Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anita Manfreda, Senior Lecturer in Tourism, Torrens University Australia

Flight Centre, one of the world’s largest travel agencies, has warned it could lose more than A$100 million in earnings this year, citing weakening demand for travel to the United States.

In a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) this week, the company pointed to “volatile trading conditions” linked to changes in US entry policies.

This is the first major indication from an Australian company that travel to the US is becoming a serious concern. It follows growing consumer fears linked to US immigration checks, reports of tourists being detained, and rising costs.

Australian visitor numbers to the US fell by 7% in March compared with the same time last year – the sharpest fall since the COVID pandemic.

Australians are not the only ones staying away. New US data for March show sharp drops in visitors from key markets: Germany (down 28%), Spain (25%), the United Kingdom (18%) and South Korea (15%), to name a few. In total, inbound tourism fell 11.6%.

Even Canadian travellers, traditionally the US’s most reliable market, dropped by more than 900,000 or 17% in March, as growing numbers of Canadians opt to boycott US holidays.

What was once a reliable flow of high-spending international travellers is becoming a much quieter stream.

America’s welcome mat is wearing thin

The US, long marketed as the land of opportunity and adventure, is increasingly perceived as unwelcoming. Tighter border scrutiny, aggressive immigration enforcement, and a sharp shift in political tone have made travellers wary.

While the Flight Centre statement used careful language, its chief executive Graham Turner was clear, saying:

People from Europe, the United Kingdom and Australia really don’t want to go to the States, given what’s happening there. We’re hearing more and more people don’t want to go through passport control.

Reports of tourists being detained, shackled and deported at US airports over minor alleged visa issues or misunderstandings have circulated widely. In some cases, visitors have had their phones and electronic devices searched without clear cause. For many travellers, that is a risk not worth taking.

Governments have started to respond. Several countries, including New Zealand, Germany, France, Denmark and Finland, have updated their official travel advice for the US, urging citizens to exercise caution when visiting. The message filtering through international media is clear: the US is not as easy, safe or welcoming as it once seemed.

But while diplomatic warnings grow louder, the economic costs of America’s hardening stance are only beginning to register.

Tourism: America’s forgotten export

While President Donald Trump has slapped tariffs on goods imports from most countries, he has ignored the contribution of services trade to the economy. The US actually runs a surplus in services such as education and tourism. Trump has dismissed the decline in visitors as “not a big deal”.

The trade wars have focused on goods – cars, steel, farm products – but the service sector, which makes up a larger share of the economy, bears the hidden costs.

Tourism is the US’ biggest service export, contributing more than US$2.3 trillion to the economy and one in ten jobs. That’s a bigger contribution than manufacturing jobs, which account for about 8% of total US employment.

As a driver of economic prosperity, tourism isn’t simply about leisure; it sustains local businesses, rural economies and millions of livelihoods.

A double blow to the tourism experience

While the decline in arrivals has been widely reported, the experience for those who still choose to visit is also likely to change.

Tourism relies on global supply chains, from food to hotel amenities to rental car fleets. Trade war tariffs have raised input costs across the board. Hotels, restaurants, airlines and attractions are passing those higher costs onto customers.

Labour shortages are intensifying the problem. Nearly 20% of the US hospitality workforce was born overseas. Cuts to seasonal work visas and heightened deportation fears have left many businesses struggling to find staff, compounding existing labour shortages.

The burden is heaviest on small- and medium-sized enterprises, which form the bedrock of the US economy and play a central role in accommodation, dining and local tourism experiences.

A quiet but costly erosion

Tourism is not just a big part of the economy; it’s also a soft power, shaping how the world perceives a nation through its culture, values and hospitality.

Every visitor who feels unwelcome, scrutinised or disappointed is not just a lost sale, but a lost connection.

Research group Tourism Economics forecasts the US could lose up to US$10 billion in international travel spending in 2025 if current trends continue.

And while manufacturing job announcements grab headlines, the slow erosion of America’s tourism brand may leave a longer, deeper scar on its culture, its communities and its place in the world.

The Flight Centre downgrade is not an isolated warning. It is a symptom of a broader shift, one that risks turning visitors away for good.

And for thousands of US businesses, workers and communities – and now Australian ones too – the losses may not be so easily shrugged off.

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

– ref. Tourism to the US is tanking. Flight Centre is facing a $100m hit as a result – https://theconversation.com/tourism-to-the-us-is-tanking-flight-centre-is-facing-a-100m-hit-as-a-result-255498

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elenie Poulos, Adjunct Fellow, Macquarie University

As Australians cast pre-poll votes in record numbers, it is not only political parties and candidates who are trying to influence votes.

Australian Christian Right (ACR) groups have produced “scorecards” that rate party policies according to so-called Christian values. And they have organised candidate forums designed for Christian audiences.

The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church has deployed hundreds of its members to pre-polling booths in marginal seats to campaign for the Coalition.

Who is the Australian Christian Right?

The ACR is a diverse movement of individuals, groups and churches that share traditional, fundamentalist approaches to the Bible and church teachings. It includes the Australian Christian Lobby, which has a long history of political activism in Australia and of engagement with the global Christian right.

In our research we examined how the ACL has adopted right-wing populist rhetoric and what the effects might be on Australian politics.

The ACR’s historical focus has been on abortion, euthanasia, sexuality and marriage. Now it also campaigns on human rights issues relating to gender, religious freedom and freedom of speech.

These interests have seen the ACR connect to global right-wing networks, including the US Conservative Political Action Network (CPAC) and Jordan Peterson’s Alliance for Responsible Citizenship.

For our research, we identified high-profile ACR actors and studied their publicly available texts. We found three intertwined themes of populist discourse. Each one has been given a Christian framing and adapted for the Australian context.

“Saving Western civilisation”

European populists have used this rhetoric to define the Muslim “other” and the threat Islam supposedly poses to Western democratic culture and values.

Australia’s construction as a white British “outpost” gives this ideology its power. It has been used to inspire fear of immigrants.

In Christian right rhetoric, “Western civilisation” is defined by Judeo-Christian values, which are purportedly under threat from an aggressive secularism that would rid society of its moral foundations and undermine the “family”.

This polemic found fertile ground in 2017’s marriage equality debate. LGBTQ+ people and their allies were cast as anti-Christian activists who undermined Western tradition. A point made by former prime minister Tony Abbott when he addressed the anti-gay Alliance Defending Freedom in New York in 2018:

the campaign for marriage in my country has mobilised thousands of new activists; and created a network that could be deployed to defend Western civilisation more broadly and the Judeo-Christian ethic against all that’s been undermining it.

“Saving the moral community”

The Australian Christian Right divides people into the traditional moral community that upholds family values, and the politically correct woke elites who allegedly threaten the Christian values that have shaped Australia.

In opposing marriage equality, religious freedom became the ACR’s primary weapon of choice.

Former Liberal Party senator and committed conservative Christian Amanda Stoker applies a right-wing populist approach to the movement’s opposition to transgender rights:

The new elite — exclusive and “woke” — in fact has disdain for the traditional family, actively seeking to break it down with new genders, new family forms, and greater dependence on the state for the roles that family used to play in education, in sharing values, and in care for those in times of need.

This rhetoric aims to position the ACR as arguing on behalf of all moral people who uphold traditional values, and all reasonable Australians who value freedom of religion.

“Saving the people from racial division”

The mythology of a “white Christian Australia” dates to the White Australia immigration policy, and remains a powerful force in Australian politics.

In contemporary Australian populism, it has found form in the identification of Indigenous people as the subject of alleged preferential treatment. In contrast, non-Indigenous Australians are portrayed as victims suffering reverse racism. It has now been given a Christian right twist.

During the referendum campaign for the Voice to Parliament, the ACR joined the far-right activist group Advance to argue the case for a “no” vote.

In its opposition to constitutional recognition, the ACR adopted two themes of the “no” campaign: Indigenous people don’t need the Voice, and it would divide Australians on the basis of race. It then added a third by doubling down on the progress made in the marriage equality debate with “religious freedom” rhetoric.

Lyle Shelton, head of Christians for Equality, claimed the Voice would be a “lever for anti-Christian” ideology.

And in a collection of essays on the “religious” perspective of the Voice proposal, a number of authors, including ACR leader Dave Pellowe, argued the Voice would breach religious freedom by imposing Aboriginal religious beliefs and practices on the entire country.

Dangerous consequences

Since last Sunday’s leaders’ debate, the populist trope of “saving Australia from racial division” has been in plain sight. Consistent with his anti-Voice position, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton declared that acknowledgement of Country has been “overdone”.

Christian political party Family First echoed his concerns, saying the ritual means:

citizens don’t have equal standing in this nation.

When the three thematic strands are woven together, the ACR’s populist vision for a “back-to-a-better” Australia becomes clear.

The mutually reinforcing rhetoric of the populist right and the Christian right creates a distinctly Australian agenda that has dangerous implications for many people, especially those who are already marginalised.

This article is based on research funded by the Australian Research Council Grant DP230100538 ‘Australian Spirituality: Wellness, Wellbeing and Risks’.

Elenie Poulos is an ordained Minister in the Uniting Church in Australia and a non-executive director on the Board of Uniting NSW.ACT.

This article is based on research funded by the Australian Research Council Grant DP230100538 ‘Australian Spirituality: Wellness, Wellbeing and Risks’.

– ref. The rise of right-wing Christian populism and its powerful impact on Australian politics – https://theconversation.com/the-rise-of-right-wing-christian-populism-and-its-powerful-impact-on-australian-politics-255392

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Digital Storytelling Team, The Conversation

We’re at the tail end of five weeks of intense campaigning for the federal election. The major and minor parties, as well as independents, have thrown a slew of policies at the Australian people, most of which we’ve catalogued in our Policy Tracker.

There have also been memorable moments, a few fairly forgettable debates, and a whole lot of memes – both astute and cringeworthy. (Where does that Coalition “diss track” fit in? We’ll leave it to you to decide.)

So, how closely have you been paying attention? It’s time to test your election campaign knowledge.

Digital Storytelling Team 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. Election quiz: have you been paying attention? – https://theconversation.com/election-quiz-have-you-been-paying-attention-255603

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

A YouGov MRP poll has Labor clearly winning a majority of seats in the federal election – 84 of the 150 seats in the House of Representatives.

Labor also leads the Coalition by 53–47% in new polls from Redbridge and Spectre Strategy.

Respondent-allocated preference flows from various pollsters do not imply a big Coalition gain from the 2022 election preference flow method.

YouGov conducted a national MRP poll (multi-level modelling with post-stratification) from April 1–29 from an overall sample of 35,185 people. MRP polls are used to estimate the outcome in each House electorate using huge samples and modelling.

YouGov’s central forecast is Labor winning 84 of the 150 lower house seats, an 18-seat majority. The Coalition would win 47 seats, the Greens three, independents 14 and others two.

Since YouGov’s previous MRP poll that was taken from late February to late March, Labor is up nine seats, the Coalition down 13, the Greens up one and independents up three.

And compared to the first YouGov MRP poll conducted before mid-February, Labor is up 18 seats and the Coalition down 26.

The high forecast in the new MRP poll is 85 seats for Labor and 53 for the Coalition, while the low forecast is 76 for Labor (just enough for a majority) and 45 for the Coalition.

On national voting intentions, Labor led the Coalition by 52.9–47.1% in this MRP poll, a 2.7-point gain for Labor since the previous MRP poll. Primary votes were 31.4% Labor (up 1.6 points), 31.1% Coalition (down 4.4), 12.6% Greens (down 0.6), 9.3% One Nation (steady), 8.1% independents (down 0.2) and 7.6% others (up 3.7).

By 2022 election flows, Labor would lead the Coalition by 54.1–45.9%.

Labor won the 2022 election by 52.1–47.9% from primary votes of 35.7% Coalition, 32.6% Labor, 12.3% Greens, 5.0% One Nation, 4.1% United Australia Party, 5.3% independents and 5.1% others.

In this poll, the major parties combined are winning just 62.5% of the vote, down from 68.3% in 2022, which was already a record low for the combined major party vote.

