Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Linette Umbrello, Postdoctoral research associate, Queensland University of Technology

You probably know about the Tasmanian devil. You might even know about its smaller, less-famous relative, the spotted-tailed quoll.

But these are far from the only meat-eating marsupials. Australia is home to a suite of other carnivorous and insectivorous pouched mammals as well, some of them the size of a mouse or smaller.

Tiniest of all are the planigales, some of which weigh less than a teaspoonful of water. Despite their size, these fierce predators often take on prey as big as themselves.

To date, there are four known species of planigale found across Australia. We have recently discovered another two species, both inhabitants of the Pilbara region of northwest Western Australia: the orange-headed Pilbara planigale (Planigale kendricki) and the cracking-clay Pilbara planigale (P. tealei).

How many kinds of planigale are there?

The name planigale translates to “flat weasel”, an allusion to their extremely flat heads, which allow them to shelter in small cracks in rocks and clay soils. Planigales are among Australia’s smallest mammals, with some weighing an average of 4–6 grams (and measuring around 11cm in length), and other species a bit larger at 8–17 grams (and 13cm long).

Scientific studies from the late 1970s onward using body-shape and DNA data have suggested there are many more planigale species than we think.

We put these theories to the test, and found that planigales in the Pilbara display unique body shapes and are genetically unrelated to any of the four known planigale species.

Why have these species only been described now?

The process of describing these two new species was actually started more than 20 years ago, by scientists who were working at the Western Australian Museum at the time.

Their work began after ecologists conducting surveys for developing mines in the Pilbara were capturing planigales that didn’t really fit the descriptions of the known species. For want of a better option, they were still usually identified as either the common planigale (P. maculata) or the long-tailed planigale (P. ingrami).

Read more:
Australia has hundreds of mammal species. We want to find them all – before they’re gone

Scientists led by taxonomist Ken Aplin began examining specimens held in the WA Museum and sequencing their DNA. These studies helped to confirm the discovery of two new species.

Sadly, Ken fell ill and passed away in 2019. This is where we stepped in.

Through support from the Australian Biological Resources Study and the Queensland University of Technology we were able to finish off Ken’s species descriptions and submit the research for publication. This is a crucial step in taxonomy – the species description has to be published before the new name can be considered official.

What do we know about the new species?

Both new species occur in the Pilbara and surrounding areas. The orange-headed Pilbara planigale is the larger of the two, weighing an average of 7g (up to 12g for large males) with a longer, pointier snout and bright orange colouring on the head.

The cracking-clay Pilbara planigale is much smaller, averaging just 4g with darker colouration and a shorter face. It has only been found on cracking clay soils, hence its name.

The orange-headed Pilbara planigale has been found on rocky and sandy soils as well, but both species require a dense cover of native grasses to persist. Both species actively forage during the night, while taking shelter during the day.

Read more:
A 140-year-old Tassie tiger brain sample survived two world wars and made it to our lab. Here’s what we found

This means the two widespread species, the common planigale and the long-tailed planigale, do not occur in the Pilbara or on neighbouring Barrow Island, as was previously thought.

There is still a lot more work for us to do as there remain two “species complexes” of planigales. These are groups where genetic data suggests a species is comprised of multiple different forms.

We’ll be following up on this with more analysis to define more of Australia’s tiniest mammals.

Linette Umbrello receives funding from the Australian Biological Resources Study program and the Queensland University of Technology. Linette is a Research Associate at the Western Australian Museum.

Andrew M. Baker receives funding from the Australian Biological Resources Study Program.

Kenny Travouillon receives funding from the Australian Biological Resources Study Program, and is an adjunct at Curtin University.

– ref. Two new Australian mammal species just dropped – and they are very small – https://theconversation.com/two-new-australian-mammal-species-just-dropped-and-they-are-very-small-210386

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Randolph Grace, Professor of Psychology, University of Canterbury

Everyone knows that arithmetic is true: 2 + 2 = 4.

But surprisingly, we don’t know why it’s true.

By stepping outside the box of our usual way of thinking about numbers, my colleagues and I have recently shown that arithmetic has biological roots and is a natural consequence of how perception of the world around us is organised.

Our results explain why arithmetic is true and suggest that mathematics is a realisation in symbols of the fundamental nature and creativity of the mind.

Thus, the miraculous correspondence between mathematics and physical reality that has been a source of wonder from the ancient Greeks to the present — as explored in astrophysicist Mario Livio’s book Is God a mathematician? — suggests the mind and world are part of a common unity.

Why is arithmetic universally true?

Humans have been making symbols for numbers for more than 5,500 years. More than 100 distinct notation systems are known to have been used by different civilisations, including Babylonian, Egyptian, Etruscan, Mayan and Khmer.

The remarkable fact is that despite the great diversity of symbols and cultures, all are based on addition and multiplication. For example, in our familiar Hindu-Arabic numerals: 1,434 = (1 x 1000) + (4 x 100) + (3 x 10) + (4 x 1).

Why have humans invented the same arithmetic, over and over again? Could arithmetic be a universal truth waiting to be discovered?

Read more:
Pythagoras’ revenge: humans didn’t invent mathematics, it’s what the world is made of

To unravel the mystery, we need to ask why addition and multiplication are its fundamental operations. We recently posed this question and found that no satisfactory answer – one that met standards of scientific rigour – was available from philosophy, mathematics or the cognitive sciences.

The fact that we don’t know why arithmetic is true is a critical gap in our knowledge. Arithmetic is the foundation for higher mathematics, which is indispensable for science.

Consider a thought experiment. Physicists in the future have achieved the goal of a “theory of everything” or “God equation”. Even if such a theory could correctly predict all physical phenomena in the universe, it would not be able to explain where arithmetic itself comes from or why it is universally true.

Answering these questions is necessary for us to fully understand the role of mathematics in science.

Bees provide a clue

We proposed a new approach based on the assumption that arithmetic has a biological origin.

Many non-human species, including insects, show an ability for spatial navigation which seems to require the equivalent of algebraic computation. For example, bees can take a meandering journey to find nectar but then return by the most direct route, as if they can calculate the direction and distance home.

How their miniature brain (about 960,000 neurons) achieves this is unknown. These calculations might be the non-symbolic precursors of addition and multiplication, honed by natural selection as the optimal solution for navigation.

Arithmetic may be based on biology and special in some way because of evolution’s fine-tuning.

Read more:
Bees learn better when they can explore. Humans might work the same way

Stepping outside the box

To probe more deeply into arithmetic, we need to go beyond our habitual, concrete understanding and think in more general and abstract terms. Arithmetic consists of a set of elements and operations that combine two elements to give another element.

In the universe of possibilities, why are the elements represented as numbers and the operations as addition and multiplication? This is a meta-mathematical question – a question about mathematics itself that can be addressed using mathematical methods.

In our research, we proved that four assumptions – monotonicity, convexity, continuity and isomorphism – were sufficient to uniquely identify arithmetic (addition and multiplication over the real numbers) from the universe of possibilities.

• Monotonicity is the intuition of “order preserving” and helps us keep track of our place in the world, so that when we approach an object it looms larger but smaller when we move away.

• Convexity is grounded in intuitions of “betweenness”. For example, the four corners of a football pitch define the playing field even without boundary lines connecting them.

• Continuity describes the smoothness with which objects seem to move in space and time.

• Isomorphism is the idea of sameness or analogy. It’s what allows us to recognise that a cat is more similar to a dog than to a rock.

Thus, arithmetic is special because it is a consequence of these purely qualitative conditions. We argue that these conditions are principles of perceptual organisation that shape how we and other animals experience the world – a kind of “deep structure” in perception with roots in evolutionary history.

In our proof, they act as constraints to eliminate all possibilities except arithmetic – a bit like how a sculptor’s work reveals a statue hidden in a block of stone.

What is mathematics?

Taken together, these four principles structure our perception of the world so that our experience is ordered and cognitively manageable. They are like coloured spectacles that shape and constrain our experience in particular ways.

When we peer through these spectacles at the abstract universe of possibilities, we “see” numbers and arithmetic.

Thus, our results show that arithmetic is biologically-based and a natural consequence of how our perception is structured.

Although this structure is shared with other animals, only humans have invented mathematics. It is humanity’s most intimate creation, a realisation in symbols of the fundamental nature and creativity of the mind.

In this sense, mathematics is both invented (uniquely human) and discovered (biologically-based). The seemingly miraculous success of mathematics in the physical sciences hints that our mind and the world are not separate, but part of a common unity.

The arc of mathematics and science points toward non-dualism, a philosophical concept that describes how the mind and the universe as a whole are connected, and that any sense of separation is an illusion. This is consistent with many spiritual traditions (Taoism, Buddhism) and Indigenous knowledge systems such as mātauranga Māori.

Randolph Grace receives funding from the Marsden Fund, administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand.

– ref. Arithmetic has a biological origin – it’s an expression in symbols of the ‘deep structure’ of our perception – https://theconversation.com/arithmetic-has-a-biological-origin-its-an-expression-in-symbols-of-the-deep-structure-of-our-perception-211337

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andy Marks, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Strategy, Government and Alliances, Western Sydney University

Changes to the management of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party in NSW reaffirm an unchanging rule of politics. Opponents be damned. The fiercest fighting is reserved for colleagues.

The party’s federal leader, Hanson, confirmed her national executive’s decision to replace its NSW division and declare Latham’s position as NSW parliamentary leader vacant.

A spokesperson for Hanson said a decline in the party’s performance at the March 2023 NSW election warranted a review of the “relationship between the organisation and parliamentary wings of the party”.

Latham challenged the decision, arguing if electoral “under-performance” was the rationale for replacing the NSW executive, then Hanson should “buy a mirror”. The party’s wider fortunes are the real issue, he observed, noting recent dips in support nationally and in Queensland.

Insisting he remains the leader of the One Nation NSW parliamentary team, Latham alleges the national intervention is really about control of the party’s finances. He committed to saying more on that issue when parliament next sits.

Read more:
Clive Palmer and One Nation flopped at the election. What happened?

Discord is not new to the party. ABC electoral analyst Antony Green observes of One Nation’s 35 state and federal parliamentarians over time, just “seven members have lasted long enough to face re-election”.

This latest conflict follows Hanson’s condemnation, in April, of Latham’s highly graphic social media post about independent NSW MP Alex Greenwich. Hanson labelled the post “disgusting”, asking Latham to issue an apology. He refused.

It is unlikely Latham and his One Nation parliamentary colleagues, Tania Mihailuk and Rod Roberts, will remain with the party. While their terms are assured – Latham’s expires in 2031 and his colleagues’ in 2027 – it is unclear what electoral traction they may have without Hanson’s backing.

Hanson’s return as leader ahead of the 2016 federal election proved pivotal in One Nation’s resurgence after a period of decline. However, direct support for Hanson in NSW has proven elusive, with her 2011 bid for election to the state’s upper house falling short.

Latham, on the other hand, has forged a sizeable support base in NSW. His profile was sufficient for him to resign mid-term from the Legislative Council position he secured in 2019, to successfully extend his term by eight years at the 2023 poll.

The party’s ambitions to secure lower house representation at this year’s NSW election went unfulfilled, but it did secure significant levels of support. In some seats in Sydney’s west, backing for One Nation eclipsed the Greens’ third-party status.

In Camden, One Nation attracted 13.8% of the primary vote. In Campbelltown, 11.5%. At Hawkesbury, 10.3%. In Badgerys Creek, Londonderry and Penrith, the party drew 8.2%, and in Leppington it secured 7.5%.

It was not quite a “Teal wave”, but the beginnings of third-party support that could afford One Nation strategic leverage over time. Many of these emerging subregions of support for the party overlay areas of mortgage, rental and cost-of-living stress.

While the NSW Labor government is yet to feel significant political pressure from the housing crisis and rising interest rates, a degree of negative sentiment is emerging over frustrated wage negotiations. Discontent is particularly apparent among many education, health and comparable public sector workers. A significant proportion of them reside in Sydney’s west and helped restore Labor’s electoral fortunes in a crucial battleground.

The test for Latham, Mihailuk and Roberts will be their capacity to navigate this episode of party turmoil, remain unified, and position themselves to build on proven levels of support for their brand of politics, whatever banner it falls under.

Read more:
Pauline Hanson built a political career on white victimhood and brought far-right rhetoric to the mainstream

The trio have over three years to do so. It’s not an impossible task, particularly given Latham’s capacity to rally support, and the “severe challenges” predicted to constrain the upcoming NSW budget.

Complicating any scenario for Latham and co is a national leader, in Hanson, who likely shares their awareness of One Nation’s potential brand growth in one of the fastest-growing regions in Australia, and the motivation to grasp it.

If the ferocity of internal conflict is a marker of true politics, then One Nation might be about to remind us of some home truths about NSW party politics and its infamous, albeit recently becalmed, penchant for volatility.

Andy Marks 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. Hanson-Latham rift leaves One Nation’s future in NSW uncertain – https://theconversation.com/hanson-latham-rift-leaves-one-nations-future-in-nsw-uncertain-211548

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marian-Andrei Rizoiu, Senior Lecturer in Behavioral Data Science, University of Technology Sydney

Social media platforms have become the “digital town squares” of our time, enabling communication and the exchange of ideas on a global scale. However, the unregulated nature of these platforms has allowed the proliferation of harmful content such as misinformation, disinformation and hate speech.

Regulating the online world has proven difficult, but one promising avenue is suggested by the European Union’s Digital Services Act, passed in November 2022. This legislation mandates “trusted flaggers” to identify certain kinds of problematic content to platforms, who must then remove it within 24 hours.

Will it work, given the fast pace and complex viral dynamics of social media environments? To find out, we modelled the effect of the new rule, in research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Our results show this approach can indeed reduce the spread of harmful content. We also suggest some insights into how the rules can be implemented in the most effective way.

Understanding the spread of harmful content

We used a mathematical model of information spread to analyse how harmful content is disseminated through social networks.

In the model, each harmful post is treated as a “self-exciting point process”. This means it draws more people into the discussion over time and generates further harmful posts, similar to a word-of-mouth process.

The intensity of a post’s self-propagation decreases over time. However, if left unchecked, its “offspring” can generate more offspring, leading to exponential growth.

The potential for harm reduction

In our study, we used two key measures to assess the effectiveness of the kind of moderation set out in the Digital Services Act: potential harm and content half-life.

A post’s potential harm represents the number of harmful offspring it generates. Content half-life denotes the amount of time required for half of all the post’s offspring to be generated.

We found moderation by the rules of the Digital Services Act can effectively reduce harm, even on platforms with short content half-lives, such as X (formerly known as Twitter). While faster moderation is always more effective, we found that moderating even after 24 hours could still reduce the number of harmful offspring by up to 50%.

The role of reaction time and harm reduction

The reaction time required for effective content moderation increases with both the content half-life and potential harm. To put it another way, for content that is longer-lived and generates large numbers of harmful offspring, intervening later can still prevent many harmful subsequent posts.

This suggests the approach of the Digital Services Act can effectively combat harmful content, even on fast-paced platforms like X.

We also found the amount of harm reduction increases for content with greater potential harm. While apparently counterintuitive, this indicates moderation is effective when it targets the offspring of offspring generation – that is, when it breaks the word-of-mouth cycle.

Making the most of moderation efforts

Prior research has shown tools based on artificial intelligence struggle to detect online harmful content. The authors of such content are aware of the detection tools, and adapt their language to avoid detection.

Read more:
Can ideology-detecting algorithms catch online extremism before it takes hold?

The Digital Services Act moderation approach relies on manual tagging of posts by “trusted flaggers”, who will have limited time and resources.

To make the most of their efforts, flaggers should focus their efforts on content with high potential harm for which our research shows that moderation is most effective. We estimate the potential harm of a post at its creation by extrapolating its expected number of offspring from previously observed discussions.

Implementing the Digital Services Act

Social media platforms already employ content moderation teams, and our research suggests the major platforms at least already have enough staff to enforce the Digital Services Act legislation. There are, however, questions about the cultural awareness of the existing staff as some of these teams are based in different countries to the majority of content posters they are moderating.

The success of the legislation will lie in appointing trusted flaggers with sufficient cultural and language knowledge, developing practical reporting tools for harmful content, and ensuring timely moderation.

Our study’s framework will provide policymakers with valuable guidance in drafting mechanisms for content moderation that prioritise efforts and reaction times effectively.

A healthier and safer digital public square

As social media platforms continue to shape public discourse, addressing the challenges posed by harmful content is crucial. Our research on the effectiveness of moderating harmful online content offers valuable insights for policymakers.

