.

What are other countries doing?

It’s against this backdrop that our broader research considers how the ABC might be able to collaborate with existing providers to target “news deserts”. These are largely in regional, rural and remote areas vulnerable to losing access to quality local public interest journalism.

Our new report draws on survey data, document analysis and interviews with public service media representatives. The evidence comes from Australia, New Zealand and many other countries, including the UK, Canada, Japan, Norway, Sweden, Slovenia, Switzerland and the United States.

Public media in these countries are trying to make better quality news by collaborating, in various ways, with small local news outlets.

But they also do these collaborations in the interests of their own legitimacy as public service media comes under increasing right-wing populist attack. In the US, for example, President Donald Trump has followed through on threats to slash public media funding.

Partnership programs with direct government support and dedicated funding tend to be more likely to have a broader impact on the news ecosystem and be more sustainable than those developed at a grassroots level.

Local news partnerships involving NRK in Norway, the BBC in the UK, and RNZ in New Zealand are all good examples of programs with big impact.

Sometimes this looks like content and resource sharing or helping out with investigative, data and accountability reporting. Public service media organisations also provide training and collaborate during emergencies or natural disasters, among other things.

An example of how effective these collaborations can be is in Norway. The country’s public broadcaster, NRK, joined forces with local newspapers to bring powerful personal perspectives to the coverage of Norway’s suicide epidemic.

It became one of the country’s first major collaborations between the public broadcaster and local newspapers, leading to 339 original stories published across 79 newspapers. The partnership sparked a nationwide conversation, enabled ethical coverage and strengthened relationships across the media sector.

What can Australia do?

Every country tailored their partnerships to suit their specific setting. There’s scope for Australia to follow suit.

Australian media organisations can be very competitive against one another, despite their shared challenges. But as these international examples show, cooperation and partnerships can benefit all involved.

We are proposing the establishment of an independent national alliance that brings together all local news producers under the auspices of the ABC. We’re researching a suite of initiatives and pilots to determine what this collaboration could look like in practice.

Collaboration alone is not the panacea to the news crisis. The issues facing the sector run deep, including impact of big tech companies, the collapse of advertising revenue for legacy media and news avoidance.

But it’s clear that to solve Australia’s news desert problem, working together is essential.

The authors would like to acknowledge researchers Angela Blakston, Susan Forde, Alison McAdam, Ragnhild Olsen, Matthew Ricketson and Hugh Martin for their contributions to the research this article discusses.

Kristy Hess receives funding from the Australian Research Council Linkage (LP220100053) and Discovery grant schemes.

Angela Ross works for the ABC as ABC News Research Lead.

– ref. Local news is dwindling globally. Here’s how other countries are trying to fix it – https://theconversation.com/local-news-is-dwindling-globally-heres-how-other-countries-are-trying-to-fix-it-266466

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melanie O’Brien, Associate Professor of International Law, The University of Western Australia

In September this year, a UN-backed independent commission of inquiry released a report concluding Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. The report said:

Israeli authorities deliberately inflicted conditions of life on the Palestinians in Gaza calculated to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinians in Gaza, which is an underlying act of genocide.

This report followed two years of investigation, but it’s not the only investigation underway.

There are two international courts with current proceedings related to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The first, a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), was brought against Israel by South Africa in late 2023.

In the second, International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutors have been investigating potential crimes allegedly committed by anyone, whether Israeli or Palestinian, on the territory of Palestine since March 2021 – even before Hamas’ October 7 2023 attack.

So, if the UN-backed commission of inquiry could put together their report in two years, why are the cases in the ICJ and ICC taking so long? And where are these proceedings up to now?

The International Court of Justice case

A case before the ICJ often takes many years.

This is because the cases often involve multiple stages, including:

• provisional measures (the ICJ version of an injunction, which is an interim court order to do or stop doing something)

• preliminary objections (where a state may object to the ICJ’s jurisdiction in the case)

• the merits case (where the court decides whether or not a country has violated international law).

Each stage involves the parties to the case making written submissions and undertaking oral proceedings. The court also makes decisions at each stage. States must be afforded due process throughout the proceedings.

Another reason for the lengthy period of cases is that states often ask for extensions for their written submissions.

In the South Africa v Israel case (which focused on the question of whether Israel is in breach of its obligation to prevent and punish genocide as per the Genocide Convention), Israel requested and was granted a six-month extension to file their written submission, which is now not due until January 2026.

This means we may not expect a hearing on the merits of the case until possibly even 2027.

The International Criminal Court case

Cases before the ICC, which are brought against individuals, not states, are not like ordinary criminal cases in a domestic court.

These cases relate to not just one crime, but many crimes. Sometimes, perpetrators are charged with multiple offences.

As an example, Dominic Ongwen – a high-ranking member of the Lord’s Resistance Army operating in Uganda – was convicted of 61 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, each of which generally involved multiple victims.

This means the ICC has to collect and present a huge amount of evidence. This can include documents, photographs, and victim and witness testimony. It can take a long time, even years, to collect all this evidence.

Once the case goes to court, it can take many months of hearings, as all the evidence is presented.

The case may also be delayed if either the prosecution or defence asks for an extension at any point in the proceedings.

All of these elements are important to ensure any trial before the ICC is fair and carried out with due process.

In the case relating to Palestine, the ICC prosecutor moved quite quickly with investigations following Hamas’ October 7 2023 attack.

Arrest warrants were issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Defence Minister Yoav Gallant in November 2024, with charges of crimes against humanity (including murder and persecution) and the war crime of starvation.

At the same time, arrest warrants were also issued for several Hamas leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity relating to the October 7 atrocities. Only one of those leaders, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri (Deif), remains likely alive, however.

The ICC now stands ready, willing and able to start a prosecution case against Netanyahu, Gallant or Hamas leaders such as Deif. All it needs is to have them in custody in The Hague.

However, the ICC has no police force. It relies on member states to the ICC to arrest and surrender wanted fugitives.

Interpol “Red Notices” may be issued for people wanted by the ICC. Recently, for instance, the Philippines arrested and surrendered its former president, Rodrigo Duterte, to the ICC, where he is now on trial for crimes against humanity.

Unfortunately, states seem less willing to arrest and surrender the Israeli head of state. This creates a challenge for the ICC in its ability to proceed with prosecutions, but also attracts criticism of double standards of states.

Netanyahu has visited Hungary, an ICC member state, but was not arrested. Hungary has since announced it intends to withdraw from the ICC.

Upholding international law

So, it’s clear the ICC and the ICJ already have legal proceedings well underway relating to crimes in Gaza. These international courts are ready to hear legal arguments and make decisions on state responsibility or individual criminal liability for crimes committed in Palestine or against Palestinians.

What we need, however, is commitment from states to uphold international law.

Countries must comply with their international law obligations and cooperate with international courts, including by arresting and surrendering wanted fugitives to the International Criminal Court.

This is what will help speed the slow-turning wheels of justice.

Melanie O’Brien is president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), which in September 2025 passed a resolution declaring that Israel is committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Gaza.

