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

This election is already shaping up as very much about energy. But notably, ambitions for and debate about combatting climate change have receded in recent times.

Peter Dutton has his proposal for an east coast gas reservation scheme at the centre of his campaign. Then of course there is that much-contested nuclear policy. But the government has declined to produce a 2035 emissions reduction target before polling day and, apart from its commitment to net zero by 2050, the Coalition won’t talk targets in opposition.

John Connor, CEO of the Carbon Marketing Institute, says “probably not since 2004 has climate been so much in the shadows, at least at this stage”. It’s a matter of the “energy wars” rather than the “climate wars” so far, he says.

The climate change issue was potent in 2022, especially in helping the “teal” candidates get elected. It probably is still cutting through in their sort of seats. And climate change demonstrators are targeting election events.

But more generally, things have changed.

The Freshwater poll in the Australian Financial Review on Monday asked people to list three issues of top concern for them.

Unsurprisingly, cost of living was a mile ahead of anything else, at 74%. Then came housing (37%), healthcare (27%), economy (26%), crime (25%) and tax (19%). Climate change followed seventh, with 18%, ahead of immigration (15%) and defence (13%).

When asked who would be best to respond to concern about climate change, Labor held a solid lead, 35% to the 22% who nominated the Coalition, but 43% said neither or were unsure.

The Morgan poll early this year compared issues of most importance to people in the September quarter of 2024 and the June quarter of 2022. Just under a third nominated global warming and climate change in 2022 (32%); by 2024 this was down to less than a quarter (23%).

The cost-of-living crisis is the most obvious reason why climate change has faded in many voters’ minds. That has pushed almost everything else aside, as families struggle with financial practicalities.

(The Carbon Market Institute says, however, that polling it commissioned, to be released later this week does show the public understand the link between climate change and the cost of living, even if the politicians are reluctant to go there just now. 62% of respondents agreed impacts of climate change – such as more frequent and severe bushfires and flooding – worsen the cost of living through insurance cost increases and grocery prices, with just 13% disagreeing.)

Now we are deeply into the transition to a clean economy the inevitable downsides are more to the fore. However necessary, they are painful, including high power bills (that have had to be subsidised by the government) and local arguments about transmission lines and wind farms blighting parts of the landscape.

After it was elected Labor highlighted the importance of climate change by legislating its 2030 43% emissions reduction target. But it has become reticent when asked to talk about the 2035 target for Australia.

That was initially due to be submitted under the Paris agreement by February, but now it won’t be announced until closer to the September deadline. Nor will the Climate Change Authority, headed by former NSW Liberal treasurer Matt Kean, produce its recommendation to the government before the election. The government’s explanation for its delay is that it can’t act before the the authority’s recommendation.

Dutton remains committed to the Paris agreement and the zero emissions by 2050 target. But he flagged at the weekend that he would not proceed with Australia’s bid to host COP31 in 2026.

The opposition says it would keep the safeguards mechanism that regulates emissions from large emitters, but we don’t know what changes it would make to it.

Nor do we know what would happen under a Dutton government to the various framework institutions around climate change policy. But Kean and his authority are certainly in the gun sights. Opposition finance spokeswoman Jane Hume has said, “I don’t think that we could possibly maintain a Climate Change Authority that has been so badly politicised”.

Peter Dutton wouldn’t live in The Lodge (though it was good enough for Robert Menzies)

What is it about some modern conservative leaders and The Lodge?

Peter Dutton on Monday declared that, if he became PM, he would live at Kirribilli House, not The Lodge.

“We love Sydney, we love the harbour, it’s a great city, and so yes. You’ve got the choice between Kirribilli or living in Canberra. I think I’ll take Sydney any day over living in Canberra,” he said.

The opposition leader’s disdain for Canberra was obvious. Then again, perhaps when you’re planning to get rid of tens of thousands of Canberra-based public servants, Kirilly Dutton might find a browse around the Manuka shops potentially awkward.

From the way he extolled the virtues of Sydney, it doesn’t seem that Dutton wishes he could stay in his home city of Brisbane, prevented from doing so only by the lack of an official residence there.

As prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull didn’t just stay living in Sydney – he chose to remain in his own house. It was certainly more glam than The Lodge.

Yet The Lodge was good enough for the leader to whom the Liberals all pay homage. Robert Menzies and his family lived there quite happily for a very long time. Menzies’ daughter Heather Henderson, in her book A Smile for My Parents, tells of life in the bush capital, when her mother kept a shanghai in the wisteria to take potshots at the currawongs.

They were simpler days. The security-conscious Dutton would be appalled at the anecdote about the intruder who appeared one night in the Lodge kitchen. Pattie Menzies, who happened to be carving the roast for dinner at the time, walked into the kitchen, armed with the knife. The intruder fled. There was no official inquiry – just a reprimand for the maid for not snibbing the door.

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

– ref. Election diary: Energy is in the foreground – but climate change is ‘in the shadows’ – https://theconversation.com/election-diary-energy-is-in-the-foreground-but-climate-change-is-in-the-shadows-253115

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Ryan, Lecturer in Criminology, Deakin University

When a jury in the New South Wales Supreme Court found Kristian White guilty of manslaughter, it was the first verdict of its kind in recent Australian history.

The verdict is significant because it offered a rare opportunity for the community to have a prominent say in what should and shouldn’t be regarded as reasonable use of force by police.

The sentence of a two-year community-based order means White won’t spend any time behind bars – a judgement that surprised some legal scholars.

Clare Nowland, aged 95, died after she was tasered by White, a police officer, in a nursing home in 2023. Nowland had approached White in distress while holding a steak knife. She fell after being tasered and died a week later in hospital.

In finding White guilty, the jury drew an important line in the sand around the appropriate use of tasers, and use of force more generally, by police in Australia.

It follows an emerging international trend, suggesting community expectations around police use of force are shifting. Recent convictions of Derek Chauvin in the United States and Benjamin Monk in the United Kingdom demonstrate this.

We don’t know much about what the public thinks about this issue. While this case is highly specific, it’s the first major window into what everyday people think police should and shouldn’t be able to do in the line of duty.

Excessive force: what are the rules?

Excessive use of force by police is notoriously difficult to define.

“Situational use of force” models, such as that used in the NSW Police, offer little insight, for officers or juries, about what level of force is appropriate for what level of resistance.

Officers in NSW are reminded that “the decision to apply force, including use of a Taser, is an individual one for which every officer will be held accountable”.

In this model, any officer who carries an array of weapons (as White did on that fateful evening) must be an expert in how to use those weapons proportionately to the threat they face.

But what tangible guidance do they have about what constitutes excessive force? Given persistent concerns among police scholars about deficiencies in training and other policy documents, it can be hard to discern what is reasonable or excessive force legally.

Every critical incident carries specific and different dynamics, and officers cannot realistically be trained for every possible scenario. Much depends on their individual decision-making.

So can we reach a definition?

How then can we find a universal way to recognise “excessive force”?

One of the better definitions of such force comes from North American police ethics scholar Carl Klockars, who suggested in 1996 excessive force was “any force that a police officer of the highest skill might find a way to avoid”.

This definition encourages us to think (and talk) more about what a police officer of the highest skill looks like. This is important in an era when ideas about what police can and should do are strongly shaped by Hollywood fantasies.

In the tragic set of circumstances that unfolded in the Cooma aged care home, we can ask ourselves: what might an officer of the highest skill have done?

Notably, a recently retired senior officer answered this question in the media the day after the events unfolded. He said “they could have thrown a blanket over her”.

Evidently, the jury agreed there were other options available that didn’t involve the use of a taser.

Modern policing must reckon with what a highly skilled officer looks like, especially as the profession adopts so-called “less lethal” force technologies such as tasers. What characteristics do we really want in a police officer’s “skills armoury”? Do we want a good aim, a strong physical presence, high levels of empathy or perhaps ethical decision-making? What should be prioritised?

The Nowland case has asked these questions. The jury’s verdict set the stage for a sentence that established a higher standard for policing vulnerable people, which made it surprising that a non-custodial sentence was ultimately imposed.

What does the public think?

The sentencing outcome will spur more debate and has disappointed Nowland’s family.

Justice Ian Harrison found there were mitigating factors, such as White’s claim he felt “justified” in his actions. As a police officer, this likely carried significant weight to reduce moral culpability and the need for “punishment”.

Justice Harrison also found White’s actions fell at the lower end of objective seriousness for manslaughter.

But what about ensuring the sentence reflects community ideals about policing standards, as reflected in the guilty verdict?

Many may now wonder whether there is any kind of police misuse of a taser that could be deemed worthy of the ultimate penalty of imprisonment.

But the case nevertheless remains a watershed moment. It provides an insight into what the public expects of police, and how strongly courts choose to reinforce those expectations.

Emma Ryan 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. How should police officers use force? The Kristian White case is an insight into what the community thinks – https://theconversation.com/how-should-police-officers-use-force-the-kristian-white-case-is-an-insight-into-what-the-community-thinks-245151

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vincent Ho, Associate Professor and Clinical Academic Gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University

People are being asked to check the use-by dates of bagged salad products they’ve purchased recently after a number of Australian supermarkets issued recalls due to potential bacterial contamination.

Recalls issued over the past week have affected bagged and pre-packaged salad products sold at supermarkets around the country including Coles, Woolworths, Aldi and IGA.

The potential contaminant is shiga-toxin-producing E. coli or STEC. But so far, no cases of illness have been reported.

So what is this bacterium and how could it affect the salad leaves in your dinner or lunch?

E.Coli and STEC

Escherichia coli (E. coli) is a bacterium that normally lives in the intestines of healthy people and animals. Fortunately most strains of E. coli are harmless and don’t cause symptoms.

But there are certain strains that can lead to symptoms such as abdominal cramping, diarrhoea, fever and vomiting. In some cases a severe infection can even result in kidney failure.

STEC is one strain that can cause gastrointestinal symptoms. It’s called “shiga toxin-producing” because the toxin from this strain of E. coli is very similar to that produced by the Shigella bacterium.

Shigella causes shigellosis, a gastrointestinal infection which can involve similar symptoms to STEC. Both can cause abdominal cramping, bloody diarrhoea, fever and vomiting.

Most people recover within ten days of the onset of symptoms. People suffering from STEC infection should stay hydrated and seek medical care if symptoms are serious or don’t resolve.

How common is it?

One estimate suggests at least 2.8 million STEC infections occur globally every year.

In general STEC infections in Australia are very rare with less than four people per million affected annually.

The diagnosis of STEC infection is made by testing a sample of a person’s stool for the presence of the bacterium.

Children under five, adults aged over 65 and people with weakened immune systems are at an increased risk of STEC infection and of getting very sick with it.

Why are bagged salads often a culprit?

The current recalls are not the first time bagged salads have been subject to food safety issues in Australia or elsewhere. These products can be vulnerable to bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella.

Contamination in bagged salads can occur at various stages, from farm to table. It can begin early during growing when leafy greens can be exposed to bacteria from contaminated water, soil or manure.

During harvesting, handling and processing, cross-contamination can happen if the equipment or surfaces are not properly disinfected. Finally, packaging can contribute to contamination if it comes into contact with contaminated surfaces or hands.

The current outbreak

Health authorities sometimes test for the presence of food-borne bacteria by culturing bacteria from packaged foods in the lab as part of a proactive public health surveillance program.

If they identify the presence of concerning food-borne bacteria they will work with retailers to undertake recalls of that food product as a precaution to protect public health.

To date there have been no cases of illness linked to the current recalls. The presence of STEC doesn’t necessarily mean people will get sick from eating the salad product, but this is an early detection aimed to prevent food-borne illness.

Members of the public have been urged not to consume any of the recalled products, and to throw them away or return them to where they bought them for a refund. Anyone who has consumed the products and has health concerns should seek medical advice.

Washed and ready to eat?

Many bagged salad products come with a selling point along the lines of “washed and ready to eat”. Given the current recalls, you might ask whether it really is safe to eat pre-packaged salads without giving the leaves a wash yourself.

Unfortunately, research shows using tap water to wash bagged leafy salads isn’t effective in removing bacteria. But washing your raw vegetables is still helpful in getting rid of any clinging dirt that may contain clumps of bacteria.

Fortunately the risk of getting sick from eating bagged lettuce is generally very low. It’s also important to wash your hands before handling food, check the expiry dates of bagged salads and pay attention to health alerts.

Vincent Ho 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. Why have supermarkets around Australia recalled bagged salad products? A gastroenterologist explains – https://theconversation.com/why-have-supermarkets-around-australia-recalled-bagged-salad-products-a-gastroenterologist-explains-253427

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wesley Morgan, Research Associate, Institute for Climate Risk and Response, UNSW Sydney

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton would withdraw Australia’s bid to co-host next year’s global climate summit if the Coalition wins the federal election.

Australia has lobbied hard for the right to host the talks, known as COP31, in conjunction with Pacific nations. Australia has emerged as a leading contender, and has the backing of most countries in its United Nations grouping, including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Canada and New Zealand.

However, Dutton on Sunday described the idea of hosting the UN climate conference as “not something we are supporting — it is madness”. He also falsely claimed it would cost Australia “tens of billions” of dollars to host the event.

Australia would reap big benefits by hosting the high-profile global talks. It would likely attract considerable investment in renewables and clean energy export industries, and strengthen Australia’s national security during a time of increasing geo-strategic competition in the Pacific. To pull out now would be a costly move.

Decison deferred until June

The decision on who will host COP31 in 2026 was expected at last year’s summit in Azerbaijan. But it was deferred until June this year – after Australia’s next federal election.

Hosting rights are shared between five UN country groupings on a rotational basis. The final decision is made by consensus.

Australia’s bid to host with Pacific nations has considerable support. But Turkey, the only other country in the running to host COP31, has so far resisted lobbying efforts to persuade it to drop out.

An economic boost for Australia

Hosting the UN climate talks is a massive economic opportunity for Australia.

COP31 would be one of the biggest diplomatic summits Australia has ever hosted. Tens of thousands of people could be expected for a fortnight of negotiations, with satellite events held across the nation and the Pacific.

Adelaide is in the box seat to play host. The South Australian government estimated hosting the UN talks could generate more than A$500 million for the state. But economic benefits would be much wider, and longer-lasting, than tourism receipts from those attending. The talks are a chance to attract investment for Australia’s energy transition and for clean energy industries of the future, including critical minerals and green iron.

The UK government’s assessment of the value of hosting the UN climate summit in Glasgow in 2021 found the net economic benefit was double that spent – around A$1 billion. That includes benefits from trade deals and foreign investment. With abundant critical minerals, and excellent wind and solar resources, Australia has even more to gain.