Unless the Coalition surges in the final days before Saturday’s election or the polls are overstating support for Labor, Labor will win the election. The graph below includes the Redbridge poll, but not the Spectre Strategy one.

Labor takes 53–47% lead in Redbridge poll

The final national poll by Redbridge and Accent Research for the News Corp tabloids, conducted April 24–29 from a sample of 1,011 people, gave Labor a 53–47% lead over the Coalition by both respondent and 2022 election flows.

This is a one-point gain for Labor since the previous national Redbridge poll in early April.

Primary votes were 34% Labor (up one), 34% Coalition (down two), 12% Greens (steady), 8% One Nation (up one) and 12% for all others (steady). One Nation’s preference flows to the Coalition had increased in this poll compared with 2022, but Labor’s flow increased from other sources.

On type of government desired, 24% wanted a majority Labor government, 12% a Labor minority government with the Greens and 10% a Labor minority government with the teals (comprising a total of 46% who wanted Labor to govern).

For the Coalition, 30% wanted a majority Coalition government, 2% a Coalition minority government with the Greens and 7% a Coalition minority government with the teals (a total of 39% who wanted a Coalition government).

New pollster Spectre Strategy gives Labor 53–47% lead

A national poll by new pollster Spectre Strategy, conducted April 24–28 from a sample of 2,000 people, also gave Labor a 53–47% lead over the Coalition by respondent preferences from primary votes of 34% Coalition, 31% Labor, 15% Greens, 10% One Nation and 11% for all others.

By 2022 election flows, this poll would give Labor about a 52.5–47.5% lead over the Coalition.

Women voters (71%) and men aged 18–34 (64%) both massively favoured Labor. Among voters aged 35–54, 61% of women supported Labor, compared to just 49% of men. Both men and women aged 55 and over favoured the Coalition by 58–42%.

Anthony Albanese led Peter Dutton as preferred prime minister by 47–35%.

DemosAU polls of Melbourne and Sydney seats

DemosAU collectively polled the Labor-held seats of Dunkley, Bruce and Hawke in Melbourne from April 13–22 from a sample of 924 people. Labor led the Coalition by 53–47%. The party won the three seats by 56.5–43.5% in 2022.

Primary votes in the poll were 32% Labor, 31% Liberal, 13% Greens, 10% One Nation and 14% for all others.

DemosAU collectively polled the Labor-held seats of Parramatta, Reid and Werriwa in Sydney from April 13–27 from a sample of 905 people. Labor led the Coalition by 56–44%. The party won the three seats 54.7–45.3% in 2022.

Primary votes in the poll were 36% Labor, 28% Liberal, 10% Greens, 5% Libertarian, 4% One Nation, 11% independents and 6% others.

Preference flows

Phillip Coorey wrote in the Australian Financial Review Tuesday that JWS polling of some seats had right-wing party preferences flowing at 80 or 90% rates to the Coalition. If this is true, the Coalition would do better than expected from current polls.

But respondent preferences were used in the Redbridge poll above, giving the same result as the 2022 flow result. The Spectre respondent result was actually 0.5 of a point better for Labor than the previous election method.

The polls I covered on Tuesday from Resolve, Essential and Morgan used respondent preferences. The Coalition was up one point in the Morgan poll compared to the previous election method and up 0.5 of a point in the Essential poll. There was no difference between the two methods in Resolve.

JWS has given the Coalition very strong results in many of its seat polls. All other evidence suggests only a small gain for the Coalition from using respondent preferences as opposed to the 2022 election flows.

Inflation increased in March quarter

The Australian Bureau of Statistics released the March quarter inflation report on Wednesday. Headline inflation increased 0.9% in the March quarter, up from 0.2% in both December and September. This was the highest quarterly inflation since June 2024. Annual inflation was steady at 2.4% from December.

Core inflation increased 0.7% in the March quarter, up from 0.5% in December. Annual core inflation dropped to 2.9% in March from 3.3% in December.

The same principles with poll analysis can be applied to economic data. We’re most interested in the current polls, not in averaging these polls with those from months ago. The quarterly inflation numbers should be emphasised, not the annual numbers that include data from the June 2024 quarter.

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

– ref. Major YouGov poll has Labor easily winning a majority of seats in election – https://theconversation.com/major-yougov-poll-has-labor-easily-winning-a-majority-of-seats-in-election-255601

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hiran Thabrew, Senior Lecturer in Child Psychiatry and Paediatrics, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition. Someone may have social and communication differences, sensory issues and/or restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviour or interests.

There has been increased awareness and an expanded definition of autism over the past couple of decades. Now around one in 40 people are thought to be autistic.

Autistic people often have strengths such as focus, honesty and dedication. But due to a combination of genetic and autism-related factors, they also have higher rates of other health conditions.

Common mental health conditions include anxiety, depression, attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder or ADHD, obsessive-compulsive disorder, eating disorders and intellectual developmental disorder.

Common physical health conditions include epilepsy, rheumatoid arthritis and heart disease.

The core features of autism can’t and don’t need to be altered. But a range of talking therapies and medications can help manage these other health conditions.

Commonly prescribed medications

The increased awareness of autism and availability of new medications has seen increased rates of prescribing for autistic people and those with other chronic conditions over the past few decades. This is a trend we have seen internationally.

The most common medications for mental health conditions among autistic people are:

1. selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), such as fluoxetine (Prozac), for anxiety and depression

2. low-dose antipsychotic medications, such as risperidone and aripiprazole, for reducing stress-related irritability and aggression

3. stimulants such as methylphenidate (Ritalin) for ADHD

4. melatonin and other sleep medications.

The most common medications for physical health conditions among autistic people are:

1. painkillers, such as paracetamol and ibuprofen, for pain and fever, especially in younger children. These are also the most commonly prescribed medication for non-autistic children

2. antibiotics, such as amoxycillin, for suspected or confirmed infections (autistic children tend to have more infections)

3. asthma and allergy medications, including salbutamol inhalers, loratadine and oral steroids (autistic people have similar rates of allergies to non-autistic people)

4. laxatives, such as lactulose, for constipation. Autistic people are at increased risk of constipation due to limited food preferences, rigid toilet habits, and difficulty recognising when they need to use the toilet.

Multiple medications, or not enough

Prescribing multiple medications at the same time is known as polypharmacy. This has become more of an issue for autistic people in Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia.

One study found autistic children and young people from Aotearoa New Zealand received a mean (average) four medications in one year (versus 2.9 medications for non-autistic people). Some 57% were prescribed three or more medications at a time.

Medications may work as well for people with and without autism. However, autistic people are more likely to have side effects. This might be due to heightened sensory sensitivities and the way medications affect the nervous system.

Polypharmacy increases the risk of medication interactions. It is also likely to contribute to autistic people’s higher chance of dying early. A 2024 study confirms this occurs at double the rate of non-autistic people.

Possible reasons for polypharmacy include:

• lack of agreement between doctors and clear guidelines for prescribing medication

• insufficient access to non-medication options to manage health conditions

• greater likelihood of being treated during crises. For instance, behaviour that escalates to the point of personal or property damage and family burnout may require medication to allow a child to stay at home.

However, at times, autistic people may not receive appropriate medications. This may be because doctors do not have clear prescribing guidelines or vary in how they prescribe. It can also be because someone or their family are concerned about side effects.

The right dose for the right time

We should aim to use the appropriate medication for the appropriate period of time for the growing number of people diagnosed with autism.

It’s essential prescribers have clearer prescribing guidance, aim for the lowest possible dose of medication, actively address polypharmacy and regularly monitor autistic people with a view to weaning medications as soon as possible.

Earlier identification and support for autistic children and their families would reduce the chance of crises and stress-related health conditions.

We need health services that can better meet the needs of autistic people. Flexible, tailored care should be provided in an environment that matches someone’s sensory needs. For instance, an environment should not be too bright or loud, or overstimulating. Ideally, this will have been designed with autistic people.

We also need an adequately resourced health system to provide autistic people with timely, appropriate, safe and equitable care.

Hiran Thabrew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist, paediatrician, autism researcher and New Zealand Chair for the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. He has never received any pharmaceutical company sponsorship for his clinical or research activities.

– ref. Which medications are commonly prescribed for autistic people and why? – https://theconversation.com/which-medications-are-commonly-prescribed-for-autistic-people-and-why-251715

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fan Yang, Research fellow at Melbourne Law School, the University of Melbourne and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society., The University of Melbourne

This election, social media has been a major battleground as candidates try to reach younger voters. As Gen Z and Millennials now make up the dominant voter bloc in Australia, securing their support is more electorally important than ever.

This effort has also played out on Chinese social media platforms, namely WeChat and RedNote. Thousands of Australians use these apps, often as a main source of news.

The RECapture research team has been tracking political activity on these platforms for years. Between October 2024 and April 2025, we observed 319 Liberal Party advertisements, 68 Labor Party advertisements, and 258 ads from independent candidates on WeChat. More than 20 Australian politicians used RedNote for self-promotion. Both platforms are becoming increasingly popular among politicians.

But there’s a catch: political communication on these apps is either banned or hidden. So how do candidates work around the rules?

We’ve found they use influencers and third parties, blurring the lines between authorised political advertising and undisclosed campaigning.

Skirting the rules

Platforms such as Facebook and Google maintain public ad repositories to document political advertising.

On WeChat and RedNote, however, such content is not formally registered or subject to public scrutiny.

Since 2019, WeChat has been a key platform for Australian politicians trying to reach Chinese-Australian voters.

From 2022 onwards, our research has observed the rising political popularity of RedNote, driven by its low entry barriers and emphasis on visual content.

In January, a shift of US-based users from TikTok to RedNote further elevated the platform’s prominence. Now, candidates of all stripes are using it.

But WeChat bans political advertisements and campaigning. RedNote uses shadowbanning (the covert hiding of specific content) to limit the visibility of political accounts.

As a result, political figures in democracies globally often bypass these restrictions by working with Chinese-language media or influencers to reach Chinese-speaking voters.

This tactic enables political messaging outside platform and regulatory oversight. It undermines transparency and accountability in political communication.

How do political ads work on WeChat?

Political advertising on WeChat isn’t transparent. WeChat requires official account registration through Chinese businesses recognised by Chinese tech conglomerate Tencent.

In Australia, Chinese-language media outlets serve as intermediaries. They distribute political campaign materials on behalf of candidates.

Political advertising on WeChat is presented in three main formats:

• embedded within articles

• as sponsored content

• and as short videos distributed via WeChat’s Channel function.

Advertising costs are typically negotiated between media outlets and campaign teams, ranging from a few hundred to several thousand dollars, depending on the outlet’s influence and the ad’s target demographic.

Spending on political ads on WeChat isn’t disclosed anywhere, so it’s very hard to track how much money is being spent this way.

What do these ads look like?

For example, we identified Scott Yung, a Liberal candidate for Bennelong, and Andy Yin, a former Liberal Party member now running as an independent for Bradfield. They both published between two and eight political advertisements on WeChat daily in April.

These ads were in addition to their self-promotional content and other campaigning activities via short videos.

This content sometimes includes celebrity endorsements. In 2019 and 2025, respectively, Yung and Yin used third-party media and marketing companies based in China to recruit celebrities to endorse their campaigns.

However, such strategies are criticised domestically due to concerns about potential “Chinese influence” and perceived links to the Communist Party of China.

But behind the public political ads lies a semi-private form of campaigning.

By attaching a QR code to their political ads, candidates direct their campaigns to private group chats, enabling a more targeted form of engagement (observed in the case of Liberal candidate for Reid Grange Chung’s sponsored content).

What about RedNote?

Non-Chinese Australian politicians often get around shadowbans on RedNote by signalling their connection to Chinese communities through symbolic gestures. This includes posts showcasing their visits to Chinese restaurants or photos taken at Lunar New Year community events.

Candidates of Chinese background often highlight their connections with prominent white Australian politicians, such as former prime ministers Tony Abbott and John Howard, to show their standing and political credibility within the party.

Discussions of party policies, especially controversial ones such as Australia-US-China relations, are rare. When they do occur, they are often selectively focused on matters of concern to Chinese migrants or those deemed safe for discussion on RedNote.