– ref. Why are the ICJ and ICC cases on Israel and Gaza taking so long? – https://theconversation.com/why-are-the-icj-and-icc-cases-on-israel-and-gaza-taking-so-long-265674

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ankur Singh, Chair of Lifespan Oral Health, University of Sydney

When your teeth and gums are in good condition, you might not even notice their impact on your day-to-day life. Good oral health helps us chew, taste, swallow, speak and convey emotions.

This means the state of your mouth can affect nutrition, confidence, forming relationships and maintaining overall good health and wellbeing.

People who have missing or damaged teeth, or other oral health issues such as gum disease, know this all too well.

They may not only live with pain that affects their sleep, speech and ability to enjoy certain foods, but often also face discrimination and stigma.

So, why is it so shameful to have missing teeth or gum disease? And what can we do about it?

The social and psychological impact

Oral health is deeply tied to social status. People who don’t have good teeth often face stereotypes about their health, wealth and even their intelligence.

For example, in one 2010 study from the United Kingdom, researchers showed young people photographs of the same person, modified with different levels of tooth decay.

Whenever decayed teeth were visible, participants rated the person lower in intelligence, social skills, confidence, self-esteem and whether they appeared happy – based only on the photo.

These stereotypes can lead to bullying and stigma that scar people for life.

In a recent study with colleagues, we looked at nationally representative data on 4,476 children from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children.

We found losing teeth to decay or injury was relatively common, affecting one in ten children. These children then had a 42% higher risk of being bullied at school.

These stigmatising experiences can lead to feelings of shame, embarrassment and low self-esteem. In some cases, they can mean people are less likely to seek dental care, fearing further humiliation or blame that they have neglected themselves.

Dental care is often out of reach

Tooth decay and gum disease are the most common oral diseases in Australia and can lead to missing teeth. These conditions can occur at any age, from childhood to adulthood, but they usually worsen with age.

Yet the government’s Child Dental Benefits Schedule only covers dental care for children aged 17 and under whose parents receive government benefits.

Some states and territories also provide oral care for eligible older adults. But long waiting lists show the public system is stretched.

This means oral health care remains inaccessible and unaffordable for many Australians.

Poor oral health affects everyday life

Arguments for improving oral health almost always focus on preventing other physical health conditions. For example, one large study of 172,630 adults in New South Wales found those with missing teeth or poor oral health were more likely to die from heart disease.

Yet when people can’t afford to fix their own oral health issues or their children’s, there can be other serious flow-on effects for their day-to-day life and wellbeing, beyond physical health.

Research shows when people are in pain from tooth decay they are more likely to take days off work and school. This can have long-term negative effects, disrupting education and employment.

Parents may also need to take time off work to take children to the dentist or dental hygienist. They often face financial pressures due to high out-of-pocket costs for dental treatments.

Research shows when people can’t afford dental treatments they may feel powerless to control their circumstances. As a result, they may choose cheaper treatments, such as having a tooth extracted even when it could have been saved.

There has also been a recent surge in people using superannuation to pay for dental treatments, for largely preventable conditions. This will further entrench financial disadvantage.

So, what’s the fix?

Research I conducted with colleagues this year found 96% of working-aged adults in Australia believe oral health care is essential.

But there continue to be significant financial barriers in getting required treatment, particularly for people who are unemployed, have low incomes or those with disability.

So, making dental care more affordable and accessible is an important step. This will encourage timely care and make sure check-ups aren’t a luxury for those who can afford them.

But while dental visits are important, they can’t provide sustainable and long-term protection from oral diseases when the social conditions and behaviours that lead to poor oral health stay the same.

Experiencing stigma because of poor oral health can be highly personal and feel shameful. But the burden to fix this should not be on individuals.

The main causes of oral diseases are behaviours – such as having a lot of sugar, alcohol and tobacco, or poor oral hygiene – and high levels of stress.

We know these behaviours and stress are more common among people who experience social disadvantage.

So we need broader policies that address the social conditions in which people live, work, age and grow – for example, by making access to nutritious food more accessible and affordable.

Reducing disadvantage is the key to addressing both tooth decay and gum disease and the stigma attached to these oral health issues.

Ankur Singh receives funding from Australian Research Council DECRA Award and the Chair of Lifespan Oral Health position at the University of Sydney is funded by the Rosebrook Foundation.

– ref. Why is it so shameful to have missing or damaged teeth? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-it-so-shameful-to-have-missing-or-damaged-teeth-264699

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Seligman, Lecturer in Municipal Services and Public Works Engineering, University of Southern Queensland

Australia has one of the world’s longest road networks, covering almost 900,000 kilometres. More than 80% of it is rural or remote.

It was hard and expensive enough to maintain this network before climate change began causing havoc. But the job of roadworkers, engineers and transport departments is getting much harder. As many drivers know, roads are suffering. Potholes are everywhere.

Record flooding in 2023 destroyed a vital bridge at Fitzroy Crossing in Western Australia, causing chaos. In 2024, bushfires closed the Eyre Highway linking South Australia to WA, followed by floods not long after. With road links out of action, communities have been cut off for months.

Climate change is a major cause of this accelerated deterioration. Extreme heat and bushfires are projected to do more damage in Australia’s southern and eastern regions. To date, water is doing the most damage through extreme rainfall and floods. Floods are projected to hit harder and more often in the continent’s northern and eastern regions.

The new National Climate Action Plan calls for upgrading Australia’s transport networks so they can better withstand the changing climate. It won’t be possible to climate-proof the whole network. Authorities will have to focus on keeping vital lifelines open.

Queensland on the frontline

Queensland’s roads are particularly vulnerable. The state has the largest road network of any state or territory, at around 180,000 kilometres.

Two-thirds of these roads run through rural and remote regions, which makes monitoring and maintenance more difficult. Almost 40% of the state’s roads (70,000 km) are built on black clay soils, which swell when wet and shrink when dry. Roads built on clay are highly susceptible to cracking, rutting and accelerated failure.

Intense rainfall and flooding events are now a leading cause of road closures and pavement damage, isolating communities and disrupting freight routes. The floods this year in northern Queensland left supermarkets emptied and disrupted industries such as agriculture and mining which rely on reliable freight connections.

Short term, this means more emergency repairs and disruption. Longer term, it means faster deterioration, higher costs and shorter road lifespans.

Extreme weather is driving up maintenance spending. In the aftermath of the 2022 floods in southeast Queensland, the state government allocated A$350 million to repair damaged roads.

These costs are climbing fast. Transport authorities estimate the state had $8.6 billion in necessary but unfunded road renewal and maintenance as of 2023-24, up from $7.8 billion a year earlier.

The challenge is most acute at a local government level. Queensland’s councils are responsible for about three-quarters of the state’s road network. They also have the least financial resources to draw on. Many report significant maintenance backlogs.

As a result, councils often resort to reactive maintenance such as patching up roads after floods. But fixing after failure drives up the lifetime cost of a road, increases disruption to traffic and leaves infrastructure exposed to the next extreme event.

Road closures hit rural and regional communities harder than urban residents. Remote communities face even greater upheaval. Many remote towns in northern Queensland have no alternative routes. If one road is closed, the town can be cut off from food, fuel, water, services and emergency responses.

