Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Natasha Hurley-Walker, Radio Astronomer, Curtin University

Slowly repeating bursts of intense radio waves from space have puzzled astronomers since they were discovered in 2022.

In new research, we have for the first time tracked one of these pulsating signals back to its source: a common kind of lightweight star called a red dwarf, likely in a binary orbit with a white dwarf, the core of another star that exploded long ago.

A slowly pulsing mystery

In 2022, our team made an amazing discovery: periodic radio pulsations that repeated every 18 minutes, emanating from space. The pulses outshone everything nearby, flashed brilliantly for three months, then disappeared.

We know some repeating radio signals come from a kind of neutron star called a radio pulsar, which spins rapidly (typically once a second or faster), beaming out radio waves like a lighthouse. The trouble is, our current theories say a pulsar spinning only once every 18 minutes should not produce radio waves.

So we thought our 2022 discovery could point to new and exciting physics – or help explain exactly how pulsars emit radiation, which despite 50 years of research is still not understood very well.

More slowly blinking radio sources have been discovered since then. There are now about ten known “long-period radio transients”.

However, just finding more hasn’t been enough to solve the mystery.

Searching the outskirts of the galaxy

Until now, every one of these sources has been found deep in the heart of the Milky Way.

This makes it very hard to figure out what kind of star or object produces the radio waves, because there are thousands of stars in a small area. Any one of them could be responsible for the signal, or none of them.

So, we started a campaign to scan the skies with the Murchison Widefield Array radio telescope in Western Australia, which can observe 1,000 square degrees of the sky every minute. An undergraduate student at Curtin University, Csanád Horváth, processed data covering half of the sky, looking for these elusive signals in more sparsely populated regions of the Milky Way.

And sure enough, we found a new source! Dubbed GLEAM-X J0704-37, it produces minute-long pulses of radio waves, just like other long-period radio transients. However, these pulses repeat only once every 2.9 hours, making it the slowest long-period radio transient found so far.

Where are the radio waves coming from?

We performed follow-up observations with the MeerKAT telescope in South Africa, the most sensitive radio telescope in the southern hemisphere. These pinpointed the location of the radio waves precisely: they were coming from a red dwarf star. These stars are incredibly common, making up 70% of the stars in the Milky Way, but they are so faint that not a single one is visible to the naked eye.

Combining historical observations from the Murchison Widefield Array and new MeerKAT monitoring data, we found that the pulses arrive a little earlier and a little later in a repeating pattern. This probably indicates that the radio emitter isn’t the red dwarf itself, but rather an unseen object in a binary orbit with it.

Based on previous studies of the evolution of stars, we think this invisible radio emitter is most likely to be a white dwarf, which is the final endpoint of small to medium-sized stars like our own Sun. If it were a neutron star or a black hole, the explosion that created it would have been so large it should have disrupted the orbit.

It takes two to tango

So how do a red dwarf and a white dwarf generate a radio signal?

The red dwarf probably produces a stellar wind of charged particles, just like our Sun does. When the wind hits the white dwarf’s magnetic field, it would be accelerated, producing radio waves.

This could be similar to how the Sun’s stellar wind interacts with Earth’s magnetic field to produce beautiful aurora, and also low-frequency radio waves.

We already know of a few systems like this, such as AR Scorpii, where variations in the brightness of the red dwarf imply that the companion white dwarf is hitting it with a powerful beam of radio waves every two minutes. None of these systems are as bright or as slow as the long-period radio transients, but maybe as we find more examples, we will work out a unifying physical model that explains all of them.

On the other hand, there may be many different kinds of system that can produce long-period radio pulsations.

Either way, we’ve learned the power of expecting the unexpected – and we’ll keep scanning the skies to solve this cosmic mystery.

Natasha Hurley-Walker is supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (project number FT190100231) funded by the Australian Government.

– ref. Astronomers have pinpointed the origin of mysterious repeating radio bursts from space – https://theconversation.com/astronomers-have-pinpointed-the-origin-of-mysterious-repeating-radio-bursts-from-space-244920

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ehsan Noroozinejad, Senior Researcher, Urban Transformations Research Centre, Western Sydney University

Imagine a city where everyone can afford a safe home, reach work or school without long, stressful commutes, and enjoy green parks and clean air.

This is Anthony Albanese’s decade-long vision for Australia’s cities after last week’s release of the new National Urban Policy (NUP).