Chinese-Australian candidates often organise their offline campaign events to target Chinese-Australian influencers. The influencers then disseminate relevant content on RedNote.

As a result, candidates rely on content creators, influencers, supporters, migrant businesses and Chinese-language media outlets to promote their campaigns.

Regulations falling by the wayside

Candidates usually follow authorisation disclosure rules on their English social media pages.

These rules, however, are often disregarded on RedNote or WeChat.

Candidates often outsource their campaigning work to Chinese media and marketing agencies. This means the candidates have minimal oversight of the activities taking place on these platforms, raising concerns about whether electoral regulations may be inadvertently violated in the process.

We’ve found instances of unauthorised pages of politicians and candidates that have gone unnoticed by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).

These are hard to find because the content is largely shadowbanned. If users or the AEC searched a particular candidate’s name, they wouldn’t be able to find much.

In April, the AEC advised rules around authorising this sort of content. It said electoral communications distributed by people or organisations that are not political entities still require authorisation if monetary or gifts-in-kind transactions are involved.

The AEC’s guidance further says political parties should include an authorisation if they repost collaborative content. The general principle is: “when in doubt, authorise it”.

The key challenges here are identifying who collaborates with whom, on which platform, how content is remixed, and whether the collaboration is voluntary or involves monetary or in-kind transactions.

The AEC doesn’t actively monitor Chinese social media platforms. This makes enforcing any regulations almost impossible.

Given how much political candidates are using these apps, there needs to be better regulatory oversight of what happens on them.

We thank researchers Robbie Fordyce and Mengjie Cai for their contributions to this project.

The project is funded by the Susan McKinnon Foundation between 2024 and 2025.

Dan Dai, Luke Heemsbergen, and Stevie Zhang do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How do candidates skirt Chinese social media bans on political content? They use influencers – https://theconversation.com/how-do-candidates-skirt-chinese-social-media-bans-on-political-content-they-use-influencers-253847

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Renaud Joannes-Boyau, Professor in Geochronology and Geochemistry, Southern Cross University

The internet’s latest absurd obsession is: who would win in a no-rules fight between 100 average human men and one adult male gorilla?

This hypothetical and strange question has taken over Reddit, TikTok, YouTube and Instagram. Some argue that humans once hunted mammoths so, clearly, we would win. Others point out that a silverback gorilla can lift close to 1,000kg and could throw a grown man like a rag doll.

To be honest, it’s not really a question we need to answer – and yet, as usual on the internet, everyone has an opinion.

But, beyond the jokes and memes, this silly debate provides an opportunity to reflect on human evolution. What are the real strengths of our species? What have we sacrificed? And what can a gorilla, our majestic, powerful and endangered distant cousin, teach us about our own nature and evolution?

Gorillas and humans: two branches of the same evolutionary tree

Gorillas are one of our closest living relatives. Along with chimpanzees, bonobos and orangutans, they belong to the great apes or Hominidae family. Chimpanzees share about 98.8% of their DNA with us, while gorillas come a close second, sharing around 98.4%.

The last common ancestor between humans and gorillas lived roughly 10 million years ago, and it is also the same ancestor for chimpanzees.

Since the evolutionary split, humans and gorillas have followed very different paths. Gorillas have adapted to dense forests and mountainous terrains, while humans have evolved to live in the open, but realistically to multiple and various environments.

Despite the substantial difference in ecological niches, humans and gorillas share many traits, such as opposable thumbs, facial expressions, complex social behaviours and emotional intelligence.

Mastering forest power

In the recent Dune saga, to win, Duke Leto Atreides wanted to develop “desert power”. Well, gorillas have mastered forest power.

And let’s be clear – in terms of raw power, the gorilla wins every time. An adult male silverback can weigh more than 160kg and lift about a tonne without going to the gym every day. Their upper-body strength is shocking. And that’s no evolutionary accident – it’s the result of intense competition between males, where dominance determines mating.

Additionally, gorillas are extremely tough and resilient, yet gentle and calm most of the time. Gorillas, like many primates, have a strong social intelligence. They use a variety of vocalisations, gestures and even chest drumming to communicate across distances.

They have shown the ability to use sign language, mourn their dead, and demonstrate empathy, attesting to sophisticated cognitive skills.

Trading muscles for minds

A fight between 100 men and one gorilla might lead to a lot of dead men, but we all know that men will come with weapons, strategies, drones, fire and other clever tricks.

Humans are not physically strong in comparison to many other mammals. Our strength as a species is our adaptability and our ability to collaborate in very large groups.

Our brains are, on average, three times larger proportionally than those of gorillas. This fantastic evolutionary adaptation has allowed us to develop abstract thinking and symbolic language, but most of all, to pass and build on complex knowledge across generations.

And this is our greatest superpower, our ability to cooperate across vast groups, far beyond the average gorilla social unit, which usually ranges from a few family members up to a group of 30 individuals.

Humans’ evolutionary history has led to trading brute force for social, cultural and technological complexity, making us Earth’s most versatile and dangerous species.

So, who’s the winner?

In a one-on-one brawl, the gorilla can make “human-mash” with one hand. There is no contest when discussing brute force and bare hands.

But humans fight dirty. Judging by our evolutionary success, humans would likely lose many battles but ultimately win the fight. Mountain gorillas were not on the brink of extinction in the 1980s without our help.

Our species has spread across all continents, all terrains, and all climates. We have reshaped ecosystems, walked on the Moon, and developed advanced technologies. But gorillas are another kind of success rooted in harmony with their environment, physical grace, and quiet strength.

Perhaps the real takeaway message isn’t who wins in a fight, but to realise that two very different and yet very close cousins have walked two separate evolutionary roads, each in their own distinct way. And both are nature’s triumph and accomplishment.

Renaud Joannes-Boyau receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Leakey Foundation, National Geographic, and the European Research Council.

– ref. Who would win in a fight between 100 men and 1 gorilla? An evolutionary expert weighs in – https://theconversation.com/who-would-win-in-a-fight-between-100-men-and-1-gorilla-an-evolutionary-expert-weighs-in-255621

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kai He, Professor of International Relations, Griffith University

The United States and China remain in a standoff in their tariff war. Neither side appears willing to budge.

After US President Donald Trump imposed massive 145% tariffs on Chinese imports in early April, China retaliated with its own tariffs of 125% on US goods.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said this week it’s up to China to de-escalate tensions. China’s Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, said the two sides are not talking.

The prospect of economic decoupling between the world’s two largest economies is no longer speculative. It is becoming a hard reality. While many observers debate who might “win” the trade war, the more likely outcome is that everyone loses.

A convenient target

Trump’s protectionist agenda has spared few. Allies and adversaries alike have been targeted by sweeping US tariffs. However, China has served as the main target, absorbing the political backlash of broader frustrations over trade deficits and economic displacement in the US.

The economic costs to China are undeniable. The loss of reliable access to the US market, coupled with mounting uncertainty in the global trading system, has dealt a blow to China’s export-driven sectors.

China’s comparative advantage lies in its vast manufacturing base and tightly integrated supply chains. This is especially true in high-tech and green industries such as electric vehicles, batteries and solar energy. These sectors are deeply dependent on open markets and predictable demand.

New trade restrictions in Europe, Canada and the US on Chinese electric vehicles, in particular, have already caused demand to drop significantly.

China’s GDP growth was higher than expected in the first quarter of the year at 5.4%, but analysts expect the effect of the tariffs to soon bite. A key measure of factory activity this week showed a contraction in manufacturing.

China’s economic growth has also been weighed down by structural headwinds, including industrial overcapacity (when a country’s production of goods exceeds demand), an ageing population, rising youth unemployment and persistent regional disparities. The property sector — once a pillar of the country’s economic rise — has become a source of financial stress. Local government debt is mounting and a pension crisis is looming.

Negotiations with the US might be desirable to end the tariff war. However, unilateral concessions on Beijing’s part are neither viable nor politically palatable.

Regional coordination

Trump’s tariff wars have done more than strain bilateral relationships; they have shaken the foundations of the global trading system.

By sidelining the World Trade Organization and embracing a transactional approach to bilateral trade, the US has weakened multilateral norms and emboldened protectionist tendencies worldwide.

One unintended consequence of this instability has been the resurgence of regional arrangements. In Asia, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), backed by China and centred on the ASEAN bloc in Southeast Asia, has emerged as a credible alternative for economic cooperation.

Meanwhile, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) continues to expand, with the United Kingdom joining late last year.

Across Latin America, too, regional blocs are exploring new avenues for integration, hoping to buffer themselves against the shocks of resurgent protectionism.

But regionalism is no panacea. It cannot replicate the scale or efficiency of global trade, nor can it restore the predictability on which exporters depend.

Looming dangers

The greater danger is the world drifting into a Kindleberger Trap — a situation in which no power steps forward to provide the leadership necessary to sustain global public goods, or a stable trading system.

Economist Charles Kindleberger’s account of the Great Depression remains instructive: it was not the presence of conflict but the absence of leadership that brought about the global economy’s systemic collapse.

Without renewed global coordination, the economic fragmentation triggered by Trump’s tariff wars could give way to something far more dangerous than a recession – rising geopolitical and military tensions that no region can contain.

The political landscape is already fraught. The Chinese Communist Party, for instance, has long tethered its legitimacy to the promise of eventual unification with Taiwan. Yet the costs of using force remain prohibitively high.

Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te’s recent designation of China as a “foreign hostile force” have sharpened tensions. Beijing’s response has been calibrated – military exercises intended more as a warning than a prelude to conflict.

However, the intensifying trade war with the US may become the final straw that exhausts Beijing’s patience, leaving Taiwan as collateral damage in a US-China final showdown.

A role for collective leadership

China alone is neither able nor inclined to assume the mantle of global leadership. Its current focus is more on domestic priorities – sustaining economic growth and managing social stability – than on foreign policy.

Yet, Beijing can still play a constructive role in shaping the international environment through its cooperation with Europe, ASEAN and the Global South.

The objective is not to replace American hegemony, but to support a more multi-polar and collaborative system — one capable of sustaining global public goods in an era of uncertainty.

Paradoxically, a more coordinated effort by the rest of the world may ultimately help bring the US back into the fold. Washington may rediscover the strategic value of engagement — and return not as the sole leader, but as an indispensable partner.

In the short term, other states may seek to gain an advantage from the great power standoff. But they should remember that what begins as a clash between giants can quickly engulf bystanders.

In this volatile landscape, the path forward does not lie in exploiting disorder. Rather, nations must cautiously advance the shared interest in restoring a stable, rules-based global order.

Kai He receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. The global costs of the US-China tariff war are mounting. And the worst may be yet to come – https://theconversation.com/the-global-costs-of-the-us-china-tariff-war-are-mounting-and-the-worst-may-be-yet-to-come-254583

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Cairney, Professor and Head of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences; Director, The Queensland Centre for Olympic and Paralympic Studies, The University of Queensland

Not so long ago, life was pretty simple for sports leagues and teams when it came to connecting with fans: the contests and athletes were the stars of the show, with the on-field action covered and celebrated by sports media accordingly.

Things are rapidly changing.

Sport used to primarily be about performance, competition and entertainment. Now, sport and the athletes who play it are often dynamic media platforms.

This paradigm shift is being driven by the convergence of artificial intelligence (AI), data mining, immersive technology and the creator economy. Each exposes anomalies in the old model and demands a new framework for how sport is consumed, valued and organised.

Read more:
The social media games: why sports teams and leagues aren’t just competing on the field

A changing landscape

In today’s modern sporting landscape, many leagues, teams and even mega-events are fully functioning media companies.

Athletes are both product and producer.

They not only generate performance-based content (highlights, stats) but also personal narratives, political positions, or cultural influence.

They are creators and media entities in the full sense — with their own brands, platforms and followers.

Professional leagues and events must reckon with the power shift these actions imply.

There is extraordinary opportunity in leveraging athletes’ identities for deeper fan engagement. But there is also caution: narratives may not always align with league and team/owner agendas.

Consider some recent examples.