Time to build resilience

In 2023, a government inquiry into the problem recommended several approaches to make Australia’s roads more resilient.

The inquiry found it wasn’t realistic to climate-proof the nation’s full road network on cost, timeframe and staffing grounds.

Instead, the inquiry recommended authorities focus on improving the most important corridors and ensuring roads reopen quickly after closures.

It won’t be easy to make this a reality. Coordinating road maintenance between federal, state and local tiers of government has long been a challenge. It’s going to get harder.

Responding to large scale events will require better collaboration to ensure essential road corridors stay open for freight and community access. It will also mean strengthening backup options where possible.

Preventative maintenance will have to ramp up to overcome the chronic backlogs of repairs to road drainage, shoulders and surface.

Authorities will have to get better at collecting and sharing data in consistent ways to guide new investment, target maintenance and make roads safer.

It’s long been common to rebuild roads exactly as they were before a disaster. But this means they’re vulnerable to the next disaster, which may be even bigger.

Instead, we should invest in “betterment”: using disaster recovery as a chance to upgrade roads by making culverts bigger, raising bridges, widening shoulders or even shifting roads to safer ground. This approach reduces future risks and often saves money over the long run.

Greener, stronger roads are possible

As climate change intensifies, new roads will have to be built to be more resilient. Design standards focused on resilience will be essential.

We already have stronger, greener ways of building roads. Foamed bitumen roads are much more flood resistant. Crumb rubber from old car and truck tyres makes road surfaces tougher.

Old asphalt pavement and waste glass can be used as recycled aggregate for new roads, cutting waste and emissions. New intelligent road rollers use real-time monitoring to compact the layers of new roads more evenly, boosting quality.

These methods haven’t been widely taken up due to cost concerns, supply chain challenges in regional areas and a reluctance to try new things. Policymakers could speed up uptake by setting new procurement rules for stronger, more resilient and low-carbon materials.

Climate change is already hitting Australian roads hard. If nothing is done, the damage will only intensify. Traditional methods will stop working.

Hannah Seligman receives funding from an Advance Queensland Industry Research Early Career Fellowship.

– ref. Intense rain, landslides and potholes everywhere: how climate change is trashing Australia’s roads – https://theconversation.com/intense-rain-landslides-and-potholes-everywhere-how-climate-change-is-trashing-australias-roads-264328

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca English, Senior Lecturer in Education, Queensland University of Technology

Across Australia, more families are choosing to homeschool.

According to NSW figures released late last month, homeschooling registrations in the state more than doubled between 2019 and 2024, from 5,907 to 12,762.

What is fuelling this growth and how do we support families to do it well?

How many people homeschool?

There are around 45,000 young people enrolled in homeschooling around the country. This compares to around 4.1 million school students around Australia in 2024.

The biggest growth has been in Queensland. As of August 2025 11,800 students were registered for homeschooling in Queensland. From 2021 to 2025, registrations in primary year levels grew by 110%. They grew by 167% in secondary year levels.

In Victoria, there are about 11,240 homeschoolers in 7,716 households a roughly 7% increase on 2023 numbers. As of 2023, there were around 6,500 homeschoolers in Western Australia, up from 3,720 prior to the pandemic.

Why are people homeschooling?

Academic research and media interviews with parents suggest there are several reasons a family might choose to homeschool a child.

This includes bullying, school refusal and neurodivergence.

While numbers were growing before the pandemic, COVID provided a boost. Some families found their child was happier at home. They also reported finding the flexibility better suited their child, so returning to school didn’t appeal to them.

Significantly, the majority of families who choose it today did not want to homeschool before they felt it essential. Some parents report their child is receiving a better education and is much more comfortable learning at home.

How do families do it?

There are a variety of ways to homeschool.

Some families choose a highly structured “school at home” approach, which is the stereotypical whiteboard and textbook learning at the kitchen table.

Other families “unschool”, which is child-led, interest-based learning through living. The day might include cooking, gardening and going to a park to see friends. Or a day of volunteering at a wildlife park. Or, it might mean a trip to the museum and creating a video about Ancient Egypt.

Factors such as parents’ education, income, and belief in structure all influence the choice of approach.

But in the most structured of households, families report following the child’s interests as much as possible. They also tend to focus on social and emotional needs as much as academic work.

It is estimated teachers make up around 20% of the homeschooling population. But differences between homeschooling and school mean teaching skills are not necessary to homeschool. Parents focus on children’s interests, learning needs and goals to guide their approaches.

Homeschooling and the curriculum

Homeschoolers do have to meet learning goals from the Australian Curriculum in subjects such as maths, English, science and humanities.

But they do not have to follow a curriculum like students in the mainstream system. This is because the curriculum is designed to be implemented in schools and teach large groups of young people – homeschooling is more individualised.

Some families use the curriculum to guide their homeschooling approach, and may report against the levels in the curriculum to state authorities.

What about progress and development?

International large-scale, survey studies suggest homeschoolers do not suffer social issues compared to matched mainstream-educated peers.

Studies – such as this 2022 US paper also suggest they seem to do just as well overall academically as their peers at school, although they tend to perform less well in maths.

While this paper found methodological problems with current homeschooling studies, they also argue there is no evidence there are academic or social problems for the homeschooled cohort.

Other US Research shows homeschooled children are accepted into university and graduate at similar rates to mainstream students.

Families face some challenges

Homeschooling is not without its challenges. Mothers often quit work, or drop work hours, to manage the homeschooling.

Another issue is regulation. Some homeschoolers say managing the reporting requirements is daunting and stressful.

Reporting requirements vary with the state and territory. For example, in Queensland, families have to complete a report every 12 months showing progress in a high quality education. In New South Wales, education authorities make home visits where parents discuss their plans and activities.

Where a young person has neurodivergence, additional learning needs, or distress due to school experiences, reporting can be harder because families may struggle to show progress.

Our research shows bureaucrats may not understand the differences between homeschooling and mainstream school, nor recognise the depth of learning in homeschooling. Homeschoolers see the child as the most important part of the education process, whereas regulators tend to be more focused on curriculum.

Regulation has an impact

In previous research, we argued co-designing regulation with parents is better. It reflects the differences between school and homeschooling and the experiences of homeschooling families.

A September 2025 audit office report also showed current regulations are not working in New South Wales.

It found the system is unable to cope with the numbers of families moving from mainstream to homeschooling. The report states the wait time for registration is more than ten weeks (about one school term). Students are not allowed to leave school until this is complete, which can be distressing.

Other states have more effective approaches. For example, Tasmania and Queensland involve parents in homeschooling regulation which has been shown to improve compliance with registration.

Sometimes learning at home – either with family member or online through a school – is a better fit for a young person.

The challenge is to ensure policy, regulation and support catch up to families’ needs.

Chris Krogh was previously a member of the NSW Education Standards Authority Home Schooling Consultative Group.

David Roy was previously a member of the NSW Education Standards Authority Home Schooling Consultative Group (2016-2022).

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

– ref. More and more Australian families are homeschooling. How can we make sure they do it well? – https://theconversation.com/more-and-more-australian-families-are-homeschooling-how-can-we-make-sure-they-do-it-well-266150

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Christensen, Executive Dean, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology

Becoming a homeowner is exciting, but the process can be complex and daunting.