By understanding the dynamics of content spread, optimising moderation efforts, and implementing regulations like the Digital Services Act, we can strive for a healthier and safer digital public square where harmful content is mitigated, and constructive dialogue thrives.

Read more:
The ‘digital town square’? What does it mean when billionaires own the online spaces where we gather?

Marian-Andrei Rizoiu receives funding from Australian Department of Home Affairs, the Defence Science and Technology Group and the Defence Innovation Network

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

– ref. Can human moderators ever really rein in harmful online content? New research says yes – https://theconversation.com/can-human-moderators-ever-really-rein-in-harmful-online-content-new-research-says-yes-209882

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Glasziou, Professor of Medicine, Bond University

When Sophie was pregnant with her first baby, she had an oral glucose tolerance blood test. A few days later, the hospital phoned telling her she had gestational diabetes.

Despite having only a slightly raised glucose (blood sugar) level, Sophie describes being diagnosed as affecting her pregnancy tremendously. She tested her blood glucose levels four times a day, kept food diaries and had extra appointments with doctors and dietitians.

She was advised to have an induction because of the risk of having a large baby. At 39 weeks her son was born, weighing a very average 3.5kg. But he was separated from Sophie for four hours so his glucose levels could be monitored.

Sophie is not alone. About one in six pregnant women in Australia are now diagnosed with gestational diabetes.

That was not always so. New criteria were developed in 2010 which dropped an initial screening test and lowered the diagnostic set-points. Gestational diabetes diagnoses have since more than doubled.

But recent studies cast doubt on the ways we diagnose and manage gestational diabetes, especially for women like Sophie with only mildly elevated glucose. Here’s what’s wrong with gestational diabetes screening.

The glucose test is unreliable

The test used to diagnose gestational diabetes – the oral glucose tolerance test – has poor reproducibility. This means subsequent tests may give a different result.

In a recent Australian trial of earlier testing in pregnancy, one-third of the women initially classified as having gestational diabetes (but neither told nor treated) did not have gestational diabetes when retested later in pregnancy. That is a problem.

Usually when a test has poor reproducibility – for example, blood pressure or cholesterol – we repeat the test to confirm before making a diagnosis.

Much of the increase in the incidence of gestational diabetes after the introduction of new diagnostic criteria was due to the switch from using two tests to only using a single test for diagnosis.

The thresholds are too low

Despite little evidence of benefit for either women or babies, the current Australian criteria diagnose women with only mildly abnormal results as having “gestational diabetes”.

Recent studies have shown this doesn’t benefit women and may cause harms. A New Zealand trial of more than 4,000 women randomly assigned women to be assessed based on the current Australian thresholds or to higher threshold levels (similar to the pre-2010 criteria).

The trial found no additional benefit from using the current low threshold levels, with overall no difference in the proportion of infants born large for gestational age.

Read more:
Sixteen-pound baby born in Brazil: here’s what increases the risk of giving birth to a giant baby

However, the trial found several harms, including more neonatal hypoglycaemia (low blood sugar in newborns), induction of labour, use of diabetic medications including insulin injections, and use of health services.

The study authors also looked at the subgroup of women who were diagnosed with glucose levels between the higher and lower thresholds. In this subgroup, there was some reduction in large babies, and in shoulder problems at delivery.

But there was also an increase in small babies. This is of concern because being small for gestational age can also have consequences for babies, including long-term health consequences.

Testing too early

Some centres have begun testing women at higher risk of gestational diabetes earlier in the pregnancy (between 12 and 20 weeks).

However, a recent trial showed no clear benefit compared with testing at the usual 24–28 weeks: possibly fewer large babies, but again matched by more small babies.

There was a reduction in transient “respiratory distress” – needing extra oxygen for a few hours – but not in serious clinical events.

Impact on women with gestational diabetes

For women diagnosed using the higher glucose thresholds, dietary advice, glucose monitoring and, where necessary, insulin therapy has been shown to reduce complications during delivery and the post-natal period.

However, current models of care can also cause harm. Women with gestational diabetes are often denied their preferred model of care – for example, midwifery continuity of carer. In rural areas, they may have to transfer to a larger hospital, requiring longer travel to antenatal visits and moving to a larger centre for their birth – away from their families and support networks for several weeks.

Read more:
Are you at risk of being diagnosed with gestational diabetes? It depends on where you live

Women say the diagnosis often dominates their antenatal care and their whole experience of pregnancy, reducing time for other issues or concerns.

Women from culturally and linguistically diverse communities find it difficult to reconcile the advice given about diet and exercise with their own cultural practices and beliefs about pregnancy.

Some women with gestational diabetes become extremely anxious about their eating and undertake extensive calorie restrictions or disordered eating habits.

Time to reassess the advice

Recent evidence from both randomised controlled trials and from qualitative studies with women diagnosed with gestational diabetes suggest we need to reassess how we currently diagnose and manage gestational diabetes, particularly for women with only slightly elevated levels.

It is time for a review to consider all the problems described above. This review should include the views of all those impacted by these decisions: women in childbearing years, and the GPs, dietitians, diabetes educators, midwives and obstetricians who care for them.

Read more:
Had gestational diabetes? Here are 5 things to help lower your future risk of type 2 diabetes

This article was co-authored by maternity services consumer advocate Leah Hardiman.

Paul Glasziou receives funding from an NHMRC Investigator grant.

Jenny Doust receives funding from NHMRC and MRFF.

– ref. 1 in 6 women are diagnosed with gestational diabetes. But this diagnosis may not benefit them or their babies – https://theconversation.com/1-in-6-women-are-diagnosed-with-gestational-diabetes-but-this-diagnosis-may-not-benefit-them-or-their-babies-205919

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joe Duggan, PhD Candidate, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Australian National University

As climate records tumble and wildfires rage, people all over the planet are feeling the toll.

Negative emotional responses such as anger, fear, sadness and despair recorded in children and young people are also felt by climate scientists. But positive emotions such as hope are also part of the picture.

Anxiety is a natural response to these conflicting emotions. The consequences range from trouble sleeping, to difficulty working and socialising. Climate anxiety can also exacerbate or trigger other mental health problems.

In our new research, we explored using group therapy to create a safe space for scientists to share their feelings. Such safe spaces are vital for people to understand and process their emotions and ultimately find the strength and resilience to continue their important work.

Anxiety can trigger action

Climate anxiety has not been classified as a mental health disorder. Some researchers warn against calling it a disease, because this implies it’s caused by some type of dysfunction within the individual, requiring therapeutic intervention, perhaps even medication.

Rather, they argue climate anxiety can be a catalyst for action. It is also a reasonable response to what is a significant existential risk.

We know collective and individual climate action can alleviate negative climate emotions.

We also know negative emotions such as guilt are less motivating than positive emotions. The limitations of fear as a motivator are well documented.

A fly on the wall

Over two days, seven environmental scientists participated in intensive group therapy facilitated by a qualified psychologist. They shared their feelings about climate change, discussed academic pressures, and how their individual identities intersected with their professional roles and research.

We analysed transcripts from these sessions and found:

• 1. Deep awareness of the climate crisis puts scientists at greater risk of mental health problems. As one participant said,

It’s very easy to fall into this vortex, right? Of thinking about climate change as a problem and not just climate change, but […] global environmental change, ecological loss.

• 2. The nature of academia means climate emotions overlap with “intersectionality” (the interconnected nature of race, class, gender and so on) to worsen their experience. According to one scientist,

I always tell students you have to do experiments in pairs, documented, because as a person of colour, I would be doubted, you know, if we made that great discovery.

• 3. Scientists do not talk about the emotional toll of their working knowledge. As one said:

How do you talk to your colleagues [about climate change] We don’t talk about it. We don’t talk about how [climate change] is making us feel. And I didn’t know if that was just me, but I was also like, why don’t we talk about it?

• 4. Safe spaces such as group therapy can have an immediate valuable cathartic effect. One participant observed:

I’m privileged to be sitting here with an amazing group of people. I think what came out of this conversation, [from] the way things have been framed and reframed and picked apart and put back together again, is incredibly useful.

Read more:
Climate anxiety is real. Why talking about it matters

More work to be done

Our findings support the value of group therapy as a cathartic outlet for climate emotions among environmental scientists. But further research is needed before this intervention is offered routinely within research institutions, among existing colleagues and peers.

In this case the scientists were strangers from across the United States, brought together by a Swedish documentary film crew. That may have made them more inclined to open up and share their emotions.

We also need to know how long this cathartic effect lasts, and what long-term support might be necessary to foster lasting benefits.

Different generations and groups experience a wide range of different climate emotions. Equally, a wide range of solutions must be made available to help people, particularly environmental scientists, deal with the negative emotions affecting their daily lives.

Group therapy is not a silver bullet, but it does show promise. The tool allows people to share their emotions, realise they are not alone, and gain a sense of community and catharsis from spending dedicated time with others who find themselves in similar situations.

As the climate crisis continues to worsen, more people will be exposed to harm. Even more will be exposed to reports and news coverage discussing our increasingly uncertain future. As a result, climate anxiety is likely to become more prolific, perhaps most so in climate scientists. This presents a real and urgent need to explore how we manage and process climate anxiety.

While collective and individual action offer ways to reduce climate anxiety indirectly, we also need more platforms for knowledge sharing, more safe spaces and more research into managing the mental health impacts that we are all clearly already feeling.

Read more:
Do phrases like ‘global boiling’ help or hinder climate action?

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. Group therapy helps scientists cope with challenging ‘climate emotions’ – https://theconversation.com/group-therapy-helps-scientists-cope-with-challenging-climate-emotions-208933

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tets Kimura, Adjunct Lecturer, Creative Arts, Flinders University

For most of the world’s population, the end of the second world war was a glorious day. This was not necessarily the case for Japanese-Australians, who faced repatriation to Japan after being interned by their home country, Australia.

Shortly after Japan entered the war in December 1941, 1,141 Japanese people living in Australia were seized and transferred to “enemy” camps – accounting for 98% of the total Japanese population in Australia. This was much higher than the proportion of Italians and Germans sent to Australian internment camps.

At the camps, such as those located in Loveday in South Australia, Tatura in Victoria and Hay and Cowra in New South Wales, Japanese internees were treated by Australian guards according to the Geneva Convention. But there was little contemporary Australian press coverage of these camps, and many Australians did not know about them – even if they lived locally.

In my newly published research, I have been exploring the forgotten experiences of Japanese-Australians during the second world war.

Read more:
The overlooked story of the incarceration of Japanese Americans from Hawaii during World War II

The Cowra breakout

One of the only pieces of contemporary news reporting on the internment of Japanese people followed the Cowra breakout in August 1944, when captured prisoners of war tried to escape. Four Australians and 231 Japanese soldiers were killed.

Even after the war, most of the media coverage focused on these POWs rather than the interred Australian residents.

Japanese POWs followed the Senjinkun military code, by which “a soldier was expected not to survive to suffer the dishonour of capture”.

This was encouraged by cultural critiques, artists and poets, exemplified by a surviving poem by Sonosuke Sato. Japanese soldiers were brainwashed to believe the chance to die was an honour.

Common to Australian media publications on this breakout is a tendency to treat the Japanese as “others”. A clear distinction exists between “us” and “them”. It was difficult for Australians to understand the motives of the fatal military decision to escape the camp where they had been treated humanely.

In contrast, media reports did not mention the experiences of the civilian Japanese living in Australia and therefore free from the Japanese military mindset.

Japanese-Australians

In pre-war Australia, many Japanese-Australians were working as pearl divers. There were also a hundred or so Japanese elites working for banks and trading companies in Sydney and Melbourne.

Many Japanese had departed Australia in the 1930s when an unofficial trade war erupted between Australia and Japan. More left as the threat of war grew and Japanese residents faced increasing discrimination and fewer business opportunities.

Not every Australian with a Japanese background associated themselves with the community, or identified strongly with their heritage. But when Japan joined the war, Australia captured the “Japanese”, even those who had lived in the country for decades or were born in Australia.

They were joined in camps by Japanese people shipped from nearby allied territories such as New Zealand, the Pacific and Indonesia.

One of them was Cairns-born Samuel Nakashiba, raised as an Australian without Japanese language fluency. Nevertheless, he was captured and imprisoned as “Japanese”.

Nakashiba lodged his first application for release in June 1942. He was not released until May 1945, when the relevant authority found a job for him in an isolated place in Queensland.

Yet Nakashiba was still lucky. He was one of only around 200 Japanese permitted to remain in Australia after the war. The rest were deported to Japan, even those with no or few ties to the country.

Repatriation to Japan

Hikotaro Wada, a laundryman, was arrested in Kalgoorlie in December 1941.

Arriving in Australia in 1891 when he was 21, he briefly visited Japan in the 1920s, when he discovered he had no family left there and immediately came back.

He applied for release during the war but was unsuccessful. He was sent back to Japan in 1946 after having lived in Australia for 50 years. His fate after repatriation is unknown.

Shigeru Yamaguchi, born in Broome, was listed as “Australian-born Japanese” in the official camp record. He stayed in the camp until the end of war and was then repatriated to Japan.

Prior to his arrest in January 1942, Yamaguchi had made a life as the owner of a vegetable garden in Geraldton, Western Australia. After the war, a major at Loveday camp “advised” him to leave for Japan, believing his prospects would be better there.

In 1947, while serving as an interpreter for the Allied Forces in Tokyo, Yamaguchi requested a re-entry permit to Australia. He was not granted permission to return. His fate after 1947 is also unknown.

In the 1950s, some Japanese divers who had worked in pre-war Broome returned to Australia. As a farmer, Yamaguchi was unlikely to have been in this party. My research on Yamaguchi ended here; Japan has highly restrictive privacy laws that block access to official individual records by anyone other than direct offspring.

Read more:
300 letters of outrage from Japanese Canadians who lost their homes

The American redress movement

During the United States’ involvement in the war, 112,000 “Japanese” were placed in internment camps. Some chose to move to Japan after the ill treatment by the US government.

Japanese-Americans began the redress movement in the 1960s. President Ronald Reagan signed an act to grant reparations for the internment of Japanese-Americans in 1988. In 1991, President George Bush senior stated: “The internment of Americans of Japanese ancestry was a great injustice, and it will never be repeated.”

By contrast, in Australia no apology has been made to the “Japanese” people who were captured or repatriated, even when Australia was their home.

In the same way stories of diggers and soldiers are Australian stories, experiences of the Japanese-Australians who were unfairly labelled as enemy aliens at our own internment camps should also be regarded as Australian stories.

Have we listened to their stories? And can we say sorry?

This work by Tets Kimura was initially supported by the National Library of Australia’s Asia Study Grant. He also received the History Trust of South Australia’s South Australian History Fund to visit former camp sites in South Australia, and the Australian Institute of Art History’s Art History Research Grant to visit Cowra, New South Wales. An earlier draft was presented at the 2022 symposium “The Art and Creativity of Japanese People Incarcerated in World War II in Australasia and the Pacific” which was funded by the Toshiba International Foundation—before the full academic article was published in the Journal of Australian Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/14443058.2023.2209594

– ref. Discrimination, internment camps, then deportation: the end of the second world war did not mean peace for Japanese-Australians – https://theconversation.com/discrimination-internment-camps-then-deportation-the-end-of-the-second-world-war-did-not-mean-peace-for-japanese-australians-208582

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

Qantas is providing travel for the Yes23 campaign and the Uluru Dialogue teams “so they can engage with regional and remote Australians”.

The airline is also decorating three planes with special “yes” campaign livery.

Outgoing Qantas chief Alan Joyce appeared on Monday with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Indigenous figures for the unveiling of the livery. It will be on a Qantas Boeing 737, a QantasLink Dash 8 Turboprop and a Jetstar Airbus A320.

Joyce has previously been a strong campaigner, notably on the same sex marriage issue.

The Qantas travel donation might invite some controversy, given the recent reaction against the airline and Joyce over high fares and late and cancelled flights.

Recently there has also been criticism of the apparent closeness between Albanese and Qantas and its CEO.

The government has refused Qatar Airways additional flights into Australia. It said it was acting in the “national interest”, referring variously to climate change and protecting local jobs.

Qantas opposed the additional flights. So did women who are taking legal action over a 2020 incident in which they were taken off a Qatar Airways aircraft and subjected to intimate searches after a newborn baby was found abandoned in Doha airport. The Australian government protested strongly at the time. It says the incident has not driven the refusal of extra flights.

Albanese has been embarrassed by a report that his son, Nathan, had been made a member of the exclusive Qantas Chairman’s Lounge.

