Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mia Cobb, Research Fellow, Animal Welfare Science Centre, The University of Melbourne

When you hear about “science focused on how dogs can live their best lives with us” it sounds like an imaginary job made up by a child. However, the field of animal welfare science is real and influential.

As our most popular animal companion and coworker, dogs are very deserving of scientific attention. In recent years we’ve learned more about how dogs are similar to people, but also how they are distinctly themselves.

We often think about how dogs help us – as companions, working as detectors, and keeping us safe and healthy. Dog-centric science helps us think about the world from a four-paw perspective and apply this new knowledge so dogs can enjoy a good life.

Here are five tips to keep the tails in your life wagging happily.

1. Let dogs sniff

Sniffing makes dogs happier. We tend to forget they live in a smell-based world because we’re so visual. Often taking the dog for a walk is our daily physical activity but we should remember it could be our dogs’ only time out of the home environment.

Letting them have a really good sniff of that tree or post is full of satisfying information for them. It’s their nose’s equivalent of us standing at the top of a mountain and enjoying a rich, colour-soaked, sunset view.

2. Give dogs agency

Agency is a hot topic in animal welfare science right now. For people who lived through the frustration of strict lockdowns in the early years of COVID, it’s easy to remember how not being able to go where we wanted, or see who we wanted, when we wanted, impacted our mental health.

We’ve now learned that giving animals choice and control in their lives is important for their mental wellbeing too. We can help our dogs enjoy better welfare by creating more choices and offering them control to exercise their agency.

This might be installing a doggy door so they can go outside or inside when they like. It could be letting them decide which sniffy path to take through your local park. Perhaps it’s choosing which three toys to play with that day from a larger collection that gets rotated around. Maybe it’s putting an old blanket down in a new location where you’ve noticed the sun hits the floor for them to relax on.

Providing choices doesn’t have to be complicated or expensive.

3. Recognise all dogs are individuals

People commonly ascribe certain personality traits to certain dog breeds. But just like us, dogs have their own personalities and preferences. Not all dogs are going to like the same things and a new dog we live with may be completely different to the last one.

One dog might like to go to the dog park and run around with other dogs at high speed for an hour, while another dog would much rather hang out with you chewing on something in the garden.

We can see as much behavioural variation within breeds as we do between them. Being prepared to meet dogs where they are, as individuals, is important to their welfare.

As well as noticing what dogs like to do as individuals, it’s important not to force dogs into situations they don’t enjoy. Pay attention to behaviour that indicates dogs aren’t comfortable, such as looking away, licking their lips or yawning.

4. Respect dogs’ choice to opt out

Even in our homes, we can provide options if our dogs don’t want to share in every activity with us. Having a quiet place that dogs can retreat to is really important in enabling them to opt out if they want to.

If you’re watching television loudly, it may be too much for their sensitive ears. Ensure a door is open to another room so they can retreat. Some dogs might feel overwhelmed when visitors come over; giving them somewhere safe and quiet to go rather than forcing an interaction will help them cope.

Dogs can be terrific role models for children when teaching empathy. We can demonstrate consent by letting dogs approach us for pats and depart when they want. Like seeing exotic animals perform in circuses, dressing up dogs for our own entertainment seems to have had its day. If you asked most dogs, they don’t want to wear costumes or be part of your Halloween adventures.

5. Opportunities for off-lead activity – safely.

When dogs are allowed to run off-lead, they use space differently. They tend to explore more widely and go faster than they do when walking with us on-lead. This offers them important and fun physical activity to keep them fit and healthy.

A recent exploration of how liveable cities are for dogs mapped all the designated areas for dogs to run off-leash. Doggy density ranged from one dog for every six people to one dog for every 30 people, depending on where you live.

It also considered how access to these areas related to the annual registration fees for dogs in each government area compared, with surprising differences noted across greater Melbourne. We noted fees varied between A$37 and $84, and these didn’t relate to how many off-lead areas you could access.

For dog-loving nations, such as Australia, helping our canine friends live their best life feels good. Science that comes from a four-paw perspective can help us reconsider our everyday interactions with dogs and influence positive changes so we can live well, together.

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

– ref. The science of happier dogs: 5 tips to help your canine friends live their best life – https://theconversation.com/the-science-of-happier-dogs-5-tips-to-help-your-canine-friends-live-their-best-life-236952

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Shaw, Professor of Politics, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

Nearly a year on from its formation, it’s clear a three-party coalition is not quite the same as the two-party versions New Zealand is accustomed to.

Normally, the primary dynamic has been clear: the major party sets the pace while the smaller governing partner receives a bauble or two for supporting the lead act. There may be occasional concerns about tails wagging dogs, but the dog is clearly in charge.

With the present National-ACT-NZ First coalition, however, things are more complex and less predictable. The dog has two tails, both of which are more than capable of vigorous wagging.

On the anniversary of the 2023 election, which produced the first three-party coalition government since the MMP system was adopted in 1996, we are perhaps beginning to get a picture of where dog ends and tails begin.

Speed wobbles

If that picture has been a little blurry until now it’s partly because of the speed with which the government has moved – not always to its own advantage.

In the process of ticking off the 49 items on its plan for the first 100 days, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s administration has kept some election promises but broken or fudged others, having to backtrack as a result.

It has delivered tax cuts, but been forced to trim and cap spending in areas (like health and infrastructure) crying out for extra investment.

It has given the impression of urgency and action with its Fast-track Approvals Bill. But it had to scrap the policy’s core element of granting three ministers unprecedented constitutional authority over which projects to fast-track.

Concerns about executive overreach and potential conflicts of interest have dogged other policy areas, too. These range from the repeal of ground-breaking smoke-free legislation to firearms control – both the responsibility of junior coalition party ministers.

This sense of a government somewhat at odds with itself extends to the swingeing cuts made to the public service workforce. Marketed as freeing up resources for front-line staff, the cuts are increasingly likely to be affecting actual service delivery in health, police, defence and elsewhere.

An ‘executive paradise’

Some of this can be put down to a new government’s distrust of a public service inherited from its predecessor, and a desire to make the most of its first year before the shadow election campaign kicks off mid-term.

But the coalition’s vigorous embrace of the executive authority baked into New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements has still been something to behold. As constitutional lawyer and former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer put it, the fast-track legislation risked turning New Zealand into “an executive paradise, not a democratic paradise”.

The government has used parliamentary urgency more frequently than any other contemporary administration. It has been rattling legislation through the House faster than the wheels of parliamentary democracy are meant to turn.

Submitters on the Māori wards legislation, for example, were given just three working days to prepare their arguments. Those wanting to comment on the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill had four days.

And the government has been making less use of parliament’s expert select committees than is standard practice. This has limited public participation and constrained scrutiny of proposed legislation.

Ministers have also been prepared to ignore public service advice while paying plenty of attention to operational matters in the departments that furnish that advice.

New Zealand’s system of public management distinguishes between ministers’ responsibility for policy outcomes and senior officials’ responsibility for the operational decisions required to deliver those outcomes.

Nonetheless, Cabinet has commandeered oversight of operational matters in Whaikaha/Ministry of Disabled People, following botched communications over changes in disability funding. And civil servants have recently been told to stop working from home and return to the office.

The government will be betting this tactical disposition bolsters its “getting stuff done” narrative. But no one wants a concern with short-term operational details to come at the expense of long-term policy thinking.

Treaty principles pantomime

Nowhere is the coalition’s internal tension more evident, however, than in its confrontational approach to Māori and te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi issues.

Having courted voters already sceptical or disgruntled about Māori cultural assertiveness, the coalition moved fast to disestablish Te Aka Whai Ora/Māori Health Authority, repeal legislation supporting Māori wards in local government, row back on official use of te reo Māori, and cut funding for Māori language revitalisation.

But its proposed Treaty Principles Bill – an ACT Party initiative – looks set to be especially constitutionally fraught and politically divisive.

National and NZ First have indicated they will not support the bill beyond its first reading, but have agreed it will receive a full six months in front of a select committee.

This only raises the question of why any parliamentary time and money should be spent on the proposal at all – especially given the government’s supposed “laser focus” on cost and efficiency elsewhere.

Can the centre hold?

The politics around the Treaty Principles Bill also reveal just how much the prime minister has had to cede to ACT, for whom the proposed legislation was a bottom line during the government formation process.

And it inevitably casts doubt on the extent and exercise of prime ministerial authority under three-way governing arrangements. ACT leader and soon-to-be deputy prime minister David Seymour has questioned Christopher Luxon’s authority more than once.

And Luxon’s apparent unwillingness to at least censure an under-performing minister from another party (NZ First’s Casey Costello, for example) contrasts starkly with his firmer treatment of those in his own National Party (Melissa Lee and Penny Simmons, both demoted).

One year into a three-year term, these issues can perhaps be dismissed as part of the process of bedding down a new government. But politics never rests. Winston Peters hands the deputy prime minister role to David Seymour at the end of next May. Both NZ First and ACT will want to distinguish themselves from National.

As the next election nears and the jockeying for attention begins, the prime minister’s authority over his administration, and the coalition’s coherence, will be tested further.

Richard Shaw 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 anniversary: a year into 3-party coalition government, can the centre hold? – https://theconversation.com/election-anniversary-a-year-into-3-party-coalition-government-can-the-centre-hold-240189

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Blackwell, Research Fellow (Indigenous Diplomacy), Australian National University

It’s one year since the failed referendum to enshrine a First Nations Voice to Parliament in the Australian Constitution.

The vote represents a moment of deep sadness and frustration for many First Nations people for the lost opportunity to move towards meaningful change in our lives, communities and for our futures. Many elders and old people will likely not live to see change.

I was one of the many people in the Uluru Dialogue at UNSW who worked last year across the country educating on and advocating for the constitutional change. I spoke to communities across New South Wales, Victoria and the ACT, from Boorowa to Melbourne.

I not only saw the campaign first-hand, I also have read every think piece imaginable in the 12 months since about why the referendum failed.

A ceaseless blame game

From the expected pieces blaming the usual suspects (Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, Indigenous peoples, the Yes campaign, the No campaign and the media), there were also some weirder supposed culprits.

Some blamed “wokeness”, Donald Trump and dark money, secret elites, identity politics, and all manner of culture war issues.

To my mind, no single thing doomed the Voice. It was a mix of a lot of the above.

Albanese treating the referendum like an election campaign but without the usual level of resourcing and advocacy. The Coalition’s outright opposition to the idea (despite previous indications of support). The media’s failure to grapple with Indigenous issues and dogmatic insistence on giving prominence to “both sides” of the debate.

The YES23 organisation was also disorganised from the start. Yes campaigners were forced onto the back foot daily by relentless misinformation, seemingly deliberate, from the No campaign.

Read more:
Why did the Voice referendum fail? We crunched the data and found 6 reasons

This built on a distinct lack of civic education among most Australians.

It was further amplified by the No campaign’s very successful “If you don’t know, vote no” slogan – the idea being that their untruths warranted little scrutiny.

That’s on top of a large undercurrent of racism that was never properly called out, and which has never been properly addressed.

Campaigns like this are something we as a nation haven’t come to terms with. We’ve seen in the United States how effective misinformation can be at confusing people, creating false senses of reality and distorting public perception.

Even if Australians supported the ideas behind the Voice in the abstract, neither they nor the media were prepared for the level of dishonesty and bad dealing from the No campaign. It was never a fair fight.

No, no, and no again

The Voice to Parliament represented a consensus plea from Indigenous communities for systemic reform. The idea was that the structure of the Australian political system was, either by design or outcome, causing many of the social and economic issues that we face, and therefore a structural solution was needed.

The No campaign claimed after the referendum that the result was a rejection of this idea of a Voice to Parliament as a solution to issues in Indigenous communities or among Indigenous peoples more generally, “because it wasn’t going to fix the things that needed to be fixed”.

Prominent No campaigner Warren Mundine even called the referendum the “most divisive, most racially charged attack on Australia I’ve ever seen”.

