Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Camilla Nelson, Associate Professor in Media and Journalism, University of Notre Dame Australia

Review: Jailbaby, directed by Andrea James, Griffin Theatre Company

Jailbaby – a new play by Suzie Miller – takes a steely look at what happens to an 18-year-old when his life collides with a criminal justice system that is bad and getting worse.

Jailbaby follows the phenomenal success of Prima Facie, which scrutinised the law’s failure to protect female victims of sexual assault. Following its premiere at Sydney’s Griffin Theatre Company in 2019, Prima Facie had seasons in London and New York, winning best new play at the United Kingdom’s Olivier Awards.

A one-time lawyer with the Aboriginal Legal Service and Shopfront Youth Legal Centre, Miller’s plays venture into dark places few want to confront.

This new play focuses on jail rape, a crime that is understudied, under scrutinised and underreported. It takes place in an environment where seeking help or speaking up has the opposite of the intended effect.

Read more:
In Suzie Miller’s Prima Facie, theatre finds a voice of reckoning on sexual assault and the law

A life of struggle

AJ is a wide-eyed teenager (compellingly played by Anthony Yangoyan). His mother (Lucia Mastrantone) is a recovering drug addict. His violent father disappeared long ago. They live in social housing. They struggle.

AJ has a long record of troubled behaviour, mostly property crimes, which has seen him spend time in juvenile detention. At 18, AJ is highly impressionable – even gullible – and under the thumb of some older, nastier criminals.

When he needs $500 to go on a soccer trip he thinks will transform his life, he chooses the wrong way to get it.

He imagines the “massive smart TV, MacBooks, iPad” he will stuff into a blue IKEA bag “like a Christmas stocking.”

“Ka-ching!” he thinks.

Of course, it doesn’t turn out like that.

Imagined sacred space

The courtroom of the public imagination is like the last sacred space in a secular society.

It is presided over by judges beyond the reach of criticism. People readily imagine a defendant’s case will be carefully considered; that everybody has a lawyer in a sharp suit who will make eloquent pleas and ask searching questions.

In reality, the lower courts are crowded and chaotic. A duty solicitor quoted in recent research paper likened the civil courts to a “zoo”. The criminal courts are worse.

Miller’s play rips right through this veil of illusion.

Despite his age, AJ fails to get bail. He is tried remotely via prison video link. The court appears as a tiny square on a computer screen.

AJ’s lawyer (Mastrantone) tries. But she is already disassociating herself from what she knows will happen. Perhaps this is just the way that lawyers cope.

AJ still thinks, by some miracle, he’ll get off with a warning. His mind is on his upcoming football training session. He doesn’t think the court will take away his big chance to change his life. But, of course, they do.

And in jail, AJ loses everything.

Incarceration in Australia

The back cover of the published script says the play pinpoints “the exact moment when it all goes so, so wrong” for AJ.

But that moment happened long before he took the jersey or the iPhone. It happened long before AJ was born, when politicians decided locking up more – and younger – people made them popular.

Even as the rate of offending in Australia has dropped, the prison rate has steadily climbed.

Read more:
Australia’s prison rates are up but crime is down. What’s going on?

Australia incarcerates a greater percentage of its population than China, Guatemala or the United Kingdom. The United States leads the world in per capita incarceration, but Australia has more people incarcerated who have not been tried or sentenced.

Children as young as ten are incarcerated in some Australian jurisdictions.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the most incarcerated people in the world.

Australian jails are brutalising. They ought to be a measure of last resort. But young people can be sent to jail simply because there are few diversionary programs in regional, remote or rural areas, or because rehabilitation programs may be full.

And it happens in the dark, because newspapers seldom cover the lower courts, unless a celebrity is on trial.

Lower court judgements are rarely published. On busy days, if you blink, you will miss it.

Some lawyers argue this protects the “privacy” of the accused. But when an 18-year-old like AJ is sent to adult jail, that kid has a lot more than “privacy” to worry about.

Read more:
The social determinants of justice: 8 factors that increase your risk of imprisonment

Ominous inevitability

Jailbaby is a high impact theatrical work. It contains graphic descriptions of sexual assault by straight men against younger male prisoners. The level of detail written into these descriptions is risky, but this raw brutality is the play’s strength.

Like a lawyer explaining legal proceedings to a client in the courtroom, Miller tells the audience what is likely to happen to AJ at every stage. This foreknowledge is horrifying, because it makes the audience complicit in the action as it unfolds.

Yet, ultimately it doesn’t quite come together. One of the story strands is underdeveloped, and the middle-class characters (whose home AJ burgles) often feel like uncomfortable caricatures.

There are 14 roles shared between three actors, and perhaps this requires a level of dexterity that contributes to uneven performances.

An ominous inevitability ties the best parts of the play together. We are left with a gut-wrenching sense that, for kids like AJ, the justice system has nothing to do with justice.

Jailbaby is at Griffin Theatre Company, Sydney, until August 19.

The National Sexual Assault, Family and Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) – is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.

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

– ref. The ominous inevitability of Suzie Miller’s new play Jailbaby: often, our justice system has nothing to do with justice – https://theconversation.com/the-ominous-inevitability-of-suzie-millers-new-play-jailbaby-often-our-justice-system-has-nothing-to-do-with-justice-209217

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Pears, Senior Industry Fellow, RMIT University

It made headlines around the world when the much-hyped Barbie movie contributed to a world shortage of fluorescent pink paint.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. When movies or TV shows become cultural phenomena, toymakers jump on board. And that comes with a surprisingly large amount of plastic waste. Think of the fad for Baby Yoda dolls after the first season of The Mandalorian in 2020. When the Barbie movie comes out this week, it’s bound to trigger a wave of doll purchases over and above the 60 million Barbies already sold annually.

Toys are the most plastic-intensive consumer goods in the world, according to a 2014 United Nations Environment Program report.

Worse, very few toys are recycled. That’s often because they can’t be – they’re made of a complex mixture of plastics, metals and electronics. When children get bored, these toys often end up in landfill.

The toll of the dolls

Consider a single Barbie doll. What did it cost to create?

Before the US-China trade war, half the world’s toys were manufactured in Dongguan, a city in China. That included one in three Barbie dolls.

American researchers last year quantified what each doll costs the climate. Every 182 gram doll caused about 660 grams of carbon emissions, including plastic production, manufacture and transport.

The researchers analysed seven other types of toys, including Lego sets and Jenga. By my calculations, emissions on average across all these types of toys are about 4.5 kilograms per kilogram of toys.

Scaled up, this is considerable. In the US, it’s estimated emissions from the plastics industry will overtake those from coal within seven years.

So the question is, how can we cut our emissions to zero as fast as possible to ensure we and our children have a liveable climate – without putting a blanket ban on plastic toys? After all, toys and entertainment add happiness to our lives.

Read more:
The marketing tricks that have kept Barbie’s brand alive for over 60 years

The role for toymakers and governments

To date, there has been little focus on making the toy industry more sustainable. But it shouldn’t escape our notice.

Toy manufacturers can – and should – use low carbon materials and supply chains, and focus on making toys easily dissembled. Toys should be as light as possible, to minimise transport emissions. And battery-powered toys should be avoided wherever possible, as they can double a toy’s climate impact and turn a plastic waste problem into an electronic waste problem. To their credit, some toymakers have cut back on plastic in their packaging, given packaging immediately becomes waste.

In a welcome move, the maker of Barbie, Mattel, launched their own recycling scheme in 2021, allowing buyers to send back old toys to be turned into new ones. This scheme isn’t available in Australia, however.

Toymakers can help at the design stage by choosing the materials they use carefully. Governments can encourage this by penalising cheap, high-environmental-impact plastics. We can look to the European and American bans on BPA-containing plastics in infant milk bottles as an example of what’s possible. Governments can set up effective recovery and recycling systems able to handle toys.

Some plastic-dependent brands such as Lego are unilaterally moving away from petrochemical-based plastic in favour of sugarcane-based plastic. But it’s not a short-term project.

While Barbie dolls had an uptick in popularity during the pandemic years – and will no doubt have another surge alongside the movie – longer-term trends are dampening plastic toy impact. While movies in the 1980s were often “toyetic” – conceived with an eye to toy sales – the trend is on the wane.

Gaming, for instance, has moved to centre stage for many older children. While gaming produces e-waste streams, it is also a likely cause of the longer-term fall in popularity of plastic toys.

What should we do?

If you’re a parent or an indulgent grandparent, it’s hard to avoid buying toys entirely – especially if your child gets obsessed with Barbie dolls after seeing the movie. So what should you do?

For starters, we can avoid cheap and nasty toys which are likely to break very quickly. Instead, look for toys which will last – and which will lend themselves to longer-term creative play. Think of the enduring popularity of brick-based toys or magnetic tiles. Look for secondhand toys. And look for toys made of simpler materials able to be recycled at the end of their lives – or even for the Barbie dolls made out of ocean plastics.

Read more:
How to find the most sustainable and long-lasting children’s toys

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

– ref. In a Barbie world … after the movie frenzy fades, how do we avoid tonnes of Barbie dolls going to landfill? – https://theconversation.com/in-a-barbie-world-after-the-movie-frenzy-fades-how-do-we-avoid-tonnes-of-barbie-dolls-going-to-landfill-209601

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deirdre McGhee, Researcher and Senior Lecturer, University of Wollongong, APA Sports Physiotherapist, University of Wollongong

In the to and fro of daily life, an accidental knock to the breast can hurt for a moment. But in the push and shove on the sporting field – such as the upcoming 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup – a blow to the breast can cause breast pain, swelling and bruising.

Coaches, health clinicians and sporting organisations don’t know enough about this silent, female-specific injury. And female athletes involved in sports like soccer or football need to be aware of the potential dangers. Our recent review paper outlines how risks vary as breasts change in structure and function over a lifetime – through puberty, pregnancy, lactation, menopause and following surgery.

Proper management of breast injury involves taking care of breast tissue during recovery and empowering athletes to make informed decisions about their participation in sports, work and leisure activities. First, we need to get a better sense of why and how often such injuries happen.

Leer más:
Long-range goals: can the FIFA World Cup help level the playing field for all women footballers?

Silent injuries

Breast injuries can happen to women in sporting and occupational settings – and from seatbelt trauma. They are usually silent injuries because although many female athletes experience them (some 50% of female college athletes in a United States study), as few as 10% report them to coaches or medical staff.

As a result, most injuries are not assessed or treated even though they cause symptoms that can last for weeks, negatively affect athletic and work performance and have long-term consequences, including:

• breast fat necrosis (or tissue death), that can result in fibrous lumps within the breast
• breast deformities and asymmetries from either the halting of breast development during puberty or the bursting of breast implants, with both requiring surgery if correction is sought
• damage to the milk ducts of lactating breasts that can affect breastfeeding.

Female athletes also suffer from frictional skin injuries from bras, and from breast pain associated with hormonal changes or excessive breast movement.

But injury does not cause breast cancer

One of the myths about breast injuries is an assumed link with breast cancer. Though an injury may draw attention to previously formed breast lumps or cause a new one, female athletes can be assured there is no evidence breast injuries cause breast cancer.

However, one of the long-term consequences of breast injuries, breast fat necrosis, can be challenging for doctors to distinguish from breast cancer. Female athletes must understand the importance of reporting breast injuries so they can be treated appropriately to minimise the risk of long-term effects.

To effectively monitor breast tissue recovery after a breast injury, female athletes also need to be familiar with the “normal” look and feel of their breasts because women’s breasts are not all the same. This practice of breast self- examination will also assist with the early detection and treatment of breast cancer, which affects one in eight women.

Leer más:
Australian researchers confirm world’s first case of dementia linked to repetitive brain trauma in a female athlete

Protecting breasts

As women’s participation in sports that have been traditionally dominated by men increases, greater awareness about breast injuries is needed. Sporting organisations like FIFA have a duty of care to educate their female players, coaches and medical staff about breast injuries and improve their management and prevention.

Although female-specific, breast-protective garments are commercially available, there is currently no published evidence that they can decrease impact on the breast. Many female athletes and workers wear breast-protective equipment and body armour designed for the male torso. These may not fit women properly. Further research is required to investigate how effective body armour and breast-protective equipment is and to improve their design and fit for the wide range of female breast and torso shapes.

For women’s football and other sports, there needs to be better injury surveillance and records. Doctors, physiotherapists and sports trainers associated with female football teams need to trained to assess and treat breast injuries.

Sporting organisations like FIFA have made progress in supporting and promoting women to return to sports post-pregnancy and breastfeeding. But it is equally essential women are aware of the risks of damaging the delicate and enlarged glandular tissue within their breasts and their breastfeeding capability.

What’s next?

More research is needed to know how frequently breast injuries occur in sports like football, how severe they are or how frequently long-term changes occur. Because the cause and type of injury will be specific to the sport played, injury surveillance in each sport is needed.

But greater awareness and education about breast injuries should not deter women from participating in sport because they can be treated. Female players have worked hard and long to have the opportunity and skills to be involved in football at the World Cup level.

We hope our review and future research can act as a catalyst for sporting organisations like FIFA to raise awareness, educate and investigate breast injuries in women’s football so they can develop evidence-based guidelines, management and prevention strategies. The goal of these should be to maximise long-term breast health, athletic performance and women’s participation at all levels of sporting competition.

Deirdre McGhee no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.

– ref. Breast injuries are common for female athletes. Here’s why better awareness and reporting are needed – https://theconversation.com/breast-injuries-are-common-for-female-athletes-heres-why-better-awareness-and-reporting-are-needed-208369

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wally Smith, Professor, School of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne

Most of us go online multiple times a day. About half of 18–29 year olds surveyed in a 2021 Pew Research Study said they are “almost constantly” connected.

How are we to make sense of this significant digital dimension of modern life?

Many questions have rightly been asked about its broader consequences for society and the economy. But there remains a simpler question about what motivates people across a range of ages, occupations and cultures to be so absorbed in digital connection.

And we can turn this question on ourselves: why am I online?

What are we doing when we go online?

As the American sociologist Erving Goffman pointed out, asking “What is it that’s going on here?” about human behaviour can yield answers framed at different levels. These range from our superficial motives to a deeper understanding of what we are “really” doing.

Read more:
Ever feel like your life is a performance? Everyone does – and this 1959 book explains roles, scripts and hiding backstage

Sometimes we might be content to explain our online behaviour in purely practical terms, like checking traffic routes or paying a bill. Other times we might struggle to articulate our reasons for going or remaining online.

Why are we continually looking at our phones or computers, when we could be getting on with physical tasks, or exercising, or meditating, or engaging more fully with the people who are physically around us?

The ever-present need to manage our emotions

As researchers of human-computer interaction, we are exploring answers in terms of the ever-present need to manage our emotions. Psychologists refer to this activity as emotion regulation.

Theories of the nature and function of emotions are complex and contested. However, it is safe to say they are expressions of felt needs and motivations that arise in us through some fusion of physiology and culture.

During a typical day, we often feel a need to alter our emotional state. We may wish to feel more serious about a competitive task or more sad at a funeral. Perhaps we would like to be less sad about events of the past, less angry when meeting an errant family member, or more angry about something we know in our heart is wrong.

One way to understand our frequent immersions into online experience is to see them as acts within a broader scheme of managing such daily emotional demands. Indeed, in earlier research we found up to half of all smartphone use may be for the purpose of emotional regulation.

Digital technologies are becoming key tools of emotion regulation

Over the pandemic lockdowns of 2020–21 in Melbourne, Australia, we investigated how digital technologies are becoming key tools of emotion regulation. We were surprised to find that people readily talked of their technology use in these emotion-managing terms.

Occasionally, this involved specially designed apps, for mindfulness and so on. But more often people relied on mundane tools, such as using social media alongside Zoom to combat feelings of boredom or isolation, browsing for “retail therapy”, playing phone games to de-stress, and searching online to alleviate anxiety about world events.

To some extent, these uses of digital technology can be seen as re-packaging traditional methods of emotion management, such as listening to music, strengthening social connections, or enjoying the company of adorable animals. Indeed, people in our study used digital technologies to enact familiar strategies, such as immersion in selected situations, seeking distractions, and reappraising what a situation means.

However, we also found indications that digital tools are changing the intensity and nature of how we regulate emotions. They provide emotional resources that are nearly always available, and virtual situations can be accessed, juxtaposed and navigated more deftly than their physical counterparts.

Some participants in our study described how they built what we called “emotional toolkits”. These are collections of digital resources ready to be deployed when needed, each for a particular emotional effect.

A new kind of digital emotional intelligence

None of this is to say emotion regulation is automatically and always a good thing. It can be a means of avoiding important and meaningful endeavours and it can itself become dysfunctional.

In our study of a small sample of Melburnians, we found that although digital applications appeared to be generally effective in this role, they are volatile and can lead to unpredictable emotional outcomes. A search for energising music or reassuring social contact, for example, can produce random or unwanted results.

A new kind of digital emotional intelligence might be needed to effectively navigate digital emotional landscapes.

An historic shift in everyday life

Returning to the question: what am I doing online? Emotion regulation may well be the part of the answer.