The PM would have faced questions on these issues had he spoken to reporters after the Qantas event, but he did not do so.

Asked by The Conversation for the total dollar value of the travel Qantas is providing for the “yes” campaigners, and who would be eligible, the airline only said it would be fairly modest.

Apart from the specific example of Qantas, there is now some feeling that corporates’ involvement in the referendum may alienate rather than persuade some voters.

Read more:
Politics with Michelle Grattan: ‘yes’ campaigner Thomas Mayo and ‘no’ advocate Derryn Hinch on the Voice

Joyce said support for an Indigenous Voice continued Qantas’s “long commitment to reconciliation and, more broadly, the notion of a ‘fair go’”.

We’re supporting the Yes23 campaign because we believe a formal voice to government will help close the gap for First Nations people in important areas like health, education and employment.

We know there are a range of views on this issue, including amongst our customers and employees, and we respect that. I encourage people to find out more, to listen to First Nations voices, and to make their own decisions.

Albanese paid tribute to Qantas’s “fine history of having a long-standing commitment to the cause of reconciliation”.

I do remember the impact in the mid 1990s, when you first unveiled the first of your fleet, decked out in an Indigenous design, the striking red of the Wunala dreaming, an unmistakable sight against the vivid blue sky that defines our continent.

For 100 years Qantas has shown the importance of extending ourselves, of reaching higher.

This Yes livery is a worthy addition to that tradition.

Meanwhile, Resources Minister Madeleine King, speaking in Perth, thanked the “long list” of resource companies that had come out for the Voice.

King said Western Australia was “a perfect example for the whole nation of how
listening to Aboriginal people only makes us better.”

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

– ref. Qantas throws weight behind Voice with travel for ‘yes’ campaigners – https://theconversation.com/qantas-throws-weight-behind-voice-with-travel-for-yes-campaigners-211523

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jocelyne Basseal, Associate Director, Sydney Infectious Diseases Institute (Sydney ID), Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney

When the COVID pandemic hit, epidemiologist Professor Emeritus Mary-Louise McLaws AO became the go-to expert for many journalists across the media spectrum. With new research being released daily, access to calm, reliable and knowledgeable experts like Mary-Louise – or “ML” as she was known to her friends – became paramount for them and many Australians.

Her manner was friendly and unassuming for someone so highly regarded in scientific circles. She had a gentle and calm presence on camera and a way of cutting through scientific terms and jargon to get to the heart of what really mattered to viewers, readers and listeners.

Yet she was also not afraid to question whether authorities were making the correct decisions. She expressed concerns that too few measures were being taken to stop the virus spreading through the air and about the time it took for rapid antigen tests to become publicly and freely available.

And when Mary-Louise spoke, the audience listened. Yet, she never resorted to hyperbole or exaggeration. When Australians needed someone to explain what at times seemed inexplicable, she knew all the right words. She had a unique way of taking her understanding of diseases such as COVID and being able to tell audiences exactly what they needed to hear.

Mary-Louise passed away on Saturday aged 70, some 18 months after her diagnosis with brain cancer. We had the privilege of collaborating with Mary-Louise, including on a paper to be published today about communicating health and science to the public. We hope to continue her legacy of building trust in science, even as it unfolds.

Unique skills

A reputable scientist – she spent 36 years in the University of NSW Medicine and Health Faculty – she was able to adeptly translate research findings into language the public could understand. Mary-Louise had the confidence to work with journalists and the media during a public health emergency. Along with countless interviews, she wrote 180 scientific papers and was made an Officer of the Order of Australia in 2022 for distinguished service to epidemiology and infection prevention. As she told ABC radio listeners just over a year ago:

My tone should always be – I’m not political but I will tell you what I think as an epidemiologist and as a global epidemiologist as well and what the [World Health Organization] and others are trying to achieve.

She was passionate about ensuring scientists and academic researchers develop public engagement and science communication skills to allow them to become influential champions and to rebuild trust in science.

Of her passing, UNSW Chancellor David Gonski said

We mourn the passing of a UNSW academic who was locally grown and became a superstar while remaining tenacious, humble, hardworking and caring. We are grateful for all she did for UNSW and Australia, she will not be forgotten.

Mary-Louise responded quickly to the media, respecting their deadlines. She often said that journalists have a difficult job to do. When she was diagnosed with a brain tumor, she thanked the media for helping her spread knowledge.

We hope her legacy will help pave the way for universities to encourage and train their scientists and academics to work confidently with journalists to communicate their research to the public.

A calm voice

To the Australian public, Mary-Louise was a calm voice who graced our lounge rooms daily via the ABC, sometimes signing off with “stay safe”. She wrote for and spoke to media outlets including The Conversation before and during the pandemic.

To her colleagues at UNSW, on the WHO Health Emergencies Program Expert Advisory Panel and the NSW COVID Infection Prevention and Control taskforce, she was a credible, well-regarded and respected epidemiologist and infection prevention and control expert and extended her expertise globally with many appointments.

To her students, Mary-Louise was devoted and while she demanded the highest quality of work from her doctoral students, she provided much more than just academic guidance – she was gentle, thought-provoking and always available.

To her friends and family, Mary-Louise was a nurturer, a kind, loving mother and devoted wife. Her Jewish heritage was important to her and she embraced diversity, culture and enjoyed travelling around the world experiencing all that it had to offer.

For all of us feeling her loss, there is some comfort knowing Mary-Louise’s life penetrated so many hearts and that her legacy will continue, forever.

Jocelyne Basseal is the President for the Australasian Medical Writers Association.

Sharon Salmon and Sophie Scott 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. ‘Stay safe’ – Vale Mary-Louise McLaws, a champion for the power of clear science communication – https://theconversation.com/stay-safe-vale-mary-louise-mclaws-a-champion-for-the-power-of-clear-science-communication-211502

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole Lee, Professor at the National Drug Research Institute (Melbourne), Curtin University

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article names and references deceased persons.

This month the Victorian government announced it’s establishing a permanent “sobering up” centre as part the state’s decriminalisation of public drunkenness.

Instead of arresting or fining you, police can take you to a “sobering up” centre if there is one in the area.

This is in line with a general move to treat alcohol and other drug problems, such as intoxication, as a health rather than policing issue. Most other states and territories (including Western Australia, the Northern Territory, South Australia and Queensland) have established sobering-up centres.

So what happens in these centres, and who will benefit from them?

Sobering-up centres

Sobering-up centres are safe places where people who are too intoxicated to look after themselves can go to recover.

It’s safer than being in a police cell because there are health professionals who can provide health care if someone is sick or injured.

Sobering-up centres provide something to eat, a shower, clean clothes and a laundry service. There are beds so people can rest or sleep, usually for up to 24 hours but sometimes longer.

The centre’s health workers are usually alcohol and drug workers, case workers or Aboriginal health workers. They sometimes include nurses and counsellors. The workers assess and monitor the person’s level of intoxication while they are at the centre and can arrange medical intervention if needed.

When some people stop drinking, they can become very unwell as the alcohol leaves their body so they may need to be moved to a hospital withdrawal setting. This can happen just a few hours after they stop drinking. Some people have seizures, severe shaking, hallucinations and dangerously high blood pressure during withdrawal.

The centres can also provide access to help and support, including referral to treatment, such as withdrawal and rehabilitation services, once the person is feeling better. They also may offer on-the-spot brief counselling about the person’s alcohol use or other issues, and provide harm-reduction information so next time they drink they have a better chance of avoiding being in risky situations.

When someone has a problem with alcohol, the first step is to reduce immediate harm because it can sometimes be a slow process to change longstanding drinking behaviours. Think about how hard it is to stick to those New Year’s resolutions we have all made. Even when people are really motivated to make changes it can be difficult and they may have several goes before they achieve progress.

Do sobering-up centres work?

Sobering-up centres are effective at reducing the harms caused by alcohol including accidents, self-harm and harm to others. One evaluation of the use of sobering-up centres in WA over a 15-year period found the use of these centres, compared with traditional police lockups, resulted in:

• reductions in police time and resources previously involved in detaining and monitoring intoxicated people in lockups

• reduced use of court time and resources

• reduced levels of domestic violence and other problems associated with alcohol abuse

• reduced burden on hospitals because of fewer hospitalisations for alcohol-related illnesses and accidents.

Surveys of law enforcement overseas indicate strong support by police for the use of sobering-up centres, over traditional arrest, for non-violent individuals who are publicly inebriated.

Read more:
From tough love to interventions, what works when a loved one is struggling with addiction?

Can anyone access them?

A person will be able to access the sobering-up service if they:

• are intoxicated in public

• are within the service region

• do not have urgent health needs that require an emergency response

• consent to receive the service

• do not pose a serious and imminent safety risk to themselves or other people.

As well as being taken there by police, a person can take themselves to a sobering-up centre or be taken by a friend or family member.

Read more:
Alcohol problems aren’t for life, and AA isn’t the only option. 8 things film and TV get wrong about drug and alcohol treatment

Are sobering-up centres a good idea?

Public drunkenness laws disproportionately affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and homeless people, partly because they are more likely to be in a public place when drinking, and partly because of overpolicing of these populations.

The Victorian government committed to decriminalising public drunkenness in 2019 during the coronial inquest into the death of Yorta Yorta woman Tanya Day. She was arrested for public drunkenness in 2017 and died while in custody after hitting her head on the concrete wall of her cell. The coroner said her death was preventable.

There have been five more Aboriginal deaths in custody in Victoria since 2020. The death in custody rate for Aboriginal people in Australia is disproportionately high compared with the rate for non-Aboriginal people, representing one in five custody deaths.

Sobering-up centres are a more effective and less harmful response to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people found intoxicated in public places than a police cell.

There has been a general shift in both policy and community sentiment away from criminal justice approaches to alcohol and other drugs, and towards health and welfare approaches. More people in the community endorse spending on education (41.2%) and treatment (32.1%) to address alcohol issues than law enforcement (26.7%). Support for harm-reduction measures for illicit drugs is showing the same trend.

A US study found every dollar spent on drug and alcohol treatment saves the community $7 by reducing use and criminal behaviour, and improving health, wellbeing, and participation in the community and employment.

Shifting alcohol and other drug responses from law enforcement to health and welfare reduces the harms associated with coming into contact with the criminal justice system, saves money that can be reinvested into effective prevention programs, and increasingly has the support of the general community.

Read more:
To reduce harm from alcohol, we need Indigenous-led responses

Nicole Lee is CEO at Hello Sunday Morning and also works as a consultant in the alcohol and other drug sector and a psychologist in private practice. She has previously been awarded funding by Australian and state governments, NHMRC and other bodies for evaluation and research into alcohol and other drug prevention and treatment.

Jarryd Bartle 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. What happens in a ‘sobering up’ centre? – https://theconversation.com/what-happens-in-a-sobering-up-centre-211038

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hulya Gilbert, Lecturer in Planning and Human Geography, La Trobe University

Amid Australia’s housing crisis, land-supply slogans are once again dominating discussions about the solutions. Governments and private developers often blame housing crises on lack of land for new housing. Their solution? Rezone farmland for housing on the suburban fringe.

Earlier this year, the South Australian government announced the state’s largest ever release of land for housing. Some 23,700 houses are to be built on the fringe of Adelaide. SA Premier Peter Malinauskas has even said urban sprawl “is not a dirty word”.

Support for the creation of fringe suburbs, while still business as usual in Australia, reflects outdated views. [Evidence] of the need to halt urban sprawl is now overwhelming. The spruiking of these greenfield developments as affordable and good for young families with children is at odds with their experiences of these developments.

Read more:
National’s housing u-turn promotes urban sprawl – cities and ratepayers will pick up the bill

What life is actually like on the suburban fringe

Greenfield developments are often attractive to young families due to the perception of affordable housing and promises of local schools, childcare, shops and public transport. However, these neighbourhoods rarely live up to such expectations. Instead, they often entrench disadvantage due to the neglect of transport costs when assessing how affordable suburban housing is.

Read more:
Outer suburbs’ housing cost advantage vanishes when you add in transport – it needs to be part of the affordability debate

Families in Truganina and Tarneit in Melbourne’s west exemplify the daily struggles of outer suburban life. Nearly a decade after moving in, the promises of local schools and public transport had failed to materialise.

Likewise, in the outer suburbs of Western Sydney, Brisbane and Adelaide, families with children struggle to get to the services they need without a car. In South Australia, the Thrive by Five alliance cites transport as the second-biggest barrier (after attendance costs) to early learning.

These suburbs all provide stark reminders to governments of the problems associated with the suburban sprawl they have encouraged.

Suburban sprawl and car dependence go hand in hand

The defining feature of suburban sprawl is car dependence. It’s linked with most of the social and economic downsides of sprawl. Continuing with such developments signals an acceptance of car dependence and the growing social and economic burdens it imposes on future generations.

Life on the fringe without a private car is particularly difficult for families with children due to their complex travel patterns. For example, trip chaining between children’s schools, extra-curricular activities and parents’ workplaces is common.

The harmful impacts of these car-centric suburbs disproportionally affect children.

Read more:
Children in the car era: bad for them and the planet

To start with, road deaths are the leading cause of death for children and young adults globally. It’s easily one of the most underestimated issues in our world.

Concerns for children’s safety in car-dominated neighbourhoods and other accessibility issues make the private car “a must use tool” in outer suburbs. We know the rest: the vicious cycle of car dependence and more and more driving.

So suburban sprawl leads to more high-speed roads, longer distances between centres of daily activity and more time in cars. All these factors increase the risk of road deaths and injuries.

Car-dependent neighbourhoods deprive children of opportunities essential for their health and wellbeing. They miss out on physical activity, unstructured play, social interaction and developing social networks. In addition, traffic noise and air pollution expose them to a wide range of environmental and health problems.

Read more:
We’re still fighting city freeways after half a century

Having a backyard doesn’t meet all children’s needs

What does a truly child-friendly neighbourhood look like? It allows for safe and convenient active travel – walking, cycling and “wheeling” (using mobility devices) – as well as public transport, to conduct daily activities. Child-friendliness is embedded in the everyday places, in streets, parks, square and public transport.

But all too often children’s play opportunities are reduced to the tiny backyards that are now common in fringe suburbs. These suburban restrictions are at odds with globally recognised principles of child-friendliness. Backyards alone cannot make up for the lack of access to child care, schools, shops, recreation and health services.

How can we develop better planning policies to create neighbourhoods that properly meet families’ needs? Some policies already exist, such as 15-minute or 20-minute neighbourhoods, to reduce private car use for daily activities. But these policies get sidelined when governments promote suburban sprawl and build more freeways.

These governments should not dismiss the suitability of higher-density living in well-serviced neighbourhoods for families with children. Yes, some densification policies have been blind to the needs of children and their families. However, when done well, high-density settings can be wonderful communities for such families.

With careful planning, many more families could be housed in established areas without having to significantly increase building heights.

Read more:
People love the idea of 20-minute neighbourhoods. So why isn’t it top of the agenda?

Car-centric planning has failed families

Car-centric planning dates back to the 1950s. Since then, Australian suburban fringe development has largely failed to create child-friendly neighbourhoods. Given the pro-sprawl political advocacy, the prospects of Adelaide’s largest ever greenfield development being good for children are rather poor, despite some encouraging steps by the government to ensure the new suburbs get adequate infrastructure.

Using aspirations of families with children to justify suburban sprawl is exploitative and misleading. It’s an approach that ignores the real-life challenges residents experience and distracts from government’s responsibility for proper planning.

If governments are serious about the needs of families with children, they could start by acknowledging children’s needs and rights to be able to get to their daily destinations without a car. To deliver neighbourhoods that make this possible, governments need to be bold and decisive in their planning.

Suburban sprawl and car dependence go hand in hand. Our politicians must commit to urban planning where cars are no longer privileged. Otherwise we deny our children basic rights to learn, play and socialise safely in their own neighbourhoods.

Read more:
No need to give up on crowded cities – we can make density so much better

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. Urban sprawl is ‘not a dirty word’? If the priority is to meet all kids’ needs, it should be – https://theconversation.com/urban-sprawl-is-not-a-dirty-word-if-the-priority-is-to-meet-all-kids-needs-it-should-be-208670

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Welch, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland

Tune into news from about any part of the planet, and there will likely be a headline about extreme weather. While these stories will be specific to the location, they all tend to include the amplifying effects of climate change.

This includes the wildfire devastation on the island of Maui in Hawaii, where rising temperatures have dried vegetation and made the risk that much greater. In Italy, summer temperatures hit an all-time high one week, followed by massive hail storms and flooding the next.

