The Fijian Media Association (FMA) has labelled comments made by former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama this week to media workers of Mai TV, Fijivillage and Fiji Sun outside the Suva courthouse as “distasteful, unbecoming, and unacceptable”.
Bainimarama told the Mai TV cameraman in the iTaukei language on Tuesday: “Qarauna de dua tacaqe, au na qai caqeta yani na muna.”(“Be careful no one stumbles, for I will then kick your backside.”)
The former prime minister also told the Fijivillage cameraperson “watch out, you slip, and then I will kick your backside”.
Earlier in the week, Bainimarama also told a Fiji Sun press photographer “kwan kwan”, a derogatory term commonly used to chase away dogs or animals.
In a statement, FMA said they found these comments highly offensive.
“The FMA continues to reiterate that journalists, photographers and videographers are doing an important work of informing the public, and threats of violence against them is unacceptable,” the statement read.
The FMA stated that journalists had come through a period — 17 years of media repression since the 2006 military coup — where they had been beaten, intimidated, and abused and would not let these threats to deter them from doing their duty.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra
The Albanese government’s new “Measuring What Matters” framework for a wellbeing economy has been criticised for relying on out-of-date data in several crucial measures. But that’s an easy and somewhat cheap criticism to make.
Notably, the Treasury document reports “little change” in overall life satisfaction based on statistics from 2020, and “stable” psychological distress, based on statistics from 2018.
As The Australian newspaper has editorialised, this old data “fails to reflect the COVID-19 pandemic, billions of dollars in extra NDIS spending, and the most aggressive series of interest rate hikes in a generation”.
True, but given these are the most recent years on which the Australian Bureau of Statistics has published data, that’s a relatively cheap shot. It’s as if the newspaper wants to find fault with the document, labelling it “a pitch to progressives” and a “fad”.
The document is more than that. It should be acknowledged as a significant and positive step in the right direction by Australia’s Treasury, in keeping with international best practice.
At the same time, it should be recognised that the measures being used need improvement, both in terms of regularity and how much they capture differences masked by national averages
When the then shadow Treasurer Jim Chalmers outlined his plan for a wellbeing budget in 2020, his opposite number Josh Frydenberg mocked it as a “yoga mat and beads” approach to economic management.
But the need to shift away from using the blunt instruments of national income or gross domestic product (GDP) to measure progress has long been recognised. Even the inventor of GDP, Simon Kuznets, said a nation’s welfare can “scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income”.
New Zealand, Wales, the United Kingdom, India and Canada are all ahead of Australia in adopting wellbeing frameworks to shape their budget decisions. International institutions such as the OECD and United Nations are working along similar lines.
The new statement is in some ways a restoration of the Treasury’s wellbeing framework developed in the early 2000s under the Howard government, championed by department head Ken Henry and inspired by the work of Nobel prizewinner Amartya Sen. It was quietly dropped in 2016 under the Turnbull government.
The problem with ‘average’ Australians
There are various approaches to measuring wellbeing. One way is to amend GDP by taking out “bad things” (pollution, loss of biodiversity, smoking) and include “good things” not currently included (such as unpaid caring work done in the home).
The approach of Measuring What Matters is to use a “dashboard” of 50 indicators of inclusion, fairness and equity over five areas: health, security, sustainability, cohesion and prosperity. The measures for health, for example, include life expectancy, mental health, prevalence of chronic conditions, and access to health and support services.
For these measures to be meaningful and useful to the budget process, they need to be both timely and capture differences in experiences between different groups – not just the “average”.
Averages can mask significant inequalities. As Paul Krugman put it, if Elon Musk walks into a bar then the average person there becomes a billionaire.
The unemployment rate is at a 50-year low, and average household income and wealth at record levels. But not all Australians are sharing in this. The Indigenous unemployment rate, for example, is still about three times the national average.
As the statement notes, “the whole of population indicators outlined in this Framework are not an accurate measure of First Nations wellbeing”.
Many wellbeing surveys show the importance of understanding the wellbeing of specific groups. For example, the national Carer Wellbeing Survey shows that unpaid carers have much lower wellbeing compared to the average Australian.
Regional wellbeing
Another area where average indicators may be inaccurate is in capturing the experience of people living in rural and remote areas.
Some aspects of wellbeing – such as social connection – are often higher in rural areas. But others are much poorer, such as access to health and social services. People in rural and remote areas are also more affected by drought, flood, fires and storms – events increasing in frequency and severity.
For example, the University of Canberra’s Regional Wellbeing Survey, conducted since 2013, has consistently shown that Australians living in outer regional and remote areas report poorer access to many services, including health, mobile phone and internet access.
Measuring What Matters shows they wait longer to see a doctor and have less trust in institutions. But many other indicators don’t have specific data for rural regions, and don’t provide insight into the often large differences in wellbeing of different rural communities.
Without measures to see how they are faring, we risk leaving rural areas behind.
Chalmers has rightly referred to the new framework as an “iterative process”.
Yes, the data in some areas is outdated, such as the cost of rent or mortgages and financial security, which come from 2020 – predating the surge in rents and higher interest rates.
The only way to fix this is to provide the resources needed to collect more detailed information more often. This should include ensuring a sample of the many groups known to be at higher risk of low wellbeing but often under-represented in national data collections.
When seeking to move from simplistic to more complex ways of measuring social progress, it is easy to criticise gaps in data, or to suggest that it’s all too hard and we should default back to easier numbers and measures.
But while Measuring What Matters is limited by the scope of the data available, it is a step in the right direction.
John Hawkins worked in Treasury when it had a wellbeing framework. He contributed to a submission about the framework.
Jacki Schirmer receives funding from a number of organisations to conduct research examining the wellbeing and resilience of Australians. These currently include the Australian, Victorian, New South Wales and ACT governments.
Physical activity has established benefits for health. The World Health Organization recommends adults do a minimum of 150–300 minutes of moderate or 75–150 minutes of vigorous activity each week. This can include active transport from place-to-place, exercise for fun and fitness, energetic housework or physical activity at work.
These amounts can be accrued by being, as the WHO recommends, regularly active throughout the week, or being a “weekend warrior” who does the bulk of their activity on one to two days only, which don’t need to be consecutive.
So far, experts haven’t fully established which of the two patterns is better for overall health. For many people, busy lifestyles may make it hard to be physically active every day. It may be more feasible to squeeze most physical activity and exercise into a few days.
Fresh analysis of the large UK Biobank database attempted to compare these two patterns of weekly activity and compare how they reduced cardiovascular risk for heart attacks, heart failure, irregular heart beat and stroke.
Researchers analysed records from 89,573 participants who wore a wrist activity tracker for seven days and were tracked for cardiovascular events for over six years.
Those who did less than the WHO recommended 150 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week were considered inactive. About a third (33.7%) of participants were inactive. Some 42.2% were active weekend warriors (they did at least 150 minutes and more than half of it occurred within one to two days) and 24% were regularly active (at least 150 minutes with most activity spread out over three or more days).
Researchers considered the potential factors that could explain the link between physical activity and new cases of cardiovascular events, such as smoking and alcohol intake. They found both active groups showed similarly lower risk of heart attack (a 27% reduction for weekend warriors and 35% for regularly active people, compared with inactive participants).
For heart failure, weekend warriors had a 38% lower risk than inactive people, while regular exercisers had a 36% lower risk. Irregular heartbeat risk was 22% lower for weekend warriors and 19% lower for regularly actively people. Stroke was 21% and 17% lower for weekend warriors and regular exercisers, respectively.
Busy people might find it easier to plan activity on the weekend. Shutterstock
Not so fast. Some study limitations
Although the information was recorded by activity trackers, researchers did not consider on which days of the week the activity was done. Some people may have been active on Saturdays and Sundays, others might have chosen Wednesday and Friday – or different days each week. In that sense, the study examined a “pseudo-weekend warrior” pattern.
Despite the many advantages the UK Biobank activity trackers have over questionnaire-based studies, these trackers are not great at capturing strength-training exercise, such as weights or pilates, and other static activities that have established cardiovascular health benefits.
There have been several questionnaire based studies in this area in the past 20 years.
Our 2017 study, for example, combined data from 63,591 adults from England and Scotland and tracked them over 12 years. We looked at risk reductions for death from any cause, cardiovascular disease and cancer causes. We found similar benefits among people who clocked at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity or at least 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity physical activity in one to two sessions per week, compared with three sessions or more per week.
Our more recent studies used activity trackers and emphasised the flexibility of activity patterns that benefit the heart and circulation. We found doing short one-minute-long bouts of incidental vigorous physical activity three to four times a day can cut the risk of death from cardiovascular causes by almost half.
Similarly, in another study we found just 19 minutes of vigorous physical activity a week was associated with 40% reduction in the risk of cardiovascular death, with steadily increasing benefits to the maximum amount of vigorous activity recorded (110 minutes a week linked to a 75% risk reduction).
Taken together, the new study and previous research suggest the same thing: if it is difficult to find time to be active during a busy week, it is good enough to plan moderate to vigorous physical activities in a couple of weekdays or in the weekend.
That said, there are benefits in being regularly physically active on most days of the week. A good session of aerobic exercise, for example, improves health indicators such as blood pressure, and blood glucose and cholesterol levels for a day or longer. Such effects can moderate some of the long-term health risks of these factors and assist with their day-to-day management.
But confirmation that we can be flexible about how physical activity is accumulated across the week for heart health benefits is encouraging. It offers more opportunities for more people to be active when it is convenient and practical for them.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
A scene examination is continuing at a construction site in central Auckland after a fatal shooting there shocked the city yesterday morning.
The gunman, 24-year-old Matu Tangi Matua Reid, was on home detention but allowed to work at the construction site.
He died at the scene in a shoot-out with police after killing two civilians with a pump-action shotgun. Six others were wounded, including two police officers.
The horror unfolded on the opening day of the FIFA Women’s Football World Cup in Auckland and a minute’s silence for the shooting victims was held at the first game at Eden Park last night when New Zealand defeated Norway 1-0.
Police officers in high-vis vests have today re-entered the high-rise building on the corner of Queen and Quay streets and at least seven police cars are at the cordoned off site.
A man working on the repairs at nearby Queen’s Wharf told RNZ the rules had been tightened at their site and people entering were being checked.
An armed police officer is seen at the cordon surrounding Thursday’s shooting incident in Auckland’s CBD. Image: Ziming Li/RNZ
A commuter said there appeared to be extra security at Britomart Station transit hub this morning but he felt safe.
Shooting ‘out of the ordinary’, says Auckland mayor Reflecting on yesterday’s events, Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown told RNZ Morning Report the shooting was a “dreadful, unexpected thing”.
“It was every emotion yesterday,” he said, but he thought the city had coped well in the aftermath of the ‘shock and horror’ of the morning’s events.”
The dead gunman Matu Tangi Matua Reid . . . on home detention but allowed to work at the central city construction site. Image: TDB
Brown said he supported Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei’s decision to call for a rahui in the CBD area, and the FIFA fan zone on Quay Street had been closed.
Ngāti Whātua has said this morning that no rahui is in place.
“[The] fan zone was right hard up against the dreadful event and it just didn’t seem to be right to be having a night of celebration right next door to something that had been so horrible,” he said.
“Ngāti Whātua called for, and I supported, a rahui on the area down there so we shut the fan zone and people, with a sad tinge, did go to the game at Eden Park, but with respect.
“They had the one minute’s silence, which was part of our culture and the correct thing to do, and then there was a wonderful game afterwards so, I think … the city took it well.”
‘Good end to dreadful day’ Brown said he had spoken to Prime Minister Chris Hipkins after last night’s match between New Zealand and Norway and they had agreed it was “a very good end to a dreadful day”.
He said FIFA officials had been “very sympathetic” about the shooting.
“They were very understanding, they were very concerned about the impact on the tournament, but also deeply respectful of the losses of — almost innocence — of the people here in Auckland CBD, plus of course the dreadful loss of life from this shocking experience.”
While he had been one of the people raising concerns about ongoing crime issues such as ram raids in Auckland, Brown said he was not thinking about anything on the scale of what occurred yesterday.
“It’s something out of the ordinary and I think this is one random person … and we shouldn’t possibly extrapolate that across the district, but crime on the streets with the ram raids is something which has got to be dealt with.”
Brown had praise for both the police and members of the public regarding how they responded to the unfolding crisis on Thursday morning.
“The police were wonderful, they responded bravely and promptly,” he said.
“People behaved very well considering what an appalling thing had happened.”
Violence like this has no place in city, says Swarbrick There would be a time for political debate and discussions about how to prevent incidents like yesterday’s shooting, Auckland Central MP Chlöe Swarbrick told Morning Report, but that time was not right now.
“I very, very strongly want the message to be here that this violence has absolutely no place in our city or in our country, and we utterly reject it,” she said.
Swarbrick said her thoughts were with the whānau and friends of those who had died as well as those who had been injured, emergency service staff, and the workers who had experienced the traumatic event.
She said questions had been put to police officials at a briefing she attended yesterday, including about how the shooter had obtained a gun without a licence and while he was on home detention.
Swarbrick expected those questions would be answered “in due course” but said it was important the facts were “crystal clear” first.
“I don’t think that anyone benefits from politicians speculating in a vacuum of facts.”
The briefing had made it “very clear that this was a tragic but isolated incident connected to the workplace and that there is no outstanding associated risk”, she said.
Asked whether she believed a broader inquiry was needed to look into the use of home detention, Swarbrick said a number of reports commissioned by successive governments had identified evidence-based policies to address what was a complex issue, but that evidence was often “politically unpalatable”.
The rhetoric and debate around law and order was often reduced to “soundbyte-solutions”, she said, “things that politicians know will not work and oftentimes are contrary to evidence”.
She said New Zealanders deserved evidence-based interventions when it came to tackling crime.
“It is really clear what we have to resource in terms of evidence-based policy but it is the crunchy and the hard stuff which looks meaningfully at prevention, it’s not this knee-jerk ‘tough-on-crime’ nonsense.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.
New Zealand Politics Daily is a collation of the most prominent issues being discussed in New Zealand. It is edited by Dr Bryce Edwards of The Democracy Project.
The opening match of the FIFA Women’s World Cup in Auckland was a historic moment for women’s sport in New Zealand – and not just because the Football Ferns upset highly-ranked Norway to win one-nil.
Played in front of 42,137 noisy and enthusiastic fans, the game showed just how far football has come since women were discouraged or simply banned from playing, right up to the 1960s.
The previously most-attended football game in New Zealand was between the All Whites and Peru in 2017. For the women’s team, last night’s stadium was like nothing they’d experienced – the biggest crowd they’d played in front of until last night was 13,000 (against the USA at Eden Park earlier this year).
There had also been doubts leading up to the tournament. Many were asking why ticket sales were lagging, and the Football Ferns came into the competition on a ten-game losing streak (bar the pre-tournament win over Vietnam).
So the World Cup win by the Football Ferns signals an important milestone in New Zealanders’ relationship with the game – and women’s sport in general.
Hannah Wilkinson scores the winning goal against Norway in the opening match of the FIFA Women’s World Cup. Getty Images
The long game
Women’s football has a long history in New Zealand, dating back to the first decade of the 20th century. But generations of talented and dedicated players have had to fight to play and be visible and respected within clubs and organisations.
As football researcher Alida Shanks has shown, women were banned from playing for 50 years because football wasn’t considered socially appropriate. From the 1960s, however, women began organising themselves, navigating space in male-dominated clubs, or creating their own associations.
This history of exclusion and marginalisation has had lasting effects, and can still be seen and felt in many clubs around the country. As Shanks has shown, 36% of women who work in New Zealand football federations feel they have been discriminated against, and 28% believe bias has limited their careers within their current organisations.
Yet despite the challenges, football’s popularity with girls and women has continued to grow. Participation rates have increased by over 35% since 2011, according to New Zealand Football (NZF).
This growth might be attributed to the growing visibility of the women’s game globally. But efforts by NZF and regional sports organisations have also made the game more accessible and exciting to a wider range of girls and women.
Top down and bottom up
We may also be seeing the fruits of significant government investment through the Sport NZ Women and Girls in Sport strategy. This long-term initiative has sought to improve opportunities for girls and women to participate in sport, active recreation and play – and to improve conditions for women as athletes and leaders.
The Women’s World Cup has also seen the game’s perennial underfunding turn around, with the government pledging NZ$19 million to upgrade facilities, including improved accessibility and gender-neutral spaces in some stadiums.
The current minister of sport Grant Robertson has been a strong advocate, too, backing New Zealand hosting the “world cup trilogy” of cricket, rugby and now football.
But these top-down strategies have been matched by the many layers of women working tirelessly behind the scenes to promote, grow and develop sporting opportunities for girls and women at all levels.
New Zealand fans celebrate the team’s 1-0 victory over Norway at Eden Park in Auckland. Getty Images
Building the legacy
Those early fears that New Zealanders might not get behind the team, or fully recognise the significance of co-hosting such a globally significant sporting event, appear to have been unfounded.
In particular, the number of families with young children – girls and boys – who turned out to watch the Football Ferns dominate a former World Cup champion team suggests new generations will keep building the local game.
As Ferns captain Ali Riley proclaimed, with tears in her eyes, at the end of the match:
There have been a lot of doubters because of our previous results, but we believed in ourselves. This is what dreams are made of. Anything is possible.
Going in as underdogs, the Football Ferns gave the crowd exactly what they wanted – a reason to believe in and celebrate women’s athleticism and dedication, and to respect the long fight to play the sport they love.
The historic opening match will undoubtedly encourage New Zealanders to fill stadiums in Hamilton, Wellington and Dunedin over the coming weeks. If that happens, the ripple effects of this extraordinary game and the tournament in general will be felt across communities and seen on football fields for years to come.
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.
Today’s release of the Commonwealth Treasury’s Measuring What Matters statement is an important step towards better government decision-making and a shared vision for the Australia we want, but it’s only the first step.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has long talked about broadening our measures of success beyond the traditional ones of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), inflation and unemployment.
The wellbeing framework announced today is an attempt to bring those ideas into being. The need for different economic thinking is demonstrated in many ways, including the current housing crisis, worsening climate change, the loss of biodiversity and increases in financial stress and mental illness.
The new framework consists of a dashboard of 50 indicators, grouped under five themes, which seek to broaden our collective ambition beyond things such as GDP.