You may be online for valid instrumental reasons. But equally, you are likely to be enacting your own strategies of emotion regulation through digital means.

It is part of an historic shift playing out in how people negotiate the demands of everyday life.

Read more:
Why comparing technology to drugs isn’t simply a question of addiction

Wally Smith receives funding from Australian Research Council.

Greg Wadley receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

– ref. Why am I online? Research shows it’s often about managing emotions – https://theconversation.com/why-am-i-online-research-shows-its-often-about-managing-emotions-208483

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wally Smith, Professor, School of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne

Most of us go online multiple times a day. About half of 18–29 year olds surveyed in a 2021 Pew Research Study said they are “almost constantly” connected.

How are we to make sense of this significant digital dimension of modern life?

Many questions have rightly been asked about its broader consequences for society and the economy. But there remains a simpler question about what motivates people across a range of ages, occupations and cultures to be so absorbed in digital connection.

And we can turn this question on ourselves: why am I online?

What are we doing when we go online?

As the American sociologist Erving Goffman pointed out, asking “What is it that’s going on here?” about human behaviour can yield answers framed at different levels. These range from our superficial motives to a deeper understanding of what we are “really” doing.

Read more:
Ever feel like your life is a performance? Everyone does – and this 1959 book explains roles, scripts and hiding backstage

Sometimes we might be content to explain our online behaviour in purely practical terms, like checking traffic routes or paying a bill. Other times we might struggle to articulate our reasons for going or remaining online.

Why are we continually looking at our phones or computers, when we could be getting on with physical tasks, or exercising, or meditating, or engaging more fully with the people who are physically around us?

The ever-present need to manage our emotions

As researchers of human-computer interaction, we are exploring answers in terms of the ever-present need to manage our emotions. Psychologists refer to this activity as emotion regulation.

Theories of the nature and function of emotions are complex and contested. However, it is safe to say they are expressions of felt needs and motivations that arise in us through some fusion of physiology and culture.

During a typical day, we often feel a need to alter our emotional state. We may wish to feel more serious about a competitive task or more sad at a funeral. Perhaps we would like to be less sad about events of the past, less angry when meeting an errant family member, or more angry about something we know in our heart is wrong.

One way to understand our frequent immersions into online experience is to see them as acts within a broader scheme of managing such daily emotional demands. Indeed, in earlier research we found up to half of all smartphone use may be for the purpose of emotional regulation.

Digital technologies are becoming key tools of emotion regulation

Over the pandemic lockdowns of 2020–21 in Melbourne, Australia, we investigated how digital technologies are becoming key tools of emotion regulation. We were surprised to find that people readily talked of their technology use in these emotion-managing terms.

Occasionally, this involved specially designed apps, for mindfulness and so on. But more often people relied on mundane tools, such as using social media alongside Zoom to combat feelings of boredom or isolation, browsing for “retail therapy”, playing phone games to de-stress, and searching online to alleviate anxiety about world events.

To some extent, these uses of digital technology can be seen as re-packaging traditional methods of emotion management, such as listening to music, strengthening social connections, or enjoying the company of adorable animals. Indeed, people in our study used digital technologies to enact familiar strategies, such as immersion in selected situations, seeking distractions, and reappraising what a situation means.

However, we also found indications that digital tools are changing the intensity and nature of how we regulate emotions. They provide emotional resources that are nearly always available, and virtual situations can be accessed, juxtaposed and navigated more deftly than their physical counterparts.

Some participants in our study described how they built what we called “emotional toolkits”. These are collections of digital resources ready to be deployed when needed, each for a particular emotional effect.

A new kind of digital emotional intelligence

None of this is to say emotion regulation is automatically and always a good thing. It can be a means of avoiding important and meaningful endeavours and it can itself become dysfunctional.

In our study of a small sample of Melburnians, we found that although digital applications appeared to be generally effective in this role, they are volatile and can lead to unpredictable emotional outcomes. A search for energising music or reassuring social contact, for example, can produce random or unwanted results.

A new kind of digital emotional intelligence might be needed to effectively navigate digital emotional landscapes.

An historic shift in everyday life

Returning to the question: what am I doing online? Emotion regulation may well be the part of the answer.

You may be online for valid instrumental reasons. But equally, you are likely to be enacting your own strategies of emotion regulation through digital means.

It is part of an historic shift playing out in how people negotiate the demands of everyday life.

Read more:
Why comparing technology to drugs isn’t simply a question of addiction

Wally Smith receives funding from Australian Research Council.

Greg Wadley receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

– ref. Why am I online? – https://theconversation.com/why-am-i-online-208483

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

A federal Newspoll, conducted July 12–15 from a sample of 1,570, gave Labor a 55–45 lead after preferences, a one-point gain for Labor since the previous Newspoll, three weeks ago. Newspoll figures are from The Poll Bludger.

Labor’s gain came despite a two-point fall in their primary vote to 36%, with the Coalition also down one to 34%. The Greens and One Nation benefitted, with both up a point, to 12% and 7% respectively, and all Others were also up one to 11%.

In the last two Newspolls, Labor may have been unlucky in the two party rounding given the primary votes. This time Labor was probably lucky to get their 55–45 lead from the primary votes.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s ratings were nearly unchanged, with 52% satisfied (steady) and 41% dissatisfied (down one), for a net approval of +11. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s net approval was down two points to -13. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 54–29, up from 52–32 previously.

The graph below shows Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll since the first Newspoll of this term in July 2022. Newspoll data is from The Poll Bludger’s BludgerTrack. Points on the graph are individual poll results, with a trend line fitted using the statistical software Minitab.

Albanese’s net approval is well down from the over +30 he had in late 2022. It’s likely concerns about high inflation and interest rates have contributed to Albanese’s slide.

While Labor’s lead in Newspoll increased, it dropped in last week’s Essential and Morgan polls. Overall Labor continues to hold a commanding poll lead.

Support for the Indigenous Voice to parliament dropped again in Newspoll, with “no” to the Voice now ahead by 48–41, from a 47–43 “no” lead three weeks ago. Here is an updated version of the 2023 Voice polls by pollster graph that I first published last week.

Morgan poll: 54.5–45.5 to Labor

In last week’s Morgan federal poll, conducted July 3–9 from a sample of 1,410, Labor led by 54.5–45.5, a 1.5-point gain for the Coalition since the previous week. Primary votes were 35% Coalition, 34.5% Labor, 12.5% Greens and 18% for all Others.

LNP holds Fadden at byelection with small swing to LNP

At Saturday’s federal byelection for the Queensland seat of Fadden, the Liberal National Party defeated Labor by 63.2–36.8, a 2.5% swing to the LNP since the 2022 federal election.

Primary votes were 48.9% LNP (up 4.3%), 22.1% Labor (down 0.3%), 8.9% One Nation (up 0.3%), 7.4% Legalise Cannabis (new) and 6.2% Greens (down 4.5%). None of the remaining eight candidates won more than 1%. This was a dismal result for the Greens, while One Nation failed to benefit from the absence of the UAP (6.6% in 2022).

Analyst Kevin Bonham said the average swing at an opposition-held seat at a byelection that is contested by both major parties is about 1% to the opposition. The average swings in government-held seats are higher owing to the loss of the sitting MP’s personal vote. So the LNP outperformed the average.

In April, Labor’s gain of Aston at a federal byelection was only the second time a federal government had gained a seat from the opposition at a byelection. The two party swing to Labor at Aston of 6.4% contrasts with the small swing to the LNP in Fadden.

Read more:
Labor and Albanese gain in Newspoll after Aston byelection triumph

Aston is located in metropolitan Melbourne, and Labor’s upset win was a continuation of a trend against the Liberals in Australia’s big cities. The Liberals lost four Melbourne seats at the 2022 election, two to Labor and two to teal independents.

Fadden is based on the Gold Coast and is not part of Brisbane. While Australia’s big cities are trending to the left, the rest of Australia is not. Overall, the left trend in our big cities is favourable to Labor, owing to the high percentage of Australia’s population that lives there.

Read more:
Will a continuing education divide eventually favour Labor electorally due to our big cities?

Turnout at the Aston byelection was 85.6%, while in Fadden turnout is currently 67.5% and is likely to only make the low 70s.

UK byelections and Spanish election upcoming in next week

I wrote for The Poll Bludger last Wednesday that there will be three United Kingdom byelections in Conservative-held seats this Thursday. While the Conservatives won all three seats by large margins at the 2019 election, there has been a massive national swing to Labour since.

The Spanish election is next Sunday, and the right-wing parties (People’s and Vox) are expected to defeat the governing left-wing parties (Socialists and Sumar). The right is also ahead in New Zealand, where an election is due in October. The June Greek election was a disaster for the left.

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

– ref. Labor gains in Newspoll 2PP despite primary slide; LNP wins Fadden byelection easily – https://theconversation.com/labor-gains-in-newspoll-2pp-despite-primary-slide-lnp-wins-fadden-byelection-easily-209686

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Doug Drury, Professor/Head of Aviation, CQUniversity Australia

Anyone who has travelled by air in the past ten years will know how stressful airports can be.

You didn’t leave home as early as you should have. In the mad rush to get to your gate, the security screening seems to slow everything down. And to add insult to injury, you’re met with the finicky request: “laptops out of bags, please”.

But what does your laptop have to do with security?

The day that changed air travel forever

Airport security changed dramatically after the terrorist attacks in the US on September 11 2001. Before 9/11, you could pass through security with a carry-on bag full of everything you might need for your holiday, including a knife with a four-inch blade. Indeed, that’s how the 9/11 attackers brought their weapons on board.

After 9/11, screening processes around the world changed overnight. In the US, private security contractors being paid a minimum wage were swapped out for a federalised program with highly trained security personnel. Anything that could be considered a weapon was confiscated.

Around the world, travellers were suddenly required to remove their shoes, belts and outerwear, and take out their phones, laptops, liquids and anything else that could be used as part of an improvised explosive device.

This lasted for several years. Eventually, more advanced screening methods were developed to effectively identify certain threats. Today, some countries don’t require you to remove your shoes when passing through security.

So why must you still take your laptop out?

Airport scanners have come a long way

The machine your bags and devices pass through is an X-ray machine.

The main reason you have to remove your laptop from your bag is because its battery and other mechanical components are too dense for X-rays to penetrate effectively – especially if the scanning system is old. The same goes for power cords and other devices such as tablets and cameras.

With these items in your bag, security officials can’t use the screened image to determine whether a risk is present. They’ll have to flag the bag for a physical search, which slows everything down. It’s easier if all devices are removed in the first place.

A laptop inside a bag can also shield other items from view that may be dangerous. Scanning it separately reveals its internal components on the screen. In some cases you might be asked to turn it on to prove it’s an actual working computer.

With newer multi-view scanning technology, security officials can view the bag from multiple angles to discern whether something is being covered up, or made to look like something else. For instance, people have tried to mix gun parts with other components in an effort to pass checked baggage screening.

Some airports have upgraded 3D scanning that allows travellers to pass their bags through security without having to remove their laptops. If you’re not asked to take out your laptop, it’s probably because one of these more expensive systems is being used.

Nonetheless, amping up the technology won’t remove the lag caused by airport screenings. Ultimately, the reason these are a major choke point is because of the speed at which staff scan the imagery (which dictates the speed of the conveyor belt).

Unless we find a way to automate the entire process and run it with minimal human supervision, you can expect delays.

What about body scanners?

But your bags aren’t the only thing getting scanned at airport security. You are too!

The tall frame you walk through is a metal detector. Its purpose is to uncover any weapons or other illegal objects that may be concealed under your clothes. Airport metal detectors use non-ionising radiation, which means they don’t emit X-rays.

The larger body scanners, on the other hand, are a type of X-ray machine. These can be active or passive, or a combination of both.

Passive scanners simply detect the natural radiation emitted by your body and any objects that might be concealed. Active scanners emit low-energy radiation to create a scan of your body, which can then be analysed.

The kind of machine you walk through will depend on where in the world you are. For instance, one type of active body scanner that emits X-rays in what’s called “backscatter technology” is used widely in the US, but is banned in Australia and the European Union, where only non-ionising technology can be used.

Another type of scanner emits lower-energy millimetre waves, instead of X-rays, to image the passenger. Millimetre wave frequencies are considered to be non-ionising radiation.

Read more:
Air travel exposes you to radiation – how much health risk comes with it?

AI in our airports

AI seems to be all around us lately, and our airports are no exception. Advancements in AI systems stand to transform the future of airport security.

For now, human reviewers are required to identify potential threats in scanned images. However, what if an advanced AI was trained to do this using a database of images? It would do so in a fraction of the time.

Some airports are already using advanced computed tomography (CT) scanners to produce high-definition 3D imagery. In the future, this technology could be further enhanced by AI to detect threats at a much faster rate.

Hypothetically, CT scans could also be used for both humans and their baggage. Could this allow travellers to walk through a body scanner while carrying their bags? Possibly.

Until then, you should probably try your best to leave the house on time.

Read more:
What’s the safest seat on a plane? We asked an aviation expert

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

– ref. Why do I have to take my laptop out of the bag at airport security? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-have-to-take-my-laptop-out-of-the-bag-at-airport-security-209041

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Rowe, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Research, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University

The 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup kicks off this Thursday night, the first football world cup hosted by Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

New Zealand opens the tournament by taking on Norway in Auckland, while Australia’s Matildas will play Ireland in front of an anticipated 80,000 fans at a sold out Stadium Australia in Sydney.

Despite the persistent delusion of some that politics should be kept out of sport, it has always been suffused with political calculations and meanings. The major question is not whether but what kinds of politics will be played and by whom.

In the lead up to this tournament, world football’s governing body FIFA announced a suite of eight armbands that could be chosen under its Football Unites the World program. Permitted selections, in partnership with various United Nations agencies, include “Unite for Indigenous Peoples” and “Unite for Gender Equality”.

But notably, the OneLove armband associated with LGBTIQA+ rights isn’t among them. That was banned at last year’s Men’s World Cup in Qatar, with captains including England’s Harry Kane threatened with a yellow card if they wore it as planned.

Unlike in Qatar, homosexuality is not illegal in these host countries, but FIFA’s “extensive consultation with stakeholders including players and the 32 participating member associations” produced the same outcome.

Read more:
Why is the Qatar FIFA World Cup so controversial?

Among the latter are three African countries (Morocco, Nigeria and Zambia) where homosexuality is criminalised, as it is in stakeholders including Middle Eastern nations such as Saudi Arabia that are increasingly influential in football and other world sports.

Australia’s captain Sam Kerr has been deprived, to her regret, of the opportunity to make a statement with a rainbow-coloured armband.

But 44 players have taken the chance to cooperate with climate advocacy groups Common Goal and Football For Future to help compensate for the environmental impact of their world cup related flights.

Already it’s clear that politics will vie with passes and penalties as major talking points at the biggest sport event in the region since the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

Indeed, when the esteemed Brazilian team flew into Brisbane two weeks before the first ball would be kicked, their plane’s tail bore pictures of Iranian human rights activists Mahsa Amini and Amir Nasr Azadani. The plane’s body also declared, “No woman should be forced to cover her head” and “no man should be hanged for saying this”.

FIFA scandals and sports diplomacy

FIFA has an ignoble history of corruption, exploitation and ethical malpractice – despite its professed commitment to human rights and transparency.

The BBC podcast Powerplay: The House of Sepp Blatter excruciatingly details the disgrace of the former FIFA President. Just before Blatter was re-elected in Zurich in 2015, the world’s media were treated to the spectacle of FIFA executives being arrested and taken from their hotel under large bedsheets (Blatter then resigned just days after being re-elected).

His successor Gianni Infantino, the object of much mockery after a pre-Qatar World Cup speech identifying with the oppressed, promised to clean up FIFA’s act and reinvent itself as a force for global good. Promoting gender equality in and through football is one such aim. This world cup, both the first hosted by two confederations (Asia and Oceania) and the first in the southern hemisphere for women, seems perfectly to fit that bill.

Read more:
FIFA’s mirage of unity: why the World Cup is a vessel for political protest

It undoubtedly has significant geopolitical implications. With the Pacific region the focus of a contest for influence between the US and its allies and China, sport has emerged as a key bargaining chip. Money for sport aid, development and infrastructure has been flowing into the Pacific islands from all directions.

Australia’s Sports Diplomacy 2030 initiative has been especially keen on Pacific partnerships, not least in football as part of its “Global Strategy with a Pacific Focus”. The Oceania Football Confederation’s and Football Australia’s Legacy Plans frequently invoke the rhetoric of the Pacific family. At the world cup, women will be unusually prominent in the sphere of sports diplomacy.

Political games

The concept of sportswashing entered the popular lexicon quite recently to describe the use of sport, especially by illiberal states including China and Russia, to disguise their abuses of human rights and ingratiate themselves with sports fans around the world.

Read more:
Is Saudi Arabia using ‘sportswashing’ to simply hide its human rights abuses – or is there a bigger strategy at play?

While this is unquestionably the case, sport’s emotional power is harnessed by all countries, liberal democratic and otherwise, to project a more positive image than is generally warranted. This “feel good” global publicity, though, brings intense scrutiny far beyond the football field.