Flooding in Slovenia recently left three people dead and caused an estimated €500 million in damage. At the same time, rainfall in Beijing has exceeded a 140-year record, causing wide-scale flooding and leaving 21 dead.

These northern hemisphere summer events mirror what happened last summer in Auckland, classified as a one-in-200-year event, and elsewhere in the North Island. So far this year, rainfall at Auckland Airport has surpassed all records dating back to 1964.

Given more rainfall is one of the likeliest symptoms of a changing climate, the new report from the Helen Clark Foundation – Sponge Cities: Can they help us survive more intense rainfall? – is a timely (and sobering) reminder of the urgency of the challenge.

Pipe dreams

The “sponge city” concept is gaining traction as a way to mitigate extreme weather, save lives and even make cities more pleasant places to live.

This is particularly important when existing urban stormwater infrastructure is often already ageing and inadequate. Auckland has even been cutting spending on critical stormwater repairs for at least the past two years.

Read more:
Auckland floods: even stormwater reform won’t be enough – we need a ‘sponge city’ to avoid future disasters

Politically at least, this isn’t surprising. Stormwater infrastructure, as it is currently built and planned, is costly to develop and maintain. As the Clark Foundation report makes clear, New Zealand’s pipes simply “were not designed for the huge volumes they will have to manage with rising seas and increasing extreme rainfall events”.

The country’s current combined stormwater infrastructure involves a 17,000 kilometre pipe network – enough to span the length of the country ten times. The cost of upgrading the entire water system, which encompasses stormwater, could reach NZ$180 billion.

This contrasts starkly with the $1.5 billion councils now spend annually on water pipes. The report makes clear that implementing sponge city principles won’t wholly solve flooding, but it can significantly reduce flood risks.

Trees and green spaces

The real bonus, though, lies in the potential for sponge city design to reduce dependence on expensive and high-maintenance infrastructure.

There are already examples in Auckland’s Hobsonville Point and Northcote. Both communities have incorporated green infrastructure, such as floodable parks and planted wetlands, which kept nearby homes from flooding.

But the report’s recommendations are at odds with some of the current political rhetoric around land use policy – in particular “greenfields” development that encourages urban sprawl.

Read more:
National’s housing u-turn promotes urban sprawl – cities and ratepayers will pick up the bill

The report urges that cities be built upwards rather than outwards, and pushes back on residential infill development encouraged by the Medium Density Residential Standards.

Citing a recent report on green space from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, the Clark Foundation report argues for the preservation of urban green spaces – like backyards – as part of the flood mitigation approach.

Preserving tree cover is another urgent priority. Trees help absorb rainfall, reduce erosion and provide essential shade and cooling in urban areas – counteracting the dangerous urban “heat island” effect. Citing data from Global Forest Watch, the report states:

Auckland has lost as much as 19% of its tree cover in the past 20 years, Dunedin a staggering 24%, Greater Wellington around 11% and Christchurch 13%.

Read more:
Planting more trees could reduce premature heat-related deaths in European cities by a third – new research

Incentives for homeowners

Making Aotearoa New Zealand more resilient to extreme weather, the report says, need not break the bank.

It recommends raising the national minimum standards governing the percentage of the total area of new developments that must be left unsealed. This would ensure the implementation of sponge city concepts, and see buildings clustered to maximise preserved green space.

The government should also require local councils to plan for and provide public green spaces, and to develop long-term sponge city plans – just as they do for other types of critical infrastructure.

Read more:
We’re building harder, hotter cities: it’s vital we protect and grow urban green spaces – new report

Neighbourhoods could be retrofitted to include green roofs, permeable pavements and unsealed car parks. Land use and zoning could also encourage more vertical development, rather than sprawl or infill housing.

The government could also provide incentives and education for homeowners to encourage minimising sealed surfaces, unblocking stormwater flow paths, and replacing lawns with native plants and rain gardens.

More extreme weather and intense rainfall is a matter of when, not if. As the Clark Foundation report makes clear, spending future billions is less of a priority than acting urgently now.

Timothy Welch 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. Creating ‘sponge cities’ to cope with more rainfall needn’t cost billions – but NZ has to start now – https://theconversation.com/creating-sponge-cities-to-cope-with-more-rainfall-neednt-cost-billions-but-nz-has-to-start-now-211181

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Umbers, Senior Lecturer in Zoology, Western Sydney University

We may not pay invertebrates much thought, but they’re the workhorses of all ecosystems. Insects and other invertebrates do essential jobs such as pollinating plants, improving soils and controlling pests. They’re also food for many larger animals, which moves nutrients up the food chain.

Invertebrates are vulnerable to rising global temperatures. In response to climate change, many are moving to cooler areas, be that across land towards the poles, or upward in elevation.

But not all invertebrates have that option. In Australia, invertebrates already living at the highest possible elevation – on mountain summits – have nowhere higher to go. So how will they cope? And how can we help them?

Answering these questions is important. Invertebrates underpin Earth’s ecosystems – so if their numbers decline, the ecological damage will be felt far and wide.

A life at the top

The invertebrates of the Australian Alps are beautiful and diverse. As in all ecosystems, they make up the largest proportion of our alpine animal species.

Most of our alpine invertebrates are found nowhere else If we don’t look after them they’re gone forever. And each species extinction is like losing a rivet in an aeroplane wing; eventually whole ecosystems will crash.

Warmer temperatures can affect invertebrates in many ways. For example, pollinating insects that collect nectar may hatch before plants flower – creating issues for both the insects and the plants. Species that rely on wet or damp conditions may find their habitat dried out. Less harsh, cold conditions may also bring new predators and competitors into their habitats.

Overseas, where mountain ranges are typically much higher, animals have been moving up in elevation to survive. But Australia’s mountains are small – less than half the height of many key mountain ranges overseas. This leaves little room to move higher.

Alpine invertebrates tend to live in small, isolated populations on mountain tops. This limits their genetic diversity and therefore the potential that offspring can survive and adapt to changing conditions.

What’s more, many invertebrates don’t have wings, so can’t fly away to a more hospitable place. And being trapped on mountain tops also makes them vulnerable to devastating local threats such as unusually severe or extensive bushfires.

Read more:
They might not have a spine, but invertebrates are the backbone of our ecosystems. Let’s help them out

Extraordinary bogong moths

Some species might seem to be moving higher up the Australian Alps. For example, it seems bogong moths inhabit low elevation caves less frequently than they once did. But this probably just shows the species’ habitat is shrinking upward.

Each year, bogong moths undertake an extraordinary nocturnal migration. From their starting point many hundreds of kilometres away, they use the stars and Earth’s magnetic field to navigate to the Australian Alps in search of cool caves and rock crevices. There, they rest and take refuge from the summer heat, before returning to their winter pastures.

In 2021, bogong moths were listed as endangered because the availability of their summer habitat is declining.

Bogong moths bring an incredibly important influx of nutrients to the alps. They provide food for many animals, including the adorable, critically endangered mountain pygmy possum, as well as many types of birds.

The Taungurung people refer to the bogong moth as “Deberra”. The annual concentration of Deberra in the alps is culturally significant to the Taungurung and other traditional custodians.

Deberra have a high fat content and were harvested by Taungurung and other groups for eating. During the harvest, large gatherings of many Aboriginal nations were held and cultural business was conducted.

So Deberra offers not only a rich source of food, but also connection with deeply significant cultural landscapes. They are an important element in the cyclical movement of people and exchange of knowledge within and between Indigenous nations.

For Traditional Owners, Deberra is, like all things, part of the interrelated web of Country. When Deberra travels, human and non-human entities follow. It supports energy flows of many kinds.

The decline of Deberra is a sign that Country is sick. Sick Country tells us the land is not being managed well.

Read more:
Next time you see a butterfly, treasure the memory: scientists raise alarm on these 26 species

Colour-changing skyhoppers

The adults of many alpine invertebrate species live for just a single summer, lay their eggs, then die. They include skyhoppers, a group of alpine grasshoppers unique to Australia, many species of which are threatened.

Skyhoppers rely on a thick snow layer to protect their eggs in winter. But Australia’s snow cover is becoming increasingly unreliable as the planet warms.

Thermocolour skyhoppers, listed as endangered, are unique among grasshoppers in that they change colour from black to turquoise when their body temperature exceeds 25℃.

Until recently, five skyhopper species were known to science. But when researchers walked the entire 655-kilometre Australian Alps walking track, they discovered 15 species of skyhopper exist – each separated by the rugged mountain landscape.

The true biodiversity of the alps is unknown. What we do know is that it is heavily fragmented. What may look like one species across the alps is likely to be many species each occupying small areas. This means they’re even more vulnerable than currently recognised.

Read more:
More than 60 billion leaf litter invertebrates died in the Black Summer fires. Here’s what that did to ecosystems

Helping them hang on

Much of the Australian Alps region is contained in national parks, but this alone is not adequate protection for our alpine biodiversity.

Greenhouse gas emissions to date have put our alpine biodiversity on a knife’s edge. Australian and international governments must swiftly undertake far more ambitious climate action to cool the alps.

And more effort is needed to give our alpine ecosystems the best chance of coping with climate change. This includes allowing Traditional Owners to connect to and manage Country and removing threats such as feral species, disease and habitat destruction.

Kate Umbers is based at the School of Science at Western Sydney University and receives funding from the Australian Research Council, NSW Government, Hermon Slade Foundation. She works for Invertebrates Australia, a not-for-profit environmental conservation charity. She is affiliated with the IUCN and the Biodiversity Council.

Jaana Dielenberg is based at The University of Melbourne and works for the Biodiversity Council. She is a member of Invertebrates Australia and the Ecological Society of Australia. She previously worked for the now ended Threatened Species Recovery Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program.

Matthew Shanks works for Taungurung Land and Waters Council and receives funding from the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action. He is affiliated with the Biodiversity Council and Back to Country.

– ref. Trapped: Australia’s extraordinary alpine insects are being marooned on mountaintops as the world warms – https://theconversation.com/trapped-australias-extraordinary-alpine-insects-are-being-marooned-on-mountaintops-as-the-world-warms-211104

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Edward Santow, Professor & Co-Director, Human Technology Institute, University of Technology Sydney

Regulation was once a dirty word in tech companies around the world. They argued that if people wanted better smartphones and flying cars, we had to look past dusty old laws dreamed up in the pre-internet era.

But something profound is afoot. First a whisper, and now a roar: the law is back.

Ed Husic, Australia’s federal minister responsible for tech policy, is leading a once-in-a-generation review of Australian law, asking Australians how our law should change for the AI era. He recently told the ABC, “I think the era of self-regulation is over.”

Sure, there were caveats. Husic made clear that regulation for AI should focus on “high-risk elements” and “getting the balance right”. But the rhetorical shift was unmistakable: if we had allowed the creation of some kind of digital wild west, it must end.

Tech companies demand regulation – but why?

One moment might sum up the dawn of this new era. On May 16, Sam Altman – chief executive of OpenAI, the company responsible for ChatGPT – declared in the US Congress, “regulation of AI is essential”.

On its face, this seems like a stunning transformation. Less than a decade ago, Facebook’s motto was “move fast and break things”. When its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, uttered those words he spoke for a generation of Silicon Valley tech bros who saw the law as a handbrake on innovation.

Reform is urgent, and so we need to seize this moment. But first we should ask why the tech world has suddenly become enamoured with regulation.

One explanation is tech leaders can see that, without more effective regulation, the threats associated with AI could overshadow its positive potential.

We have recently had tragic reminders of the value of regulation. Think of OceanGate, the company behind the Titanic-seeking submersible that disintegrated earlier this year, killing everyone on board. OceanGate avoided safety certification because “bringing an outside entity up to speed on every innovation before it is put into real-world testing is anathema to rapid innovation”.

Maybe there has been a genuine change of heart: tech companies certainly know their products can harm as well as help. But something else is also at play. When tech companies call for governments to make laws for AI, there is an unstated premise: currently, there are no laws that apply to AI.

But this is plain wrong.

Existing laws already apply to AI

Our current laws make clear that no matter what form of technology is used, you cannot engage in deceptive or negligent behaviour.

Say you advise people on choosing the best health insurance policy, for example. It doesn’t matter whether you base your advice on an abacus or the most sophisticated form of AI, it’s equally unlawful to take secret commissions or provide negligent advice.

Read more:
Calls to regulate AI are growing louder. But how exactly do you regulate a technology like this?

A significant part of the problem in the AI era is not the content of our law, but the fact it is not consistently enforced when it comes to the development and use of AI. This means regulators, courts, lawyers and the community sector need to up their game to ensure human rights and consumer protections are being enforced effectively for AI.

This will be a big job. In our submission to the government’s AI review, we at the University of Technology Sydney Human Technology Institute call for the creation of an AI Commissioner – an independent expert advisor to government and the private sector. This body would cut through the hype and white noise, and give clear advice to regulators and to businesses on how to use AI within the letter and spirit of the law.

Australia needs to catch up with the world

Australia has experienced a period of extreme policy lethargy on the AI front. While the European Union, North America and several countries in Asia (including China) have been creating legal guardrails, Australia has been slow to act.

In this context, the review of regulation for AI is crucial. We shouldn’t mindlessly copy other jurisdictions, but our law should ensure parity of protection for Australians.

This means the Australian parliament should adopt a legal framework that is suitable for our political and legal system. If this means departing from the EU draft AI Act, all well and good, but our law must protect Australians from the risks of AI at least as effectively as people are protected in Europe.

Read more:
EU approves draft law to regulate AI – here’s how it will work

Personal information is the fuel for AI, so the starting point should be to update our privacy law. The Attorney-General’s Department has published a review that would modernise our privacy law, but we are yet to see any commitment for change.

Reform is particularly urgent for high-risk uses of AI, such as facial recognition technology. A series of investigations by CHOICE has shown companies are increasingly using this tech in shopping centres, sports stadiums and in the workplace – without proper protection against unfairness or mass surveillance.

There are clear reform solutions that enable safe use of facial recognition, but we need political leadership.

Government needs to get AI right

Government must also set a good example. The Robodebt Royal Commission showed in harrowing detail how the federal government’s automated system of recovering debts in the welfare system went horribly wrong, with enormous and widespread harm to the community.

The lesson from this experience isn’t that we should throw out all the computers. But it does show we need clear, strong guardrails that ensure government leads the way in using AI safely and responsibly.

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. Do we need a new law for AI? Sure – but first we could try enforcing the laws we already have – https://theconversation.com/do-we-need-a-new-law-for-ai-sure-but-first-we-could-try-enforcing-the-laws-we-already-have-211369

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duane Hamacher, Associate Professor, The University of Melbourne

Content note: this article mentions genocide and acts of colonial violence against Aboriginal people.

How long do you think stories can be passed down, generation to generation?

Hundreds of years? Thousands?

Today, we publish new research in the Journal of Archaeological Science demonstrating that traditional stories from Tasmania have been passed down for more than 12,000 years. And we use multiple lines of evidence to show it.

Read more:
The Memory Code: how oral cultures memorise so much information

Tasmania’s violent colonial history

Within months of establishing a colonial outpost on the island in 1803, British officials had committed several acts of genocide against Aboriginal Tasmanian (Palawa) people. By the mid-1820s, soldiers, convicts, and free settlers had taken up arms to fight what became known as the “Black War”, aimed at capturing or killing Palawa and dispossessing them of their Country.

Tasmania’s colonial government appointed George Augustus Robinson to “conciliate” with the Palawa. From 1829 to 1835, Robinson travelled with a small group of Palawa, including Trukanini and her husband, Wurati. By 1832, Robinson’s “friendly mission” had turned to forced removals.

Read more:
Coming to terms with Tasmania’s forgotten war

Robinson kept a daily journal, which included records of Palawa languages and traditions. Over time, Palawa men and women slowly began to share some of their knowledge, explaining how their ancestors came to Tasmania (Lutruwita) by land from the far north, before the sea formed and turned their home into an island. They also spoke about the Sun-man, the Moon-woman, and a bright southern star.

These stories are of immense importance to today’s Palawa families who survived the devastating impact of colonisation, and who continue to share these unique creation stories. Through careful investigation of colonial records, and collaborating with Palawa knowledge-holders, we found something remarkable.

Rising seas and the formation of Lutruwita

Over the past 65,000 years, Australia’s First Peoples witnessed natural disasters and significant changes to the land, sea and sky. Volcanoes spewed fire, earthquakes shook the land, tsunamis inundated the coastlines, droughts plagued the continent, meteorites fell to the earth, and the stars shifted in the night sky.