“Australia has voted no to the Voice of division”, was the common refrain from people like Pauline Hanson and other No campaigners. Australians “wanted practical solutions” to Indigenous issues, not a body without any detail that wouldn’t hear “real communities”.

I am not bringing up these issues again to relitigate the issues of the referendum. Instead, I want to ask a very important question: the Voice to Parliament was designed to address our systemic disadvantage, so what solutions to these serious structural issues have any of the No campaigners offered in the past 12 months?

Read more:
A royal commission won’t help the abuse of Aboriginal kids. Indigenous-led solutions will

We have seen some policies from the Coalition. Plans to reduce “fly in, fly out” workers in remote communities. Reforming land rights and native title. A royal commission into child sexual abuse in Indigenous communities. Less need for programs with “a specific Indigenous focus” in urban areas, where most First Nations people live.

Some of these are just a rehash of failed Coalition policies of the past, as many others have mentioned. Some appear to have come personally from Senator Jacinta Price and are seemingly not backed by experts (or many people in Indigenous communities). Others appear to be tied directly into conservative political talking points, rather than really addressing Indigenous need.

The Coalition also abandoned its plan for an alternative second referendum almost immediately after the failed vote.

The Coalition and other leading No campaigners clearly have no plans to address the structural issues facing our peoples. They’re only offering more of the regular policy tinkering and seesawing we have seen far too often before.

Abandoning the cause

The same is true of the government. I have already written for this masthead about the government’s abject failures at implementing the Closing the Gap targets and its lack of meaningful consultation.

The government’s current attempts at Indigenous policy remain exercises in seeking consent over genuine consultation. Its proposed “economic empowerment” agenda for First Nations peoples is a perfect example.

Aside from the lack of codesign and meaningful engagement, such policies have been bandied about for the better part of two decades and still have not substantively moved the dial.

The pursuit of market-based wealth for some privileged few First Nations peoples and communities, under the guise of closing the gap, as well as focusing on the overexaggerated benefits of renewable energy as a driver of Indigenous economic power, is not “economic development” for all mobs.

The policy focus was also announced as Albanese abandoned his commitment to a Makaratta Commission – the Treaty and Truth components that were meant to follow the Voice to Parliament.

These ideas fall into the same tired policy stereotypes of throwing money at some of the usual organisations and peoples who have long benefited, and claiming this solves the systemic problems we face. The problem isn’t money, it’s the very rules of the game.

Charting a way forward

Research following the referendum shows that 87% of Australians think First Nations peoples should be able to decide for ourselves about our way of life. Moreover, 64% think the disadvantages faced by our communities warrant extra government attention, and 68% believe this disadvantage comes from “past race-based policies”.

Only 35% believe Indigenous peoples are now treated equally to other Australians, and only 37% believe injustices faced by our community are “all in the past”.

This clearly shows a level of recognition by the Australian people that something needs to be done about Indigenous policy and the structural issues in this country.

According to the same data, 87% of Australians agree it is “important for First Nations peoples to have a voice/say in matters that affect them”. This jumps to 98.5% among Yes voters, but also is true of 76% of No voters.

This suggests that Australian people see the problem and can identify the structural issues.

The real work, then, is on civics education, getting people to understand that the structural issues they can see need structural change; but also making them more aware of the effects of misinformation. It’s not right that proposals that should get the support of the Australian people can be derailed the way this was.

But what also isn’t right is the current abdication of Indigenous policy by both major parties and their abandonment of any attempt to remedy structural issues. Following the referendum, the major parties have given up.

To paraphrase myself from February’s Closing the Gap announcement: the next time you run into an MP, ask them what their plan for Indigenous people is. Ask them not just about closing the gap, but to fix the structural issues that so clearly disadvantage our people.

That’s the question no one wants to answer, but it’s what we need to do if we are to move on from the 2023 referendum in a positive direction.

James Blackwell is a member of the Uluru Dialogue at UNSW. He is also an Independent Councillor for Hilltops Council in NSW.

– ref. The Voice defeat set us all back. And since then, our leaders have given up – https://theconversation.com/the-voice-defeat-set-us-all-back-and-since-then-our-leaders-have-given-up-239732

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Procter, Professor and Chair: Mental Health Nursing, University of South Australia

Escalating violence in the Middle East, particularly in Lebanon in recent weeks, has brought news of death, casualties and displacement.

In response, the Australian government has organised evacuation flights for Australian citizens and is urging all Australians in Lebanon to take the earliest available flights due to the unpredictable nature of the conflict.

For the more than 248,000 Australians with Lebanese ancestry, and others, this has been a deeply distressing time.

Escalating violence in Lebanon has also resonated deeply with other diasporas in Australia, such as those from Palestine and Ukraine. These scattered communities share similar experiences of conflict and displacement.

So how do Australians with links to Lebanon, Gaza or other conflict zones look after their mental health at this time? And how can you support others who may be struggling?

Identifying with pain and suffering

People with emotional ties to conflict zones overseas identify with the pain and suffering they see and hear. Australians with shared cultural heritage may be living in the shadow of homeland events and experiencing what research has called “push-pull” dynamics.

This may be experiencing periods of calm and ease mixed with intermittent periods of intense fear, uncertainty and emotional pain as upsetting events unfold.

For some, sleeplessness, irritability, fear, frustration, uncertainty and emotional exhaustion combine. People are no longer isolated from their country of origin. Rather, global events influence their personal and social life, and mental health.

The way people manage the interplay between homeland events, sense of powerlessness, and mental health in Australia are complex. It is easy to be rapidly consumed by what is happening. Events are graphic, compelling and fast moving.

How to look after yourself

So what can you do if you notice yourself or someone close to you is becoming impacted?

Know your distress triggers. For some, this might be witnessing violence on television news or social media. For others, this might be stories about children and young people who have been killed. Seeing and hearing images and stories can be distressing if they are repeated across multiple platforms. Some people may need to minimise their media exposure.

Talk to people you trust about how you are feeling. Describe what is happening and what you notice about yourself. If you are feeling fragile or concerned about your mental health, or the mental health of a loved one, seek support from your health-care provider.

Reconnect with and strengthen personal support networks. Supportive cultural connections and family members, and other supports including friends and colleagues, can protect against the onset or worsening of mental distress.

Getting help early can create more options for support. It can also make it easier to accept help in the future.

Refer to trusted sources of information and calibrate media exposure. While many people need to know about events, news stories and imagery are distressing.

Incorporate activities that comfort and distract you, and make your situation feel safer. This can include:

• spending time with family members or friends

• spiritual, faith or religious reconnecting

• distraction through music or food.

Avoid taking devices to bed to protect your sleep and your mental health.

How to support others

If you work with or support someone who is impacted, recognise this is a time for sensitivity and compassion. Show you are concerned and, at the same time, check they’re OK. Ask:

What would be most helpful in our support for you?

What is the best way for me/the team at work to be supportive and alongside you?

It is also important to ask about someone’s mental health. You can ask:

With events unfolding, how are things at home for you right now?

When validating a person’s experience, remember it is not always important to know personal detail or circumstances in fine detail. What is important is to demonstrate genuine interest, create trust and psychological safety. Aim to really listen, rather than listening so you can respond.

As a friend, colleague or manager, offering support and listening without judgement may help a person impacted by global catastrophic events.

In times like these, validation, human connection and support are some of the best things you can do to protect your own and other people’s mental health.

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

Nicholas Procter currently receives funding from Overseas Services to Survivors of Torture and Trauma, Foundation House and SA Health. He has previously received sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs.

Mary Anne Kenny has previous received funding from the Australian Research Council and sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs.

– ref. How to look after your mental health right now if you have family in the Middle East or another conflict zone – https://theconversation.com/how-to-look-after-your-mental-health-right-now-if-you-have-family-in-the-middle-east-or-another-conflict-zone-240995

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

Battery electric vehicle sales in Australia have flattened in recent months. The latest data reveal a sharp 27.2% year-on-year decline (overall new vehicle sales were down 9.7%) in September. Tesla Model Y and Model 3 cars had an even steeper drop of nearly 50%.

Sales also fell in August (by 18.5%) and July (1.5%). There’s a clear downward trend.

Before this downturn, electric vehicle sales had been rising steadily, supported by increased choices and government incentives. In early 2024, year-to-date sales continued to grow compared to the same period in 2023. Then, in April, electric vehicle sales fell for the first time in more than two years.

Australia isn’t simply mirroring a broader global trend. It’s true sales have slowed in parts of Europe and the United States — often due to reduced incentives. But strong sales growth continues in other regions, such as China and India.

A range of factors or combinations of them could help explain the trend in Australia. These include governments axing incentives, concerns about safety and depreciation, and misinformation.

Governments are cutting incentives

Electric vehicles typically cost more upfront. However, the flood of cheaper Chinese vehicles is lowering the cost barrier.

Federal, state and territory governments also provide financial incentives to buy electric vehicles. These have been among the main drivers of sales in Australia.

Nationally, incentives include a higher luxury car tax threshold and exemptions from fringe benefits tax and customs duty. But several states and territories have scaled back their rebate programs and tax exemptions in 2023 and 2024.

New South Wales and South Australia ended their $3,000 rebates on January 1 this year. At the same time, NSW ended a stamp duty refund for new and used zero-emission vehicles up to a value of $78,000. Both incentives had been offered since 2021.

Victoria ended its $3,000 rebate, also launched in 2021, in mid-2023.

In the ACT, the incentive of two years’ free registration closed on June 30 2024.

Queensland’s $6,000 electric vehicle rebate ended in September.

The market clearly responded to these changes. However, reduced financial incentives alone cannot explain the full picture. Despite several rounds of price cuts, sales of popular Tesla models are falling.

Buyers are increasingly opting for hybrid vehicles instead. In September, sales of hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles were up by 34.4% and 89.9%, respectively.

These sales trends reflect other consumer concerns beyond just the upfront cost.

Resale value worries buyers

One major issue for car buyers in Australia, and globally, is uncertainty about their resale value. Consumers are concerned electric vehicles depreciate faster than traditional cars.

These concerns are particularly tied to battery degradation, which affects a car’s range and performance over time. And batteries account for much of the vehicle’s total cost. Potential buyers worry about the long-term value of a used electric vehicle with an ageing battery.

For example, a 2021 Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus with nearly 85,000km currently lists for about $34,000. It has lost roughly half its value in just three years.

While Tesla offers transferable four-year warranties and software updates, the rapid evolution of EV technology also makes older second-hand models less desirable, further reducing their value.

Fires raise fears about safety

Electric vehicle fires have made headlines globally. This has created doubts among consumers about the risks of owning them.

In Korea, a high-profile battery fire in August 2024 led to a ban on certain electric vehicles from underground car parks. While similar bans are not common in Australia, some have been reported. These could have harmed local consumer confidence.

Incidents of electric vehicle fires have increased along with vehicle numbers. Statistically, these vehicles are not more prone to fires than conventional cars – in fact, the risk is clearly lower.

For example, analysis of publicly available statistics from South Korean government agencies, one of the early adopters of electric vehicles, show the number of fires per registered electric vehicle is steadily increasing. Fire risk remains lower than for traditional vehicles, although the gap is shrinking as the electric vehicle fleet ages. And the highly publicised nature of their fires is a source of growing buyer hesitancy.

Misinformation and politicisation are rampant

The full environmental benefits of electric vehicles depend on widespread adoption. However, there is a wide gap between early adopters’ experiences and potential buyers’ perceptions.

Persistent misconceptions include exaggerated concerns about battery life, charging infrastructure and safety. Myths and misinformation often fuel these concerns. Traditional vehicle and oil companies actively spread misinformation in campaigns much like those used against other green energy initiatives.

In response, coalitions such as Electric Vehicles UK have formed to combat these false narratives and promote accurate information.

The politicisation of green initiatives adds to the challenge. When electric vehicles become associated with a specific political ideology, it can alienate large parts of the population. Adoption then becomes slower and more divisive.

Green transition is a work in progress

The electric vehicle market in Australia is facing challenges, despite the growing variety of models and price cuts.

The EV sales trend signals deeper issues in the market. Broader trends, such as the dominance of SUVs and utes, underscore the fact that while the transition to greener vehicles is progressing, it remains uneven.