The two settler colonial countries hosting the 2023 Women’s World Cup still have much to redress regarding their First Nations peoples, who have called FIFA and their respective associations and confederations to account. The event’s “bespoke” Sustainability Strategy and its “key social, economic, human rights and environmental priorities for the current time and geographical context” will be thoroughly examined.

This world cup is a landmark event that will bring pleasure to many people. An important moment in the recognition and development of women’s football, Infantino has positioned it as a staging post on the path towards gender pay parity by 2027. In this respect, the amount commanded in crucial media (especially broadcast) rights has been less than encouraging.

But one thing is certain – this will not be a politics-free festival of football.

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

– ref. Penalties, passes, and a touch of politics: the Women’s World Cup is about to kick off – https://theconversation.com/penalties-passes-and-a-touch-of-politics-the-womens-world-cup-is-about-to-kick-off-209050

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Sievert, Research Fellow in Food Systems, Deakin University

Emotions can run high when the topic of how much red and processed meat to eat is raised. For many of us, eating these foods is culturally important – often tied to specific dishes and traditions.

That’s why this week’s landmark new report from the World Health Organization (WHO) is welcome. The report focuses explicitly on what the science says about how red and processed meat affects our health – and the health of the ecosystems on which we depend.

What does it say? Moderation is important. In high-income countries, we tend to eat too much red meat, which boosts the risk of some cancers and heart disease. We should treat processed meat, such as salami, with even greater caution, as the link to cancer risk is even clearer.

If you want a quick take-home, it’s this: eat less red meat, avoid processed meat and choose meat farmed under better conditions. But this is not always easy or affordable for everyone. So most importantly, we need changes to the policies that affect how our food systems operate so that our well-being and the health of the planet are prioritised.

What does the evidence say about red meat and our health?

Red meat is a rich source of many important nutrients, including iron, B-vitamins and all essential amino acids. These are compounds essential for human growth, development and good health.

Importantly, these nutrients are not exclusively found in red meat. Beans and legumes are also high in iron and B-vitamins, though in less easily absorbed form. Many cultures have developed healthy diets without an over-reliance on red meat by including beans and legumes.

In populations that experience food insecurity, red meat can be an important source of nutrition. In these contexts, it doesn’t make sense to advise people to avoid red meat.

But in other parts of the world, red meat intake is too high. Australians are some of the world’s biggest red meat eaters, which puts us at higher risk of chronic diseases such as bowel cancer and cardiovascular disease. Both of these are amongst Australia’s top killers.

Processed and ultra-processed meats such as ham and chicken nuggets come with even greater health risks, especially when consumed in excess. The WHO considers processed meat a Group 1 carcinogen. That means there’s strong evidence linking consumption to cancer risk.

The way we produce red and processed meat comes with a host of other health issues, such as antimicrobial resistance due to overuse of antibiotics, as well as the risk of new zoonotic animal-to-human diseases. Intensive farming done on industrial scales poses particular risks.

What does the evidence tell us about red meat and the environment?

Ruminant livestock need grass, which often means farmers chop down the trees or shrubs previously there, making pasture inhospitable for native species. In feedlots, these animals are often fed on grains or soy. Producing the volumes needed – of both animal feed and livestock – means felling more forests. That’s why we can clearly link increased livestock farming to damaged biodiversity.

There are issues on the climate front, too. Livestock production accounts for up to 78% of all greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Of this, cattle farming contributes 80%.

In Australia, livestock farming is generally less intensive compared to the United States. Even so, deforestation to make room for cattle is still a major issue in Australia. In the last five years, 13,500 hectares have been cleared for beef cattle operations in Queensland alone.

It doesn’t have to be so destructive. Mixed farming systems, where cattle graze on land covered by trees and native grasses, is less destructive.

So are farming methods built around agro-ecological principles where the health of the land and fairness are prioritised.

As global heating escalates, it will pose increasing challenges for livestock farmers (and livestock animals). Increases in extreme weather have major implications for animal welfare, farmer livelihoods and food security.

What does the evidence say about industrial farming?

Many farmers care greatly about the welfare of their animals and the environment.

But meat production in many parts of the world is now dominated by large corporations. To maximise production, these companies rely on intensive farming techniques such as feedlots and extensive use of antibiotics. These techniques are spreading as low- and middle-income countries such as China and Brazil gain more appetite for meat.

Industrial scale farming comes with real costs. If we can make meat production better, we will lower the risk of antimicrobial resistance and zoonotic diseases, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss, and improve the lives of workers and the animals themselves.

Read more:
Organic, grass fed and hormone-free: does this make red meat any healthier?

Knowing this, what should we do?

If we leave the situation as it is, intensive farming and red and processed meat consumption will continue to increase.

But this is not sustainable. To improve the health of people and the planet we need to change how we produce meat. And we need to consume more diverse diets. These changes have to be sensitive to the local context.

Changing what we eat must involve governments. Just as governments have a role in encouraging food manufacturers to avoid carcinogens or dangerous chemical additives, they have a role in promoting healthy diets from food systems that are sustainable over the long term.

What does that look like? It could be investing in agro-ecological farming practices, tackling corporate concentration of meat production, penalising antibiotic overuse and subsidising healthy options like beans and legumes. Taxing the riskiest meat-based foods, such as heavily processed meat, is another option.

Sensible policy-making may also help shift cultural norms in which meat is so highly valued.

Could we just swap red meat for different meat? It’s not that simple. The majority of chickens are intensively farmed, too, meaning antibiotic resistance remains a risk. Ultra-processed plant-based meats may also pose problems for human health.

A better option is to focus on minimally-processed whole foods (think brown rice, nuts and pulses) and sustainably-produced foods from animals. But we need action from the government to make these options affordable and convenient.

Importantly, the WHO report does not say stop eating red meat – it simply lays out the evidence about what it does to your health. It also points to ways of farming livestock that are less destructive and outlines ways to reduce our habitual consumption.

Read more:
Intensive farming is eating up the Australian continent – but there’s another way

Katherine Sievert received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council for previous work related to this topic.

Gary Sacks receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council and VicHealth.

– ref. Talking about eating less red and processed meat provokes strong feelings. That’s why this new evidence-based report is welcome – https://theconversation.com/talking-about-eating-less-red-and-processed-meat-provokes-strong-feelings-thats-why-this-new-evidence-based-report-is-welcome-209234

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marion Stell, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

In the lead-in to the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup, it is revealing to look back on the media coverage of women’s international soccer to measure how far attitudes have shifted for today’s Matildas.

Media coverage is important. It builds personalities, creates public knowledge, sustains interest, draws crowds, attracts sponsors and generates participation.

Since the 1930s, sports journalists have written articles about sportswomen for major newspapers. These articles record years of player dedication and hard work.

But not all media coverage has treated sportswomen with respect.

The first Australia/New Zealand match

Women’s international soccer surged in the mid-to-late 1970s. The first recognised international soccer game between Australian and New Zealand women was played in October 1979 on a Saturday afternoon in southern Sydney.

The day before the match, a small advertisement appeared on page 68 in the Sydney Sun. Accompanying it, the newspaper profiled only the male referee.

The crowd that attended the match numbered about 200. There were no sponsor banners, corporate boxes or grandstands. There was little media. No dignitaries addressed the crowd. No one remembers if national anthems were played.

The women filed out of the change room in ill-fitting, borrowed men’s uniforms. There was no official team photo. The controlling body, the Australian Women’s Soccer Association, sold a small program for 20c.

When football stalwart Heather Reid and I interviewed many of the players from that game 40 years later, their memories were hazy and uncertain. Even Heather, who had driven from Canberra to watch the match, could not recall specific details.

To fill the gaps of memory we sought out players’ scrapbooks – but we were uncertain what we would find.

Read more:
Long-range goals: can the FIFA World Cup help level the playing field for all women footballers?

Collecting the clippings

The leading men’s soccer player and Australian captain in the 1970s, Johnny Warren, amassed numerous scrapbooks filled with clippings, photographs, programs and fan letters.

Warren’s scrapbooks weigh more than 150 kilograms – more than twice his playing body weight.

We believed there had been little press coverage of women playing soccer in this era, and thought: how could women fill even one scrapbook?

What we found surprised us. It was rare for women not to have kept a scrapbook. Australian soccer captain Julie Dolan had a folder of cuttings related to her career, as did many of the Australian and New Zealand team members from 1979.

Here was not a dearth but a wealth of newspaper coverage.

But there was a sting in the tail. While the quantity existed, as I looked closely I found it confronting and unsettling. These scrapbooks contained newspaper clippings that belittled, trivialised and sexualised these women and the sport they played.

Read more:
Women sportswriters were critical to the growth of cricket in the 1930s. How have we gone backwards?

The sexist, underestimating press

The press coverage had recurring themes around appearance, fashion, body parts (especially eyes, legs and hair), sexual attractiveness, implied sexuality and general unwelcome sleaze.

Even a neutral match report would attract a sub-editor’s headline such as “Gorgeous goal getters” or “Fashion on parade at Australian titles”.

Captions to newspaper photos suggested their skills were more about dance than soccer. Press photographs were selected to reinforce this view: “Booted ballet”; “Shall we dance – cha, cha, cha”; “Remove the boots and these ladies could be doing the hustle, the bump or any of the other dance crazes sweeping the nation”.

Male journalists reported the women, although skilled, were “easier on the eye” than their male counterparts.

Players were asked to apply make-up after training for photographers. Femininity was emphasised.

In one article, New Zealand coach Dave Boardman rejected the label his charges were “butch types”.

“They are delightful young ladies,” he said.

The men involved in soccer played by women – the coaches and the referees – were portrayed in news articles as active and in charge. Their opinions mattered most to the press.

Player Pat O’Connor was one of the driving forces behind the growth of soccer in New South Wales, alongside her husband and coach Joe O’Connor. In one article about Pat, the journalist wrote: “Striker Pat has to obey her husband!”

When 24-year-old Bonnie Rae qualified as a referee, the headline read: “Bonnie gets all the whistles”.

AFL legend Lou Richards, commenting on the Victorian team, wrote he wanted “to have a cuddle with those pretty little soccerettes after every score […] I’d be quite willing to act as official trainer and masseur”.

The schoolgirls in the national teams were not spared. Jamie Rosman, just 15 when she was playing for Australia, was described as “attractive”, “leggy” and “dark-eyed”, “a gazelle” and “a model”.

Being in the zone

The articles in these scrapbooks are a toxic time capsule of sexism, misogyny and veiled homophobia. They remind us just how difficult it was for women and girls to navigate a safe space for themselves in soccer in the eyes of the public.

Good football players say they block out noise and play in a bubble – the “zone”. Is this the way the women also coped with the toxic media coverage of their soccer? Does this partly explain hazy memories of the first series in 1979?

When we spoke to the players about their scrapbooks, they recalled often feeling uncomfortable in their interactions with the press. Shona Bass said “I walked away with this unease about the way they had portrayed us […] it was almost patronising, almost scoffing”.

As the Matildas and the New Zealand Ferns move into hosting a historic home world cup, we can look forward to today’s media demonstrating a far greater maturity and higher level of respect.

Read more:
From ‘girls’ to Lionesses: how newspaper coverage of women’s football has changed

Marion Stell is an appointed member of Football Australia’s Panel of Historians.

– ref. ‘Gorgeous goal getters’: 1970s media coverage of ‘soccerettes’ was filled with patronising sleaze – https://theconversation.com/gorgeous-goal-getters-1970s-media-coverage-of-soccerettes-was-filled-with-patronising-sleaze-208953

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

The Liberals have retained the Gold Coast seat of Fadden, with a small swing towards them, in a result that will be a relief to Opposition leader Peter Dutton.

The outcome indicates that cost of living issues outweighed the negatives around former member Stuart Robert, which Labor hilighted in its campaign.

The result will be some concern to Queensland state Labor because the Liberals made crime an issue in their campaign and also featured Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk. The state government faces an election next year.

But the federal government immediately emphasised the swing to the Liberals was modest, playing down the result in a seat that was never expected by either side to change hands.

As of 9pm, the primary vote swing to the Liberals was about 4.6%, with a two-party swing of just over 2%. The average byelection swing against governments where the major parties contest is around 3.6%.

The Liberals went into the byelection with Fadden on a margin of 10.6%.

Before the result, Labor sought to set up a hurdle for the Liberals, saying they would need to get a swing of more than 4, to avoid embarressment.

The new member for Fadden is Cameron Caldwell, a prominent and long-serving local councillor. Dutton hailed the outcome as a “resounding result”, putting it down to cost of living and saying Australians were hurting.

“Labor’s economic experiment is failing Australians. Labor’s energy experiment is failing Australians”, Dutton told Liberal supporters.

Agriculture Minister Murray Watt, a Queenslander , said it looked like people in Fadden had largely voted as they had in the past.

But he said Labor was “conscious cost of living issues […] haven’t gone away”.

The Fadden win follows Dutton’s debacle in the Aston byelection.

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.

– ref. Liberals retain Fadden with a small swing – https://theconversation.com/liberals-retain-fadden-with-a-small-swing-209837

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

The Liberals have retained the Gold Coast seat of Fadden, with a small swing towards them, in a result that will be a relief to Opposition leader Peter Dutton.

The outcome indicates that cost of living issues outweighed the negatives around former member Stuart Robert, which Labor emphasiswed in its campaign.

The result will be some concern to Queensland state Labor because the Liberals made crime an issue in their campaign and also featured Premier Annastacia Palascszuk.

But the federal government immediately emphasised the swing to the Liberals was modest, playing down the result in a seat that was never expected by either side to change hands.

As of 9pm, the primary vote swing to the Liberals was about 4.6%, with a two-party swing of just over 2%. The average byelection swing against governments where the major parties contest is around 3.6%.

Before the result, Labor sought to set up a hurdle for the Liberals, saying they would need to get a swing of more than 4%.

The new member for Fadden is Cameron Caldwell, a prominent and long-serving local councillor. Dutton hailed the outcome as a “resounding result”, putting it down to cost of living and saying Australians were hurting.

“Labor’s economic experiment is failing Australians. Labor’s energy experiment is failing Australians”, Dutton told Liberal supporters.

The Agriculture minister, Murray Watt, a Queenslander , said it looked like people in Fadden had largely voted as they had in the past.

But he said Labor was “conscious cost of living issues […] haven’t gone away”.

The Fadden win follows Dutton’s debacle in the Aston byelection.

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

– ref. The Liberals retain Fadden, with a small swing to them – https://theconversation.com/the-liberals-retain-fadden-with-a-small-swing-to-them-209837

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Carson, Professor of Political Communication, Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy, La Trobe University

An urgent problem for governments around the world in the digital age is how to tackle the harms caused by mis- and disinformation, and Australia is no exception.

Together, mis- and disinformation fall under the umbrella term of “fake news”. While this phenomenon isn’t new, the internet makes its rapid, vast spread unprecedented.

It’s a tricky problem and hard to police because of the sheer amount of misinformation online. But, left unchecked, public health and safety, electoral integrity, social cohesion and ultimately democracy are at risk. The COVID-19 pandemic taught us not to be complacent, as fake news about COVID treatments led to deadly consequences.

À lire aussi :
COVID misinformation is a health risk – tech companies need to remove harmful content not tweak their algorithms

But what’s the best way to manage fake news spread? How can it be done without government overreach, which risks the freedom and diversity of expression necessary for deliberation in healthy democracies?

Last month, Minister for Communications Michelle Rowland released a draft exposure bill to step up Australia’s fight against harmful online mis- and disinformation.

It offers more stick (hefty penalties) and less carrot (voluntary participation) than the current approach to managing online content.

If passed, the bill will see Australia shift from a voluntary to a mandatory co-regulatory model.

Following an EU model

According to the draft, disinformation is spread intentionally, while misinformation is not.

But both can cause serious harms including hate speech, financial harm and disruption of public order, according to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

To date, research shows countries tend to approach this problem in three distinct ways:

• non-regulatory “supporting activities” such as digital literacy campaigns and fact-checking units to debunk falsehoods

• voluntary or mandatory co-regulatory measures involving digital platforms and existing media authorities

• anti-fake news laws.

The Albanese government’s draft bill will bring us closer to the European Union-style model of mandatory co-regulation.

Platforms remain responsible, not government

Initial opinions about the bill are divided. Some commentators have called the proposed changes “censorship”, arguing it will have a chilling effect on free speech.

These comments are often unhelpful because they conflate co-regulation with more draconian measures such anti-fake news laws adopted in illiberal states like Russia, whereby governments arbitrarily rule what information is “fake”.

For example, Russia amended its Criminal Code in 2022 to make the spread of “fake” information an offence punishable with jail terms of up to 15 years, to suppress the media and political dissent about its war in Ukraine.

To be clear, under the proposed Australian bill, platforms continue to be responsible for the content on their services – not governments.

The new powers allow ACMA to look under the platform’s hood to see how they deal with online mis- and disinformation that can cause serious harm, and to request changes to processes (not content). ACMA can set industry standards as a last resort.