Developing a wellbeing framework brings Australia into line with many forward-thinking democracies, including the five members of the Wellbeing Economy government partnership: Finland, Iceland, New Zealand, Scotland and Wales.
But creating such an economy requires more than a dashboard.
The Wellbeing Economy Alliance, a global collaboration of people and organisations working for a wellbeing economy, has developed five “tests” of a genuine wellbeing economy:
Does the economy provide everyone with what is needed to live a life of dignity and purpose?
Does the economy restore, protect, and cherish the natural environment and is the economy guided by the principles of interconnection and indivisibility of human, animal, plant, and environmental health?
Does the economy value activities and behaviours by their contribution to social and ecological wellbeing?
Is the economy designed to ensure a just distribution of income, wealth, power, and time?
Is the shape and form of the economy locally rooted and determined by people’s active voices?
It says the next step will be integrating the framework into decision making.
Consistent with our international counterparts, we will be looking for opportunities to embed the Framework into government decision-making. This will involve guidance for agencies to inform policy development and evaluation.
This won’t be easy. While the metrics in the framework will be useful for tracking progress and sparking action aimed at reversing negative trends and building on successes, international examples tell us it’s hard to use a framework built from 50 different metrics to work out what to do.
It can turn compliance into a box-ticking exercise, when what’s really needed is a paradigm shift.
Wales found a way around this through a national conversation that eventually led to the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. That act requires public bodies to use sustainable development as guiding principle and to work to achieve seven goals that reflect the values and aspirations of the Welsh people.
Those goals include prosperity, resilience, health, equality, global responsibility, cultural vibrancy and connection – not dissimilar to the themes in Measuring What Matters.
Where the Welsh goals differ from those in Australia’s Measuring What Matters statement is that they have a democratic mandate, and all Welsh public authorities are legally obligated to work towards achieving all of them.
Inaugural Welsh Future Generations Commissioner Sophie Howe.
Realising the potential of Measuring What Matters will require the support and vigilance of the Australian people. Australians, and the government, will need to be willing to experiment and sometimes fail.
It took Wales three attempts at developing a wellbeing framework before it landed on the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.
It is encouraging that treasury and the treasurer are openly saying that what was released on Friday is only the start of a conversation about measures of progress.
Measuring what matters, when the people have been robustly engaged in defining what matters, is a vital precondition for the economic system change Australia needs.
Spoiler alert: this review contains plot details of the film.
At last – after the hype and advance mass-merchandising – the Barbie movie is here. Part spoof, part action fantasy, part Barbie doll virtual museum, it’s a full-blown product placement experience – but ironic as much as iconic.
The movie sets off feeling like a post-pandemic party. It’s an opportunity to be frivolous after a time of adversity, and to reclaim the pink of life – especially, perhaps, for fun-starved Gen Z. Given Barbie first appeared in 1959 as a baby boomer’s plastic mini-mannequin, dress-up fashion doll, that’s real inter-generational reach.
But to early critics, the doll evoked the mass production of white, American tween culture. To feminists seeking women’s liberation, Barbie symbolised a culture that objectified women, treating them quite literally as living dolls.
All this is captured in the first part of the film, where “Stereotypical Barbie” and “Just Beach Ken” are brilliantly brought to life by Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling. The film playfully toys with the long history of Barbie debates, subtly feeding into the backstory.
Just as impressively, no expense has been spared on set and accessory design. Watching the actors breathe, think, move and play like dolls is hilarious and spooky.
Ruth Handler, co-founder of Mattel and creator of the Barbie doll, on her creation’s 40th birthday in 1999. Getty Images
Of course, real people playing dolls might suggest those feminist fears have been realised. Except for the fact that Barbie Land in this film is an empowering matriarchy, full of dreams coming true, and where the dolls are leading perfect lives of substance.
Unlike real-world America, there is a woman president. Equity, diversity and the acceptance of all body types are on display. All of which support Barbie manufacturer Mattel’s claim to create the dolls as “role models” for women’s advancement in a changing world.
And then the aspirational matriarchy starts to malfunction. Stereotypical Barbie develops bad breath, flat feet, cellulite and a fear of death. A leak in the portal to the Real World means dark and crazy drawings by that Barbie’s owner are having a voodoo effect. She must travel there to sort things out.
‘I am Kennough’
The movie turns dark, with tag-along Ken discovering patriarchy in the Real World and taking it back to Barbie Land. With Ken largely invisible in the film’s merchandising and girls-night-out launches, we’ve been set up for the surprising plot twist.
Gosling proceeds to own the screen and make this the Ken Movie. He rejects being “just Ken” and instead acts, dances, prowls and flexes to steal the show. (He calms down later, accepting that Barbie does not want to be his girlfriend.)
An appendage no more, it is Ken, not Barbie, who whines about blonde fragility and every night being a girls’ night, and who now sings of seeking to push women around and take them for granted.
This is where the movie is at its most profound. Ken, not Barbie, is the victim of sexism. As Barbie has flourished, Ken has been left behind. Kens are the objectified, excluded second sex.
There are echoes here of the American feminist Susan Faludi’s writings. In the early 1990s, she saw feminism as being defined in a sign hoisted by a little girl at the 1970 Women’s Strike for Equality march: I AM NOT A BARBIE DOLL.
By the end of that decade she described the betrayal of the American man, and a crisis of masculinity. Emasculated men, she wrote, were left behind in the wake of women’s progress. But as the inhabitants of Barbie Land discover in the film, matriarchy can be just as damaging as patriarchy. Better to mix pink and blue to make purple instead of them competing.
Irony at every turn: Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie at the European premiere of Barbie in London. Getty Images
Rejects save the day
Writer-director Greta Gerwig and her collaborator (and husband) Noah Baumbach feed the dichotomy of being “for” or “against” Barbie. But they ultimately render that debate history.
Enter Weird Barbie (Kate McKinnon) and Alan (Michael Cera), outcasts and rejects of Barbie Land, who want “nobody in the shadows”. These are the real heroes who save the day, deprogramming the brainwashed Barbies. It is one more layer of irony in a film about a doll once accused of brainwashing girls.
Indeed, when Barbie cries at one point about being ugly, providing irony within irony, narrator Helen Mirren steps in to suggest that Margot Robbie was probably not the right actress to cast to make that point.
By the end of the film, Barbie has become real and ordinary. Replete with genitalia, she liberates herself from her plastic-fantastic dream world – without Ken – to live in the unruly real world. In a full circle, the doll becomes human.
So, must women’s empowerment come at men’s expense? The historian of patriarchy Gerda Lerner once addressed this very question. She said the idea was an outmoded construct that
no longer serves the needs of men or women and in its inextricable linkage to militarism, hierarchy, and racism it threatens the very existence of life on earth.
As in the finale of Gerwig’s film, Lerner’s feminist vision was for everybody to stand in the sunshine. In a world emerging from COVID and grappling with the general grimness of war and climate change, Gerwig’s Barbie is both an exuberant opiate and a comment on the state of global feminism.
Perhaps most ironically, however, it may signal market saturation for Barbie. Surely this must be her peak moment, a massive last hurrah, after which the doll and all she has represented for over 60 years recede into history. Then again, Hollywood loves a sequel.
Katie Pickles 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kaitlin Cook, DECRA Fellow, Department of Nuclear Physics and Accelerator Applications, Australian National University
Shutterstock
I would like to know what a nuclear bomb actually does – Rafael, age 11, Melbourne
Hi Rafael!
A nuclear bomb, like any bomb, makes an explosion by releasing an enormous amount of energy at once. Nuclear bombs just use a different process from other bombs.
You may have heard of atoms. These are the super-tiny particles that make up matter – which in turn makes everything around us (and us).
Nuclear bombs work by changing the cores of atoms to turn them into other types of atoms. This process releases a lot of heat energy, which quickly gets converted into a big wave of pressure: an explosion!
What are nuclei?
Nuclear bombs release much more energy than normal bombs that use chemicals such as TNT. This is because the cores of atoms are held together very strongly. But before I get into that, let me explain some of the basics.
Atoms themselves are made up of even smaller particles called protons, neutrons and electrons. A cloud of electrons surrounds a tiny inner core made of protons and neutrons. This core is called the nucleus, and more than one nucleus are called nuclei.
An atom is made up of electrons surrounding a central core of protons and neutrons. The core is about one-hundred thousand times smaller than the atom. AG Caesar/Wikimedia Commons
Chemical reactions happen when electrons are rearranged, whereas nuclear reactions happen when protons and neutrons inside the nucleus are rearranged.
There are two types of nuclear bombs. In the case of “fission” bombs, nuclei that have a lot of protons and neutrons – such as those in a very dense metal called uranium – are split apart.
Uranium is a chemical element with the atomic number 92. It has 92 protons and electrons. Shutterstock
In another type of nuclear bomb called a “fusion” bomb, two very small nuclei – such as the cores of two hydrogen atoms – are stuck together.
But fission bombs are simpler and more common, so let’s talk about those.
Chain reactions
Some nuclei don’t take very much energy at all to split apart, such as those in some types of uranium or plutonium atoms (plutonium is another dense metal which has 94 protons in its nuclei).
These nuclei will sometimes fission even when they’re just sitting around. When a nucleus fissions, it turns into two smaller nuclei and spits out a few neutrons.
However, one nucleus doing this isn’t a big deal. To make an explosion, you need to have a certain amount of uranium together in one spot.
For instance, a fission bomb would usually use a very purified sphere of uranium weighing about 52kg. Even this would have to use certain types of uranium in which the atoms have a specific number of neutrons.
If you have enough of these atoms together in one spot, the neutrons that are spit out during fission will hit other nuclei, which then also fission and spit out more neutrons – and so it continues in a chain reaction that sets off a massive explosion.
A nuclear chain reaction happens when one nucleus fissions, releasing neutrons which cause another nucleus to fission, and so on. Adapted from MikeRun/Wikimedia Commons
An unexploded fission bomb will usually be holding separate pieces of uranium (or plutonium) that are too small to start the chain reaction on their own. A chemical explosive is used to smash the pieces together – triggering the chain reaction that sets the bomb off.
Fission bombs work by taking pieces of uranium or plutonium that are too small to make a chain reaction on their own, and using a chemical explosive to push them together until a chain reaction starts. Adapted from Fastfission/Wikimedia Commons
Fallout
After fission happens, the two smaller nuclei that are left over are radioactive. Having enough of them in one spot can be very harmful to human health.
These leftovers after a nuclear explosion are called “fallout”. Besides the huge size of the explosion itself, the fallout in particular is what makes nuclear bombs more dangerous than other bombs. The technology used to make nuclear weapons is some of the most secret information in the world.
Nuclear bombs have only ever been used twice. Both of these bombs were detonated during World War II, by the United States against Japan. People around the world are working hard to make sure they are never used again.
Kaitlin Cook receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
A week-long trip to Beijing by the Pacific’s most flamboyant statesman Manasseh Sogavare, was always going to cause concern in Canberra.
The substance of the visit was as expected. The relationship between China and the Solomon Islands was upgraded to a “comprehensive strategic partnership” (on par with Papua New Guinea, the first Pacific nation to sign up to the Belt and Road Initiative). Nine agreements were also signed covering everything from civil aviation and infrastructure to fisheries and tourism.
The Chinese premier, Li Qiang, who inked the deals with Sogavare, made a point of not mentioning the controversial policing cooperation agreement, the draft of which was leaked more than a year ago to New Zealand academic Anna Powles.
Despite repeated calls from Australia and New Zealand to release the text of the policing agreement, there is no indication the Chinese or the Solomon Islands leadership will do so.
There were also moments of theatre in Sogavare’s trip. The prime minister declared “I’m back home” when he arrived in Beijing in a clip posted by China Global Television Network.
He then said in a longer interview on the same network that his nation had been “on the wrong side of history” for the 36 years it recognised Taiwan instead of the People’s Republic of China, and lauded President Xi Jinping as a “great man”.
Sogavare saved his biggest serve for his return to the Solomon Islands, though. He accused Australia and New Zealand of withdrawing crucial budget support and hinted he would look to China to fulfil his ambitions to establish an armed forces, should Australia be unwilling to help.
China’s slow start in the Pacific
Some key questions have been overlooked this week in the pantomime about what Australia should or shouldn’t do to shore up its relationship with an important Pacific partner. (We could start by accepting that Sogavare will never love us, and avoid getting into an arms race in the Solomon Islands with China.)
What’s been somewhat lost, though, is how China has made inroads so quickly in a region that it still officially classifies as “peripheral”.
China has certainly had to work harder to gain a foothold in the region. Relative to other regions, it has a lack of historical state ties with the Pacific. In Africa and Southeast Asia, China can draw on memories of shared anti-colonial struggles and aid projects like the Tanzam railway. In the Pacific, the Chinese Communist Party is a latecomer.
Also holding it back is the remoteness and small population of the region. This has not made the Pacific a good fit for China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which has flourished in countries with rapid transport and communication links, substantial Chinese diasporas and leaders who are easily reached. Most of China’s own Pacific experts were baffled when the region was belatedly included in the project.
Yet despite these obstacles, it’s clear the Chinese state’s approach in the Pacific has shifted, most remarkably in its diplomacy and the role state-linked companies are expected to play.
Diplomats with serious intent
China’s wolf warrior diplomacy has received plenty of attention, but the picture in the Pacific is less straightforward.
The recently appointed special envoy to the Pacific, Qian Bo, undoubtedly styles himself as a wolf warrior. Under his tenure as Fijian ambassador, a Taiwanese representative was assaulted by Chinese diplomats for the crime of displaying a Taiwanese flag cake.
Yet, other appointments suggest China is appointing higher-calibre diplomats to the region. These include Li Ming, the current ambassador to the Solomon Islands, and Xue Bing, the former ambassador to Papua New Guinea who now holds the challenging post of special envoy to the Horn of Africa.
With experience in the region and good language skills, these diplomats have been more able to engage with Pacific communities than their predecessors, who largely focused on sending good news back to Beijing. More serious representatives suggest more serious intent.
Chinese companies exerting influence, too
China’s state-linked companies remain the driving force behind China’s engagement with the Pacific.
Unlike the embassies, they are well-resourced and have skin in the game. Many company men (in construction, where Chinese companies dominate, they’re mostly men) are based in the region for decades, developing a deep understanding of how to win projects and influence political elites.
Failed projects generate plenty of headlines, but many companies – such as COVEC PNG and China Railway First Group – are effective operators. They are building infrastructure cheaply in the Pacific and winning the favour of multilateral donors, particularly the Asian Development Bank.
A China Railway construction site near the Chinese embassy in Suva, Fiji. Aileen Torres-Bennett/AP
For larger state-linked companies, like China Harbor Engineering Company and the China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC), the geopolitical game has shifted. In the past, they could rely on their standing within the Chinese political system (their parent companies often outrank the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) to resist pressure to act on behalf of state.
Now, they are expected to carry geopolitical water for Beijing. Often this can benefit the companies. For instance, when CCECC lobbied the Solomon Islands leadership to switch their allegiance from Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China, it helped the company when it came to bidding for projects for the Pacific Games in Honiara.
The leaders of these companies realise it can harm their image when they are seen as Beijing’s pawns. Yet, the companies, diplomats and Pacific leaders who choose Beijing’s embrace know times have changed. China is now a serious player in the region with a development philosophy to sell.
It’s no longer enough to read Beijing’s talking points. You have to look like you mean it.
Graeme Smith 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.
Crab on polymetallic nodulesNOAA Ocean Exploration
A little-known organisation is meeting this week in a conference centre in Jamaica. The rules the International Seabed Authority (ISA) are drafting could have immense impact.
That’s because this United Nations body has the power to permit – or deny – mining on the deep seabed, outside any nation’s exclusive economic zones. Boosters say the billions of tonnes of critical minerals like nickel, manganese, copper and cobalt lying in metal-dense nodules on the seabed could unlock faster decarbonisation and avoid supply shortages.
Developing Pacific nation Nauru has led the charge to open up the seabed for mining, seeing it as a new source of income. (Ironically, Nauru itself was strip-mined for guano, leaving a moonscape and few resources.)
But researchers warn the mining could trash entire ecosystems, by ripping up the sea floor or covering creatures with sediment. Early indications from trial mining efforts suggest the process is worse than expected, with long-lasting impact on sealife.
Almost 20 governments are calling for a moratorium or slowdown on mining. But China, Russia and South Korea are pushing for mining to begin.
The ISA has already missed its July 9 deadline to produce regulations governing seabed mining. That could mean we’re heading for a deep-sea free-for-all.
Why mine the deep sea at all?
Because no one owns it, and because parts of it are rich in easily accessible metals (once you get to the bottom, that is). Land-based mining usually involves processing vast volumes of rock, taking out the minerals you want and leaving the tailings behind. But on the seabed, things are different.
The main area prospectors are eyeing off is the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, an abyssal plain 4,000–5,000 metres deep east of Hawaii. Here, plate tectonics and underwater volcanoes have produced huge numbers of polymetallic nodules, accretions of minerals about 10-15 centimetres wide. They grow glacially slowly, about one centimetre every million years. But there are a lot of them – an estimated 21 billion tonnes in this zone alone, according to the ISA.
By 2050, demand for nickel and cobalt to make electric vehicle batteries could grow by up to 500%, according to the World Bank. That’s why companies like Nauru’s partner, The Metals Company, are investing in this type of mining.
Seabed mining, they argue, is an environmentally better option than expanding land-based mining into more challenging locations, mining low-grade ore bodies and risking contaminating waterways.
Boosters say seabed mining in international waters avoids the risk of dominance by a few countries or suppliers. For instance, the Ukraine-Russia war has hit battery grade nickel availability, as Russia is the primary global supplier.
This is the sticking point. The seabed in question is a pristine environment. While fishing trawlers already tear up large areas of seafloor to devastating effect, mining would open up even more of the seabed.
Opposition has come from many conservation organisations, civil society representatives, governments like Canada, Germany, Fiji and Papua New Guinea. They want a moratorium on seabed mining based on the precautionary principle – not acting until we know what impact it will have. They argue we lack the technology to monitor the seabed and knowledge of the ecosystems of the deep, meaning we cannot be certain seabed mining can proceed without causing serious and long lasting harm. Early research shows this type of mining can be destructive.
Should the ISA have the power to decide this?
It took 25 years for the UN to negotiate the law of the sea treaty. The treaty is clear about how we should protect and use the seabed, as part of the “common heritage of mankind”. The ISA was created to steward these commons, with the power to make rules in international waters. These cover two-thirds of the world’s oceans and 90% of known polymetallic nodule deposits.