Further efforts will be needed to reduce misconceptions and misinformation, and bridge the gap between owners’ experience and potential buyers’ perceptions. Only then can Australia enjoy the environmental benefits of widespread EV adoption.

Hadi Ghaderi receives funding from the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre, Transport for New South Wales, Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, Victorian Department of Transport and Planning, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, IVECO Trucks Australia limited, Victoria Department of Education and Training, Australia Post, Bondi Laboratories, Innovative Manufacturing Cooperative Research Centre, Sphere for Good, Australian Meat Processor Corporation,City of Casey, 460degrees and Passel.

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

– ref. Electric car sales have slumped. Misinformation is one of the reasons – https://theconversation.com/electric-car-sales-have-slumped-misinformation-is-one-of-the-reasons-240545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Glenn Savage, Associate Professor of Education Policy and the Future of Schooling, The University of Melbourne

As Australian students begin the final term of 2024, governments are in the middle of a bitter standoff over public school funding for next year.

The federal government has offered states and territories a 2.5% funding increase for schools to the tune of A$16 billion, but some are demanding 5%.

The deadline for states and territories to sign the proposed new school funding agreement ended on September 30, leaving the future of Australian school funding beyond 2025 in limbo.

On top of ongoing funding uncertainty, there are also significant issues with how the proposed new agreement is designed. How can we fix this?

How does school funding work?

Federal, state and territory governments each contribute to public school funding.

The federal government currently contributes 20% of the schooling resource standard. This is the estimate of how much public funding a school needs to meet students’ educational needs.

The Commonwealth ties this funding to reforms and targets aimed at improving equity and learning outcomes for students. The remaining 80% is up to states and territories to fund.

The current agreement expires at the end of this year and the Albanese government is proposing to replace it with the ten-year Better and Fairer Schools Agreement from the start of 2025.

The new agreement provides some important opportunities to improve schools and student outcomes, including measures to enhance student wellbeing, increase attendance, strengthen the teacher workforce, and increase the proportion of students who leave school with a Year 12 certificate.

Read more:
There’s a new school funding bill in parliament. Will this end the funding wars?

Painfully slow progress

The current round of funding negotiations has been plagued by sour politics and persistent roadblocks.

The new national agreement was originally due to begin in 2024, but was delayed after a damning December 2022 Productivity Commission review. This found the current agreement had “done little” to lift student outcomes.

The federal government then commissioned an expert review panel (of which one of us, Pasi Sahlberg, was a member) to inform a new agreement. This year, we have seen negotiations with states and territories over funding and details of the Better and Fairer Schools Agreement were released in July.

But progress has been painfully slow. While Tasmania, Western Australia and the Northern Territory have signed on, other states and territories are holding out.

In August, federal Education Minister Jason Clare issued an ultimatum: sign the agreement by September 30 or forgo the 2.5% funding increase. The federal government has since downplayed the missed deadline while critics suggest it was always an “arbitrary” ultimatum.

Ambiguous equity targets

The political theatre and inability to find consensus raises major concerns about how effective the national reform agenda can be.

A closer look at the targets also raises questions about how they might work in practice.

For example, the new agreement is supposed to have equity at its core (it claims to be “better and fairer”) but it lacks a clear definition of equity. It also lacks specific equity targets to narrow achievement gaps between students from low and high socioeconomic backgrounds.

The new agreement has “learning equity targets”. This includes measures to reduce the proportion of students in the “needs additional support” NAPLAN category for reading and numeracy by 10% and increase those in the “strong” and “exceeding” categories by 10% by 2030.

The only specific target for disadvantaged students is there is a “trend upwards” of the proportion in higher NAPLAN proficiency levels.

Past experience suggests schools will likely “triage” students to reach these targets. This means they will focus more on students who are just below or above the target levels, and less on those unlikely to make the mark. This is what happened when similar targets were set in Ontario in the 2000s.

So, even if overall average NAPLAN scores improve, achievement gaps (between advantaged and disadvantaged students) could grow. This will not improve equity – it will do the opposite.

Toothless targets

There are also no mechanisms to hold states and territories accountable for meeting targets until schools are “fully funded” under the agreement.

Fully funded means states and territories are receiving 100% of the schooling resource standard. To make matters worse, even when jurisdictions are fully funded, there are no penalties or sanctions for failing to cooperate with the agreement.

Timelines to reach full funding in the bilateral agreements already signed are years away. For example, it is 2026 for Western Australia and 2029 for the Northern Territory.

This means states and territories can choose whether they meet the targets or not.

3 ways to fix school funding

Failure to fully and fairly fund schools, mixed with an inability to set meaningful targets, creates deep uncertainty for schooling systems as a new year approaches.

For example, last week the Australian Education Union placed a nationwide ban on the implementation of the new agreement, including “unfunded” reforms that would increase teachers’ workloads.

This is not a sustainable situation. So, how can we fix it?

1. Set meaningful targets: it is not enough to have ambiguous goals for improvement that might improve test scores for some but also worsen inequities. At a minimum, we need to rethink targets to ensure they narrow achievement gaps between equity groups. Without this, education systems will continue to fail those who need the most support.

2. Ensure accountability for the targets: we need to make sure states and territories cannot escape or delay their obligations to improve equity and learning outcomes. To do this, schools should be fully funded from 2025, so current (not future) education ministers are compelled to act.

3. Distance the politics from school funding: schools need stability and consistency to plan effectively. The Better and Fairer Schools Agreement has a helpful ten-year term but reforms are needed to ensure funding decisions remain fair and consistent across the nation. Instead of messy and protracted political negotiations between governments, we could instead set up a national agency to oversee the distribution of school funding.

These measures would help avoid political interference and ensure funding is allocated in line with student needs, national reform priorities and agreed targets.

It’s time to address the deeper issues

The ongoing failure to fairly resource and set meaningful reforms for our schools is a symptom of a broken national funding system.

Unless we address its foundational issues, Australian teachers and students — particularly those in disadvantaged schools — will continue to be short-changed.

Glenn C. Savage receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Pasi Sahlberg was a member of the Australian Government’s Expert Panel to inform a better and fairer education system in 2023.

– ref. Australia’s school funding system is broken. Here’s how to fix it – https://theconversation.com/australias-school-funding-system-is-broken-heres-how-to-fix-it-240908

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Beattie, Lecturer, Media and Communication, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Are you a news avoider? Do you turn off the six o’clock TV news, scroll past headlines, skip radio bulletins – or just ignore news entirely?

If you do some or all of these things, you are not alone. A new survey shows New Zealand has some of the highest rates of news avoidance in the world.

With news media already struggling with declining revenues and audiences, this adds to the immense challenges the sector faces in a competitive and politically polarised environment.

Previous research has found news avoidance is increasing around the world. But New Zealanders have also shown something of a love-hate relationship with the news: avoidance rates are high, but so too is general interest in the news. At the same time, trust in the media has been steadily declining.

To make sense of this, we surveyed 1,204 people in New Zealand in February 2023. We asked about news avoidance and the motivation for it, and recorded demographic details such as age, gender and political belief.

We found 60% of survey participants reported they sometimes, often, or almost always avoid the news. This combined total is higher than any other national figure reported in other studies, with Greece and Bulgaria the next highest at 57%.

Women reported higher rates of news avoidance than men. This could be due to a legacy of unequal access to the news, and a perceived lack of diverse voices in New Zealand’s news production, causing some to feel the news just isn’t for them.

We also found people with far-left or far-right political beliefs were more likely to avoid the news than those with centrist views. Those nearer the ends of the political spectrum are less likely to find their views represented in major news outlets and therefore seek alternative news sources that support their worldview.

Avoiding depressing and untrustworthy news

The major reason given for news avoidance is the negative effect news has on mood (32.7%).

Most immediately, New Zealand had been hit by severe floods in Auckland and Cyclone Gabrielle in the North Island only a month before our survey. But more generally, there has been increased concern about the impact of news consumption on personal wellbeing since the pandemic.

Similarly, many New Zealanders are experiencing news fatigue, with nearly 20% of respondents saying they were worn out by the sheer quantity of news these days.

The second most popular reason given was a perception the news was untrustworthy or biased (30.1%). People with right-wing political beliefs were more likely to cite this.

This suggests the decline in trust might be more about right-wing audiences perceiving a left-wing bias in the media, rather than a general distrust of New Zealand media overall.

Roughly a quarter of respondents said the news is too sensationalist (25.3%). Ironically, the use of clickbait and alarming headlines to engage audiences may be driving them away in the competitive attention economy.

In contrast, younger people (18–24) were more likely to cite not having enough time as a reason for avoiding the news.

Does news avoidance matter?

Our high rates of news avoidance say several things about audiences. On one hand, skipping the news occasionally can help manage stress and keep people interested in the long run.

This might explain why New Zealanders show high rates of both news avoidance and interest in the news: avoiding the news some of the time might help people manage their overall ability to engage and care.

Furthermore, despite high news avoidance rates, voter turnout at the 2023 general election was 78%. News avoidance may not affect civic participation.

However, we also found New Zealanders have high rates of very low or no news consumption at all. Just over 13% of participants reported they avoid the news “almost always”, more than in any other survey internationally.

Instead of consuming traditional news, many are likely turning to YouTube, social media and blogs, which often lack the more rigorous journalistic standards applied by mainstream media.

Scapegoating the news media

It might be easy to conclude New Zealand’s high rates of news avoidance are an implicit criticism of the media themselves. But this is to overlook the nature of their work and the immense challenges they face.

Holding governments to account and covering crises or divisive issues can be an unpopular and thankless task. Blaming the messenger is perhaps an understandable response.

But we also expect the news media to compete with information giants such as Facebook and Google, which do not employ journalists or recognise any real responsibility in disseminating news.

This feeds a commercial environment where traditional media must compete for attention and revenue against platforms that operate without the same ethical and professional standards.

Our findings also highlight the difficulty of satisfying an increasingly polarised news audience. With diverse groups perceiving bias and untrustworthiness differently, it’s nearly impossible to keep everyone happy.

With Google recently threatening to remove local news from its search engine due to its opposition to the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill (which would require digital platforms to pay for news content), these issues are not going away soon.

Rather than scapegoat the media for high news avoidance rates, we see our survey results as part of a broader argument for supporting and strengthening what is an essential service in a functioning democracy.

Alex Beattie receives funding from the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and
Employment.

John Kerr works for the Public Health Communication Centre, which is funded by a philanthropic endowment from the Gama Foundation.

Richard Arnold receives funding from the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and the Tertiary Education Commission. He is a member of the New Zealand Labour Party.

– ref. News blues: study reveals why 60% of Kiwis avoid the news at least some of the time – https://theconversation.com/news-blues-study-reveals-why-60-of-kiwis-avoid-the-news-at-least-some-of-the-time-240544

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer King, Senior Clinical Lecturer, University of Sydney

As a urogynaecologist I care exclusively for women with pelvic floor problems. These are the women with leaking bladders and weak supporting tissues allowing the vaginal walls to bulge outside.

Pelvic organ prolapse can be distressing or embarrassing and interfere with everyday activities. But it’s also common. For many women treatment is simple, effective and doesn’t involve surgery.

What is it pelvic organ prolapse?

Pelvic organ prolapse occurs when the supporting muscles and ligaments holding up the vagina are weakened, allowing the vaginal tissues to sag or stretch. The pelvic organs behind the vaginal walls – such as the bladder, bowel and uterus – can then drop out of position.

One or more organ may be involved. But other than being out of position, there is not necessarily any problem with how these organs function.

Prolapse is usually described according to which organ has dropped, for example “bladder prolapse” (cystocele). Severity is graded according to extent the vaginal wall has descended from its previous position.

What does it feel like?

Most women don’t know an organ or organs have prolapsed until they notice a protrusion from the vaginal opening. They may feel a soft lump bulging in the vagina when they’re washing.

Many simply feel aware “something is coming down”.

Other women may notice they can’t trust their bladder not to leak when they’re jumping on a trampoline or running at the gym. Or perhaps they find it harder to keep a tampon in position than it was before children.