As Transport and Infrastructure Minister in 2011, he introduced Our Cities, Our Future. Then in 2021, as opposition leader, he pledged a new urban framework.

The new NUP now sets the course for transforming Australia’s cities.

However, as our cities grow, so do the complexities they face: a housing crisis, locking out households, heavier traffic, and rising temperatures caused by climate changes.

These challenges can disproportionately affect low-income and vulnerable communities, especially in our outer suburbs.

The new NUP aims to address all of that, but the big question remains: does it go far enough to build the cities we need for the future?

What is the National Urban Policy?

This policy is Australia’s road map for sustainable city development. It guides collaboration between the federal government, states, territories and local communities to shape future cities to be liveable and productive.

The policy focuses on three key pillars:

1. Liveable and equitable cities: this is to ensure the basic human rights everyone should have access to, like affordable housing, public transport, and essential services like healthcare and education.

2. Productive and innovative cities: this will support jobs, industries and infrastructure to drive economic growth.

3. Sustainable and resilient cities: this will protect the environments in Australian cities to develop urban areas for climate change impacts like floods and heatwaves.

A key element of the policy is its commitment to ensuring strong collaboration with First Nations, Aboriginal and Indigenous communities, acknowledging their connection to the land and integrating their knowledge into urban planing of the future cities.

What does this policy mean for everyday people?

If the new policy delivers on its promise, here is how daily life could be affected for Australians.

Affordable housing: With the ambitious goal of delivering 1.2 million homes by 2029, the government aims to ease the housing crunch. More social housing and making homes closer to jobs and schools are top priorities.

Improved public transport: The government is planning to support public transport upgrades for faster, more reliable and greener commute choices like bike paths.

More green spaces: The government is also keen to boost Australians’ physical and mental health by providing more parks, shaded streets and green rooftops to reduce urban heat. This also aligns with broader climate, health, and wellbeing strategies, and includes heading towards net zero Australia.

Inclusive communities: Ensuring opportunities and services are available to everyone, including First Nations people, elders and those with disabilities, and providing job opportunities closer to home.

Can the policy address Australia’s critical challenges?

Our cities face enormous challenges and the new policy aims to tackle many of them (the housing crisis, climate issues and social inclusion).

But addressing them requires more than a list of goals – it demands bold actions and long-term commitments.

This is an area Western Sydney University has researched in its newly released report looking at international best practices in infrastructure funding.

It highlights how fragmented, short-term funding systems worsen these challenges.

It advocates for long-term, stable funding streams, collaboration, and community-driven approaches and principles successfully embedded in other countries.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and United Nations Habitat’s Global State of National Policy report also provides a comprehensive overview of strategies used by other countries to tackle similar issues.

Other developed countries like Singapore, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States have addressed many of the gaps we have noted through their approaches, including long-term funding models, coordination and clear sustainability goals.

Gaps in the new policy

While the new NUP sets a strong vision, it leaves several critical gaps:

Long-term funding is crucial: The policy leans heavily on short-term budgets and competitive grants, which prioritise projects based on competition, not community need. This leaves many communities and stakeholders with inadequate infrastructure.

An example of this is the short-term, limited support for modular and prefabricated systems as a solution to the housing crisis. A multi-decade funding commitment is essential to allow councils to plan effectively.

Collaboration across government levels is essential: The siloed approach between local councils and state governments impedes effective action. The Commonwealth must take a more proactive role in aligning projects and addressing fragmentation.

Clear timelines and accountability: When will these goals be achieved? The policy lacks clear deadlines and measurable targets to track progress. An ongoing evaluation framework is essential to ensure projects are executed efficiently and build trust among communities.

Embracing digital trasnformation: Many developed countries are using emerging technologies like digital twins and AI to improve their urban planning. Australia’s new policy could adopt similar approach to make smarter, data-driven decisions, though this is not clearly outlined in the current framework.

Infrastructure funding models need overhaul: Australia’s current infrastructure funding system is considered by some as fragmented, inconsistent and poorly coordinated, driven more by short-term political cycles than a by a long-term strategy. The NUP must address this critical gap.

Investment in green construction: The policy overlooks the role of financial institutions in driving sustainable urban development. Green mortgages, green bonds, and incentives for energy-efficient construction, like those in the UK and Europe, could help bridge the gap between affordability and sustainability while ensuring climate resilience in future housing strategies.