Hosting the world’s largest climate summit is a chance to attract the investment needed to replace ageing and unreliable coal-fired power stations. According to the Clean Energy Investor Group, which represents the capital behind large-scale renewables, more than 70% of the investment in clean energy comes from international sources.

Dutton says he plans to replace coal with nuclear power (and to rely on gas until nuclear plants are built decades from now). The Coalition’s nuclear plan would require hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer support.

Securing our place in the Pacific

Working with Pacific nations to address climate change is key to Australian national security.

Australia aims to be the security partner of choice for Pacific island countries. And Pacific island countries are crystal clear: climate change is their “single greatest threat”.

In 2022, Solomon Islands signed a security deal with China, which raised the prospect of a potential Chinese naval base in Australia’s maritime approaches. Foreign Minister Penny Wong – who was in opposition at the time – described it as the worst foreign policy blunder in the Pacific since the end of WWII.

The Albanese government has looked to cement Australia’s place in the Pacific by working with island nations to address climate change. In July 2022, Albanese joined Pacific leaders to declare a Pacific climate emergency and launched bid to co-host a UN climate summit with Pacific nations. In 2023, Australia signed a climate migration deal with Tuvalu that also prevents Tuvalu from pursuing a security deal with China.

Pacific leaders have welcomed Australia’s plans to host the UN climate talks and have agreed to work together to advocate for the joint bid. Walking away now could do real damage to Australian strategy in the region.

Embracing our clean energy future

Hosting COP31 is a chance to set up Australia’s economy of tomorrow, signalling the shift from fossil fuel heavyweight to clean energy superpower.

Australia is leading the clean energy transition. This is a story to tell the world. One in three households have rooftop solar. Already 40% of the main national power grid is powered by wind, solar and storage. We are on track for 80% renewables by 2030.

South Australia is moving even faster, set for 100% clean electricity by 2027. Hosting COP31 in the state is also a chance to showcase clean energy export industries, especially plans to produce green iron and green steel at the Whyalla steelworks.

Australia is the world’s largest exporter of raw iron ore, but is well positioned to export more-valuable, and lower-polluting, green iron to major economies in our region. The potential export value of green iron is estimated to be $295 billion a year, or three times the current value of iron ore exports.

More broadly, our clean energy exports – including green metals, green fertilisers and green fuels – could be worth six to eight times more than our fossil fuel exports.

Walking away from the chance to host the world and showcase our clean energy future would be costly indeed.

Wesley Morgan is a fellow with the Climate Council of Australia

– ref. Hosting the UN climate summit is far from ‘madness’ – here’s how Australia stands to benefit – https://theconversation.com/hosting-the-un-climate-summit-is-far-from-madness-heres-how-australia-stands-to-benefit-253423

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wesley Morgan, Research Associate, Institute for Climate Risk and Response, UNSW Sydney

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton would withdraw Australia’s bid to co-host next year’s global climate summit if the Coalition wins the federal election.

Australia has lobbied hard for the right to host the talks, known as COP31, in conjunction with Pacific nations. Australia has emerged as a leading contender, and has the backing of most countries in its United Nations grouping, including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Canada and New Zealand.

However, Dutton on Sunday described the idea of hosting the UN climate conference as “not something we are supporting — it is madness”. He also falsely claimed it would cost Australia “tens of billions” of dollars to host the event.

Australia would reap big benefits by hosting the high-profile global talks. It would likely attract considerable investment in renewables and clean energy export industries, and strengthen Australia’s national security during a time of increasing geo-strategic competition in the Pacific. To pull out now would be a costly move.

Decison deferred until June

The decision on who will host COP31 in 2026 was expected at last year’s summit in Azerbaijan. But it was deferred until June this year – after Australia’s next federal election.

Hosting rights are shared between five UN country groupings on a rotational basis. The final decision is made by consensus.

Australia’s bid to host with Pacific nations has considerable support. But Turkey, the only other country in the running to host COP31, has so far resisted lobbying efforts to persuade it to drop out.

An economic boost for Australia

Hosting the UN climate talks is a massive economic opportunity for Australia.

COP31 would be one of the biggest diplomatic summits Australia has ever hosted. Tens of thousands of people could be expected for a fortnight of negotiations, with satellite events held across the nation and the Pacific.

Adelaide is in the box seat to play host. The South Australian government estimated hosting the UN talks could generate more than A$500 million for the state. But economic benefits would be much wider, and longer-lasting, than tourism receipts from those attending. The talks are a chance to attract investment for Australia’s energy transition and for clean energy industries of the future, including critical minerals and green iron.

The UK government’s assessment of the value of hosting the UN climate summit in Glasgow in 2021 found the net economic benefit was double that spent – around A$1 billion. That includes benefits from trade deals and foreign investment. With abundant critical minerals, and excellent wind and solar resources, Australia has even more to gain.

Hosting the world’s largest climate summit is a chance to attract the investment needed to replace ageing and unreliable coal-fired power stations. According to the Clean Energy Investor Group, which represents the capital behind large-scale renewables, more than 70% of the investment in clean energy comes from international sources.

Dutton says he plans to replace coal with nuclear power (and to rely on gas until nuclear plants are built decades from now). The Coalition’s nuclear plan would require hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer support.

Securing our place in the Pacific

Working with Pacific nations to address climate change is key to Australian national security.

Australia aims to be the security partner of choice for Pacific island countries. And Pacific island countries are crystal clear: climate change is their “single greatest threat”.

In 2022, Solomon Islands signed a security deal with China, which raised the prospect of a potential Chinese naval base in Australia’s maritime approaches. Foreign Minister Penny Wong – who was in opposition at the time – described it as the worst foreign policy blunder in the Pacific since the end of WWII.

The Albanese government has looked to cement Australia’s place in the Pacific by working with island nations to address climate change. In July 2022, Albanese joined Pacific leaders to declare a Pacific climate emergency and launched bid to co-host a UN climate summit with Pacific nations. In 2023, Australia signed a climate migration deal with Tuvalu that also prevents Tuvalu from pursuing a security deal with China.

Pacific leaders have welcomed Australia’s plans to host the UN climate talks and have agreed to work together to advocate for the joint bid. Walking away now could do real damage to Australian strategy in the region.

Embracing our clean energy future

Hosting COP31 is a chance to set up Australia’s economy of tomorrow, signalling the shift from fossil fuel heavyweight to clean energy superpower.

Australia is leading the clean energy transition. This is a story to tell the world. One in three households have rooftop solar. Already 40% of the main national power grid is powered by wind, solar and storage. We are on track for 80% renewables by 2030.

South Australia is moving even faster, set for 100% clean electricity by 2027. Hosting COP31 in the state is also a chance to showcase clean energy export industries, especially plans to produce green iron and green steel at the Whyalla steelworks.

Australia is the world’s largest exporter of raw iron ore, but is well positioned to export more-valuable, and lower-polluting, green iron to major economies in our region. The potential export value of green iron is estimated to be $295 billion a year, or three times the current value of iron ore exports.

More broadly, our clean energy exports – including green metals, green fertilisers and green fuels – could be worth six to eight times more than our fossil fuel exports.

Walking away from the chance to host the world and showcase our clean energy future would be costly indeed.

Wesley Morgan is a fellow with the Climate Council of Australia

– ref. Dutton says it would cost too much to host UN climate summit, but pulling out would cost Australia even more – https://theconversation.com/dutton-says-it-would-cost-too-much-to-host-un-climate-summit-but-pulling-out-would-cost-australia-even-more-253423

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Nicole Driessen, Postdoctoral Researcher in Radio Astronomy, University of Sydney

On Thursday 27 March, the European Space Agency (ESA) sent its last messages to the Gaia Spacecraft. They told Gaia to shut down its communication systems and central computer and said goodbye to this amazing space telescope.

Gaia has been the most successful ESA space mission ever, so why did they turn Gaia off? What did Gaia achieve? And perhaps most importantly, why was it my favourite space telescope?

Running on empty

Gaia was retired for a simple reason: after more than 11 years in space, it ran out of the cold gas propellant it needed to keep scanning the sky.

The telescope did its last observation on 15 January 2025. The ESA team then performed testing for a few weeks, before telling Gaia to leave its home at a point in space called L2 and start orbiting the Sun away from Earth.

L2 is one of five “Lagrangian points” around Earth and the Sun where gravitational conditions make for a nice, stable orbit. L2 is located 1.5 million kilometres from Earth on the “dark side”, opposite the Sun.

L2 is a highly prized location because it’s a stable spot to orbit, it’s close enough to Earth for easy communication, and spacecraft can use the Sun behind them for solar power while looking away from the Sun out into space.

It’s also too far away from Earth to send anyone on a repair mission, so once your spacecraft gets there it’s on its own.

Keeping L2 clear

L2 currently hosts the James Webb Space Telescope (operated by the USA, Europe and Canada), the European Euclid mission, the Chinese Chang’e 6 orbiter and the joint Russian-German Spektr-RG observatory. Since L2 is such a key location for space missions, it’s essential to keep it clear of debris and retired spacecraft.

Gaia used its thrusters for the last time to push itself away from L2, and is now drifting around the Sun in a “retirement orbit” where it won’t get in anybody’s way.

As part of the retirement process, the Gaia team wrote farewell messages into the craft’s software and sent it the names of around 1,500 people who worked on Gaia over the years.

What is Gaia?

Gaia looks a bit like a spinning top hat in space. Its main mission was to produce a detailed, three-dimensional map of our galaxy, the Milky Way.

To do this, it measured the precise positions and motions of 1.46 billion objects in space. Gaia also measured brightnesses and variability and those data were used to provide temperatures, gravitational parameters, stellar types and more for millions of stars. One of the key pieces of information Gaia provided was the distance to millions of stars.

A cosmic measuring tape

I’m a radio astronomer, which means I use radio telescopes here on Earth to explore the Universe. Radio light is the longest wavelength of light, invisible to human eyes, and I use it to investigate magnetic stars.

But even though I’m a radio astronomer and Gaia was an optical telescope, looking at the same wavelengths of light our eyes can see, I use Gaia data almost every single day.

I used it today to find out how far away, how bright, and how fast a star was. Before Gaia, I would probably never have known how far away that star was.

This is essential for figuring out how bright the stars I study really are, which helps me understand the physics of what’s happening in and around them.

A huge success

Gaia has contributed to thousands of articles in astronomy journals. Papers released by the Gaia collaboration have been cited well over 20,000 times in total.

Gaia has produced too many science results to share here. To take just one example, Gaia improved our understanding of the structure of our own galaxy by showing that it has multiple spiral arms that are less sharply defined than we previously thought.

Not really the end for Gaia

It’s difficult to express how revolutionary Gaia has been for astronomy, but we can let the numbers speak for themselves. Around five astronomy journal articles are published every day that use Gaia data, making Gaia the most successful ESA mission ever. And that won’t come to a complete stop when Gaia retires.

The Gaia collaboration has published three data releases so far. This is where the collaboration performs the processing and checks on the data, adds some important analysis and releases all of that in one big hit.

And luckily, there are two more big data releases with even more information to come. The fourth data release is expected in mid to late 2026. The fifth and final data release, containing all of the Gaia data from the whole mission, will come out sometime in the 2030s.

This article is my own small tribute to a telescope that changed astronomy as we know it. So I will end by saying a huge thank you to everyone who has ever worked on this amazing space mission, whether it was engineering and operations, turning the data into the amazing resource it is, or any of the other many jobs that make a mission successful. And thank you to those who continue to work on the data as we speak.

Finally, thank you to my favourite space telescope. Goodbye, Gaia, I’ll miss you.

Laura Nicole Driessen is an ambassador for the Orbit Centre of Imagination at the Rise and Shine Kindergarten, in Sydney’s Inner West.

– ref. The best space telescope you never heard of just shut down – https://theconversation.com/the-best-space-telescope-you-never-heard-of-just-shut-down-253343

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan Hicks, Lecturer & Movement Scientist / PhD Sports Biomechanics, Flinders University

Every now and then an athlete comes along who makes people wonder, “how are they so fast?”

Let me introduce you to Gout Gout.

Gout is a 17-year-old sprint sensation from Australia, whose blistering 100m and 200m times have drawn comparison to none other than Jamaican sprint legend Usain Bolt.

While he was edged out over 200 metres in Melbourne last weekend by 21-year-old Lachlan Kennedy – recent 60-metre world indoor silver medallist who is a rising sprinter poised to break the ten-second barrier for 100 metres – Gout’s performances continue to signal a bright future on the track.

In a seven-month period since last August, Gout has:

• won silver in the 200m at the World Junior Championships (20.60 seconds, -0.7 metres/second wind)
• broken Peter Norman’s long-standing Australian 200m record (20.04 seconds, +1.5m/s)
• two weeks ago in Brisbane, smashed through the magical 20-second barrier for the 200m, recording a world-leading 19.98 seconds (+3.6m/s), albeit wind-aided (anything greater than 2.0 metres/second is considered wind-aided).

But what makes Gout so fast?

Is it his explosive start, long stride, top speed or smooth technique?

The answer, as with all athletic outliers, is likely a combination of several unique attributes.

Let’s dive into the science.

The science of sprinting

Sprinting is an ongoing battle of force and mass.

Gravity is pulling the athlete’s body mass down. Meanwhile, the athlete must apply muscular force into the track to keep the body upright.

Research suggests the world’s fastest sprinters generate the highest ground reaction force relative to their body mass and apply it in the shortest period, in the right direction (more horizontally in acceleration and more vertically at top speed).

At 5’11” (180cm) and 66kg, Gout does not display the muscular physiques of past champion sprinters including Asafa Powell (Jamaica), Justin Gatlin (the USA), or Australia’s own Matt Shirvington. Yet his performances suggest is he redefining the archetype of elite sprinting.

For anyone who has run at school, you know the difficulty of holding your top speed for the duration of a 200-metre race.

But Gout defies logic. His speed endurance (maintaining speed) sets him apart from nearly all athletes.

And not just compared to his age group, although he currently sits second on the all-time under-18 200-metre list behind US runner Erriyon Knighton.

Gout’s speed endurance is up there with the best in 200-metre history: Bolt, Michael Johnson or Noah Lyles. Each of them has won multiple Olympic medals.

The fastest official 100-200 metre segment (the final 100 metres of the race) ever run in a 200-metre event is 9.16 seconds by American Lyles, on his way to winning the 2022 world athletics championships in Oregon (19.31 seconds overall).

In Gout’s recent performance in Brisbane, he completed this segment of the race in 9.31 seconds. Bolt and Johnson’s best 100-200 metre segment is 9.27 and 9.20 seconds respectively.

This statistic puts Gout in elite company.

The magic of Gout

Closer analysis of Gout’s performance highlights some sprinting anomalies.