The problem is many governments and organisations don’t think it’s fit for purpose.
The ISA is, like some other UN bodies, a complex bureaucracy and has been criticised for lacking transparency. Even though all 167 nations which signed the law of the sea treaty are automatically ISA members, critical decisions can be made with far fewer.
Applications to mine the seabed are approved or denied by the ISA’s council, which has 36 members. Council decisions stem from recommendations by a legal and technical commission, made up of 30 members appointed by the council. Dominated by lawyers and geologists, this commission, according to NGOs and governments, has ignored comments and critique. Only a handful of the members have environmental expertise.
The council is also geared towards mineral extraction, with many members elected on the basis they already export minerals like nickel and manganese, have invested heavily in seabed mining technology, and already use significant volumes of these minerals.
The ISA’s secretary general Michael Lodge was earlier this year criticised by the German government for allegedly pushing to permit mining, an accusation Lodge rejected.
So is it a done deal?
Ideally, the authority would have more time to develop rigorous rules based on good environmental assessments.
But time is up. Two years ago, Nauru triggered a clause giving the ISA two years to produce a mining code and rules – a feat it had not previously managed. Those two years were up on July 9th and the code isn’t out. That means it’s now legally possible to lodge mining applications.
So because of the delays, we may be heading for a future where seabed mining becomes legal by default – without rules to govern it at all.
Claudio Bozzi 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.
One of New Zealand’s most exceptional fossil sites may soon be open to scientists again following a land purchase that saved it from commercial mining.
Foulden Maar is a small, deep lake that formed 23 million years ago in Otago, at the start of the Miocene epoch when New Zealand’s climate was much warmer and wetter. A rainforest thrived around the lake’s fringes, and algae known as diatoms bloomed each summer.
As the algal blooms died off and sank to the lake bed, they formed sedimentary layers of diatomite and preserved the most exquisite and delicate fossils of flowers, insects and fish as well as a climate record covering 100,000 years.
But the diatomite was also of interest to mining company Plaman Resources – until, following long negotiations, the Dunedin City Council bought most of the land earlier this year.
Fossil sites are relatively common, but examples representing entire ecosystems are extremely rare. Foulden Maar is one of only two such sites in New Zealand that preserve ecological interactions and features such as eyes, skin, stomach contents and original colour patterns.
The diatomite at Foulden Maar preserved fossils, such as this galaxiid fish, in delicate detail. Authors provided, CC BY-ND
Such sites yield remarkable information about the history of life, which is impossible to obtain from other sources.
The other site is the nearby Hindon Maar complex, which is 15 million years old.
Both sites preserve ecosystems of small crater lakes and the animals and plants of surrounding rainforests. Recent discoveries at these sites are transforming our understanding of New Zealand’s past biodiversity and climate.
All fossils of the iconic southern-hemisphere family Galaxiidae derive from Otago Miocene lake deposits, with the entire life cycle from larvae (whitebait) to juveniles and fully grown adults present at Foulden Maar.
Remarkable preservation of numerous articulated skeletons includes eyes, gaping mouths and skin, the last including the star-like patterning that gave galaxiids their name.
Some galaxiid fossils still show the colour and patterning of skin. Authors provided, CC BY-ND
Gut contents and an abundance of fossilised poo (coprolites) provide evidence of a changing diet. Larvae dined on diatoms while adults were lake-margin ambush predators feeding on terrestrial and aquatic insects. Fish debris in other less common coprolites show the galaxiids were themselves prey.
Slender, elongated articulated fish skeletons with rows of curved conical teeth provide the only southern-hemisphere records of the freshwater eel, Anguilla. This was likely the top predator in these lakes.
A fossil from Hindon Maar shows skeletal details of the freshwater eel Anguilla. Authors provided, CC BY-ND
Trapped in these small, closed lakes, the eels would have been unable to return to the sea to breed and were effectively “living dead”, unlike the galaxiids which could reproduce in the maars.
Otago’s maar lakes are a treasure trove of insect fossils, such as this weevil. Authors provided, CC BY-SA
These ancient maar lakes also contain a treasure trove of spiders and insects. When our research programme began in 2003, only six fossil insects more than two million years old were known from New Zealand. We now have more than 600, almost all different.
Foulden Maar has yielded 270 insects from 17 genera in 15 families and nine orders.
It is rare to find fossilised spiders because they lack hard parts. Authors provided, CC BY-ND
Spiders are commonly the top terrestrial invertebrate predators in modern New Zealand forests, but rarely fossilise because they lack hard parts. But in Foulden Maar, we found several specimens, including a juvenile trapdoor spider.
Early studies at Hindon Maar have already added 240 more insects in five orders and 20 families.
Insects are often completely preserved with details of antennae, fragile wings and compound eyes visible.
Fossils from the Foulden and Hindon maars include ancient lineages of termites, armoured scale insects in life position along leaf veins, bark bugs and a lace bug that probably lived on Astelia (kakaha, bush lily) as its close living relative does today.
Others include leaf beetles with structural colour, weevils, rove beetles, numerous ants and wasps, caddis flies with larvae still in their cases, crane flies with well preserved compound eyes and a hairy cicada whose closest relative today is found in Tasmania.
Delicate detail of a fossilised cicada wing. Authors provided, CC BY-ND
These taxa are only the tip of the taxonomic iceberg. Hundreds more terrestrial arthropods are also being revealed in our research on inclusions in New Zealand amber – 90 specimens in one block of layered amber alone.
Myriad leaves with excellent preservation show that both maars were surrounded by subtropical to warm, temperate rainforests, dominated by members of the laurel and cinnamon plant families at Foulden Maar and a southern beech forest at Hindon.
Fossilised leaves show that both maars were surrounded rainforests. Authors provided, CC BY-SA
Of particular importance are diverse fossil flowers with reproductive structures such as petals, stamens and anthers with pollen still present, as well as abundant fossilised fruits and seeds.
These reproductive structures are treasures of a different kind – fragile, seasonal and fleeting. But they provide critical information about the ecology of the parent plants and their possible pollination and dispersal mechanisms.
Fossil flowers provide information about ancient plants’ pollination and dispersal. Authors provided, CC BY-ND
Close comparisons to the biology of living plants also suggest the fossil species reproduced in a similar manner to their living relatives. This implies that reproductive mechanisms were conserved for 23 million years in the New Zealand flora.
Currently, the Dunedin City Council is exploring management options for the site, which will once again allow public and scientific access to this remarkable fossil-rich, ancient lake deposit well into the future.
John G Conran received funding from the Royal Society of New Zealand Marsden Fund (11-UOO-043 and 14-UOO-102) towards this research
Uwe Kaulfuss receives funding from the German Research Foundation (project 429296833).
Daphne Lee 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gwilym Croucher, Associate Professor, Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne
There is no doubt the federal government has big ambitions for the Universities Accord. Set up last November, the interim report was made public on Wednesday.
This is the first broad review of higher education since the 2008 Bradley Review. If the government’s aspirations are met, it could mean the most significant changes to Australian higher education in a generation.
The interim report covers many different issues, from student fees to governance, teaching, international students, student wellbeing and research.
But the interim report also asks us to think more broadly about the entire education system post-high school. This includes both vocational education and training (VET) providers (such as TAFE) and universities. It wants to see the whole tertiary education “pursue greater opportunities for alignment and collaboration”.
Why is this important? And how can this be done?
What does ‘alignment’ and ‘collaboration’ mean here?
When politicians and education commentators talk about the university and vocational sectors collaborating more, this can mean many different things.
This can include creating pathways between vocational and higher education, including how prior study in each is recognised.
It could also include universities, vocational education and training providers and employers collaborating in the design and delivery of their courses. It can also means students have the right incentives at every stage of their lives to connect with the type of education that is right for them at the time.
Attempts to better integrate post-secondary education are not new – and there have been effort since at least the time of former education minster John Dawkins in the 1980s.
But progress has been slow, with VET largely under the purview of state government while higher education is largely funded federally.
Why is this important?
If university and vocational education systems work together more, we will have a more flexible and more functional education system.
The report states that over the next two decades Australian workers will change jobs an estimated 2.4 times and it is estimated tasks within Australian jobs will change by 18% every decade. Even if these estimates prove wrong, there is broad recognition that updating skills is something workers will need to do over their working lives.
As the report notes, “many students move between the higher education and vocational education sectors during their lifetime”.
Vocational education can be an entry pathway into higher education. Or people will complement their higher education with job-specific skills from vocational education.
These transitions should be as seamless as possible.
Changing educational landscape worldwide
Any collaboration will occur against a backdrop of big changes coming to post-secondary education all around the world.
Just before the pandemic, global enrolments in higher education and higher vocational education were estimated at more than 200 million people. Around two-thirds of these students were in developing or recently developed countries. Overall, it is estimated global higher education and upper vocational education has grown by more than 50% in the past 20 years.
It is argued this growth is driven by the expansion of higher education in developing countries, particularly India. This means the locus of higher education will increasingly move away from wealthy countries.
Since 2011, the number of university students in wealthy countries has plateaued and, in some cases, even declined. One of the reasons for this is demographic changes, as large proportion of the populations in many wealthy countries age.
For Australia, like other countries, this presents many challenges, not least because there will be less people of working age. This only increases the importance of ensuring post-school education delivers the skills and workers our society and economy need.
What is being proposed?
The report calls for a conversation about making it easier for students to move between vocational education and university settings as well as more consistency around how prior learning is credited and recognised.
Rules can be a challenge here, especially where vocational courses are industry specific. The government is yet to fully respond to a 2019 review of the Australian Qualifications Framework, which remains an important piece of the puzzle.
The accord interim report proposes extending federal funding and HELP loans beyond the universities to TAFEs, to provide financial support to some of their programs.
It also suggests “Cooperative Skills Centres”, where universities and vocational education providers would work together as “joint ventures for fast skilling up in areas of urgent industry need”.
On top of this, it asks whether there should be a requirement (maybe a regulation) for the two sectors to work more together.
This suggests a more heavy-handed approach could be on the table, and given the slow progress in aligning higher education and VET it might be an attractive option to some.
So far, the accord process is picking up on a significant opportunity here for Australia – to create a more integrated system for post-high school education. As the report notes:
The tertiary sector must adapt to facilitate growth in lifelong learning.
Responses to the interim report are due in September, with a final report expected in December.
Gwilym Croucher 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.
This week the Albanese government produced a detailed breakdown of the A$3 billion it plans to save over four years by cutting the use of outsourced labour and consultants.
The savings, which begin this financial year, take about $600 million each from the departments of defence and social service, followed by about $450 million from the treasury, most of it to be reportedly from the tax office.
They cover what the government describes as “savings from external labour, advertising, travel and legal expenses”. They are in line with the Labor’s election promise to cut its consulting and contractor bill by $3 billion over four years, except that the starting year is 2023-24 instead of the expected 2022-23.
Given that Labor says it’s already cut $500 million in its first year in office, they are set to take the five-year total to $3.5 billion.
But the cuts won’t come easily, a point Finance Minister Katy Gallagher conceded in an interview with the Australian Financial Review, saying it had
become very clear just how entrenched the use of consultancies and external labour became in the public service under the former Coalition government.
There’s nothing wrong with moderate use of consultants and contract labour. It’s been done by both sides of politics for decades.
More than 30 years ago, the then Labor government’s commercial support program outsourced defence functions, including cooking, cleaning, maintenance and guarding, to deliver services at a much lower cost than the military.
Outsourcing weakens accountability
The concern is the extent to which core public service functions – policy advice to ministers and delivery of welfare programs – have also been outsourced.
The public service has (or ought to have) a corporate memory of what works and what does not. Consultants hired on a one-off basis need not.
It is true that the public service does not always live up to its legislated standards, as has been found to have been the case with Robodebt. But it can be held accountable when it fails.
Accountability mechanisms for private consultants and contractors are weak by comparison, with failings often obscured by a veil of “commercial in confidence”.
In The Conversation in June, Richard Mulgan expertly analysed the findings of the audit of employment Labor commissioned shortly after taking office.
He listed three reasons why public servants like using consultants:
they allow governments to bury advice they don’t like
they help persuade ministers who distrust the public service. This is especially important with Coalition ministers.
they maintain a revolving door for public servants to leave their job, collect their super and continue working on the same issues.
Prime Minister’s XI at Manuka, Canberra. Lukas Coch/AAP
There is a fourth, more venal, reason – the millions of dollars consultants spend each year entertaining public servants.
One such prized invitation is to a private marquee at the annual Prime Minister’s XI cricket match at Manuka in Canberra.
There are hundreds of other dinners, lunches, private boxes at sporting events, theatre and concert tickets with which consulting firms seek to influence public service decision-makers.
The firms wouldn’t be spending that money if it didn’t win them business.
These constitute formidable obstacles. But there are three ways they could be overcome.
1. End the free lunches
One measure would be for departments to ban their staff from accepting gifts and hospitality from consulting firms.
If that is regarded as too much of an imposition, departments could publish all such gifts on their websites, disclosing the names of recipients and the value of what was received.
That would at least make what happens more open.
2. Stop insider hiring
Another would be to prohibit public servants from obtaining employment in a consulting firm with which their former department does business.
This could be done either through “non-compete” clauses (common in the private sector) or through departments excluding firms that employ former departmental staff from tenders. A reasonable time limit – for example between three and five years – could apply.
3. Tender internally first
Commonwealth procurement rules could be amended to require departments, before calling for tenders from outside the public service, to advertise internally for public servants to do the work.
The work would then only be sent out to a consultant if no public servant could be found to do it. Who knows, that might even encourage some former public servants to return from consulting back to their old jobs.
Getting senior public servants to want to use their own staff instead of consultants might be an unintended benefit of the PwC scandal.
Until May this year – when PwC confirmed one of its partners had shared confidential government information obtained while serving on a government advisory board – many public servants considered using consultants low-risk.
It has become clear it involves a much higher risk than hiring a public servant.
Stephen Bartos 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.
You’ve been pressured to work overtime to finish a project. You won’t get paid for the extra hours but you’ve been assured there will be kudos from senior management. There is – but only for your boss, who takes the credit.
You’re a hard, efficient worker, but your manager closely monitors you, demanding you constantly account for your time and questioning your actions, as if you can’t be trusted.
You find out your boss is overclaiming on expenses. When you bring this to their attention, they ask you not tell anyone until they work it out. They then mention they’re considering recommending you for a promotion.
These are signs of Machiavellianism, the dark personality trait named after the 16th century Italian political theorist who wrote the first “how to” guide for rulers.
A Machiavellian personality is self-serving, opportunistic and ambitious – traits that can help them attain positions of power and status.
Estimates of the prevalence of Machiavellianism are imprecise, but experts have good reason to believe it is at least as common in the workplace as psychopathy, which affects about 1% of the population but an estimated 3.5% of executives.
For example, US business author Lewis Schiff says 90% of the millionaires he surveyed for his book Business Brilliant: Surprising Lessons from the Greatest Self-Made Business Icons agreed with the statement “it’s important in negotiations to exploit the weaknesses in others”, compared with just 24% of those with “middle-class” incomes.
Working for a Machiavellian boss is likely to be infuriating, stressful and bad for your mental health. By understanding what drives this personality, and how it differs from the other “dark personality traits”, you can limit the fallout.
Origins of Machiavellianism
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469–1527) was a diplomat in Florence during a period of power struggle involving the powerful Medici family. When the Medicis returned to rule the city in 1512 after almost two decades in exile, he was briefly imprisoned and then banished. He then wrote Il Principe (The Prince) as a sort of job application.
A statue of Niccolo Machiavelli at the Uffizi art gallery in Florence. Shutterstock, CC BY
The book (not formally published till 1532, though copies circulated in the two decades before) is regarded as the first work of modern political philosophy. It advises rulers to be pragmatic, cunning and strategic. “The lion cannot protect himself from traps,” it says, “and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognise traps and a lion to frighten wolves.”
In 1970 two US psychologists, Richard Christie and Florence Geis, published Studies in Machaivellianism, using the term for a personality trait characterised by self-interest, manipulativeness, opportunism and deceitfulness.
Machiavellianism is now accepted as one of three antisocial personality types that comprise the “Dark Triad” – the other two being narcissism and psychopathy. However, while the three traits are lumped together due to their antisocial qualities, there are important differences.
Narcissism is a set of traits as well as a personality disorder, characterised by egoism, self-absorption and the need to feel superior to others. Psychopathy is also a diagnosable personality disorder, defined by lack of empathy or conscience. Machiavellianism is not classified as a formal personality disorder.
A Machiavellian personality can be charismatic, like a narcissist, but is driven by self-interest rather than self-aggrandisement. They tend to be calculating rather than impulsive like a psychopath.
Christie and Geis came up with a 20-question checklist, based on statements from Machiavelli’s writings, to gauge Machiavellian traits. This test, known as the MACH-IV, is still being used.
Data collected on those taking the test shows, on average, that men score higher than women, and are more likely to get the highest possible result (~1% compared with ~0.2%).
A score of 60 or more out of 100 on the test is deemed “high Machiavellianism”, and less than 60 as “low Machiavellianism”.
A “high Mach” will likely be highly manipulative, in ways you won’t even necessarily identify as manipulation at the the time. A “low Mach” will tend be more empathetic and more reluctant to exploit others.
But knowing which is which in real life isn’t so straightforward. “Everyone sees what you appear to be, few experience what you really are,” as Machiavelli writes in The Prince. It is important to remember this even when approaching “low Mach” individuals. The boss who assures you they have your best interests at heart might just be telling you what you want to believe.
How to deal with a Machiavellian boss
A Machiavellian boss may seek to manipulate
with flattery or bullying, promising reward or threatening punishment.
They are less likely to trust you, causing them to micromanage and criticise. Your feelings are of little concern. This experience can leave you angry, emotionally exhausted and cynical.
So how to deal with a Machiavellian boss?
The first lesson is to be clear about what drives a Machiavellian personality. Fundamentally that is self-interest. You can’t judge motivations according to superficial charm or niceness. They may seem kind, caring and helpful most of the time – because that works for them. But be warned: if you’ve been on the receiving end of their “dark” traits before, you should expect it to happen again, sooner or later, when circumstances suit.