Former No. 1-ranked women’s tennis player Naomi Osaka used her platforms to create a brand that spans fashion, media and activism.

Her 2021 withdrawal from the French Open, which she announced on her own terms on social media, stemmed from her decision to skip post-match press conferences to protect her mental health.

Osaka’s move highlighted both the opportunity created by authentic, athlete-driven engagement and the challenge it posed to traditional tournament control.

In 2024, Shohei Ohtani, the Japanese baseball phenomenon, offered a different but related case.

A dominant pitcher and elite hitter, Ohtani signed a record-breaking US$700 million (A$1.1 billion) contract with the Los Angeles Dodgers, the most lucrative deal in baseball history.

Since joining the Dodgers, he has tightly curated his public image, favouring controlled, self-managed media content over traditional press access.

His control over access and messaging means the Dodgers and Major League Baseball can’t fully shape his story.

Ash Barty’s post-retirement career offers a compelling Australian parallel.

Since stepping away from tennis in 2022 while ranked No. 1, Barty has carefully balanced commercial endorsements, a memoir and media appearances.

Like Osaka and Ohtani, Barty’s example speaks to a new form of athlete agency: one where narrative control, emotional transparency and strategic silence all play a role in reshaping sport’s public conversation.

All these cases illustrate a shifting paradigm — where athletes are no longer just performers but powerful media outlets, often with more influence than the familiar institutions they represent.

The influence of AI

This opens important questions around ownership, intellectual property, image rights and the ethical stewardship of public platforms.

It also means if athletes, players and leagues are media companies, monetisation is a function — but not the sole purpose. Successful media ecosystems don’t just sell content, they also build belonging.

This means investing in and influencing community, culture and shared values — not just launching branded apps, paid streaming services, or spin-off content that extend the brand.

AI, in this context, becomes a community-builder, not just a recommendation engine. Its ability to support personalised experiences and micro-segmented fan journeys allows for mass intimacy: experiences that feel deeply individual yet can be scaled broadly.

With the help of data and machine learning, leagues and teams can now deliver mass customisation not just of products but of experiences and narratives — tailoring highlight reels, merchandise, content and even storylines for each fan. This shift enables a deeper, more emotional form of engagement.

The National Basketball Association (NBA)’s upgraded app and NBA ID platform bring this to life, using Microsoft Azure AI to serve fans personalised highlight reels, real-time stat overlays and exclusive content based on their favourite teams and players.

These “fan journeys of one” show how leagues can turn data into connection — building not just audiences but communities, powered by AI.

As to what the future may hold, some key questions in this space are:

• How does AI reshape the power dynamics between leagues, athletes and fans?
• What new business models will emerge when the fan is also a co-creator?
• Can AI be used to foster social good through sport, not just drive engagement metrics?

This ongoing tension between “brand-dom” (controlled or innovative messaging) and “fandom” (grassroots, emotionally driven engagement) will continue to evolve as technology also evolves.

Sport’s future won’t just be something we watch — it will be shaped by fans, athletes and technology working together, and it will keep changing faster than ever.

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

– ref. Savvy athletes and new technology are flipping traditional sports marketing on its head – https://theconversation.com/savvy-athletes-and-new-technology-are-flipping-traditional-sports-marketing-on-its-head-254596

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Griffiths, Democracy Deputy Program Director, Grattan Institute

At the last federal election, the then opposition leader Anthony Albanese pledged to “change the way politics operates in this country”. Integrity was a key issue in 2022, and Australians voted for a change of government and a wave of independents who championed anti-corruption reforms.

Labor’s election commitments included a federal corruption commission “with teeth” and the powers to hold public hearings. The new government was subsequently held to account by crossbenchers who were elected on platforms of integrity and honesty in politics.

Three years on, how much progress has been made on those promised changes?

Australia has made significant headway on some of these fronts, while others are still in progress or have stalled. Whoever forms government after Saturday will need to stay the course on many of these reforms and lift its game on others.

Corruption watchdog

Australia now has a National Anti-Corruption Commission(NACC), a huge reform for public accountability.

However, compromises were made on the promised model, most notably that the Commission only has the power to hold public hearings in “exceptional circumstances”.

The NACC has been fairly quiet in its first two years in operation – not surprising given the time it takes to establish itself and wade through a mountain of potential investigations.

But it did raise its head above the parapet with a decision not to investigate the Robodebt royal commission referrals, which drew so many complaints the decision was independently reviewed, and subsequently reversed.

It is too soon to assess the success of the NACC, but we have seen some improvement in Australia’s Corruption Perceptions Index in recent years, which is at least partly attributed to its establishment.

Other progress

The Albanese government has also made progress on reducing vested-interest influence in our politics. Under the Electoral Reform Bill passed in February this year, Australians will now get better and more timely information on political donations. The new caps on electoral expenditure put a ceiling on the fundraising “arms race”.

These are important steps forward. But the bill also takes a step back. It favours incumbents, which will make it harder for new entrants to contest elections. The changes don’t come into effect until July 1 next year, so there is still time for the next parliament to amend the rules.

Finally, progress was made on appointments to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which Labor claim had become highly politicised by the Morrison government.

That tribunal was abolished and replaced with a new body, the Administrative Review Tribunal.

Where are we now?

On the eve of the 2025 election, Australia’s institutions are generally strong, outperforming many of our international peers.

But we cannot afford to be complacent. The global context is increasingly alarming, with the international rules-based order under siege. Democracy is more fragile than ever.

Australians generally trust that government will protect lives in an emergency, and that it takes decisions based on evidence. But they are more sceptical when it comes to corporate influence in politics, and misuse of public office for personal or political gain.

5 priorities for action

There are several things the next government can do to maintain trust and confidence in our institutions.

The first is to stay the course on the NACC as it builds trust with the Australian people. This will take time, and increased public engagement, particularly through its corruption prevention outreach.

Second, amending the recent electoral reforms would level the playing field for new candidates. The total cap of $90 million for electoral expenditure by a political party is too high. And the per-seat cap of $800,000 is too low, advantaging incumbents over new entrants, who typically need to spend more to
introduce themselves to their electorates.

There are also loopholes in the legislation that benefit the major parties by allowing the donations cap and disclosure threshold to apply separately to each branch of a party.

Third, it would be timely to take a closer look at government advertising. Parliament should tighten the rules to ensure that taxpayer-funded advertising can’t be used to spruik the government of the day.

Fourth, the government has the opportunity to build on the abolition of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, by extending best-practice processes to all public appointments. And it should make public grants processes more open and competitive.

These reforms would support confidence in our institutions, ensure taxpayers get better value for money, and reduce opportunities for “jobs for mates” and “pork-barrelling”, which are particularly corrosive to public trust.

Finally, the government can do more to reduce vested-interest influence in politics. Ministerial diaries should be published to improve transparency of lobbying activity.

Gambling is one example of a powerful industry swaying policy in its favour. Consumer protections to prevent gambling harm are weak, despite the compelling case for reform. Government should be taking action in the public interest.

Collectively, these reforms would have very little budgetary impact. But they could substantially improve confidence in our policy-making institutions, which should be a clear priority for whoever forms government after Saturday.

The Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute’s activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities as disclosed on its website.

– ref. 3 years on from the ‘integrity’ election, how is Australia tracking on corruption reforms? – https://theconversation.com/3-years-on-from-the-integrity-election-how-is-australia-tracking-on-corruption-reforms-255635

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amal Elawady, Associate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University

From a distance, a downburst can look like a torrent of heavy rain. But at ground level, its behavior can be far more destructive.

When a downburst’s winds hit the ground, they shoot out horizontally in all directions, sometimes with enough force to shatter windows and overturn vehicles.

These winds behave in complicated ways, particularly in cities, as our latest research shows. Downburst winds can deflect off tall buildings, increasing the pressure on neighboring buildings’ windows and walls. The result can blow out glass and chip off facade. Even buildings designed to survive hurricanes can suffer major damage in a downburst.

As engineers, we study downbursts with the goal of designing buildings, components such as solar panels and windows, and infrastructure such as power lines that can stand up to that powerful force. To do this, informed by field measurements, we create our own powerful downbursts using a hurricane simulator known as the Wall of Wind at Florida International University.

What is a downburst?

Downbursts can be as destructive as tornadoes, but their winds develop in a very different way.

A downburst forms when a thunderstorm pulls cooler, heavier air down from high in the atmosphere. As this rain-cooled air rushes downward, it gains speed. Once it slams into the ground, it has nowhere to go but outward, sending strong winds in all horizontal directions.

The wind speed in a downburst can reach over 150 miles per hour. That’s the strength of a Category 4 hurricane and strong enough to knock down trees and power lines, damage buildings and flip vehicles.

These winds also rotate, but not in the same way tornadoes do. Downburst winds are typically considered straight-line winds, but they rotate around a horizontal axis as the wind curls upward after hitting the ground. Tornadoes, in contrast, spin around a vertical axis.

Powerful storm systems known as derechos are often made up of multiple downburst clusters, each containing many smaller downbursts, sometimes called microbursts.

Recreating Houston’s downburst in a warehouse

On May 16, 2024, a derecho hit Houston with a downburst that was so strong, it blew out windows in several high-rise buildings that had been built to survive Category 4 hurricanes. The winds also pried off chunks of buildings’ facades.

Two months later, Hurricane Beryl hit Houston with similar wind speeds, yet it left minimal damage to the downtown buildings.

To understand how a downburst like this can be so much more destructive – and what cities and building designers can do about it – we simulated both the Houston downburst winds and Hurricane Beryl’s winds in the Wall of Wind.

The test facility is equipped with a dozen jet fans, each almost as tall as the workers who run them and powerful enough to simulate a Category 5 hurricane. Our team used these fans to recreate powerful downburst winds that hit horizontally with the maximum wind speeds near ground level. Then, we put several models of buildings to the test to see how roofs, windows, facades and the structures of power lines reacted under that force.

In the Houston derecho, a downburst hit downtown with 100 mph winds. It cracked some lower windows, likely with blowing debris, but it also caused widespread unexpected damage midway up some of the buildings.

The Chevron Building Auditorium actually suffered the most damage on a side that wasn’t directly in the line of the storm but was facing another tall building. That left some intriguing questions. It suggested that the way the buildings channel the wind may have created a strong suction that blew out windows midway up the tower. Another burning question is whether building design codes are outdated when it comes to how well their cladding can stand up to these localized winds.

Using the Wall of Wind, we were able to test those pressures on models of the Houston buildings and see how downburst winds increased the pressured on a tall building model with excessive forces near the ground level.

The ability to simulate these winds is important for improving engineers’ understanding of the differences in how downbursts and other wind events exert force on buildings. The results ultimately inform building standards to help create more resilient and better-protected communities.

Building better power lines

Big storms, like downbursts, can also take down power lines.

Power lines extend hundreds of miles between cities and states, making them more susceptible to a hit from a localized severe storm, such as a downburst. If one of the towers falls, it can cause a chain reaction, like dominoes falling one after another. That can knock out power for large numbers of people.

With colleagues, we have been testing transmission towers and multispan power-line systems under downburst and hurricane winds to understand how these structures respond, with the goal of developing better construction techniques. That work has helped to update the American manual for the design of power lines, which engineers use for designing safer, more storm-resilient transmission towers.

What’s next

Low-rise and mid-rise buildings are also vulnerable to downbursts, but the effects are less well understood. Downburst winds are most intense between 10 and 300 feet above the ground, meaning the roofs and walls of some low-rises can be hit with intense horizontal wind.

Recent building codes have offered design guidelines to help ensure these buildings can withstand tornadoes. However, the way downbursts rotate in a short time around a building or a community of buildings puts pressure on the walls and the roof in different ways. Similar to straight-line winds, we expect high suction on the roof. Due to their short duration, varying wind direction and intense wind speed, downbursts may also cause excessive vibrations and varying pressure distribution on the roof components.

We’re now testing downburst damage to low- and mid-rise buildings to better understand the risks and help highlight changes that can make buildings more resilient.

As populations grow, cities are adding more buildings. At the same time, powerful storms are becoming more frequent and more intense. Understanding the effects of different types of storms will help engineers construct high-rises, low-rises and power lines that are better able to withstand extreme weather.