He covers the first 100m of the race in 10.67 seconds, which is quite slow relative to his finishing time of 19.98.

For comparison, when Bolt broke the 200-metre world record in 2009 (19.19 seconds), he ran 9.92 seconds on the curve (and 9.27 seconds on the straight).

But once Gout enters the straight, his magic is on full display.

Gout has an average step length of 2.60 metres. Bolt’s average step length in his 100-metre world record performance was 2.45m, with Lyles displaying a similar result, 2.35m, in his 100-metre win in Paris.

This allows Gout to take between 3.75-4 steps for each ten-metre segment, which he covers at an average speed of 10.8m/s (or 38.8km/h). Like Bolt, his step length is a huge advantage over his competitors.

However, there is a trade-off with step length and step frequency.

Gout’s longer-than-average step length reduces his average step frequency to 4.15Hz (steps per second), much lower than Bolt who averaged 4.47Hz when at his best.

However, research highlights elite sprinters are reliant on either step length or frequency, and athletes should train to their strengths, rather than fixing their weaknesses.

So this may not be an area of concern for the teenager.

Gout also displays a unique coordination pattern in how he interacts with the ground: the way he strikes the track with his feet almost makes it look like he has springs in his spikes.

Well, we all do in a sense.

Elastic energy is stored and released in our Achilles tendon which acts as a muscle power amplifier during running.

Longer Achilles tendon length and stiffness play a huge role in sprint efficiency. This allows athletes to move at faster speeds for longer periods at a reduced energy cost, and may be another one’s of Gout advantages over his contemporaries.

A bright future

At 17, Gout’s performances are out of this world.

The way he generates and maintains speed challenges some conventional paradigms in sprinting – namely that raw power and muscle mass are the primary determinants of speed.

With most elite sprinters peaking in their mid-20s, Gout’s performances at this stage of his career are even more noteworthy.

His success likely highlights the role of his unique coordination patterns, biomechanics, technical efficiency, hard work and great coaching all bundled together.

Gout has already rewritten Australian sprinting history. Next up, he’s taking on the world.

Just don’t blink – he’s that fast, you might miss him.

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. Step length, a devastating finish and ‘springs in his spikes’: the science behind Gout Gout’s speed – https://theconversation.com/step-length-a-devastating-finish-and-springs-in-his-spikes-the-science-behind-gout-gouts-speed-252629

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sugumar Mariappanadar, Senior Academic Researcher – Human Resource Management and Management, Australian Catholic University

For young people in the early stages of their career, the idea of waiting 40 years or more to retire might feel like a marathon. For those already feeling burnt out, it can be an excruciating thought.

So – why not take a break or two somewhere along the way?

The concept of “micro-retirement” is having a moment. While the term appears to have been first coined in 2007, it’s recently found new popularity on social media.

The idea is that retirement doesn’t have to be a fixed, clearly defined period at the end of your working life. Rather, it’s possible to restore your human energy and levels of wellbeing by dipping in and out of it, with small or large career breaks.

Many onlookers have pointed out that the underlying concept is not a new idea. Sabbaticals and other kinds of career breaks have been a feature of the workforce for a long time.

However, the trend gripping some of the Gen Z workforce on social media appears to be slightly different. And while it’s trying to solve some legitimate problems, it could also carry some unique risks.

Taking a break

The notion that rest is crucial – that humans shouldn’t just work themselves into the ground – is very old indeed.

Major religions around the world have long preached the importance of rest and restoration for human beings to survive the hardship of paid work.

Career breaks, however, are a bit different from the ordinary rest opportunities we get such as weekends, public holidays and annual leave. There are a few different types.

The first is the full-time career break, such as a sabbatical. This is where an employee, in consultation with their employer, hits pause for an extended period.

This might be to enjoy travel, develop new hobbies or complete training necessary for career progression. However, the company typically continues to pay a salary (or a percentage of it) during the mutually agreed period.

In Australia, many employees are entitled to paid long service leave after serving between seven and 10 years with the same employer, depending on which state or territory they’re in.

Taking a full-time job part-time, can also constitute a kind of career break for some. This is where an employee reduces their working hours or days and earns reduced pay compared to full-time work.

Other types of long-term leave can include parental leave and leave for medical assistance.

In Belgium, a government scheme allows employees to take a career break of up to a year, during which they receive a paid allowance from the government. Previous research into the scheme showed 76% of employees taking full-time career breaks from both public and private sectors were aged between 25 and 49.

Micro-retirement might be different

When Gen Z is talking about micro-retirement, they often aren’t talking about exactly the same thing as a paid, mutually agreed sabbatical.

For many, micro-retirement is a voluntary choice to terminate their employment and support their living through personal savings or government support.

But they are trying to solve similar problems: the health and wellbeing risks associated with pushing too hard – or for too long – at work.

Research by the World Health Organization found the number of deaths from heart disease and stroke that could be attributed to long working hours increased by 29% between 2000 and 2016.

Read more:
What’s the difference between burnout and depression?

The energy ceiling

My own previous research has examined the “ceiling effect” of human energy. This is when an employee’s energy depletion reaches a tipping point due to their work and begins to affect their wellbeing.

When employees reach the tipping point, or ceiling effect at work, they often use coffee and alcohol as a coping mechanism. This has long-term negative impacts on health.

Sleep also becomes a problem, which can lead to “presenteeism” – where employees show up physically to work but function poorly. This can cost businesses in lost employee productivity.

Flexible or hybrid work can be a double-edged sword that leads to intrusion on home life.

Like any extended break, micro-retirement is a way to replenish or restore the energy depleted. Research into Belgium’s career break scheme found it did improve individual physical and mental health – but it’s important to remember this scheme paid an allowance.

What are the risks?

Micro-retirement might be a new label. But drawing parallels from research into career breaks, there is evidence of so-called “scarring” effects.

This is where the future wages of an individual attempting to re-enter the job market after a career break may be lower than if they had an uninterrupted career.

This can impact physical and mental health, and lead to lower income levels in retirement.

Businesses may not be too inclined to develop policies to implement paid career breaks such as sabbaticals. That may lead more young people to take their own unpaid breaks.

Outside of taking extended breaks, there’s a broader discussion to be had about increasing productivity by redesigning the way we work every day with sustainability and flexibility in mind.

It’s crucial there are ways for employees to disengage from work on a daily basis to restore and replenish their energy.

In addition to his academic post at Australian Catholic University, Sugumar Mariappanadar is a senior sustainability advisor at InSync Australia, where he has advised businesses on environmental, social and governance (ESG) sustainability business strategy.

– ref. Some Gen Zs are taking a ‘micro-retirement’. It’s one way to address burnout – but it comes with risks – https://theconversation.com/some-gen-zs-are-taking-a-micro-retirement-its-one-way-to-address-burnout-but-it-comes-with-risks-252505

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ksenia Kosheleva, Doctoral candidate, Marketing, Hanken School of Economics

When Auckland mayor Wayne Brown said in 2022 that the Auckland Art Gallery had the foot traffic of a corner dairy and cast the institution as an “uneconomic” entity, he conceded he was at risk of “being seen as something of a philistine”.

But the mayor’s comments also highlighted a very real challenge. How can New Zealand cultural organisations secure their future when the value of art and culture is seen through the economic lens of profit?

And does an overemphasis on profit make cultural groups wary of market and strategy, hampering innovation in the art and culture sector?

Our research proposes a concept we call “generative coexistence”. We suggest that when market approaches are integrated thoughtfully, market forces and cultural missions can work together and enable each other.

Why the market vs. culture debate is changing

For years, cultural organisations were shielded from the market by state funding. But while government support remained relatively consistent, there was no consistent funding strategy. With each budget round being akin to a lottery, calls for change are becoming louder.

The 2024 budget included significant reductions in arts funding. Cultural organisations were expected to find new ways to stay viable. However, as art institutions turn to practices like sponsorship, ticketed events and merchandising to boost revenue, there’s understandable concern about a potential loss of artistic integrity.

Yet, market principles and cultural values can be aligned.

In 2023, the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra launched a digital platform, NZSO+, to stream performances, open rehearsals and artistic talks. Later that year, the NZSO performed to a flock of farm chickens, to support ethical farming and, simultaneously, modernise its brand image.

The moves raised questions about whether the orchestra’s essence could be nurtured outside of concert halls. At the same time, they showed a possibility for cultural organisations to blend their authentic mission with commercial acumen, without compromising their intrinsic values.

The NZSO’s streaming strategy didn’t just address a budget shortfall. It allowed the orchestra to reach wider, younger and more diverse audiences who might not otherwise engage with classical music. Through this market-driven approach, the symphony orchestra sustained its core mission of bringing music to all New Zealanders.

Our research includes examples of cultural groups from around the world. It captures how, rather than seeing commercialisation as a “necessary evil” undermining the arts, cultural groups can use the tensions that come from the competing demands to produce creative solutions.

Here, generative coexistence allows cultural organisations to adapt in ways that not only keep the lights on but also broaden their impact.

Generative coexistence in the arts

We identified three main strategies for organisations in the arts and culture sector designed to help them thrive in a world where financial and cultural goals can seem at odds with each other.

First, organisations need to embrace the commercial potential of cultural products.

When approached thoughtfully, the strong commercial appeal of cultural products can support an organisation’s core mission and create a democratic counterbalance against sponsorship dependency.

Wellington’s Te Papa Museum, for example, creates value through blockbuster ticketed exhibitions that attract a wider audience – such as last year’s Dinosaurs of Patagonia. By using selective commodification processes, Te Papa maintains its educational and cultural status and generates the revenue needed to innovate and expand its reach.

Cultural organisations also need to adopt an entrepreneurial mindset.

Organisations worldwide experiment with innovating existing business models to allow for creative and operational freedom. For example, performing art organisations are increasingly moving away from legacy models – such as venue-based events with tickets as the key revenue stream – into hybrid and digitally-led ones.

Similarly, galleries and art spaces are opting for nomadic models, eschewing permanent locations but maintaining a strong online presence. This enables cultural actors to adapt and lower reliance on funding while creating cultural value.

Finally, cultural organisations need to look into cross-disciplinary collaborations that align on shared goals. Finding a balance between financial stability and cultural integrity requires recognising opportunities to work together.

How market and cultural values can coexist

The New Zealand arts sector is still cautious about non-intuitive collaborations with adjacent fields, such as gaming, fashion or advertising. But partnering with the tech industry holds the promise of new levels of visitor engagement, while staying rooted in the commitment to community enrichment.

Cultural organisations have to navigate a complex landscape where financial pressures and cultural missions intersect and create tensions.

Our concept of generative coexistence encourages a more flexible view. Examples from around the globe show it isn’t about choosing between culture and commerce. It’s about turning tensions into a foundation for innovation, accessibility and resilience.

Arts and culture are neither luxuries nor commodities, but integral parts of a thriving society. We are certain that New Zealand’s creative sector, which is unique, resilient and economically viable, can secure its place in a future that honours both the power of art and the realities of financial sustainability.

Ksenia Kosheleva receives funding from The Foundation for Economic Education, Finland.

Julia Fehrer and Kaj Storbacka 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. Art for art’s sake? How NZ’s cultural organisations can maintain integrity and still make money – https://theconversation.com/art-for-arts-sake-how-nzs-cultural-organisations-can-maintain-integrity-and-still-make-money-252362

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

Labor’s regaining of polling momentum has continued into the first week of the formal election campaign. A national Newspoll, conducted March 27–29 from a sample of 1,249, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, a two-point gain for Labor since the previous Newspoll, three weeks ago. This is Labor’s first Newspoll lead since July 2024.

Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down two), 33% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (steady), 6% One Nation (down one) and 12% for all Others (up two). By 2022 election preference flows, Labor would have led by about 51.5–48.5.

Anthony Albanese’s net approval improved three points to -9, with 52% dissatisfied and 43% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval slid four points to -18. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 49–38 (47–38 previously).

This is Albanese’s best net approval in Newspoll since September 2024, Dutton’s worst since October 2023 and Albanese’s biggest better PM lead since May 2024. Here is the graph of Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll this term with a trend line.

The budget itself was not well received, with a net 10 points saying it would be bad for the economy (zero for the previous budget in May 2024) and a net 19 points bad for you personally (two previously). However, a net nine points said the Coalition would not have delivered a better budget (six previously).

There have been three polls released since the budget, with Labor gaining the lead in Newspoll, making a big gain for a tie in Resolve, but not gaining in Freshwater. The trend in the polls to Labor prior to the budget was clear, and Newspoll and Resolve confirmed this trend. Here is the poll graph.

The gains for Labor are probably in spite of the poorly rated budget. I believe US President Donald Trump is the most important reason for Labor’s gains in the last month, owing to his tariffs and associated stock market falls.

Resolve poll: Labor makes big gain from outlier for a tie

A national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers, conducted March 26–29 from a sample of 3,237 (double the usual sample size), had a 50–50 tie by respondent preferences, a five-point gain for Labor from the previous Resolve poll in late February, a pro-Coalition outlier.

Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down two), 29% Labor (up four), 13% Greens (steady), 7% One Nation (down two), 9% independents (steady) and 5% others (up one). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by 51–49, a three-point gain for Labor.

Albanese’s net approval was up 11 points since February to -11, with 49% saying his performance was poor and 38% good. Dutton’s net approval slumped 15 points to -10. Albanese led Dutton by 42–33 as preferred PM, a reversal of Dutton’s 39–34 lead in February. This is Albanese’s biggest lead since April 2024.

The Liberals led Labor on economic management and keeping the cost of living low, but their leads were much reduced. They led on economic management by 36–29 (41–24 previously). On cost of living, the Liberals led by 31–27 (37–25 previously). Treasurer Jim Chalmers had a net +6 approval, while shadow treasurer Angus Taylor was at net -6.

Freshwater poll steady at 51–49 to Coalition

A national Freshwater poll for The Financial Review, conducted March 28–30 from a sample of 1,059, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead, unchanged from the previous Freshwater poll two weeks ago. An unrounded figure of 50.6–49.4 to the Coalition was provided.

Primary votes were 39% Coalition (steady), 32% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (down two) and 17% for all Others (up one). By 2022 election flows, this poll would be about a 50–50 tie.

In contrast to trends in other polls, both leaders were at -11 net approval, which was down one for Albanese and up one for Dutton. Albanese led Dutton by 46–45 as preferred PM (45.9–42.5 previously).

The Coalition led Labor by six points on cost of living, a two-point gain for Labor. They led on the economy by 11 points, a two-point gain for the Coalition.

The polls below were all conducted before Tuesday’s budget.