How common is it?

Prolapse is very common and its likelihood increases with age. Based on routine vaginal examination (for example, for cervical screening), easily 50% of women in developed countries will be classified as having prolapse. Most of these will have no symptoms at all.

When defined by symptoms such as a vaginal bulge or difficulty passing urine, around 5% will have specific symptoms.

What causes pelvic organ prolapse?

Pregnancy and vaginal birth generally cause physical changes, such as relaxation of the vaginal tissues. For most women these are minor, but for some, prolapse can seriously impact quality of life.

After pregnancy some women may find they need to adjust physical activities – particularly high impact exercise or repetitive heavy lifting – as this can make prolapse symptoms more noticeable.

Women who give birth via caesarean section are less likely to experience prolapse and incontinence. However as caesareans have their own risk of serious complications, they can’t be recommended purely to avoid pelvic floor issues.

After vaginal delivery, ageing is the second-most common cause of prolapse. This is because the strength of the pelvic floor deteriorates as we age and especially after menopause.

Excessive weight lifting and high-impact exercise can also weaken these muscles.

Chronic lung problems, diabetes, high cholesterol, constipation and obesity further increase the severity of prolapse and incontinence.

Some women also have genetically poorer quality connective tissues, making them more at risk.

How is it treated?

Severe prolapse, which persistently extends through the vagina and causes significant discomfort, is often managed with surgery.

But it is not always required. In developed countries, only 6-18% of those diagnosed with pelvic prolapse will have surgery.

For milder cases, a clinician will usually recommend pelvic floor therapy.

Structured pelvic floor muscle exercises (generally working with a therapist over time) are effective as an initial treatment when prolapse has occurred. Pelvic floor training during late pregnancy can also be used to treat and prevent further prolapse or urinary incontinence.

Read more:
Men have pelvic floors too – and can benefit when they exercise them regularly

Interestingly, general body strength and fitness does not translate into strong pelvic floor muscles – only specific exercises do this. But keeping your weight under control and managing other health conditions can help reduce symptoms.

Intravaginal support devices, called pessaries, can also substantially reduce symptoms. These are usually silicone rings or discs to help support the vaginal walls. They can be fitted by doctors, nurses or physiotherapists and can often be managed by women themselves.

Prolapse can also cause mental health distress. Some women may find their body image suffers, and they may experience anxiety or depression which needs specific management.

What does surgery involve?

In severe cases, a clinician might recommend surgery if conservative management (such as pelvic floor muscle training) has been ineffective.

Surgery can also be necessary in those uncommon cases where the prolapse is affecting kidney or bowel function. In these situations surgery can restore quality of life.

Surgery for prolapse can be performed through the abdomen (usually keyhole approach) or vaginally. For most women, mesh is not required and the surgery involves reshaping and reattaching the stretched tissues to strong ligaments.

Unfortunately this is not always successful, particularly when the tissues are very weak. Approximately 25% of women will need further surgery.

In 2017, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration withdrew their approval for vaginal mesh products for prolapse, after safety concerns. There has since been a marked reduction in surgery for prolapse and urinary incontinence.

However we have not seen a corresponding increase in non-surgical treatments, so we can only assume many women are simply not seeking treatment at all.

We do need to continue working towards better and safer products to improve the durability of our pelvic floor repairs. But in the meantime we must also continue to provide individualised care for every affected woman.

For many, maintaining pelvic floor strength and a healthy lifestyle will be enough to return to and enjoy their normal activities. The first step is to talk to your GP, who can explain what options will work best for you.

Jennifer King is affiliated with the International Urogynecological Association – secretary

– ref. What is pelvic organ prolapse and how is it treated? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-pelvic-organ-prolapse-and-how-is-it-treated-239199

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Dowdy, Principal Research Scientist in Extreme Weather, The University of Melbourne

Tropical cyclones, known as hurricanes and typhoons in other parts of the world, have caused huge damage in many places recently. The United States has just been hit by Hurricane Milton, within two weeks of Hurricane Helene. Climate change likely made their impacts worse.

In Australia, the tropical cyclone season (November to April) is approaching. The Bureau of Meteorology this week released its long-range forecast for this season.

It predicts an average number of tropical cyclones, 11, are likely to form in the region. Four are expected to cross the Australian coast. However, the risk of severe cyclones is higher than average.

So what does an average number actually mean in our rapidly changing climate? And why is there a higher risk of intense cyclones?

The bureau’s forecast is consistent with scientific evidence suggesting climate change is likely to result in fewer but more severe tropical cyclones. They are now more likely to bring stronger winds and more intense rain and flooding.

Climate change is making prediction harder

Our knowledge of tropical cyclones and climate change is based on multiple lines of evidence globally and for the Australian region. This work includes our studies based on observations and modelling.

The bureau’s seasonal outlook in recent years has assumed an average of 11 tropical cyclones occurring in our region (covering an area of the southern tropics between longitudes 90°E and 160°E). It’s based on the average value for all years back to 1969.

However, for the past couple of decades the annual average is below nine tropical cyclones. In earlier decades, it was over 12. This long-term downward trend adds to the challenge of seasonal predictions.

The most recent above-average season (assuming an average of 11) was almost 20 years ago, in the 2005–06 summer with 12 tropical cyclones. Since then, any prediction of above-average tropical cyclone seasons has not eventuated.

El Niño and La Niña influences may be changing too

Historical observations suggest more tropical cyclones tend to occur near Australia during La Niña events. This is a result of warm, moist water and air near Australia, compared with El Niño events. The shifting between El Niño and La Niña states in the Pacific region is known as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO).

Such events can be predicted with a useful degree of accuracy several months ahead in some cases. For example, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has forecast:

La Niña is favored to emerge in September–November (71% chance) and is expected to persist through January–March 2025.

Based on that, one might expect a higher-than-average number of tropical cyclones for the Australian region. However, the ENSO influence on tropical cyclones has weakened in our region. It’s another factor that’s making long-range predictions harder.

The bureau’s ENSO outlook is somewhat closer to neutral ENSO conditions, based on its modelling, compared to NOAA’s leaning more toward La Niña. The bureau says:

Should La Niña form in the coming months, it is forecast to be relatively weak and short-lived.

The bureau’s prediction of an average number of tropical cyclones this season is broadly consistent with its prediction of close-to-average ENSO conditions.

So what does this all mean for this cyclone season?

If we end up getting an average Australian season for the current climate, this might actually mean fewer tropical cyclones than the historical average. The number might be closer to eight or nine rather than 11 or 12. (Higher or lower values than this range are still possible.)

However, those that do occur could have an increased chance of being category 4 or 5 tropical cyclones. These have stronger winds, with gusts typically exceeding 225km per hour, and are more likely to cause severe floods and coastal damage.

If we end up getting more than the recent average of eight to nine tropical cyclones, which could happen if NOAA predictions of La Niña conditions eventuate, that increases the risk of impacts. However, there is one partially good news story from climate change relating to this, if the influence of La Niña is less than it used to be on increasing tropical cyclone activity.

Another factor is that the world’s oceans are much warmer than usual. Warm ocean water is one of several factors that provide the energy needed for a tropical cyclone to form.

Many ocean heat records have been set recently. This means we have been in “uncharted waters” from a temperature perspective. It adds further uncertainty if relying on what occurred in the past when making predictions for the current climate.

Up-to-date evidence is vital as climate changes

The science makes it clear we need to plan for tropical cyclone impacts in a different way from what might have worked in the past. This includes being prepared for potentially fewer tropical cyclones overall, but with those that do occur being more likely to cause more damage. This means there are higher risks of damaging winds, flooding and coastal erosion.

Seasonal prediction guidance can be part of improved planning. There’s also a need for enhanced design standards and other climate change adaptation activities. All can be updated regularly to stay consistent with the best available scientific knowledge.

Increased preparedness is more important than ever to help reduce the potential for disasters caused by tropical cyclones in the current and future climate.

The authors acknowledge the contribution of CSIRO researcher Hamish Ramsay during the writing of this article.

Andrew Dowdy receives funding from University of Melbourne, including through the Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes and the Melbourne Energy Institute.

Liz Ritchie-Tyo receives funding from The Australian Research Council and The U.S. Office of Naval Research.

Savin Chand receives funding from the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program (NESP) and the UK-based Gallagher Research Centre (GRC).

– ref. Why hurricanes like Milton in the US and cyclones in Australia are becoming more intense and harder to predict – https://theconversation.com/why-hurricanes-like-milton-in-the-us-and-cyclones-in-australia-are-becoming-more-intense-and-harder-to-predict-241000

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tamika Worrell, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Critical Indigenous Studies, Macquarie University

Since artificial intelligence (AI) became mainstream over the past two years, many of the risks it poses have been widely documented. As well as fuelling deep fake porn, threatening personal privacy and accelerating the climate crisis, some people believe the emerging technology could even lead to human extinction.

But some risks of AI are still poorly understood. These include the very particular risks to Indigenous knowledges and communities.

There’s a simple reason for this: the AI industry and governments have largely ignored Indigenous people in the development and regulation of AI technologies. Put differently, the world of AI is too white.

AI developers and governments need to urgently fix this if they are serious about ensuring everybody shares the benefits of AI. As Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people like to say, “nothing about us, without us”.

Indigenous concerns

Indigenous peoples around the world are not ignoring AI. They are having conversations, conducting research and sharing their concerns about the current trajectory of it and related technologies.

A well-documented problem is the theft of cultural intellectual property. For example, users of AI image generation programs such as DeepAI can artificially generate artworks in mere seconds which mimic Indigenous styles and stories of art.

This demonstrates how easy it is for someone using AI to misappropriate cultural knowledges. These generations are taken from large data sets of publicly available imagery to create something new. But they miss the storying and cultural knowledge present in our art practices.

AI technologies also fuel the spread of misinformation about Indigenous people.

The internet is already riddled with misinformation about Indigenous people. The long-running Creative Spirits website, which is maintained by a non-Indigenous person, is a prominent example.

Generative AI systems are likely to make this problem worse. They often conflate us with other global Indigenous peoples around the world. They also draw on inappropriate sources, including Creative Spirits.

During last year’s Voice to Parliament referendum in Australia, “no” campaigners also used AI-generated images depicting Indigenous people. This demonstrates the role of AI in political contexts and the harm it can cause to us.

Another problem is the lack of understanding of AI among Indigenous people. Some 40% of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population in Australia don’t know what generative AI is. This reflects an urgent need to provide relevant information and training to Indigenous communities on the use of the technology.

There is also concern about the use of AI in classroom contexts and its specific impact on Indigenous students.

Looking to the future

Hawaiian and Samoan Scholar Jason Lewis says:

We must think more expansively about AI and all the other computational systems in which we find ourselves increasingly enmeshed. We need to expand the operational definition of intelligence used when building these systems to include the full spectrum of behaviour we humans use to make sense of the world.

Key to achieving this is the idea of “Indigenous data sovereignty”. This would mean Indigenous people retain sovereignty over their own data, in the sense that they own and control access to it.

In Australia, a collective known as Maiam nayri Wingara offers important considerations and principles for data sovereignty and governance. They affirm Indigenous rights to govern and control our data ecosystems, from creation to infrastructure.

The National Agreement on Closing the Gap also affirms the importance of Indigenous data control and access.

This is reaffirmed at a global level as well. In 2020, a group of Indigenous scholars from around the world published a position paper laying out how Indigenous protocols can inform ethically created AI. This kind of AI would centralise the knowledges of Indigenous peoples.

In a positive step, the Australian government’s recently proposed set of AI guardrails highlight the importance of Indigenous data sovereignty.

For example, the guardrails include the need to ensure additional transparency and make extra considerations when it comes to using data about or owned by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, to “mitigate the perpetuation of existing social inequalities”.

Indigenous Futurisms

Grace Dillon, a scholar from a group of North American Indigenous people known as the Anishinaabe, first coined the term “Indigenous Futurisms”.