Amal Elawady receives funding from the National Science Foundation.

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

– ref. What is a downburst? These winds can be as destructive as tornadoes − we recreate them to test building designs – https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-downburst-these-winds-can-be-as-destructive-as-tornadoes-we-recreate-them-to-test-building-designs-254931

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

It used to be de rigueur for the prime minister and opposition leader to turn up to the National Press Club in the final week of the election campaign. But now Liberal leaders are not so keen.

Scott Morrison gave it a miss in 2022, although he was there in 2019. Nobody expected Peter Dutton, who has often been reluctant to face the Canberra press gallery in the past three years, to front the club this week.

It’s also happened in the past that a leader has said something significantly newsworthy during the Q&A session on these final big occasions.

Bob Hawke, days away from becoming prime minister in 1983, flagged he would be willing to break election promises if he found, on reaching office, that fiscal circumstances were different from what was anticipated. They were, and he did.

Anthony Albanese on Wednesday made his appearance, but he was not going to grab a headline with anything unexpected.

He delivered a spirited stump speech concentrating on everything Labor is offering voters – improvements to Medicare, tax cuts all round, and much else. He played and replayed his familiar mantra about nobody being left behind or held back. When it came to questions, the prime minister defended and deflected.

Are Australians better off than before he was elected? Well, they’d be worse off if Dutton had had his way.

Will whoever is in government need to increase the tax base in the next decade? “We’ll have not one but two income tax cuts.”

Would he consider a compromise on Labor’s plan to tax unrealised capital gains on some superannuation balances? “We have our policy.”

Is there something he regrets from the last three years? “I don’t pretend to be perfect.” So no regrets? “I’m not saying that at all.”

What he is saying is that the final sprint of the campaign is not the time to enter the confessional.

With the polls, and even most Liberals, at least privately, expecting Albanese to still be PM next week, whether in minority or majority government, he knows he has two challenges in these last days: to avoid being caught on any sticky paper, and to continue to project a sense of momentum by going full tilt (Labor people remember Bill Shorten easing up just before polling day in 2019). He is visiting every state, before he votes in his home electorate of Grayndler where, he indicated, his talisman dog Toto will accompany him to the polling booth on Saturday.

Before his press club appearance, Albanese had encouraging news from the latest consumer price index quarterly figures, which showed underlying inflation falling to 2.9%. This points to another cut in interest rates.

Westpac said, “Inflationary pressures have moderated, and the door is open for a rate cut in May”.

The Reserve Bank doesn’t meet until May 19-20, but the prospect of a cut can be a mood lifter for stretched households – just as the pre-campaign February decrease was.

Also able to be cast positively, US President Donald Trump, who has proved elusive in the face of the government’s attempts to get him to pick up the phone to discuss a tariff deal, confirmed a call would come. Asked whether he would speak to Albanese about trade, the president said, “they are calling, and I will talk to him, yes.”

There is no detail of whether, or what, deal could be in the offing, but Trump, by signalling the call, has given (inadvertently) another bit of help to the government in an election in which the “Trump factor” has played all Albanese’s way.

Instead of the press club, Dutton had done an hour’s “Ask Me Anything” appearance on Tuesday with Paul Murray on Sky, taking around a dozen viewers’ questions. It was an easy, friendly gig, directed squarely at his base. That might be one thing if he’s seeking the preferences of those voting One Nation or Trumpet of Patriots, but it is not where the middle-ground swinging voters are.

In this last week, Dutton has put his anger at a section of the media on display. Earlier in the week he lashed out at the ABC, Guardian and “other hate media”.

On Wednesday he doubled down, in a bit of pointed but embittered humour on FM radio when quizzed on tips for a good election night party. “I think alcohol is the first essential ingredient, I’m sure of that. Responsible drinking as well, but not watching the ABC would be a good start. For any young ones listening at home, forget the ABC.”

Dutton’s disdain for the ABC is long-standing and well-known. But in an election campaign, why he thinks it is a good tactic to expose it so blatantly is a mystery. It shows questionable judgement and a lack of discipline.

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. Election Diary: post-election rate cut and phone call from Trump in the pipeline – https://theconversation.com/election-diary-post-election-rate-cut-and-phone-call-from-trump-in-the-pipeline-255615

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ang Li, ARC DECRA and Senior Research Fellow, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Healthy Housing, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne

Across Australia, communities are grappling with climate disasters that are striking more frequently and with greater intensity. Bushfires, floods and cyclones are no longer one-off events. And this pattern is predicted to worsen due to climate change.

As it becomes more common to face climate disasters again and again, what does this mean for the mental health and wellbeing of people affected?

In a new study published today in the Lancet Public Health, we found experiencing repeated disasters leads to more severe and sustained effects on mental health compared to experiencing a single disaster.

What we did in our study

We drew on ten years of Australian data (2009–19) from the nationally representative Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey.

Specifically, our study involved data from 1,511 people who experienced at least one disaster. We tracked them from the year before the first disaster, at the first disaster, and, where applicable, each subsequent disaster, and a few years after each disaster.

We also included 3,880 people who did not experience disasters during this time but shared similar demographic, socioeconomic, health and place-based characteristics for comparison.

We measured exposure to climate disasters based on whether respondents reported a weather-related disaster (for example, flood, bushfire or cyclone) damaged or destroyed their home in the previous year.

The mental health outcomes were measured using two questionnaires commonly administered to assess depression and anxiety disorders (the 5-item mental health inventory) and psychological distress (the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale).

Cumulative effects

Our results show mental health declines became more severe with repeated disasters.

The graph below plots the mental health trajectories for everyone in our study who experienced at least one disaster, and the control group who did not experience any disasters. We looked at a maximum of three disasters in the study due to data availability.

It shows experiencing one disaster led to a decline in mental health during the disaster year, followed by a recovery to pre-disaster levels in the post-disaster period.

However, with repeated disasters, mental health trajectories declined further and it took longer to recover to pre-disaster levels.

We also found experiencing an additional disaster close to a previous disaster (for example, one or two years apart) was linked to greater mental health declines than disasters that were spaced further apart.

Some risk factors

We observed that certain factors consistently shaped mental health outcomes. For instance, having social support was consistently a protective factor, while having a long-term health condition consistently increased the risk of poorer mental health. This was true regardless of the number of disasters someone experienced.

On the other hand, some risk factors became stronger with each disaster. In particular, households with lower incomes, those in rural areas, and younger people appeared to experience greater effects of cumulative disasters.

There are some limitations to our research. For example, the data we had did not detail the type or severity of each disaster. It also was limited in what it could tell us about the mental health effects of three or more disasters.

Nonetheless, our study provides novel insights into the mental health consequences of multiple climate disasters. This highlights the need for better support for communities facing an increasing number of emergencies.

Our findings also align with other studies that have observed increasing risk to mental health with multiple disasters.

At the same time, our findings add a new perspective by showing how trajectories can change over time. People’s mental health often recovers to pre-disaster levels after a single disaster, but repeat disasters can delay or halt this recovery.

Why might repeated disasters lead to worse mental health?

Repeated disasters, especially when they occur in close succession, can lead to cumulative stress driven by trauma and uncertainty. This can create a reinforcing cycle. People already facing social disadvantages – such as poor health and low income – are more likely to be exposed to disasters. In turn, these events disproportionately affect those facing existing disadvantages.

The result is a compounding effect that can contribute to worsening mental health outcomes and slower recovery over multiple disasters. This means disasters are an issue of social equity and must be considered in efforts to reduce poverty and improve social outcomes, as well as health outcomes.

Repeated disasters in particular can drain financial, social and community resources. They can exacerbate existing strain on household savings, disrupted social ties due to displacement, and reduced access to services after disasters – especially in rural areas.

What can we do to support people through multiple disasters?

We need to transform the way we think about disasters. It’s estimated children born today will experience up to seven times the number of extreme weather events across their lifetimes than someone born in 1960.

We are starting to get a better picture of what people need to recover from climate disasters. Our research points to the need for clinical services (for example, GPs) to screen for past disaster exposures in mental health assessments.

Emergency services need to plan services to reach at-risk groups during disasters. They also need to ensure recovery planning considers the effects of past disasters, for example by making sure support programs are not just tied to one disaster, but can be used across multiple.

The current approach to emergency services that looks at “one disaster at a time” doesn’t work anymore. As the climate continues to change, we urgently need to consider the effects of multiple disasters in public health, welfare and disaster services.

Ang Li receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Claire Leppold 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’s mental health goes downhill after repeated climate disasters – it’s an issue of social equity – https://theconversation.com/peoples-mental-health-goes-downhill-after-repeated-climate-disasters-its-an-issue-of-social-equity-254475

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Victoria Cornell, Research Fellow, Flinders University

It would be impossible at this stage in the election campaign to be unaware that housing is a critical, potentially vote-changing, issue. But the suite of policies being proposed by the major parties largely focus on young, first home buyers.

What is glaringly noticeable is the lack of measures to improve availability and affordability for older people.

Modern older lives are diverse, yet older people have become too easily pigeonholed. No more so than in respect to property, where a perception has flourished that older people own more than their fair share of housing wealth.

While the value of housing has no doubt increased, home ownership rates among people reaching retirement age has actually declined since the mid-1990s.

Older people can also face rental stress and homelessness – with almost 20,000 homeless people in Australia aged over 55. Severe housing stress is a key contributing to those homelessness figures.

It’s easy to blame older Australians for causing, or exacerbating, the housing crisis. But doing so ignores the fact that right now, our housing system is badly failing many older people too.

No age limits

Owning a home has traditionally provided financial security for retirees, especially ones relying on the age pension. This is so much so, that home ownership is sometimes described as the “fourth pillar” of Australia’s retirement system.

But housing has become more expensive – to rent or buy – for everyone.

Falling rates of home ownership
combined with carriage of mortgage debt into retirement, restricted access to shrinking stocks of social housing, and lack of housing affordability in the private rental market have a particular impact on older people.

Housing rethink

Housing policy for older Australians has mostly focused on age-specific options, such as retirement villages and aged care. Taking such a limited view excludes other potential solutions from across the broader housing system that should be considered.

Furthermore, not all older people want to live in a retirement village, and fewer than 5% of older people live in residential aged care.

During my Churchill Fellowship study exploring alternative, affordable models of housing for older people, I discovered three cultural themes that are stopping us from having a productive conversation about housing for older people.

• Australia’s tradition of home ownership undervalues renting and treats housing as a commodity, not a basic need. This disadvantages older renters and those on low income.

• There’s a stigma regarding welfare in Australia, which influences who is seen as “deserving” and shapes the policy responses.

• While widely encouraged, “ageing-in-place” means different things to different people. It can include formal facilities or the family home that needs modifications to make it habitable as someone ages.

These themes are firmly entrenched, often driven by policy narratives such as the primacy of home ownership over renting. In the past 50 years or so, many have come to view welfare, such as social housing, as a last resort, and have aimed to age in their family home or move into a “desirable” retirement village.

Variety is key

A more flexible approach could deliver housing for older Australians that is more varied in design, cost and investment models.

The promises made so far by political parties to help younger home buyers are welcome. However, the housing system is a complex beast and there is no single quick fix solution.

First and foremost, a national housing and homelessness plan is required, which also involves the states and territories. The plan must include explicit consideration of housing options for older people.

Funding for housing developments needs to be more flexible in terms of public-private sector investment and direct government assistance that goes beyond first home buyer incentives.

International models

For inspiration, we could look to Denmark, which has developed numerous co-housing communities.

Co-housing models generally involve self-managing communities where residents have their own private, self-contained home, supported by communal facilities and spaces. They can be developed and designed by the owner or by a social housing provider. They can be age-specific or multi-generational.

Funding flexibility, planning and design are key to their success. Institutional investors include

• so-called impact investors, who seek social returns and often accept lower financial returns

• community housing providers

• member-based organisations, such as mutuals and co-operatives.

Government also plays a part by expediting the development process and providing new pathways to more affordable ownership and rental options.

Europe is also leading the way on social housing, where cultural attitudes are different from here.