YouGov MRP poll puts Labor just one seat short of a majority

YouGov conducted a national MRP poll (multi-level modelling with post-stratification) from February 27 to March 26 from an overall sample of 38,629. MRP polls are used to estimate the outcome in each House of Representatives electorate using huge samples and modelling.

YouGov’s central forecast if the election were held now is Labor winning 75 of the 150 lower house seats, one short of a majority. The Coalition would win 60 seats, the Greens two, independents 11 and others two. Since YouGov’s previous MRP poll that was taken from late January to mid-February, Labor is up nine seats, the Coalition down 13 and independents up four.

The high forecast for Labor is 80 seats and 68 for the Coalition, while the low forecast is 69 for Labor and 55 for the Coalition. This poll is not a prediction of the election result, as the polls could change before the election.

The overall vote share in this MRP poll was 50.2–49.8 to Labor, a 1.9% swing to the Coalition since the 2022 election, but a 1.3% swing to Labor since the last MRP poll. Primary votes were 35.5% Coalition (down 1.9), 29.8% Labor (up 0.7), 13.2% Greens (up 0.5), 9.3% One Nation (up 0.2), 8.3% independents (down 0.6) and 3.9% others (up 1.1).

Although Labor’s share of Greens and One Nation preferences has risen since the last MRP poll, by 2022 election flows this poll would have Labor further ahead, by 51.5–48.5.

Redbridge poll: Labor maintains narrow lead

A national Redbridge poll, conducted March 13–24 from a sample of 2,039, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, unchanged from the previous Redbridge poll in early March. Primary votes were 38% Coalition (up one), 34% Labor (up two), 11% Greens (down one) and 17% for all Others (down two).

By 54–29, voters were unable to identify something the Labor government had done since its election in May 2022 that had made their lives better. Of those who could identify something, 36% selected electricity rebates, with 11% for the next most popular.

By 35–23, voters opposed the government placing tariffs on goods imported into Australia. By 68–24, voters were concerned about Chinese naval ships sailing down Australia’s east coast and conducting live fire drills.

Seat polls of teal-held Kooyong and Goldstein

The Poll Bludger reported Saturday that JWS polled the Victorian teal-held seats of Kooyong and Goldstein “a fortnight ago” from samples of 800 each for Australian Energy Producers. In Kooyong, teal Monique Ryan led the Liberals by 51–49, while in Goldstein the Liberals led teal Zoe Daniel by 54–46.

The Kooyong poll agrees well with the YouGov MRP, but the YouGov MRP had Daniel leading by 54.5–45.5 in Goldstein. The March 8 WA election indicated the Coalition would do worse in swing terms in affluent inner city seats.

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

– ref. Labor gains lead in post-budget Newspoll; would be one seat short of majority in YouGov MRP poll – https://theconversation.com/labor-gains-lead-in-post-budget-newspoll-would-be-one-seat-short-of-majority-in-yougov-mrp-poll-253410

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

Peter Dutton is a tease when it comes to the fine print of policies. At least that’s the benign explanation. Critics have a harsher take on why we’re always being told to wait for the detail. They would claim his policies are often thin, or unfolded on the run.

Right now, we’re into the first week of the campaign and we’re still waiting for more on the Coalition’s gas reservation policy, announced in Dutton’s budget reply, as well as precision on its immigration policy and for how much extra it would spend on defence.

Dutton said on Sunday we’d get information on the gas policy in the next “couple of days”.

Danny Price, of Frontier Economics, has been hard at work, putting some modelling together. Price did the modelling for the opposition’s controversial nuclear policy, finding it much cheaper than the government’s energy transition plan. But those numbers depend on the assumptions. That modelling was contested, and no doubt so will be the gas policy analysis.

Whatever the numbers that come out, they won’t include one key figure: what you would (arguably) save on your power bill. The opposition has learned something from Labor’s debacle of promising, before the last election, that its energy policy would save households $275 by 2025.

At the weekend Albanese dismissed Labor’s modelling before the 2022 election as “RepuTex modelling based on the circumstances at the time”. Indeed.

Dutton has, however, suggested his gas policy would reduce the wholesale domestic price from $14 per gigajoule to under $10 a gigajoule. More gas would mean cheaper prices, is its logic.

The opposition’s thinking is that it lands the generality of a policy first, lets the public absorb that, and then produces detail. But the trouble with releasing the detail so late is the Coalition is likely to get bogged down in a confusing and damaging debate over what opponents will say are dodgy numbers and assumptions.

This can lose a day or more and there aren’t that many days in a five-week campaign, especially when pre-polling starts a fortnight before the end.

While Dutton was batting off questions about gas at the weekend, Anthony Albanese swung into his campaign stride in a comfort zone – at attack on supermarkets.

He announced that if re-elected, Labor will legislate against supermarkets being able to price gouge. Not immediately though. There’d be a taskforce to work out the detail.

There’s more than a touch of chutzpah here. We’ve just seen the report of a long inquiry by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission into supermarkets. It found they were very profitable but it didn’t find price gouging. Its raft of recommendations did not include legislation on price gouging.

This hasn’t deterred the PM, who provided his own definition of the problem. “I got asked today by someone … ‘how do you know what price gouging is?’ Price gouging is when supermarkets are taking the piss off Australian consumers. That’s what it is. That’s what price gouging is. Everyone out there knows. Consumers know. We’ll take action here.”

He did give the rather less colloquial EU definition.“In the EU, a price is unfair and excessive if, and to quote their law, ‘it has no reasonable relation to the economic value of the product supplied’.”

After a fairly ordinary start to the campaign, this week Donald Trump will step right into the centre of it, with his much-anticipated tariff announcement. Australian officials continue to lobby the US; no one is confidently predicting whether or not we’ll be escape the firing line.

Before the Trump announcement will come Tuesday’s first meeting of the new monetary policy board that has been set up under Labor’s changes to the Reserve Bank.

Unlike February, when all the heat was on the bank’s governor to deliver that rate cut (which did come), nobody is expecting another cut yet. Michele Bullock can relax this week.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Dutton has questions to answer on gas; Albanese has supermarket answer still hunting for the problem – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-dutton-has-questions-to-answer-on-gas-albanese-has-supermarket-answer-still-hunting-for-the-problem-253118

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

In early 2021, after a decade of political and economic reforms, Myanmar looked like it was finally beginning to shake off the hangover of decades of military rule. Foreign investment was growing, and standards of living were gradually improving.

In February that year, however, the military again grabbed power after ousting Aung San Suu Kyi’s democratically elected government in a coup. This sent the country spiralling towards civil war and social and economic collapse.

In the latest addition to the daily misery of Myanmar’s long-suffering people, a huge 7.7-magnitude earthquake hit the centre of the country on Friday. Its epicentre was just outside Mandalay, the county’s second-largest city.

The Thai capital of Bangkok, more than 1,000 kilometres from the epicentre, experienced extensive damage too. Video images showed a collapsing building under construction and sloshing rooftop infinity pools causing waterfalls down high-rise condominiums.

Information on the extent of the damage in Myanmar was slower to emerge, given the junta has largely banned social media and communications apps, such as Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Signal and X.

The death toll has now passed 1,000 at the time of writing. US Geological Survey modelling, however, suggests there could be more than 10,000 deaths and economic losses potentially exceeding the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

Unusually for the isolationist military juntas of Myanmar, its leader, Min Aung Hlaing, immediately issued a call for international assistance.

The junta, however, has full control of as little as 21% of the country in the ongoing civil war, with the rest contested or controlled by ethnic armed groups and resistance fighters. This indicates some hard-hit areas of the country may be inaccessible to international aid.

Compounding these difficulties, the Trump administration has decimated the US Agency for International Development (USAID) activities in the country. This will make it far more challenging to determine the areas most in need and distribute any aid on the ground.

Natural disasters in Myanmar

Along with its history of brutal and authoritarian military rule since gaining independence in 1948, Myanmar is also regularly afflicted by natural disasters.

At least 430 people are believed to have died in floods last September due to the remnants of Typhoon Yagi. In 2023, Cyclone Mocha reportedly killed about 460 of the Rohingya ethnic minority, who are largely confined to government camps in Rakhine state in inhuman conditions.

The worst natural disaster in living memory, however, was Cyclone Nargis in 2008, which left at least 140,000 dead. On that occasion, the military junta resisted international assistance, likely resulting in many unnecessary deaths.

At that time, there was no independent media in Myanmar and it was almost impossible to find out what was actually happening on the ground.

Fortunately, the proliferation of mobile phones in the last decade has allowed information to spread much more widely, even with the junta’s internet blocks and other methods of censorship currently in place.

When Cyclone Nargis occurred – the year after the iPhone was launched – only around 1% of the Myanmar’s population had mobile phones. By the time of the coup in 2021, Myanmar had a smartphone penetration rate of 114%. (This means the country has more smartphones than people.)

Foreign assistance has been compromised

While Min Aung Hlaing has gone farther than his predecessor in 2008 in asking for international help, US President Donald Trump’s actions have ensured that any aid will be far less effective than it would have been two months ago.

On Friday, the same day the earthquake hit, the Trump administration told Congress it would cut nearly all remaining jobs at USAID and shut the agency, closing all USAID missions worldwide.

Jeremy Konyndyk, the president of Refugees International and a former USAID official, called the move “a total abdication of decades of US leadership in the world”. He argued the firings would cut “the last remnants of the team that would have mobilised a USAID disaster response” to the earthquake.

In 2024, USAID spent US$240 million (A$380 million) in Myanmar, around one-third of all multilateral humanitarian assistance to the country.

However, since Trump’s inauguration in January, the number of USAID programs in Myanmar has shrunk from 18 to just three. Several NGOs and at least seven US-funded hospitals operating along Myanmar’s border with Thailand have been shut down.

Myanmar’s exiled independent media outlets, which shine a light on the military’s atrocities, have also seen their funding slashed by the Trump administration’s USAID cuts.

What happens now?

The day before the earthquake, Min Aung Hlaing addressed troops at the 80th anniversary of Armed Forces Day Parade. He announced national elections would go ahead in December – a vote that human rights groups are already calling a “sham”.

There is no conceivable way elections of any integrity can be held in the country under military rule or while the civil war continues to rage.

Military-backed parties have been overwhelmingly rejected by Myanmar’s electorate in every remotely free or fair election over the last four decades. This includes the most recent elections held in 2020, won by the National League of Democracy (NLD), led by Aung San Suu Kyi.

While the world should welcome – and urgently respond to – Min Aung Hlaing’s invitation for international assistance, this doesn’t mean the past is forgotten. Thousands of innocent lives have been lost as a result of the military’s unnecessary and destructive 2021 coup.

If the NLD had remained in government, the country would be infinitely more prepared to deal with consequences of this earthquake. Once again, the military’s brutal rule – and Trump’s draconian aid cuts – will no doubt cause more unnecessary suffering and deaths.

Adam Simpson 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. Thousands are feared dead in Myanmar’s quake. Trump’s USAID cuts will cause even more unnecessary deaths – https://theconversation.com/thousands-are-feared-dead-in-myanmars-quake-trumps-usaid-cuts-will-cause-even-more-unnecessary-deaths-253403

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bridianne O’Dea, Little Heroes Professor of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Flinders University

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised a Coalition government would spend an extra A$400 million on youth mental health services.

This is in addition to raising the number of subsidised psychology sessions from ten to 20, which had been previously announced.

While extra funding for youth mental health is welcome, it’s important to target this in ways that will make a real difference to young people.

In our recent research, we asked young people about their experiences of waiting for mental health support, how they coped in the meantime, and what would really make a difference while they waited.

Rates of mental illness rising

An estimated one in seven Australian children and adolescents had a mental illness in the past 12 months. Rates of mental illness have also increased over time, particularly among younger generations.

The COVID pandemic led to a rapid rise in the number of children and young people seeing their GP for mental health problems. Visits for depression rose by 61% and eating disorders by 56% compared with before the pandemic.

The number of visits to the emergency department in New South Wales for self-harm, or plans or thoughts about suicide, have also increased since COVID.

The annual Mission Australia Survey reveals young Australians see mental health as one of their biggest challenges, with thousands calling for more support.

But there are long waits for care

Despite the greater demand for mental health treatment in Australia, there is very little information on how long young people wait to access it.

The Australian Psychological Society reported that during the pandemic, 88% of psychologists increased their wait times and one in five were not taking on new clients. This meant about half of people waited more than three months to begin psychological treatment. But this is for clients of all ages.

There is also little information on how young people experience the wait for treatment.

We asked young people about the wait for care

We recently published research on the wait times for mental health treatment for Australian teens.

We asked 375 young people aged 13–17 about the mental health care they have tried to access for their anxiety and depression and how long they waited to start treatment. We also asked them about their mental health while they waited, what helped them cope, and the types of support they received.

We found that on average, teens were waiting more than three months for their first session of treatment. Most teens waited to access psychologists and psychiatrists after a GP referral.

While their wait times varied, nearly all teens felt they waited “too long”.

Longer wait times were linked to poorer mental health, with more than 90% of teens reporting high distress while they waited. Many of the teens felt their feelings of worry and sadness had worsened and they had used risky and unhealthy ways to cope, such as spending more time alone, sleeping more, self-harming, and using alcohol and other drugs.

Most teens did not receive any support from their health-care providers during the wait time, despite wanting it.

One female 17-year-old had waited six months for treatment and told us:

It felt like I was hanging over a cliff and was just told to hold on.

Teens also felt their parents would benefit from greater support during the wait time. But we need more research to better understand how to help families.

Together, these findings show we desperately need to address wait times for young people’s mental health treatment.

Teens know the support they need

If teens are to wait for mental health treatment, they told us they need support while they do so.

Young people wanted more regular contact and “check-ins” from their service providers, someone to talk to during the wait, as well as more useful information on positive ways to cope.

Most teens in our study used digital mental health tools – such as mental health websites, online mental health checks, mobile apps, online chat services and forums – while they waited.

We’re developing digital mental health tools, in consultation with young people and GPs, to support doctors to care for their teen patients when treatment isn’t available right away. We’re testing the system of short digital mental health programs, supportive text messages and peer support in NSW this year.

But not all teens we surveyed found digital mental health tools helpful. So we need to offer teens a range of supports – from their family, their GP, and from their referred service provider – to help them cope while they wait for treatment.

What can governments do?

We must carefully consider when, where and how mental health funds are invested. If governments wish to see more young people treated for their mental health problems, then we need to look at how our health-care system will cope with the growing demand.

We also need national, transparent benchmarks for how long young Australians wait for mental health treatment. Only some health services in Australia have this. Other countries, such as the United Kingdom, have something similar to minimise the health risks of young people waiting too long for care.