Some 20,000 years ago, the world was in the grip of an ice age. Australia was conspicuously drier than it is today, and the ocean was significantly lower. All of that sea water was bound up in glaciers that swathed vast tracts of land, particularly across the Northern Hemisphere, and polar ice caps much larger than ours today.

As time passed, temperatures gradually rose and the ice began to melt. After 10,000 years, the sea level had risen 125 metres; a process that dramatically transformed coastlines and submerged landscapes that had been ancestral Country for thousands of generations. This forced humans to change where and how they lived.

Read more:
Ancient Aboriginal stories preserve history of a rise in sea level

During the ice age, both Lutruwita and Papua New Guinea were connected to mainland Australia by dry land, forming a landmass called Sahul. As the seas rose, Tasmania’s connection gradually narrowed to form what geologists call the Bassian Land Bridge.

People continued to live on this “land bridge”, but by 12,700 years ago it had narrowed to just 5 kilometres wide (lime-green shading on the map above). Habitable land was gradually reduced as the sea closed in. Less than 300 years later, the “land bridge” was gone and Lutruwita was completely surrounded by water.

Palawa traditions from that time survived hundreds of generations of retelling, forming part of a larger canon of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander stories around Australia. They described rising seas and submerging coastlines as the ice sheets melted before levelling off around 7,000 years ago. Stories of similar antiquity are known from other parts of the world.

Read more:
Ancient Aboriginal stories preserve history of a rise in sea level

A great south star

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures developed rich and complex knowledge systems about the stars, which are still used today. They describe the movements of the Sun, Moon, and stars, as well as rare cosmic events, such as eclipses, supernovae, and meteorite impacts.

In the 1830s, a Palawa Elder spoke about a time when the star Moinee was near the south celestial pole. He laid down a pair of spears in the sand and drew a few reference stars to triangulate its position.

Read more:
Stories from the sky: astronomy in Indigenous knowledge

Colonists seemed perplexed about the presence of an antipodean counterpart to Polaris, as no southern pole star exists today. Some tried to identify the stars on the star map, but seemed confused and labelled them incorrectly, as they were unaware of an important astronomical process called axial precession.

As the Earth rotates, it wobbles on its axis like a spinning top. This shifts the location of the celestial poles, tracing out a large circle every 26,000 years. As thousands of years pass by, the positions of the stars in the sky slowly change.

Read more:
Stars that vary in brightness shine in the oral traditions of Aboriginal Australians

Long ago, Canopus was at its southernmost point in the sky. Lying just over 10 degrees from the south celestial pole, it appeared to always hover in the southern skies each night. That last occurred 14,000 years ago, before rising seas turned Lutruwita into an island.

Exciting collaborative futures

We can see through independent lines of evidence that Palawa stories have been passed down for more than twelve millennia. We also find here the only example in the world of an oral tradition describing a star’s position as it would have appeared in the sky over 10,000 years ago.

Our investigation of colonial records that record traditional systems of knowledge has demonstrated a powerful cross-cultural way of better understanding deep human history. This also recognises the immense value of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander traditions today.

This research was co-authored by graduate Michelle Gantevoort from RMIT University, and student researchers Ka Hei Andrew Law from the University of Melbourne and Mel Miles from Swinburne University of Technology.

Duane W. Hamacher receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Lady Foundation.

Greg Lehman receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Patrick D. Nunn receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Asia-Pacific Network, and the British Academy

Rebe Taylor receives funding from Australian Research Council.

– ref. Rising seas and a great southern star: Aboriginal oral traditions stretch back more than 12,000 years – https://theconversation.com/rising-seas-and-a-great-southern-star-aboriginal-oral-traditions-stretch-back-more-than-12-000-years-211114

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marija Taflaga, Lecturer, School of Political Science and International Relations, Australian National University

The Coalition is attempting to claim it supports a legislated Voice to Parliament because it “is important in the way it may close the gap and the way it may improve the lives of indigenous people”, but that a Voice protected by the Constitution – on which Australians will vote in a referendum later this year – is dangerous and will wreak chaos.

The opposition has struggled to articulate what precisely it thinks the risks are, and recent off-the-record backgrounding indicates the aim appears to be to damage Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s standing, in the hope this will extend to voters’ general faith in the government.

Perhaps the party leadership feels this is the only viable strategy given their political position, but it comes with risks.

This logic rests on several assumptions:

• that the prime minister, and not the opposition, would be blamed for the yes campaign’s failure
• that Labor will oblige the opposition by tearing itself apart
• that politics is zero-sum and every vote lost from Labor is one for the Coalition.

The first two factors are unknowable. But it is worth noting that Albanese’s biggest downside risk is in being seen to have shied away from his heartfelt commitment. That is because it goes to his authenticity and trustworthiness. Losing after standing up for a point of principle is a different calculus. It is also an empirical fact that more prime ministers have lost referendums than won them.

It is possible Labor will turn on itself in the wake of a referendum defeat and a looming economic crisis. Both the ill-discipline and lack of nerve of the Whitlam and Rudd-Gillard governments made it possible for the extreme negative politics of the Snedden-Fraser and Abbott oppositions to succeed.

However, the government has so far shown itself to be composed largely of tough-minded pragmatists in economically ill-favoured times.

The idea that Australian electoral seats end up with either Labor or Coalition was an article of faith in Australian politics. It was underwritten by very high levels of party loyalty and our compulsory, preferential voting system.

Read more:
What now for the Liberal Party? A radical shift and a lot of soul-searching

But the conditions that buttressed this orthodoxy have been in decline for decades, and have been shaping election outcomes for some time. There are now multiple viable political alternatives, and while it is not possible to predict whether voters will continue to abandon the major parties, offering voters more of what they just rejected is unlikely to be a winning strategy.

The strategy could backfire and the Coalition may reinforce a perception that its approach to politics remains cynical and tactical, rather than focused on finding solutions to longstanding problems and building a better future.

The electoral rout in 2022 was the Liberal party’s worst ever. While some of that is attributable to the unpopularity of former prime minister Scott Morrison, much of it was also the result of long-term trends, including voter dealignment and a growing generational gap in ideological outlook.

Why have voters abandoned the major parties, and young people and women in particular turned their backs on the Coalition? The reasons are complex, but can be summarised as a growing sense that politicians don’t listen, don’t act in the national interest, and pursue partisan aims over the wider public good. The result is that governments appear unwilling to solve a growing number of pressing problems – and voters have rationally sought alternatives.

Virtually every royal commission we’ve had has come about because governments failed (often wilfully) to listen to those affected or those in a position to give good advice.

The Liberals’ approach to the Voice is illustrative of the party’s ongoing commitment to negative campaigning with a minimal positive agenda.

In the wake of the election, the party said it heard what women had to say. Others argued the party needed to do more for young people, particularly in relation to housing and global heating.

But the response so far has been largely backward-looking – reheating old policies, invoking old platitudes and, in the case of the Voice, reviving arguments and language from the 1990s.

First-term oppositions typically aren’t imaginative, but they are usually reflective on some level. After all, they have just lost an election.

The Liberals have made much of their claims to being a “broad church”. In reality, this refrain has been a useful tool to quickly end discussions about how much internal debate the party should allow. The party has always consisted of two irreconcilable political traditions – after all, Liberals and Conservatives were the government and opposition of the 19th century.

The Liberal party, like other hybrid Conservative-Liberal parties, has managed this dilemma by having one faction dominate the other. What was different in the past was the degree to which the party was prepared to tolerate differences of opinion in open forums.

Debate within the Liberal Party has been in decline for decades. Genuine debate has been eroded by message discipline and the centralisation of power with party leaders.

These are worldwide trends facing all parties. But the Liberal Party now also faces the dilemma of having lost a significant number of its moderate flank.

There are simply far fewer countervailing voices in today’s Liberal party room.

The 2022 election saw many of the party’s most able political leaders, capable of articulating a centre-right vision of the good life in the 21st century, exit parliament. Many of the remaining moderates are in the shadow cabinet, where discipline means they cannot publicly articulate the range of views that would truly denote the “broad church” that has historically so successfully appealed to Australian voters.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Without those ‘lefties’ the Liberals can’t regain government

The Liberal Party is not going anywhere. It draws on considerable institutional buffers, including public funding and electoral and administrative laws that protect established parties from some competition. Significantly, it retains the support of more than one-third of the electorate.

But with public movement away from both major parties now an established trend, and the party’s seemingly entrenched backward-looking focus, it remains an open question as to how long will remain in the wilderness – and whether it will choose to remain, permanently, a smaller and narrower party.

Marija Taflaga receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Accentuate the negative: why the Liberal Party’s fondness for ‘no’ might ultimately backfire – https://theconversation.com/accentuate-the-negative-why-the-liberal-partys-fondness-for-no-might-ultimately-backfire-211106

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yuting Zhang, Professor of Health Economics, The University of Melbourne

Private health insurance is under review, with proposals to overhaul everything from rebates to tax penalty rules.

One proposal is for higher-income earners who don’t have private health insurance to pay a larger Medicare Levy Surcharge – an increase from 1.25% or 1.5%, to 2%. And if they want to avoid that surcharge, they’d need to take out higher-level hospital cover than currently required.

Encouraging more people to take up private health insurance like this might seem a good way to take pressure off the public hospital system.

But our research shows these proposals may not achieve this. These may also be especially punitive for people with little to gain from buying private health insurance, such as younger people and those living in regional areas who do not have access to private hospitals.

Read more:
Do you really need private health insurance? Here’s what you need to know before deciding

What is the Medicare Levy Surcharge?

The Medicare Levy Surcharge was introduced in 1997 to encourage high-income earners to buy health insurance. People earning above the relevant thresholds need to buy “complying” health insurance, or pay the levy.

This surcharge is in addition to the Medicare levy, which applies to most taxpayers.

The surcharge varies depending on your income bracket, and the rate is different for families.

For instance, to avoid paying the surcharge currently, a single person living in Victoria earning A$108,001 can buy basic hospital cover. The lowest annual premium for someone under 65 is about $1,100, after rebates. That varies slightly between states and territories.

Not buying private health insurance and paying the Medicare Levy Surcharge instead would cost even more, at $1,350 (1.25% of $108,001).

Read more:
If you’ve got private health insurance, the choice to use it in a public hospital is your own

What is being proposed?

The report, by Finity Consulting and commissioned by the federal health department, reviews a range of health insurance incentives.

It recommends increasing the Medicare Levy Surcharge to 2% for those with an income above $108,001 for singles, and $216,001 for families.

The definition of a “complying” private health insurance policy would also change.

Rather than having basic hospital cover as is required now, someone would need to buy silver or gold cover to avoid the surcharge.

Under the proposed changes, people who pay the 2% surcharge would also no longer receive any rebate, which currently reduces premiums by about 8% for people earning $108,001-$144,000.

So, for a single person under 65, earning $108,001 and living in Victoria, the annual cost of buying complying hospital cover would be at least $1,904 (without the rebate). Again, that varies slightly between states and territories.

But the cost of not insuring and paying the Medicare Levy Surcharge instead would go up to $2,160 (2% of $108,001).

Read more:
How to switch health insurers if you’re worried about cybersecurity, costs or claims

Is this a good idea?

However, our research, out earlier this year, suggests increasing the Medicare Levy Surcharge will not meaningfully increase take-up of private health insurance. We’ve shown that people do not respond as strongly to the surcharge as theory would predict.

For example, when the surcharge kicks in, we found the probability of insuring only increases modestly from about 70% to 73% for singles, and about 90% to 91% for families.

It is generally cheaper to buy private health insurance than to pay the surcharge. However, we found about 15% of single people with an income of $108,001 or above don’t insure despite it being cheaper than paying the Medicare Levy Surcharge.

We don’t know precisely why. Maybe people are not sure of the financial benefit due to changes in their income, or if they are, cannot be bothered, or do not have time, to explore their options.

Maybe, as anecdotal reports suggest, rather than buying private health insurance, some people would rather support the public system by paying the Medicare Levy Surcharge.

The point is, people who are not buying private health insurance appear to be highly resistant to financial incentives. So stronger penalties might have little effect.

Instead, we propose the Medicare Levy Surcharge be better targeted to true high-income earners. We can do that by increasing income thresholds for the surcharge to kick in, which are then indexed annually to reflect changes in earnings.

How about needing more expensive cover?

Requiring people to choose silver level cover or above would address criticisms about people buying “junk” private health insurance they never intend to use.

However, people may be buying this type of product because private health insurance has little value to them. Requiring them to spend even more on a product they don’t want is a roundabout way of taking pressure off the public system.

So we propose keeping the current level of hospital cover required to avoid the surcharge, rather than increasing it.

Who loses?

Taken together, the cost of these proposed changes would disproportionately fall on people with little to gain from private health insurance. These include younger people, those living in regional areas who do not have access to private hospitals, or those who prefer to support the public system directly.

These groups are the least likely to use private insurance so have the least to gain from upgrading their cover.

Read more:
Getting rid of junk health insurance policies is just tinkering at the margins of a much bigger issue

Where to next?

The report also recommends keeping health insurance rebates (a government contribution to your premiums), the Lifetime Health Cover loading (to encourage people to take out hospital cover while younger), as well as the Medicare Levy Surcharge.

We also support keeping these three in the short to medium term.

But we recommend gradually reducing public support for private health insurance.

We believe the ultimate goal of reforming private health insurance is to optimise the overall efficiency of the health-care system (both public and private systems) and improve population health while saving taxpayers’ money.

The goal should not be merely increasing the take-up of private health insurance, which is the focus of the current report.

So, as well as our recommendation to better target the Medicare Levy Surcharge, we need to:

• lower income thresholds for insurance rebates, especially targeting those on genuinely low incomes. This means lower premiums only for the people who can least afford private health care

• remove rebates based on age as higher rebates for older people do not encourage more to insure. Rebates should be tied to just income, which is a better indicator of financial means.

Read more:
Private health insurance premiums should be based on age and health status

Yuting Zhang receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the Victorian Department of Health, and National Health and Medical Research Council. In the past, Professor Zhang has received funding from several US institutes including the US National Institutes of Health, Commonwealth fund, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. She has not received funding from for-profit industry including the private health insurance industry.

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

– ref. Private health insurance is set for a shake-up. But asking people to pay more for policies they don’t want isn’t the answer – https://theconversation.com/private-health-insurance-is-set-for-a-shake-up-but-asking-people-to-pay-more-for-policies-they-dont-want-isnt-the-answer-210981

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Australia’s leading economists believe Australia can sustain an unemployment rate as low as 3.75% – much lower than the latest Reserve Bank estimate of 4.25% and the Treasury’s latest estimate of 4.5%.

This finding, in an Economic Society of Australia poll of 51 leading economists selected by their peers, comes ahead of next month’s release of a government employment white paper, and an expected direction from Treasurer Jim Chalmers that the Reserve Bank quantify its official employment target.

Asked what unemployment rate was most consistent with “full employment” under present policy settings, the 46 respondents who were prepared to pick a number or range picked an average rate of 3.75%.

The median (middle) response was higher, but still below official estimates – an unemployment rate of 4%.

Significantly, only two of the economists surveyed picked an unemployment rate of 5% or higher, which is where Australia’s unemployment rate has been for most of the past five decades.

The 3.75% average implies either that the Reserve Bank and government have lacked ambition on employment for much of the past half-century, or that the sustainable unemployment rate has fallen.

Australia’s unemployment rate dived to 3.5% in mid-2022 and has remained close to that long-term low since.

The survey result suggests the government can lock in the present historic low and need not – and should not – allow unemployment to climb too far from its present rate.

Many of the experts surveyed questioned the idea of a “magic number” or non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU) used by the Treasury and the Reserve Bank as a guide to how low unemployment can go without feeding inflation.

Former OECD official Adrian Blundell-Wignall said the concept was not helpful “even in the short run, and certainly not the long run” because NAIRU kept changing depending on what else was going on in the domestic and global economy.

Any rate of unemployment would have a different implication for inflation depending on what the government was doing with tax and spending policy.

Geopolitical events and climate change have probably pushed up the rate of inflation to be expected from any given domestic unemployment rate.

3.5% unemployment, yet falling inflation

Craig Emerson, a former minister in the Rudd and Gillard governments, said NAIRU was best described as the lowest unemployment rate consistent with inflation not taking off. Given Australia’s inflation rate is now coming down, NAIRU is clearly below the present unemployment rate of 3.5%, he argued.

The University of Queensland’s John Quiggin said Australia can be considered to have full employment when the number of job vacancies matches the number of unemployed people. This is the case at present, suggesting “full employment” means an unemployment rate of 3.5%.