In Vienna, Austria, more than 60% of residents live in 440,000 socially provided homes. These homes are available for a person’s entire life, with appropriate age-related modifications permitted if required.

At over 20% of the total housing stock, social housing is also a large sector in Denmark, where the state and municipalities support the construction of non-profit housing.

Overcoming stereotyes

Our population is ageing rapidly, and more older people are now renting or facing housing insecurity.

If policymakers continue to ignore their housing needs, even more older people will be at risk of living on the street, and as a result will suffer poor health and social isolation.

Overcoming stereotypes – such as the idea that all older people are wealthy homeowners – is key to building fairer, more inclusive solutions.

This isn’t just about older Australians. It’s about creating a housing system that works for everyone, at every stage of life.

Victoria Cornell is employed by Flinders University, and received The AV Jennings Churchill Fellowship to investigate alternative, affordable models of housing that could help older Australians to age-in-place

– ref. Older Australians are also hurting from the housing crisis. Where are the election policies to help them? – https://theconversation.com/older-australians-are-also-hurting-from-the-housing-crisis-where-are-the-election-policies-to-help-them-255391

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Xanthe Mallett, Criminologist, CQUniversity Australia

It’s election time, which means the age old “tough on crime” rhetoric is being heralded by many politicians aiming to score votes.

Opposition leader Peter Dutton is pushing for a national public sex offender register. Currently only Western Australia has a registry that is open to the public.

In South Australia, Premier Peter Malinauskas brought in tougher child sex offender laws earlier this week.

What are these new laws in SA?

Under these new laws, serious child sex offenders are to be permanently locked up or electronically monitored, if they reoffend.

Automatic indefinite detention is a significant change.

Previously, the South Australian attorney-general could apply to the Supreme Court to request an offender be indefinitely detained, if the offender was considered to remain a danger to children and could not be rehabilitated.

The courts would then decide if they would grant the request, basing their decision on medical and other expert evidence.

The changes in SA mean those found guilty of a second serious sexual offence against anyone younger than 17 now receive automatic indefinite detention.

To be considered for release under the new law, an offender needs to show they can control their sexual instincts – so the onus is on them to prove they are not at risk of reoffending.

To achieve this, two court-selected psychologists would have to provide reports demonstrating the offender was both willing and able to resist committing further sex offences.

And if they are ever released, they will be electronically monitored for the rest of their lives.

In addition, registered child sex offenders would be banned from working with anyone under 18.

The new law also strengthens “Carly’s Law”, which focuses on reducing the sexual grooming of children online by adult predators.

Inconsistencies across Australia

The age of legal consent is 16 across Australia, except SA and Tasmania, where it is 17.

In 2024, an Australian Institute of Criminology report highlighted many of the inconsistencies across the country, including terminology and definitions of sexual offences, despite efforts to achieve national regularity.

Each state and territory approaches the problem of child sexual abuse differently.

In NSW, for example, sentencing for child sexual offences has increased over time. This reflects societal expectations given what we know now about the long-term, traumatic consequences of victimisation.

However, one consideration in sentencing in NSW is whether the sentence could have a “crushing” effect on the offender, and whether they may be entitled to an “element of mercy”.

Certainly, a full life sentence is a significant departure from this position.

Why now?

There is little doubt this is a political move, as these changes were first promised by Labor in the build-up to the 2022 SA election.

Then in January 2025, Labor announced it planned to introduce them in March – right before the federal election.

On the face of it, toughening laws aimed at reducing sexual violence against children is a good thing. No one would argue.

However, the legislation has been fast-tracked in the wake of a number of cases where those previously convicted of a sexual offence against a child reoffended.

One such case is Dylan Lloyd, who is alleged to have assaulted a 12-year-old girl while she travelled alone on a train. Lloyd had previously been convicted of assaulting a 10-year-old girl in 2021, and since then more alleged victims have come forward to police.

Cases such as Lloyd’s are preventable, as in this case Lloyd should still be imprisoned. This is one step forward. But consistency across states is needed and the long-term consequences need considering more fully.

Whether these laws will have the desired deterrent effect has not been answered.

We need to ensure personal and societal factors affecting crime rates, and which influence peoples’ attitudes and behaviours, are not overlooked.

Will the laws be good for the community?

These changes do have the potential to have a meaningful impact, but changing the behaviour of potential offenders is far more complex.

Potential offenders usually don’t consider the law. At a micro level, their behaviour is most affected by biological and psychological factors, including alcohol, drug addiction and mental health issues, as well as social and environmental factors.

In addition, there are numerous human rights and constitutional issues with permanent detention or lifelong monitoring, and the SA government may be walking into a legal minefield now they have removed the possibility of parole.

It would be better to allow judges options for discretion, as the context in which the offending happened is crucial in determining the likelihood of someone being successfully rehabilitated.

Mandatory full life sentences ignore the fact many sex offenders can be successfully rehabilitated.

One study in Queensland, which considered local and global evidence, indicated sexual recidivism can be significant reduced when offenders complete sex offender treatment programs.

Although it costs money to run these programs, the savings outweigh the costs of ongoing incarceration – particularly if we consider indefinite detention.

Black-and-white laws with little room for movement produce unintended and harmful outcomes.

It will be interesting to see how the new laws in SA play out in court and if any other states and territories follow suit.

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

– ref. Locked up for life? Unpacking South Australia’s new child sex crime laws – https://theconversation.com/locked-up-for-life-unpacking-south-australias-new-child-sex-crime-laws-255429

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Clare Collins, Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Newcastle

Did you start 2025 with a promise to eat better but didn’t quite get there? Or maybe you want to branch out from making the same meal every week or the same lunch for work almost every day?

Small dietary changes can make a big difference to how you feel, how your body functions and health indicators such as blood pressure, blood sugar and cholesterol levels.

You can meet your nutrient needs by eating a range of foods from the key food groups:

• vegetables and fruit
• protein (legumes, beans, tofu, meats, poultry, fish, eggs, nuts, seeds)
• grains (mostly wholegrain and high-fibre)
• calcium-rich foods (milk, yoghurt, cheese, non-dairy alternatives).

But you also need a variety of foods to get enough vitamins, minerals and phytonutrients from plant foods. Phytonutrients have antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer and other functions that help keep you healthy.

Use these five dietary tweaks to boost your nutrient intake and add variety to what you eat.

1. Include different types of bran to boost your fibre intake

Different types of dietary fibre help improve bowel function through fermentation by gut microbes in the colon, or large bowel. This creates larger, softer bowel motions that then stimulate the colon to contract, leading to more regular bowel movements.

Add different types of dietary fibre – such as oat bran, wheat bran or psyllium husk – to breakfast cereal or add some into recipes that use white flour:

• psyllium husk is high in soluble fibre. It dissolves in water forming viscous gel that binds to bile salts, which get excreted and your body is then not able to convert them into cholesterol. This helps lower blood cholesterol levels as well as with retaining water in your colon, making bowel motions softer. Soluble fibre also helps slow the digestive process, making you feel full and slows the normal rise in blood sugar levels after you eat

• wheat bran is an insoluble fibre, also called roughage. It adds bulk to bowel motions, which helps keep your bowel function regular

• oat bran contains beta-glucan, a soluble fibre, as well as some insoluble fibre.

Try keeping small containers topped up with the different fibres so you don’t forget to add them regularly to your breakfast.

2. Add a different canned bean to your shopping list

Dried beans are a type of legume. From baked beans to red kidney beans and chickpeas, the canned varieties are easy to use and inexpensive. Different colours and varieties have slightly different nutrient and phytonutrient profiles.

Canned beans are very high in total dietary fibre, including soluble fibre and resistant starch, a complex carbohydrate that resists digestion in the small intestine and then passes into the colon where it gets fermented.

The body digests and absorbs the nutrients in legumes slowly, contributing to their low glycemic index. So eating them makes you feel full.

Regularly eating more legumes lowers blood sugar levels, and total and LDL (bad) cholesterol.

Add legumes to dishes such as bolognese, curry, soups and salads (our No Money No Time website has some great recipes).

3. Try a different wholegrain, like buckwheat or 5-grain porridge

Wholegrain products contain all three layers of the grain. Both the inner germ layer and outer bran layer are rich in fibre, vitamins and minerals, while the inner endosperm contains mostly starch (think white flour).

Wholegrains include oats, corn (yes, popcorn too), rye, barley, buckwheat, quinoa, brown rice and foods made with wholegrains, like some breads and breakfast cereals such as rolled oats, muesli and five-grain porridge.

Wholegrains aren’t just breakfast and lunch foods. Dinner recipe ideas include tuna and veggie pasta bake,
chicken quesadillas and buckwheat mushroom risotto.

4. Try a different vegetable or salad mix every week

A review of the relationship between plant-based diets and dying of any cause followed more than half a million people across 12 long-term studies.

It found people who ate the most plants had a lower risk of dying during the study and follow-up period than those who ate hardly any.

Try adding a new or different vegetable or salad item to your weekly meals, such as rainbow coleslaw, canned beetroot, raw carrot, red onion, avocado or tomatoes.

Or try a stir-fry with bok choy, celery, capsicum, carrot, zucchini and herbs.

The more variety, the more colour, flavour and textures – not to mention phytonutrients.

5. Go nuts

Cashews, walnuts, almonds, macadamias, pecans and mixed nuts make a great snack.

(Peanuts are technically a legume because they grow in the ground but we count them as nuts because their nutrient profile is very similar to the tree nuts.)

You have to chew nuts well, which means your brain receives messages that you are eating and should expect to soon feel full.

Nuts are energy-dense, due to their high fat content. A matchbox portion size (30 grams) contains about 15 grams of fat, 5 grams of protein and 740 kilojoules.

While some people think you need to avoid nuts to lose weight, a review of energy restricted diets found people who ate nuts lost as much weight as those who didn’t.

My colleagues and I at the University of Newcastle have created a free Healthy Eating Quiz where you can check your diet quality score, see how healthy your usual eating patterns are and how your score compares to others. You can also get some great ideas to make your meals more interesting .

Clare Collins AO is a Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, HMRI, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update, the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns and current Co-Chair of the Guidelines Development Advisory Committee for Clinical Practice Guidelines for Treatment of Obesity.

– ref. Sick of eating the same things? 5 ways to boost your nutrition and keep meals interesting and healthy – https://theconversation.com/sick-of-eating-the-same-things-5-ways-to-boost-your-nutrition-and-keep-meals-interesting-and-healthy-245672

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert G. Patman, Professor of International Relations, University of Otago

Is it possible to reconcile increased international support for Ukraine with Donald Trump’s plan to end the war? At their recent meeting in London, Christopher Luxon and his British counterpart Keir Starmer seemed to think so.

Starmer thanked New Zealand for its “support” for a “coalition of the willing” that would safeguard the implementation of a potential peace deal concluded by the Trump administration.

But unless something drastically changes in the near future, all the signs point to the US president envisaging a Ukraine peace settlement on Russian president Vladimir Putin’s terms.

According to that view, peace can only be achieved if Ukraine is prepared to accept that territories wholly or partially annexed by Russia now belong to Moscow.

In 2014, Russia seized Crimea on the Black Sea. Following the illegal 2022 invasion, Russia claimed four parts of eastern and southern Ukraine as its own – Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and the Zaporizhzhia region.

At the same time, Trump’s peace deal includes a provision that rules out NATO membership for Ukraine. This meets a key Russian demand that seeks to deny Ukraine’s sovereign right to choose its own security arrangements.

According to Trump, Putin’s major concession is the promise that Russia will not annex the rest of Ukraine – something Moscow has been trying to do for the past three years.

To accept this, however, liberal democracies such as New Zealand and Britain would be tacitly signalling they share common values and interests with the Trump administration and its apparent enthusiasm for a geopolitical partnership with Putin’s dictatorship.

And in some ways, Trump’s Ukraine peace initiative is a bigger challenge for New Zealand than it is for Britain.

Lessons of the past

Like Britain, New Zealand fought in two world wars in the 20th century to advance, among other things, certain key international principles. These included state sovereignty and a prohibition on the use of force to change borders, principles subsequently enshrined in the United Nations Charter.