Ultimately, though, we need to prevent mental health issues from starting in the first place. That would reduce the need for treatment, the very type young Australians are waiting too long for.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Bridianne O’Dea is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Investigator Fellowship (1197249) and a MRFF Millions Minds Mental Health Grant (2035416). Bridianne O’Dea received funding from the Buxton Family Foundation, Australian Unity, the Frontiers Technology Clinical Academic Group Industry Connection Seed Funding Scheme and the UNSW Medicine, Neuroscience, Mental Health and Addiction Theme and SPHERE Clinical Academic Group Collaborative Research Funding to conduct this research. Bridianne O’Dea is a member of the Australian Society for Mental Health Research and the International Society for Research on Internet Interventions. Bridianne O’Dea’s current work has received pro bono support from Deloitte Digital Australia.

– ref. The Coalition has promised $400m for youth mental health. Young people told us what they need – https://theconversation.com/the-coalition-has-promised-400m-for-youth-mental-health-young-people-told-us-what-they-need-253328

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fei Gao, Lecturer in Taxation, Discipline of Accounting, Governance & Regulation, The University of Sydney, University of Sydney

Tuesday night’s federal budget revealed a sharp drop in what was once a major source of revenue for the government – the tobacco excise.

This financial year, the government expects to earn revenue from the tobacco excise of A$7.4 billion. That’s down sharply from $12.6 billion in 2022–23, and an earlier peak of $16.3 billion in 2019–20.

The government expects this downward trend to continue. Australia’s heavy tobacco taxation has driven many consumers towards illicit cigarettes.

But this is more than just a problem for government coffers accustomed to revenue from the tobacco tax.

It presents a major challenge for a public health policy that has long relied on increasing tobacco excise duty as its primary tool to reduce smoking.

Read more:
The 2025 budget has few savings and surprises but it also ignores climate change

Climbing tax rates, falling revenue

If government revenue from tobacco is falling, it isn’t because we aren’t trying to tax it. Cigarette prices in Australia are among the highest in the world, with taxes making up a substantial chunk of the price.

About $1.40 of the cost of each cigarette represents excise duty. GST is payable on top of that.

Australia’s tobacco excise is indexed every March and September, in line with average weekly ordinary-time earnings.

On top of indexation, the excise rate is currently being increased by
an additional 5% each year, for a period of three years that began in September 2023.

This policy is grounded in the principle that higher costs deter smoking.
And smoking rates have fallen in recent decades. About 8% of Australians aged 14 and over still smoke daily, down from almost 20% in 2001.

Some of that fall has been offset by the rapid ascent of vaping. About 7% of Australians use e-cigarettes – about half of whom vape daily.

But while legal cigarette prices are prohibitively high for some, illegal alternatives are widely available and significantly cheaper. That’s because these unregulated products bypass excise and GST entirely.

Unintended consequences

The estimated value of illicit tobacco entering the Australian market has soared, from $980 million in 2016–17 to more than $6 billion in 2022–23. Of this $6 billion, almost $3 billion entered the market undetected.

The actual decline in tobacco excise revenue, as exposed in the latest budget papers, has been much more significant than previously forecast.

To make things worse, the cost of enforcement is rising. The 2025–26 federal budget allocates an additional $156 million over the next two years to combat illicit tobacco — on top of the $188 million committed in the previous budget.

There are other broader impacts on overall tax revenue. Convenience stores lose legitimate sales to illegal tobacco vendors, resulting in less corporate tax income.

Holding back broader public health efforts

On other measures, Australia has long been a global leader in tobacco control. The first health warnings on cigarette packets appeared in 1973.

In 2006, graphic health warnings were introduced. And in 2011, Australia pioneered plain packaging laws.

Such public health measures are set to get even stronger this year, with new requirements for every individual cigarette sold to have an “on-product” health warning such as “causes 16 cancers” or “shortens your life”.

These new regulations come into effect on April 1 2025, but retailers will have a three-month transition period to phase out existing stock.

The tight transition period may prove challenging for the legitimate cigarette trade.

But it is unlikely those who ply the unlawful trade in illegal tobacco – or their customers – will be particularly bothered by this latest attempt to wean the public off the habit.

No easy solution

The increasing heavy tobacco excise and the new law requiring warning messages on individual cigarettes have the potential to reduce tobacco consumption among those who purchase the product legally.

However, suppliers of black-market cigarettes – who now comprise an estimated 18% of market share – are unlikely to allow this initiative to affect their illegal trade.

The widespread move to vaping, with poor regulation, has further fuelled the black market for both products.

It is going too far to draw parallels with the prohibition era in the United States, when the manufacture, transportation and sale of alcohol was illegal. This was a brief but disastrous experiment in social engineering with unfortunate and, in retrospect, arguably predictable consequences.

But there are some unfortunate similarities when it comes to Australia’s tobacco tax policy, which has inadvertently encouraged black markets, criminality and organised crime.

Yet for the government, lowering the excise tax to encourage smokers back to legal cigarettes would be completely out of step with its public health objectives. Legal or illegal, black-market cigarettes and vapes still contribute to health risks, undermining the public health goals behind regulatory controls.

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. Tobacco excise revenue has tanked amid a booming black market. That’s a diabolical problem for the government – https://theconversation.com/tobacco-excise-revenue-has-tanked-amid-a-booming-black-market-thats-a-diabolical-problem-for-the-government-253329

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

➡️ View the full interactive version of this article here

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

– ref. Policy tracker: how will Labor, the Coalition, the Greens and the independents make Australia better? – https://theconversation.com/policy-tracker-how-will-labor-the-coalition-the-greens-and-the-independents-make-australia-better-253345

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tanya Latty, Associate Professor, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney

Ants are among nature’s greatest success stories, with an estimated 22,000 species worldwide.

Tropical Australia in particular is a global hotspot for ant diversity. Some researchers believe it could hold some of the richest ant biodiversity on the planet, with an estimated 5,000 species in the tropics alone.

But if ants are so successful out in nature, why do they so often turn up in our homes and even upper-level apartments?

And what can we do to keep them out?

There’s probably an ant near you right now

Ants dominate the planet in terms of sheer abundance.

At any given moment, there are an estimated 20 quadrillion ants alive — that’s 20 followed by 15 zeros.

In fact, for every human being, there are roughly 2.5 million ants.

So the short answer to “Why are there ants in my house?” is simply this: there are a lot of ants.

We live on a planet where ants outnumber us by an almost unimaginable margin. The fact that a few occasionally wander into our homes shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Ants work from home (yours, that is)

Ants owe much of their success to their highly social nature.

Within the colony, some individuals (female queens and male drones) are responsible for reproduction, while others (workers) are busy caring for the young, cleaning or foraging for food. Workers ants are always female.

Ant colonies do not have leaders. They are an excellent example of collective behaviour and swarm intelligence, where individuals following relatively simple rules can collectively achieve far more than any individual could alone.

Just as the individual neurons in your brain can’t compose music, play football, or read articles, the brain as a whole can achieve all these feats and more.

Colonies of co-operating ants are capable of amazingly sophisticated behaviours such as:

• building efficient trail networks
• building living bridges with their bodies, and
• “farming” fungi and aphids (small, sap-sucking insects that feed on plants).

Ants even outperform humans on some cooperative cognition tasks.

The highly social nature of ants is a big part of their success — and a key reason why they are so good at finding their way into our homes.

Each colony contains thousands of intrepid workers, many of which are constantly searching for new food sources. If even a single ant discovers a valuable resource in your home, it can quickly share that information with its nest mates.

Different ant species use different methods of communication, but the ones that most often invade our homes tend to use “pheromone trails”.

When an ant finds a food source, she returns to her nest leaving little drops of pheromones as she goes; this trail guides other ants from their nest directly to the food source.

This highly efficient communication system means a single ant can rapidly recruit thousands of its nest mates to any food it finds.

Ants may also come inside in search of water, particularly when the weather is hot.

Some species prefer to build their nests in humid environments, which might explain why they are often found in bathrooms.

I once discovered an entire colony of sugar ants nesting inside my aquarium filter! The combination of high humidity and an enclosed structure made it an ideal place to build a nest.

On the flip side, heavy rains can flood ant nests, prompting colonies to seek drier ground — sometimes leading them straight into our homes.

I live in an upper-floor apartment. How did ants get in?

Many ant species are exceptional climbers, thanks to tiny adhesive pads and fine hairs on their feet.

These specialised structures allow ants to stick to walls and find footholds even on surfaces that appear smooth to the human eye.

Remarkably, some canopy-dwelling ants have evolved a behaviour known as “controlled descent” which protects them when they fall. By adjusting the position of their abdomens, falling ants can steer their trajectory, directing themselves back toward the tree trunk and safety.

How do I keep ants out of my house?

Well, good luck. No matter what you do, ants will probably enter your house at one time or another.

Finding a few ants in your home doesn’t mean your house is dirty. We simply live on a planet that is absolutely teeming with ants.

To minimise unwanted ant visits, start by eliminating any potential food sources that could feed a hungry ant.

Store all food in sealed airtight containers, clean behind the fridge and inside/under the toaster, avoid leaving pet food out longer than needed and make sure your bins are securely sealed.

Ants have tiny stomachs, so even small crumbs or the residue from spilled sugary drinks can be enough to entice them back.

If ants seem to be following each other in a line, try disrupting their chemical trail using vinegar or bleach. Be warned, however: ants are very good at repairing broken trail networks.

Seal any small cracks or entrance points that might allow ants to get into your home and make sure your windows and doors have well-fitting fly screens.

Insecticidal baits can kill ant colonies, but before you deploy the nuclear option, ask yourself: what harm are the ants really doing?

Most common home-invading ants do not sting and are pretty harmless. They can usually be redirected simply by removing their food source.

Ants are nature’s clean-up crew, tirelessly scavenging waste and helping to maintain a healthy, balanced ecosystem.

They also play important roles as predators and seed dispersers.

Before reaching for insecticides, consider whether a few ants in your house are truly a problem.

Tanya Latty co-founded and volunteers for conservation organisation Invertebrates Australia, is former president of the Australasian Society for the Study of Animal Behaviour and is on the Education committee for the Australian Entomological Society. She receives funding from the Australian Research Council, NSW Saving our Species, and Agrifutures Australia.

– ref. Ants in your house? Here’s how they get everywhere – even high up in tall buildings – https://theconversation.com/ants-in-your-house-heres-how-they-get-everywhere-even-high-up-in-tall-buildings-250625

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hamish McCallum, Emeritus Professor, infectious disease ecology, Griffith University

Last week, Queensland Health alerted the public about the risk of Australian bat lyssavirus, after a bat found near a school just north of Brisbane was given to a wildlife carer group.

The bat later died, but it was not confirmed whether it carried the virus.

This is not unusual. Volunteer wildlife carers respond to thousands of calls from the public every year after encountering sick, injured and orphaned bats. And testing them all routinely for the virus is not warranted or feasible.

Here’s what you need to know about the risk of catching Australian bat lyssavirus and how it can be treated.

What is bat lyssavirus?

Australian bat lyssavirus belongs to the same group of viruses that includes rabies – one of the most notorious diseases humans can catch from animals. Rabies causes about 59,000 deaths worldwide a year, mainly after dog bites. It is almost always fatal once symptoms appear.

Australian bat lyssavirus was discovered in 1996. There have been only three confirmed cases of the virus in humans in Australia, the most recent in 2013. All three were fatal.

Fortunately, because Australian bat lyssavirus and rabies are so closely related, the preventative measures that have been developed internationally against rabies can also protect humans from the effects of Australian bat lyssavirus.

Australian bat lyssavirus and rabies have a long incubation period (the period between exposure to infection and appearance of symptoms). If preventative treatments are given during the incubation period, they are highly effective in preventing disease and saving lives.

Such treatment reduces what is already a very low risk of illness and death to effectively zero.

How could I be exposed to the virus?

The virus is present in the saliva of some Australian bats, including the large flying foxes (fruit-eating bats) and some smaller bats that eat insects. But the proportion of bats infected by the virus is normally very low – less than 0.5%.

Infected bats may become sick and die, but some may appear unaffected. In other words, you can’t always tell just by looking at a bat whether it’s infected or not. However, there is evidence the virus is present at a higher level in sick bats than in healthy ones.

You cannot be exposed to the virus by being under a flying fox roost, even if the bats poo on you. You cannot be exposed by having bats in your roof or in a shed.

But the virus can be transferred to a human via either a scratch or bite. That’s if an infected bat scratches or bites you, or if their saliva is transmitted to an existing wound.

So you do need to be careful if you come across a sick or injured bat, or you find a child playing with a bat.

There is no evidence the virus regularly infects dogs and cats, although rabies does.

Nevertheless, given that Australian bat lyssavirus is a close relative of rabies and that rabies will infect most mammals, the possibility that it may sometimes spill over to mammals other than humans cannot be eliminated.

For example, in 2013 two horses in the same paddock became infected and had to be euthanised. The source of infection was not identified.

So you should also seek advice if you see an animal such as a dog or cat play with a dead or injured bat. Contact a wildlife care group for advice about the bat and a vet to discuss post-exposure treatment for your pet.

How great is the risk?

It is important to put the risk posed by Australian bat lyssavirus into perspective.

Although each of the three deaths known to have been caused by the virus since 1996 is tragic, in 2017-2018 alone, 12 people in Australia died from
bee or wasp stings.

Bats play an important role in our ecosystems. Without the pollination and pest control services bats provide, our increasingly fragmented native forests would struggle to recover after fires, and we’d need to use more pesticides on our crops. There is also no evidence bat lyssaviruses are increasing in Australian bat populations.

Is the risk to humans changing?

However, as we encroach upon natural habitats via land clearing we are likely to have increased contact with wildlife, including bats.

Mass mortality events in bats in Australia – such as those in recent years caused by extreme heat or bat paralysis syndrome (thought to be caused by bats ingesting an environmental toxin) – are likely to lead to increased contact between people, their pets and vulnerable bats.

The risk to human health is therefore likely increasing, albeit from a very low level.

What should I do?

First, don’t panic. Infection is extraordinarily rare and will continue to be so.

Second, don’t interfere with bat populations. Do not pick up sick or injured bats and do not allow your children or pets to play with them. Keep your pets inside at night to minimise potential contact with bats.

Third, if you or a member of your family is bitten or scratched by a bat, or suspect you have been, seek medical attention, including post-exposure treatment. People who regularly handle bats, such as wildlife carers or researchers, should be vaccinated in advance. They are also trained to handle bats safely and use appropriate personal protection equipment.

If you find a sick or injured bat, contact your local wildlife rehabilitation group or veterinarian.