À lire aussi :
Why public trust in elections is being undermined by global disinformation campaigns

The proposed changes don’t give ACMA arbitrary powers to determine what content is true or false, nor can it direct specific posts to be removed. Content of private messages, authorised electoral communications, parody and satire, and news media all remain outside the scope of the proposed changes.

None of this is new. Since 2021, Australia has had a voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation and Misinformation, developed for digital platforms by their industry association (known as DIGI).

This followed government recommendations arising out of a lengthy Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) inquiry into digital platforms. This first effort at online regulation was a good start to stem harmful content using an opt-in model.

But voluntary codes have shortfalls. The obvious being that not all platforms decide to participate, and some cherry-pick the areas of the code they will respond to.

The proposed changes

The Australian government is now seeking to deliver on a bipartisan promise to strengthen the regulators’ powers to tackle online mis- and disinformation by shifting to a mandatory co-regulatory model.

Under the proposed changes, ACMA will be given new information gathering powers and capacity to formally request an industry association (such as DIGI) vary or replace codes that aren’t up to scratch.

Platform participation with registered codes will be compulsory and attract warnings, fines and, if unresolved, hefty court-approved penalties for noncompliance.

These penalties are steep – as much as 5% of a platform’s annual global turnover if repeatedly in breach of industry standards.

The move from voluntary to mandatory regulation in Australia is logical given the EU has set the foundation for other countries to hold digital technology companies responsible for curbing mis- and disinformation on their platforms.

Questions remain

But the draft bill raises important questions to address before it’s legislated as planned for later this year. Among them are:

• how to best define mis- and disinformation? (at present the definitions are different to DIGI’s)

• how to deal with the interrelationship between mis- and disinformation, especially regarding election content? There’s a potential issue because research shows the same content labelled “disinformation” can also be labelled “misinformation” depending on the online user’s motive, which can be hard to divine

• and why exclude online news media content? Research has shown news media can also be a source of harmful misinformation (such as 2019 election stories about the “Death Tax”).

While aiming to mitigate harmful mis- and disinformation is noble, how it will work in practice remains to be seen.

An important guard against unintended consequences is to ensure ACMA’s powers are carefully defined along with terms and likely circumstances requiring action, with mechanisms for appeal.

Public submissions close August 6.

Andrea Carson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She has also received research funding from Meta Inc. Professor Carson is a member of Facebook’s global Misinformation Interventions Working Group.

– ref. More stick, less carrot: Australia’s new approach to tackling fake news on digital platforms – https://theconversation.com/more-stick-less-carrot-australias-new-approach-to-tackling-fake-news-on-digital-platforms-209599

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

For months, speculation has swirled about the appointment of a new governor of the Reserve Bank, a key position in the management of the Australian economy.

The present governor, Philip Lowe, has faced sharp criticism, especially over his prediction interest rates would be held steady until 2024, which proved wrong. It always seemed unlikely he would get another term.

Now the government has named his successor – the present deputy governor Michele Bullock. She will be the first woman to hold the position.

From the government’s point of view, it is a cautious appointment, signalling both continuity and change. Bullock is of the bank, but she will oversee the reforms that have come out of the review of its operations.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers joins the podcast to talk about the new governor.

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Treasurer Jim Chalmers on Michele Bullock’s appointment as Reserve Bank Governor – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-treasurer-jim-chalmers-on-michele-bullocks-appointment-as-reserve-bank-governor-209793

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Isaac Gross, Lecturer in Economics, Monash University

Australia’s next Reserve Bank governor, Michelle Bullock – the first woman in the job – will take office in September at a time when much of the bank’s work in fighting inflation will be done and its focus will be on changing the way it operates.

She is already the deputy governor, having been appointed to that post by the previous treasurer Josh Frydneberg in April last year.

Both Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese say she is the right person to implement recommendations of the independent review of the bank intended to make it less insular and more open to outside perspectives.

Yet, as a 38-year veteran of the bank, having joined in 1985, she could be seen as perhaps another insider.

But in another way she is an outsider, having been in positions outside of the core economic policy group since 1998 and only being on the RBA’s Board for the past year.

Read more:
Reserve Bank veteran Michele Bullock becomes first woman governor, replacing Philip Lowe

In those 25 years, Bullock has worked as either assistant governor or head of the parts of the bank that deal with the payments system, the financial system, business services, and the issuing of currency.

Not being part of the group that helped make the interest rate decisions for which the bank has come under makes her well placed to do things differently.

Michele Bullock was raised in regional New South Wales and studied economics at high school and the University of New England, graduating with honours.

She inherits an organisation criticised in this year’s independent review for being “insular” and vulnerable to “group think” and for encouraging mortgage holders to believe it would not be increasing rates shortly before it began a series of 12 near-consecutive rate increases in May 2022.

Why was Phil Lowe passed over?

Chalmers was keen to point out that the decision not to reappoint Governor Philip Lowe at the end of his seven-year term was in no day a personal reflection of Lowe’s work, thanking him

for more than four decades of dedication and commitment and service, not just to the Reserve Bank and not just to the economy, but to our country as well; Phil Lowe goes with our respect, he goes with our gratitude, and he goes with dignity.

Lowe’s work during the early years of the COVID crisis was indeed top-notch. He worked around the clock to keep the economy afloat during a myriad of lockdowns and shortages.

However the government clearly thought he was not the best person to lead the bank from here on, even though he had said he was prepared to serve. Why not?

Here are three reasons:

One is the mistake he made as governor trying to keep the unemployment rate high to reign in home prices prior to the pandemic.

Under Lowe, the bank adopted a deliberate policy of keeping interest rates higher than were needed to restrain inflation, leading to higher-than-needed unemployment.

An estimate by myself and Andrew Leigh, calculated using the Reserve Bank’s own economic model published in the Economic Record, finds this cost the economy more than 270,000 jobs.

Read more:
The RBA’s failure to cut rates faster may have cost 270,000 jobs

Another reason to deny Lowe a second term is the bank’s mistaken approach to forward guidance, which effectively promised Australian households that interest rates would stay near zero until 2024. This turned out not to happen, hurt many home buyers and damaged the bank’s credibility.

And yet another reason is that the review of the bank found a hierarchical work environment in which decisions were not questioned, staff were not listened to and agreement with those at the top was encouraged.

Lowe rejected several of these findings, which is why changing the culture at the top of the bank would have been difficult had he remained.

What’s next?

The big question facing the bank at the moment is how high to lift interest rates to reign in inflation and bring it back towards the RBA’s 2–3% target band.

Bullock and her replacement as deputy (to be announced by Chalmers shortly) take office in September.

By then it is unlikely there will be much to do differently. Inflation is on the way down throughout the world. This week US inflation fell to just below 3%, the least since March 2022. Australia gets its next quarterly update this month.

Read more:
The RBA has kept interest rates on hold. Here’s why it’ll be cautious from here on

On Friday the ANZ bank changed its view of the future course of interest rates, saying it expected no further hikes from here on.

It stressed this change of view was unrelated to the change of governor.

In its view, consumer spending was deteriorating, and much of the damage from the 12 interest rate rises to date was yet to be felt.

Whether or not Bullock faces fewer challenges than Lowe did, she is well placed to lead one of Australia’s most important institutions into the 21st century.

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

– ref. Meet Michele Bullock, the RBA insider tasked with making the Reserve Bank more outward-looking as its next governor – https://theconversation.com/meet-michele-bullock-the-rba-insider-tasked-with-making-the-reserve-bank-more-outward-looking-as-its-next-governor-209379

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Wilson, PhD Candidate, The University of Queensland

Drones are increasingly swarming our skies, capturing images, managing crops and soon, delivering packages. But what do the birds make of this invasion of their territory?

With strict animal ethics approval, we flew drones towards flocks of birds in Queensland’s Moreton Bay. We found many species were not disturbed, provided the drone was small and flew above 60m.

The exception was the critically endangered eastern curlew, which became alarmed and flew away – even when a tiny drone approached at the maximum legal altitude of 120m. But when the eastern curlew took flight, other nearby species were often startled, creating a domino effect that eventually caused the whole flock to take flight.

Drone disturbance can interrupt birds as they rest or feed. It can even cause them to avoid some locations altogether. If birds are consistently interrupted or scared away from their preferred habitats, they may find it difficult to eat and rest enough to survive and reproduce. This is particularly concerning for species such as the eastern curlew, which migrate thousands of kilometres to breed.

Read more:
This bird’s stamina is remarkable: it flies non-stop for 5 days from Japan to Australia, but now its habitat is under threat

Yet another threat to shorebirds

We studied a diverse group of birds typically found along coastlines, known as shorebirds. Heartbreakingly, their global population has plummeted as they continue to battle habitat destruction, sea level rise, disturbance and hunting.

The last few decades have been bleak for the eastern curlew, which is the world’s largest migratory shorebird. Research in 2011 indicated a population decline of 80% over three generations.

While drones are unlikely to have played a major role in shorebird decline so far, our results, combined with the increasing presence of drones along our coastline, indicate they could become yet another source of disturbance for these birds, many of which are already endangered.

Use with care

At the same time, drones have proven to be a valuable tool. They’ve been used to plant trees, deliver healthcare in developing countries, and have even proven useful for bird conservation.

Drones can observe birds in places that are hard to reach on foot, such as birds of prey nesting in tree tops, or seabirds feeding on tidal inlets. In some cases, they can even be more accurate compared to traditional ground-based survey methods.

Shorebirds spread out across vast mudflats to feed, making it very difficult to survey them on foot and identify critical foraging habitats. Our research has shown that, for certain species, drones may overcome this barrier, providing information that may be pivotal in arresting shorebird population declines.

Drones can be beneficial in many ways, but we must identify when and how drones can be used to minimise potential harm. In some locations, such as some Australian national parks, drone use is already prohibited or restricted. But managers need to understand how drones affect wildlife to inform these regulations.

Our findings provide clear-cut parameters around how much space to give birds to keep drone disturbance to a minimum. In most cases this is about 60m, but it can vary significantly between species. For the eastern curlew, we don’t recommend approaches within 250m, even with small drones.

The Moreton Bay Marine Park, where this research was undertaken, is the single most important site in Australia for the eastern curlew. Disturbing shorebirds within the marine park is an offence that can result in fines. The Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service has already used our findings to place conditions on research projects and media activities involving drones.

Sharing the skies

We recommend organisations with influence on this issue, such as the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and national parks authorities, regulate drone use near bird flocks – especially those containing at-risk and highly sensitive species.

We also encourage those researchers considering adding drones to their conservation toolkit to carefully evaluate the risk of disturbance before using them to conduct wildlife surveys.

By understanding how shorebirds react to drones, we can inform effective and efficient management actions. Regulating drone use near critical shorebird habitats will help us to avoid exacerbating population declines, while still allowing the use of a valuable tool, where appropriate.

Hopefully, through small steps like this we can arrest the decline of shorebird populations, ensuring we can continue to share our shorelines with these beautiful birds for generations to come.

This research was supported by The Moreton Bay Foundation and the Queensland Wader Study Group. It was conducted under strict ethical clearance with the purpose of benefiting the birds with the knowledge gained.

Read more:
Eyes on the world – drones change our point of view and our truths

Joshua Wilson receives funding from The Moreton Bay Foundation and The Queensland Wader Study Group.

– ref. Drones are disturbing critically endangered shorebirds in Moreton Bay, creating a domino effect – https://theconversation.com/drones-are-disturbing-critically-endangered-shorebirds-in-moreton-bay-creating-a-domino-effect-209391

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Musker, Enterprise Fellow (Senior Research Fellow/Senior Lecturer), University of South Australia

Ketamine might be better known as a recreational drug or anaesthetic. But there’s growing evidence for its use for people with hard-to-treat depression.

An Australasian study out today showed some positive results for people with treatment-resistant depression when they had ketamine injections.

But we don’t know if these effects are sustained in the long term, and there are other ways of delivering ketamine. There are also other treatment options for this type of depression.

Read more:
Weekly Dose: anaesthetic and recreational drug ketamine could be used to treat depression

What is ketamine?

Ketamine has been used as a powerful general anaesthetic for more than 50 years.

It’s also an illicit drug of abuse and is considered a psychedelic. Psychedelics dramatically alter some neurotransmitters (chemical messengers) in the brain to create a profound change in perception, mood and anxiety.

In early animal studies, ketamine led to increase in levels of certain brain chemicals, such as dopamine, by up to 400%. This led researchers to trial ketamine in humans to see what would happen in our brains.

Now, doses of ketamine (at those lower than used as an anaesthetic) are being used to help treatment-resistant depression. That’s when someone has tried at least two antidepressants and shows no improvement.

It is usually prescribed under strict conditions and observation that mitigate some serious risks, such as increased feelings about suicide in some people. So people need to be assessed and monitored not only during treatment, but afterwards.

But some clinicians have resisted using ketamine due to its potential to become a drug of abuse.

Ketamine is also used to treat other mental health disorders such as PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder).

Read more:
Hallucinations in the movies tend to be about chaos, violence and mental distress. But they can be positive too

How about this new study?

The research involved multiple centres across Australia and New Zealand and compared how well ketamine injected under the skin compared with taking another drug in treating people with treatment-resistant depression.

The trial randomised the 184 study participants into different groups – some receiving ketamine, the rest the drug midazolam, twice a week over four weeks. Neither the study participants nor those assessing the results knew who had ketamine and who didn’t.

At the start of the study, all participants had a clinical depression score of at least 20 (moderate depression) using a particular scale known as the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale.

The researchers then looked for a score of less than 11, indicating a shift from a depression to remission.

After four weeks, there was a big difference between people treated with ketamine (19.6% in remission) compared with midazolam (2%). Another, less-strict way of measuring outcomes is to look for a halving of the depression score. This had an even bigger difference (29% compared with 4%).

However, four weeks after the treatment had ended, there was only limited sustained improvement in symptoms in the ketamine group. This suggests treatment may be needed over a longer period.

Read more:
Do psychedelics really work to treat depression and PTSD? Here’s what the evidence says

There are other options

In the trial, ketamine was given via an injection under the skin, which is a low-cost and efficient option. But ketamine can also be delivered directly into the bloodstream via an intravenous drip. Neither of these two options are routinely available in Australia and New Zealand outside clinical trials.

A third option uses a different form of ketamine and comes in a nasal spray (approved for use in Australia and New Zealand).

Each option delivers ketamine in different amounts, and research into how these work in practice, and how they compare, is ongoing.

There are also other drug and non-drug options for treatment-resistant depression. These include:

• transcranial magnetic stimulation, which stimulates parts of the brain to improve mood

• psilocybin, another psychedelic drug that has just been given the go-ahead for use in Australia under strict conditions as part of psychedelic-assisted therapy

• psychotherapy (talking therapy) such as cognitive behavioural therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy

• changing some lifestyle factors, such as diet and exercise, or practising mindfulness meditation.

In a nutshell

Serious consequences of depression include suicide or a lifetime of anguish. This latest research shows promising outcomes for people whose symptoms are harder to treat. But this option is not yet widely available outside a clinical trial. Only the ketamine nasal spray has been approved for use in Australia and New Zealand.

There are also other treatments. So if your existing treatment is not working for you, discuss this with your doctor who will explain what else is available.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14. Beyond Blue provides the free resource A guide to what works for depression.

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

– ref. Ketamine injections for depression? A new study shows promise, but it’s one of many options – https://theconversation.com/ketamine-injections-for-depression-a-new-study-shows-promise-but-its-one-of-many-options-209591

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

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is the specialised cancer agency of the World Health Organization, has today declared aspartame may be a possible carcinogenic hazard to humans.

Another branch of the WHO, the Joint WHO and Food and Agriculture Organization’s Expert Committee on Food Additives has assessed the risk and developed recommendations on how much aspartame is safe to consume. They have recommended the acceptable daily intake be 0 to 40mg per kilo of body weight, as we currently have in Australia.

A hazard is different to a risk. The hazard rating means it’s an agent that is capable of causing cancer; a risk measures the likelihood it could cause cancer.

So what does this hazard assessment mean for you?

Firstly, what is aspartame?

Aspartame is an artificial sweetener that is 200 times sweeter than sugar, but without any kilojoules.

It’s used in a variety of products including carbonated drinks such as Coke Zero, Diet Coke, Pepsi Max and some home brand offerings. You can identify aspartame in drinks and foods by looking for additive number 951.

Food products such as yogurt and confectionery may also contain aspartame, but it’s not stable at warm temperatures and thus not used in baked goods.

Commercial names of aspartame include Equal, Nutrasweet, Canderel and Sugar Twin. In Australia the acceptable daily intake is 40mg per kilo of body weight per day, which is about 60 sachets.

In America the acceptable daily intake has been set at 75 sachets.

What evidence have they used to come to this conclusion?

IARC looked closely at the evidence base from around the world – using data from observational studies, experimental studies and animal studies.

They found there was some limited evidence in human studies linking aspartame and cancer (specifically liver cancer) and limited evidence from animal studies as well.