But unlike Britain, New Zealand is a relatively small state that does not have a veto in the UN Security Council to protect its interests. Consequently, it is even more dependent on an international rules-based order for its security and prosperity.

For New Zealand, Trump’s current Ukraine peace plan is a clear and present danger because it would set such a terrible precedent.

Under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons (left over from when it was part of the Soviet Union) in return for assurances from Russia, the US and UK that recognised Ukrainian independence and the inviolability of its existing borders.

The Trump administration’s plan, however, insists Ukraine must accept the illegal and partial dismemberment of its territory to attain peace with Russia.

Rewarding Russian aggression in this way is tantamount to a failure to learn the historical lessons of the 20th century. In particular, it seems to forget the period during the 1930s when Britain tried in vain to appease an expansionist Nazi regime in Germany.

Trump’s peace plan basically endorses the idea that “might is right” and that it is fine for great powers or big countries to steal land from smaller countries.

Adjusting NZ foreign policy

In Trump’s top-down world view, multilateral institutions and international law are regarded as superfluous at best and an enemy at worst.

In such a world, relatively small powers such as New Zealand, with “no cards to play” at the top table, must either submit to the dominance of great powers (including the US) or suffer the consequences.

Moreover, there is a real risk that Trump’s stance toward Putin’s regime will be viewed as weakness by China, Russia’s most important backer. This could embolden Beijing to increasingly assert itself in the Indo-Pacific, including the Pacific Islands region, where New Zealand has core strategic interests.

Trump’s plan for Ukraine brings into sharp focus what has already been evident from other recent trends: a domestic slide toward autocracy in Washington, the unilateral imposition of tariffs, and territorial threats against close allies Canada and Denmark.

As European Union Commission President Ursula von der Leyen put it, “The West as we knew it no longer exists.”

The transactional nature of Trump’s leadership – including that peace in Ukraine can be bought with mineral rights and territorial trade-offs – suggests the US can no longer be relied on to provide a security guarantee for liberal democracies in Europe or elsewhere.

The current New Zealand government needs to find the self-confidence and resolve to admit Trump is backing Putin’s imperial project in Ukraine. And it needs to adjust its foreign policy accordingly.

This does not mean Wellington should weaken its traditional friendship with the US.

On the contrary, many Americans might expect and welcome the prospect of New Zealand clearly and publicly standing against their president’s dangerous alignment with an authoritarian regime at Ukraine’s expense.

Robert G. Patman 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. Peace in our time? Why NZ should resist Trump’s one-sided plan for Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/peace-in-our-time-why-nz-should-resist-trumps-one-sided-plan-for-ukraine-255495

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Monica Gagliano, Research Associate Professor in Evolutionary Biology, Southern Cross University

Earth’s cycles of light and dark profoundly affect billions of organisms. Events such as solar eclipses are known to bring about marked shifts in animals, but do they have the same effect on plants?

During a solar eclipse in a forest in Italy’s Dolomites region, scientists seized the chance to explore that fascinating question.

The researchers were monitoring the bioelectrical impulses of spruce trees, when a solar eclipse passed over. They left their sensors running to record the trees’ response to the eclipse – and what they observed was astonishing.

The spruce trees not only responded to the solar eclipse – they actively anticipated it, by synchronising their bioelectrical signals hours in advance.

This forest-wide phenomenon, detailed today in the journal Royal Society Open Science, reveals a new layer of complexity in plant behaviour. It adds to emerging evidence that plants actively participate in their ecosystems.

Do trees respond collectively?

The research was led by Professor Alessandro Chiolerio of the Italian Institute of Technology, and Professor Monica Gagliano from Australia’s Southern Cross University, who is the lead author on this article. It also involved a team of international scientists.

A solar eclipse occurs when the Moon passes between the Sun and Earth, fully or partially blocking the Sun’s light.

An eclipse can inspire awe and even social cohesion in humans. Other animals have been shown to gather and synchronise their movements during such an event.

But scientists know very little about how plants respond to solar eclipses. Some research suggests the rapid transitions from darkness to light during an eclipse can change plant behaviour. But this research focuses on the responses of individual plants.

The latest study set out to discover if trees respond to a solar eclipse together, as a living collective.

What the research involved

Charged molecules travel through the cells of all living organisms, transmitting electrical signals as they go. Collectively, this electrical activity is known as the organism’s “electrome”.

The electrical activity is primarily driven by the movement of ions across cell membranes. It creates tiny currents that allow organisms, including humans, to coordinate their body and communicate.

The researchers wanted to investigated the electrical signals of spruce trees (Picea abies) during a partial solar eclipse on October 25, 2022. It took place in the Costa Bocche forest near Paneveggio in the Dolomites area, Italy.

The scientists set out to understand the trees’ electrical activity during the hour-long eclipse. They used custom-built sensors and wired them to three trees. Two were healthy trees about 70 years old, one in full sun and one in full shade. The third was a healthy tree about 20 years old, in full shade.

They also attached the sensors to five tree stumps – the remnants old trees, originally part of a pristine forest, but which were devastated by a storm several years earlier.

For each tree and stump, the researchers used five pairs of electrodes, placed in both the inner and outer layers of the tree, including on exposed roots, branches and trunks. The electrodes were connected to the sensors.

This set-up allowed the scientists to monitor the bioelectrical activity from multiple trees and stumps across four sites during the solar eclipse. They examined both individual tree responses, and bioelectrical signals between trees.

In particular, the scientists measured changes in the trees’ “bioelectrical potentials”. This term refers to the differences in voltage across cell membranes.

What did they find?

The electrical activity of all three trees became significantly more synchronised around the eclipse – both before and during the one-hour event. These changes occur at a microscopic level, such as inside water and lymph molecules in the tree.

The two older trees in the study had a much more pronounced early response to the impending eclipse than the young tree. This suggests older trees may have developed mechanisms to anticipate and respond to such events, similar to their responses to seasonal changes.

Solar eclipses may seem rare from a human perspective, but they follow cycles which can occur well within the lifespan of long-lived trees. The scientists also detected bioelectrical waves travelling between the trees. This suggests older trees may transmit their ecological knowledge to younger trees.

Such a dynamic is consistent with studies showing long-distance signalling between plants can help them coordinate various physiological functions in response to environmental changes.

The researchers also detected changes in the bioelectrical responses of the stumps during the eclipse, albeit less pronounced than in the standing trees. This suggests the stumps were still alive.

The research team then used computer modelling, and advanced analytical methods including quantum field theory, to test the findings of the physical experiment.

The results reinforced the experimental results. That is, not only did the eclipse influence the bioelectrical responses of individual trees, the activity was correlated. This suggests a cohesive, organism-like reaction at the forest scale.

Understanding forest connections

These findings align with extensive prior research by others, highlighting the extent to which trees in forest ecosystems are connected.

These behaviours may ultimately influence the forest ecosystem’s resilience, biodiversity and overall function, by helping it cope with rapid and unpredictable changes.

The findings also underscore the importance of protecting older forests, which serve as pillars of ecosystem resilience – potentially preserving and transmitting invaluable ecological knowledge.

This research is featured in a documentary, Il Codice del Bosco (The Forest Code), premiering in Italy on May 1, 2025.

Monica Gagliano received funding for this research from the Templeton World Charity Foundation.

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

– ref. ‘A living collective’: study shows trees synchronise electrical signals during a solar eclipse – https://theconversation.com/a-living-collective-study-shows-trees-synchronise-electrical-signals-during-a-solar-eclipse-255499

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Clune, Honorary Associate, Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

While many Australians have already voted at pre-poll stations and by post, the politicking continues right up until May 3.

So what’s happened across the country over the past five weeks?

Here, six experts analyse how the campaign has looked in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia.

New South Wales

David Clune, honorary associate, government and international relations, University of Sydney

The campaign in NSW is concluding much as it began, largely mirroring the Australia-wide trend with little evidence of localism.

The main themes of both sides remain similar: cost-of-living alleviation, improved health care and housing affordability. Both leaders quickly matched each other’s promises: it could be described as the “Albanutton” campaign.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s campaign continued to be hampered by slip-ups and a lack of focus, detail and discipline. Although the government’s record had given him plenty of scope, Dutton struggled to land a blow.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had his share of gaffes, but appeared more coherent and convincing. Labor’s negative campaign to portray Dutton as a local Trump clone seems to have been effective.

Some in the Liberal Party argue there’s pent-up resentment against the government in Western Sydney that hasn’t been picked up by opinion polls. Whether this hypothetical backlash turns into seats on polling day remains to be seen.

Bennelong (notionally Liberal after the redistribution) and Gilmore, seem the most likely Liberal gains. Parramatta, Reid, Paterson, Robertson and Werriwa are also in play. There is speculation about an independent threat in the safe Labor seat of McMahon.

The Coalition has a fight on its hands to retain Cowper and Bradfield, with strong independent challenges in both seats. There is a tight three-way contest in Calare between former National turned independent, Andrew Gee, a National and a Teal.

As there is little real policy differentiation between the major parties; it seems to come down to which side the voters find more credible and trustworthy in uncertain times.

According to a Newspoll published on April 27, Albanese led Dutton as preferred prime minister by 51% to 35%. Only 39% of those surveyed believed the government deserved to be re-elected. However, 62% believed the Coalition was not ready to govern.

An aggregate of polling data showed in NSW, as at April 28, Labor’s two-party preferred vote was 53.0%, an increase since the March Budget of 2.8% and of 1.6% since the 2022 election.

Queensland

Paul Williams, associate professor of politics and journalism, Griffith University

In the campaign’s closing week, Queensland remains largely inconsequential as to whether Albanese or Dutton will call The Lodge home.

But that doesn’t mean the Liberal National Party (LNP) isn’t concerned about its prospects north of the Tweed.

While the LNP still leads Labor in the two party-preferred vote, 54 to 46, across Queensland – roughly the 2022 result – last week’s YouGov poll found that result to be a three-point fall for the LNP from the previous week.

While Labor is hardly going to blitz Queensland, some LNP seats are nonetheless more vulnerable than at any time over the past decade. These include the regional seats of Leichhardt (3.4 %) and Flynn (3.8%), the outer suburban seats of Dickson (held by Dutton by just 1.7%), Longman (3.1%), Forde (4.2%) and Petrie (4.4%), and the middle-suburb mortgage-belt seat of Bonner (3.4%).

Independent Suzie Holt might also worry the LNP in the usually safe seat of Groom, around Toowoomba.
But the last-minute “rescue” of the LNP by Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (PHON) – Hanson (reciprocating the LNP’s preferencing of PHON) pulped existing how to vote cards and printed new ones placing the LNP second in most seats – might just save the opposition.

However, the campaign has offered little clarity on the prospects in other key Queensland contests: the battles for three Greens-held inner-urban seats of Brisbane, Ryan and Griffith.

But a mid-April DemosAU poll found the Greens’ primary vote falling by 1.7 points to 29%, a figure exactly tied with Labor’s, which has risen 2.7% since 2022.

Problematically for Dutton, the LNP, whose primary vote remains locked at 36%, appears not to have capitalised on cost-of-living angst in inner Brisbane.

Despite 58% of inner Brisbane leaning centre-left, these figures suggest the LNP may fail to win any Greens seats, with the contest a close one between the Greens and Labor only. The result rests on who runs third: Labor or the Greens. There could be a mere 100 votes in these must-watch seats.

In the Northern Territory, the seat of Lingiari, which takes in Alice Springs and Katherine, is held by Labor’s Marion Scrymgour by 1.7%. In 2022, just one in three enrolled voters cast a ballot in the electorate, prompting the Australian Electoral Commission to try to increase voter turnout. In the wash-up, it will be interesting to see if this improves.

South Australia

Rob Manwaring, associate professor of politics and public policy, Flinders University

Given SA is home to only a handful of marginal seats, it’s not a well-trodden part of the campaign trail. That’s typical of most federal elections.

What’s not so typical is the overall feel of the campaign. The rhythms of Australian elections are changing. On one level, there are the familiar tropes and activities; TV debates, campaign launches and letter box blitzes in key marginal seats.