Ambelin Kwaymullina, an academic and futurist practitioner from the Palyku nation in Western Australia, defines it as:

visions of what-could-be that are informed by ancient Aboriginal cultures and by our deep understandings of oppressive systems.

These visions, Kwaymullina writes, are “as diverse as Indigenous peoples ourselves”. They are also unified by “an understanding of reality as living, interconnected whole in which human beings are but one strand of life amongst many, and a non-linear view of time”.

So how can AI technologies be informed by Indigenous ways of knowing?

A first step is for industry to involve Indigenous people in creating, maintaining and evaluating the technologies – rather than asking them retrospectively to approve work already done.

Governments need to also do more than highlight the importance of Indigenous data sovereignty in policy documents. They need to meaningfully consult with Indigenous peoples to regulate the use of these technologies. This consultation must aim to ensure ethical AI behaviour among organisations and everyday users that honours Indigenous worldviews and realities.

AI developers and governments like to claim they are serious about ensuring AI technology benefits all of humanity. But unless they start involving Indigenous people more in developing and regulating the technology, their claims ring hollow.

Tamika Worrell 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. AI affects everyone – including Indigenous people. It’s time we have a say in how it’s built – https://theconversation.com/ai-affects-everyone-including-indigenous-people-its-time-we-have-a-say-in-how-its-built-239605

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Professor (Practice), Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Monash University

This week the United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls presented a report detailing the violence experienced by women and girls in sport globally.

The report provides a global snapshot of the abuse women athletes experience, who is most likely to perpetrate the violence, and makes recommendations on what should been done to promote safety of women and girls.

Off the back of the Paris Olympic and Paralympic games, where Australia cheered on the record-breaking success of women athletes, the report should be a wake-up call for Australian sports and clubs.

Abuse of women and girls in sport

Drawing on more than 100 submissions and consultations with 50 people, the report finds:

Women and girls in sport face widespread, overlapping and grave forms and manifestations of violence at all levels.

These abusive behaviours include coercive control, physical violence, corporal punishment, verbal abuse, social exclusion, bullying and identity abuse.

The impacts of this violence are wide-ranging: physical injuries, insomnia, fear and anxiety, reduced self-confidence, substance misuse, eating disorders, self harm, and decline in athletic performance and participation.

These impacts can extend well beyond the athlete’s involvement in their sport.

Women and girls also experience economic violence in sport. For example, when women athletes do not have control over their earnings, or when they are coerced into signing exploitative contracts.

The report notes women athletes also experience heightened rates of abusive and harassing behaviours in online settings. This includes sexual harassment and threats, racism, ridicule, body shaming, sexualised comments, stalking, doxing and revenge porn.

Perpetrators are wide-ranging. They include coaches, managers, spectators, teachers, peers, sports lawyers, referees and medical staff.

The report describes sexual harassment and abuse as “rampant” and acknowledges the high rate of sexual violence, in particular with relationships between coaches and athletes.

This includes grooming of younger athletes, where power and control dynamics, combined with an abuse of trust between an adult and child athlete, provide the conditions for sexual abuse to proliferate.

It follows a 2023 report from the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and UN Women, which estimates 21% of girls worldwide have experienced at least one form of sexual abuse as a child in sport.

Is this a problem in Australia?

Australians often pride themselves on how sports bring the nation, communities and families together but we too have a wide-reaching problem in this area.

In 2021, a review of Swimming Australia found women athletes and coaches had experienced physical and mental abuse while the “Change the Routine” review of Gymnastics Australia revealed child abuse and neglect, misconduct, bullying, abuse, sexual harassment and assault towards gymnasts.

More recently, a review by Sports Integrity Australia into Australian volleyball, which revealed systemic verbal and physical abuse of athletes, prompted a formal apology to past athletes.

And a 2024 Deakin University study showed 87% of Australian sportswomen had experienced online harm within the past year.

A lack of accountability and consequence

In the traditionally male-dominated culture of sport, abusers have often gone unsanctioned, while those who experience abuse often leave their sport early and with significant consequences to their careers, financial stability, and mental and physical wellbeing.

There are examples where abuse has been minimised or ignored by those in leadership to protect the reputation of the team or the sporting code, and where coaches have been able to move between teams without consequence.

Take, for example, the sexual abuse of young female gymnasts by United States coach Larry Nassar.

The first complaint against Nassar was made in 1997. Despite this, and the numerous other complaints which followed, Nassar remained in his coaching position with USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University until 2015. In December 2017 he was convicted of numerous counts of sexual abuse of minors.

Outcomes of investigations by sporting bodies often remain confidential. For example, in 2017 the Fremantle Dockers and the AFL were criticised for their use of a “confidentiality agreement” in settling a sexual harassment matter.

This impunity demonstrates a significant lack of accountability.

The barriers to reporting abuse in sport

There are significant barriers to reporting.

Women elite athletes may fear losing their funding and sponsorship deals if they report abuse.

In Australia, the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse heard child athletes are most at risk of experiencing abuse by a person of authority (such as a coach) when they are about to achieve their best performance.

As the UN Report states, it is at this time that “there is very little to gain by revealing the abuse and too much to lose”.

This must change.

When sporting codes put a desire to win above safeguarding and accountability, the clear message sent to victims is that violence is excusable, and that sporting heroes are immune to the consequences of their abusive actions.

Raising awareness around early identification of abusive behaviours is key.

The UN report reveals athletes often feel uncertain and uncomfortable in identifying early forms of abusive behaviours and lack information on what supports are available to them when they do.

Ensuring a suite of reporting pathways is also critical. There is no one-size-fits-all model.

Why Australia should take the lead

Participating in sport has significant benefits. But sport settings must be safe for all.

Many sporting organisations and clubs have recognised the problem of abuse of women and girls in sport, rolling out respect and responsibility programs, sexual harassment policies, as well as clearer reporting and investigation policies.

This is a good start but must be built on.

Indeed, the safety of women and girls must be a key focus of the Australian High Performance “Win Well” strategy for the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Recent initiatives and policy changes should be monitored to examine how they work and whether they deliver safer outcomes for women and girls in sport at all levels.

Responses to proven allegations of abuse must hold perpetrators to account. And critically, investigations must be independent, transparent and timely.

The UN report reminds us “sports is a microcosm of society”.

Violence against women and children in Australia has been declared a national emergency – ensuring the safety of women and girls in all sport settings is one critical component of addressing that crisis.

Kate has received funding for family violence-related research from the Australian Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Victorian, Queensland and ACT governments, the Commonwealth Department of Social Services and the Victorian Women’s Trust. This piece is written by Kate Fitz-Gibbon in her role at Monash University and is wholly independent of Kate Fitz-Gibbon’s role as Chair of Respect Victoria.

– ref. ‘Violence at all levels’: UN report into the abuse of women and girls in sport is a wake-up call for Australia – https://theconversation.com/violence-at-all-levels-un-report-into-the-abuse-of-women-and-girls-in-sport-is-a-wake-up-call-for-australia-239085

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elina Hypponen, Professor of Nutritional and Genetic Epidemiology, University of South Australia

Vitamin D is essential for bone health, immune function and overall wellbeing. And it becomes even more crucial as we age.

New guidelines from the international Endocrine Society recommend people aged 75 and over should consider taking vitamin D supplements.

But why is vitamin D so important for older adults? And how much should they take?

Young people get most vitamin D from the sun

In Australia, it is possible for most people under 75 to get enough vitamin D from the sun throughout the year. For those who live in the top half of Australia – and for all of us during summer – we only need to have skin exposed to the sun for a few minutes on most days.

The body can only produce a certain amount of vitamin D at a time. So staying in the sun any longer than needed is not going to help increase your vitamin D levels, while it will increase your risk of skin cancer.

But it’s difficult for people aged over 75 to get enough vitamin D from a few minutes of sunshine, so the Endocrine Society recommends people get 800 IU (international units) of vitamin D a day from food or supplements.

Why you need more as you age

This is higher than the recommendation for younger adults, reflecting the increased needs and reduced ability of older bodies to produce and absorb vitamin D.

Overall, older adults also tend to have less exposure to sunlight, which is the primary source of natural vitamin D production. Older adults may spend more time indoors and wear more clothing when outdoors.

As we age, our skin also becomes less efficient at synthesising vitamin D from sunlight.

The kidneys and the liver, which help convert vitamin D into its active form, also lose some of their efficiency with age. This makes it harder for the body to maintain adequate levels of the vitamin.

All of this combined means older adults need more vitamin D.

Deficiency is common in older adults

Despite their higher needs for vitamin D, people over 75 may not get enough of it.

Studies have shown one in five older adults in Australia have vitamin D deficiency.

In higher-latitude parts of the world, such as the United Kingdom, almost half don’t reach sufficient levels.

This increased risk of deficiency is partly due to lifestyle factors, such as spending less time outdoors and insufficient dietary intakes of vitamin D.

It’s difficult to get enough vitamin D from food alone. Oily fish, eggs and some mushrooms are good sources of vitamin D, but few other foods contain much of the vitamin. While foods can be fortified with the vitamin D (margarine, some milk and cereals), these may not be readily available or be consumed in sufficient amounts to make a difference.

In some countries such as the United States, most of the dietary vitamin D comes from fortified products. However, in Australia, dietary intakes of vitamin D are typically very low because only a few foods are fortified with it.

Why vitamin D is so important as we age

Vitamin D helps the body absorb calcium, which is essential for maintaining bone density and strength. As we age, our bones become more fragile, increasing the risk of fractures and conditions like osteoporosis.

Keeping bones healthy is crucial. Studies have shown older people hospitalised with hip fractures are 3.5 times more likely to die in the next 12 months compared to people who aren’t injured.

Vitamin D may also help lower the risk of respiratory infections, which can be more serious in this age group.

There is also emerging evidence for other potential benefits, including better brain health. However, this requires more research.

According to the society’s systematic review, which summarises evidence from randomised controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation in humans, there is moderate evidence to suggest vitamin D supplementation can lower the risk of premature death.

The society estimates supplements can prevent six deaths per 1,000 people. When considering the uncertainty in the available evidence, the actual number could range from as many as 11 fewer deaths to no benefit at all.

Should we get our vitamin D levels tested?

The Endocrine Society’s guidelines suggest routine blood tests to measure vitamin D levels are not necessary for most healthy people over 75.

There is no clear evidence that regular testing provides significant benefits, unless the person has a specific medical condition that affects vitamin D metabolism, such as kidney disease or certain bone disorders.

Routine testing can also be expensive and inconvenient.

In most cases, the recommended approach to over-75s is to consider a daily supplement, without the need for testing.

You can also try to boost your vitamin D by adding fortified foods to your diet, which might lower the dose you need from supplementation.

Even if you’re getting a few minutes of sunlight a day, a daily vitamin D is still recommended.

Elina Hypponen receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Foundation, Medical Research Future Fund, Australian Research Council, and Arthritis Australia.

Joshua Sutherland’s studentship is funded by the Australian Research Training Program Scholarship, and he volunteers on the board for the Australasian Association and Register of Practicing Nutritionists.

– ref. Are you over 75? Here’s what you need to know about vitamin D – https://theconversation.com/are-you-over-75-heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-vitamin-d-231820

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Braedan Taylor, Traditional Owner; Karajarri Lands Trust Association/UWA, Indigenous Knowledge

How can a desert burn? Australia’s vast deserts aren’t just sand dunes – they’re often dotted with flammable spinifex grass hummocks. When heavy rains fall, grass grows quickly before drying out. That’s how a desert can burn.

When our Karajarri and Ngurrara ancestors lived nomadic lifestyles in what’s now called the Great Sandy Desert in northwestern Australia, they lit many small fires in spinifex grass as they walked. Fires were used seasonally for ceremonies, signalling to others, flushing out animals, making travel easier (spinifex is painfully sharp), cleaning campsites, and stimulating fresh vegetation growth ready for foraging or luring game when people returned a few months later. The result was a patchwork desert.

After colonisation, this ended. Without management, the spinifex and grassy deserts began to burn in some of the largest fires in Australia.