The second lesson is harder. You can’t trust a Machiavellian, and need to deal with them cautiously. But distrusting your boss and operating with a “strike before the other does” mindset will, if you’re a relatively normal person, be emotionally draining. You may find yourself becoming more cynical and distrustful generally.
Machiavelli endorsed the strategy of “divide and conquer” in another of his books (The Art of War, published in 1521). Take the opposite tack. This is a time for solidarity. Having a support network and knowing that you are not alone, can serve as an emotional pillar.
There are no laws against being a manipulative, scheming and self-interested boss. But if these traits manifest as bullying, abuse or victimisation, there is action you may be able to take. For advice contact your union or workplace regulator, such as Australia’s Fair Work Ombudsman, Britain’s Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, or Employment New Zealand.
Manipulation, deceit and bullying should never be considered acceptable or necessary. Your psychological and physical wellbeing matters.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gemma Sharp, Associate Professor, NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow & Senior Clinical Psychologist, Monash University
Instagram
“…when you’re shooting a film like Magic Mike, and you’re doing dance routines for two weeks at a time, you have to peak every day. So that became kind of crazy. We had a gym in the parking lot, and we’d all be lifting weights on set all day,” explained actor Joe Manganiello, about performing in the film Magic Mike.
It is not unusual for actors to undergo drastic changes in preparation for a role, including gaining muscle and losing body fat for that shredded look. In fact, this is becoming the norm in Hollywood.
Jake Gyllenhaal in Road House, Michelle Rodriguez in Dungeons & Dragons, and Paul Rudd in Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, have all undertaken body modifications for roles this year.
As the audience, we readily accept these body modifications to be part of the preparation for the role without necessarily considering the potentially long-term physical and mental health consequences.
So how do they do it?
From what Hollywood shares with the general public about these body modifications, which is generally very limited, it appears these transformations occur through excessive exercise and highly restrictive diets.
Nevertheless, these Hollywood workouts are highly popular with ordinary people, with Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Chris Hemsworth’s workouts particularly sought after.
The typical process for bodybuilders involves two phases: a “bulking” phase, during which the goal is to have enough energy for muscle growth, and a “cutting” phase, when the aim is to lose weight but not muscle.
The end result of such a process is usually highly applauded, even though drastic measures have been taken to achieve such a look.
Actors of all genders are undergoing these body transformations for various roles such as superheroes, athletes, or the portrayal of real-life people.
What are the consequences?
“I’ve become a little bit more boring now, because I’m older and I feel like if I keep doing what I’ve done in the past I’m going to die. So, I’d prefer not to die,” said Christian Bale, who has undertaken multiple extreme transformations for roles.
To achieve what is needed for a particular role, extreme measures are often taken. However, the consequences of these measures, such as use of substances, exercise dependence, and an increased risk of developing muscle dysmorphia and/or an eating disorder, is seemingly not common knowledge.
A concern for the bodybuilding community is the widespread use of drugs, often multiple drugs at a time not obtained through prescription. Androgenic-anabolic steroids are commonly used which can have extensive negative effects on the human body, including on the cardiovascular system, hormones, metabolism and even psychiatric wellbeing.
Exercise dependence can also occur when an individual engages in an extreme amount of exercise, to the point at which physical, psychological or emotional harm can occur. We are not sure exactly why exercise dependence happens, but it could potentially be a form of behavioural addiction.
Another risk is muscle dysmorphia, a subtype of body dysmorphic disorder characterised by the individual being preoccupied with the idea their physique is not muscular enough, even if they have a high degree of muscle.
What about the dieting impacts?
There are many similarities between the requirements of bodybuilding and eating disorders. Both are characterised by restrictive diets, high levels of exercise, potential social isolation, and adherence to a rigid schedule.
The seminal Minnesota Starvation Experiment fundamentally shaped our understanding of the changes a person can experience when they are consuming less than their daily nutrition energy needs, such as during the “cutting” phase for bodybuilders. This research showed that people who are experiencing starvation for a period of time will experience devastating impacts in the physical, psychological, behavioural and social aspects of their lives.
Some of the many documented changes included reductions in heart muscle mass, heart rate and blood pressure, dizziness, fatigue, increased feelings of depression and anxiety, obsessive thoughts about food, and withdrawal from social activities and relationships.
Concerningly, even once a person is renourished, the psychological issues around body size and food can persist. Therefore, even after an actor has returned to their pre-modification weight and size, it does not mean they have recovered from the consequences that came with that body modification.
What are the impacts on the general public?
Rapid changes in physical appearance are not realistically achievable for most people. So seeing actors doing this seemingly easily with the assistance of their professional teams sets an unrealistic standard.
For people without the same income or access to resources to achieve these body modifications in a safe way, more extreme means would be undertaken and consequent damage to mental and physical wellbeing can ensue. These body modifications are definitely a case of “do not try this at home”.
There are many risks when undertaking dramatic body modifications, most of which are not talked about in public. Actors are just as vulnerable to these risks, despite us rarely seeing what exactly they go through to achieve these dramatic transformations. Hollywood is a highly competitive environment, and being honest about body modification and its consequences could stop an actor landing their next gig.
We don’t recommend body modifications in any way, but if someone does want to make a change to their lifestyle, we strongly recommend consulting with a team of health professionals to ensure physical and psychological safety during the process and beyond.
––
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, do not hesitate to reach out for support. For concerns around eating, exercise, or body image visit the Butterfly Foundation or call the national helpline on 1800 33 4673. For concerns around drug use visit Drug Help or call the National Alcohol and Other Drug Hotline on 1800 250 015.
Gemma Sharp receives funding from an NHMRC Investigator Grant (Emerging Leadership 2).
Bronwyn Dwyer 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.
Australia presents a mixed picture of national wellbeing, according to the government’s Measuring What Matters report released by Treasurer Jim Chalmers.
On the positive side, over the past two decades life expectancy has increased, income and job opportunities have improved, and we are better at accepting diversity.
But Australians now have more chronic health conditions, access to care and support services is more difficult, and there has been little progress on mental health.
While school outcomes have improved, they are falling behind other countries, and we are spending less time developing new skills.
After a trial run of a wellbeing statement in Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ first budget last year, he says this is the first proper national wellbeing framework.
Fifty indicators are used to measure wellbeing under five themes: how healthy, secure, sustainable, cohesive and prosperous we are. The idea is to go beyond the traditional economic measures.
Measuring What Matters, Commonwealth Treasury
The report says that over recent decades there have been improvements in 20 of the 50 indicators, while seven have been stable or little changed, and 12 have gone backwards. Eight have mixed trends, and for three there is not comparable data.
There has been environmental progress: on emissions reduction, resources use and waste generation. But biological diversity has deteriorated.
Household income and wealth have improved, as has job satisfaction, but people are finding it harder to make ends meet and homelessness is worse. Fiscal sustainability and economic resilience have also deteriorated.
There’s been little change in income and wealth inequality. The outcome on wages is mixed.
Trust in national government has fallen, although trust in others has increased.
In relation to Indigenous Australians, the report says: “the concept of wellbeing has always been the result of preserving and maintaining culture, which directly affects mental, physical and spiritual health”.
As a result:
the whole of population indicators outlined in this Framework are not an accurate measure of First Nations wellbeing as they are limited in their ability to represent these intrinsic cultural differences or acknowledge the past practices that have had detrimental impacts
There has been little change in Australians’ overall life satisfaction in recent years.
“Between 2014 and 2020 the average overall life satisfaction in Australia (out of 10) was relatively stable at around between 7.5 between 2014 and 2019 before declining slightly to 7.2 in 2020,” the report says.
The decline was likely due to COVID.
Overall progress on Australians wellbeing
Measuring What Matters, Commonwealth Treasury
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
My daughter came into the kitchen early today to tell me her friends were downtown in Auckland at Britomart, the transit hub of New Zealand’s biggest city, and that a construction worker had just run past them saying a man with a gun was shooting people.
I immediately swept all the online news media and saw nothing and was in the process of suggesting to her that maybe her friends were pranking her when it broke on Breakfast TV.
I know the area this shooting occurred in well — I was there a few days ago; most Aucklanders will know it as it is a vital entry point to downtown Auckland. To have a mass shooting event there is utterly outside the norm for Aucklanders.
As the reverberations and shock ease, there will of course be immediate political fall out.
Before all that though, first, let us acknowledge the uncompromising courage of our New Zealand police and emergency services. We all saw them sprint into that building knowing someone was armed and shooting people.
I am the first to be critical of the NZ Police, but on this day, their professionalism and unflinching bravery was one of the few things we can be grateful for on such a poisoned morning.
Let us also pause and mourn the two who were killed and 10 wounded. These were simply good honest folk going about their day of work and not one of them deserved the horror visited upon them by 24-year-old Matu Tangi Matua Reid.
Now let’s talk about Matu.
Troubling pump-action shotgun access The media have already highlighted that he was on home detention for domestic violence charges and was wearing an ankle bracelet. This is of no surprise nor shock, many on home detention have the option of applying for leave to work — we do this because those on home detention still need to pay the rent, far more troubling was his access to a pump-action shotgun he didn’t have a gun licence for.
We know he had already been in a Turn Your Life Around Youth Development Trust programme.
Political partisans will try and seize any part of his story to whip into political frenzy for their election narrative and we should reject and resist that.
The banality of evil always tends to be far more basic than we ever appreciate.
There is nothing special about Matu; he is simply another male without the basic emotional tools to facilitate his anger beyond violence. In that regard Matu is depressingly like tens of thousands of men in NZ.
His background didn’t justify this terrible act of violence today and his actions can’t be conflated to show Labour are soft on crime.
Another depressing violent male Matu is just another depressing male whose violence he could not control. There are tens of thousands like him and until we start focusing on building young men who have the emotional tools to facilitate their anger beyond violence, he won’t be the last.
He has shamed himself.
He has shamed his family.
He has shamed us all.
Today isn’t a day for politics, it is far too sad for that, the politics will come and everyone will be screaming their sweaty truth, but at its heart this is about broken men incapable of keeping their violence to themselves.
Andrew Leigh won’t have made himself many friends in Labor with his attack this week on the stifling power of the party’s factions.
Then again, when it comes to political advancement, Leigh’s non-factional status has, in opposition and government, left the well-credentialed Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities, Treasury and Employment relatively friendless. To ascend to the higher reaches of the ladder in Labor, you need to march in either the right or left battalion.
Leigh’s Wednesday speech, denouncing the factional “duopoly” and pointing to its downsides, received little attention among colleagues. The system suits very well those it benefits.
Labor has a long history of factions. What is distinctive about them now is how professionally they operate, as two powerful machines of control in an alliance of mutual convenience.
Under a proportional representation system, the factions carve up all the spoils – ministries, seats, trips. In the federal caucus, they keep the troops in line, so there are few notable breakouts.
That (as Leigh says) such an arrangement can undermine democracy within the party, suppress internal policy debate, and make it harder to attract and advance good candidates – who cares? That’s the way politics works, isn’t it?
It may be. But that doesn’t mean it should be, at least to the extent that it is.
Factions within broad-based political parties have their place in bringing together people with common views, playing an organising role, managing conflict.
But when they become over-tight, as in Labor, they can eventually corrode democracy more generally. Or where, as in the Liberals, they are warring fiefdoms, resorting to “whatever it takes” behaviour (as in the NSW division), they are seriously dangerous to their host party. “Community candidates” are attractive to some voters fed up with over-factionalised parties.
Currently, Labor’s factional system works very nicely for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (who hails from the left). In contrast, factions in the Liberal Party are a nightmare for Peter Dutton, trying to keep together a party split on fundamentals.
In Labor, right and left have converged on the centre as they have become less ideological and found common interest in an orderly sharing of spoils. In the Liberals, the factions have increasingly diverged and formalised, with the right becoming more assertive and ideological and the moderates losing ground in most parts of the party.
Within the federal Labor caucus, not only is everyone factionalised apart from Leigh and fellow ACT MP Alicia Payne, but as they have become all-pervasive, the factions have been tamed. Debates in caucus over policy are virtually non-existent; a few questions to the frontbench can be seen as a lively caucus meeting.
Leigh argues the factionalism at the party’s grass roots risks forcing recruits into an “uncomfortable choice”. Uncomfortable or not, the members make that choice, at least when it comes to the party’s national conference.
Voting for delegates to the conference, to be held in Brisbane on August 17-19, has just finished. There’ll be 402 delegates, half of whom are chosen directly by the rank and file. Of the 402, only about 20 are unaligned with either broad faction.
For the first time since the 1980s, the left will be the largest faction at the conference, with 49% of the total delegates, compared to the right’s 45%. In theory, this gives the unaligned delegates a balance of power. In practice, the factional chiefs will wrangle deals and trade offs. The debate about AUKUS is set to be a major test at the conference, but the factional heavyweights will manage it in a way that ensures it doesn’t embarrass Albanese (one insider makes the point this isn’t new, but how successful conferences have operated historically).
Labor’s blanket factionalism, with its modus operandi, is part of a wider development – the extensive professionalisation of modern politics generally, and the priority it gives to control. This has been a creeping phenomenon.
The government has an army of propagandists (titled “media advisers”) in ministerial officers to control and promote its messages, which are crystallised into comprehensive “talking points” (or swot sheets) for frontbenchers and backbenchers. Ministers are deployed with military precision to occupy the daily media landscape. No trench is left without a soldier.
The sheer volume of the government’s media presence (mainstream and social) disguises the large void in our current knowledge of what is happening behind the scenes.
Once, the media had much more access to the public service to discuss policy (we’re talking about background information, not “leaks”). Governments shut this down, as far as they could, years ago. Ministerial offices jealously guard the flow of information; if public servants are called in to do any media briefing, it is strictly overseen.
There is access to material through freedom of information, but this has its strict limits and needs reform.
The media know very little about the internal dynamics of the Albanese cabinet. From Albanese’s point of view, this is a triumph. It is a product of a high degree of genuine unity, but it is also a mark of iron discipline.
Sometimes, when journalists hear what’s said in a cabinet, it’s a sign of leadership destabilisation. Remember the spectacular leaks from Tony Abbott’s cabinet, driven by the Turnbull camp’s (successful) undermining. It was the same in the latter days of Bob Hawke.
At other times during the Hawke government, there was a steady flow of information about ministers’ positions on issues and the arguments they were putting, which told a lot about the policy-making process and relations among ministers. For example, from early on in that government, much was known about the relationship between treasurer Paul Keating and Hawke.
We have little insight into the dynamic between the current PM and Treasurer Jim Chalmers. We do know they differed over the Stage 3 tax cuts. But that was early – what about other issues? We’re aware there’ve been strains between Resources Minister Madeleine King and Industry Minister Ed Husic, but they haven’t been given much media attention.
Significantly at the moment: what, if any, cabinet debate is going on about the strategy to boost the Voice, now its support is flagging? If there is not that debate, this says something about the cabinet. In general, we have minimal detail about the Albanese cabinet’s remit. For instance, what was the degree and timing of the full cabinet’s involvement in the planned AUKUS spend? Is the government’s decision-making effectively done in the expenditure review committee and the national security committee, as well as at leadership level?
Of course we can’t put all our ignorance down to control – we, as media, are not marshalling our own forces sufficiently.
It’s an irony. The PM and his ministerial team swarm into every corner of the media. But the media know less about the entrails of decision-making than we often did before the 24-hour news cycle.
Michelle Grattan ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
US President Joe Biden has the heart condition atrial fibrillation. This increases his risk of having a stroke five-fold and doubles the risk of a heart attack or dementia.
More than 37.5 million people globally also have atrial fibrillation, but many don’t realise they have it.
For most, the condition has few symptoms and does not limit daily life. However, identifying it and treating it is the only way to reduce its serious health consequences.
Our research, just published in the journal Heart, looks at the importance of managing blood pressure in reducing such risks.
Atrial fibrillation is when the heart beats irregularly, sometimes fast, sometimes slow. It’s the most common heart rhythm disorder and is more common as you get older. But some people develop it in their 30s and 40s.
The abnormal heart rhythm starts in the top chambers of the heart, meaning the heart does not propel the blood forward properly. This, and the erratic movements of these heart chambers, result in blood pooling, and occasionally clots.
The heart can go into atrial fibrillation for short periods of time, and then return to normal rhythm, or stay in this abnormal heart rhythm continuously.
Here’s what happens if you have atrial fibrillation and your heart beats irregularly.
How do I know if I have it?
Some people have lots of symptoms, such as heart palpitations (a feeling of fluttering or pounding heart), breathlessness or even discomfort, and know exactly when they have gone into atrial fibrillation. Their symptoms can stop what they would normally do. But others have no symptoms and don’t know they have atrial fibrillation. We know very little about why some people have symptoms and others do not.
If you have symptoms, discuss these with your GP. Your GP will ask about triggers for your symptoms, your general health and other risk factors, and will likely organise an electrocardiogram (also called an ECG). This is a type of non-invasive test where 12 leads are attached to your chest to measure the electrical activity of the heart.
Generally, your GP will refer you to a cardiologist (heart specialist) or a hospital clinic if they suspect you have a heart rhythm problem, including atrial fibrillation, for further testing and treatment.
Some people say you can detect atrial fibrillation using consumer wearables, such as smartwatches. However, it’s not clear how accurate these are.
An ECG measures the electrical activity of your heart. Shutterstock
Once diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, you will be assessed for serious potential complications, such as an increased risk of stroke.
You’ll be advised to manage any risk factors that worsen atrial fibrillation and increase your risk of stroke. This includes cutting down on alcohol, managing your weight and doing more exercise.
Some people at higher risk of a stroke will be started on blood thinning medicines. Some people may also need to take medicines to control their heart rhythm or have a procedure called “ablation”. This is when wires are passed into the heart to identify and treat the electrical origin of the condition.
More than three in five people with atrial fibrillation also have high blood pressure (hypertension). This is another major cause of stroke and heart attack. So managing blood pressure is very important.
In our new research, we analysed data from the electronic medical records from about 34,000 Australian GP patients with both atrial fibrillation and hypertension. We found one-in-three had poorly controlled blood pressure. This places a group already at a high risk of stroke at an even greater risk.
When someone’s blood pressure is poorly controlled, this is usually because their medicines are not adequately bringing down their blood pressure. This could be because doctors are not increasing the number of different types of medicine when needed, or because patients cannot afford their medicines, or forget to take them.
We also found that people who visited the same GP regularly were more likely to have their blood pressure controlled, so were at lower risk of stroke.