Perhaps you’ve found a home listing you like, you have your deposit and finances in order and you are going to check the place out at an inspection.

As property prices continue to rise, and the demand for housing remains greater than supply, it is easy to rush into a decision without having all the information you need before you make your purchase.

So, let’s walk through some of the common steps in the home-buying process, because there can be many hurdles and pitfalls. And remember, everyone’s situation is unique – so always consider seeking professional advice tailored to your circumstances.

What happens at your initial inspection?

Usually, when a property is up for sale through a private sale or auction, the real estate agent will arrange viewing times.

This is an opportunity to physically inspect and assess the quality of the property compared to the sales photos and descriptions.

Real estate agents are skilled in making a property look attractive and generating a sense of hype and fear of missing out.

It’s a good idea to take your time to make sure the property is right for you. Inspecting it more than once, and at different times of day, can help build a more accurate picture.

This article is part of The Conversation’s series on buying a first home.

We’ve asked experts to unpack some of the biggest topics for first-home buyers to consider – from working out what’s affordable and beginning the search, to knowing your rights when inspecting a property and making an offer.

What information can you expect from the seller?

At the inspection, agents will usually provide a copy of the contract of sale, along with information that is required to be disclosed by law.

Typically, this includes information about known defects in the property, as well as issues or restrictions that apply. The purpose of disclosing this information is to promote transparency, fair dealing and informed decisions by buyers.

In most states, a seller is required to provide:

• a copy of the title and registered plan
• details of interests (a legal right) of third parties, such as easements for driveways and access rights for infrastructure, such as sewerage, electricity, telecommunications
• planning and zoning information
• government notices or orders (for example, is the property likely to be bought back by the government for the construction of a new road or rail line) affecting the property.

If you are buying a unit or townhouse, there will also be additional information disclosed, such as body corporate fees (which cover things like maintenance of common areas) and insurance requirements.

Avoid signing a contract without investigating the accuracy of disclosures and obtaining financial and legal advice.

Other things to find out

Mandatory seller disclosure does not tell you everything you need to know about the property. Additional inquiries will depend on the information provided by the seller and the way you intend to use the property.

If you are going to live in the property, investigating anything that may impact the property’s value is critical. Key questions include:

Are there any structural defects in the building? Obtain a building and pest inspection report from an independent and qualified person.

Are there any encroachments from adjoining buildings? Check the boundaries by obtaining a survey.

Are building approvals current? If not, this may impact your future use of the property and insurance costs.

Check if there are any issues adversely affecting the amenity of the property, such as future transport proposals.

Are there any environmental contamination issues? Are there disputes with neighbours about overgrown trees? What are the potential impacts of flooding and bushfires? What are the future plans for development on adjoining properties that may affect your view?

If you are buying a unit or townhouse, search the body corporate or owners’ corporation records to confirm there is no adverse financial liability to owners.

This is not an exhaustive list. Do not to assume you can get out of the contract if you discover something adverse after you sign the contract.

Making the contract conditional upon satisfactory inspections may provide you with time to carry out these inquiries, but ultimately may not protect you.

Making an offer and signing a contract of sale

You have decided this is the property for you – how do you make an offer?

If it is an auction, your bid at the auction is an offer to buy on the terms of the contract provided by the seller’s agent. You will not be able to add conditions to the contract and no cooling off period will apply.

Doing your homework before the auction is critical. Upon the fall of the auction hammer, you are bound to buy the property.

If it is a private sale, you can make an offer to buy a property by signing a contract of sale. You can add conditions such as subject to finance. The seller can accept or reject these conditions.

Once the seller signs the contract accepting your offer, you are bound to buy. A cooling off period may apply.

Key takeaways

Don’t rush. Take time to research the property, read the information disclosed by the seller and read the contract of sale carefully before you make an offer.

If your contract is made subject to obtaining finance or carrying out building and pest inspections, make sure there is enough time to get this finance or information.

Getting professional advice early is vital to understanding your legal rights and obligations.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation, or needs. It is not intended as financial advice. All investments carry risk.

Sharon Christensen has previously received funding from Australian Research Council and State government for housing disclosure research and is a member of the Queensland Law Society Property Committee.

Catherine Brown 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. Checking out a listing you like? Experts explain what to look out for when inspecting a first home – https://theconversation.com/checking-out-a-listing-you-like-experts-explain-what-to-look-out-for-when-inspecting-a-first-home-265750

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Wesselbaum, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, University of Otago

Finance Minister Nicola Willis has called them the “merchants of misery”, but critics of her government’s economic performance doubled down when the June quarter GDP figures showed a contraction in many sectors.

No government or finance minister can be expected to make flawless decisions, of course. But blaming the current state of the economy on Willis’ leadership ignores aspects of the bigger picture.

Since the National-led coalition took office nearly two years ago, New Zealand’s economy has gone through a necessary and deliberate transition: from overheated and inflation-plagued to a more stable, long-term footing.

Not all the news is good, but progress has been made.

Inflation tamed, stability regained

Two years ago, consumer price inflation was running at 6% and higher. Food inflation alone had peaked at a staggering 12.5%.

Today, inflation has been brought down to 2.7%, which is within the Reserve Bank’s 1–3% target range (albeit near the top). Food inflation is down to 5%.

These outcomes aren’t accidental but rather the result of monetary policy, including high interest rates and disciplined fiscal management, with significant changes to the trajectory of government expenditures.

The current account deficit has also been significantly reduced, from 7.5% of GDP to 3.7%. This signals a healthier balance between what we consume and what we produce.

Part of the improvement is due to stronger commodity prices. But the broader picture tells us domestic demand is now more aligned with our productive capacity.

Economic activity is down

And yet, other numbers are sobering: GDP is 1.2% lower than it was in June 2023. On a per capita basis, it is 2.8% lower.

The unemployment rate has risen from about 4% to 5.2%. Productivity has also declined across several key sectors.

Average house prices, as measured by the QV Index, are now more than NZ$100,000 below their peak in early 2022. Of course, this also represents progress in making housing more affordable.

The legacy of stagflation

New Zealand entered a period of “stagflation” under the previous Labour-led governments. This is a toxic mix of high inflation, stagnant or declining output, and rising unemployment.

It is one of the most difficult economic conditions to manage, because the usual tools of economic policy work against each other. Lowering interest rates might boost growth, but worsens inflation. Cutting inflation might worsen unemployment.

Stagflation does not appear overnight, but is the product of several years of poor macroeconomic management, often triggered or worsened by external shocks.

In New Zealand’s case, that included a combination of aggressive fiscal stimulus during the COVID pandemic, monetary policy mistakes (not raising interest rates sooner, for example), supply chain disruptions, tight labour markets, and global energy price shocks.

A government can’t control all of these factors, but the previous governments did little to address underlying structural weaknesses, particularly low productivity and persistent current account deficits.

By the time the current government took office, the stagflationary spiral was already well underway.

A long road out

Exiting stagflation is not quick, nor is it painless. Research and historical example (including the United States in the 1970s) suggest it often takes several years of disciplined, coordinated policy to unwind the effects, partly because economic policies only work with long lags.