But now the work of caring for desert country (pirra) with fire (jungku, or warlu) has begun again. We are Karajarri and Ngurrara rangers who care for 110,000 square kilometres of the Great Sandy Desert. Our techniques have changed – we now drop incendiaries from helicopters to cover more distance – but our goals are similar. Guided by our elders, we are combining traditional knowledge with modern technologies and science to refine how we manage fire in a changing world.

In research published today, we and our co-authors paired analysis of historic fire patterns with five years of fauna surveys. Put together, we found mature spinifex was important for creatures of the Great Sandy Desert – and that means we should burn small and often, like our ancestors.

Fire and sand

In the 1940s and ‘50s, the Royal Australian Air Force photographed the Great Sandy Desert from the air. These photos were taken before our people moved to settlements and pastoral stations between the 1960s and ’80s.

That means these aerial photographs capture a time when traditional burns were still happening.

Our ranger teams are studying these photographs to draw out the fire patterns produced by our ancestors.

These photographs tell a story. Our ancestors burned many small areas, creating a complicated patchwork of spinifex at different stages of regrowth after fire.

But they also left a great deal of mature spinifex – large old hummocks that hadn’t burnt for years. This patchwork of burned and unburned areas made it hard for bushfires to spread far and fast. When traditional burning practices stopped, bushfires became common.

The knowledge contained in these old photos is very valuable. The images give us clear goals for our fire management. We combine this with guidance from elders and information on fuel loads across Country gleaned from remote sensing and weather modelling, to plan our fire management.

What does fire mean for desert creatures?

Australian deserts are remarkably biodiverse, especially in reptiles. In a single clump of mature spinifex, you might find up to 18 different species of lizard. Then there are snakes and goannas, as well as mammals such as marsupial moles found only in the arid zone.

Spinifex hummocks are crucial to many of these species, offering shelter, food and prey. What does fire do to spinifex-dwellers?

On this topic, scientific knowledge is playing catchup with Indigenous traditional knowledge but we see value in using the scientific method – a universal language – to help us manage Country, and tell other people about what we are doing.

The past few decades have been a time of major change for the Great Sandy Desert. Cultural burns stopped, and feral animals such as camels and cats grew in number. As a result, many native animals are disappearing or already gone.

We think larger, more frequent fires play a part. Our Karajarri and Ngurrara rangers are using science to make sure our patchwork burns – known as right-way fire – are good for native animals.

Between 2018 and 2022, we surveyed reptiles and mammals from 32 sites across the Karajarri and Warlu Jilajaa Jumu (Ngurrara) Indigenous Protected Areas in the desert. We caught almost 3,800 mammals and reptiles from 77 species. Reptiles made up the lion’s share, with 66 species. We also recorded when fire had come through, and how big the burnt patches were.

The data showed reptile species care a lot about where they live. Some prefer recently burned areas, where the spinifex is gone or still very small. Others like old spinifex, huge hummocks going unburned for years. And others still liked mid-sized spinifex.

We found mammals were rare in recently burned areas and more common in mature spinifex. We also found more mammal diversity in areas with fine-scale patchworks of fires.

This shows we must keep our fires small, burning different areas at different times, and protect enough mature spinifex.

This patchwork approach will help spinifex hopping mice, desert mice, planigales, dunnarts, and dozens of small reptile species to survive. But it will also help now-rare game species, the marlu (red kangaroo in Walmajarri language) and pijarta (emu in Karajarri).

Our research tells us returning to the traditional burning techniques of our ancestors is still the right thing to do – even though the desert has changed.

Rare finds

Scientists have rarely surveyed the Great Sandy Desert. As a result, our surveys have turned up important findings.

The kaluta (Dasykaluta rosamondae), for instance, is a feisty little carnivorous marsupial. We found it on the Canning Stock Route, 500km further north than the distribution known to scientists.

Similarly, we found the threatened Dampierland sandslider (Lerista separanda), a vividly coloured skink, in the Karajarri Indigenous Protected Area, expanding its distribution 450km southeast. Karajarri people call sandsliders winkajurta, or “lice eaters”, because in the old days you could use them to hunt lice in your hair.

Our research gives us confidence that bringing back traditional burns helps desert creatures. We want more people to know that right-way fire is part of healthy Country, including our own mob and tourists who pass through, so we can all look after the desert.

In our work, we take our old people out onto Country to get advice on burning and their knowledge of animals. As one told us, seeing the old ways return made him “real happy [and] to come alive” – just like the desert.

We thank Karajarri and Ngurrara Traditional Owners and acknowledge past and present elders. Thanks to the many rangers and coordinators who helped in these surveys, and our partners: Environs Kimberley, Charles Darwin University, Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, and Indigenous Desert Alliance. Special thanks to Hamsini Bijlani, our project coordinator.

Braedan Taylor and other rangers in this project were funded by the Australian Government’s Indigenous Protected Area Program, Indigenous Ranger Program, and the National Environmental Science Program via the Threatened Species Recovery Hub; by the Western Australia State Natural Resource Management, Aboriginal Ranger Program, Lotteries West, and via in kind support from the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions; by the Indigenous Desert Alliance/10Deserts; and by the Australian Research Council.

Jacqueline Shovellor receives funding from the same sources as the lead author.

Frankie McCarthy receives funding from the same sources as the lead author.

Sarah Legge receives funding from the Australian Research Council. The work reported here was partly funded by the National Environmental Science Program via the Threatened Species Recovery Hub.

Thomas Narda receives funding from the same sources as the lead author.

– ref. A patchwork of spinifex: how we returned cultural burning to the Great Sandy Desert – https://theconversation.com/a-patchwork-of-spinifex-how-we-returned-cultural-burning-to-the-great-sandy-desert-240447

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By William Cheung, Senior Lecturer, Business School, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

New Zealand’s economy has been described as a “housing market with bits tacked on”. Buying and selling property is a national sport fuelled by the rising value of homes across the country.

But the wider public has little understanding of how those property valuations are created – despite their being a key factor in most banks’ decisions about how much they are willing to lend for a mortgage.

Automated valuation models (AVM) – systems enabled by artificial intelligence (AI) that crunch vast datasets to produce instant property values – have done little to improve transparency in the process.

These models started gaining traction in New Zealand in the early 2010s. The early versions used limited data sources like property sales records and council information. Today’s more advanced models include high-quality geo-spatial data from sources such as Land Information New Zealand.

AI models have improved efficiency. But the proprietary algorithms behind those AVMs can make it difficult for homeowners and industry professionals to understand how specific values are calculated.

In our ongoing research, we are developing a framework that evaluates these automated valuations. We have looked at how the figures should be interpreted and what factors might be missed by the AI models.

In a property market as geographically and culturally varied as New Zealand’s, these points are not only relevant — they are critical. The rapid integration of AI into property valuation is no longer just about innovation and speed. It is about trust, transparency and a robust framework for accountability.

AI valuations are a black box

In New Zealand, property valuation has traditionally been a labour-intensive process. Valuers would usually inspect properties, make market comparisons and apply their expert judgement to arrive at a final value estimate.

But this approach is slow, expensive and prone to human error. As demand for more efficient property valuations increased, the use of AI brought in much-needed change.

But the rise of these valuations models is not without its challenges. While AI offers speed and consistency, it also comes with a critical downside: a lack of transparency.

AVMs often operate as “black boxes”, providing little insight into the data and methodologies that drive their valuations. This raises serious concerns about the consistency, objectivity and transparency of these systems.

What exactly the algorithm is doing when an AVM estimates a home’s value is not clear. Such opaqueness has real-world consequences, perpetuating market imbalances and inequities.

Without a framework to monitor and correct these discrepancies, AI models risk distorting the property market further, especially in a country as diverse as New Zealand, where regional, cultural and historical factors significantly influence property values.

Transparency and accountability

A recent discussion forum with real estate industry insiders, law researchers and computer scientists on AI governance and property valuations highlighted the need for greater accountability when it comes to AVMs. Transparency alone is not enough. Trust must be built into the system.

This can be achieved by requiring AI developers and users to disclose data sources, algorithms and error margins behind their valuations.

Additionally, valuation models should incorporate a “confidence interval” – a range of prices that shows how much the estimated value might vary. This offers users a clearer understanding of the uncertainty inherent in each valuation.

But effective AI governance in property valuation cannot be achieved in isolation. It demands collaboration between regulators, AI developers and property professionals.

Bias correction

New Zealand urgently needs a comprehensive evaluation framework for AVMs, one that prioritises transparency, accountability and bias correction.

This is where our research comes in. We repeatedly resample small portions of the data to account for situations where property value data do not follow a normal distribution.

This process generates a confidence interval showing a range of possible values around each property estimate. Users are then able to understand the variability and reliability of the AI-generated valuations, even when the data are irregular or skewed.

Our framework goes beyond transparency. It incorporates a bias correction mechanism that detects and adjusts for constantly overvalued or undervalued estimates within AVM outputs. One example of this relates to regional disparities or undervaluation of particular property types.

By addressing these biases, we ensure valuations that are not only accountable or auditable but also fair. The goal is to avoid the long-term market distortions that unchecked AI models could create.

The rise of AI auditing

But transparency alone is not enough. The auditing of AI-generated information is becoming increasingly important.

New Zealand’s courts now require a qualified person to check information generated by AI and subsequently used in tribunal proceedings.

In much the same way financial auditors ensure accuracy in accounting, AI auditors will play a pivotal role in maintaining the integrity of valuations.

Based on earlier research, we are auditing the artificial valuation model estimates by comparing them with the market transacted prices of the same houses in the same period.

It is not just about trusting the algorithms but trusting the people and systems behind them.

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. Use of AI in property valuation is on the rise – but we need greater transparency and trust – https://theconversation.com/use-of-ai-in-property-valuation-is-on-the-rise-but-we-need-greater-transparency-and-trust-240880

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rawan Nimri, Lecturer in Tourism and Hospitality, Griffith University

Sexual harassment is all too common in hospitality and tourism. One Australian survey found almost half of the respondents had been sexually harassed, compared to about one in three in workplaces more generally.

Hospitality and tourism are marked by intense and close interpersonal interactions and dismissive treatment by some customers, including verbal and physical aggression, bullying and sexual suggestions.

Workers who are young, female, low-paid and casual are especially vulnerable.

The scandals at the Merivale Hospitality Group and Sydney’s Swillhouse restaurant are only the most recent.

The widely held view that “the customer is always right” gives customers power. The power imbalance is magnified where tipping makes up a substantial part of workers’ earnings.

What newspapers report

To examine how sexual harassment is reported, we identified about 2,000 newspaper articles across a number of countries published between 2017 and 2022 dealing with the treatment of hotel room attendants, airline cabin crew and massage therapists. We zeroed in on 273 for closer analysis.

This was a period in which the public awareness of sexual harassment climbed with the rise of the #MeToo movement and media coverage probably peaked.

Media coverage matters because of its effect on public opinion.

Computer-assisted thematic analysis showed four different types of coverage, some overlapping, relating to legal matters, celebrities, power dynamics, and calls to action.

The language used varied according to the countries in which the newspapers were located.

In the United States and the United Kingdom, the accused were often described by their social or economic status, with cases involving famous people getting a lot of attention. In Asia and Africa, the reports focused on basic details such as the offender’s age and where they lived.

Women infantilised

But universally we found the terms used to describe victims were highly gendered and dated in ways that suggested subservience and undermined their professional skills. Cabin crew were called “air hostesses”. Room attendants were called “maids”.

Framing these professionals as modern-day servants has the potential to foster and perpetuate an expectation that sexual harassment is to be expected.

Reports involving celebrity harassers highlighted victims’ narratives with emotionally charged quotes using words such as “awful” and “terrible”. These words were perhaps intended to evoke empathy for the victims but also serve to further victimise them.

Female aggression under-reported

In all cases, women were heavily featured as victims but never as aggressors. It is a gender bias that does not match the established statistics, which show that almost one-quarter of aggressors are women.

This misrepresentation creates a skewed understanding of who commits and suffers from sexual harassment. It has the potential to discourage victims of harassment by women from coming forward.