Hamish McCallum receives funding from the US NSF and fron the EU Horizons program. His work on bat virus disease ecology has previously been funded by the US NSF and DARPA

Alison Peel receives funding from the US NIH. Her work on bat virus disease ecology has previously been funded by the ARC, US NSF and DARPA

Cinthia is a volunteer wildlife carer for a not-for-profit organisation based in Southeast Queensland that works with bats.

– ref. What is Australian bat lyssavirus? Can I catch it from bat poo? What if bats roost near me? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-australian-bat-lyssavirus-can-i-catch-it-from-bat-poo-what-if-bats-roost-near-me-252632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan Gaffney, Associate Professor of Palaeolithic Archaeology, University of Oxford

Owing to its violent political history, West Papua’s vibrant human past has long been ignored.

Unlike its neighbour, the independent country of Papua New Guinea, West Papua’s cultural history is poorly understood. But now, for the first time, we have recorded this history in detail, shedding light on 50 millennia of untold stories of social change.

By examining the territory’s archaeology, anthropology and linguistics, our new book fits together the missing puzzle pieces in Australasia’s human history. The book is the first to celebrate West Papua’s deep past, involving authors from West Papua itself, as well as Indonesia, Australasia and beyond.

The new evidence shows West Papua is central to understanding how humans moved from Eurasia into the Australasian region, how they adapted to challenging new environments, independently developed agriculture, exchanged genes and languages, and traded exquisitely crafted objects.

Early seafaring and adaptation

During the Pleistocene epoch (2.5 million to 12,000 years ago), West Papua was connected to Australia in a massive continent called Sahul.

Archaeological evidence from the limestone chamber of Mololo Cave shows some of the first people to settle Sahul arrived on the shores of present-day West Papua. There they quickly adapted to a host of new ecologies.

The precise date of arrival of the first seafaring groups on Sahul is debated. However, a tree resin artefact from Mololo has been radiocarbon dated to show this happened more than 50,000 years ago.

Genetic analyses support this early arrival time to Sahul. Our work suggests these earliest seafarers crossed along the northern route, one of two passages through the Indonesian islands.

Interestingly, the first migrants carried with them the genetic legacy of intermarriages between our species, Homo sapiens, and the Denisovans, a now extinct species of hominins that lived in eastern Asia. Geneticists currently dispute whether these encounters took place in Southeast Asia, along a northerly or southerly route to Sahul, or even in Sahul itself.

In the same way modern European populations retain about 2% of Neanderthal ancestry, many West Papuans retain about 3% of Denisovan heritage.

As the Earth warmed at the end of the Pleistocene, rising seas split Sahul apart. The large savannah plains that joined West Papua and Papua New Guinea to Australia were submerged around 8,000 years ago. Much of West Papua’s southern and western coastlines became islands.

Social transformations during the past 10,000 years

As environments changed, so did people’s cuisine and culture.

We know from sites in Papua New Guinea that people developed their own agricultural systems between 10,000 and 6,000 years ago, at a similar time to innovations in Asia and the Americas. However, agricultural systems were not universally adopted across the island.

New chemical evidence from human tooth enamel in West Papua shows people retained a wide variety of diets, from fish and shellfish to forest plants and marsupials.

One of the key unanswered questions in West Papua’s history is when cultivation emerged and how it spread into other regions, including Southeast Asia. Taro, bananas, yams and sago were all initially cultivated in New Guinea and have become important staple crops around the world.

The arrival of pottery, some 3,000 years ago, represents movements of new people to the Pacific. These are best illustrated by iconic Lapita pottery, recorded by archaeologists from Papua New Guinea all the way to Samoa and Tonga.

Lapita pottery makers spoke Austronesian languages, which became the ancestors of today’s Polynesian languages, including Māori.

New pottery discoveries from Mololo Cave suggest the ancestors of Lapita pottery makers existed somewhere around West Papua. Finding the location of these ancestral Lapita settlements is a major priority for archaeological research in the territory.

Other evidence for social transformations includes rock paintings and even bronze axes. The latter were imported all the way from mainland Southeast Asia to West Papua around 2,000 years ago. Metal working was not practised in West Papua at this time and chemical analyses show some of these artefacts were made in northern Vietnam.

At all times in the past, people had a rich and complex material culture. But only a small fraction of these objects survive for archaeologists to study, especially in humid tropical conditions.

Living traditions and the movement of objects

From the early 1800s, when West Papua was part of the Dutch East Indies, colonial administrators, scientists and explorers exported tonnes of West Papuan artefacts to European museums. Sometimes the objects were traded or gifted, other times stolen outright.

In the early 1900s, many objects were also burned by missionaries who saw Indigenous material culture as evidence of paganism. The West Papuan objects that now inhabit museums in Europe, America, Australia and New Zealand are connections between modern people and their ancestral traditions.

Sometimes these objects represent people’s direct ancestors. Major work is currently underway to connect West Papuans with these collections and to repatriate some of these objects to museums in West Papua. Unfortunately, funding remains a central issue for these museums.

Many West Papuans continue to produce and use wooden carvings, string bags and shell ornaments. Anthropologists have described how people are actively reconfiguring their material culture, especially given the presence of new synthetic materials and a cash economy.

Far from being “ancient” people caught in the stone age – a stereotype propagated in both Indonesian and international media – West Papuans are actively confronting the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.

Despite our new findings, West Papua remains an enigma for researchers. It has a land area twice the size of Aotearoa New Zealand, but there are fewer than ten known archaeological sites that have been radiocarbon dated.

By contrast, Aotearoa has thousands of dated sites. This means West Papua is the least well researched part of the Pacific and there is much more work to be done. Crucially, Papuan scholars need to be at the heart of this research.

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. Fitting the ‘missing puzzle pieces’ – research sheds light on the deep history of social change in West Papua – https://theconversation.com/fitting-the-missing-puzzle-pieces-research-sheds-light-on-the-deep-history-of-social-change-in-west-papua-250616

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathy Reid, PhD Candidate, School of Cybernetics, Australian National University

Amazon has disabled two key privacy features in its Alexa smart speakers, in a push to introduce artificial intelligence-powered “agentic capabilities” and turn a profit from the popular devices.

Starting today (March 28), Alexa devices will send all audio recordings to the cloud for processing, and choosing not to save these recordings will disable personalisation features.

How do voice assistants work?

A voice assistant works by constantly listening for a “wake word”, such as “Alexa”. Once woken, it records the command that is spoken and matches it to an action, such as playing a music track. Matching a spoken command to an action requires what computer scientists call natural language understanding, which can take a lot of computer power.

Matching commands to actions can be done locally (on the device itself), or sound recordings can be uploaded to the cloud for processing. On-device processing has improved substantially in recent years, but is still less accurate than using the cloud, where more computer power is available.

Amazon is making two changes today

Alexa devices send recordings to the cloud by default. However, some high-end Echo models previously supported a setting called “Do not send voice recordings”.

If this setting was enabled, all recordings were processed locally. In practice, only a tiny fraction of Echo users (around 0.03% had this turned on.

In the first change, this setting is being disabled, and all recordings will be sent to the cloud.

Once in the cloud, recordings can be deleted or saved.

Saved recordings are used for Amazon’s Voice ID feature, which distinguishes between speakers in the same household and aims to provide a personalised experience.

Alexa users also have a setting called “Don’t save recordings”, which, if enabled, deletes cloud recordings once they’re processed. In the second change, if the “Don’t save recordings” setting is enabled, Voice ID will stop working, and with it, access to personalised features such as user-specific calendar events.

This two-step change means Alexa users need to make a trade-off between privacy and functionality.

Alexa loses a lot of money

Put simply, Amazon needs Echo devices to start making money.

As US voice assistant expert Joseph Turow has detailed, Amazon began selling Echo devices very cheaply as a “loss leader”. Amazon says it has sold more than 500 million Alexa devices, but between 2017 and 2021 alone the company lost more than US$25 billion on the project.

Amazon is looking to generative AI to turn the business around, with a US$8 billion investment in OpenAI competitor Anthropic.

In February, Amazon launched a new AI-powered Alexa+ system. It promises more natural interaction and the ability to carry out tasks such as booking flights. Alexa+ is currently only available in the United States.

“Agentic capabilities” such as booking flights require detailed profile information about the user on whose behalf they are acting. This would include details such as preferred products or services.

Voice ID and data from spoken commands assist Amazon in tying preferences to a particular person.

An AI-powered intermediary

How will Alexa+ help Amazon make money? The first way is via direct subscription fees: the service will eventually only be available to Amazon Prime members or people who pay US$19.99 per month.

But what may prove more important is that it will help Amazon to position itself as an intermediary between buyers and sellers. This is what Amazon already does with its existing e-commerce platform.

It’s easy to see the system in action when you search for a product on Amazon’s website. Alongside items sold directly by Amazon, you are presented with products from multiple sellers, each of whom pays Amazon to be listed.

Everybody pays the platform

Agentic capabilities are likely to have a similar business model. Service providers – such as airlines or restaurant reservation companies – would pay Amazon when Alexa+ refers customers to them.

Amazon’s move is part of a broader phenomenon termed “platform capitalism”. This takes in the crowdsourced content of social media platforms, “sharing economy” businesses such as AirBnb, and the automated gig work of the likes of Uber.

Platform capitalism has delivered benefits for consumers, but in general the greatest benefits flow to those who own the platforms and design their infrastructure, services and constraints.

How to protect your privacy

After receiving a US$25 million fine from the US Federal Trade Commission for retaining childrens’ voice recordings in contravention of US laws, Amazon has overhauled Alexa’s privacy settings.

The settings can be viewed and changed from the Alexa app on your smartphone, under “More > Alexa Privacy”. Alexa users may wish to review the settings in “Manage
your Alexa Data” to choose how long recordings are saved for and which
voice recordings to delete. Recordings may also be deleted using a voice
command.

As Alexa+ becomes available more widely, users will need to decide whether they are comfortable sharing data about their preferences with Amazon to enable agentic capabilities.

What are the alternatives?

For users who are uncomfortable with the privacy settings now available with Alexa, a private voice assistant may prove a better choice.

The Home Assistant Voice Preview is one example. It gives people the option to have voice recordings processed on-device, but offers less functionality than Alexa and can’t work with as many other services. It’s also not very user-friendly, being aimed more at technical tinkerers.

Users may face a trade-off between privacy and functionality, both within Alexa itself and when considering alternatives. They may also find themselves grappling with their own place in the increasingly inescapable systems of platform capitalism.

Kathy Reid receives funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) for her doctoral work and is a recipient of the Florence Violet McKenzie scholarship.

She currently contracts on a part-time basis to Mozilla Common Voice as a linguistic engineer. She is a past President of Linux Australia, Inc., an organisation dedicated to supporting open source communities and practices in the region. She was previously Director of Developer Relations at Mycroft.AI, a privacy-focused voice assistant, and held shares in the company, which is now dissolved. She has previously contracted with NVIDIA as a speech data specialist. NVIDIA provided hardware for Echo devices prior to 2021.

– ref. Everything you say to an Alexa speaker will be sent to Amazon – starting today – https://theconversation.com/everything-you-say-to-an-alexa-speaker-will-be-sent-to-amazon-starting-today-252923

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Altman, Vice Chancellor’s Fellow and Professorial Fellow, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

It seems Britain has one key inducement to offer US President Donald Trump: a state visit hosted by King Charles.

One can only imagine what the king thinks of this, but he will undoubtedly maintain a stiff upper lip and preside over several lavish dinners.

Following reports of this offer, which would make Trump the only US president to be twice hosted by a British monarch, stories surfaced that the US might become an associate member of the Commonwealth.

Read more:
The king has a tricky diplomatic role to play in inviting Trump for a state visit

There has been no official confirmation of this, but the story has been floated in several British newspapers.

What is the Commonwealth?

The Commonwealth came into existence as a means of retaining links with former British colonies, so there is a certain historical justification for the idea.

Almost all of Britain’s former colonies are now members of the Commonwealth of Nations, with Ireland and the US notable exceptions.

The Commonwealth is an organisation that ties together 56 countries, including a few in Africa that have been admitted despite not having been British colonies.

Of the 56, only a minority recognise the British king as their head of state, a point local monarchists are reluctant to acknowledge.

Indeed, some members of the Commonwealth, such as Malaysia, Brunei and Tonga, have their own hereditary monarchs.

In theory, all members are democratic, and several, such as Fiji, have at times been suspended from membership for failing on this count.

Whatever doubts we might have about the state of US democracy, it is hard to argue the US would fail to meet a bar that allows continued membership to states such as Pakistan and Zimbabwe.

The Commonwealth is largely seen as less important than other international groupings, and its heads of government meetings are often skipped by leaders of the most significant members.

Other than turning up to the Commonwealth Games, few recent Australian prime ministers have paid it much attention, compared to our membership of the G20 or the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).

Nonetheless, the Commonwealth does include a remarkable range of countries ranging from significant states such as India, Canada and South Africa to the many island states of the Pacific and the Caribbean.

While its work is largely unreported, it does provide a range of international assistance and linkages that otherwise would be out of reach for its smaller and poorer members.

Why is Trump interested in joining?

Trump, it can be assumed, has no interest in the Commonwealth as a means of better working with states such as Namibia and Belize.

The attraction seems to be linked to his strange reverence for royalty and a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the British sovereign.

King Charles is head of the Commonwealth through agreement of its members, probably in recognition of the extraordinary commitment his mother showed as the Commonwealth developed out of the old British Empire. Indeed, she clashed several times with her British ministers because of her loyalty to the Commonwealth.

But unlike the king’s British – and Australian – crown, this is not a position that belongs automatically to the British monarch.

So, while inviting Trump to Windsor Castle may be the gift of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, admission to the Commonwealth would require the agreement of all its members.

Given Trump’s demands to acquire Canada and to punish South Africa for recent land expropriation law, it is hard to imagine unanimous enthusiasm.

Read more:
Donald Trump is picking fights with leaders around the world. What exactly is his foreign policy approach?

Most member states are cautious about being too closely linked to either the US or China, although Australia might end up the last true believer in US alliances. Others, such as Ghana and Pakistan, depend considerably on Chinese aid.

In a world dominated by increasingly autocratic leaders, a middle power like Australia needs as wide a range of friends as possible. Most of us have only a vague sense of what the Commonwealth entails.

Like all international institutions, the Commonwealth often seems more concerned with grand statements than actual commitment.

But there is value in a global organisation whose members claim to be committed to:

democracy and democratic processes, including free and fair elections and representative legislatures; the rule of law and independence of the judiciary; good governance, including a well-trained public service and transparent public accounts; and protection of human rights, freedom of expression, and equality of opportunity.

Would Trump’s America meet those demands?