They also considered the biological mechanism studies which showed how cancer may develop from the consumption of aspartame. Usually these are lab-based studies which show exactly how exposure to the agent may lead to a cancer. In this case they found there was limited evidence for how aspartame might cause cancer.

There were only three human studies that looked at cancer and aspartame intake. These large observational studies used the intake of soft drinks as an indicator of aspartame intake.

All three found a positive association between artificially sweetened beverages and liver cancer in either all of the population they were studying or sub-groups within them. But these studies could not rule out other factors that may have been responsible for the findings.

A study conducted in Europe followed 475,000 people for 11 years and found that each can of diet soft drink consumed was linked to a 6% increased risk of liver cancer. However the scientists did conclude that due to the rarity of liver cancer they still had small numbers of people in the study.

In a study from the US, increased risk of liver cancer was seen in people with diabetes who drank more than two or more cans of a diet soda a week.

The third study, also from the US, found an increase in liver cancer risk in men who never smoked and drank two or more artificially sweetened drinks a day.

From this they have decided to declare aspartame as a Group 2b “possible carcinogen”. But they have also said more and better research is needed to further understand the relationship between aspartame and cancer.

IARC has four categories (groupings) available for potential substances (or as they are referred to by IARC, “agents”) that may cause cancer.

What does each grouping mean?

Group 1 Carcinogenic to humans: an agent in this group is carcinogenic, which means there is convincing evidence from human studies and we know precisely how it causes cancer. There are 126 agents in this group, including tobacco smoking, alcohol, processed meat, radiation and ionising radiation.

Group 2a Probably carcinogenic to humans: there are positive associations between the agent and cancer in humans, but there may still be other explanations for the association which were not fully examined in the studies. There are 95 agents in this group, including red meat, DDT insecticide and night shift work.

Group 2b Possibly carcinogenic in humans: this means limited evidence of causing cancer in humans, but sufficient evidence from animal studies, or the mechanism of how the agent may be carcinogenic is well understood. This basically means the current evidence indicates an agent may possibly be carcinogenic, but more scientific evidence from better conducted studies is needed. There are now 323 agents in this group, including aloe vera (whole leaf extract), ginkgo biloba and lead.

Group 3 Not classifiable as a carcinogen: there’s not enough evidence from humans or animals, and there is limited mechanistic evidence of how it may be a carcinogen. There are 500 agents in this group.

So do I have to give up my diet soft drink habit?

For a 70kg person you would need to consume about 14 cans (over 5 litres) of soft drink sweetened with aspartame a day to reach the acceptable daily intake.

But we need to remember there may also be aspartame added in other foods consumed. So this is an unrealistic amount to consume, but not impossible.

We also need to consider all the evidence on aspartame together. The foods we typically see aspartame in are processed or ultra-processed, which have recently also been shown to be detrimental to health.

Read more:
Ultra-processed foods are trashing our health – and the planet

And artificial sweeteners (including aspartame) can make people crave more sugar, making them want to eat more food, potentially causing them to gain more weight.

All together, this indicates we should be more careful about the amount of artificial sweeteners we consume, since they do not provide any health benefits, and have possible adverse effects.

But overall, from this evidence, drinking the occasional or even daily can of a diet drink is safe and probably not a cancer risk.

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

– ref. Does artificial sweetener aspartame really cause cancer? What the WHO listing means for your diet soft drink habit – https://theconversation.com/does-artificial-sweetener-aspartame-really-cause-cancer-what-the-who-listing-means-for-your-diet-soft-drink-habit-208844

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Sanders, Senior Research Fellow on Law and the Future of War, The University of Queensland

The AUKUS partnership between Australia, the US and the UK isn’t just about nuclear-propelled submarines.

It also includes an information exchange agreement related to a number of new advanced technologies. These include cyber capabilities, electronic warfare, quantum technology, hypersonics, artificial intelligence and autonomous military capabilities.

Although the partners committed to sharing these technologies and information, there’s a problem. The US has strict trade control restrictions that impede certain technologies from being easily exported to Australia, or sold elsewhere by Australian companies after being incorporated into other items.

The restrictions on military items that would fall under the AUKUS agreement are spelled out in the United States’s International Traffic of Arms Regulations (ITAR).

The controls apply to military and dual-use technologies, as well as the information and skills needed to build them – and they are important. The US has international obligations to prevent the proliferation of weapons and military technology globally. It also has domestic concerns about which countries can access US military technology and information.

Australian companies wanting to import US technologies on the International Traffic of Arms Regulations list need to meet certain conditions to obtain a license. This can include vetting their staff, limiting access to the information or technology, and agreeing to onerous monitoring and reporting requirements.

They could be exposed to US criminal laws if they fail to meet these obligations after being granted a licence.

Are changes to the US restrictions on the way?

Since the AUKUS agreement was announced, a number of American think tanks, export control experts and senators have spoken out about these onerous requirements.

They have expressed a need to make US and Australian defence trade easier so the AUKUS deal can work as intended.

In late May, US President Joe Biden responded to these calls. In a joint statement with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, he announced the US will take steps to amend its laws to streamline the sharing of technologies with Australia.

This change would deem Australia a “domestic source” in the Defence Production Act of 1950, alongside the US and Canada.

There is a separate proposal before Congress to give effect to this change. Named the TORPEDO Act, it would not only designate Australia a “domestic source”, but also ease restrictions for technology-sharing with Australia and the UK.

In addition, it would create a general license for the export, re-export or transfer of certain defence articles to Australia and the UK under the International Traffic of Arms Regulations.

Meanwhile, another bill, the AUKUS Undersea Defence Act, was introduced in June to facilitate the transfer of nuclear submarines from the US to Australia and the training of Australian personnel on the vessels, as well as proposing other exemptions.

Other experts have called for a US presidential executive order to give Australia an exemption under the regulations.

Whichever path the US takes, it could take years for any of these legislative changes to be accepted and implemented.

What would this mean for Australia?

The proposed change announced by Biden mirrors the exemption Canada currently enjoys with the US government. Canadian arms manufacturers and researchers can now access US technologies and information without going through the onerous licensing requirements under the International Traffic of Arms Regulations.

This would be a boon for the Australian defence industry, boosting our competitiveness in the global market. Trade to the US and Canada would be also be simplified, with much greater opportunity to export goods back to the those countries.

If passed, however, this change would not amount to an arms trade free-for-all.

US trade controls would still apply to any technologies not included in a pre-approved list, as well as to the trade of equipment or technologies beyond the AUKUS partners.

Other requirements, like security vetting and data protection requirements, would also still apply. Australia’s own export laws will also still be in effect.

Read more:
Fears AUKUS will undermine Australia’s defence sovereignty are misplaced

Does Australia need to change its own laws?

Although Australia has not exactly followed the American model of defence export controls, our system is quite similar. Australia currently requires licences to allow items or information on the Defence and Strategic Goods List to be supplied, published or brokered for sale to another country.

However, Australia doesn’t have the same ongoing monitoring obligations the US has. The US system requires that any sales to third countries of equipment containing US controlled technology are still subject to the stringent International Traffic of Arms Regulations.

This is meant to prevent a country from buying military equipment from the US and then reselling it to a third country, like Russia. Russia has been circumventing international sanctions by buying military equipment like this from third-party states.

Australia’s end-use monitoring is much more limited than this often-criticised feature of the US controls.

Read more:
If AUKUS is all about nuclear submarines, how can it comply with nuclear non-proliferation treaties? A law scholar explains

Australia also doesn’t have country-specific bans for the trade of defence items. Rather, each export application is dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Australia, for instance, has not replicated the US ban on selling semiconductors to China. This reflects Australia’s different trade policies and relationship with China, compared to the US relationship with China.

Because Australia has less stringent rules (in some respects), the US may expect Canberra to strengthen its regulations when it comes to trading technologies or sharing information.

The AUKUS Undersea Defence Act before Congress, for instance, proposes Australia would first need to be assessed as having a “comparable” export control system to the US in order to qualify for the proposed exemptions. What that means, however, is not clearly defined.

Australia is still drafting updates to its Defence Trade Controls Act to address a host of deficiencies with its export control system, including how to accommodate new technologies like artificial intelligence.

While the US expectations for parity in defence control systems are important, they must be balanced carefully with our independence to manage our own trade partnerships and build a sovereign defence industry.

One can surmise the impending updates to the Australian Defence Trade Controls Act will reveal exactly how this balance will be established.

In addition to her role as a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Queensland, Lauren Sanders works as a legal consultant with a law firm, advising Defence industry on international humanitarian law and weapons law issues. Any comments made here are in her personal capacity and do not represent the views of the Australian government or the Australian Defence Force.

– ref. AUKUS is supposed to allow for robust technology sharing. The US will need to change its onerous laws first – https://theconversation.com/aukus-is-supposed-to-allow-for-robust-technology-sharing-the-us-will-need-to-change-its-onerous-laws-first-206607

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christiaan De Beukelaer, Senior Lecturer in Culture & Climate, The University of Melbourne

A revised strategy to reduce global shipping emissions has emerged from two weeks of intense talks in London. It marks a significant increase in the industry’s climate ambition.

The revised strategy has been criticised for not being ambitious enough. However, the forecast growth in global trade and the world’s shipping fleet means the reductions required of individual ships are much greater than the overall greenhouse gas emission targets.

The new targets for international shipping are:

• reductions of 20% (from a 2008 baseline), striving for 30%, by 2030
• reductions of 70%, striving for 80%, by 2040
• net-zero emissions “by or around, i.e. close to” 2050.

We calculate the strategy will require cuts in emissions per ship of up to 60% by 2030 and as much as 91% by 2040. This means the days of fossil-fuelled ships are numbered.

Edging closer to limiting warming to 1.5℃

Global shipping emissions rank within to the top 10 countries for emissions. The industry should do its fair share in keeping global warming below 1.5℃.

Read more:
Global shipping is under pressure to stop its heavy fuel oil use fast – that’s not simple, but changes are coming

The revised strategy was negotiated at the London headquarters of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the United Nations agency that regulates shipping. Backed by the Science-Based Targets initiative, several Pacific Island states, New Zealand, the US, the UK and Canada had proposed emission cuts of at least 37% by 2030, 96% by 2040 and to absolute zero by 2050. (An initial strategy adopted in 2018 aimed to reduce shipping emissions by at least 50% by 2050.)

The revised strategy’s targets are not as high as those called for by the science and the most ambitious governments. However, they are still very stringent at a ship level.

Shipping volumes have grown by more than 50% since 2008, with further growth expected. Increasing numbers of ships mean average emission reductions per ship will need to be 54-60% by 2030 and 86-91% by 2040.

Before the revised strategy, IMO policy focused on improving the energy efficiency and carbon intensity of new and existing ships. These tools failed to rein in shipping emissions.

Climate Action Tracker’s most recent analysis concluded the “highly insufficient” initial strategy put shipping on a pathway consistent with 3-4℃ of warming. To estimate how the new targets compare – assuming the strategy’s measures that are yet to be adopted will be effective – they can be superimposed on this assessment’s current trajectories.

This shows the revised strategy still does not align global shipping with the emission-reduction pathway needed to avoid more than 1.5℃ of warming. But it does mark the beginning of the end for fossil fuels.

Read more:
Global carbon emissions at record levels with no signs of shrinking, new data shows. Humanity has a monumental task ahead

What are the strategy’s key elements?

The revised strategy calls for “net-zero” GHG emissions “by or around, i.e. close to 2050”. The term “net” leaves an unfortunate loophole for future use of emission offsets. It’s big enough for the giant container ship Ever Given to steam through. This ambiguity has been left for future negotiations to resolve.

Importantly, though, IMO member states agreed to set targets for emissions on a “well-to-wake” basis, covering emissions from both fuel production and combustion. Including “upstream” emissions ensures shipping decarbonisation does not shift emissions ashore. Being required to achieve these reductions will fundamentally and rapidly change the sector’s technology and energy supply chains.

Decarbonisation will drive up shipping costs. Developing countries fear the impacts will be much greater for them than for developed countries.

Small island developing states and least developed countries bear almost no historical responsibility for the climate crisis. They have called for
a “just and equitable transition”. So too have countries with large numbers of maritime workers, like the Philippines, as well as the International Transport Workers’ Federation representing these workers.

Read more:
To reach net zero, we must decarbonise shipping. But two big problems are getting in the way

To deliver a policy that both reduces emissions and supports a just and equitable transition, the revised strategy includes a commitment to finalise a “basket of candidate measures”, both technical and economic.

The technical measure is a fuel standard that ratchets down the permissible emission intensity of fuels over time. This proved uncontroversial.

The “candidate” economic measures to price emissions did not all get broad support. For example, a mandatory universal emissions levy – proposed by the Marshall Islands and the Solomon Islands – was strongly opposed by countries like China, Brazil and Argentina for fear it might harm their exports.

Many “small island developing states” and “least developed countries” backed a levy. They see it as the most environmentally effective companion to a fuel standard. A price on emissions will speed up the transition, while revenues from the levy can be used to support a just and equitable transition.

As a result of these political differences, more work needs to be done to resolve the specifics of the emissions pricing mechanism.

Read more:
Marshall Islands, a nation at the heart of global shipping, fights for climate justice

Strategy is still a work in progress

The message to industry is crystal clear: the commercial competitiveness of fossil-fuel-driven ships, and demand for them, will dwindle rapidly with almost a full phasing out by the 2040s. During this rapid transition, shipping firms will have to very carefully manage the liabilities and risks of existing investments and formulate ways to maximise opportunities and market share.

Pressure from Pacific Island states and increased public scrutiny forced IMO member states to commit to higher levels of ambition than many had wanted to accept. Continued pressure will be needed, though, to ensure the measures adopted deliver on the ambition of the IMO strategy.

Before member states adopt any of these measures, the UN Conference
on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) will model the expected impacts on states. Some countries may then fight hard to block or reduce the effect of measures that have “disproportionate negative impacts”.

The final “basket of measures” won’t be adopted until 2025 when their details are finalised. They will become legally binding when the strategy comes into force in 2027.

In sum, the revised strategy is a modest win, but the battle is far from over.

Christiaan De Beukelaer receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the ClimateWorks Foundation.

Tristan Smith owns shares in UMAS International, that working alongside UCL Energy Institute, provides advisory services on the subject of maritime decarbonisation. My research group is recipient of research funding from UKRI, Climateworks Foundation and Quadratue Climate Foundation. I am on the advisory board of the Global Maritime Forum, and the Strategy Board of the Getting to Zero Coalition – not for profit structures that work across governments and industry stakeholders on maritime decarbonisation.

– ref. Why the shipping industry’s increased climate ambition spells the end for its fossil fuel use – https://theconversation.com/why-the-shipping-industrys-increased-climate-ambition-spells-the-end-for-its-fossil-fuel-use-209321

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

The government has appointed Michele Bullock the new governor of the Reserve Bank – the first woman to occupy the post.

Bullock, currently deputy governor, replaces Philip Lowe, who has weathered strong criticism, including from within Labor, during sustained rises in interest rates.

Bullock’s appointment was announced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers at a joint news conference, after cabinet ticked off on Chalmers’ recommendation.

Chalmers said:

Michele is an outstanding economist, but also an accomplished and respected leader. Her appointment best combines experience and expertise with a fresh leadership perspective at the Reserve Bank as well.

He said Bullock was “fiercely independent.”

Bullock has worked for the bank for nearly 40 years.

The announcement comes after months of speculation about Lowe’s future. The shortlist included treasury secretary Steven Kennedy and finance department secretary Jenny Wilkinson.

Lowe’s term, which started in 2016, runs out in September.

He made it clear as recently as this week that he would like another term. But this never seemed likely in view of the criticisms of him and the fact the government wanted a fresh face to oversee the extensive reforms of the bank following the recent review.

These changes will see two boards replace the present one, with interest rates to be set by a more specialist board.

The main criticisms of Lowe have been his inaccurate prediction that rates would not rise before 2024, and (by some) that the bank was too slow in starting to put them up.

Among the public, with people suffering acute cost of living pressures, he became the face of mortgage pain. There have been a dozen rises in something over a year.

Lowe has been adamant that rates must rise as high as necessary to deal with inflation. The Reserve Bank paused the cash rate this month, but Lowe made it clear rates could go higher if necessary.

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

– ref. Reserve Bank veteran Michele Bullock becomes first woman governor, replacing Philip Lowe – https://theconversation.com/reserve-bank-veteran-michele-bullock-becomes-first-woman-governor-replacing-philip-lowe-209785

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kovi Rose, Astrophysics PhD Candidate, University of Sydney

We have identified the coldest star ever found to produce radio waves – a brown dwarf too small to be a regular star and too massive to be a planet.

Our findings, published today in the Astrophysical Journal, detail the detection of pulsed radio emission from this star, called WISE J0623.

Despite being roughly the same size as Jupiter, this dwarf star has a magnetic field much more powerful than our Sun’s. It’s joining the ranks of just a small handful of known ultra-cool dwarfs that generate repeating radio bursts.

Making waves with radio stars

With over 100 billion stars in our Milky Way galaxy, it might surprise you astronomers have detected radio waves from fewer than 1,000 of them. One reason is because radio waves and optical light are generated by different physical processes.