The first and most important step is to restore price stability. This is where the Reserve Bank’s single mandate to control inflation comes into play, with a high but now declining official cash rate, down from 5.5% in 2023-24 to 3% now.

One-year mortgage rates are also easing, down from 6.9% to 4.9% over the same period, providing some relief to households.

The second component is fiscal policy. The government deficit has increased slightly, from $7.2 billion to $10 billion, but has been put on a credible path toward long-term consolidation.

The government has committed to reducing the debt burden and ensuring spending is targeted and effective.

There is a trade-off here: tightening fiscal policy too quickly risks deepening the recession, while waiting too long could undermine inflation control. The government appears to be navigating the course carefully.

The third pillar is structural, supply-side reform. Improving productivity requires tackling long-standing regulatory bottlenecks, removing barriers to trade, and fast-tracking infrastructure and housing development.

The government has moved to address some of this with regulatory reviews, a housing construction growth programme and resource management reform.

While the effects will take time to become fully apparent, these strategies play an important role in supporting potential output growth and keeping future inflation in check. Macroeconomic rebalancing is not a popularity contest. It is a matter of timing, sequencing, managing expectations and maintaining credibility.

It may be politically opportunistic to blame the government entirely for the current economic situation. But it also ignores the hangover from stagflation, and signs of recovery.

Dennis Wesselbaum 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. Nicola Willis is right: NZ’s economy isn’t as bad as the ‘merchants of misery’ claim – https://theconversation.com/nicola-willis-is-right-nzs-economy-isnt-as-bad-as-the-merchants-of-misery-claim-266465

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tony Kushner, James Parkes Professor of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations, University of Southampton

On the surface, I am ideally suited to write about the terrorist atrocity on the Heaton Park synagogue. The attack, on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, Yom Kippur, left two Mancunian Jews dead, several seriously injured and a local (and national) Jewish community traumatised.

Over a 40-year career, I have researched and written about antisemitism in the UK, from the readmission of the Jews to Britain in the mid 17th century through to today. I have also published widely on British Jewish history over the same period. Lastly, I am a Mancunian Jew born and brought up in the city, later working in the Manchester Jewish Museum.

There are, however, limits to my ability to understand what happened. I am an insider because of my roots: my parents bought their first house on the same street as Heaton Park synagogue in the 1950s. But I am also an outsider, having grown up in the south side of the city in one of its leafier suburbs, and spent over half my life some 260 miles away in Southampton.

What follows is an attempt to put the events of October 2 into the historical context of Manchester Jewry and antisemitism in the city. In my view, the horror does not fit into a wider pattern of responses to Jews in Manchester, or the wider British Jewish community.

Read more:
Manchester synagogue attack: why so many people in Britain’s Jewish community felt a sense of inevitability that this day would come

The historian of Manchester Jewry, Bill Williams, insisted that “in no sense can the Jewish community be regarded as ‘alien’ to Manchester. It was not a late addition to an established pattern of urban life, but an integral part of the pattern itself”.

Although Manchester has Roman roots – Mancuniam – it is essentially a modern city. Indeed, it has a justified claim to be regarded as the first modern, industrial city in the world. It has been and remains a city made by migration. The first Jews, pedlars and then shopkeepers, settled in the town in the late 18th century, mainly of German Jewish origin.

Manchester grew slowly in the first half of the 19th century, with Jews coming also from eastern Europe and north Africa. This diversity of origin was reflected in the synagogues and communal organisations. By the 1870s, the community had grown to around 4,000, half of whom were from eastern Europe. It was a trend that would intensify in the period of mass immigration until 1914, when it reached around 25,000.

Even before that influx of Jews with Polish, Lithuanian, Romanian and Ukrainian origin, Manchester Jewry was by far the largest provincial Jewish community in the UK, a status that is increasingly true today.

As part of that pattern, the Heaton Park synagogue was founded in 1935 and moved to its present location in 1967. Its history reflects the growing suburbanisation of Manchester Jewry away from the original settlement areas of Cheetham Hill and Strangeways.

Today, Manchester is one of the few Jewish communities in the UK that is growing, totalling around 28,000 in the 2021 census, a 12% increase from that a decade earlier. Much of that growth is made up of the very orthodox, or Haredi, communities, some of whom came from Hungary as refugees in 1956.

Manchester Jewry has maintained an extraordinarily strong local identity, but is notable in its diversity. This is evident in its different forms of religious practice, geographical origins (including 7,000 who escaped Nazi Germany in the 1930s and the more recent migrants from Israel), socioeconomic profile and politics.

Antisemitism in Manchester

The city has always prided itself on its cosmopolitanism and tolerance, though has not always lived up to the ideal of the latter. There were occasional attacks, in print and in person, on the early Jewish pedlars to the town.

In the late 19th century the Manchester City News described eastern European Jews as an “invading force, foreign in race, speech, dress, ideas and religion”. Another local journal called them “just as desirable as rats”. In contrast, the Manchester Guardian (which became The Guardian) supported the right of asylum for refugees, and praised the respectable middle-class Jews for the contribution they had made to the economy and culture of the city.

During the first world war, Jewish soldiers fought back against slurs that they were avoiding military service. There was an even more militant response from Jews and non-Jews during the 1930s to attempts by the British Union of Fascists to stir up antisemitism in Manchester and other areas of Jewish concentration in Britain.

Until the horror of the Heaton Park synagogue attack, perhaps the most difficult moment for Manchester’s Jews came in 1947 when there were antisemitic riots in Manchester and nearby Eccles following rightwing extremist Zionist terrorism against British soldiers in Palestine. Most of the violence was against Jewish property and not person; it was still shocking to a community still reeling from the impact of the Holocaust.

One thing uniting such articulation of antisemitism is the official response to them. The magistrate who described the 1947 riots as “both un-British and unpatriotic” was very similar to the sentiment from all British religious and political leaders in 2025.

Manchester has recovered from and shown genuine solidarity after acts of terrorism before: the IRA bomb in 1996 and the Islamist terrorist bombing of Manchester Arena in 2017. It is already clear this pride of place and mutual support is present in Manchester today. As one local resident stated: “These people are sent to divide us, but they won’t.”

The attacks of 2017 and 2025 were terrorist acts of individuals, utterly untypical of and denounced by the local Muslim communities. They were hard, if not impossible, to predict. These outrages have and will leave huge scars on those directly impacted, but they run totally against the grain of a place that takes genuine pride in its diversity, including the rich Jewish history which is integral to Manchester.

Tony Kushner 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. Synagogue attack: the Manchester I know – by antisemitism researcher and Mancunian Jew – https://theconversation.com/synagogue-attack-the-manchester-i-know-by-antisemitism-researcher-and-mancunian-jew-266712

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mkhaimar Abusada, Visiting Scholar of Global Affairs, Northwestern University

Weakened militarily and facing declining Palestinian support, particularly among Gazans, Hamas was already a shadow of the militant group it once was. And then came President Donald Trump’s peace plan.