Yet, on the other hand, voters behave differently than they used to. Data from the Australian Election Study(AES) tells us far fewer voters have made their decision “a long time ago” (55% in 2007, down to 36% in 2022).

This means the number of “soft” voters is probably much higher as major parties have fewer “lifetime voters”. Voters are much more transactional.

Voters are more distanced from parties, too. The study shows fewer voters use how to vote cards (51% used them in 2007, 31% in 2022). We can’t rely on traditional metrics in the same way, such as the national two-party preferred vote given the number of “non-traditional seats”.

In short, it’s now harder to more know how the campaigns are tracking. So while the Coalition campaign has been beset by a number of mis-steps, how this is playing out is far less clear.

Further, a strange paradox of the emergence of the Teals and other independents is there is a stronger local focus on representation, rather than broader policy debates. Again, AES data suggests most voters tend to vote for policy reasons (like the economy or health) but the current media focus on the major parties, especially through the TV debates, actually seems to narrow the broader policy discussions.

So while the proof will be in the pudding when the votes are counted, it may be high time to reflect on what campaign strategies work best for politics in 2025.

Tasmania

Robert Hortle, deputy director of the Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania

On Australia’s South Island, most of the campaign focus has been on Lyons, Franklin and Braddon.

In Lyons, Tassie’s most marginal electorate (ALP by 0.9%), the latest polls have swung behind the ALP’s Rebecca White. Her popularity as a state MP for the electorate has been bolstered by some crucial slip ups from Liberal candidate Susie Bower.

One potentially vote-winning policy announcement that has gone under the radar nationally is Labor’s commitment of $24 million to guarantee the continued operation of the Boyer Paper Mill in Lyons, an important employer and regional symbol of economic activity.

Franklin has been full of drama. 19-year-old Greens candidate Owen Fitzgerald had to withdraw his candidacy after it emerged that he is likely to still be a New Zealand citizen. It seemed like the Greens would encourage their voters to preference independent anti-salmon candidate Peter George.

However, when the party’s how to vote cards were published, they said “Vote 1 – Owen Fitzgerald”.

According to the Greens, this was to make sure that voters completed their ballot correctly. The Liberal Party argued the Greens were just trying to secure public funding.

There have also been billboard shenanigans and various other dirty (or should that be clean?) tricks.

The result is likely to rest on how Liberal voters feel about salmon farming and how this influences their preferences. Are they so anti-Labor that they will preference Peter George ahead of Julie Collins despite his anti-salmon stance? Or will they put Collins ahead of George based on Labor’s support for the industry?

In Braddon, where salmon farming is again a key issue, Labor’s Anne Urquhart has been more visible on the campaign trail than Liberal Mal Hingston. Although the margin at the last election was 8% in favour of the Liberals, last-minute polling (albeit with a small sample size) has offered Labor hope of winning the crucial seat.

Bridget Archer, Liberal MP for Bass, has had a solid if unspectacular campaign. She was helped by Labor selecting a low-profile first-time candidate, Jess Teesdale, who the party sees as “one for the future”. Teesdale revealed her “greenness” – in both senses of the word – by accidentally contradicting the ALP’s position on native forest logging, which is always a flashpoint in Tassie.

Victoria

Zareh Ghazarian, senior lecturer in politics, school of social sciences, Monash University

With just days to go in this campaign, Victoria still looks like a key state that will determine who governs for the next three years. Many seats across the state have new boundaries following the AEC redistribution.

Victoria is also home to the most marginal seat in the country. Deakin, which covers the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, is held by Liberal Michael Sukkar with a margin of just 0.02%, according to ABC Election Analyst Antony Green.

Deakin will be the seat to watch on election night. If the Liberal Party can’t hold on to Deakin, it would be unlikely to be able to win government.

There are also other seats that will provide a fascinating contest on Saturday night. Labor will face its own test in trying to retain Chisholm and Aston, both in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne.

Chisholm is a swinging seat. It has been won by both Labor and Liberal parties over the past 40 years and is currently held by Labor with a margin of 3.3%. It has had a significant redistribution, losing strong Labor booths in the north and south parts of the electorate.

Aston is also on a similarly slim margin of 3.6% and was famously won by Labor at the by-election in 2023. Holding onto Aston will be a crucial test for Labor. Losing this seat may threaten Labor’s chances of forming a majority government after the election.

There are also the two seats held by the independents which promise to be tight contests. The previously safe Liberal seats of Kooyong and Goldstein, which were won by Monique Ryan and Zoe Daniel respectively, have been targeted by the Liberal Party. The independents will face a significant battle and, if successful, will demonstrate a significant shift in voting behaviour has occurred in these electorates.

Western Australia

Narelle Miragliotta, associate professor in politics, Murdoch University

The idea that WA would determine the outcome of government has been a persistent theme throughout the campaign, reinforced by four visits from Albanese and three from Dutton. The amount of attention WA has received from the major party leaders was more than any state or territory other than the three big population states: NSW, Victoria and Queensland. Even then, Albanese made one more visit to WA than he did Queensland at the time of writing.

Both major parties brought their big guns on the campaign trail. Former Liberal PM John Howard visited Curtin, Tangney and Bullwinkel. The newly re-elected WA Labor Premier Roger Cook campaigned heavily with Albanese during his visits. And in the final days of the campaign, Mark McGowan, the popular former premier, was seen on the hustings with Labor candidates in four marginal seats.

Neither major party leader ventured to places where they might receive an unwelcome reception. Dutton’s intention to steer clear of the Shire of Collie, particularly the town of Muja, the proposed site of the one of the seven nuclear power plants, was signalled early in the campaign. Albanese avoided electorates in the state’s southwest opposed to coastal wind farms.

There were no significant candidate blunders. However, questions were raised about the whereabouts of Andrew Hastie, shadow defence minister and (putative) future Liberal leader. Hastie was also questioned about the missing party logo (as against party authorisations) on his campaign materials.

The competition between the Nationals and Liberals in the seat of Bullwinkel was without major media incident. This includes when the Nationals’ candidate, Mia Davies, broke with the federal coalition over support for Labor’s production tax credits plan.

The contest for Curtin attracted outsized local media attention. In the final days of the campaign, there were renewed efforts to link the independent incumbent, Kate Chaney, to the Greens. All the proof the West Australian newspaper required was Chaney’s connection to a senior Greens party official, evidenced by a 2024 donation totalling $104, a photo and an author’s credit.

To what extent has the leader visits and the campaign moved the needle? A recent study found party leader visits make only a modest impact on the vote. Polling for Labor and the Liberals in WA has remained very steady. This doesn’t mean some seats won’t change, but to which party or candidate remains unclear.

Paul Williams is a research associate with the T.J. Ryan Foundation.

David Clune, Narelle Miragliotta, Rob Manwaring, Robert Hortle, and Zareh Ghazarian 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. State of the states: the campaign is almost over, so how has it played out across Australia? – https://theconversation.com/state-of-the-states-the-campaign-is-almost-over-so-how-has-it-played-out-across-australia-253125

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Briony Hill, Deputy Head, Health and Social Care Unit and Senior Research Fellow, Monash University

According to a study from the United States, women experience weight stigma in maternity care at almost every visit. We expect this experience to be similar in Australia, where more than 50% of women of reproductive age live in larger bodies.

Weight stigma can present as stereotyping, negative attitudes and discriminatory actions towards larger-bodied people.

It occurs in other areas of health care and in society at large. But our research is focused on weight stigma in maternity care, which can cause significant harm for larger-bodied women and their babies.

What does weight stigma look like in maternity care?

Sometimes weight stigma is explicit, or on purpose. Explicit weight stigma includes health-care professionals having negative attitudes towards caring for larger-bodied pregnant women. This might present, for instance, when health professionals make negative comments about weight or accuse women of dishonesty when they discuss their dietary intake.

Sometimes weight stigma is implicit, or unintentional. Implicit weight stigma includes maternity care providers avoiding physical touch or eye contact during consultations with larger-bodied women.

Policies, guidelines and environments also contribute to weight stigma. Women in larger bodies frequently report feeling stigmatised and unable to access the type of maternity care they would prefer. Lack of availability of adequately fitting hospital clothing or delivery beds are other notable examples.

In a review published last year, we looked at weight stigma from preconception to after birth. Our results showed larger-bodied women are sometimes automatically treated as high-risk and undergo extra monitoring of their pregnancy even when they have no other risk factors that require monitoring.

This approach is problematic because it focuses on body size rather than health, placing responsibility on the woman and disregarding other complex determinants of health.

How does this make women feel?

Qualitative evidence shows women who experience weight stigma during their maternity care feel judged, devalued, shamed and less worthy. They may feel guilty about getting pregnant and experience self-doubt.

As one research participant explained:

One doctor told me I was terrible for getting pregnant at my weight, that I was setting up my baby to fail […] I was in tears, and he told me I was being too sensitive.

A 2023 Australian paper written by women who had experienced weight stigma in maternity care recounted their care as hyper-focused on weight and dehumanising, robbing them of the joy of pregnancy.

According to one woman, “there was no compassion or conversation, just blame”.

Beyond making women feel humiliated and disrespected, weight stigma in maternity care can affect mental health. For example, weight stigma is linked to increased risk of depressive symptoms and stress, disordered eating behaviours and emotional eating.

One of the key reasons why weight stigma is so damaging to pregnant women’s health is because it’s closely linked to body image concerns.

Society unfairly holds larger-bodied women up to unrealistic ideals around their body shape and size, their suitability to be a mother, and the control they have over their weight gain.

Self stigma occurs when women apply society’s stigmatising narrative – from people in the community, the media, peers, family members and health-care providers – to themselves.

Impacts on mum and baby

Several adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes have been linked to weight stigma in maternity care. These include gestational diabetes, caesarean birth and lower uptake of breastfeeding.

While we know these things can also be linked to higher body weight, emerging evidence shows weight stigma may have a stronger link with some outcomes than body mass index.

There are a variety of possible reasons for these links. For example, weight stigma may result in delayed access to and engagement with health-care services, and, as shown above, poorer mental health and reduced confidence. This may mean a woman is less likely to initiate and seek help with breastfeeding, for example.

Experiencing weight stigma also leads to a stress response in the body, which could affect a woman’s health during pregnancy.

In turn, the adverse effects of weight stigma can also affect the baby’s health. For example, gestational diabetes has a range of potential negative outcomes including a higher likelihood of premature birth, difficulties during birth, and an increased risk of the child developing type 2 diabetes.

But the burden and blame should not fall on women. Pregnant and postpartum women should not have to accept experiences of weight stigma in health care.

What can we do about it?

While it’s essential to address weight stigma as a societal issue, health services can play a key role in undoing the narrative of blame and shame and making maternity care more equitable for larger-bodied women.

Addressing weight stigma in maternity care can start with teaching midwives and obstetricians about weight stigma – what it is, where it happens, and how it can be minimised in practice.

We worked with women who had experienced weight stigma in maternity care and midwives to co-design resources to meet this need. Both women and midwives wanted resources that could be easily integrated into practice, acted as consistent reminders to be size-friendly, and met midwives’ knowledge gaps.

The resources included a short podcast about weight stigma in maternity care and images of healthy, larger-bodied pregnant women to demonstrate the most likely outcome is a healthy pregnancy. Midwives evaluated the resources positively and they are ready to be implemented into practice.

There is a long road to ending weight stigma in maternity care, but working towards this goal will benefit countless mothers and their babies.

Briony Hill receives funding from the Australian Research Council. Some research reported in this article was funded by the Australian Prevention Partnership Centre. The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre was supported through the NHMRC partnership centre grant scheme with the Australian Government Department of Health, ACT Health, Cancer Council Australia, NSW Ministry of Health, Wellbeing SA, Tasmanian Department of Health, and VicHealth. It is administered by the Sax Institute.

Haimanot Hailu 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. ‘No compassion… just blame’: how weight stigma in maternity care harms larger-bodied women and their babies – https://theconversation.com/no-compassion-just-blame-how-weight-stigma-in-maternity-care-harms-larger-bodied-women-and-their-babies-252725