Unlike the thermal (heat) radiation coming from the hot outer layer of a star, radio emission is the result of particles called electrons speeding up and interacting with magnetised gas around the star.

Because of this we can use the radio emission to learn about the atmospheres and magnetic fields of stars, which ultimately could tell us more about the potential for life to survive on any planets that orbit them.

Read more:
The Webb telescope has released its very first exoplanet image – here’s what we can learn from it

Another factor is the sensitivity of radio telescopes which, historically, could only detect sources that were very bright.

Most of the detections of stars with radio telescopes over the past few decades have been flares from highly active stars or energetic bursts from the interaction of binary (two) star systems. But with the improved sensitivity and coverage of new radio telescopes, we can detect less luminous stars such as cool brown dwarfs.

WISE J0623 has a temperature of around 700 Kelvin. That’s equivalent to 420℃ or about the same temperature as a commercial pizza oven – pretty hot by human standards, but quite cold for a star.

These cool brown dwarfs can’t sustain the levels of atmospheric activity that generates radio emission in hotter stars, making stars like WISE J0623 harder for radio astronomers to find.

How did we find the coolest radio star?

This is where the new Australian SKA Pathfinder radio telescope comes in. This is located at Inyarrimanha Ilgari Bundara, the CSIRO Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory in Western Australia, and has an array of 36 antennas, each 12 metres in diameter.

The telescope can see large regions of the sky in a single observation and has already surveyed nearly 90% of it. From this survey we have identified close to three million radio sources, most of which are active galactic nuclei – black holes at the centres of distant galaxies.

So how do we tell which of these millions of sources are radio stars? One way is to look for something called “circularly polarised radio emission”.

Radio waves, like other electromagnetic radiation, oscillate as they move through space. Circular polarisation occurs when the electric field of the wave rotates in a spiralling or corkscrew motion as it propagates.

For our search we used the fact that the only astronomical objects known to emit a significant fraction of circularly polarised light are stars and pulsars (rotating neutron stars).

By selecting only highly circularly polarised radio sources from an earlier survey of the sky, we found WISE J0623. You can see using the slider in the figure above that once you switch to polarised light, there is only one object visible.

What does this discovery mean?

Was the radio emission from this star some rare one-off event that happened during our 15 minute observation? Or could we detect it again?

Previous research has shown that radio emission detected from other cool brown dwarfs was tied to their magnetic fields and generally repeated at the same rate as the star rotates.

To investigate this we did follow-up observations with CSIRO’s Australian Telescope Compact Array, and with the MeerKAT telescope operated by the South African Radio Astronomy Observatory.

These new observations showed that every 1.9 hours there were two bright, circularly polarised bursts from WISE J0623 followed by a half an hour delay before the next pair of bursts.

WISE J0623 is the coolest brown dwarf detected via radio waves and is the first case of persistent radio pulsations. Using this same search method, we expect future surveys to detect even cooler brown dwarfs.

Studying these missing link dwarf stars will help improve our understanding of stellar evolution and how giant exoplanets (planets in other solar systems) develop magnetic fields.

We acknowledge the Wajarri Yamatji as the traditional owners of the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory site where Australian SKA Pathfinder is located, and the Gomeroi people as the traditional owners of the Australian Telescope Compact Array site.

Tara Murphy works for the University of Sydney and receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

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

– ref. We’ve detected a star barely hotter than a pizza oven – the coldest ever found to emit radio waves – https://theconversation.com/weve-detected-a-star-barely-hotter-than-a-pizza-oven-the-coldest-ever-found-to-emit-radio-waves-207830

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Wallace, Professor, School of Politics Economics & Society, Faculty of Business Government & Law, University of Canberra

The robodebt royal commission revelations have triggered revulsion in all fair-minded Australians.

They’ve also stimulated a critically important national conversation about what could be going on in Australian government, including in the Australian Public Service (APS), that such a thing was even possible.

For 40 years now, without most Australians realising it, the APS has operated under a different philosophy from its foundational one at Federation. In a few key respects, it was subjected to significant system change.

The question facing the Albanese government now is how to change the system to make “frank and fearless advice” the norm in the APS again, in a way that doesn’t rely on the weak options of exhortation and individual courage.

A quick history tour of public service system design helps identify a robust path forward.

Read more:
Robodebt royal commissioner makes multiple referrals for prosecution, condemning scheme as ‘crude and cruel’

The British civil service in the middle of the 19th century was massively underperforming, not least because it was riddled with patronage appointments.

The imperial Chinese civil service, which recruited on merit via examination and with career-long employment, was seen to produce much better quality advice.

In 1854, the Northcote-Trevelyan Report successfully recommended the adoption of the same kind of approach in Britain, and what we know as the Westminster-style public service was born.

The British state has changed in several respects since. But as British historian Peter Hennessy has said, that ethic has survived as a “kind of gold standard”.

And my friends in the bureaucracy branch of the international management consultancy trade tell me that this is what ministers and officials in recently de-tyrannized nations seek most avidly -– the secret of an uncorrupt, rational, politically clean Civil Service, something they believe the British specially, if not uniquely, possess.

The British system was emulated here at Federation, and served Australia well.

However, the election of the Thatcher government in Britain in 1979, coinciding with the rise of “econocrats” in the senior echelons of government departments, led to a “private sector good, public sector bad” ethos coming to dominate globally.

Its public service manifestation is known as “managerialism”, or “new public management”. It eliminated key design features of the Westminster-style public service and made it operate more and more like a private company. Contract employment for APS secretaries and many senior executive service (SES) officials was a – arguably the – key change. Like their private sector counterparts, these contract officials can now be fired essentially at will.

In 1983, the APS had departmental secretaries on far lower salaries relative to today’s. But they could nevertheless afford to give frank and fearless advice because they had secure positions and good superannuation.

Back then, bureaucrats knew not everything important could be measured. The service was free of private sector-style performance pay and key performance indicators (KPIs), neither of which have been shown to produce better outcomes than the previous system which lacked them.

The APS in 1983 was staffed by career public servants proud of working in, and only in, the public interest. It was not staffed with high-end precariat officials on contract wondering if and when they might need to ask the big seven consulting, accounting and advisory firms for a job should they fall out of favour with the minister. The “revolving door” between the APS and consulting firms didn’t exist then because it simply wasn’t needed.

The mooted benefits of managerialism were more efficient (cheaper) outputs from a “responsive” (compliant) and streamlined (smaller) APS. Have those mooted gains been made? And, if so, have they offset the accumulating and recently prominent costs of compromised advice?

The public servant who actually ended robodebt when Minister Stuart Robert would not, former Department of Human Services Secretary Renée Leon, describes “a strange, twilight version of ‘smaller government’” under the nine years of Coalition government from 2013 to 2022.

The scale of government spending, and hence government’s role and outputs, increased rather than decreased […] The Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments had spent as much, or more, on programs and activities, but increasingly administered their outputs via private-sector means rather than the APS.

Within weeks of ending robodebt, Leon was sacked by the Morrison government. She was just the latest in a long list of examples of Coalition governments harnessing Hawke and Keating government changes from the 1980s and 1990s, originally made in the interest of “responsiveness” but used by the Coalition to ensure compliance.

After winning the 2019 election, Morrison gathered departmental secretaries together and warned them against “providing a detached or dispassionate summary of the risks that can be logged in the ‘told you so’ file”. In other words, don’t write anything down that might embarrass ministers later.

The “no fingerprints” policy this represents enabled ministers to skirt their full share of public opprobrium for robodebt and other integrity breaches like the Morrison “multiple ministries” scandal. And they’re just the ones we know about. As Leon has commented:

The increasingly overt agenda of recent conservative governments to reduce the role and undermine the capacity of the public service has morphed from a preference for small government and light regulation to a concerted effort to limit evidence and expertise as the basis for government action, with significant implications for effective governance and public trust.

Public servants understood, and understand still, that their job is to advise on and implement, but not decide, policy. That’s the job of ministers in the government of the day.

That’s why many public servants have been and remain mystified by the drive for a more “responsive” public service via managerialist changes made since the 1980s.

Ministers are the major beneficiaries of frank and fearless advice, which they’re free to accept or reject. So why was managerialist change necessary at all?

Read more:
Explainer: what is the ‘tort of misfeasance’ and how might it apply in the case of robodebt?

Today’s APS leaders have risen in, and in some cases been active architects, promoters and beneficiaries of, the managerialist shift that innocently paved the way for public sector erosion.

Fixing it will require exceptional vision at the summit of the APS. It will need to fully account for what’s been lost in the managerialist era, and acknowledge that the emulation of corporate models and processes is not the best or only way to achieve public service goals, as history shows.

Cultures shape systems; thereafter, systems shape cultures.

If there is an obvious place to start, it’s re-establishing tenure for departmental secretaries, and converting SES officials on contracts to continuing employment.

This is one simple, clear, powerful, doable system change. It can replace a negative feedback loop promoting compliance with a positive feedback loop making frank and fearless advice the powerful default response again. In the public interest.

Chris Wallace has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. After robodebt, here’s how Australia can have a truly ‘frank and fearless’ public service again – https://theconversation.com/after-robodebt-heres-how-australia-can-have-a-truly-frank-and-fearless-public-service-again-209488

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caitlan McLean, PhD Candidate, Torrens University Australia

Housework is rarely split evenly, for lots of different reasons. Sometimes it’s tied to who has more time at home or more physical capacity, but most of the time it is linked to gender and gender roles.

A significant body of research has looked at how heterosexual couples divide housework, so we decided to look more closely at the housework experiences of people in same-gender couples.

Our study, published today in the journal PLOS One, involved interviews with 16 same-gender couples with no children. Specifically, we wanted to know how these couples handled division of “cognitive labour”, also known as the “mental load”.

That’s the often-invisible “project-manager” work of running a household – things like organising bills, scheduling appointments, remembering birthdays and anniversaries, keeping track of house maintenance, writing the grocery list, keeping stock of the fridge and planning meals.

In heterosexual couples, the burden of the mental load falls primarily on women. Uneven division of household labour can affect mental and physical health and drive resentment.

Many people assume labour is evenly split in same-gender couples. Our study found, however, that same-gender couples divided the cognitive labour according to each other’s strengths, preferences and changing needs.

In other words, the couples did not necessarily aim for the split to be 50/50, but rather for it to be “fair”.

Read more:
Yet again, the census shows women are doing more housework. Now is the time to invest in interventions

What we did and what we found

The 16 couples in our study were in a same-gender relationship and living together. They did not have children living with them and were aged between 19-47. We interviewed these couples over eight months via Zoom. Four of our interviewees were men, ten were women and two were non-binary. All interviewees identified as being in a same-gender couple at the time of the study. Unlike most other studies, we chose to speak to the interviewees as a couple so they could tell their story together.

What was stark was the performance and allocation of cognitive labour shifted between each person depending on their individual circumstances.

We found the cognitive labour workload wasn’t shared 50/50 all the time (and sometimes not at all). Instead, this labour was divided according to needs that arose within the household and what was considered to be fair and just.

Couples talked about cognitive load shifting between them because of things like study commitments, changes at work, chronic illness and health. Couples also predicted their management of cognitive labour would likely shift through the course of their lives.

The way these couples viewed and performed cognitive labour was influenced by a few different factors.

These included the way they’d seen their own parents manage it, past relationships they had been in and also the way they valued fairness, justice and the uniqueness of their relationship.

Our results show that couples divided the cognitive labour according to each other’s strengths, preferences and changing needs. As one interviewee put it:

That was one of the first things that I was, like, “this is an awesome part of being queer and creating your house.” And so for me, I’ve just thought, it doesn’t have to be, there’s a person who always does these things and a person who does these things and those lists better be the same length.

No ‘queer utopia’

Some couples said this did not mean they were living in a “queer utopia”. During interviews, couples talked about reaching a threshold and feeling stressed by the cognitive labour they were taking on.

There were some couples who had not considered cognitive labour their partner was taking on for their household until it was discussed in the interview (such as keeping Google calendars for social events or making plans to prepare their house for changes in seasons).

But many found ways of dealing with it. Couples talked about communicating their needs and their changing capacity to take on this labour on a regular basis.

They also acknowledged no one person should always be responsible for certain tasks. Cognitive labour in the home was something couples made a point of negotiating on a regular basis. Many saw the ability to be dynamic in how they performed housework as a strength. One participant said:

I think part of my philosophy of household division of labour, sharing the emotional and cognitive load, goes back to my perspective on what a queer household is. And a 50/50 division of labour, I don’t know; we can create whatever we want the house to be.

Our research offers fresh insight into how we can look at and understand housework inequity. A 50/50 split in cognitive labour may not work for everyone or be the goal couples strive for.

Instead, our data shows it’s possible to see cognitive labour as something that is negotiated and shifts dependent on the needs, strengths and preferences of the couple.

Read more:
Mum, dad and two kids no longer the norm in the changing Australian family

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

– ref. We asked same-gender couples how they share the ‘mental load’ at home. The results might surprise you – https://theconversation.com/we-asked-same-gender-couples-how-they-share-the-mental-load-at-home-the-results-might-surprise-you-208667

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fron Jackson-Webb, Deputy Editor and Senior Health Editor

Australian of the Year and body positivity advocate Taryn Brumfitt has called for doctors to avoid discussing a patient’s weight when they seek care for unrelated matters.

A 15-minute consultation isn’t long enough to provide support to change behaviours, Brumfitt says, and GPs don’t have enough training and expertise to have these complex discussions.

“Many people in larger bodies tell us they have gone to the doctor with something like a sore knee, and come out with a ‘prescription’ for a very restrictive diet, and no ongoing support,” Brumfitt told the Nine newspapers.

By raising the issue of weight, Brumfitt says, GPs also risk turning patients off seeking care for other health concerns.

So should GPs bring up a patient’s weight in consultations about other matters? We asked 5 experts.

Three out of five said yes

Here are their detailed responses:

Disclosure statements: Brett Montgomery is a general practitioner. He does not have a specific interest in obesity, but like almost all GPs, he treats many patients who are overweight or obese. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners; the college’s position statement on obesity prevention and management is linked to from this article. However, Brett writes here as an individual, and not on behalf of any organisation; Emma Beckett has received funding for research or consulting from Mars Foods, NHMRC, ARC, AMP Foundation, Kellogg, and the University of Newcastle. She works for Nutrition Research Australia and member of committees/working groups related to nutrition or the Australian Academy of Science, the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Nutrition Society of Australia. Emma has lived experience of GPs bringing up her weight; Liz Sturgiss receives funding from NHMRC, RACGP Foundation, National Centre for Healthy Ageing, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. She is an appointed committee member of the Guidelines Development Committee for the review and update of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Overweight and Obesity in Adults, Adolescents and Children in Australia and is the co-founder of the RACGP Specific Interest Group in Poverty; Nick Fuller works for the University of Sydney and has received external funding for projects relating to the treatment of overweight and obesity. He is the author and founder of the Interval Weight Loss program; Helen Truby has received funding from the NHMRC, the MRFF, the Commonwealth Department of Health, Health and Wellbeing Qld, Clinical Therapy Research in the Specialist Health Services (KLINBEFORSK, Norway), the Andrea Joy Logan Trust, the Victorian Cancer Agency Health Services Scheme.

– ref. Should GPs bring up a patient’s weight in consultations about other matters? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/should-gps-bring-up-a-patients-weight-in-consultations-about-other-matters-we-asked-5-experts-209681

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kai Li Lim, St Baker Fellow in E-Mobility, The University of Queensland

You’re ready for your first long road trip with your new electric vehicle. But there are nagging questions in your mind. “What if I can’t find an available charging station when I need it?” “What if the charger doesn’t work?”

A new concern is overtaking the once-dominant “range anxiety”, the fear of your vehicle running out of charge before reaching a charging station. “Charging anxiety” now arises from the uncertainty of finding an available and functional charging station when needed.

With electric vehicle sales surging, the reliability of the network of chargers is no longer a potential problem on the horizon. It’s now an urgent matter.

In the United States, the world’s second-largest electric vehicle market, up to 20% of charging attempts fail. The most common cause is charging equipment malfunctions.

But what if we told you we already have a blueprint for reliable charging stations? It’s right before our eyes, in our trusty petrol stations. We can draw on the lessons of the petrol network to develop a charging network that’s ready for mass adoption of electric vehicles.

Read more:
Australia’s electric vehicle numbers doubled last year. What’s the impact of charging them on a power grid under strain?

How did petrol stations become so reliable?

For decades, the petrol industry has maintained a 99.9% availability and reliability rate for its fuel pumps. How was this remarkable feat achieved?

The secret lies in factors such as stringent quality control, standardised equipment, comprehensive technician training, robust network design and a mature industry. All these elements work together to ensure widespread reliability. Whenever you need to fill up your car you can.

The contrast between the petrol industry and today’s electric vehicle charging infrastructure is striking. Petrol bowser manufacturing and service station operations have been largely consolidated under a few industry giants. The charging industry is fragmented and lacks standardisation.