Our research highlighted the importance of seeing the same GP regularly. Shutterstock
It is important people at the highest risk of stroke – such as those with both atrial fibrillation and high blood pressure – are receiving appropriate treatment to minimise their risk.
Strokes, heart attacks and dementia are still leading causes of death and ill health in Australia. Prevention is so much better than treating them when they develop.
Ritu Trivedi is a recipient of the Commonwealth Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship to support her PhD studies.
Clara Chow receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council. Dr Chow is affiliated with the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand.
Liliana Laranjo receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.
Slower employment growth, faster population growth and a steady rate of unemployment are the main stories from the Bureau of Statistics’ labour force update, released on Thursday.
Employment climbed by 32,600 between May and June, while the population grew 49,900. The rate of unemployment (happily) remains fixed at 3.5 per cent, although to two decimal places, it fell from 3.55% to 3.47%.
This story isn’t new. The waning of the Delta wave of COVID-19 from late 2021 brought a strong recovery in the demand for workers. Even after the immediate bounce-back from lockdowns, employment grew impressively.
In the nine months from November 2021, total employment increased by an average of 55,000 per month – double the 20,000 to 30,000 common before COVID.
Thereafter, employment growth has grown more slowly, by an average of 35,600 per month since August 2022.
Population growth has climbed as employment growth has slowed. During the nine months to August 2022, in which major restrictions on immigration remained, it averaged 37,200 per month.
After that time, with those restrictions removed, population growth averaged 50,300 per month.
Who is getting work has been changing
Mid-2022 didn’t just mark a change in the pace of employment growth. It also marked a shift in the sources of employment growth.
Up to August 2022, extra workers had been drawn from unemployment and from new entrants joining the labour force, as well as from population growth.
But since August 2022, employment growth has come almost entirely from population growth. The rates of unemployment and of labour force participation have remained largely constant.
Why unemployment didn’t jump
A combination of slowing job growth and faster population growth ought to have pushed up the unemployment rate. But so far that hasn’t happened.
Having hit a low of 3.5% in August 2022, unemployment has stayed there pretty much the whole time since.
The reason is our record level of job vacancies. Fewer new jobs are being created, but an unusually high number of vacancies is keeping demand for workers high.
New entrants to the labour force have been able to take up those vacancies, rather than becoming unemployed.
Where population growth coming from
The higher rate of population growth is coming from increased immigration, a term that encompasses international students and working holidaymakers.
Net overseas migration (the extent to which arrivals exceed departures) averaged 23,270 per month in the first half of 2022, and then 35,200 in the second half.
A big part of the growth is from the return of international students and working holidaymakers.
Unsurprisingly, the biggest reductions in job vacancies came in the occupations where these temporary visa holders make up the largest shares of the workforce.
Since mid-2022, the vacancy rate for food trades workers has fallen from 4.4% to 3.0%, the largest fall by far of any occupation group.
Vacancy rates for hospitality and food preparation workers have each fallen by about three quarters of a percentage point.
Where to from here
Continued (now modest) growth in new job creation, together with the huge backlog of vacancies, might well allow the rate of unemployment to remain around its current level – even with a high rate of population growth.
Whether that does indeed happen depends on how future growth in new jobs is affected by actions of the Reserve Bank aimed at dampening economic growth.
So far, these actions have slowed the jobs market, but haven’t sent it into a tailspin.
Whether that remains the case will be the story to watch in the coming months.
Jeff Borland receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
The Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) is a A$20 billion fund to support Australian health and medical research. It was set up in 2015 to deliver practical benefits from medical research and innovation to as many Australians as possible.
Unlike the other research funding agencies, such the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), most of the MRFF funding is priority-driven. It seeks to fund research in particular areas or topics rather than using open calls when researchers propose their own ideas for funding.
As the Nine newspapers outlined this week, researchers have criticised the previous Coalition government’s allocation of MRFF funds. There is widespread consensus the former health minister had too much influence in the allocation of funds, and there was limited and sometimes no competition when funding was directly allocated to one research group.
The current Health Minister, Mark Butler, has instituted a review. So how should the big decisions about how to spend the MRFF be made in the future to maximise its value and achieve its aims?
However, most researchers and institutions will simply argue more funding is needed for their own research. If the board seeks to satisfy such lobbying, it will produce fragmented funding that aligns poorly with the health needs of Australians.
A better approach would be to systematically assemble evidence about what is known and the key evidence gaps. Here, the board would benefit from what is known as a “value of information” framework for decision-making.
This framework systematically attempts to quantify the most valuable information that will reduce the uncertainty for health and medical decision-making. In other words, it would pinpoint which information we need to allow us to better make health and medical decisions.
There have been attempts to use this method in Australia to help inform how we prioritise hospital-based research. However, we now need to apply such an approach more broadly.
A structured framework for engaging with the public is also missing in Australia. The public’s perspective on research prioritisation has often been overlooked, but as the ultimate consumers of research, they need to be heard.
Research is a highly complex and specialised endeavour, so we can’t expect the public to create sensible priorities alone.
One approach used overseas has been developed by the James Lind Alliance, a group in the United Kingdom that combines the public’s views with researchers to create agreed-on priorities for research.
This is done using an intensive process of question setting and discussion. Priorities are checked for feasibility and novelty, so there is no funding for research that’s impossible or already done.
The priorities from the James Lind Alliance process can be surprising. The top priority in the area of irritable bowel syndrome, for example, is to discover if it’s one condition or many, while the second priority is to work on bowel urgency (a sudden urgent need to go to the toilet).
While such everyday questions can struggle to get funding in traditional systems that often focus on novelty, funding research in these two priority areas could lead to the most benefits for people with irritable bowel syndrome.
Consider our comparative advantages
Australia is a relatively small player globally. To date, the MRFF has allocated around $2.6 billion, just over 5% of what the United States allocates through the National Institute of Health funding in a single year.
A single research grant, even if it involves a few million dollars of funding, is unlikely to lead to a medical breakthrough. Instead, the MRFF should prioritise areas where Australia has a comparative advantage.
This could involve building on past success (such as the research that led to the HPV, or human papillomavirus, vaccine to prevent cervical cancer), or where Australian researchers can play a critical role globally.
However, there is an area where Australian researchers have an absolute advantage: using research to improve our own health system.
A prime example would be finding ways to improve dental care access in Australia. For example, a randomised trial of different ways of providing insurance and dental services, similar to the RAND Health Insurance Experiment conducted in the United States in the 1970s.
This could provide the evidence needed to design a sustainable dental scheme to complement Medicare. Now that is something the MRFF should consider as a funding priority.
Adrian Barnett receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund and the National Health and Medical Research Council. He is a member of the NHMRC Research Committee; this article represents his own views.
Philip Clarke receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund via grants held at the University of Melbourne.
The Voice to Parliament reached another milestone this week, with the official essays for the Yes and No cases published online by the Australian Electoral Commission. These will be sent to all Australian electors in the lead up to the vote, which will be in the last quarter of the year
In recent weeks, polls have suggested the “yes” vote is on the slide, and has an uphill battle if it is to be successful.
In this podcast, we talk with two Indigenous senators, The Greens’ Dorinda Cox, and Liberal Kerrynne Liddle. Cox is campaigning for the Voice, while Liddle does not believe a Voice will achieve the practical outcomes those in favour are championing.
Cox, from Western Australia, believes a Voice will deliver more and better practical results for First Nations peoples compared to the former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC). She says ATSIC was a “boots and all” approach that “gave a lot of power through commissioners and through a governance structure that essentially was different from what’s being proposed”.
“I see the Voice enabling us to provide advice to all sides of parliament to talk through those representations to the executive government and to talk very specifically about what Closing The Gap is.”
Liddle, from South Australia, is a supporter of Constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians, but has an issue with the referendum proposal. She would rather see an Indigenous Voice legislated, with the “executive government” clause removed. “I think we would blitz that if it was that single [recognition] question and the Voice was actually legislated.”
Liddle has a message for Anthony Albanese. “I would like to see this prime minister stop this divisive form and approach that he’s taken to this, and actually go back and say constitutional recognition, tick, we can all do this.”
“Because if this is defeated, the concept of constitutional recognition may not ever occur.”
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.
A View from Afar: Paul G Buchanan and Selwyn Manning examine democratic backsliding around the world and in New Zealand.
A View from Afar
PODCAST: How and Why Democracy is Backsliding Around the World - Buchanan and Manning
/
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed
In this the seventh episode of A View from Afar podcast for 2023 political scientist Dr Paul Buchanan and Selwyn Manning examine the strengths and weaknesses of democracy around the world.
In particular Paul and Selwyn consider how and why democracy in many countries around the world is on the slide.
They examine the causes of democratic backsliding and also test why the erosion of high democratic ideas have, in many cases, popular support.
First, Paul offers a context, and defines democratic backsliding. He identifies the countries that are decisively eroding their own democracies of principles that were once embraced by both power elites and citizenry.
The Questions include:
Why are we seeing more democratic backsliding in recent times?
Is it just a political phenomenon or does it extend beyond the political sphere?
Where has democratic backsliding been most evident?
What do Chile, Guatemala, Israel and Thailand have in common when it comes to backsliding?
What is occurring in the United States?
If a democracy “backslides,” what does it slide into?
INTERACTION WHILE LIVE:
Paul and Selwyn encourage their live audience to interact while they are live with questions and comments.
RECOGNITION: The MIL Network’s podcast A View from Afar was Nominated as a Top Defence Security Podcast by Threat.Technology – a London-based cyber security news publication. Threat.Technology placed A View from Afar at 9th in its 20 Best Defence Security Podcasts of 2021 category.
You can follow A View from Afar via our affiliate syndicators.
The Thai parliamentary election was held over two months ago and yet, the country still has no prime minister or government. While much remains in flux, one thing appears certain – the popular reformist leader of the party that received the most votes in the election, Pita Limjaroenrat, will not be the country’s next prime minister.
In demoralising, though familiar, scenes this week, the Constitutional Court announced Pita would be suspended as an MP until a ruling is made on allegations he knowingly held shares in a media company when he contested the May election.
The parliament then voted to void his prime ministerial nomination, preventing him from contesting a second vote in the legislature for the premiership. (He had already failed in one vote last week.)
Pita is clearly the people’s choice for prime minister. And under a more democratic system, he would already be sitting in the PM office.
So, why has the winner of the election been blocked from taking office?
Who is Pita?
The charismatic 42-year-old Pita is a Harvard-educated businessman who entered parliament in the 2019 election as a member of the Future Forward Party, led by another young, charismatic, American-educated politician, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit.
After the election, in an almost identical complaint to Pita’s case, the Election Commission accused Thanathorn of holding shares in a media company when he registered as an MP, violating election laws. He was convicted by the Constitutional Court, disqualifying him as an MP.
Thanathorn’s party was then dissolved by the court for allegedly accepting an “illegitimate” loan. However, it was soon replaced by the newly established Move Forward Party, and Pita was elected its leader in March 2020.
Pita proved to be a talented campaigner, and the newly established party stunned political analysts in this year’s election by winning 151 seats in the House of Representatives. Even more astonishing was Move Forward’s almost clean sweep of Bangkok, winning 32 out of 33 seats. The military-backed parties of the previous government were eviscerated.
Pita then built a coalition of eight parties that together controlled 312 of the 500 seats in the House, a clear majority.
Why was Pita disqualified?
The problem for Pita, Move Forward and any democratic party in Thailand is the prime minister is elected under the 2017 constitution, which was written by the military. It gives the 250 members of the Senate, who were appointed in 2019 by the previous military junta, a vote in electing the prime minister.
This means a candidate needs 376 votes of the total 750 parliamentarians to be elected prime minister, but just 500 have been democratically elected. Of those, Pita’s coalition only controlled 312 seats. This feature of the Constitution is designed to allow the military-appointed Senate to play the role of spoiler.
Before the first round of parliamentary voting, Pita and his party were presented with two other significant hurdles – the Constitutional Court had received two cases against them.
The first complaint accused the Move Forward of “attempting to overthrow the democratic system with his majesty the king as the head of state”. The second, referred by the Election Commission, argued Pita should be removed as an MP for knowingly holding shares in a media company when he registered.
Pita was allowed to contest the first round of voting on July 13 nonetheless, but fell short, winning 324 votes. Only 13 senators supported him.
Then, before Wednesday’s second round of voting, the court announced Pita’s suspension and conservative forces in parliament joined to block him from standing again.
It should be noted both the Election Commission and the Constitutional Court are generally considered to be the vehicles of the conservative elites and have repeatedly made bogus or adverse judgements against liberal parties and politicians who might challenge the power of the military or monarchy.
Why do conservatives oppose Pita?
Pita ran on a platform of liberalising reforms in most areas of Thailand’s society and economy.
The party’s key policy proposal was to push for a referendum to establish an assembly to rewrite the Constitution and remove its anti-democratic elements, such as the appointment of the Senate and its ability to elect the prime minister.
Another key policy was to amend Section 112 of Thailand’s criminal code, the lèse-majesté law, which punishes anyone who criticises the king or other senior royals with up to 15 years in prison.
Since 2020, at least 250 people have been prosecuted under the law. A new book on the Thai king by an exiled academic, Pavin Chachavalpongpun, was also recently banned for defaming the monarchy. Anyone importing it could be imprisoned for three years and fined, despite the book not yet being published.
Pita and his party have also committed to push for a bill to legalise same-sex marriage and improve gender equality in Thailand.
Significantly, they sought to restrict the power of the military, as well. Move Forward proposed significant reductions in the defence budget, which is always a courageous stance in a country bedevilled by regular military coups.
In addition, the party planned to pass wealth and land taxes and increase corporate taxes for large companies to pay for its welfare policies focused on education, children, people with disabilities and retirees.
All of these positions made Pita popular with younger, more cosmopolitan voters. But it also made the party a target of powerful, anti-democratic, conservative forces, particularly the military, the monarchy and their supporters.
So what could happen next?
After the decision to suspend Pita and the vote to deny him a second nomination, protesters began to gather outside parliament, then later at Bangkok’s famed Democracy Monument. Many young people feel as though the conservative forces in Thai society have stifled the democratic will of the people – yet again.
It is now likely one of the three prime minister candidates of the second-place party, Pheu Thai, will be nominated in the next round of parliamentary voting, scheduled for July 27.
Despite Pita being suspended from parliament, Move Forward still commands the most seats in the House and will still be a powerful force in pursuing its agenda. There are rumours Pheu Thai could abandon its coalition with the party, though that remains to be seen.
When Pita left the parliament this week to applause from his supporters, he adopted an optimistic tone. He said Thailand had changed since the May election and “the people are now half way to victory”.
There is a chance this is true and we are on the cusp of a surge of democratic power in Thailand. But for many long-time observers of civil-military relations in Southeast Asia, this view might turn out to be overly optimistic.
Adam Simpson 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gail Pacheco, Professor of Economics, Director of the NZ Work Research Institute, Auckland University of Technology
Getty Images
Literacy and numeracy are under the spotlight as Aotearoa New Zealand grapples with how to improve student performance in these basic skills.
This decision followed a damning report revealed that by the age of 15, two out of five children are either only just meeting or failing to meet literacy standards.
It is clear the warning bells are ringing over student learning – maybe just not loud or urgently enough.
Our research shows just how essential it is that education policy addresses these basic skills now. If we don’t, struggling students – particularly in already disadvantaged groups – face lifelong consequences that reach well beyond educational success.
The state of New Zealand education
There is a growing sense something is wrong with New Zealand’s education system.
Level 1 National Certificates of Educational Achievement (NCEA) results have been steadily decreasing since 2017. A 2022 trial of new NCEA literacy and numeracy tests – due to become compulsory in 2024 – produced abysmal results and caused alarm for a number of principals.
Against international benchmarks, New Zealand’s trends in literacy and numeracy paint a gloomy picture.
A global study found a sharp decline in New Zealand students’ proficiency in reading and mathematics.
In 2009, 14% of students fell below the baseline threshold for literacy proficiency and 15% fell below in maths. In 2018, those falling below the baseline climbed to 19% and 22% respectively.
The OECD considers the baseline level to be one that enables students “to participate effectively and productively in life”.
For Māori students, the decline in basic literacy and numeracy is even more significant. In 2009, 24% of Māori students fell below the literacy baseline. This increased to 30% in 2018. Over the decade, the number of Māori students who fell below the baseline in maths went from 27% to 37%.
The decline was smaller for Pacific students, although their starting point was less favourable. More than a third fell below the literacy baseline in 2009, with this share increasing only slightly to 36% in 2018. For maths, 40% of Pacific students fell below the baseline in 2009, increasing to 44% in 2018.
Why literacy and numeracy matter
Our research found literacy and numeracy skills correlate to the wellbeing of individuals. As such, they significantly influence life choices and outcomes.
Our ten-year study followed a cohort of rangatahi (young people) who were 15 years old in 2009. We found those with low reading and maths skills have poorer outcomes across a range of wellbeing measures including education, employment, income, and health and justice.
That those with low literacy and numeracy skills have poorer educational outcomes, particularly in attaining bachelor’s degrees and tertiary qualifications, is unsurprising. They are also less likely to be employed and have lower earnings. The difference is particularly stark among women.
But the impact of these low skills goes beyond education and employment – it also affects wider areas of wellbeing such as health and justice.
For example, those with lower literacy and numeracy skills have higher hospitalisation rates – 59% had at least one hospitalisation between the ages of 15 and 25, compared to 46% of those with higher core competencies.
They were also more likely to engage in criminal activity: just over a quarter of this group had a conviction by time they were 25, compared to just 8% of the group with above-baseline skills.
Importantly, while life outcomes are influenced by literacy and numeracy skills, we also found that higher core skills alone do not necessarily lead to positive wellbeing outcomes.
Ethnicity also plays a powerful role. For example, we found that at age 25, Māori with above-baseline literacy and numeracy skills have about the same average earnings as Pākehā with low skill levels.
Average annual earnings at age 25.
Using education to address systematic inequalities
There are myriad reasons why New Zealand needs a curriculum that ensures our future generations are equipped with the skills necessary to succeed and thrive in our fast-changing global economy.
Future generations need and deserve tools that will help them navigate the complexities of life within and beyond our shores. Failure to deliver on the government’s literacy and numeracy goals for the new curriculum will merely perpetuate the existing inequities.
Most of all, failure will undermine the yet-to-be-realised potential in our individual rangatahi and across our collective communities of Aotearoa.