It’s important for the tourism industry to foster secure and dignified working conditions. But it is also important that the media reflect the actual behaviour of aggressors and victims.

Done better, reporting could help

The media could play a crucial role in bringing about better policies and practices in these industries by emphasising the severe consequences of ignoring the problem and the benefits of taking proactive steps.

More respectful and accurate reporting might be able to help drive lasting change, making a positive difference in the lives of the skilled workers on whom so many of us depend.

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. It’s time to talk about how the media talks about sexual harassment – https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-talk-about-how-the-media-talks-about-sexual-harassment-238771

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Godfrey, Senior Lecturer, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is a product of a unique time in American filmmaking, when independent exploitation films were nastier than ever, and equally capable of piercing the mainstream consciousness.

Tobe Hooper’s 1974 film arrived in a recently transformed exhibition landscape. The 1967 outcry over onscreen violence in Bonnie and Clyde marked the end of Hollywood’s Motion Picture Production Code and the introduction of film ratings.

Films like Easy Rider (1969) elevated the standing of formerly disreputable exploitation fare within Hollywood. By 1973, The Exorcist was packing out cinemas and producing lines around city blocks with the promise of the most unremitting horror film yet made.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was shot quickly on a shoestring budget, financed in part by the newly-formed Texas Film Commission. The film assembled its cast and crew from Austin’s circles of recent college graduates and dropouts.

Its plot is straightforward enough: a group of young people are stranded when they run out of gas in rural Texas. They are terrorised and subsequently murdered by an eccentric local family, including the chainsaw wielding Leatherface – a nonverbal, childlike giant who wears masks made from the skin of his flayed victims.

We learn this family have lost their jobs at the local slaughterhouse with the introduction of bolt gun technologies, leaving them sell roadside meat made from human victims.

This detail has inspired a range of thematic interpretations for the film, encompassing commentary on class and family, gender and animal rights.

The film lays bare the horrors of meat production, inflicted on human victims. The family home is the site where these themes come into conflict.

Porn and violence on screen

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was picked up by the Bryanston Distributing Company. In 1972, Bryanston was the distributor for the theatrical release of the hardcore pornographic film Deep Throat. The film’s success shifted popular discourse around pornography, and helped Bryanston widen the theatrical release for The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.

In subsequent years, media reported on alleged abusive on-set conditions on Deep Throat, along with claims Bryanston was connected with organised crime. Director Hooper, and many of the Chain Saw Massacre cast, alleged they never received their share of box office from the distributor.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre’s proximity to Deep Throat stoked controversy, conflating concern about increasingly extreme depictions of sex and violence onscreen.

Two years earlier, young filmmaker Wes Craven had transitioned from making pornography to horror film. His low budget rape-revenge exploitation film The Last House on the Left (1972) was originally developed as a hardcore pornographic film. This approach was abandoned when it entered production.

Unlike Craven’s notorious film, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is not overtly sexualised. While there may be a sexual undertone to Leatherface’s pursuit of Sally and her companions, it does not escalate to onscreen acts of sexual violence.

Regardless, the film drew condemnation, particularly in the United Kingdom, where it was banned, and later figured in public debates about the censorship of “video nasties” in the 1980s.

For my part, I remember encountering The Texas Chain Saw Massacre at the video rental store as a child: its title, cover and R-rating promised horrors beyond comprehension, many years before I actually saw the film itself.

Horrors implied, rather than shown

Beyond its controversies, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre played an important role in the developing field of horror film studies. It figures prominently in Robin Wood’s taxonomy of “reactionary” horror movies (which uphold traditional values) and “progressive” horror movies, which take a more ambivalent stance on the figure of the monster, challenging conservative social values. Wood counts The Texas Chain Saw Massacre in the latter category.

It is also central to Carol J. Clover’s influential codification of the “final girl” narrative trope, in which a sole young woman is able to withstand the monster’s onslaught.

Alongside Halloween (1978), The Texas Chain Saw Massacre helped steer the trajectory of American horror films in the 1980s.

Halloween is situated within the manicured surroundings of suburbia, and conveys its menace through the slick technical qualities of its gliding camera, and John Carpenter’s staccato synth score.

By contrast, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre locates its horror in the backroads and decrepit farmhouses of central Texas. The idea of Texas looms large, connoting a place of lawlessness, violence and danger.

Hooper punctuates his long shots with extreme close ups via rapid editing. The film’s most grotesque horrors are implied, rather than shown. Its most visceral impact comes from its extended chase sequences, and via its soundtrack: Sally’s piercing screams, and Leatherface’s ever-present chainsaw.

While the Texas Chain Saw Massacre spawned several sequels and influenced even more imitators over the years, from the Ramones to Wolf Creek (2005) and X (2022), it has rarely been matched in its intensity, and its harrowing, visceral impact.

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

– ref. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and its harrowing, visceral impact has been rarely matched, 50 years on – https://theconversation.com/the-texas-chain-saw-massacre-and-its-harrowing-visceral-impact-has-been-rarely-matched-50-years-on-236700

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew P. Sinclair, Lecturer and Researcher of Education Policy, School of Education, Curtin University

On Thursday, federal Education Minister Jason Clare introduced a school funding bill to parliament.

The bill aims to set a new “floor” for how much the federal government contributes towards public school funding in Australia.

It would mean the Commonwealth has to contribute at least 20% of the schooling resource standard (how much funding a school needs to meet students’ educational needs) for public schools each year in all states and territories from 2025.

Clare argues it will provide “certainty” to schools, but it also comes in the middle of a standoff between the federal government and some states over school funding policy.

What’s in the bill?

The bill proposes to change the current arrangement, under which the Commonwealth contributes 20% to the schooling resource standard of public schools. As the government explains:

This means the 20 per cent will become the minimum, not the maximum, the Commonwealth contributes to public schools.

The Albanese government says the bill will increase “transparency and accountability” and ensure funding cannot go backwards.

But it cannot be certain of parliamentary support – Greens and independent senators are among those pushing for the government to provide more funding for public schools than is currently on the table.

The bigger picture

The bill also comes as the federal government is still trying to sign off new deals with some of the states and territories about their public school funding for next year.

The current agreements will run out at the end of the year. While the new proposed arrangements would increase the federal contribution, it’s not by as much as some states want.

So far, Clare has made agreements with Western Australia and Tasmania to increase the federal contribution from 20% to 22.5%. For the Northern Territory it will increase funding to a 40% contribution by 2029.

So far, it has not signed deals with New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, and South Australia, which are pushing for a federal contribution of 25%.

The Australian Capital Territory is also yet to sign, despite its public schools receiving at least 100% of the schooling resource standard (via both federal and its own funds) for several years now.

Clare set a deadline of September 30 for the holdout states to sign on for the 2.5% funding boost, or risk losing an extra A$16 billion in funding. But that has passed without any compromise from either side.

Progress and politics

At the very least, the introduction of the bill to federal parliament is symbolically significant, particularly in light of the Commonwealth’s willingness to increase its contribution to the school resource standard of public schools.

But politics is never far away in school funding policy. Critics could argue the bill is more of a box-ticking exercise, rather than substantive reform. Indeed, the change in wording to a 20% minimum was inevitable given the specifics of the funding agreements already signed with Western Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory.

Critics might also point out national school funding policy is currently a bit of a mess, with four of the five most populous Australian states ignoring the government’s new funding deal. And they could remind us this agreement has already been delayed by a year. The previous one expired at the end of 2023 and was extended for 12 months by the Albanese government.

What happens to schools next year?

The bill does nothing to bring the holdout states any closer to signing on to the new funding agreement.

But this does not mean the federal government will withdraw its funding when school starts next year. Instead, the current funding arrangements will continue for another 12 months. This is why Clare says $16 billion in “additional investment” is on the table for public schools.

With a federal election due next year, it is even possible there will be no resolution before Australians go to the polls. This continues the fight over the schooling resource standard funding for public schools, which has has been ongoing since the so-called Gonski Review was made public in 2012.

Matthew P. Sinclair 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. There’s a new school funding bill in parliament. Will this end the funding wars? – https://theconversation.com/theres-a-new-school-funding-bill-in-parliament-will-this-end-the-funding-wars-240994

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

China has removed the last significant trade barrier it imposed on Australia, with a timetable to resume full lobster imports by the end of the year.

Anthony Albanese announced the breakthrough after a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Qiang in Vientiane, where the prime minister is attending the ASEAN-Australia summit.

Albanese said the end of the barrier would be in time for the Chinese New Year. This would be welcomed by those in the lobster trade in places including Geraldton, Western Australia, and in South Australia and Tasmania, he said.

The lobster decision means the Chinese over the last two years have removed trade barriers of nearly $20 billion slapped on Australia during the time of the former government when relations between the two countries went into a deep freeze. This followed various Australian decisions, including the call for an inquiry into the origins of COVID.

Remaining impediments are now worth less than $500 million, with two red meat establishments still affected.

The lobster trade was worth more than $700 million in 2019.

More than 3000 people are employed in the lobster industry, 2000 of them in WA.

“The reinstatement in normalised trade for all commodities is front and centre of the Government’s engagement strategy with China,” Albanese said.

“It is in the interests of both our countries to continue this path of stabilising our relationship. A resumption in trade for all Australian commodities is an important part of this process.”

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. China removes block on Australian lobster, in last big bilateral trade breakthrough – https://theconversation.com/china-removes-block-on-australian-lobster-in-last-big-bilateral-trade-breakthrough-241012

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Art Cotterell, Research Associate, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University

In recent years, a new “space race” has intensified between the United States and China. At a campaign rally last weekend, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump invoked this rivalry when declaring the US will “lead the world in space”, echoing Democratic counterpart Vice President Kamala Harris.

Meanwhile, the president of China, Xi Jinping, has said becoming “a space power is our eternal dream”.

But what is this latest “race” about, and are there pathways to common ground? History suggests these do exist. As a space governance specialist, I argue our future depends on it.

The ‘race’ to the Moon

Lunar missions have become synonymous with a “space race”. During the Cold War, the US and Soviet Union’s competition to achieve that first “one small step” on the Moon was a symbolic and strategic quest for political, technological, military and ideological dominance on Earth.

Geopolitical tensions are again moving off-Earth. The US and China are leading separate missions which aim to return humans to the Moon. One goal is to further scientific research. But space mining and economic expansionism are also driving these efforts.

This new “race” may give rise to new conflicts, especially over prime landing sites and valuable and scarce resources speculated to be located on the lunar south pole.

Mining water ice could produce oxygen, drinking water and rocket fuel – all vital for sustaining lunar exploration and beyond. The Moon may also contain rare earth metals used in everyday electronics, and a rare non-radioactive isotope, helium-3, for nuclear power.

Space mining could lead to a concerning “lunar gold rush” or trade war with nations and private actors in space. Resources mined off-Earth are predicted to be worth trillions of dollars.

The US has a longer history of demonstrated space-faring capabilities, investments and partnerships. Yet China is catching up. While the US made its first uncrewed landing on the lunar south pole this year, China has made several landings. In June this year, China’s Chang’e 6 mission returned with the first rock and soil samples from this sought-after region of the Moon.

How are nations working together on space?

Both superpowers have invited other nations to join them in realising their lunar visions. This week the Dominican Republic became the 44th signatory to the US-led NASA Artemis Accords.

Thirteen other nations are participating in the China-led International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) in collaboration with Russia. Senegal joined last month.

With no membership overlap between the two initiatives, new “space blocs” are emerging, reflective of global power dynamics.

The Artemis Accords and ILRS are currently not legally binding, but they will be influential in shaping space governance in the 21st century. This is because treaty-making in the United Nations’ Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS, established in 1959) hasn’t kept pace with the latest developments and actors in space.

Nor has space governance adequately engaged with growing ethical questions, including on space colonisation and light pollution caused by satellites.

We’re at a critical juncture. It’s important the emergence of these new “space blocs” doesn’t escalate into a contest over whose space governance approach prevails. Not only could this increase the risk of conflict on the lunar surface itself, but it could even fuel geopolitical instability and military competition on Earth.