Alison Preston from the University of Western Australia said industrial relations changes have given workers much less power to obtain higher wages than before, suggesting the “non-inflation accelerating rate of unemployment” was either lower than before or an irrelevant concept.

Curtin University’s Harry Bloch says there will always be a mismatch between the jobs on offer and the skills available – an academic can’t do the work of a plumber, or vice versa, for instance. But even so, he says it ought to be possible to get unemployment down to the 2% achieved repeatedly during the 1950s and 1960s.

Consulting economist Rana Roy says in normal times “full employment” probably meant an unemployment rate near 1%, but the business cycle meant there would always be brief – “and I stress brief” – periods when governments might have to accept an unemployment rate of nearer 2%.

Fix education, job-matching and childcare

Asked to select the three measures from a list of 11 that would do the most to bring down the sustainable rate of unemployment, the 51 experts overwhelmingly backed improving the quality of school education (55%), followed by improving employment services (39%) and cutting out-of-pocket childcare costs (39%).

There was also strong support for relaxing industrial relations to give employers greater flexibility (33%) and winding back taxes and regulations facing businesses (24%) as well as boosting enrolments in tertiary education (27%).

There was very little support for cutting immigration or the JobSeeker payment.

Labour market specialist Sue Richardson said a high-quality job-matching service would both reduce unemployment and boost productivity because Australians would be matched to jobs for which they were best suited.

The unemployed who would benefit the most would be those further down the queue who were the least successful in finding jobs.

Industry economist Julie Toth said digital technologies and working from home were already making it easier to match Australians with jobs across a range of industries, and it was important to preserve these recent gains.

Read more:
Australia is about to set its first full employment target – and it will define people’s lives for decades

One of the panellists, Peter Tulip from the Centre for Independent Studies, rejected all the options offered for lowering the achievable unemployment rate, and said the only one that might have some effect was restraint when increasing minimum wages.

Another, Brian Dollery from the University of New England, said much of Australia’s unemployment had been generated by unemployment benefits that were too high.

Together, the results of the survey call for the government and the Reserve Bank to be ambitious about unemployment, and not to accept a rate above 4%.

The government’s employment white paper is due by the end of September.

Individual responses. Click to open:

Peter Martin 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. We can and should keep unemployment below 4%, says our survey of top economists – https://theconversation.com/we-can-and-should-keep-unemployment-below-4-says-our-survey-of-top-economists-211277

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona Crawford, Adjunct Lecturer at the Centre for Justice, Queensland University of Technology

As the Matildas prepare for their 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup sudden-death quarter final against France, they have become the hottest sporting property in the country. For example, formerly uninterested major media just days ago hired a helicopter to spy on one of the team’s training sessions.

The expensive, paparazzi-style move was designed to gather exclusive footage of the team, particularly of injured Matildas captain Sam Kerr.

That conservative media was going to such lengths to gain footage of the team speaks volumes of the starkly different landscape the current Matildas are operating in, and the evolution of a team that’s gone from few resources and relatively anonymity to equal pay and national treasure status.

No longer an afterthought

More people watched the Matildas’ Round of 16 match against Denmark on Channel Seven, the highest rating show of the year to date, than watched the men’s NRL and AFL grand finals last year.

Channel Seven is also delaying Saturday’s news bulletin to broadcast the Matildas’ quarter final, while the AFL will be broadcasting the match in the stadium before the men’s West Coast Eagles versus Fremantle derby.

This is all particularly interesting given FIFA had to castigate broadcasters for undervaluing the broadcast rights in the tournament lead-up.

What’s more, Matildas jerseys are outselling the Socceroos’ jerseys by two to one. It’s worth remembering they were unavailable to buy until recent years because manufacturers didn’t deem there to be a market for them.

Read more:
Fans are finding out just how disappointing merchandise for women’s football is

More than 1.7 million tickets have been sold, exceeding FIFA’s stretch target of 1.5 million. And the total crowd figure record of 1,353,506 set in 2015 had been surpassed with 12 games to spare.

That’s a far cry from the Matildas’ early years, when players had to produce and hand out flyers to try to attract people to watch their games, or phone television stations and beg them to broadcast matches. When the team travelled to the 2003 world cup, not a single journalist turned up to the airport press conference.

It’s also quite the contrast from the traditional media coverage approach that relegates women’s sport to an afterthought. A 30-year study of women’s sports coverage, published in 2021, determined major media generally adopt a “one and done” approach: a box-ticking exercise, providing a token women’s sports story before a succession of in-depth men’s sports stories.

So, how did we get here?

It was 1988 when the intrepid Matildas ventured out to their inaugural “world cup” – a pilot tournament FIFA only staged after concerted pressure from other organising bodies and women footballers themselves.

There were some significant changes considered or implemented – ones that would not have been tabled for the men’s game. Matches were truncated from 90 to 80 minutes; there was some patronising discussion of whether women would play with a smaller ball; and with the tournament absent any true FIFA badging, the players had to pay $850 each for the privilege of participating. They pulled that fee together by fundraising through lamington drives, car washes, and casino nights.

Still, the Australian team quickly made history by defeating Brazil in an upset victory in the tournament’s first match, setting the tone for an upwards trajectory.

However, the 1995, 1999, and 2003 tournaments were not, by the Matildas’ own standards, considered breakout successes. A harsh red card for Sonia Gegenhuber in the team’s first group-stage match against Denmark in 1995 cruelled the team’s chances from the outset. And 1999 saw Alicia Ferguson awarded the fastest red card in history for an ill-timed tackle two minutes into the game against China.

The Matildas’ sustained upward course arguably began in 2007. The World Cup that year was the first womens’ tournament for which SBS broadcast all the games. It also became the first time the Matildas progressed to the knockout rounds.

Although laundry and internet costs weren’t yet covered, that era also marked the beginning of the players receiving (albeit nominal) daily allowances and playing contracts of up to approximately A$10,000. Administrators were able to leverage that 2007 success into the establishment of the W-League (now renamed the A-League Women’s), the domestic semi-professional football league that helped the Matildas become the first Australian team (women’s or men’s) to win the Asian Cup. It’s also a development pathway for the current Matildas.

2011 marked the emergence of the Matildas’ “golden generation”, with then-youthful players Caitlin Foord and Sam Kerr attending their first Women’s World Cup.

All the focus has been on Kerr in recent years, but at the time, Foord was tipped to be the player to watch, and was named the tournament’s best young player.

Read more:
FIFA Women’s World Cup: Professional women athletes are still fighting for equitable sponsorship

Striking for pay parity

To understand the groundbreaking success the Matildas are now experiencing, we must look at the lonely stand they took across the road from governing body Football Federation Australia’s office in 2015.

They were off contract, unpaid, and without medical insurance. Now lapsed, they had been on contracts of around A$22,000 a year: in the ballpark of Australia’s poverty line.

So the Matildas went on strike for two months to draw attention to the imperiled nature of their footballing careers, which demanded full-time, elite-athlete commitment and results, but with part-time, amateur pay.

The headlines that followed encapsulated the exasperation many felt (and still feel) at the inequity women athletes experience. This included the Junkee headline

The Matildas Have Gone on Strike Because, Oh My God Can We Just Pay Them Properly?

The Matildas achieved pay parity with the Socceroos in 2019, but the groundwork for that achievement was laid with that 2015 strike.

The year 2017 also marked an important moment in the team’s evolution. It was when the team sold out Penrith Stadium with a then-record crowd of about 17,000.

The crowd figure signalled there was an engaged audience and market there – it had just been under-catered for.

Read more:
FIFA Women’s World Cup: Gender equity in sports remains an issue despite the major strides being made

Fast forward to 2019. Off-pitch distractions imperilled the Matildas’ group-stage world cup results. The team was steered through the tournament by temporarily installed coach Ante Milicic, after incumbent coach Alen Stajcic had been sacked for reasons still not entirely clear.

With the rise of European nations that had invested heavily in women’s football, Australian football had stood still. The Matildas’ opening loss against debutantes Italy put the team under pressure. However, the players then produced the “Miracle of Montpellier”, winning 3-2 against superstars Brazil to salvage their tournament – before being bundled out by Norway on penalties in the round of 16.

This year, the media’s initial focus was on Kerr’s troublesome calf and then late substitution decisions by coach Tony Gustavsson. Under pressure following a shock loss to minnows Nigeria, the Matildas recorded a resounding 4–0 victory over reigning Olympic champions Canada.

Now, in a few pressure-filled hours, Australia’s most successful football team have the potential to make history: to progress to the semi finals for the first time ever.

A win would see Matildas’ media coverage and fandom enter uncharted, euphoric territory. But with record crowds, viewership, and merchandise sales, and with several of their players now household names, in many ways the Matildas will already have won before they even set foot on the pitch.

Fiona Crawford has worked in and around football for more than a decade, including having previously worked for Football Federation Australia/Football Australia.

– ref. From handing out their own flyers, to sell-out games: how the Matildas won over a nation – https://theconversation.com/from-handing-out-their-own-flyers-to-sell-out-games-how-the-matildas-won-over-a-nation-211338

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kasey Symons, Postdoctoral research fellow, Swinburne University of Technology

With the Matlidas progressing to the quarter finals of the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup, Australia’s sports media is focussed on this global mega event and the potential it has to change the women’s game.

Broadcast numbers are setting records, stadiums are packed, Matildas jerseys are flying off the shelves and the media is paying attention.

But why aren’t Australia’s netballers afforded the same media focus? On August 6, the Australian Diamonds won the Netball World Cup for the 12th time with a 61–45 victory over England in Cape Town.

While some Australians celebrated this moment in the early hours of Monday morning, many sports fans would have been unaware the final was even happening among the level of coverage the football is currently receiving.

One contributing factor was time zones. The recent netball world cup was held in South Africa, and Australian audiences suffered from an unpalatable time difference.

However the specific challenges traditional women’s sports encounter within the greater complexities of the women’s sports world cannot be ignored.

Barriers for traditional women’s sports

Australian netball has seen recent growth in broadcast and ticket sales. The 2023 final of Australia’s professional netball league was the most watched Super Netball match ever on Foxtel. And yet the media attention afforded to netball pales in comparison to women’s sporting codes aligned with traditional men’s sports.

At the FIFA world cup, the sports media is showcasing the thriving and inclusive fan culture, the history of women’s football and stories from grassroots and community football.

These stories offer a point of difference to men’s football and highlight obstacles overcome compared to the men’s code.

The narratives of progress for women’s football demonstrate a “dream finally being realised” and a bridging of historical gaps.

For netball, there are no comparative narratives to tell. While there is men’s netball and a national men’s netball team in Australia, the history of netball as a sport designed for women provides a perception it does not experience the same challenges as other women’s sports playing “catch up”.

Netball is taken for granted and is largely out of mind for sports media.

Read more:
‘Gorgeous goal getters’: 1970s media coverage of ‘soccerettes’ was filled with patronising sleaze

Netball and Australian sport culture

Netball was historically designed for women and girls based on the original rules of basketball adapted to suit the “ideal qualities” placed on women in the late 19th century.

The sport removed dribbling to limit physical exertion and maintain appropriate dress standards, ensured no contact, restricted movement on the court and, at certain periods, enforced silence on participants.

Unlike the global game of football, netball remains popular only in a handful of Commonwealth countries.

Netball has the highest participation rate of any team sport for women and girls in is Australia. Most Australian women are directed to and encouraged to play netball at some point in their lives.

Despite this prevalence, there has been little research on netball, the game’s origins and cultural significance in Australian sporting culture.

Read more:
From ‘good temper and pluck’ to fierce international rivalry: the story of netball

Women’s sports media coverage

Coverage for women in sport consistently makes up less than 10% of the overall sports media coverage in Australia.

Even with no live sport during the height of the COVID pandemic, men’s sport stories still dominated.

Despite netball’s popularity and high participation rates, a study of nine Australian newspapers’ coverage of the 2017 Super Netball season revealed only 4.58% of total sports media coverage was dedicated to the sport.

The most coverage the game generates is when it is in crisis: the 2020 controversy surrounding the competition’s only Indigenous player at the time, Jemma Mi Mi, not given court time in the league’s Indigenous round, despite featuring in the marketing; Netball Australia’s financial position and subsequent proposed sponsorship with Hancock Prospecting; and the folding of the Collingwood Super Netball Team.

The Australian domestic netball competition is arguably the best in the world and attracts the world’s best netballers. But if not for independent women’s sport and dedicated netball media platforms, passionate freelancers and champions driving netball coverage at their mainstream media mastheads, it’s sobering to think where that 4.6% of coverage would sit.

While more Matildas become household names, few could name the Diamonds co-captains, Steph Wood and Liz Watson, and know Wood has just retired from international competition .

Few are discussing the fact World Netball does not offer prize money, and what the current uncertainty of the Commonwealth Games means for athletes who do not have their sport included in the Olympics.

As we reflect on the exciting gains this global mega event can offer women’s football, and the stories which are being told about the barriers these players have faced in a traditionally male sport, we must also reflect on what barriers exist in other women’s sports.

Netball plays an incredibly powerful role in connecting many women to sport in Australia. Media coverage is important to continue to celebrate the athletes at both a grassroots and a professional level. But it also has an important role to play in calling attention to the challenges and change netball needs to continue to drive the code forward alongside other developing professional women’s sports.

Read more:
Women’s World Cup: five issues holding back the female game

Kasey Symons consults to and conducts research for a number of organisations across Australia. Her research has received funding from organisations including the Victorian Government, and national and state sport governing bodies including the Australian Football League and its clubs and the National Rugby League. Dr Symons is also one of the co-founders of Siren: A Women in Sport Collective.

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

– ref. Australia just won the netball world cup. Why isn’t there room for multiple women’s world cups in our sports media? – https://theconversation.com/australia-just-won-the-netball-world-cup-why-isnt-there-room-for-multiple-womens-world-cups-in-our-sports-media-211413

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

Today’s release of the threat assessment by the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (SIS) is the final piece in a defence and security puzzle that marks a genuine shift towards more open and public discussion of these crucial policy areas.

Together with July’s strategic foreign policy assessment from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the national security strategy released last week, it rounds out the picture of New Zealand’s place in a fast-evolving geopolitical landscape.

From increased strategic competition between countries, to declining social trust within them, as well as rapid technological change, the overall message is clear: business as usual is no longer an option.

By releasing the strategy documents in this way, the government and its various agencies clearly hope to win public consent and support – ultimately, the greatest asset any country possesses to defend itself.

Low threat of violent extremism

If there is good news in the SIS assessment, it is that the threat of violent extremism is still considered “low”. That means no change since the threat level was reassessed last year, with a terror attack considered “possible” rather than “probable”.

It’s a welcome development since the threat level was lifted to “high” in the
immediate aftermath of the Christchurch terror attack in 2019. This was lowered
to “medium” about a month later – where it sat in September 2021, when another extremist attacked people with a knife in an Auckland mall, seriously
injuring five.

Read more:
NZ’s first national security strategy signals a ‘turning point’ and the end of old certainties

The threat level stayed there during the escalating social tension resulting from the government’s COVID response. This saw New Zealand’s first conviction for sabotage and increasing threats to politicians, with the SIS and police intervening in at least one case to mitigate the risk.

After protesters were cleared from the grounds of parliament in early 2022, it was
still feared an act of extremism by a small minority was likely.

These risks now seem to be receding. And while the threat assessment notes that the online world can provide havens for extremism, the vast majority of those expressing vitriolic rhetoric are deemed unlikely to carry through with violence in the real world.

Read more:
The ‘number 8 wire’ days for NZ’s defence force are over – new priorities will demand bigger budgets

Changing patterns of extremism

Assessments like this are not a crystal ball; threats can emerge quickly and be near-invisible before they do. But right now, at least publicly, the SIS is not aware of any specific or credible attack planning.

Many extremists still fit well-defined categories. There are the politically motivated, potentially violent, anti-authority conspiracy theorists, of which there is a “small number”.

And there are those motivated by identity (with white supremacist extremism the dominant strand) or faith (such as support for Islamic State, a decreasing and “very small number”).

However, the SIS describes a noticeable increase in individuals who don’t fit within those traditional boundaries, but who hold mixed, unstable or unclear ideologies they may tailor to fit some other violent or extremist impulse.

Espionage and cyber-security risks

There also seems to be a revival of the espionage and spying cultures last seen during the Cold War. There is already the first military case of espionage before the courts, and the SIS is aware of individuals on the margins of government being cultivated and offered financial and other incentives to provide sensitive information.