Electric vehicle users must deal with variations in plug types, payment options, communication protocols between chargers, and charging speeds offered by different manufacturers.

The influx of new manufacturers and operators makes the situation worse. In their eagerness to seize opportunities in this fast-growing market, these newcomers may struggle to maintain consistent service quality. Early market instability may mean companies are taken over or go out of business, possibly leaving stranded assets.

Another issue is charger ownership and maintenance responsibilities. If a business pays for an electric vehicle charging company to install a charger, it’s not always clear who’s responsible when it breaks. Clear terms of ownership and maintenance, including who bears the cost of repairs or replacements, are needed.

Read more:
Australia’s adoption of electric vehicles has been maddeningly slow, but we’re well placed to catch up fast

What can governments do to help?

Overcoming “charging anxiety” calls for a two-pronged strategy to increase consumer confidence in electric vehicle charging: rigorous efforts by the industry itself, and effective government policy frameworks. Priorities include standardisation, quality control and ongoing skills development, as well as warranty, service and reliability requirements, and monitoring of chargers.

Governments can actively promote standardised charging infrastructure. This will make it more user-friendly and intuitive.

Australia, for instance, doesn’t have an official charging standard. The Type-2 charger is merely the de facto default option. The government must rectify this.

Governments can also impose warranty and service requirements. Enforcing robust reliability standards will ensure problems with charging stations are fixed quickly. In the United States, federally funded chargers must maintain an up-time of 97%.

Governments also have a role to play in developing specialised training programs. These will equip workers with the skills and knowledge needed to handle charger manufacturing, installation and maintenance.

Governments must also ensure co-funding grants to develop charging infrastructure are put to the best possible use. These grants should be distributed on merit, giving priority to organisations with proven expertise. This will help pave the way for more robust, reliable charging stations.

Importantly, charger specifications should be rooted in the reality of current customer usage data and foreseeable developments in electric vehicle technology. The focus should be on meeting immediate practical needs, rather than chasing over-ambitious future-proofing.

Read more:
Thinking of buying an electric vehicle for your next car? Here’s the market outlook and what to consider

Electric vehicle industry has a digital advantage

Developing a highly reliable charging network is undeniably a challenge. However, the industry has the advantage of being able to harness digital technology.

Integrating Internet of Things technology into these chargers, coupled with data analytics, enables real-time monitoring and diagnostics to enhance charger performance. Operators can then identify and resolve issues before they lead to charger failure, or quickly identify failures and fix the charger. It also enables tracking of communication issues between the charger and the vehicle, ensuring a smoother charging process.

However, reliability isn’t just a matter of technology. Other factors might hinder charging, including physical obstacles such as other vehicles blocking access to chargers. Smart design of charging station locations and efficient management systems can help ensure unimpeded access.

Continuous data collection and analysis enable operators to identify patterns and trends. They can then anticipate faults and perform preventive maintenance. This can minimise downtime and maximise charger availability.

This preventive approach not only ensures more reliable charging for electric vehicle users but also reduces operators’ costs.

So, what’s the takeaway? A cohesive approach will pave the way to a reliable charging network. We must learn from the past successes and limitations of the petrol industry, embrace the transformative power of digital technologies, and adopt policies to steer the industry in the right direction.

Australia needs charging infrastructure that is robust, reliable and ready for electric mobility. It’s a collective responsibility of industry stakeholders and government bodies. As we speed up our efforts to get this right, we can finally put an end to range anxiety and its successor, charging anxiety.

Kai Li Lim is the inaugural St Baker Fellow in E-Mobility at The University of Queensland’s Dow Centre for Sustainable Engineering Innovation. His position is endowed through the St Baker Energy Innovation Fund, but he does not receive any income from it or any of its portfolio companies.

Scott Hardman receives funding from the California Air Resources Board, the California Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Transportation, CliamteWorks Foundation, and the Institute he works in receives funding from many major automakers, infrastructure providers, and energy companies.

– ref. How far to the next electric vehicle charging station – and will I be able to use it? Here’s how to create a reliable network – https://theconversation.com/how-far-to-the-next-electric-vehicle-charging-station-and-will-i-be-able-to-use-it-heres-how-to-create-a-reliable-network-209222

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Ubilava, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Sydney

The World Meteorological Organization has declared the onset of the first El Niño event in seven years. It estimates 90% probability the climatic phenomenon, involving an unusual warming of the Pacific Ocean, will develop through 2023, and be of moderate strength.

El Niño events bring hotter, drier weather to places such as Brazil, Australia and Indonesia, increasing the risk of wildfires and drought. Elsewhere, such as Peru and Ecuador, it increases rain, leading to floods.

The effects are sometimes described as a preview of “the new normal” in the wake of human-forced climate change. Of particular concern is the effect on agricultural production, and thereby the price of food – particularly “breadbasket” staples such as wheat, maize and rice.

El Niño’s global impacts are complex and multifaceted. It can potentially impact the lives of the majority of the world’s population. This is especially true for poor and rural households, whose fates are intrinsically linked with climate and farming.

The global supply and prices of most food is unlikely to move that much. The evidence from the ten El Niño events in the past five decades suggests relatively modest, and to some extent ambiguous, global price impacts. While reducing crop yield on average, these events have not resulted in a “perfect storm” of the scale to induce global “breadbasket yield shocks”.

But local effects could be severe. Even a “moderate” El Niño may significantly affect crops grown in geographically concentrated regions — for example palm oil, which primarily comes from Indonesia and Malaysia.

In some places El Niño-induced food availability and affordability issues may well lead to serious social consequences, such as conflict and hunger.

Read more:
Global temperature rises in steps — here’s why we can expect a steep climb this year and next

Impact on global food prices

The following graph shows the correlation between El Niño events and global food prices, as measured by the United Nations’ Food Price Index. This index tracks monthly changes in international prices of a basket of food commodities.

Despite the general inflationary pattern, there have rarely been big swings in El Niño years. Indeed, it shows prices decreasing during the two most recent events, and these two strongest El Niño episodes of the past three decades.

Other human-caused factors were at play – notably the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997, and the Global Financial in 2008. In 2015, prices decreased due to stronger (than expected) supply and weaker demand, when El Niño event did not turn out to be as bad as feared.

This all suggests that El Niño does not usually play the lead role in global commodity price movements.

Impacts on wheat supply

Why? Because El Niño does induce crop failures, but for food grown around the world the losses tend to be offset by positive changes in production across other key producing regions.

For example, it can bring favourable weather to the conflict-ridden and famine-prone Horn of Africa (Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia).

A good example is wheat.

The following chart shows how El Nino has affect Australian wheat production since 1980. In six out of nine El Niño events of at least moderate strength, production has dropped significantly – in four cases, at least 30% below the “trend line” (representing the long-term average).

Australia is one of the world’s the top three wheat exporters, accounting for about 13% of global exports. So its production does affect on global wheat prices. But in terms of total wheat grown it’s less signicant – about 3.5% of world production. And El Niño-induced crop failures tend to be offset by production in other key wheat-producing regions.

The next graph compare changes in Australia’s wheat production with other significant wheat exporters in El Niño years. Dips in Australia’s production tend tend to be offset by changes elsewhere.

In 1994, for example, Australian wheat production dropped nearly 50% but barely changed elsewhere. In 1982, when Australian production dropped 30%, Argentina’s production was 50% higher. Such balancing patterns tends to be present across most El Niño years.

But some will bear the cost

That said, there will be at least some negative effects. Even if crop failures in one region are fully offset by rich harvests in others, some people are going to bear the costs of El Niño’s direct impact.

Australian farmers, for example, will be worse off if local wheat yields drop while global prices remain relatively stable.

Moreover, because most countries are connected via trade, El Niño will have wider economic impacts. It could still lead to deeper societal issues in some region, such as famine and agro-pastoral conflicts.

Read more:
Global warming to bring record hot year by 2028 – probably our first above 1.5°C limit

These effects may also be nuanced. For example, poor harvests in Africa may mitigate seasonal violence linked with the appropriation of agricultural surpluses. But considering other vulnerabilities around the world, the odds are that even a moderate El Niño will make already dire socio-economic conditions in some countries worse.

Most of the usual warnings about the caveats of climate change apply here. The difference, of course, is that all this is happening now.

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

– ref. What this year’s El Niño means for wheat and global food supply – https://theconversation.com/what-this-years-el-nino-means-for-wheat-and-global-food-supply-209386

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Ford, Lecturer in Media, University of Adelaide

With the new Barbie movie, Greta Gerwig is joining an elite class female filmmakers. Alongside Ava DuVernay, Patty Jenkins and Kathryn Bigelow, Gerwig is one of only a few women to direct a live-action film with a budget of US$100 million.

Directing just three movies, Gerwig has quickly become a household name in Hollywood. However, her movie career is much longer than just her directing career. Gerwig has had a unique career, moving quickly from in front of the camera to behind it.

Although disparate in subject matter – teen angst, civil war family drama and much-debated children’s toys – Gerwig’s film oeuvre is united by her interrogation of femininity. She is known for her dedication to telling women’s stories with heart and humour, and an intimate “indie” style of film-making.

Mumblecore

Gerwig started her career acting and co-writing in a sub-genre of American indie cinema called “mumblecore”. These low-key, naturalistic films featured non-professional actors in mundane, everyday scenarios.

The term “mumblecore” was coined by film critics to describe a wave of do-it-yourself, dialogue-driven films where characters literally mumbled and bumbled through life.

Due to the improvisational nature of mumblecore films, the cast often shares writing credit, taking an active role in constructing dialogue, character and story.

Gerwig was a fixture in this low-budget experimental film scene, working closely with Joe Swanberg, co-writing and starring in LOL (2006) and Hannah Takes the Stairs (2007). Further developing her skills, she co-directed Nights and Weekends (2008) with Swanberg.

Andrew Bujalski’s Funny Ha Ha (2002) is generally considered to be the first mumblecore film. Emphasising amateur actors and naturalistic settings, Funny Ha Ha’s depiction of a recent college graduate trying to find a temporary job set the tone and template for a new wave of low-budget, low-key filmmakers.

We can see the influence of mumblecore in TV shows like Girls (2012-2017), Broad City (2014-2019) and High Maintenance (2016-2020).

Mumblecore has proven to be an important training ground for many of today’s influential filmmakers, including Barry Jenkins, the Safdie Brothers, and, of course, Gerwig.

Indie darling

After her mumblecore success, Gerwig began working as an actor with more established indie writer-directors, such as Woody Allen in To Rome with Love (2012), Whit Stillman in Damsels in Distress (2011), and Rebecca Miller in Maggie’s Plan (2015).

Gerwig quickly established herself as a quirky leading lady who The New York Times’ film critic, A.O. Scott, describes as “more goose than swan … big-boned and a little slouchy, indifferent to the imperatives of gracefulness”.

Perhaps the most important relationship of Gerwig’s career is with writer-director Noah Baumbach. Gerwig and Baumbach met when she starred alongside Ben Stiller in Greenberg (2010). They have been together since 2011 and share two children.

Thus far, Gerwig and Baumbach’s creative collaboration has resulted in Frances Ha (2012), Mistress America (2014), White Noise (2022) and now Barbie. Gerwig co-wrote and starred in Frances Ha and Mistress America, with Baumbach co-writing and directing.

Under Baumbach’s direction, Gerwig’s sparkling and vivacious energy is undeniable. She oozes awkwardness, youthful abandon and joy. As The New Yorker’s Richard Brody writes, “Gerwig may be famed for acting like a nonactor, but she’s an extraordinarily accomplished actor.”

In Frances Ha and 20th Century Women (2016), Gerwig is electric, demanding attention alongside other magnetic screen presences like Adam Driver, Annette Bening and Elle Fanning.

In recent years, Gerwig has moved increasingly behind the camera, starting with her directorial debut, Lady Bird (2017).

A director

Lady Bird was much more widely watched and acclaimed than most filmmakers’ debut films, earning five Academy Award nominations. Gerwig was nominated for writing and directing, making her only the fifth woman to be nominated for the best director award.

Perhaps owing to her career as a writer and actor, Lady Bird catapulted Gerwig onto many “directors to watch” lists. Lady Bird also established Gerwig’s investment in femininity, women’s culture and the lives of young women, which are historically devalued.

Directors (both men and women) have found critical and commercial success telling stories about masculinist concerns, such as war epics like Sam Mendes’ 1917 (2019), stories of male genius like Christopher Nolan’s forthcoming Oppenheimer (2023), and superhero franchise films such as The Batman (2022).

In contrast, women-centered, domestic stories rarely receive as many kudos, as they do not have the cultural veneer of “importance”. Yet Gerwig’s films consistently challenge this dichotomy by rendering intimate, personal stories of women’s lives large on our movie screens.

Read more:
What is the ‘nine-dash line’ and what does it have to do with the Barbie movie?

Capitalising on the commercial and critical success of Lady Bird, Gerwig parlayed her newfound cultural and industrial capital into writing and directing a new adaptation of Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women. While it may not seem so now, this was a risky second film. Gillian Armstrong’s 1994 version, starring Winona Ryder, Susan Sarandon, Claire Danes, Kirsten Dunst and Christian Bale, is a classic and beloved by a generation of women.

Gerwig’s Little Women (2019) starred Lady Bird’s Saorise Ronan and Timothée Chalamet, and was nominated for six Academy Awards. Such a well-known and beloved adaptation comes with it high expectations, but Gerwig’s version has been widely praised as inventive, yet faithful.

With Little Women, Gerwig established herself as a powerful writer-director able to shepherd beloved properties with nuance and intellect. With Barbie, Gerwig seems to be embodying the claim made by Amy March in Little Women that “writing things is what makes them important.” In writing (and making a movie) about Barbie dolls, Gerwig is bestowing importance.

If the Barbie trailers are to be believed, we can expect the film to take seriously the much maligned feminine cultural object, approaching the much-loved doll (and her friends) with irony, intelligence and love. From her mumblecore films through to Lady Bird and Little Women, Gerwig has infused her work with a kindness, a sharp wit and a reverence for femininity.

Despite the big budget, flashy trailers and movie stars, Barbie dolls are inherently domestic and personal. Ask any child with a beloved Barbie and they can tell you all about their doll’s personality, peculiarities and professions.

Given her track record of honouring femininity, intimacy, domesticity and women’s culture, I think Barbie is in safe hands with Gerwig.

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

– ref. More than mumblecore and bigger than Barbie – who is Greta Gerwig? – https://theconversation.com/more-than-mumblecore-and-bigger-than-barbie-who-is-greta-gerwig-209389

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

Stuart Robert has kept well away from the byelection to choose his parliamentary successor, but Labor has made sure the controversial former member hasn’t been forgotten.

Just over a week out from Saturday’s vote in the Gold Coast seat of Fadden, Robert received a pasting from the Robodebt royal commission (although not, he says, a referral for further action). Labor hopes the voters care. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton is banking on their attention being on other things.

Dutton was glad to see the back of Robert, just as he was to have another discredited former minister, Alan Tudge, resign from parliament.

But Tudge’s departure came at high cost. The Liberals lost the seat of Aston at that byelection, which underscored the depth of Dutton’s difficulties in Victoria.

Fadden could deliver a blow or a boost to Dutton. He can hardly afford the former and desperately needs the latter.

Unlike Aston, which became marginal in 2022, Fadden sits on what is considered an impregnable 10.6% margin. Both sides are convinced it will stay in Coalition hands, so it’s all about the size and direction of the swing.

We shouldn’t over-read the results of byelections. Some matter, others don’t, but in today’s fevered politics, their results have impact in the moment.

In Fadden, both Labor and the Liberal National Party have had meaty issues on which to campaign.

Read more:
Robodebt royal commissioner makes multiple referrals for prosecution, condemning scheme as ‘crude and cruel’

Labor has made the most of the discredited Robert, who faces other integrity questions separate to his role in Robodebt. Despite the welter of bad publicly about the former MP, some in Labor believe voters’ thoughts will be squarely on their own personal circumstances.

The Liberals have going for them the cost-of-living pressures. They are also seeking to exploit concern over crime, targeting the state Labor government, which has lost its pandemic gloss and faces an election next year. The Liberals are urging voters to send messages to both federal and state Labor.

The Voice to Parliament is not featuring.

Both sides are focusing on the local. The Liberals’ Cameron Caldwell is a long-time councillor with a small-business background. He has a bit of history – prior to the 2012 Queensland election he was dropped as a candidate after a complaint that he had, some years before, attended a “swingers club” (dressed in a pirate outfit). He said he was there with his wife for a drink. Dutton, campaigning in Fadden on Thursday, promoted Caldwell as a “local champion”.

Labor’s candidate, Letitia Del Fabbro, is a nurse educator at Griffith University. Like Mary Doyle in Aston, Del Fabbro ran at last year’s federal election, which means she had already done the spadework by the time the byelection came.

The field of 13 includes candidates from the Greens and One Nation.

The byelection matters for Anthony Albanese but less than it does for Dutton.

An anti-Labor swing – presuming it wasn’t too large – could be written off as what normally happens in byelections. The average byelection swing against governments, when both major parties contest, is 3.6%. Polling analyst Kevin Bonham points out that in byelections in federal opposition seats the historic average swing is only about 1% to the opposition.