History shows we can work together

Space has fostered cooperation even between superpower rivals during tense geopolitical times. During the Cold War, the US and Soviet Union cooperated on space governance, laws, science and technologies. This built mutual trust and eased tensions.

Within COPUOS, nations worked together to agree on what became the first of multiple foundational space law treaties, the Outer Space Treaty in 1967. It prohibits placing nuclear weapons in space and national appropriation claims over celestial bodies like the Moon.

A joint Moon landing never eventuated. But in 1975, the Apollo and Soyuz spacecrafts docked while in orbit. This marked the first international human spaceflight partnership, a historic feat made possible thanks to technical cooperation and diplomacy. COPUOS heralded this as inspiring ongoing cooperation.

More recently, NASA’s International Space Station (ISS) has been an orbiting testament to coexistence. Astronauts from the US, Russia and other partners have conducted over 3,000 experiments in microgravity.

At the recent UN Summit of the Future, video messages from the ISS and China’s Tiangong space station astronauts reaffirmed the importance of international cooperation and the peaceful uses of space.

From rhetoric to practice

Humanity has much to lose if global superpowers don’t cooperate on space governance. There is a real and growing risk of exporting and exacerbating our earthly conflicts in space. This will invariably increase tensions on Earth.

The US and China need to explore opportunities to open dialogue between the Artemis Accords and ILRS. There are some similarities in their separate planned activities, governing principles and guidelines already.

To make this happen, the US will need to revisit the 2011 Wolf Amendment, a law that restricts NASA from using its funding to cooperate with China, without congressional approval. But China has no equivalent and recently expressed its willingness to cooperate, including sharing its rock and soil samples.

Sharing scientific information may help find initial common ground before further discussions on space governance. This could even move towards agreeing on landing sites or a lunar time zone. If a rescue mission is ever necessary on the Moon, having some compatible technology through interoperability would make it much easier.

The US and China do actively engage in COPUOS, including in the working group on space resources. Yet treaty-making is often slow moving. This means greater opportunities for communication, consistency and certainty on space governance are imperative. This could even support multilateral efforts.

Perhaps a joint lunar research mission between the US and China – in the spirit of the Apollo-Soyuz docking – can still happen in the future.

In the meantime, the world needs to see space not only in terms of a “race”. It’s also an opportunity to improve international relations, benefiting our future humanity on Earth and, one day, beyond.

Art Cotterell 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. Space isn’t all about the ‘race’ – rival superpowers must work together for a better future – https://theconversation.com/space-isnt-all-about-the-race-rival-superpowers-must-work-together-for-a-better-future-240543

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

Cinnamon has been long used around the world in both sweet and savoury dishes and drinks.

But a new TikTok trend claims adding a teaspoon of cinnamon to your daily coffee (and some cocoa to make it more palatable) for one week can help you burn fat. Is there any truth to this?

Not all cinnamon is the same

There are two types of cinnamon, both of which come from grinding the bark of the cinnamomum tree and may include several naturally occurring active ingredients.

Cassia cinnamon is the most common type available in grocery stores. It has a bitter taste and contains higher levels of one of the active ingredient cinnamaldehyde, a compound that gives cinnamon its flavour and odour. About 95% of cassia cinnamon is cinnamaldehyde.

The other is Ceylon cinnamon, which tastes sweeter. It contains about 50-60% cinnamaldehyde.

Does cinnamon burn fat? What does the research say?

A review of 35 studies examined whether consuming cinnamon could affect waist circumference, which is linked to increased body fat levels. It found cinnamon doses below 1.5 grams per day (around half a teaspoon) decreased waist circumference by 1.68cm. However, consuming more than 1.5g/day did not have a significant effect.

A meta-analysis of 21 clinical trials with 1,480 total participants found cinnamon also reduced body mass index (BMI) by 0.40kg/m² and body weight by 0.92kg. But it did not change the participants’ composition of fat or lean mass.

Another umbrella review, which included all the meta-analyses, found a small effect of cinnamon on weight loss. Participants lost an average of 0.67kg and reduced their BMI by 0.45kg/m².

So overall, the weight loss we see from these high-quality studies is very small, ranging anywhere from two to six months and mostly with no change in body composition.

The studies included people with different diseases, and most were from the Middle East and/or the Indian subcontinent. So we can’t be certain we would see this effect in people with other health profiles and in other countries. They were also conducted over different lengths of time from two to six months.

The supplements were different, depending on the study. Some had the active ingredient extracted from cinnamon, others used cinnamon powder. Doses varied from 0.36g to 10g per day.

They also used the two different types of cinnamon – but none of the studies used cinnamon from the grocery store.

How could cinnamon result in small amounts of weight loss?

There are several possible mechanisms.

It appears to allow blood glucose (sugar) to enter the body’s cells more quickly. This lowers blood glucose levels and can make insulin work more effectively.

It also seems to improve the way we break down fat when we need it for energy.

Finally, it may make us feel fuller for longer by slowing down how quickly the food is released from our stomach into the small intestine.

What are the risks?

Cinnamon is generally regarded as safe when used as a spice in cooking and food.

However, in recent months the United States and Australia have issued health alerts about the level of lead and other heavy metals in some cinnamon preparations.

Lead enters as a contaminant during growth (from the environment) and in harvesting. In some cases, it has been suggested there may have been intentional contamination.

Some people can have side effects from cinnamon, including gastrointestinal pain and allergic reactions.

One of the active ingredients, coumarin, can be toxic for some people’s livers. This has prompted the European Food Authority to set a limit of 0.1mg/kg of body weight.

Cassia cinnamon contains up to 1% of coumarin, and the Ceylon variety contains much less, 0.004%. So for people weighing above 60kg, 2 teaspoons (6g) of cassia cinnamon would bring them over the safe limit.

What about the coffee and cocoa?

Many people may think coffee can also help us lose weight. However there isn’t good evidence to support this yet.

An observational study found drinking one cup of regular coffee was linked to a reduction in weight that is gained over four years, but by a very small amount: an average of 0.12kg.

Good-quality cocoa and dark chocolate have also been shown to reduce weight. But again, the weight loss was small (between 0.2 and 0.4kg) and only after consuming it for four to eight weeks.

So what does this all mean?

Using cinnamon may have a very small effect on weight, but it’s unlikely to deliver meaningful weight loss without other lifestyle adjustments.

We also need to remember these trials used products that differ from the cinnamon we buy in the shops. How we store and how long we keep cinnamon might also impact or degrade the active ingredients.

And consuming more isn’t going to provide additional benefit. In fact, it could increase your risk of side effects.

So if you enjoy the taste of cinnamon in your coffee, continue to add it, but given its strong taste, you’re likely to only want to add a little.

And no matter how much we’d like this to be true, we certainly won’t gain any fat-loss benefits by consuming cinnamon on doughnuts or in buns, due to their high kilojoule count.

If you want to lose weight, there are evidence-backed approaches that won’t spoil your morning coffee.

Evangeline Mantzioris is affiliated with Alliance for Research in Nutrition, Exercise and Activity (ARENA) at the University of South Australia. Evangeline Mantzioris has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, and has been appointed to the National Health and Medical Research Council Dietary Guideline Expert Committee.

– ref. Is TikTok right? Can adding a teaspoon of cinnamon to your coffee help you burn fat? – https://theconversation.com/is-tiktok-right-can-adding-a-teaspoon-of-cinnamon-to-your-coffee-help-you-burn-fat-240683

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark David Ryan, Professor, Film, Screen, Animation, Queensland University of Technology

It has been 50 years since the cinema release of Peter Weir’s iconic, offbeat, cult classic The Cars That Ate Paris. The film seared the image of a silver Volkswagen Beetle weaponised with deadly spikes into the national imagination. It also helped shape the tropes of Ozploitation filmmaking within the history of Australian cinema.

Main character Arthur Waldo (Terry Camilleri) and his older brother drive through idyllic countryside, filmed like a tourism commercial. But when a sign diverts them off the highway towards the fictitious town of Paris, it soon becomes clear the place survives on a “crash economy”.

Older men in the community orchestrate car crashes on the road into Paris and survivors are taken to a hospital where a psychopathic doctor experiments on them. The townsfolk trade luggage from the cars for food and clothing and wrecks are salvaged by youths who terrorise the community.

The mayor of Paris (John Meillon) pities Arthur and adopts him into his family. Arthur is eventually forced to work as the town’s sole parking inspector, gripped by a phobia of driving, having caused more than one death from behind the wheel.

A uniquely Australian genre

Cars was Australia’s first “car crash” film. These were Ozploitation films, which privileged “low” culture and sensationalist sex, violence, nudity or gore to shock viewers after the R rating was introduced in 1971.

The Mad Max franchise later popularised the car-crash trope to create what has been regarded as a uniquely Australian film genre in the 1970s and 1980s. Movies in this canon included Chain Reaction (1980), Dead End Drive-In (1986) and Road Games (1981).

Both The Cars That Ate Paris and Weir’s next feature – Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975), which would catapult him onto the global stage – marked a critical turning point for Australian cinema. They generated increased interest from distributors and film buyers in international markets and established the Australian Gothic style.

Cars is one of our most iconic Australian horror movies, but it is paradoxically a movie most Australians have never seen.

The slow burn of success

Cars was Weir’s second feature film and a far more polished effort than his first experimental horror. Homesdale (1971) is about the owners of a guesthouse performing hideous social experiments on characters already suffering trauma.

Cars was the first Australian movie to screen at France’s prestigious Cannes Film Festival. It marked a significant achievement for a local movie during the rebirth of the local movie industry, after the production of fiction movies had collapsed during the 1950s.

To market the film, Car’s producers drove the spiked Volkswagen around Cannes’ streets in an ingenious attempt to hype its screening during a packed festival schedule. The film was well received, but as critic David Stratton observed, it proved just too different from anything Australian filmmakers had made before, and indeed to anything being made anywhere.

The film failed to secure a distributor or reach large audiences at home or abroad – though it was released several years later in North America as The Cars That Eat People.

A cult following

A key reason for the movie’s slow reception was also why it became a cult classic: it defies filmic categories. It was originally promoted as a horror movie before being marketed as an art film. This was partly because the movie’s tone shifts jarringly from parody and black comedy to social commentary, before settling on all-out horror.

The story is mostly a dark comment on authority, normality and car culture, which descends into schlock violence in the final act. After the older patriarchy punishes youths for terrorising the streets, a gang of monstrous cars – including the iconic porcupine VW beetle – idle on a darkened hill to the sound of animal noises. The killer cars attack the town, leading to murder, mayhem and a violent battle.

Authur, drawn into the fight, kills one of the youths by repeatedly reversing over him. But rather than express shock or regret, he delights at being cured of his phobia. Arthur drives out of town joyously as survivors of the carnage flee the burning town.

Some things don’t change

The movie’s longevity comes from how it tackles social issues at the heart of the national character. Onscreen we see a dark critique of our obsession with cars and the “hoon culture” that results in tragic speeding or drink-driving-related deaths every year.

The movie also examines tensions between generations. The older, conservative generation arranges car crashes before hypocritically attending church services and preaching justice. The younger hoons bristle at being controlled in a town where they see no future.

One of the movie’s lasting thematic contributions to Ozploitation film is Weir’s depiction of the economic fragility and inopportunity of rural economies that lead to absurdly immoral activities.

More recently, the 2010 film The Clinic adapted this premise by portraying the small town of Montgomery as reliant on an illegal international adoption ring. Townsfolk steal babies and force their mothers to fight to the death in an abandoned abattoir while affluent foreign couples watch on monitors to determine which baby they will adopt.

The Clinic is a bleak, absurd example. But it shows how The Cars That Ate Paris continues to influence Australian cinema in profound and surprising ways.

Mark David Ryan has received funding from the Australian Film Institute Research Collection (AFIRC) fellowship and is a co-founding member of the Streaming Industries and Genres Network (SIGN).

– ref. Peter Weir’s The Cars That Ate Paris – a driving force in Ozploitation filmmaking – https://theconversation.com/peter-weirs-the-cars-that-ate-paris-a-driving-force-in-ozploitation-filmmaking-237233