The SIS says espionage operations by foreign intelligence agencies against New Zealand, both at home and abroad, are persistent, opportunistic and increasingly wide ranging.

Read more:
Cutting-edge new aircraft have increased NZ’s surveillance capacity – but are they enough in a changing world?

While the government remains the main target, corporations, research institutions and state contractors are now all potential sources of sensitive information. Because non-governmental agencies are often not prepared for such threats, they pose a significant security risk.

Cybersecurity remains a particular concern, although the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) recorded 350 incidents in 2021-22, which was a decline from 404 incidents recorded in the previous 12-month period.

On the other hand, a growing proportion of cyber incidents affecting major New Zealand institutions can be linked to state-sponsored actors. Of the 350 reported major incidents, 118 were connected to foreign states (34% of the total, up from 28% the previous year).

Russia, Iran and China

Although the SIS recorded that only a “small number” of foreign states engaged in deceptive, corruptive or coercive attempts to exert political or social influence, the potential for harm is “significant”.

Some of the most insidious examples concern harassment of ethnic communities within New Zealand who speak out against the actions of a foreign government.

The SIS identifies Russia, Iran and China as the three offenders. Iran was recorded as reporting on Iranian communities and dissident groups in New Zealand. In addition, the assessment says:

Most notable is the continued targeting of New Zealand’s diverse ethnic Chinese communities. We see these activities carried out by groups and individuals linked to the intelligence arm of the People’s Republic of China.

Overall, the threat assessment makes for welcome – if at times unsettling – reading. Having such conversations in the open, rather than in whispers behind closed doors, demystifies aspects of national security.

Most importantly, it gives greater credibility to those state agencies that must increase their transparency in order to build public trust and support for their unique roles within a working democracy.

Alexander Gillespie 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. Out of the shadows: why making NZ’s security threat assessment public for the first time is the right move – https://theconversation.com/out-of-the-shadows-why-making-nzs-security-threat-assessment-public-for-the-first-time-is-the-right-move-211183

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Madeline Sprajcer, Lecturer in Psychology, CQUniversity Australia

After a long day, you flop onto the sofa and find yourself dozing off while watching TV. The room is nice and warm, the sofa is comfortable, and the background noise of the TV lulls you to sleep.

Then a loved one nudges you awake and reminds you to go sleep – in bed. But when you get there, you find to your frustration that you’re wide awake.

Why does sleep come so easily on the sofa but not always in bed?

Read more:
How do I stop my mind racing and get some sleep?

Why is it so easy to fall asleep on the sofa?

Sleep pressure is one reason why you fall asleep on the sofa. This refers to the strength of the biological drive for sleep. The longer you’ve been awake, the greater the sleep pressure.

Your body clock or circadian rhythm is another factor. This tells you to be awake during the day and to sleep at night.

Your environment will also impact how likely it is you fall asleep. You might have just eaten a meal, your very comfortable sofa is in a warm room, with dim lighting and maybe a TV program in the background. For many people, this environment is perfect for falling asleep.

So by the end of the day, sleep pressure is strong, your circadian rhythm is telling you it’s time for sleep and your environment is cosy and comfortable.

Read more:
Health Check: ‘food comas’, or why eating sometimes makes you sleepy

What happens after a nap on the sofa?

If you’ve had a nap on the sofa before heading to bed, your sleep pressure is likely much lower than it was before your nap. Instead of having more than 16 hours of wakefulness behind you, you’ve just woken up and therefore have less sleep pressure. This can make it much harder to fall asleep in bed.

If you just fell asleep on the sofa for five minutes, you might not have too much trouble getting to sleep in bed. This is because a nap that short is unlikely to reduce your sleep pressure very much. But if you were asleep for an hour, it might be a different story.

Your sleep cycles might also be working against you. Most sleep cycles are about 90 minutes long. They start with light sleep, progress to deep sleep, and then end with light sleep again. If you wake up during deep sleep, you’re probably going to feel groggy – and it might be easy to get back to sleep when you go to bed. But if you wake up during light sleep it could be harder to fall asleep again in bed.

The activities you might do when you get up from the sofa – like turning on bright lights or brushing your teeth – can also make you feel more alert and make it harder to sleep when you get to bed.

Read more:
Health Check: are naps good for us?

Why can’t I fall asleep in my own bed?

There are other reasons why falling also in your bed could be challenging. Many people experience anxiety about falling asleep. They worry about getting enough sleep or falling asleep fast enough.

In such cases, getting into bed can be associated with feelings of stress and apprehension, which make it even harder to sleep. It might be easier to fall asleep on the couch, where there is less stress involved.

It might also be harder to fall asleep in bed because of poor sleep hygiene. This refers to your pre-sleep behaviours and sleep environment.

Good sleep hygiene, or healthy sleep habits, includes having a regular routine before bed, a dark, quiet room to sleep in, and not using your mobile phone in bed. For many people who don’t have good sleep hygiene, their behaviours before bed and their bedroom environment might not be conducive to sleep.

Read more:
‘Phubbing’: snubbing your loved ones for your phone can do more damage than you realise

How can I make it easier to fall asleep in bed?

First, make sure your room is dark, quiet and comfortable. In winter this might mean putting a heater on 20 minutes before you go to bed or taking a heat pack to bed with you. In summer, you might consider air conditioning or a fan to make your bedroom comfortable for sleeping.

If you find it easy to fall asleep with the TV on, you might like to play “white noise” in your bedroom as you fall asleep. Some evidence suggests this may make it easier to fall asleep by masking other disruptive noises.

Your behaviour before bed also impacts how easy it is to fall asleep. Making sure you follow the same bedtime routine every night (including going to bed at the same time) can help.

Also, even though it’s hard, try not to look at your phone while you’re in bed. Scrolling on your phone before bed can make it harder to sleep due to both exposure to blue light and the potentially stressful or alerting effect of the content you interact with.

Read more:
What is brown noise? Can this latest TikTok trend really help you sleep?

In a nutshell

The best way to make it’s easier to fall asleep in your bed is to avoid falling asleep on the sofa in the first place.

This will ensure all the sleep pressure you build up during the day will be directed towards a deep sleep in your bed.

Read more:
Why do we wake around 3am and dwell on our fears and shortcomings?

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

– ref. Why do I fall asleep on the sofa but am wide awake when I get to bed? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-fall-asleep-on-the-sofa-but-am-wide-awake-when-i-get-to-bed-208371

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Lowe, Emeritus Professor, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University

The federal government has scrapped plans to build the nation’s first radioactive waste storage facility on farmland near Kimba in South Australia. Frankly, it was never going to work. The plan was doomed from the start.

That’s because the “decide and defend” model, where a government decides to put radioactive waste somewhere and then attempts to defend it against the community, hasn’t worked anywhere. It hasn’t worked in the United Kingdom. It hasn’t worked in the United States. Those countries still don’t have any process for long-term management of radioactive waste.

The only country to successfully manage the process is Finland, where the community was engaged. Over a period of several years, the government worked with its people to find a place where the community as a whole was happy to have the radioactive waste, in return for compensation. They’re now building a deep underground repository for permanently storing their radioactive waste.

But Australia’s national government has made the same mistake three times now: a proposal in the Woomera area 20 years ago, Muckaty station in the Northern Territory ten years ago and now Napandee near Kimba. Deciding on a site and then trying to defend it against the community doesn’t work. The government really needs to understand this. The only way to manage our radioactive waste is to engage the community from the start. That means the whole community, including the land’s traditional owners.

Stacking the deck

The Federal Court last month ruled against plans by the former Coalition government to build the Kimba facility, after a court challenge by the traditional owners, the Barngarla people.

The traditional owners had not been consulted – in fact they were specifically excluded from the consultation process. And that’s why the Federal Court overturned the decision.

On Thursday morning, Federal Resources Minister Madeleine King told the House of Representatives she would not challenge the Federal Court decision.

She described Kimba as “a town divided” and emphasised broad community support would have included “the whole community, including the traditional owners of the land”.

But she also drew attention to flaws in the plan, saying:

The previous Government sought to temporarily store intermediate level radioactive waste on agricultural land and contemplated the double handling of the transport of this waste; first from Lucas Heights in NSW, to temporary storage in SA, then on to an undetermined permanent disposal site.

This approach has raised concerns regarding international best practice and safety standards.

King noted the amount of radioactive waste will keep growing, and said her department has begun work on alternative proposals.

Consulting traditional owners is crucial

The Barngarla people understandably objected to nuclear waste being imposed on their land without their prior informed consent.

It might have been possible for the federal government to persuade them to accept low-level waste, which is given that classification because it has relatively low levels of radiation. If buried under a few metres of earth, the radiation reaching the surface is not much above normal background levels.

But the decision to use the site for temporary storage of the intermediate level waste from the Lucas Heights reactor in New South Wales was unlikely to get their approval.

And that raises a quite fundamental issue. Anywhere we want to store radioactive waste in Australia is the traditional land of a group of Indigenous people. Given the history of the Menzies government allowing nuclear weapons to be tested here and the impacts that had on Indigenous people, it’s going to be very difficult to persuade Indigenous people to allow the permanent storage of radioactive waste on their land.

If it’s going to happen, it will require a long process of engagement and communication with Indigenous people to find a group somewhere that’s happy to manage the radioactive waste the community is producing.

Read more:
There’s a long and devastating history behind the proposal for a nuclear waste dump in South Australia

What should happen next?

The vast majority (97%) of the existing nuclear waste produced in this country comes from Australia’s Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), the research reactor at Lucas Heights in Sydney.

The idea of shifting intermediate-level waste from Lucas Heights to another temporary store 1,700km away is particularly silly. The waste is quite nasty stuff that requires serious management. There’s no obvious reason it would have been better in a temporary store at Kimba than in the current temporary store of Lucas Heights.

People have accepted it at Lucas Heights. The sensible approach would be to leave it there until we find somewhere people are happy to have it permanently.

In the fine print of the AUKUS agreement, the Australian government has agreed to manage the radioactive waste from nuclear submarines sourced from the UK and the US. That raises a much more difficult issue.

The Virginia class submarines use highly enriched uranium, which is weapons-grade material. It produces a more complex and intractable set of waste products than what’s produced at Lucas Heights. I’m not sure how many people understand Australia has taken that task on.

Read more:
Australia hasn’t figured out low-level nuclear waste storage yet – let alone high-level waste from submarines

Looking ahead

Naturally, anti-nuclear campaigners welcomed this week’s announcement. But they also held out an olive branch to the federal government, recognising the waste problem hasn’t gone away.

The Australian Conservation Foundation campaigner Dave Sweeney said:

ACF looks forward to constructive dialogue with the Albanese government to help develop a new and responsible approach to radioactive waste management in Australia.

Similarly, Conservation SA chief executive Craig Wilkins said:

Now that the Kimba plan is officially dumped, the real work can finally begin to find a more credible and respectful approach to identifying a long-term storage and disposal site for Australia’s nuclear waste that is consistent with international best practice.

Ian Lowe was for twelve years a member of the Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council, which advises the regulator of nuclear issues. He was also a member of the Expert Advisory Committee for the South Australia Nuclear Royal Commission.

– ref. The Kimba nuclear waste plan bites the dust. Here’s what went wrong and how to do better next time – https://theconversation.com/the-kimba-nuclear-waste-plan-bites-the-dust-heres-what-went-wrong-and-how-to-do-better-next-time-211344

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dan Worthley, Gastroenterologist and cancer scientist, South Australian Health & Medical Research Institute

As medical technology advances, many diseases could be detected, prevented and cured with cells, rather than pills.

This branch of medicine is called cellular or cell therapy. It’s already used in clinical practice in some situations, such as patients receiving faecal microbial transplants (“poo transplants”) when they have a severe gastrointestinal infection, or a bone marrow transplant for treating blood cancer.

Using synthetic biology, we can also engineer new and improved cells that could help us manage various diseases. In a new study published today in Science, my colleagues and I describe how we engineered bacteria to successfully detect cancer cells.

Leveraging competent bacteria

Our project started with a presentation by synthetic biologist Rob Cooper during our colleague Jeff Hasty’s weekly lab meeting at the University of California San Diego. Rob was studying genes and gene transfer in bacteria.

Genes are the fundamental unit of genetic inheritance. It’s the stuff that gives you your mother’s smile or your father’s eye colour.

Gene transfer (or inheritance) is the process by which genes are passed from one cell to another. They may be inherited vertically – when one cell replicates its DNA and divides into two separate cells. This is what happens in reproduction, and how children inherit DNA from their parents.

Genes may also, however, be inherited horizontally – when DNA is passed between unrelated cells, outside of parent-to-offspring inheritance.

Horizontal gene transfer is quite common in the microbial world. Certain bacteria can salvage genes from cell-free DNA found in their immediate environment. This free-floating DNA is released when cells die. When bacteria hoover up cell-free DNA into their cells, it’s called natural competence.

So, competent bacteria can sample their nearby environment and, in doing so, acquire genes that may provide them with an advantage.

After Rob’s talk, we engaged in some frenzied speculation. If bacteria can take up DNA, and cancer is defined genetically by a change in its DNA, then, theoretically, bacteria could be engineered to detect cancer.

Colorectal cancer seemed a logical proof of concept as the bowel is not just full of microbes, but is also full of tumour DNA when it’s struck by cancer.

Read more:
One test to diagnose them all: researchers exploit cancers’ unique DNA signature

We put the bacterium through its paces

Acinetobacter baylyi, a naturally competent bacterium, was chosen to be the experimental biosensor – a disease-detecting cell.

Our team modified the A. baylyi genome to contain long sequences of DNA to mirror the DNA found in a human cancer gene we were interested in capturing. These “complementary” DNA sequences functioned as sticky landing pads – when specific tumour DNA was taken up by the bacteria, it was more likely to integrate into the bacterial genome.

It was important to integrate – hold in place – the tumour DNA. In doing so, we could activate other integrated genes, in this case an antibiotic resistance gene, as a signal for the cancer being detected.

The signal would work as follows: if bacteria could be grown on antibiotic-laden culture plates, their antibiotic resistance gene was active. Therefore they had detected the cancer.

We conducted a series of experiments in which our new bacterial biosensors and tumour cells were brought together in increasingly complex systems.

Initially, we simply marinated the biosensor with purified tumour DNA. That is, we presented our biosensor with the exact DNA it was built to detect – and it worked. Next, we grew the biosensor alongside living tumour cells. Again, it detected the tumour DNA.

Ultimately, we delivered the biosensor into live mice that either did or did not have tumours. In a mouse model of colorectal cancer, we inject mouse colorectal cancer cells into the colon, using mouse colonoscopy.

Over several weeks, the mice that were injected with cancer cells develop tumours, while the mice that were not injected serve as the healthy comparison group. Our biosensor perfectly discriminated between mice with and without colorectal cancer.

CATCH’s promising start – but more testing is needed

After these encouraging results, we engineered the bacteria even further. The biosensor can now tell apart single base pair changes within the tumour DNA, allowing for finely tuned precision in how it detects and targets the genes. We have named this technology CATCH: cellular assay for targeted, CRISPR-discriminated horizontal gene transfer.

Read more:
What is CRISPR, the gene editing technology that won the Chemistry Nobel prize?

CATCH holds great promise. This technology uses cell-free DNA as a new input for synthetic biological circuits, and thus for the detection of a range of different diseases, particularly infections and cancers.

However, it is not yet ready to be used in the clinic. We’re actively working on the next steps – to increase the efficiency of DNA detection, to more critically evaluate the performance of this biosensor compared to other diagnostic tests, and, of course, to ensure patient and environmental safety.

The most exciting aspect of cellular healthcare, however, is not in the mere detection of disease. A laboratory can do that.

But what a laboratory cannot do is pair the detection of disease (a diagnosis) with the cells actually responding to the disease with an appropriate treatment.

This means biosensors can be programmed so that a disease signal – in this case, a specific sequence of cell-free DNA – could trigger a specific biological therapy, directly at the spot where the disease is detected in real time.

Acknowledgements: I am grateful to be part of this incredible team including Professor Jeff Hasty, Dr Rob Cooper, Associate Professor Susan Woods and Dr Josephine Wright.

Dan Worthley owns shares in GenCirq, a synthetic biology company focussed on cancer therapeutics.
This work was supported by an NHMRC ideas grant (2020555) awarded to Dan Worthley.
Dan Worthley is listed as an inventor on a provisional patent application, “Detection of Cancer Mutations”, filed by the University
of California San Diego with the US Patent and Trademark Office (Application No. 63/239,100).