On Oct. 3, 2025, Hamas said that it accepted some aspects of the 20-point proposal, including handing over administration of the Gaza Strip to a body of independent Palestinian technocrats and releasing all remaining Israeli hostages.

Those hostage are the last of the 252 taken during the Oct. 7, 2023, attack – an event that two years on looks to represent a high point, so to speak, of Hamas’ power. As an expert on Palestinian political attitudes, I believe the group now has few options to survive.

Like former resistance groups in past peace processes, it could renounce arms and transform itself into a purely political party. But to do so, it needs to overcome a series of hurdles: confronting other parts of Trump’s plan, its unpopularity at home and its rigid ideology being the three most prominent.

Campaign of assassination

It is worth taking stock of just how degraded Hamas has become as the result of two years of onslaught by Israel’s vastly superior military.

According to many intelligence reports, Hamas has lost most of its senior command in the Al-Qassam Brigades, its military wing. Izz al-Din al-Haddad, its current commander, survives, having presumably taken over from Mohammed Sinwar – the brother of Yahya Sinwar, mastermind of Oct. 7 attack – who was killed in May 2025. But he presides over a dwindling army.

President Trump may not have been exaggerating when he indicated on Truth Social on Oct. 3 that Hamas had lost 25,000 fighters. Estimates regarding the group’s losses vary, but it could represent more than half of the fighting force it had at the beginning of the war.

Hamas has succeeded in recruiting new fighters during that time. But many of these new recruits lack the competence and the experience of the dead ones. And the only motivations the new recruits have are hate and anger toward Israel.

Hamas’ political leadership has also been decimated. Chief political leaders, including Ismail Haniyeh, Saleh al-Arouri and Yahya Sinwar, have all been killed.

And it could have been worse. Had the Israeli attack on Hamas’ political leadership in Doha, Qatar, succeeded in September 2025, it could have been a devastating loss for the movement. But the operation missed its primary targets there.

Falling support in Gaza

Palestinian public pressure on Hamas has risen as the miseries of war have mounted.

According to local heath officials, more than 67,000 have been killed, and more than 169,000 have been injured. Most of the Gaza Strip has been reduced to rubble, and more than 90% of the population has been displaced multiple times – with most Gazans now living in tents. International organizations have reported famine and starvation in some parts of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas has lost its power and influence over many areas now under Israeli control. Israeli military and intelligence have encouraged some members of the local Palestinian clans and militia to offer services in militia-controlled areas.

In such areas, Hamas fighters have often clashed with other Palestinian groups, resulting in many deaths and growing resentment toward Hamas.

Hamas’ execution and torture of Palestinians suspected of collaboration with Israel has only worsened the situation, leading to chaos and lawlessness in many parts of Gaza.

It is little wonder, then, that half of Gazans in the latest poll of attitudes – taken in May 2025 – say they supported anti-Hamas demonstrations. Indeed support for the group in both Gaza and the West Bank have continued to decline as the war has progressed.

The push for peace

The ongoing war and the inhumane daily conditions that local Palestinians in Gaza are dealing with have led to exhaustion and fatigue among the public.

On social media, many Palestinians are asking Hamas publicly to endorse the Trump plan and put an end to their misery.

In deciding whether to accept all of the plan’s 20-points, Hamas will, from its perspective, have to weigh whether agreeing to a very bad outcome is better than the alternative. Trump has warned that a failure to get on board will cause Hamas to face “all hell.”

Hamas has already agreed to release all of the remaining Israeli hostages and to relinquish power in Gaza to a technocratic Palestinian committee. If endorsed in full, this would put an end to the war and see the gradual Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, and no expulsion of the Palestinians out of Gaza.

Egypt, Qatar and Turkey have been facilitating Hamas’ response to the plan. And there is huge regional and international pressure to get the deal over the line.

However it would force Hamas to disarm itself and allow the entry of an international and regional force into Gaza to oversee the destruction of military infrastructure, including tunnels, weapon manufacturing and the remaining rockets – points of the latest plan that Hamas appears more unwilling to accept.

What happens to the remaining Hamas fighters is a sticking point that might lead to the collapse of the whole plan.

And any rejection of the plan that can be blamed on Hamas will no doubt be welcomed by members of the Israeli extreme right. Hardline factions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition have an alternative plan: to fully occupy Gaza, expel the Palestinians and reestablish Israeli settlements in Gaza.

Where next for Hamas?

Perhaps the most viable option for Hamas is to transform itself into a political party. But to do so, the group will need to reform not only its structures but also its ideology.

Political momentum is swinging back to a two-state solution. France and Saudi Arabia recently spearheaded a fresh push to that end at the United Nations, and a host of Western nations recognized Palestinian statehood for the first time. Hamas may feel the pressure to finally accept a two-state solution, something it has long resisted. For its part, Trump’s plan only makes vague assertions noting the Palestinian “aspiration” for a state.

If transforming into a purely political party is to be the fate of Hamas, it will need to play its cards shrewdly and swiftly. The Palestine Liberation Organization went through this process after their departure from Beirut in 1982, eventually putting politics and diplomacy over armed resistance. And Qatar, Turkey and Egypt can help Hamas moderate its stances, too.

The rigid ideology of Hamas remains a hurdle. Since it was formed in 1987, Hamas has tethered itself to a hardline Islamist ideology that does not allow fundamental compromises on issues such as recognition of Israel and the development of Palestine as a secular state.

But there is the recent example of Syria, where following the ouster of long-term dictator Bashar al-Assad, the main Islamist fighting group pivoted to politics, and was lauded in the international community for doing so.

Whether Hamas can succeed in such a transformation – should it attempt to – remains to be seen. And there is one final snag: Even if Hamas does accept the latest peace proposal, other Palestinian militant groups in Gaza might not – and could attempt to sabotage the whole process.

Mkhaimar Abusada is affiliated with, Member of the Board of Commissioners of the Independent Commission for Human Rights, Palestine

– ref. Hamas has run out of options – survival now rests on accepting Trump’s plan and political reform – https://theconversation.com/hamas-has-run-out-of-options-survival-now-rests-on-accepting-trumps-plan-and-political-reform-266515

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Kear, Sessional Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

Hamas announced that it has accepted several parts of the peace plan put forth by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to finally end Israel’s war on Gaza.

Hamas has agreed to release the remaining Israeli captives it holds and is willing to hand over administration of Gaza to a technocratic committee proposed by the plan.

However, Hamas did not say it would disarm. Nor did it agree to withdraw from Palestinian politics fully. Instead, it said the future of the Gaza Strip and legitimate rights of the Palestinian people should be decided on the basis of a “collective national position” and relevant international laws and resolutions.

With ceasefire talks resuming in Egypt on Monday, Netanyahu said he expected the hostages to be quickly released and Trump said he believes Hamas is “ready for a lasting peace”.

However, there are many reasons for Hamas to be reticent about supporting a plan that is replete with ambiguity and robs Palestinians of agency to decide their own political fate.

A future governance plan sidelining Palestinians

So, why does Hamas seem reticent?

First, the plan envisages Israel’s continuing military occupation of Gaza until it can hand over responsibility to an “international stabilisation force” at some point in the future.

Then there is the plan’s proposed governance structure.