Dennis Altman 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. Trump is interested in joining the Commonwealth. It’s not up to him – or even the king – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-interested-in-joining-the-commonwealth-its-not-up-to-him-or-even-the-king-253217

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

Australians will go to the polls on May 3 for an election squarely centred on the cost of living.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visited Governor-General Sam Mostyn at Yarralumla first thing on Friday morning.

Later he told an 8am news conference at parliament house the election choice was “between Labor’s plan to keep building or Peter Dutton’s plan to cut.

“Only Labor has the plan to make you better off over the next three years,” he said. “Now is not the time for cutting and wrecking, punching down.”

Less than a week after the federal budget and following an earlier delay caused by Cyclone Alfred, the formal campaign starts with government and opposition neck and neck and minority government considered a real possibility.

But in recent days, the government has gained more momentum and Labor enters the campaign more confident than at the start of the year.

The aggregated January-March quarterly Newspoll had the Coalition leading Labor 51-49%, but Albanese leading Peter Dutton as preferred PM 45% to 40%. Polling only shows a snapshot of the present, and the campaign itself could be crucial to the election result.

This is the fourth consecutive election launched off the back of a budget, with both sides this week bidding for voters’ support with big handouts.

Labor pushed through legislation for its $17 billion tax cut, the first stage of which comes in mid next year. Opposition leader Peter Dutton in his budget reply promised a 12-month halving of excise on petrol and diesel and a gas reservation scheme.

Labor goes into the election with 78 seats in the lower house, and the Coalition with 57 (counting the seats of two recent Liberal defectors). The large crossbench includes four Greens and half a dozen “teals”.

With a majority being 76 seats in the new 150-seat parliament, the Coalition needs to win 19 seats for an outright majority. This would require a uniform swing of 5.3% (although swings are not uniform). A swing of less than 1% could take Labor into minority. The Coalition would need a swing of about 3.6% to end with more seats than the government. While all states are important if the result is close, Victoria and NSW are regarded as the crucial battlegrounds.

If the Coalition won, it would be the first time that a first-term government had been defeated since 1931, during the great depression.

Since the end of the second world war, while all first term governments have been reelected, each saw a two-party swing against them.

One challenge for Albanese is that he has only a tiny majority, providing little buffer against a swing.

The combined vote of the major parties will be something to watch, with the vote steadily declining from 85.47% of the vote just 19 years ago at the 2007 election, to only 68.28% at the 2022 election.

Labor won the last election with a two-party vote of
52.13% to the Coalition’s 47.87%.

As of December 31 2024, 17,939,818 Australians were enrolled to vote.

The start of the formal campaign follows a long “faux” campaign in which both leaders have been travelling the length and breadth of the country non-stop, with the government making a series of major spending announcement but the opposition holding back on policy.

Marginal seats based on the redistribution

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. Albanese calls May 3 election, with cost of living the central battleground – https://theconversation.com/albanese-calls-may-3-election-with-cost-of-living-the-central-battleground-250774

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

The usual story for a first-term government is a loss of seats, as voters send it a message, but ultimate survival.

It can be a close call. John Howard risked all in 1998 with his GST, and almost lost office, despite having a big majority.

But you have to go back to 1931 to find a first-term government thrown out.

So, going into this campaign, Anthony Albanese has the weight of history on his side. But modern day politics is volatile, and the voters are cranky, which has in recent months given the opposition hope it could run the government close or even defy the odds.

Government and opposition start the formal campaign with the polls close on the two-party vote. In the past few weeks, the government has improved its position, arguably to be now in the lead. If the election were held today, Labor would probably win more seats than the Coalition, and form government.

But the margins are narrow. With the next parliament, like this one, expected to have a large crossbench, present polling is pointing towards a minority government as a likely outcome. Things can change during a campaign.

Albanese started the term with substantial public goodwill – although his majority was razor thin, and his 2022 election owed more to the unpopularity of then prime minister Scott Morrison than to any real enthusiasm for Labor.

If one had to point to the single biggest political mistake the prime minister made, it was his over-investment in the Voice referendum. Whatever one thinks of the proposal itself, Albanese let it distract from what was a growing-cost-of-living crisis. The referendum was probably always destined to fail, but Albanese and the “yes” side were also out-campaigned by the “no” forces, strongest among them opposition spokeswoman Jacinta Price.

Albanese never properly recovered from the Voice’s defeat.

Early in the term the government was complacent about its opponents, believing Peter Dutton was unelectable. Indeed, that was a widespread view, including among many on the conservative side of politics. It underestimated Dutton’s strategic and tactical skills, the changing nature of the electorate, and how deeply the cost-of-living crisis – with its dozen interest rate rises under Labor, on top of one under Morrison – would bite.

Suburbia up for grabs

What was once ALP heartland, outer suburbia, is now up for grabs. Many of the tradies have become conservatives, to whom Dutton’s blunt, black-and-white political pitch is not just acceptable but potentially attractive.

Labor’s appeal to working people in this campaign is that that the worst is over on the economy, with unemployment still low and real wages in (slightly) positive territory. The latest national accounts figures showed Australia’s per capita recession, which had lasted seven quarters, was over. The February interest rate fall has also been a plus for the government: it may not be a big vote changer but it has reinforced Labor’s argument that things are going in the right direction.

The question remains: will people buy the story of life getting better when they are still not back to where they were a few years ago, and continue to feel under the financial pump?

This week’s budget and Dutton’s reply have homed in on cost of living. The government has come up with modest tax cuts, starting mid next year. These were legislated in a rush before parliament rose, so the Coalition was forced into saying it would repeal them. Dutton countered by promising an immediate cut to the excise on petrol and diesel. The opposition leader also used his budget reply to open another front in the battle over the energy transition, with the promise of a gas reservation scheme.

In the past month or two, there has been some change in the political atmosphere. Dutton’s momentum seemed to have stalled. The tight internal disciple he had maintained frayed somewhat, with messages over some policy and internal fears Dutton had left policy announcements too late.

Will voters think they don’t know enough about Peter Dutton?

The risk for Dutton is that people will fear they’re buying a pig in a poke. He has run a small target strategy; leaders (Howard in 1996, Abbott in 2013) have won on these before.

But if Dutton’s policy offerings in the campaign fall short, or his policy doesn’t stand up to the forensic scrutiny that comes in a campaign, he is likely to stall. So far, Dutton has established himself as a strong negative campaigner but he has yet to come through as a positive alternative prime minister.

His signing up to Labor’s $8.5 billion bulk-billing initiative was an example of a short-term tactic to neutralise an issue that raised questions about the Coalition’s inability to produce its own health blueprint.

The government will mobilise industrial relations against the Coalition, arguing Labor has delivered benefits to workers that a Coalition government would attack. This is risky for Dutton. His plans for slashing the public service, curbing working-from-home and removing the right to disconnect will fuel Labor’s negative campaigning, which will focus too on Dutton’s general plan to cut spending.

The Trump factor

A major unknown is what impact overseas events will have on this election. There has been a general swing to the right internationally. But the Trump factor has become a danger for Dutton.

His opponents seek cast Dutton as Trump-lite. The opposition leader is a critic of Trump on Ukraine, and he’s aware Trumpism is now politically scary for many voters. Nevertheless, Dutton’s pre-occupation with the size of the public service and his emphasis on cuts (without giving detail) will, to some voters, sound like echoes (albeit faint) of Trump. Labor claims its focus groups show people have been increasingly seeing Dutton as Trumpist.

Trump this week announced tariffs on foreign cars (not a worry to Australia, which doesn’t make any anymore). Next week he’ll announced the next stage in his tariff policy. This will feed into the election campaign. The extent it does will depend on whether Australia is directly hit. The government is busy with intense last-minute lobbying.

The cost of living is front and centre in the election, but the recent appearance of Chinese ships near Australia and their live-fire exercise has contributed to making national security and defence (especially how much we should be spending on it) issues as well, although second tier for most voters.

Major attention in this election will be on the performance of independents. Half a dozen so-called teals seized Liberal seats in 2022, and it would be very hard for the Coalition to obtain a majority without regaining some of them. The Melbourne seats of Kooyong and Goldstein will be especially closely watched. In New South Wales, one teal seat has already been lost through the redistribution.

The teals ran last time on climate change, integrity, and equity for women. This election, climate is less to the fore in the voters’ minds, while we now have an anti-corruption body, the National Anti-Corruption Commission. And there is no Scott Morrison, who was a lightning rod for the Liberals’ “women problem”. So in terms of issues, the teals have a harder case to make than before.

On the other hand, people remain deeply disillusioned with the major parties, and the teals have had plenty of time to dig into their seats. The general “community candidate” movement has strengthened and broadened. Whatever its precise composition, the new House of Representatives is expected to have a large crossbench.

In the event of a hung parliament, the crossbench will come into play. This means its potential members, especially the teals, will be under pressure during the campaign to indicate what factors they would take into account in deciding to whom to give confidence and supply. They are likely to keep their cards close to their chests.

The election will also test whether the hardline positions the Greens have taken, on local and foreign issues, have alienated or attracted voters. The Greens are at an historic high with four seats in the lower house. The three of those that are in Queensland will be on the line.

Given the closeness of the polls as the formal campaign starts, what happens in the coming five weeks, and notably the personal performances of Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton could be crucial to the outcome. This is not one of those elections where either side can be confident it has the result in the bag.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: uninspiring leaders, stressed voters and the shadow of Trump make for an uncertain contest – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-uninspiring-leaders-stressed-voters-and-the-shadow-of-trump-make-for-an-uncertain-contest-250775

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pandanus Petter, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National University

Now that an election has been called, Australian voters will go to the polls on May 3 to decide the fate of the first-term, centre-left Australian Labor Party government led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

In Australia, national elections are held every three years. The official campaign period only lasts for around a month.

This time around, Albanese will be seeking to hold onto power after breaking Labor’s nine-year dry spell by beating the more right-leaning Liberal Party, led by Scott Morrison, in 2022.

Now, he’s up against the Liberals’ new leader, a conservative with a tough guy image, Peter Dutton. It’s looking like a tight race.

So how do elections work in Australia, who’s contesting for the top spot and why is the race looking so close?

For Albanese, the honeymoon is over

Albanese was brought into power in 2022 on the back of dissatisfaction with the long-term and scandal-prone Liberal-National Coalition government.

At the time, he was considered personally more competent, warm and sensible than Morrison.

Unfortunately for Albanese, the dissatisfaction and stress about the cost of living hasn’t gone away.

Governments in Australia almost always win a second term. However, initially high levels of public support have dissipated over the first term. Opinion polls are pointing to a close election, though Albanese’s approval ratings have had a boost in recent weeks.

At the heart of what makes this such a tight contest are issues shared by many established democracies: the public’s persistent sense of economic hardship in the post-pandemic period and longer-term dissatisfaction with “politics as usual”, combined with an increased focus on party leaders.

Around the world, incumbents have faced challenges holding onto power over the past year, with voters sweeping out the Conservatives in the United Kingdom and the Democrats in the United States.

Australia has faced some similar economic challenges, such as relatively high inflation and cost-of-living problems.

Likewise, Australia – like many other established democracies – has long-term trends of dissatisfaction with major parties and the political system itself.

However, this distaste with “business as usual” manifests differently in Australia from comparable countries such the UK and US.

Australia’s voting system

In Australia, voting is compulsory, and those who fail to turn out face a small fine. Some observers have argued this pushes parties to try to persuade “swing” voters with more moderate policies, rather than rely on their faithful “bases” and court those with more extreme views who are more likely to vote.

In the UK, by comparison, widespread public distaste with the Conservatives, combined with low turnout and first-past-the-post voting, delivered Keir Steirmer’s Labour Party a dramatic victory. This was despite a limited uptick in support.

And in the US, turnout in the 2024 election was only about 64%. Donald Trump and the Republicans swept to power last year by channelling a deep anti-establishment sentiment among those people who voted.

And the country is now so polarised, that the more strongly identifying Democrat and Republican voters who do turn out to vote can’t see eye to eye on highly emotionally charged issues which dominate the parties’ platforms. Independent voters are left without “centrist” options.

Because Australia’s voting system is different, Dutton is unlikely to follow Trump’s far-right positioning too closely, despite dabbling in the “anti-woke” culture wars.

It also explains why Albanese’s personal style is usually quite mild-mannered and why he’s unlikely to present himself as a radical reformer.

However, neither man’s approach has made them wildly popular with the public. This means neither can rely on their own popularity to win over the public.

Another factor making Australia distinct is that voters rank their choices, with their vote flowing to their second choice if their first choice doesn’t achieve a majority. This means many races in the 150-seat lower house of parliament are won from second place.

Similarly, seats in the Senate (Australia’s second chamber, with the power to amend or block legislation) are won based on the proportion of votes a party receives in each state or territory. This gives minor parties and independents a better chance at winning seats compared to the lower house.

This means dissatisfaction with the major parties has in recent years created space for minor parties and a new crop of well-organised independents to get elected and influence policy. In 2022, around one-third of voters helped independents and minor parties take seats off both the Liberals and Labor in the inner cities.

To win government, Dutton will need to get them back, or take more volatile outer-suburban seats off Labor.

The big policy concerns

Against this backdrop, Australian voters both in 2022 and today have a fairly consistent set of policy concerns. And while parties want to be seen addressing them, their messaging isn’t always heard.

The 2022 Australian Election Study, run by Australian political researchers, revealed that pessimism about the economy and concerns about the cost of living were front of mind when Australians voted out the Liberal-National Coalition government last federal election.

This time around, one might think some relative improvement in economic factors like unemployment and cuts to interest rates would put a spring in the prime minister’s step.

However, the public is still very concerned about the day-to-day cost-of-living pressures and practical issues such as access to health care.

The government’s policy efforts in this direction – for example, tax cuts and subsidies for power bills – have so far not strongly cut through.

What have the major parties promised?

Comparing the parties’ platforms, Labor is firmly focused on economic and government service issues to support people in the short term.

Although expected to announce the election earlier, Albanese was handed the opportunity of delivering an extra budget by a tropical storm in early March. This included spending promises foreshadowed earlier, as well as a new modest tax cut as an election sweetener.

In the longer term, Labor has promised significant incentives to improve access to free doctor’s visits and focused on investments in women’s health, as well as technological infrastructure.

Labor is also encouraging more people to fill skill shortages through vocational education and promising to make the transition to renewable energy, while simultaneously supporting local manufacturing.

The Coalition, for its part, has been critical of these long-term goals and promised to repeal the newly legislated tax cuts in favour of subsidies for petrol. It has focused its message on reduced government spending, while strategically mirroring promises on health to avoid Labor attacks on that front.

Dutton has also proposed cuts to migration to reduce housing pressures and a controversial plan to build nuclear power plants at the expense of renewables.