Although the government could dismiss a modest swing, Labor hardheads would see it as a warning sign of the cost of living starting to bite in political terms. Labor knows the politics of that issue will only get tougher for the government in coming months.

A swing against Labor might be more alarming for the Palaszczuk government.

The Liberals, fearing the impact of another bad showing, have run the bigger campaign. Queensland is Dutton’s home state, where the Coalition held up at the 2022 election. Dutton is reportedly happy with the party’s efforts in Fadden, with the Liberal National Party machine running a competent campaign.

While the LNP organisation is in solid shape, there are bleak stories elsewhere.

The faction-ridden shambles in the NSW division took its toll in the 2022 election. Then federal minister Alex Hawke, in cahoots with Scott Morrison, delayed preselections for their own purposes, with disastrous results. Recently Dutton, Liberal National president John Olsen and party director Andrew Hirst wrote to the NSW organisation telling it to come up with a preselection timetable. Reportedly this caused some tensions.

Jason Falinski, a prominent moderate and one of the MPs defeated by a teal independent candidate at the federal election, is the new NSW president. He’s committed to improving the division, but it has a long record of being stubbornly committed to its own infighting.

The troubles with the Liberals in Victoria are centred on the state parliamentary party but spread through the division. Already on their knees after being routed at the state election, the Victorian Liberals have been torn apart over Moira Deeming, now expelled from the parliamentary party. Triggered by her attendance at the Let Women Speak rally, which Nazis gatecrashed, the imbroglio has hugely damaged state leader John Pesutto and divided the rank and file, where Deeming has strong support. It spilled over federally when last month the Liberals’ federal women’s committee called for Deeming to be reinstated.

Tasmania is the only state with a Liberal government, but the party is chaotic there too. The government was thrown into minority when two MPs defected to the crossbench in protest at its support for an expensive new stadium. The premier, Jeremy Rockliff, faces discontent from the grass roots.

In Western Australia there is an enormous rebuilding job from wipeouts at the state and federal elections.

One of Dutton’s problems in trying to knock heads together in NSW and Victoria is his own unpopularity in the south. But without the state machines being in better shape, the chance of electoral progress will be dragged down.

Outspoken Tasmanian federal Liberal MP Bridget Archer this week again called attention to something else the Liberals need – for Morrison to leave parliament.

Morrison came out of the Robodebt commission particularly badly. There is general agreement he has not quit earlier because he can’t get a decent job. The commission’s findings will put another negative on his CV.

Dutton would be delighted to have the former PM move on. That would, however, mean another byelection, with its opportunities and risks.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Fadden byelection is Dutton’s immediate hurdle but party reform is the bigger challenge – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-fadden-byelection-is-duttons-immediate-hurdle-but-party-reform-is-the-bigger-challenge-209685

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Rudge, Law lecturer, University of Sydney

After several years of controversy, and both praise and blame for his willingness to perform high-risk surgeries, neurosurgeon Charlie Teo has been subject to practice restrictions by a special committee of the Medical Council of New South Wales.

So how does the process of restricting doctors’ medical practice work? And what did this mean for Teo?

How are health practitioners regulated in Australia?

Health practitioner regulators in Australia aren’t generally empowered to make punitive decisions about health professionals’ conduct.

Instead, Australia’s health practitioner regulations (the so-called “national law”) require decision-makers to exercise their powers to protect patients. They operate in what is often called a “protective jurisdiction”.

And though the regulator may sometimes impose fines, it is rare. That’s because it may do so only when it is “satisfied there is no other order, or combination of orders, that is appropriate in the public interest”.

In all state versions of the national law, regulators may restrict doctors’ medical practices only if it’s “necessary to ensure health services are provided safely and of an appropriate quality”.

But the NSW national law includes additional wording. In all its decisions, the regulator must regard the “health and safety of the public” as the “paramount consideration.”

This can have unusual effects. As the Australian Health Practitioners Regulation Agency (AHPRA) acknowledges, requirements to protect the public may sometimes result in “a determination that is harsher on the practitioner than if punishment were the sole purpose”.

Read more:
Who is our health regulator, AHPRA, and does it operate effectively?

What happened in the Teo case?

In late 2022, proceedings commenced against Teo via two complaints by the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC).

The complaints concerned two brain surgeries on two patients. Both involved “radical resections” (“en bloc” removals) of these patients’ brain tumours. Tragically, neither patient regained consciousness after the operations and both patients died – one just ten days after.

In legal terms, the complaints were based on a provision of the national law that defines certain categories of wrongdoing as unsatisfactory professional conduct.

The HCCC alleged Teo had engaged in two categories of this wrongdoing: conduct below the standard reasonably expected of a doctor of his training and experience, and unethical conduct.

The HCCC alleged Teo’s decisions to operate were inappropriate and substandard because the risks of “neurological morbidity” (so-called brain death) outweighed the (potential) benefits of the interventions. There was no allegation that Teo’s surgical skills were substandard.

The surgeries were also unethical, it was alleged, as informed consent had not been obtained from the patients and one patient was required to pay an expensive upfront fee in circumstances of clear vulnerability.

What were the findings and consequences for Teo?

The HCCC Professional Standards Committee, made up of an experienced judge, two expert neurosurgeons and a lay member, applied the civil standard of proof – the balance of probabilities – to the evidence. Though the committee is not legally bound to apply the rules of evidence applied in criminal courts, it decided, broadly for procedural fairness reasons, to receive and consider all of Teo’s unchallenged evidence.

In a decision of more than 100 pages, the committee found Teo guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct. It determined to “reprimand” Teo (this means a record of “reprimand” is noted on the public copy of his practitioner licence) and to impose four conditions on his practice.

Three conditions involve increased oversight of his practice records. But a more restrictive condition will require Teo to obtain written support from a neurosurgeon approved by the Medical Council of New South Wales for any neurosurgery involving “recurring malignant tumours in the brain or brain stem”.

While this was order was hotly contested in the proceedings, the committee determined that, for reasons including Teo’s evidenced “isolation from his peers”, the condition was “necessary to protect the health and safety of the public”.

Read more:
Doctors may soon get official ‘endorsements’ to practise cosmetic surgery – but will that protect patients?

What about patient autonomy or clinical freedom?

Difficult ethical questions arise in medical regulation. Here, the committee had to balance the practitioner’s right to practise medicine against the paramount consideration of patient health and safety and against the patient’s right to exercise autonomy.

This last right is sometimes seen as a patient’s moral right to be wrong. On these considerations, the committee relied on accepted evidence from ethical experts that proposed that, as a matter of ethics,

a surgeon does not have a licence to undertake any conceivable procedure even with the agreement or acquiescence of the patient.

Is medical regulation strict in Australia and NSW?

Many reviews and academic studies find the national law to be fair and appropriate, or not strict enough.

However, some scholars and representative groups including the Australian Medical Association (AMA) find some aspects are too strict and unsympathetic to practitioners.

But a potted history of NSW medical history showcases how successive medical scandals have tended to drive strong regulatory reform. In 1984, when the tragic impacts of the shocking and unethical treatment at Chelmsford psychiatric hospital were coming to light, NSW was the first jurisdiction globally to establish a complaints body for health consumers. Known as the Complaints Unit, this body is now the HCCC.

Another milestone occurred in the early 2000s following several scandals, including the so-called “Butcher of Bega” episode. An inquiry into these events prompted the NSW government to introduce laws permitting medical practitioners to be immediately suspended if the regulator considered it was in the “public interest”.

This was the first power of its kind in Australia and was only adopted into the broader national law of other states in 2018.

What next for Teo?

Teo may appeal the orders of the committee to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal or seek a review of the conditions. But as the conditions are not subject to an end date, it appears they will otherwise continue indefinitely.

Read more:
How can the health regulator better protect patients from sexual misconduct?

Christopher Rudge was formerly engaged (2018) as a special research officer at the Medical Council of NSW.

– ref. What happens when doctors don’t act as they should? And what’s the ruling against neurosurgeon Charlie Teo? – https://theconversation.com/what-happens-when-doctors-dont-act-as-they-should-and-whats-the-ruling-against-neurosurgeon-charlie-teo-209612

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pavel Castka, Professor in Operations Management and Sustainability, University of Canterbury

Assurance systems such as freshwater monitoring are a cornerstone of New Zealand’s agribusiness. They enable compliance with regulations, product safety and international trade.

But these systems face growing challenges. Urban communities demand higher transparency and engagement, and consumers are increasingly sceptical of the effectiveness and compliance of farm operations.

Based on a recent survey, we developed a white paper to address these challenges and to improve farm assurance systems. We explore technological developments, public awareness and the potential to incorporate Māori perspectives.

The survey was designed to gather public perceptions of farm assurance and identify ways to enhance public understanding of farming and its impacts.

It suggests better farm monitoring systems could strengthen agriculture’s social license to operate. It also highlights the importance of transparency, accountability and engagement with interest groups and communities to foster trust and ensure compliance.

Public perceptions of farm monitoring

The survey shows most respondents have positive views of assurance programs in New Zealand. They believe farm monitoring programs are necessary to ensure food safety, animal welfare and sustainable use of water and land.

However, it also highlights the need for better public engagement with these programs as many respondents were not familiar with how they work.

Based on our survey, most New Zealanders believe on-site farm inspections are essential for efficient farm monitoring. But they also acknowledge the constraints of these inspections. A significant number of respondents suggest the use of technology to supplement them.

Respondents recognise the value of independent governance and personal interaction when monitoring farms. The public values the participation of qualified personnel and on-site visits, while having less confidence in monitoring conducted by commercial partners and, in part, modern technologies.

Read more:
A new farming proposal to reduce carbon emissions involves a lot of trust – and a lot of uncertainty

The survey also reveals the public considers auditors and inspectors trustworthy if they have industry experience, high integrity and are approved by independent certifying bodies. Respondents value the independence of individuals involved in farm assurance.

These findings suggest organisations and farmers should prioritise transparency and independence when developing or improving farm assurance programs to build public trust and improve their reputation.

Use of technologies for farm monitoring

Food safety, animal welfare and water quality are the respondents’ main concerns. Many would like to see Māori values and land practices incorporated into monitoring systems.

The public is interested in sharing information about farm performance through mechanisms such as benchmarking and audit grades. Views differ about data sharing, but it is clear that disclosing more details about farm performance will play a major role in developing a positive relationship with the public.

Survey participants were not fully supportive of futuristic concepts such as 24/7 monitoring of farms through satellites or remote sensors. However, they encouraged the use of technology to improve farm assurance programs.

The survey also shows substantial support for unannounced farms visits. However, we found variation in the level of support for monitoring technologies based on respondents’ level of knowledge about farming. This highlights the importance of education and outreach.

Incorporating a Māori worldview

Māori concepts and approaches increasingly guide national policies and regulations, especially for environmental issues. This involves understanding the environment in a relational way and emphasising the interdependence between humans and the land and water they rely on.

Māori farming collectives are investing in environmental sensing technologies to improve their operations. They use voluntary and compulsory assurance systems to improve governance and market access.

Incorporating Māori worldviews into assurance practices requires investing in trust-building relationships with tangata whenua and recognising local context and authority. The use of Māori values and mātauranga Māori in assurance practices offers innovation but requires careful consideration of local differences.

Where to from here?

Based on our study, we suggest the development and implementation of a comprehensive farm assurance strategy to lift the performance of primary sector supply chains in New Zealand.

This strategy should be inclusive, involving all stakeholders in its development and implementation. We recommend a multi-stakeholder approach to funding, including partnerships between the government, private sector and community organisations. Additional funds could come from user fees or grants.

Read more:
Robot farmers could improve jobs and help fight climate change – if they’re developed responsibly

Future work should focus on integrating assurance and monitoring systems with data platforms. The strategy should define pathways for the assessment and possible inclusion of technologies such as remote sensing, satellite imaging, AI and machine learning. It should explore possible incentives to support the uptake of these technologies and issues related to data security and ownership.

One thing is clear. The New Zealand public is more engaged with the farming sector than it used to be. It is important to use this momentum to build trust with communities.

The authors acknowledge the contribution of Jon Manhire from the Agribusiness Group in the preparation of this article.

Pavel Castka received funding from Our Land and Water National Science Challange for this project. He has also recieved funding from New Zealand China Food Protection Network for projects on food safety and assurance. Pavel is affiliated with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) at Technical Committee TC176 and cooperates & consults with various organisations on matters related to assurance.

John Reid is Managing Director of Earth Quotient – a consultancy specialising in environmental sensing. He receives funding from the Biological Heritage National Science Challenge and the Our Land and Water National Science Challenge.

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

– ref. Consumers want NZ farmers to comply with regulations — better monitoring and transparency would help to build trust – https://theconversation.com/consumers-want-nz-farmers-to-comply-with-regulations-better-monitoring-and-transparency-would-help-to-build-trust-204682

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Hazel, Associate Professor, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

As cat researchers, one of the most common complaints we hear is:

My cat is a jerk! Whenever I do something he doesn’t like, he pees on my bed or the rug.

Often this complaint is based on an assumption the cat is seeking revenge or trying to send a message, The Godfather-style.

Unfortunately, a rhetoric has developed that cats are manipulative, vengeful, uncaring or even psychotic. This rhetoric means when cats do something we don’t like, it’s easy to reach for the idea they did it deliberately to hurt or annoy us.

But cats don’t behave the way humans do and their motives are not the same. They aren’t trying to irritate or punish us. So let’s forget the human rhetoric and delve into five reasons your cat might be peeing on your rug, bed or clothes.

Read more:
Why does my dog eat grass? And when is it not safe for them?

1. It could be a medical issue

First, ask yourself: are they sick?

Many illnesses or injuries – including urinary tract infections, cystitis, diabetes and chronic pain – can cause a cat to have unusual urination behaviour.

Feline idiopathic cystitis occurs in approximately 2-4% of cats worldwide. The exact causes are not known, although having an anxious or stressed cat increases the risk.

It’s often difficult to tell when a cat is sick. They are incredibly adept at hiding pain.

One clue is cats experiencing discomfort will want to pee somewhere they feel comfortable, often a place they associate with safety – such as your bed, your clothes or the rug.

One reason they may feel comfortable there is because it smells like you, someone they associate with positive feelings.

So if your cat pees somewhere odd, your first instinct should be to wonder if it’s time to contact your vet.

2. It could be short-term stress

Has something changed in your household lately? Are you renovating? Are there loud noises? Did a new cat move in next door? Did your friend bring their dog to visit?

Situations like these could lead to your cat feeling stressed and peeing in an unexpected place.

Log the days your cat pees somewhere unusual and see if a pattern emerges.

If it correlates with something in particular – such as a friend visiting with their dog – try to adapt the house set-up to make your cat more comfortable.

For instance, keep the dog outside or put your cat in your room with their food, water and a litter tray.

Think about how to make your cat more comfortable (or remove the stressor itself).

3. It could be chronic stress

Unlike a short-term stressor, chronic stress is an ongoing issue that can’t simply be stopped or removed.

This could be an ongoing stress from living in a multi-cat household or with a dog, or it could from a condition such as anxiety.

While chronic stress can be trickier to handle, it’s important to identify it and seek help.

Ongoing stress can lead to serious health issues such as cystitis, which can cause a urinary blockage and be life threatening. If your cat visits the litter tray and is straining without any result, this is an emergency. They need to see a vet as soon as possible.

Keep a short daily log and try to identify areas that may be causing ongoing stress for your cat.

Adjust the environment to limit these stressors and if needed, seek a veterinary behaviourist’s advice about treating potential anxiety in your cat.

And if you are very stressed, this might make your cat feel stressed. Sometimes you both need to take a deep breath!

Read more:
Why do cats and dogs get the zoomies?

4. It could be the litter

Your cat’s “accidents” may be as simple as them not liking the substrate, tray or positioning of the litter they are given.

Cats want to feel comfortable and safe when they toilet. So they may not want to use it if:

• the substrate you’re using hurts their paws or is too deep and makes them slide around

• the tray is too small or too covered or

• the litter is positioned somewhere that is disturbed easily.

Each cat is an individual; what works for one may not work for another. That said, here are some general rules for providing a pleasant litter experience for your cat:

• provide one litter tray per cat plus an extra one for the household

• litter depth should be enough to cover the bottom of the tray well but not so much that the cat’s weight makes them slip down into it

• go for unscented litter (cats are very sensitive to smells)

• place the tray in an area that has privacy and is away from any potential stressors such as children, dogs or loud noises

• if possible, place the trays around the house in appropriate areas so your cat always has easy access when needed

• scoop regularly and keep the tray clean.

5. It could because your cat is a jerk

Just kidding. This is never the reason.

Susan Hazel is affiliated with the Dog and Cat Management Board of South Australia, RSPCA South Australia and Animal Therapies Ltd.

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

– ref. Why does my cat pee on the rug? Are they trying to tell me something? – https://theconversation.com/why-does-my-cat-pee-on-the-rug-are-they-trying-to-tell-me-something-208935