Under the plan, Gaza would be administered through a transitional period by “a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee”. This would be responsible for delivering basic services to millions of starving, traumatised, homeless and jobless Gazans.

Yet, this committee would also include international experts, which will dilute Palestinians’ voices and their ability to decide the fate of Gazans. Again, many details remain unknown, including who will sit on the committee, when it will be formed and how many members would be Palestinian.

A new international transitional body called the “Board of Peace” would also be formed, headed by Trump and purportedly including former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Importantly, the plan does not specifically say the board would include any Palestinians.

The board would be responsible for the committee’s “oversight and supervision”. It would also oversee the reconstruction of Gaza until the Palestinian Authority (PA), which is currently dominated by the Fatah party, has undergone reforms and is able to take back control of Gaza.

Many questions remain unanswered here, too. These include:

• a timeline for new elections for the Palestinian Authority
• whether Gazans can take part in an election
• which political factions would be permitted to run candidates
• whether these candidates would be screened by the board, and
• who decides whether the PA has reformed sufficiently.

This leaves an open-ended political process exposed to differing interpretations that Hamas may fear will take power out of the hands of Palestinians.

After Hamas’ statement was released, a senior Hamas official outright rejected the idea of the “Board of Peace”, saying:

We will never accept anyone who is not Palestinian to control the Palestinians.

The plan also stipulates that Hamas “and other factions” (left unstated and open to interpretation) will not have a role in the future governance of Gaza. And it mandates that Gaza be demilitarised. But how this would be achieved and by whom, again, remains unknown.

What Palestinians say they want

These stipulations not only deprive the Palestinians of agency. They ignore the reality of Palestinian politics and the legitimacy that Palestinians attach to resisting Israeli occupation and the Netanyahu government’s stated goal of denying Palestinian statehood.

This highlights the greatest challenge for the “Board of Peace” – a reformed Palestinian Authority under the control of the Fatah party would struggle to gain legitimacy among Palestinians.

In a poll of 1,270 respondents in the Occupied Territories in May, Fatah garnered only 21% of popular support, compared with 32% for Hamas, and 12% for third parties.

When asked what the PA should be doing, most respondents nominated forming a unity government comprising all Palestinian factions to negotiate with Israel and the international community to rebuild Gaza.

When asked about plans to disarm Hamas, 77% of respondents in both the West Bank and Gaza opposed this action, with 65% of respondents opposed to expelling Hamas leaders from Gaza.

Tellingly, 80% of total respondents believed that if Hamas did disarm, Israel would not end the war and withdraw from Gaza.

The reality is some Palestinians still want Hamas to be a part of any future Palestinian government and remain capable of protecting Gazans from Israel’s military.

The disconnect between the plan’s aspirations and the political reality on the ground means it may have little chance of success, even if Hamas ultimately agrees to it.

It’s also unclear if Netanyahu truly supports the Palestinian Authority running a future Gaza, as the peace plan says. His remarks alongside Trump last week run counter to the plan:

Your plan is consistent with the five principles my government set for the end of the war and the day after Hamas. […] Gaza will have a peaceful civilian administration that is run neither by Hamas nor by the Palestinian Authority.

This suggests that Netanyahu’s primary goal here is dismantling Hamas’ military capabilities and political rule, while also maintaining the political division that currently exists between Gaza and the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

However, this would deny Palestinians the only faction many see as willing to resist Israel’s occupation and its intent of destroying any chance of Palestinians gaining statehood.

Additionally, the establishment of a new civil and military bureaucracy to help Gaza’s transition would take an indefinite period of time. It would also be subject to the political whims of capricious Western leaders.

This would leave the Israeli military occupying Gaza for the foreseeable future. This means there would be nothing to protect the millions of Gazans from further assaults from a military already accused of serious breaches of international humanitarian law.

Martin Kear 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. Hamas and Israel are on the verge of a ceasefire. What’s being left unsaid, though, could scupper the deal – https://theconversation.com/hamas-and-israel-are-on-the-verge-of-a-ceasefire-whats-being-left-unsaid-though-could-scupper-the-deal-266581

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By William Feeney, Research fellow, Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University; Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD-CSIC)

Language enables us to connect with each other and coordinate to achieve incredible feats. Our ability to communicate abstract concepts is often seen as a defining feature of our species, and one that separates us from the rest of life on Earth.

This is because while the ability to pair an arbitrary sound with a specific meaning is widespread in human language, it is rarely seen in other animal communication systems. Several recent studies have shown that birds, chimpanzees, dolphins, and elephants also do it. But how such a capacity emerges remains a mystery.

While language is characterised by the widespread use of sounds that have a learned association with the item they refer to, humans and animals also produce instinctive sounds. For example, a scream made in response to pain. Over 150 years ago, naturalist Charles Darwin suggested the use of these instinctive sounds in a new context could be an important step in the development of language-like communication.

In our new study, published today in Nature Ecology and Evolution, we describe the first example of an animal vocalisation that contains both instinctive and learned features – similar to the stepping stone Darwin envisioned.

A unique call towards a unique threat

Birds have a variety of enemies, but brood parasites are unique.

Brood parasites, such as cuckoos, are birds that reproduce by laying their egg in the nest of another species and manipulating the unsuspecting host to incubate their egg and raise their offspring. The first thing a baby cuckoo does after it hatches is heave the other baby birds out of the nest, claiming the effort of its unsuspecting foster parents all to itself.

The high cost of brood parasitism makes it an excellent study system to explore how evolution works in the wild.

For example, our past work has shown that in Australia, the superb fairy-wren has evolved a unique call it makes when it sees a cuckoo. When other fairy-wrens hear this alarm call, they quickly come in and attack the cuckoo.

During these earlier experiments, we couldn’t help but notice other species were responding to this call and making a very similar call themselves. What’s more, discussions with collaborators who were working in countries as far away as China, India and Sweden suggested the birds there were also making a very similar call – and also only towards cuckoos.

Birds from around the world use the same call

First, we explored online wildlife media databases to see if there were other examples of this call towards brood parasites. We found 21 species that produce this call towards their brood parasites, including cuckoos and parasitic finches. Some of these birds were closely related and lived nearby each other, but others shared a last common ancestor over 50 million years ago and live on different continents.

For example, this is a superb fairy-wren responding to a shining bronze-cuckoo in Australia.

And this is a tawny-flanked prinia responding to a cuckoo finch in Zambia.

As vocalisations exist to communicate information, we suspected this call either functioned to attract the attention of their own or other species.

To compare these possibilities, we used a known database of the world’s brood parasites and hosts. If this call exists to communicate information within a species, we expected the species that produce it should be more cooperative, because more birds are better at defending their nest.

We did not find this. Instead, we found that species that produce this call exist in areas with more brood parasites and hosts, suggesting it exists to enable cooperation across different species that are targeted by brood parasites.

Communicating across species to defend against a common threat

To test whether these calls were produced uniquely towards cuckoos in multiple species, we conducted experiments in Australia.

When we presented superb fairy-wrens or white-browed scrubwrens with a taxidermied cuckoo, they made this call and tried to attack it. By contrast, when they were presented with other taxidermied models, such as a predator, this call was very rarely produced.