This research was funded by a Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment Endeavour grant.
The concept of the home advantage can be traced back as far as the 1870s, around the time the first professional sports leagues formed. Back then, data suggested teams experienced more success when playing at home than away.
One study looked at win-loss records in top domestic sport leagues across 65 countries between 2011 and 2015, and found most professional sports experience a home advantage. Basketball, handball and rugby union had the strongest home advantage, winning between 58-60% of their points at home. For men’s football, teams won 56.5% of their points at home.
In women’s football leagues across Europe, research between 2004 and 2010 found the home ground advantage was slightly weaker, averaging 54.2% of points won at home compared with around 60% for men’s leagues. It’s not yet known why this difference exists.
The home team in football tends to take more risks and is more proactive than away teams, and gets positive reinforcement from the crowd.
Away teams tend to attack less, attempt fewer shots, put in fewer crosses, and score fewer goals.
3 key factors
Academic research has spent considerable time exploring the factors related the home advantage.
There are three main factors that stand out.
1. The crowd effect
When playing at home, the crowd is usually filled with home fans wanting to see a big win. But as the number of supportive crowd members increases, there’s also a larger expectation placed on the team and individual athletes to perform well.
Researchers have been interested in how crowd size and density impact the home advantage. Results are mixed, but there’s some evidence to suggest that as average attendance at football games increases, the home advantage may also increase.
As crowds typically have more supporters for the home team, referees are thought to subconsciously favour the home team when making officiating decisions.
Research from Germany found crowd noise caused more referee decisions in favour of the home team. The away side is generally given more yellow cards. The authors say these effects correlate with the density of the crowd, such that the more dense (and presumably therefore louder) the home crowd is, the more likely it is the away team will receive more yellow cards.
Other research from England found “home teams consistently received fewer cards and converted more penalty kicks than visiting teams”.
When there were no crowds during the 2020 European football season due to the COVID-19 pandemic, research found the portion of home advantage that comes through referee decisions was eliminated.
It also found fewer yellow and red cards were given to away teams in this period. The authors say they “interpret these results to mean that crowds influence referee judgements about how severe an infraction is”.
2. The location matters
Disadvantages for the away team include disruptions to routine, unfamiliarity with the venue and conditions, longer travel times, and less support.
By playing at home, the Matildas and Football Ferns will experience familiar sights and sounds. They won’t need to speak a different language to communicate, they will be closer to family and friends, and they won’t have to adjust to a large time zone difference. Not having to contend with a new environment can be an advantage for the home team.
Research suggests these factors can support what are called “superior psychological states”, such as greater confidence in the self and the team.
3. Every player perceives pressure differently
When trying to understand the home advantage, it’s important not to overlook the individual athlete. While for some, playing at home may be viewed as motivating and inspiring, for others it creates extra pressure and anxiety.
Whether playing at home or away, another factor to consider is what’s at stake. Because many teams will only play three matches before being eliminated, each match of the world cup will hold great importance, with the outcome having consequences for each team.
For some players, higher stakes may present a threat, which may lead to greater anxiety and lower performance.
But other athletes might view added pressure as an opportunity to perform. Research shows such players experience much more “adaptive” thoughts, emotions and behaviours, meaning they’re more able to cope with the demands and thrive.
So, will our football stars from Australia and New Zealand be saying “there’s no place like home” when the world cup finishes? Let’s watch and see.
Amber Mosewich is an Associate Professor at the University of Alberta whose role involves research, teaching, and academic service. She receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Sport Participation Research Initiative.
Alyson Crozier 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Prudence Flowers, Senior Lecturer in US History, College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Flinders University
Production on US film and television sets has ground to a halt as Hollywood actors have joined writers in walking off sets. At issue are residuals (or royalties), streaming services and the use of artificial intelligence.
The last time there was a “double strike” was 1960, when future United States President Ronald Reagan was head of the powerful Screen Actors Guild (SAG).
Over his career he churned out over 50 films, appearing in Westerns, thrillers, war films and romantic comedies, as well as famously co-starring with a monkey called Bonzo.
In the 1930s and 1940s, Reagan was a self-proclaimed “New Deal Liberal” and a proud supporter of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Reagan became a SAG member within a month of moving to Hollywood. In 1941, his then wife Jane Wyman, a member of the union’s board of directors, suggested him for a vacancy on the board.
Reagan was nominated for the SAG presidency by movie star Gene Kelly. He would go on to serve two stints as union head, from 1947–1952 and 1959–1960.
The year he first became SAG president he was part of the Second Red Scare, an anticommunist witch hunt that saw Americans fired, jailed and blacklisted over accusations of communist affiliation.
Hollywood – seen as rife with communist activity – was targeted amid fears it might produce socialist propaganda.
Reagan was fiercely anti-communist. In 1947, he appeared as a “friendly” witness for Congress, blaming industrial unrest and strikes in Hollywood on “subversive” elements.
Classified documents subsequently revealed Reagan was a confidential informant for the FBI. When he became president of SAG he provided FBI agents with dozens of actor’s files.
Leading the strike
Much like today, in the early 1950s a major issue facing Hollywood actors were residuals. During his first tenure as SAG president, Reagan was lauded within the industry when he helped secure the first residual payments for television actors.
With movie attendance plummeting and films increasingly aired on television, film actors also wanted residuals. They faced strong opposition from the movie studios.
In 1959, after negotiations ground to a halt, Reagan was asked to return as SAG president. He called for a strike in February 1960.
Actors walked off sets in March, joining the Writers Guild of America, which had been on strike since early January 1960. The actors’ strike lasted six weeks, paling in comparison to the 21-week writers’ strike.
Reagan ultimately won an agreement that residuals would be paid to actors for films produced from 1960. He also won a lump sum payment for the union of US$2.65 million, used to create SAG’s first pension and health plan for members.
Reagan was cheered by SAG members when the deal was ratified. It was approved by an overwhelming majority of members, although some Golden Age stars saw it as a betrayal.
Reagan resigned from the SAG presidency two months after the strike concluded. Unbeknown to most in the industry, he had a significant conflict of interest, working as both an actor and a producer.
While Reagan had been a registered Democrat, over the course of the 1950s his ideological views moved rightward.
He saw no tension between these beliefs and his role leading the 1960 strike, exhibiting the flexiblepragmatism scholars later identified with his time in the White House.
In the 1964 presidential election, he campaigned vigorously for Republican Barry Goldwater, a staunch conservative rejected by party moderates.
Goldwater opposed taxation and the social welfare state, voted against the Civil Rights Act on libertarian grounds, and viewed nuclear weapons as part of tactical warfare. Lyndon Johnson, his opponent, summarised the views of Democrats and many Republicans when he jibed of Goldwater, “In your guts you know he’s nuts”. Johnson defeated Goldwater in a landslide.
Yet 1964 proved to be the beginning, rather than the end, of the modern American right.
One of Reagan’s televised fundraising speeches for Goldwater, titled A Time for Choosing, catapulted him onto the national stage as the new conservative heir apparent.
Despite having no political experience, Reagan was approached by a group of influential businessmen to run as the Republican candidate for Governor of California. His last acting roles were in 1965.
Reagan’s conservative gubernatorial campaign was sharply critical of the counterculture and student protests, emphasising law and order. He won decisively and served two terms, from 1967–1975.
An anti-union president
From the mid-1970s, Reagan had his eyes firmly set on the White House. He articulated a politics that incorporated economic conservatism, hawkish anticommunism and moral traditionalism, including opposition to legal abortion. He also described “big labor” as a major problem for the US.
Reagan’s polish, charisma and sunny optimism made once politically extreme views palatable and attractive to ordinary Americans.
After a hard fought but failed bid for the Republican nomination in 1976, Reagan won the 1980 presidential election, easily defeating Democratic incumbent Jimmy Carter.
He barred them from working in their old jobs or anywhere in the Federal Aviation Administration for the rest of their lives. His administration also formally decertified their union, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO).
Reagan’s response to the PATCO strike was unprecedented in the post-World War II period. It had a chilling effect on the fortunes of unions and working conditions, contributing to ongoing wage stagnation and the loss of various forms of leave and entitlements.
Reagan is the only union leader to serve as US President. Paradoxically, he was also one of the most aggressively anti-union presidents of the 20th century.
Prudence Flowers has received funding from the South Australian Department of Human Services. She is a member of the South Australian Abortion Action Coalition.
While Christopher Nolan’s new film Oppenheimer is opening in much of the world this week, a Japanese release date has not yet been announced.
A delay in naming a release date is nothing new for Japan, where Hollywood releases often take place weeks or months later than other national markets.
Japan’s cinema industry is savvy enough to take a wait-and-see approach to blockbuster films.
If Oppenheimer fails at the box office in other markets, then Japan may decide on a quick opening in a smaller number of cinemas. If it is the global hit the producers hope, it may open across the country.
Some have speculated the tragic history of events in Hiroshima and Nagasaki make the film too sensitive for Japanese audiences. But concerns that the film contains sensitivities to Japan’s past can be easily discarded by a quick glance through Japan’s cinematic history.
The Oppenheimert trailer. Video: Universal Pictures
The Japanese film industry The Japanese film industry began in 1897, developing quickly through studios such as Nikkatsu and Shochiku. In the 1930s, the industry gained international attention with emerging filmmakers such as Yasujiro Ozu.
By the late 1930s, studios and filmmakers were drafted into the war effort, making propaganda films.
Until the end of the second world war, the Japanese government had been strictly censoring all films in line with efforts to produce this state-sanctioned propaganda. From 1945 to 1949, the US-Occupation forces set up procedures to ensure films avoided intensely nationalist or militaristic themes.
Japan’s film classification body was created in 1949 following the withdrawal of the Production Code. This gave Japanese authorities the chance to determine their own rules around film content based on themes of language, sex, nudity, violence and cruelty, horror and menace, drug use and criminal behaviour.
Japanese film was always quite progressive in terms of artistic licence, escaping the type of strictly enforced limitations found in America’s Hays Code, which put restrictions on content including nudity, profanity and depictions of crime.
Filmmakers in Japan had freedom to practice their art, so the pinku (soft pornography) films of the 1960s and 70s were the products of the major studios rather than underground independents.
These freedoms saw Japanese filmmakers absorb influences from Europe (particularly through French and Italian cinema), but saw significant content differences between Japanese and Hollywood cinema until the close of the Hays era.
Since the 1950s, censorship in the form of suggested edits or very rarely, “disallowed films”, has mostly been in response to violent or overly-explicit sexual imagery, rather than concerns over political or militaristic issues.
Japan is the third biggest box office market in the world, behind only China and North America, and cinema is dominated by local films.
While it can appear that Japanese cinema is dominated by anime and live-action remakes of manga and anime, it includes a rich array of genres and styles. The late 1990s saw a global appetite for horror films, under the mantle of J-horror. Films like Battle Royale (2000) and Ichi: The Killer (2001) created a new level of violence combining the horror genre with comic moments. Meanwhile samurai and yakuza films continue to find audiences, as do high-school themed dramas.
Internationally, the arthouse stylistics of films by Hirokazu Kore-eda, Kiyoshi Kurosawa and Naomi Kawase are feted at Cannes and Venice.
The war on screen Many Japanese filmmakers have explored the second world war.
As early as 1952, Kaneto Shindo’s Children of Hiroshima directly addressed the aftermath of the war through confronting imagery then with a gentle, humanist touch.
A year later, Hideo Sekigawa’s Hiroshima upped the political ante with a docudrama critical of the United States’ actions in a film that included real survivors from the nuclear blast acting as victims.
The obvious metaphorical imagery of successive Godzilla films reflect fears of the potential horrors nuclear activities could unleash.
The title of Shōhei Imamura’s Black Rain (1989, not to be confused with Ridley Scott’s yakuza film of the same name and same year) referenced the colour of the acid rain following the nuclear blast in Hiroshima, and was recognised with some of Japan’s highest film honours.
Anime has also directly shown the damage wrought by Oppenheimer’s device, most notably with Barefoot Gen in 1983, and its sequel in 1986.
In the style of Astro Boy and Kimba the White Lion, a young wide-eyed boy, Gen, is caught in the horrors of the conflict, watching as his mother literally melts in front of him.
Summer with Kuro (1990) and In This Corner of the World (2016) each gave their own, less graphic, anime versions of lives touched by the conflict.
Foreign films Foreign films about the second world war have also found an audience in Japan.
Alain Resnais’ intensely serious French New Wave drama, the French/Japanese co-production Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959), exposed the international implications of personal relations after the bomb.
Japan warmly welcomed Clint Eastwood’s 2006 twin-release of Letters from Iwo Jima and Flags of Our Fathers, which showed the battle from the views of Japanese and US soldiers, respectively.
Stories of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not a taboo topic in Japan. Of all the nations in the world to be banning films, Japan must surely be near the bottom of the list.
Whether there’s a release date or not, Oppenheimer must have the appeal to be a box office hit to determine its suitability for release in Japan.
The 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup starts today, and more teams are taking part than ever before. The number of women and girls playing soccer around the world has also increased from about five million in 2014 to more than 13 million in 2019.
This greater participation in soccer over the years has led to an increase in injuries, including concussions. These can follow a range of situations, such as when the head hits the ball, players’ heads collide, or when the head hits the ground or goalpost.
But are women more at risk than men from such concussions? And if so, why? Here’s what the evidence says.
Concussion is a mild traumatic brain injury that usually happens when someone’s head hits something or someone. But it can also happen after being hit on the body, causing a whiplash-type motion to the head.
Common symptoms include headache, dizziness and fatigue. Most soccer players return to play within four weeks of a concussion. Although an estimated 10% of players (particularly women) will have persisting symptoms lasting several months.
Concussions are twice as likely to occur in games rather than in practice sessions. Defenders and goalkeepers have more concussions than forwards or midfielders.
Concussion is more likely as a result of contact between the head and an opponent’s elbow or shoulder, head-to-head contact, or contact of the head with the ground or goalpost.
Contact between players (whether head-to-head or elbow-to-head) is more common during a heading duel – when two or more players compete for a ball in the air.
Heading the ball, when players intentionally use their heads to redirect the ball, is unique to soccer. But concussion is more likely after the ball hits the head accidentally.
Regardless of whether such an impact is intentional, there is increasing concern that players exposed to repeated head impacts in soccer, including from headers, are more at risk of developing neurodegenerative diseases, such as dementia, in later life.
But current evidence for this only exists in men. In Australia (and other countries), soccer was deemed “medically inappropriate” for women until the 1970s. So not only have fewer women played soccer historically, their game hasn’t been so well researched.
In soccer, and other sports where men and women participate under the same rules, women appear to have much higher rates of concussion compared to men.
For every 1,000 hours of playing or practising soccer, there are about 1.5 concussions for women compared with 1.0 for men.
Women report greater number of symptoms, increased symptom intensity and greater time lost from sport after a concussion.
Concussions caused by ball-to-head contact is also much more common in women and girls, than in men.
So what might be happening in soccer? To answer this, we need to look at several factors, some biological, some related to how women are trained.
1. Neck strength
Women soccer players generally have weaker neck muscles than men. This may place them at higher risk of concussion if they cannot engage these muscles to stabilise their head if it is hit by another head, body or the ball.
The female sex hormones oestrogen and progesterone may protect women from sustaining a concussion.
Half of concussions also take place in the part of the menstrual cycle known as the late “luteal phase”. This is a seven-day window when oestrogen and progesterone levels are declining. However, the research is too limited to speculate further on the role of sex hormones.
Women and girls are less likely than men and boys to be trained in how to head the ball, according to an Australian survey of players and coaches. Adolescent players without this training are more likely to report concussion.
Most concussions in soccer occur when two players compete to head the ball. Here, their heads and arms are more likely to make contact, leading to concussion, rather then concussion resulting from hitting the ball itself.
So training players to safely head the ball should include how to position the body to minimise the risk of injury and keeping the eyes open to track the ball’s trajectory to prepare for ball-to-head contact.
But 90% of women close their eyes when heading a ball compared to 79% of men, according to one report. This potentially reduces a player’s readiness for ball contact, and makes them less aware of any players around them. As a result, they are less able to protect their head against an opponent’s elbow or head. However, further research is needed to understand the role of players having their eyes open or shut, and the risk of concussion.
Guidelines published last month aim to reduce the numbers of headers in soccer. These approaches are also likely to decrease the number of header duels, a common mechanism of concussion, as well as the long-term risks associated with ball-to-head impacts.
Recommended strategies include:
fewer players, smaller goals – small-sided play (for example five-a-side or seven-a-side) during matches and training for younger, beginner players, plus smaller goals, reduces the number of balls in the air, and headers
playing out from the back – passing the ball out from the goalkeeper to defenders rather than kicking it long the pitch leads to less high-force headers from goal kicks
short corner kicks – kicking the ball from a corner kick to a close-by team-mate is less likely to lead to header duels around the goal
neck exercises – to prepare the neck muscles for heading, neck exercises can be added to injury prevention programs. These can reduce head acceleration and potential concussion in adolescent players
red cards – enforcing red cards (being sent off the pitch) for deliberate head contact reduces the number of concussions.
Under 5% of the 211 soccer associations around the world endorse heading guidelines. So now is the ideal time to explore strategies that keep all soccer’s positive benefits while minimising the risk to current and future generations of players.
Shreya Mcleod is a Lecturer and Course Coordinator in Physiotherapy at Australian Catholic University. She is a PhD Candidate at the University of Newcastle, researching concussion in women’s contact and collision sports. She is also a Titled Sports and Musculoskeletal Physiotherapist and currently contracts with Cricket NSW. She has previously been a Contract Physiotherapist for Cricket Australia, Hobart Hurricanes WBBL, Singapore Sports Council and the WTA.
Kerry Peek is a senior lecturer (physiotherapy) and sports injury researcher from the University of Sydney. Kerry has received funding from a FIFA Research Scholarship and from Sports Medicine Australia. Kerry is currently an injury spotter (concussion) for FIFA organised tournaments (2023: U20s Men’s World Cup and Women’s World Cup). Kerry is a member of UEFA’s Heading Expert Group and Football Australia’s Expert Working Group (Heading and Concussion).
He said there was no identified “political or ideological motivation” for the shooter and as such, there was no need to change the national security risk.
The government has spoken to FIFA organisers today and the Women’s Football World Cup tournament will proceed as planned with the opening match tonight between New Zealand and Norway.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, Author provided
Last year, we made an intriguing discovery – a radio signal in space that switched on and off every 18 minutes.