– ref. Genetically engineered bacteria can detect cancer cells in a world-first experiment – https://theconversation.com/genetically-engineered-bacteria-can-detect-cancer-cells-in-a-world-first-experiment-211201

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Howard Manns, Senior Lecturer in Linguistics, Monash University

It’s hard to sympathise with powerful people hounding out innocents — which is why the Coalition wanted us to know the Robodebt Royal Commission was a political witch-hunt. Poor Donald Trump wants us to know he’s the victim of a witch-hunt, too.

To be fair, maybe the Coalition and Trump are trading on the good reputation of witches. After all, a 2013 poll found most Americans preferred witches (also cockroaches and haemorrhoids) to politicians.

But much like polls, political terms tell us something about society and language. Words like “witch-hunt” take us on an illustrative – and sometimes illusory — journey through metaphor, semantics and the politics of, believe it or not, professional wrestling.

Read more:
Brekkies, barbies, mozzies: why do Aussies shorten so many words?

The cynical political power of metaphor

Pollies and pundits love metaphors. In fact, we all do. They are the containers you put ideas in before you hand them over to the world. And they can be shiny linguistic confetti for the brain.

Going back as far as Aristotle, scholars have emphasised the ability of metaphors to bring to mind new aspects of the world and new ways of understanding reality. They have been shown to be effective pedagogical tools, and their therapeutic value is well established.

Metaphors can be helpful — but they can also be harmful.

Good political metaphors can move a nation. Post-war Australian Prime Minister Ben Chiefly’s “light on the hill” had good pedigree (the Sermon on the Mount) and a positive message (“betterment of mankind” in Australia and beyond).

But the pedigree and message of political metaphors can get dark, very fast. When Premier Dan Andrews was up in the polls, some political pundits accused Victorians of suffering from “Stockholm syndrome” — a traumatic bonding as might happen between captives and their abusers. Metaphorical uses of this controversial condition, and the domains it’s been applied to, have grown exponentially since the 1970s.

Metaphors are effective spin doctors when it comes creating political realities and influencing public perceptions, all the more so in the current climate of general scepticism towards experts. “Knowing stuff isn’t enough”, as one article put it. Two epoch-making events, Brexit and Trump, were bankrolled by persuasive metaphors.

Cappuccinos and witch-hunts

It’s not hard to find bizarre examples of powerful people moulding language and others accepting it. At a café in tech company WeWork’s headquarters, the “cappuccinos” were called “lattes” because CEO Adam Neumann insisted they were.

“Witch-hunt” is a particularly egregious use of metaphor. When the term first appeared (originally as witch-hunter) in the 1600s, literal witch-hunts empowered some people at the expense of others to cope with the unknown – failed crops and things that went bump in the night.

But at a deeper level, witch-hunts often served to settle personal grudges and punish (largely) women who didn’t conform to a community’s expectations. Most importantly, witch-hunts were at the discretion of the powerful and at the expense of the less powerful.

“Witch-hunt” has had metaphorical and political currency for more than a hundred years. It’s been drawn into many 20th century debates, including racial politics in Canadian elections (1900) and, perhaps most famously, US Senator Joseph McCarthy’s (1940s-1950s) campaign against communism. Links between McCarthyism and witch-hunts strengthened with Arthur Miller’s 1953 play about the Salem Witch Trials, The Crucible – which was an allegory of McCarthyism.

In the 21st century, “witch-hunt” has become the go-to metaphor for powerful people, especially men, evading scrutiny. The persecution of Harvey Weinstein led some, like Woody Allen, to claim a witch-hunt of Hollywood men was afoot.

And, perhaps most famously, Donald Trump – by his own account – is a prolific victim of witch-hunts – whether through investigations of his business practices, his nominees to government positions or his practices as president.

In short, there’s a bit of blatant, moral inversion at work here. Witch-hunts left many thousands of victims in their wake – usually the less powerful at the hands of the powerful. Now, the powerful are invoking “witch-hunt” as a metaphorical and moral shield, and to claim victimhood.

Read more:
From ‘technicolour yawn’ to ‘draining the dragon’: how Barry Humphries breathed new life into Australian slang

Language, kayfabe and keeping the bastards honest

Frank Luntz – the Republican Party pollster who helped shift the debate from “global warming” to “climate change” – has aptly pointed out, “it’s not what you say, it’s what people hear”.

Increasingly, we don’t hear the same things.

Studies of Trump’s speeches suggest he speaks at a 4th-6th grade level. Some have celebrated supposed empirical proof that Trump is a dummy. Others point out this makes him more accessible. Trump’s fan-base loves that he speaks to them in their language – and it’s a robust finding in linguistics that this is exactly what he should do.

But witchcraft and similar metaphors point to a more sinister strategy. When it comes to language, some of us want a fact-based debate, whereas others want a pro-wrestling spectacle. More than a few scholars and journalists have drawn parallels between something called “kayfabe” and contemporary politics – especially right-wing politics.

Kayfabe is a pro-wrestling term referring to “the performance of staged and ‘faked’ events as actual and spontaneous”. In other words, we know wrestling is scripted and the wrestlers know we know it’s scripted, but we all maintain the pretence of believing it isn’t. The same can be true for political language.

An even more understated part of kayfabe are the “marks” — they are the ones who don’t know it’s all scripted.

So, we’re faced with witch-hunts, lynchings and Stockholm syndrome. People don’t hear the same thing, and even if they do, it may or may not be real. Language as a social contract has more loopholes than footholds.

Journalist and essayist Abraham Josephine Riesman, lamenting the impact of kayfabe on US politics, might be observing language when she writes:

perhaps the only antidote […]is radical honesty. It’s less fun, but it tends to do less material harm, in the long term.

We love metaphors, but accountability and honest debate disappear in a mist of kayfabe when powerful people use them. But metaphorical meaning requires collaboration – sometimes we just have to say, no, actually, that’s a cappuccino.

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. How ‘witch-hunts’ and ‘Stockholm syndrome’ became part of political language (and what it has to do with wrestling) – https://theconversation.com/how-witch-hunts-and-stockholm-syndrome-became-part-of-political-language-and-what-it-has-to-do-with-wrestling-209375

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Moremon, Senior Lecturer in Defence Studies, Massey University

New Zealanders have been put on notice that defence and security are among the bigger challenges the country faces this century.

The assessment earlier this year by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Navigating a Shifting World-Te whakatere i tētahi ao hurihuri, warned “the future looks grim” geopolitically. The release last week of a new national security strategy and defence policy strategy statement underscored the urgency of the required response.

Announcing the strategies, Minister of Defence Andrew Little said New Zealand is “facing more geostrategic challenges than we have in decades”, with geographic remoteness no longer affording protection. Possibly the last time this hit home was in 1942 when Japanese forces advanced in the Pacific.

The news is not all bad, however. The defence policy strategy statement emphasises New Zealand can identify and respond to threats by understanding the strategic and operating environments, partnering with other nations for collective security, and acting with “a credible, combat-capable, deployable force”.

Creating and maintaining such a force is central to New Zealand being perceived by its allies as a credible partner. But this will require financial and social investment in the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) at a scale not seen for decades.

Underfunding and apathy

Successive governments have underfunded defence. At the end of the Cold War in 1991, defence expenditure was 2.26% of GDP. Many countries imposed a “peace dividend”, reducing defence expenditure. But New Zealand cut more than most, more than half in real terms.

The low point was 2015 when defence spending fell to 0.99% of GDP. It has since climbed to around 1.4%, but the NZDF now needs to recover from those historically low budgets. Such GDP ratios will not be enough to match the rhetoric around the new defence and security strategies.

Read more:
NZ’s first national security strategy signals a ‘turning point’ and the end of old certainties

But Aotearoa New Zealand is a small country with funding challenges in many areas, including housing, health, education, security, conservation and infrastructure. Furthermore, New Zealanders have tended to endorse lower defence spending.

Analysts have previously pointed to a degree of public apathy and negative perception of the NZDF. A poll in 2007 showed a majority of New Zealanders were unwilling to see taxes increase to pay for defence.

The defence policy strategy statement and accompanying future force design principles do not indicate the likely implementation costs. But they do acknowledge it will require “balancing the required resourcing with associated trade-offs on policy outcomes”.

The documents identify several challenges that logic dictates will require increased funding and better public support for defence.

The technology deficit

The strategy statement notes that military technology is “evolving at an exponential rate”. This includes artificial intelligence, robotics, weapons, communications, and warship and aircraft design. The NZDF “needs to be more agile in adopting new technologies, including those that will help protect New Zealand and those that can project force”.

This is emphasised by the cover image of a Boeing P-8A, New Zealand’s newest military aircraft. By contrast, the cover of the design principles document offers a clue to the challenge by featuring a 1980s-designed ANZAC frigate warship.

Read more:
Cutting-edge new aircraft have increased NZ’s surveillance capacity – but are they enough in a changing world?

The Australian navy begins retiring its similarly aged frigates next year, but New Zealand’s will be updated and in service for another decade. This risks the ships passing the point where they can meaningfully contribute to military operations.

Replacement Australian-built frigates cost on average around $5 billion each. New Zealand will likely procure less expensive, off-the-shelf models. But these will need to be equipped for maritime and island operations, as well as war fighting. The NZDF will need new amphibious craft and strategic and tactical drones for sea, air and land.

The next government may well need to revisit past decisions driven by the low priority placed on defence. As one critical assessment in 2020 argued, “The decision to scrap air combat [fighter jet] capability in 2001 appears particularly reckless.”

Skills, people and pay

Another major challenge concerns personnel and skills. The NZDF needs to “adapt to a changing labour force to attract appropriate personnel”. It must compete for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) graduates.

The NZDF also needs non-STEM recruits for intellectual balance. To sustain capability, it must attract physically fit and educated young people who can understand and utilise modern technologies, and who possess analytical, interpersonal and communication skills. It must then train them for complex, high-risk operations.

The 2022 NZDF annual report noted how the challenges in recruiting and retaining personnel affect operational readiness and resilience. Given the employment market offers “remuneration rates greater than the NZDF currently provides”, a new pay model is needed.

Read more:
AUKUS is already trialling autonomous weapons systems – where is NZ’s policy on next-generation warfare?

Finally, the NZDF “will be called upon more often” for contingencies that include armed conflict, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. High-tempo operations and multiple deployments strain personnel and families. To ensure personnel retention, conditions of service and support of families need improving.

The old “number 8 wire” resort to Kiwi ingenuity, imposed on the NZDF by decades of meagre defence budgets, will no longer wash. Identifying and responding to threats in the new geostrategic environment will depend on improved political, financial and societal support for the NZDF.

Of course there will be compromises. New Zealand cannot afford everything the NZDF might desire. In return for what is provided, however, governments and the NZDF itself must better explain to the public how the force contributes to national and collective security.

For New Zealanders to accept a beefed-up, more deployable and more expensive defence force, they will need to understand the threats and be assured the investment is warranted and the money spent wisely.

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

– ref. The ‘number 8 wire’ days for NZ’s defence force are over – new priorities will demand bigger budgets – https://theconversation.com/the-number-8-wire-days-for-nzs-defence-force-are-over-new-priorities-will-demand-bigger-budgets-211182

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Larcombe, Associate Professor and Head of Respiratory Environmental Health, Telethon Kids Institute

If you asked me what’s in e-cigarettes, disposable vapes or e-liquids, my short answer would be “we don’t fully know”.

The huge and increasing range of products and flavours on the market, changes to ingredients when they are heated or interact with each other, and inadequate labelling make this a complicated question to answer.

Analytical chemistry, including my own team’s research, gives some answers. But understanding the health impacts adds another level of complexity. E-cigarettes’ risk to health varies depending on many factors including which device or flavours are used, and how people use them.

So vapers just don’t know what they’re inhaling and cannot be certain of the health impacts.

Read more:
No, vapes aren’t 95% less harmful than cigarettes. Here’s how this decade-old myth took off

What do we know?

Despite these complexities, there are some consistencies between what different laboratories find.

Ingredients include nicotine, flavouring chemicals, and the liquids that carry them – primarily propylene glycol and glycerine.

Concerningly, we also find volatile organic compounds, particulate matter and carcinogens (agents that can cause cancer), many of which we know are harmful.

Our previous research also found 2-chlorophenol in about half of e-liquids users buy to top-up re-fillable e-cigarettes. This is one example of a chemical with no valid reason to be there. Globally, it’s classified as “harmful if inhaled”. Its presence is likely due to contamination during manufacturing.

Read more:
Many e-cigarette vaping liquids contain toxic chemicals: new Australian research

How about polonium?

One potential ingredient that has been in the news in recent weeks is radioactive polonium-210, the same substance used to assassinate former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. The Queensland government is now testing vapes for it.

Polonium-210 can be found in traditional cigarettes and other tobacco products. That’s because tobacco plants absorb it and other radioactive materials from the soil, air and high-phosphate fertiliser.

Whether polonium-210 is found in aerosols produced by e-cigarettes remains to be seen. Although it is feasible if the glycerine in e-liquids comes from plants and similar fertilisers are used to grow them.

Read more:
Litvinenko poisoning: polonium explained

It’s not just the ingredients

Aside from their ingredients, the materials e-cigarette devices are made from can end up in our bodies.

Toxic metals and related substances such as arsenic, lead, chromium and nickel can be detected in both e-liquids and vapers’ urine, saliva and blood.

These substances can pose serious health risks (such as being carcinogenic). They can leach from several parts of an e-cigarette, including the heating coil, wires and soldered joints.

Read more:
We asked over 700 teens where they bought their vapes. Here’s what they said

That’s not all

The process of heating e-liquids to create an inhalable aerosol also changes their chemical make-up to produce degradation products.

These include:

• formaldehyde (a substance used to embalm dead bodies)

• acetaldehyde (a key substance that contributes to a hangover after drinking alcohol)

• acrolein (used as a chemical weapon in the first world war and now used as a herbicide).

These chemicals are often detected in e-cigarette samples. However due to different devices and how the samples are collected, the levels measured vary widely between studies.

Often, the levels are very low, leading to proponents of vaping arguing e-cigarettes are far safer than tobacco smoking.

But this argument does not acknowledge that many e-cigarette users (particularly adolescents) were or are not cigarette smokers, meaning a better comparison is between e-cigarette use and breathing “fresh” air.

An e-cigarette user is undoubtedly exposed to more toxins and harmful substances than a non-smoker. People who buy tobacco cigarettes are also confronted with a plethora of warnings about the hazards of smoking, while vapers generally are not.

Read more:
Sex and lies are used to sell vapes online. Even we were surprised at the marketing tactics we found

How about labelling?

This leads to another reason why it’s impossible to tell what is in vapes – the lack of information, including warnings, on the label.

Even if labels are present, they don’t always reflect what’s in the product. Nicotine concentration of e-liquids is often quite different to what is on the label, and “nicotine-free” e-liquids often contain nicotine.

Products are also labelled with generic flavour names such as “berry” or “tobacco”. But there is no way for a user to know what chemicals have been added to make those “berry” or “tobacco” flavours or the changes in these chemicals that may occur with heating and/or interacting with other ingredients and the device components. “Berry” flavour alone could be made from more than 35 different chemicals.

Flavouring chemicals may be “food grade” or classified as safe-to-eat. However mixing them into e-liquids, heating and inhaling them is a very different type of exposure, compared to eating them.

One example is benzaldehyde (an almond flavouring). When this is inhaled, it impairs the immune function of lung cells. This could potentially reduce a vaper’s ability to deal with other inhaled toxins, or respiratory infections.

Benzaldehyde is one of only eight banned e-liquid ingredients in Australia. The list is so short because we don’t have enough information on the health effects if inhaled of other flavouring chemicals, and their interactions with other e-liquid ingredients.

Where to next?

For us to better assess the health risks of vapes, we need to learn more about:

• what happens when flavour chemicals are heated and inhaled

• the interactions between different e-liquid ingredients

• what other contaminants may be present in e-liquids

• new, potentially harmful, substances in e-cigarettes.

Finally, we need to know more about how people use e-cigarettes so we can better understand and quantify the health risks in the real world.

Alexander Larcombe has previously received funding for e-cigarette research from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Lung Foundation Australia, Minderoo Foundation, Health Department of Western Australia and Asthma Foundation of Western Australia. The funders played no role in the conduct of the research. He is also a member of the Australian Council on Smoking and Health (ACOSH).

– ref. What’s in vapes? Toxins, heavy metals, maybe radioactive polonium – https://theconversation.com/whats-in-vapes-toxins-heavy-metals-maybe-radioactive-polonium-210462