When we presented the fairy-wrens and scrubwrens with recordings of the call, they responded strongly. This suggests both species produce the call almost exclusively towards cuckoos, and when they hear it they respond predictably.

If this call is something like a “universal word” for a brood parasite across birds, we should expect different species to respond equally to hearing it – even when it is produced by a species they have never seen before. We found exactly this: when we played calls from Australia to birds in China (and vice-versa) they responded the same.

This suggests different species from all around the world use this call because it provides specific information about the presence of a brood parasite.

Insights into the origins of language

Our study suggests that over 20 species of birds from all around the world that are separated by over 50 million years of evolution use the same call when they see their respective brood parasite species.

This is fascinating in and of itself. But while these birds know how to respond to the call, our past work has shown that birds that have never seen a cuckoo do not produce this call, but they do after watching others produce it when there is a cuckoo nearby.

In other words, while the response to the call is instinctive, producing the call itself is learned.

Whereas vocalisations are normally either instinctive or learned, this is the first example of an animal vocalisation across species that has both instinctive and learned components. This is important, because it appears to represent a midpoint between the types of vocalisations that are common in animal communication systems and human language.

So, Darwin may have been right about language all along.

William Feeney receives funding from the Spanish National Research Council. He has previously received funding from the Queensland Government, Hermon Slade Foundation, Seaworld Research and Rescue Foundation, Fulbright Association, Winston Churchill Memorial Trust, Australian Government Endeavour Award, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Australian Geographic. He is CEO of Wildlife Research and Education.

James Kennerley receives funding from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. He has previously received funding from the University of Cambridge, the Cambridge Philosophical Society, the International Society for Behavioral Ecology and the British Ornithologists’ Union.

Niki Teunissen received funding and support from Monash University, Wageningen University and Research, the Australian Research Council, and Australian Wildlife Conservancy.

– ref. Birds all over the world use the same sound to warn of threats – https://theconversation.com/birds-all-over-the-world-use-the-same-sound-to-warn-of-threats-266618

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karin Hammarberg, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, Global and Women’s Health, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University

Reports of several cases of embryo and sperm mix-ups have put the Australian fertility industry in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons.

These bungles have raised serious questions about the industry’s current model of self-regulation, and demonstrate a lack of transparency about how it handles complaints and misconduct. In response, the federal government commissioned a rapid review of the sector in June.

Last Friday, the report was quietly released. State, territory and federal health ministers had already committed to accepting all the review’s recommendations earlier in September. But we’ve only just learned the details of those recommendations.

So, what are they? And will they work? Here are the main takeaways.

What did the review look at?

The fertility industry is highly lucrative, profit driven, fast growing and increasingly complex. So one of the review’s main questions was whether self-regulation is fit-for-purpose.

Currently, Australian fertility clinics must be accredited and licensed by the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee and adhere to its code of practice. But this body is funded by the industry and run by an arm of the industry peak body, the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand.

The rapid review focused on accreditation and regulation in particular. It looked at:

• how an independent accreditation body and process could work
• how to strengthen existing state-based regulation.

Independent accreditation

The review recommends the existing Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health should be responsible for accrediting fertility clinics. This commission already oversees accreditation of hospitals and other health services.

The review also identified the need for clear, evidence-based standards for clinics and their staff, and a more effective auditing process to pick up when these are breached.

These new standards would align with existing rules that govern other health services. They would protect consumers with minimum standards for patient care, and include measures of clinics’ performance and guardrails for so-called “add-ons”. These are optional extra procedures or medications offered by fertility clinics, which can be costly and often lack evidence they work.

For those involved in delivering fertility care – such as nurses, counsellors, embryologists and doctors – the review recommends introducing minimum requirements for qualifications and ongoing professional development.

Better regulation

Rules for the fertility industry are state-based, and currently vary across states and territories. The review recommended the jurisdictions streamline:

• clinic registration and reporting requirements
• how they monitor compliance with regulation
• how they enforce the regulation.

This would require state and territories to work together so the same rules apply nationally. The review was vague on how this would be done.

Insights from people who use fertility services

The review team also consulted with 18 people who’ve used fertility services as patients, to get their perspectives on the health of the fertility industry.

Their insights suggest the sector has a lot of work to do to improve its relationship with patients.

Problems identified by consumers included:

• clinics advertising misleading success rates
• lack of transparency about cost
• incomplete and inconsistent information, hindering informed decisions
• inadequate counselling services
• providers being more focused on maximising profit than patient care
• complaints processes that are confusing and difficult to navigate.

So, the review recommended better support for people to use existing complaints processes. It also said complaints data should be shared between clinics, the accreditor, regulator and complaints handling bodies.

To help people make informed decisions about treatment, the review recommends adding content to the existing YourIVFSuccess website, which is funded by the federal government. The platform provides independent, personalised estimates of someone’s chance of success, based on their circumstances. The review said it should also provide treatment costs and evidence for add-ons.

What was missing

Consumers were very concerned about the lack of a national donor register. Currently, donors can exceed legislated family limits by donating in several jurisdictions. This means some donor-conceived people discover they have dozens of half-siblings.

But the review kicked this problem down the road, recommending only that the Australian Law Reform Commission should be asked to review state-based donor legislation. This will likely take many years. In the meantime, donor-conceived people remain at risk.

The review also offered no suggestions for how to increase donor supply and reduce Australia’s reliance on overseas donor banks.

Nor did it address issues with clinics advertising to patients. Fertility clinics appear not to be subject to the same restrictions as individual doctors (who are banned from advertising services or products to patients). Similar rules for fertility clinics would ensure more balanced, evidence-based communication with patients.

We also believe making complaints and misconduct information public is essential to improve transparency – but the review didn’t mention this.

While it did consider the option of running public health campaigns about fertility care, this was explicitly not recommended, on the basis it’s too expensive.

This is another missed opportunity, since research shows knowledge about fertility in the community is low. Improving awareness can prevent infertility and reduce the need for treatments.

Will the proposed changes make a difference?

The recommendations will likely improve industry standards, transparency about performance, complaints processes, and accountability when things go wrong.

However, health ministers have provided very little information about when recommendations will be fully implemented. Their joint response says only that “the new accreditation requirements will be in place by January 2027”.

It’s still unclear:

• how the recommendations will be implemented
• who will be responsible
• where the money will come from for the new accreditation system
• how clinics that don’t meet standards will be dealt with.

Let’s hope for clear answers – and prompt reform.

Alex Polyakov is affiliated with Genea Fertility and currently serves as Medical Director of Genea Fertility Melbourne.

Catherine Mills has received industry research funding from Monash IVF, Ferring Pharmaceutical, and Illumina and travel support and honoraria from Organon and Merck. She has also received research funding from government and other sources, including the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, the Medical Research Future Fund and the Wellcome Trust.

Karinne Ludlow receives and has previously received funding from Australia’s Medical Research Future Fund and the ARC

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

– ref. Here’s what the review of the IVF industry said should change – and what it missed – https://theconversation.com/heres-what-the-review-of-the-ivf-industry-said-should-change-and-what-it-missed-266576