Astronomers expect to see some repeating radio signals in space, but they usually blink on and off much more quickly. The most common repeating signals come from pulsars, rotating neutron stars that emit energetic beams like lighthouses, causing them to blink on and off as they rotate towards and away from the Earth.
Pulsars emit powerful beams of radio waves from their poles, which sweep across our line of sight like a lighthouse. Joeri van Leeuwen
Pulsars slow down as they get older, and their pulses become fainter, until eventually they stop producing radio waves altogether. Our unusually slow pulsar could best be explained as a magnetar – a pulsar with exceedingly complex and powerful magnetic fields that could generate radio waves for several months before stopping.
Unfortunately, we detected the source using data gathered in 2018. By the time we analysed the data and discovered what we thought might be a magnetar it was 2020, and it was no longer producing radio waves. Without additional data, we were unable to test our magnetar theory.
Nothing new under the sun
Our Universe is vast, and so far every new phenomenon we’ve discovered has not been unique. We knew that if we looked again, with well-designed observations, we had a good chance of finding another long-period radio source.
So, we used the Murchison Widefield Array radio telescope in Western Australia to scan our Milky Way galaxy every three nights for several months.
A single tile of the hundreds that make up the Murchison Widefield Array, a radio telescope in outback Western Australia. Natasha Hurley-Walker
We didn’t need to wait long. Almost as soon as we started looking, we found a new source, in a different part of the sky, this time repeating every 22 minutes.
At last, the moment we had been waiting for. We used every telescope we could find, across radio, X-ray, and optical light, making as many observations as possible, assuming it would not be active for long. The pulses lasted five minutes each, with gaps of 17 minutes between. Our object looked a lot like a pulsar, but spinning 1,000 times slower.
The newly discovered mystery object emits pulses of radio waves in a 22-minute cycle.
Hiding in plain sight
The real surprise came when we searched the oldest radio observations of this part of the sky. The Very Large Array in New Mexico, United States, has the longest-running archive of data. We found pulses from the source in data from every year we looked – the oldest one in an observation made in 1988.
Observing over three decades meant we could precisely time the pulses. The source is producing them like clockwork, every 1,318.1957 seconds, give or take a tenth of a millisecond.
Radio images taken with the MeerKAT radio telescope in South Africa, showing one of the pulses, sped up by a factor of 20. The other nearby radio sources remain constant. Natasha Hurley-Walker
According to our current theories, for the source to be producing radio waves, it should be slowing down. But according to the observations, it is not.
In our article in Nature, we show that the source lies “below the death line”, which is the theoretical limit of how neutron stars generate radio waves; this holds even for quite complex magnetic field models. Not only that, but if the source is a magnetar, the radio emission should only be visible for a few months to years – not 33 years and counting.
So when we tried to solve one problem, we accidentally created another. What are these mysterious repeating radio sources?
What about ET?
Of course, it’s very tempting at this point to reach to extraterrestrial intelligence as an option. The same thing happened when pulsars were discovered: astrophysicist Jocelyn Bell Burnell and her colleagues, who found the first pulsar, nicknamed it “LGM 1”, for “Little Green Men 1”.
Observation of pulses from the first pulsar to be discovered, CP 1919. The chart recorder shows regular deflections every 1.3 seconds. Jocelyn Bell Burnell and Anthony Hewish
But as soon as Bell and her colleagues made further detections, they knew it could not be aliens. It would be incredibly unlikely for so many similar signals to be coming from so many different parts of the sky.
The pulses, similar to those of our source, contained no information, just “noise” across all frequencies, just like natural radio sources. Also, the energy requirements to emit a signal at all frequencies are staggering: you need to use, well, a neutron star.
While it’s tempting to try to explain a new phenomenon this way, it’s a bit of a cop out. It doesn’t encourage us to keep thinking, observing and testing new ideas. I call it the “aliens of the gaps” approach.
Fortunately, this source is still active, so anyone in the world can observe it. Perhaps with creative follow-up observations, and more analysis, we’ll be able to solve this new cosmic mystery.
Natasha Hurley-Walker is funded by a Future Fellowship from the Australian Research Council.
Nomadic animal-herders from the Eurasian steppe mingled with Copper Age farmers in southeastern Europe centuries earlier than previously thought.
In a new study published in Nature, we used ancient DNA to gain new insights into the spread of culture, technologies and ancestry at a crucial juncture in European history.
How ancient DNA can help us understand change
Humanity’s archaeological record reveals massive changes in cultural practices and technologies.
However, it is not always clear how these changes moved between different groups of people. It can happen either by a spread of ideas (such as through trade), or through the migration of people.
First, there was an expansion of early farming groups from Anatolia around 9,000 years ago. This was associated with the introduction of farming practices and animal husbandry, a more sedentary lifestyle (permanent housing) and the wide use of pottery and new types of polished stone tools.
Second was the expansion of steppe herders from the Eurasian Pontic Steppes around 5,000 years ago. This is associated with the spread of pastoralism and dairying technologies, a different type of ancestry and possibly some of the Indo-European languages.
In our new research, we studied the interaction between farming and pastoralist groups from the steppe from a new angle by analysing the genomes of 135 individuals from southeastern Europe and the northwestern Black Sea region, who lived between 4,000 and 7,000 years ago.
The area around Odesa was a ‘melting pot’ of cultures and ancestries. Modified from Penske et al. (2023), Author provided
We uncovered previously unknown and significant genetic changes in the people living in these regions. We also found the presence of steppe ancestry in the contact zone in the northwestern Black Sea region around 5,500 years ago, some 500 years earlier than previously assumed.
The Copper Age in southeastern Europe
Southeastern Europe played an important role in the spread of farming across Europe after early farmers from Anatolia arrived around 9,000-8,000 years ago. Approximately 1,000 years later, easy access to copper, gold and salt led to the development of many flourishing settlements in parts of today’s Bulgaria and Romania.
Settlements on the Black Sea and major rivers such as the Danube thrived through contact and trade with surrounding areas. Similarity in material culture visible in the archaeological record across a wider region indicates a period of social and political stability of approximately 500 years, between around 6,200 and 6,700 years ago.
Ninety-five of the ancient genomes we analysed were from this period and region, and this cultural similarity and stability is reflected in the absence of major genetic differences.
A new era and a melting pot of human interaction
Following this period of stability, many Copper Age settlements were abruptly abandoned around 6,000 years ago. For almost the next 1,000 years so few people lived in southeastern Europe that the period is often referred to as “the dark millennium”. The reason for this is not fully understood, but it is likely due to the depletion of resources due to unfavourable climatic conditions.
Instead, large settlements of several thousand houses emerged further north in parts of what are now Moldova and Ukraine. Located on the western end of the forest steppe zone, these mega-sites were associated with the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture.
Here, during a period called the Eneolithic spanning from 5,200 to 6,500 years ago, the region around today’s Odesa became a “melting pot” of human interaction. Numerous cultural influences appear in the archaeological record, including the waning Copper Age cultures and the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture.
Interestingly, the resulting style of pottery and other artefacts at the mega-sites showed influences from two additional groups. First, from nearby groups that could be traced to the steppe region east of Odesa. Second, from the distant Maykop culture of the North Caucasus, a mountain range east of the Black Sea.
Characteristic jewellery, weapons, tools and pottery from the melting pot area around today’s Odesa. The pottery combines characteristics from numerous cultures of the area. I. Manzura (2020), History Carved by the Dagger: the Society of the Usatovo Culture in the 4th Millennium BC
The steppe groups practised a different way of life, called nomadic pastoralism. Where farmers lived on and worked the same piece of land, nomadic pastoralists kept moving to find fresh pastures for their large herds of animals.
On top of this very different lifestyle, they also carried a distinct genetic profile called “steppe ancestry”.
A surprising discovery
By analysing the genomes of 18 ancient individuals from the Odesa region from this period, we could see genetic evidence of the many cultural influences observed by archaeologists.
In addition to the previously observed Copper Age ancestry, we detected new genetic contributions from individuals from the forest steppe regions, and the North Caucasus. This new ancestry and its appearance in western Europe had been uniquely associated with the spread of a later cultural group known as the Yamnaya.
This was a huge surprise. We didn’t expect to see signs of this ancestry until at least 500 years later, when the Yamnaya arrived.
These findings show there was not only a cultural exchange between the different groups. There must have also been biological interactions of many genetically distinct people coming together in this contact zone as early as 5,400 to 6,500 years ago.
Due to this “melting pot” the Eneolithic was characterised by a number of innovations. Technologies such as wheels, wagon transportation and improved metal-working spread quickly into western Europe and Central Asia.
A mosaic of ancestries
We also analysed 21 individuals from the Early Bronze Age, approximately 4,000–5,300 years ago. In eight of these individuals we observed the expected westward expansion of steppe pastoralists, this time associated with the Yamnaya culture.
This final migration brought with it the last part of the modern Western European gene pool, likely emerging from the preceding period of contact and exchange that we identified. However, the remaining 13 individuals retained the genetic signature from the preceding Copper Age. These findings indicated a coexistence of these genetically distinct peoples.
Our study of genetic data over time reveals a highly dynamic picture of human prehistory in southeastern Europe. As more ancient DNA data becomes available, so too will more chapters of this story.
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.
Why, in a country of more than 330 million people, does it appear that Americans will have to choose between Joe Biden or Donald Trump at the 2024 US presidential election?
Sure, not everyone can run for president. Anyone under the age of 35 is out, as are those born overseas and non-residents of 14 years or more. It helps to be well-known, popular and to sit on an eye-watering pile of money; the 2020 presidential election cycle, for example, cost candidates a combined US$5.7 billion ($A8.37 billion), more than the GDP of several small countries.
Those who have previously served in an official role also have advantages when it comes to competing for the top job. Having a known political track record, public name recognition, and existing voter support all go a long way to financing campaigns and encouraging voter turnout.
But even with all that considered, the pool of possibles surely could not be reduced to the same two candidates as 2020. So, why then are the odds of Biden and Trump going head-to-head once again so good?
Why Biden?
The fate of the Democrat nomination process is almost certainly sealed, with President Joe Biden as the Democrats’ nominee for the 2024 election. There are two main reasons for this.
Firstly, any primary challenge from a serious Democrat contender would present undue risk to the “incumbent advantage” of the party. With only ten of the 45 former presidents unable to secure second terms, incumbent presidents generally have a pretty good shot at winning a second term in office.
The punishing reminder of Senator Ted Kennedy’s fierce and unsuccessful primary challenge to incumbent President Jimmy Carter in 1980 is no doubt curbing any Democrat’s bid to take on Biden. Combined with Carter’s low approval rating and a country bogged down in “malaise”, the challenge all but paved the way for Ronald Reagan’s walloping victory with 489 Electoral College votes to Carter’s 49.
A president, like Carter, seeming to grovel for their own party’s support after a leadership contest, is an easy target for the opposition. A Democrat party united in full faith behind the incumbent leader – Biden – has a better chance of beating the Republican nominee.
Secondly, even if a serious Democrat could shake off the cautionary tale of 1980, there is no clear persuasively electable alternative to Biden. More than half of American voters do not want Biden to run in 2024, but dissatisfaction with a sitting president isn’t new. For example, 60% of Americans did not want Reagan to run again in 1984, despite him having a relatively high approval rating at the time.
It is one thing to not want the president to run again and yet another to unanimously agree on the alternative. No prominent Democrat officeholders appear willing or have enough support from the party or the public to suggest a challenge would be successful.
Kamala Harris, as Vice President, probably has the next best chance to secure the Democratic nomination. Every sitting or former vice president who has sought Democrat leadership since 1972, including Biden, has been successful. However, Harris suffers even lower approval ratings than Biden, and her chances at winning election in November are less predictable.
The reality is, despite being 80 and sometimes appearing frail, Biden is an electable leader. He won the popular vote in 2020 by more than 7 million votes and a 4.5% victory margin. And among his own party the president maintains a high approval rating, with 82% of Democrats approving of Biden in June 2023.
For Democrats who might dislike Biden, the only thing worse than a second Biden term, is a second Trump term; while they might not like it, Biden presents the best chance at re-election next year.
Despite concerns about his age, Joe Biden remains the Democrats’ best hope in 2024. Stephanie Scarbrough/AAP/AP
Why Trump?
The story is a little different when it comes to the Republican party nomination. Trump is not as likely as Biden to secure the nomination for his party in 2024. Still, the former president remains the clear front runner ahead of the main primary season, averaging 50% of the party’s support as the preferred nominee, and maintaining a 32-point lead over his nearest rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.
Trump’s campaign to reclaim office is the first attempt of any former president to regain office after losing in over 130 years. Unlike other one-term modern presidents who might have sought a second term after losing, Trump seems to have fewer issues persuading Republican voters and the party that he could be a winner once again.
Not only did Trump only lose the Electoral College by a razor thin count (the equivalent of around 44,000 votes), but an average of two-thirds of Republican voters believe Biden’s victory was fraudulent. An unforgettable 147 House Republicans also voted to reject Biden’s 2020 victory in January 2021, believing it was stolen from Trump.
Almost all the Republican primary challengers are reluctant to openly criticise the former president. They have stood him even amid the two recent criminal indictments, which would ordinarily present a golden opportunity for opponents to give their own campaigns an edge. For so-called “Teflon Don”, the scandals have done little to dissuade and unstick the Trump-loyal Republican base, and have only served to starve Trump’s opponents of media oxygen.
Of course, Trump’s nomination far from a home run, and the primary process is often long and unpredictable. But like the Democrats, the major question facing the party is, if not him, then who? And the party is coming up short with a more compelling answer.
And despite Trump’s very significant legal troubles, he retains a large Republican supporter base. Cristobal Herrera-Ulashkevich/EPA/AAP
The crowded Republican field and winner-takes-all nature of the system means it is very difficult for non-Trump-supporting Republicans to coalesce around a single alternative with a margin big enough to surpass Trump’s lead. Even DeSantis, who was once crowned “DeFuture” of the party and is supposedly the best chance of taking on Trump for the nomination, has found his popularity and momentum waning in recent weeks.
Ultimately, it is still too hard to know for sure what the election in November 2024 will look like, and any US political watcher will be loath to make any firm predictions after surprises in both the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
But, at this point in the election cycle, despite the wants of the majority of Americans, and no matter how uninspiring – 2024 looks to be 2020 all over again.
Victoria Cooper is affiliated with the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney
The cost of groceries has risen substantially over the last year. Food and non-alcoholic drinks rose by 7.9% in the year to May, with biggest increases in dairy products (15.1%), breads and cereals (12.8%) and processed foods (11.5%).
Meat costs rose by 3.8%, but the absolute increase was high, with a kilo of fillet steak costing up to A$60 for a kilogram.
Meat is a good source of protein, iron, zinc and vitamin B12.
Recommendations are for a maximum of three serves of cooked lean red meat a week. This includes beef, lamb, veal, pork, or kangaroo, with a serve being 65g cooked, which equates to 90–100g raw. This means purchasing 270–300g per person per week.
Check prices online and weekly specials. Less expensive cuts include oyster blade, chuck or rump steak ($22–$25 per kilogram). They can be tougher, making them better for casseroles or slow cook recipes, like this beef stroganoff.
One exception is mince because higher star, lower fat, more expensive products shrink less during cooking compared to regular mince, which shrinks by 25–30%.
Extend casserole and mince dishes by adding vegetarian protein sources, such as dried or canned beans and legumes.
A 400g can of red kidney beans costs about $1.50 and contains 240g of cooked beans, equivalent to 1.6 standard serves. Add a can of any type of legume (black, adzuki, cannelloni, butter, chickpeas, four-bean mix, brown lentils) or use dried versions that don’t need pre-soaking like dried red lentils at about $5 per kilogram.
This adds nutrients including protein, B vitamins, iron, zinc, calcium, magnesium and dietary fibre.
Dairy products are important sources of protein, calcium, magnesium, zinc, potassium and vitamins A, B2 and B12. Australian recommendations are for two to three serves a day for adults and four serves for women over 50. One serve is equivalent to a cup of milk or 40g cheese.
Fresh milk costs between $1.50 and $3.00 per litre depending on type and brand, while UHT milk is cheaper, about $1.60 per litre. It’s even cheaper to buy powdered milk ($10 per kilogram pack, which makes ten litres), equating to $1 per litre.
Making yoghurt at home costs about $5–6 per kilogram using a powder mix and yoghurt maker ($25). Once set, divide into smaller tubs yourself. Use as a substitute for cream or sour cream.
Fresh yoghurt varies from $11–$18 per kilogram, with individual serves and flavoured varieties more expensive (but not always). Compare per kilogram or per 100g prices and check for specials.
Cheese prices vary a lot so compare prices per kilogram. As a guide, block cheese is cheaper than pre-sliced or grated cheese. Home brand products are cheaper than branded ones. Mature cheeses are more expensive and processed cheese least expensive. But, if you cut block cheese really thick you end up using more. Block cheese ranges from $15 to $30 a kilogram, while packets of pre-sliced cheese vary from $18 to over $30.
Pre-grated cheeses range from $14 to $30 per kilo, with most around $20, and processed cheese varies from $10 to $15. Extend grated cheese by mixing with grated carrot (about $2 a kilogram) and use as a topper for tacos, wraps, pasta and pizza. Use processed cheese slices for toasted sandwiches. Most recipes work adding less cheese than specified.
A high-calcium alternative to cheese in sandwiches is canned salmon, but at $15–$30 per kilogram ($6–$7 per 210g can) you add variety but may not save money.
About 50% of household food dollars are spent on takeaway, eating out, coffee, alcohol, food-delivery services and extras, so have a budget for discretionary food items. This is where you can make big savings.
Your household might need an incentive to stick to the budget, like voting on which “discretionary” items food dollars get spent on.
Turn leftovers into tomorrow’s lunch or dinner. When clearing the dinner table, pack leftovers straight into lunch containers so it’s grab and go in the morning (or freeze for days you’re too busy to cook).
Use our resources at No Money No Time for ideas on how to help your food dollars go further. If you need food help right now, the Ask Izzy website can locate services in your area.
Clare Collins AO is a Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, HMRI, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update and the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brandon Michael Sideleau, PhD student studying human-saltwater crocodile conflict, Charles Darwin University
Shutterstock
Last week, a 67-year-old man was bitten on the arm by a saltwater crocodile at a waterhole in the Northern Territory’s Top End. Predictably, the incident has prompted debate over whether a crocodile cull is needed.