Will these differences in long-term plans cut through? Or are people focused on short-term, hip-pocket concerns?

This election, whatever the result, will not represent a long-term shifting of loyalties, but rather a precarious compact with distrustful voters looking for relief in uncertain times.

Pandanus Petter is employed at the Australian National University with funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Australians almost never vote out a first-term government. So why is this year’s election looking so tight? – https://theconversation.com/australians-almost-never-vote-out-a-first-term-government-so-why-is-this-years-election-looking-so-tight-250249

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, Visitor, School of History, Australian National University

At the last federal election, Australia elected the largest lower house crossbench in its post-war federal history.

In addition to four Greens MPs, Rebekah Sharkie from the Centre Alliance and Bob Katter (with his own micro-party), there were ten independent MPs, seven of them new to parliament. These MPs have the freedom and flexibility to vote on every piece of legislation without having to adhere to any party-room pledge.

Micro-parties and independents also fared well in the Senate in 2022, thanks in part to the fact that we use proportional representation to elect our senators. In a half-Senate election with 40 vacancies, six went to the Greens, one to Independent ACT candidate David Pocock, one to United Australia Party Senator Ralph Babet and one to Pauline Hanson in Queensland.

Defections during the 47th parliament grew the crossbench even further. Five former Coalition MPs and Senators have moved to the crossbench, one over allegations of sexual harassment, one over the Voice to Parliament referendum and three over bruising preselection defeats.

Senator Fatima Payman defected from the Labor Party last year, citing problems with the party’s stance on Palestine, and has now set up the Australia’s Voice party.

Getting elected

Independents hardly enjoy a level playing field in federal elections. Brian Costar and Jennifer Curtin pointed out in their book, Rebels with a Cause, that independent candidates lack equal access to the electoral roll, do not initially benefit from the public funding that flows consistently to the major parties, and cannot be listed above the line on the Senate ballot paper unless they form a group or party.

Unless they are party defectors with a seat in parliament already, independent candidates also lack the advantages of incumbency. Previous research from the Australia Institute has shown the dollar value of an incumbent MP’s entitlements (in terms of their salary and those of staff, printing and travel allowances, public exposure), is about $2.9 million per term.

Once elected, though, Independents have shown the major parties that they can be very hard to beat. Helen Haines and her predecessor as Member for Indi, Cathy McGowan, have won four consecutive elections between them. Zali Steggall, who famously beat former prime minister Tony Abbott in the electorate of Warringah in 2019, has been re-elected once, and the people of metropolitan Hobart have returned former public servant and whistleblower Andrew Wilkie to Canberra five times in a row.

No safe seats

Political parties and journalists have conventionally treated certain seats as “safe” (if the winning party’s vote two-party preferred margin was 60% or higher), others as “fairly safe” (if the winning party’s 2PP margin was between 56% and 60%) and others as “marginal” (those won by less than 56% at the previous election).

But the days of safe and marginal seats are over. These terms belong to an age of two-party contests and more predictable preference flows. As Bill Browne and Richard Denniss of the Australia Institute have pointed out, the major party vote share has now “crossed a threshold” below which the idea of “safe seats” becomes redundant.

Independent candidates can win with a relatively low share of the primary vote. In 2022, community independent Kylea Tink won the electorate of North Sydney with 25% of the primary vote, having ranked favourably, but not first, on many voters’ ballots.

Holding on?

Several contests involving current crossbenchers may prove nationally influential in the event of a hung parliament. Tink, whose electorate has been abolished in a routine redistribution, will not be among the incumbents hoping to hold their seat.

The Liberal Party, by some accounts, perceives the Perth seat of Curtin, won by community independent Kate Chaney in 2022, as an important litmus test for the future. January saw a “surge in volunteers and donations” for Liberal candidate Tom White’s campaign, according to media reports.

Elsewhere, the Liberals are attempting to meet incumbent community independents with candidates that more closely resemble them. The Liberal candidate for Warringah, Jaimee Rogers, is, like the sitting member Zali Steggall, a former athlete with a public profile. Wentworth candidate Ro Knox, a former Deloitte consultant, will run against Allegra Spender, whose own pitch for re-election has emphasised tax reform and productivity.

In Victoria, Monique Ryan, who won the seat of Kooyong from then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg, will this time face Amelia Hamer, a local woman, professional and grand-niece of former Victorian premier Rupert Hamer.

There are exceptions to that pattern. Former RSL President James Brown was preselected as the Liberal candidate for Mackellar, currently held by community independent Sophie Scamps. And in Goldstein, there will be a rerun of the previous contest between community independent Zoe Daniel and her Liberal predecessor Tim Wilson.

At least three of the major party defectors in both houses are hoping to keep their seats, too. Gerard Rennick, formerly a Coalition senator who was denied a winnable spot on the Liberal National Party ticket, has registered the Gerard Rennick People First Party ahead of his bid for re-election this year. Rennick has pointed out that this will get his name “above the line” on the Senate ballot paper.

Former Liberals Ian Goodenough and Russell Broadbent have both indicated they will run as independents to defend their seats – Moore and Monash respectively – from their erstwhile colleagues.

Room for growth?

Despite the watershed result in 2022, the crossbench may grow yet. Fundraising group Climate 200 is reported to be backing up to 35 candidates across the country, and an army of volunteers has already begun to mobilise in support.

Health professional Carolyn Heise will hope that, with the support of the new campaign fundraiser the Regional Voices Fund, her second campaign in the regional electorate of Cowper may land her in parliament alongside Indi MP Helen Haines.

The retirement of shadow minister Paul Fletcher as member for Bradfield in inner-Sydney makes for a particularly interesting contest in that electorate. Gisele Kapterian, who won Liberal preselection against Warren Mundine, will campaign against community independent Nicolette Boele, who would need a swing of only 5% in her favour to win on her second attempt.

In Victoria’s western district, community independent Alex Dyson will attempt for the third time to win the seat of Wannon from shadow immigration minister Dan Tehan. Dyson came close in 2022 and would need only a 4% swing (two-candidate preferred) to win this time.

In 2022, community groups supported independent candidate Penny Ackery in her campaign against then-minister and now shadow treasurer Angus Taylor. The two-candidate preferred vote left the seat “relatively safe” (in old terms), but declining support for the Coalition saw the state electorate of Wollondilly (within Hume’s borders) elect community independent Judy Hannan in a “surprise win” at the 2023 state election.

There is plenty of potential for surprise victories and shock defeats at the forthcoming election. Community independents are running in at least four Labor-held seats. What should surprise nobody is that every vote in every seat will count on election day.

Joshua Black is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Australia Institute.

– ref. Australia’s embrace of independent political candidates shows there’s no such thing as a safe seat – https://theconversation.com/australias-embrace-of-independent-political-candidates-shows-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-safe-seat-250751

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University

They are neither as leafy nor as affluent as much of the Liberal heartland, but Peter Dutton believes the outer ring-roads of Australia’s capitals provide the most direct route to power.
He has been telling his MPs these once-safe Labor-voting suburbs are where the 2025 election can be won.

From the moment the Queenslander assumed control of the Liberal Party in 2022, he was intent on this suburbs-first strategy, even if it seemed historically unlikely and involved repositioning his formerly business-loyal party as the new tribune of the working class. As he told Minerals Week in September 2023:

The Liberal Party is the party of the worker. The Labor Party has become the party of the inner city elite and Greens.

This has been Dutton’s long game. It’s an outsider approach reminiscent of what US President Donald Trump had achieved with disaffected blue-collar Democratic supporters in the United States, and what Boris Johnson managed by turning British Labour supporters in England’s de-industrialised north into Brexiteers and then Conservative voters.

Read more:
Labor’s in with a fighting chance, but must work around an unpopular leader

A political gamble

It was not the obvious play but it may prove the right one.

After a tumultuous period in which the Liberals had cycled through three prime ministers and ignored a clear public clamour for policy modernisation on women, anti-corruption and climate change, the Morrison government had been bundled from office.

Morrison hadn’t merely failed to attract disengaged undecideds in the middle-ground, but had haemorrhaged engaged constituents from some of Australia’s safest Liberal postcodes.

Nineteen seats came off the Coalition tally in that election, yet Labor’s gain was only nine.

Something fundamental had happened. Six new centrist independents now sat in Liberal heartland seats – all of them professional women.

Numerically, they formed a kind of electoral Swiss Guard around the new Labor government’s otherwise weak primary vote and thin (two-seat) parliamentary majority.

In a sharp visual contrast to the Coalition parties, women made up around half of Anthony Albanese’s new Labor government and he moved to prioritise the very things on which the Coalition had steadfastly refused to budge – including meaningful constitutional recognition of First Peoples.

Albanese, it seemed, had tuned in to the zeitgeist. He would even go on to break a 102-year record a year later, becoming the first PM to increase his majority by taking a set off the opposition in a byelection. One more urban jewel shifted out of the Liberals’ column.

Dutton, however, never blinked.

His first press conference as leader in 2022 had been notable for the absence of the usual mea culpa – a suitably contrite acknowledgement that he’d heard the message from erstwhile Liberals who had abandoned their party for more progressive community independents.

Instead, Dutton confidently responded that the 2025 election would be decided not in these comfortable seats but in the further-flung parts of Australia’s cities where people make long commutes to work and struggle to find adequate childcare and other services.

It was a bold strategy because it meant targeting seats with healthy Labor margins.
Canberra insiders wondered privately if this was brave or simply delusional. Some concluded it could only work as a two-election strategy.

Many asked where a net gain of 19 seats would come from if not through the recovery of most or all of what became known as the “teal” seats?

Yet the combative Liberal continued to focus on prising suburbanites away from Labor with a relentless campaign emphasising the rising cost-of-living under Labor.

Three years later and even accounting for the first interest rate cut in over four years, it is Dutton’s strategy that has looked the more attuned to the electoral zeitgeist.

So much so that he goes into this election with a realistic chance of breaking another longstanding electoral record: that of replacing a first-term government.

This hasn’t been done federally since the Great Depression took out the Scullin Labor government of 1929-1931.

It’s all about geography

While only votes in ballot boxes will tell, the Coalition’s rebounding support appears to have come from the outer mortgage belt, just as he predicted.

These voters absorb their political news sporadically via social media feeds, soft breakfast interviews, and car-radio snippets.

These are media where Dutton’s crisp sound-bite messaging around cost-of-living pressures has simply been sharper and more resonant than Labor’s.

And it is by this means that these voters may have picked up that a Dutton government would seek to deport dual citizens convicted of serious crimes, stop new migrants from buying property (a policy first ridiculed as inconsequential by Labor and since copied), and cut petrol excise, temporarily taking around $14 off the price of a tank of fuel.

These voters may have noticed Dutton’s campaign against the supermarket duopoly, which includes the option of forced divestiture for so-called “price-gouging”.

Recently, he added insurance conglomerates to that divestment hit-list.

And they might have heard his dramatic nuclear “solution” to high energy costs and emissions (in reality, devilishly complex and expensive).

On top of these, semi-engaged voters might recall Dutton’s culture-war topics for which he has regularly received generous media minutes, including:

• his opposition to what he called “the Canberra Voice”
• his defence of Australia Day
• his refusal to stand in front of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags
• his oft-made claim that a Greens-Teals-Labor preoccupation with progressive issues has left the cost-of-living crisis unaddressed.

Beyond such rhetoric, Dutton has had little to say in detailed policy terms. But will that matter? However comprehensive, Labor’s list of legislated achievements has, arguably, achieved even less purchase in the electoral mind.

Polls taken as the election campaign neared showed Dutton’s Coalition was well-placed to win seats from Labor in suburban and outer-suburban areas of Perth, Melbourne, and Sydney, as well as regional seats in the NSW Central Coast.

These include seats such as Tangney and Bullwinkel in outer Perth; McEwen and Chisolm in suburban Melbourne, and as many as seven seats in NSW – mostly on the periphery of Sydney or in the industrial Hunter Valley region.

There may be other seats to move also. Liberal sources say they like their chances in Goldstein, currently held by the Teal, Zoe Daniel. And with a recent conservative turn in the Northern Territory election to the CLP, seats like the ultra-marginal Lingiari and the numerically safer Solomon could also be in play.

A YouGov MRP poll reported by the ABC on February 16 put Dutton’s chances of securing an outright majority after the election at 20%.

It measured the Coalition’s two-party-preferred support at 51.1% over Labor on 48.9%. That represents a swing towards the Coalition of 3.2%. But it is where the swing occurs that matters most.

Seat-by-seat assessment of the YouGov results suggested the Coalition would be likely to win about 73 seats (median), with a lower estimate of 65 and an upper estimate of 80, if a federal election was held today.

The same modelling indicates Labor would go backwards, holding about 66 seats in the next parliament, with a lower estimate of 59 and an upper estimate of 72. This is just one, albeit unusually large poll, but it will concern Albanese that even on its upper margin of Labor seat holds, he would not retain a majority.

Of course, the campaign can change things and already, the delayed start caused by Cyclone Alfred introduced further variables in the form of a federal budget, replete with income tax cuts.

A succession of polls conducted through March point to a Labor recovery with a Redbridge poll of 2,007 respondents, taken over March 3–11 putting Labor ahead 51%–49%. The same poll however showed a majority of people worry that the country is heading in the wrong direction.

The final contest

In political circles, people talk about momentum in campaigns, and say things like “the trend is our friend”. If true, that electoral amity has leaned decisively towards Dutton for the past year, and only recently to Labor.

But caution is always advised. Election counts invariably throw up oddities – swings being more (or less) marked in one state compared to others, and seats retained (or lost) against a broader national trend on the night.

Such surprises give the lie to the concept of uniform swings and makes prediction of a final seat count more difficult.

If the polling consensus is broadly correct – rather than being the result of herding – and the source of Dutton’s rising support is former Labor suburbs, the question is, will those vote gains materialise at sufficient scale to translate into seat gains?

If so, this election could redraw the political map and require new thinking about major party voting bases, policies and strategies into the future.

The final outcome seems likely to turn on three things:

1. Dutton’s ability to stay on message about the cost-of-living through the campaign when others in his team, buoyed by Trump’s war on wokeness, want to raise tendentious social issues.

2. Albanese’s effectiveness in convincing wayward Labor voters that Labor has in fact delivered, that the economy has turned the corner, and that Dutton’s comparative toughness is code for budget cuts that would hit them hardest.

3. Unforeseen events – at home or abroad.

The Liberal leader is surprisingly well-placed. But remember, he is coming from a long way back.

Mark Kenny 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. Can Peter Dutton flip Labor voters to rewrite electoral history? It might just work – https://theconversation.com/can-peter-dutton-flip-labor-voters-to-rewrite-electoral-history-it-might-just-work-248664