The incident occurred in Litchfield National Park at Wangi Falls, a popular tourist spot. The man was hospitalised with non-life threatening injuries. Authorities later removed and killed the 2.4 metre crocodile responsible for the attack.
Fatal crocodile attacks in the NT peaked in 2014 when four people died. The last fatal incident in the territory occurred in 2018 when an Indigenous ranger was killed while fishing with her family.
Despite the low number of fatal attacks in recent years, NT Chief Minister Natasha Fyles said last week the territory’s crocodile population had risen dramatically in recent decades and “it’s time for us to consider” if culling should be reintroduced.
This is an over-reaction to a fairly isolated incident. Data suggest the saltwater crocodile population in the NT does not need to be culled and their management does not need changing.
Getting to grips with ‘salties’
Saltwater crocodiles, fondly known in Australia as “salties”, are the largest in the crocodilian order of reptiles and can grow to six metres.
Hundreds of saltwater crocodile attacks on humans are reported globally each year. This, as well as demand for crocodile skins, has resulted in the species being eradicated from much of its former range.
The saltwater crocodile was once found widely across the Indo-Pacific region. Now, there are no saltwater crocodiles in several countries including Cambodia, China, Seychelles, Thailand and Vietnam.
Current and historical distribution of the saltwater crocodile. Green = present, yellow = possibly present, orange = extinct. CrocAttack: The Worldwide Crocodilian Attack Database
Elsewhere, saltwater crocodile populations declined dramatically last century. In the Northern Territory, crocodile numbers dropped to about 5,000 before a culling ban was introduced in 1971. The species’ numbers have since rebounded to more than 100,000.
In some areas, recovering crocodile populations come into conflict with humans. This can occur when, for example, humans destroy the species’ habitat or their prey becomes scarce due human activity such as overfishing and poaching. This can force the species to relocate, bringing them closer to people.
Saltwater crocodiles have long been known to enter Wangi Falls during the wet season, when the location is closed to the public. In fact, a 3.4 metre crocodile was captured there in January this year.
It’s never 100% safe to swim at locations within the natural range of saltwater crocodiles. However, Wangi Falls is considered reasonably safe for swimming during the dry season (May to October) because park officials survey and remove crocodiles before it opens to the public each year.
So what went wrong in this case? We don’t know for sure. The crocodile in question was relatively small: perhaps it wasn’t spotted during surveys. Or it could have just arrived after surveys were conducted.
A saltwater crocodile incident last week has reignited the debate about culling. Brandon Sideleau, Author provided
The current approach works
Following last week’s crocodile attack, Fyles said culling may be needed, telling the media:
I think it’s time for us to consider: do we need to go back to culling considering the significant increase in the crocodile population, and the impact it’s happening, not just on our tourists and visitors, but also locals?
These comments are surprising. Recent data for the Top End suggests crocodile populations are stabilising. And the rarity of fatal attacks on humans indicates the territory’s crocodile management plan is effective.
The plan involves, among other measures, removing problem crocodiles, raising public awareness around safely co-existing with the animals, and monitoring their impact.
Since 2018, the NT has experienced one fatal saltwater crocodile attack while Queensland has experienced two. That’s despite an average saltwater crocodile density in the territory of 5.3 individuals per kilometre – three times more than in Queensland.
This, coupled with data from outside Australia, suggests the frequency of crocodile attacks depends more on human behaviour and population density than how many crocodiles are in a given area.
In Indonesia, crocodiles killed at least 71 people last year alone. Yet the crocodile population there is likely small and recovering, based on the limited number of surveys conducted.
And seeing saltwater crocodiles in the wild is important to the NT’s economy. Culling them could damage the NT’s reputation as an ecotourism destination.
Lastly, culling dominant male crocodiles can be dangerous. Saltwater crocodiles are the most territorial of all crocodilians. When one is removed, other large crocodiles begin to compete for the newly available territory. This can present a threat to public safety.
The crocodile population in the NT does not need to be culled. Indeed, the territory’s current crocodile management plan is an example of large predator conservation done right.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter C. Pugsley, Associate professor, Department of English, Creative Writing and Film, University of Adelaide
While Christopher Nolan’s new film Oppenheimer is opening in much of the world this week, a Japanese release date has not yet been announced.
A delay in naming a release date is nothing new for Japan, where Hollywood releases often take place weeks or months later than other national markets.
Japan’s cinema industry is savvy enough to take a wait-and-see approach to blockbuster films. If Oppenheimer fails at the box office in other markets, then Japan may decide on a quick opening in a smaller number of cinemas. If it is the global hit the producers hope, it may open across the country.
Some have speculated the tragic history of events in Hiroshima and Nagasaki make the film too sensitive for Japanese audiences. But concerns that the film contains sensitivities to Japan’s past can be easily discarded by a quick glance through Japan’s cinematic history.
The Japanese film industry began in 1897, developing quickly through studios such as Nikkatsu and Shochiku. In the 1930s, the industry gained international attention with emerging filmmakers such as Yasujiro Ozu.
By the late 1930s, studios and filmmakers were drafted into the war effort, making propaganda films.
Until the end of the second world war, the Japanese government had been strictly censoring all films in line with efforts to produce this state-sanctioned propaganda. From 1945 to 1949, the US-Occupation forces set up procedures to ensure films avoided intensely nationalist or militaristic themes.
Japan’s film classification body was created in 1949 following the withdrawal of the Production Code. This gave Japanese authorities the chance to determine their own rules around film content based on themes of language, sex, nudity, violence and cruelty, horror and menace, drug use and criminal behaviour.
Japanese film was always quite progressive in terms of artistic licence, escaping the type of strictly enforced limitations found in America’s Hays Code, which put restrictions on content including nudity, profanity and depictions of crime.
Filmmakers in Japan had freedom to practice their art, so the pinku (soft pornography) films of the 1960s and 70s were the products of the major studios rather than underground independents.
These freedoms saw Japanese filmmakers absorb influences from Europe (particularly through French and Italian cinema), but saw significant content differences between Japanese and Hollywood cinema until the close of the Hays era.
Since the 1950s, censorship in the form of suggested edits or very rarely, “disallowed films”, has mostly been in response to violent or overly-explicit sexual imagery, rather than concerns over political or militaristic issues.
Japan is the third biggest box office market in the world, behind only China and North America, and cinema is dominated by local films.
While it can appear that Japanese cinema is dominated by anime and live-action remakes of manga and anime, it includes a rich array of genres and styles. The late 1990s saw a global appetite for horror films, under the mantle of J-horror. Films like Battle Royale (2000) and Ichi: The Killer (2001) created a new level of violence combining the horror genre with comic moments. Meanwhile samurai and yakuza films continue to find audiences, as do high-school themed dramas.
Internationally, the arthouse stylistics of films by Hirokazu Kore-eda, Kiyoshi Kurosawa and Naomi Kawase are feted at Cannes and Venice.
The war on screen
Many Japanese filmmakers have explored the second world war.
As early as 1952, Kaneto Shindo’s Children of Hiroshima directly addressed the aftermath of the war through confronting imagery then with a gentle, humanist touch.
A year later, Hideo Sekigawa’s Hiroshima upped the political ante with a docudrama critical of the United States’ actions in a film that included real survivors from the nuclear blast acting as victims.
The obvious metaphorical imagery of successive Godzilla films reflect fears of the potential horrors nuclear activities could unleash.
The title of Shōhei Imamura’s Black Rain (1989, not to be confused with Ridley Scott’s yakuza film of the same name and same year) referenced the colour of the acid rain following the nuclear blast in Hiroshima, and was recognised with some of Japan’s highest film honours.
Anime has also directly shown the damage wrought by Oppenheimer’s device, most notably with Barefoot Gen in 1983, and its sequel in 1986.
In the style of Astro Boy and Kimba the White Lion, a young wide-eyed boy, Gen, is caught in the horrors of the conflict, watching as his mother literally melts in front of him.
Summer with Kuro (1990) and In This Corner of the World (2016) each gave their own, less graphic, anime versions of lives touched by the conflict.
Foreign films about the second world war have also found an audience in Japan.
Alain Resnais’ intensely serious French New Wave drama, the French/Japanese co-production Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959), exposed the international implications of personal relations after the bomb.
Japan warmly welcomed Clint Eastwood’s 2006 twin-release of Letters from Iwo Jima and Flags of Our Fathers, which showed the battle from the views of Japanese and US soldiers, respectively.
Stories of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not a taboo topic in Japan. Of all the nations in the world to be banning films, Japan must surely be near the bottom of the list.
Whether there’s a release date or not, Oppenheimer must have the appeal to be a box office hit to determine its suitability for release in Japan.
Peter C. Pugsley 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.
On Wednesday, Education Minister Jason Clare released a much-anticipated report on universities. This is the interim report of the Universities Accord review.
The review, commissioned in November 2022 and led by Professor Mary O’Kane, has been tasked with creating a “visionary plan” for Australian higher education. It is examining everything from university governance, to research, teaching, international students and student wellbeing.
But one area of great interest is what will happen to the fees students pay to attend university. For domestic government-supported students, these are called “student contributions”.
The government and the review panel are also emphasising equity of access to higher education and the report suggests major changes to how university funding works. These changes would be invisible to students, but the goal is more people from disadvantaged backgrounds enrol in university and complete their degrees.
The interim report confirms the Job-ready Graduates scheme for student fees be scrapped. This was introduced in 2021 by the Morrison government.
It was intended to steer students to courses that matched labour market demand (such as teaching or nursing) or other national priority areas (such as mathematics and foreign languages). Student contributions for these courses were discounted.
Other courses, notably arts degrees, saw price increases. The cost of most subjects more than doubled.
But this does not work. Along with other higher education policy analysts, I argue student contributions only have small effects on student choices. The main practical consequence is some students will be burdened with HELP debts that take decades to repay, if they ever are repaid.
The accord review panel agrees, noting:
the continuation of these current arrangements risk causing long-term and entrenched damage to Australian higher education.
Narrowing the list of alternative systems
The review panel has delayed any firm recommendations on what will replace Job-ready Graduates until its December 2023 final report, but some version of a multi-rate system looks set to return.
So what happens now? One option is to reverse the worst of Job-ready Graduates, and take arts students and others affected by high student contributions back to their old rates. But this would be a disappointing response for a review supposed to come up with “big ideas”. As the interim report observes, a simple reversal would “cost in the order of A$1 billion a year”.
Some university interest groups suggest going back to a flat student contribution rate, where every student pays the same fee. This was the system between 1989 and 1996. Students in longer degrees would still pay more, but the annual fee would be the same regardless of course.
Without fully ruling it out, the accord panel says this “risks unfair trade-offs”. Indigenous, regional, low socioeconomic status and female students would all pay more on average than they do now. This is because they are more likely to take courses that are currently discounted under Job-ready Graduates including nursing, teaching and agriculture.
Other interest groups favour a system where student contributions are linked to expected future income. The interim report mentions this in a neutral way.
The interim report does not directly mention my variant of this, which is also based on expected future incomes and aims to narrow differences in HELP repayment times between courses.
This would require a greater focus on the total average debt a student accumulates before starting full-time work – recognising some courses take longer or are more likely to involve additional study.
My proposal would also take into account varying patterns of post-study income. Graduates of some courses can walk straight into well-paid jobs, while others take longer to find work and have lower initial salaries. These factors can have significant effects on repayment times.
More higher education opportunities
Two key goals for the accord are to expand the higher education system to meet labour market skill needs and to provide more opportunities for people from disadvantaged backgrounds. The interim report suggests a target of parity in participation rates between the general population and people classified as low socioeconomic status, living in a regional area or with disability by 2035.
This is very unlikely. As Clare pointed out in his National Press Club speech on Wednesday, school results for some disadvantaged groups have been going backwards in recent years. He has other school-focused reviews to address this, but the interim report cites no evidence such rapid change could be achieved in just over a decade.
They do, however, have many ideas for expanding opportunity. While short on detail, they propose a “universal learning entitlement” for tertiary education, including vocational and higher education. Currently anyone who meets university entry criteria is eligible for a government subsidised place and a HELP loan, but whether they receive it depends on whether a university will accept them.
The accord panel also suggest the funding rate a university receives per student might be linked to student as well as course characteristics. This already happens in the school system. Existing higher education programs distribute fixed amounts of money between universities based on their share of enrolments of disadvantaged groups. But this funding is not linked to additional teaching and support costs.
These costs are potentially very large. They would also require substantial revision of current definitions of disadvantage. Two equity groups – low socioeconomic status and regional – are based purely on geographic measures.
They are OK as rough indicators of broad trends in the sector, but they are well-known to misclassify the disadvantage level of individual students. To reach the people who need help, we will need more precise indicators.
What now?
There is a huge amount of work and debate to happen between now and the end of the year. The interim report calls for advice on more than 70 policy ideas over 150 pages. The accord panel and Clare say they are are keeping their minds open. In his National Press Club address Clare specifically invited critique and alternatives.
Submissions containing these – or offering support – are due by September 1.
Andrew Norton works for the Australian National University, which like all universities will be affected by policy change following Universities Accord recommendations.
He is also on a the Universities Accord ministerial reference group. This is an unpaid position. He was not involved in writing the Universities Accord interim report.
As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.
In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss Premier Dan Andrews’ surprise decision to pull Victoria out of hosting the 2026 Commonwealth Games. They also canvass the official yes and no cases issued this week for the Voice referendum, and Labor frontbencher Andrew Leigh’s strong speech warning of the excessive level of factional control within the Labor Party.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The cancellation of the 2026 Commonwealth Games by Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews took all stakeholders – Commonwealth Games officials, athletes, sports bodies and local government officials – by surprise.
The Andrews administration will likely deal with the political fallout from not honouring its contract to host the games, but there may be legal and reputational damage ahead.
The principal reason given for pulling out of the games was financial. The Victorian government has said that based on its projections, the costs had ballooned from the initial projection of A$2.6 billion to more than A$6 billion. Such an investment could no longer be justified.
There were hints earlier this year that a significant reassessment of Victoria’s commitment to the games was taking place.
In the state budget for 2023–24, delivered in May, the treasury admitted the risks to Victoria’s economic outlook were greater than normal. The state has a growing debt burden, with net debt forecast to grow from about $135.4 billion in 2024 to $171.4 billion by 2026–27.
These projections mean Victoria’s net debt as a proportion of the state economy would, by the time the games were to take place in 2026, be approaching 24%. This is also going to be an election year in Victoria.
Victoria’s debt is due in part to long periods of lockdown during the COVID pandemic, which necessitated significant public spending. In some senses, the Commonwealth Games could be said to be a victim of long COVID.
Other reasons behind the cancellation
Behind the financial reasons for cancelling the games, there were a number of other factors in play.
First, it would be far easier in financial, contractual and reputational terms to not honour a contact with the Commonwealth Games Federation than it would be to pull out of an Olympics or a World Cup. The revenues generated by the Commonwealth Games in terms of sponsorships, broadcasting, ticketing and sports tourism are a fraction of those generated during one of the other two mega-events.
Second, in a sporting context, the largest sports in Victoria – Australian Rules football, the football and rugby codes and cricket – will largely be unaffected by Victoria not hosting the games. Other sports such as swimming and field hockey, for which the games are important in terms of participation, broadcasting and commercial exposure for the athletes, are easier for the government to let down.
Third, the blowback from regional Victoria, which was to be the hosting hub for the games, will be softened by the fact that investment commitments will still be upheld by the government. Some $2 billion will be directed to social and affordable housing and other infrastructure commitments in the regions.
However, the issue for government lawyers as they deal with the ramifications of walking away from the host contract is that, in strict legal terms, all of this context is irrelevant to the other party, the Commonwealth Games Federation.
In signing a contract, the Victorian government was saying it was willing and financially able to host the games. And the federation had the legitimate expectation the games would be delivered, as per the contract.
It is very unlikely this matter will end up in court – it will almost certainly be settled through compensation to the federation for breach of contract.
On damages, Katie Sadleir, the chief executive of the Commonwealth Games Federation, said expected revenues would be taken into account.
There are a series of clauses [in the host contract] that articulate the kind of cash flows that would have happened if the games had gone on.
There are likely also to be discussions on compensation for the reputational damage that has been done to the Commonwealth Games brand and for the logistical nightmare of searching for a new host.
Commonwealth Games representatives are likely to question the government’s projections of cost blowouts and ask whether they had been exaggerated to provide cover for pulling out of the contract. The initial cost projections were in line with the costs of recent games in the Gold Coast (2018) and Birmingham (2022).
Plus, independent reports suggested the Birmingham games resulted in a considerable net benefit to the English Midlands region.
Moreover, the federation is likely to stress that what the Victorian government did is highly unusual in the history of mega sporting events.
Another argument the federation could make: it was the government’s decision to host the games in its regional areas (thus entailing significant infrastructure costs).
According to John Coates, vice president of the International Olympic Committee, this regional model was never workable without federal support. Now, the fact it proved unworkable is a loss the Victoria government must bear.
Reputational damage for the games themselves
There is no doubt the Victorian government is currently in an uncomfortable spot. Victoria prides itself as being the sporting centre of Australia. It hosts the Boxing Day Test, followed by the Australian Open, the Formula One Grand Prix, the AFL Grand Finals and the Melbourne Cup. There will be some collateral reputational damage associated with this decision.
In the longer term, the Commonwealth Games are also now in a confronting position. The games are not as popular or prominent as they once were. Although the Olympics can carry it off as a commercial juggernaut, hosting a multi-sports event once every four years is difficult to sustain with ever-increasing costs.
The sports world moves on quickly and to be blunt the appeal of the Commonwealth Games is struggling to maintain the pace. Even though the cancellation was a shock on Tuesday, the attention of the Australian sporting public was soon diverted to the next Ashes cricket test and the Women’s World Cup.
The inaugural edition of the Commonwealth Games – then known as the British Empire Games – was held in Hamilton, Ontario, in August 1930. A month earlier, the first edition of the men’s FIFA World Cup took place in Uruguay.
At the time, the events were of a similar magnitude. They are not anymore.
There is no doubt the centenary of the FIFA World Cup in 2030 will be a genuinely global celebration. The legacy of Victoria’s aborted 2026 Commonwealth Games may well be that the 2030 centenary edition struggles even to find a host.
Jack Anderson 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.