More support for vulnerable groups: While inclusivity is mentioned in the new policy, there is room for more specific strategies to support migrants, international students, refugees, single parent families and those from asylum-seeking backgrounds.

Overall, the new NUP is a positive and welcomed step forward.

For success, it must be shaped by meaningful collaboration between policymakers, planners, communities and researchers, drawing on global successes to ensure long-term impact. Only then can the government achieve its ambitious vision.

Dr. Ehsan Noroozinejad has received competitive funding from national and international organisations to support research addressing the housing and climate crises.

Nicky Morrison receives funding from all tiers of governments and works with the National Growth Area Alliance.

– ref. Cheaper housing and better transport? What you need to know about Australia’s new National Urban Policy – https://theconversation.com/cheaper-housing-and-better-transport-what-you-need-to-know-about-australias-new-national-urban-policy-244947

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 national YouGov poll, conducted November 15–21 from a sample of 1,515, had a 50–50 tie, unchanged from the previous YouGov poll in September. Primary votes were 38% Coalition (down one), 30% Labor (steady), 13% Greens (down one), 9% One Nation (up two) and 10% for all Others (steady).

Albanese’s net approval was up two to -20, with 56% dissatisfied and 36% satisfied. Dutton’s net approval was up two to -8. Albanese led Dutton by an unchanged 42–39 as better PM.

By 77–23, respondents supported the proposed social media ban for children under 16, a large increase in support from 61% in August.

In a separate YouGov poll that was conducted in late October, by 59–41 voters opposed replacing King Charles with an Australian president as head of state. Now 43% (up eight since September 2023) say Australia should remain a constitutional monarchy after the king passes away.

Most royals were regarded far more positively than Australia’s politicians. Of prominent politicians, Lidia Thorpe was at -45, Adam Bandt at -14, Pauline Hanson at -13, Tanya Plibersek at -4, Penny Wong at +2 and Jacqui Lambie at +7.

This YouGov poll and other polls in this article suggest little movement in the last two weeks, and it’s still roughly tied at 50–50. However, the improvement in economic sentiment may help the government.

Essential poll: Labor regains lead

A national Essential poll, conducted November 13–17 from a sample of 1,206, gave Labor a 48–47 lead including undecided, (49–47 to the Coalition in early November). Primary votes were 35% Coalition (up one), 30% Labor (down one), 13% Greens (up one), 7% One Nation (down two), 2% UAP (steady), 8% for all Others (steady) and 5% undecided (steady).

Albanese’s net approval was down one since October to -5, with 48% disapproving and 43% approving. Dutton’s net approval fell five points to +1, indicating the October sample was pro-Dutton.

By 48–35, respondents thought Australia was on the wrong track, but this was a big drop for wrong track since October (a 52–30 lead). In Essential’s monthly tracking of this question, it’s wrong track’s worst net position since May 2023.

The Guardian reported that for the first time since October 2023, more said they were financially comfortable (51%) than said they were struggling (49%). Better perceptions of the economy should help Labor.

On addressing climate change, 37% (down one since March) thought Australia is doing enough, 33% (down two) not doing enough and 19% (up one) doing too much.

Freshwater poll: Coalition’s primary slips

A national Freshwater poll for The Financial Review, conducted November 15–17 from a sample of 1,046, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead, unchanged from October. Primary votes were 40% Coalition (down one), 30% Labor (steady), 14% Greens (up one) and 16% for all Others.

The primary vote movements suggest a one-point gain for Labor after preferences. Rounding explains why Labor didn’t gain.

Albanese’s net approval dropped three points to -17, with 50% unfavourable and 33% favourable. Dutton’s net approval dropped two points to -4. Albanese maintained a one-point lead as preferred PM by 43–42.

Cost of living was the top issue, with 77% saying it was important, up five points since October. The Coalition’s lead over Labor on this issue dropped two points to 12. The Coalition’s lead on economic management was up a point to 17.

By 47–36, respondents favoured Dutton over Albanese for being best to negotiate with Trump in Australia’s best interests.

On the effects of Trump’s election, by 55–28 voters thought the world would be less safe rather than safer. By 60–10, they thought the world would be less likely rather than more likely to achieve the net zero by 2050 emissions reduction target. By 42–27, they thought the Australian economy would be weaker rather than stronger.

Morgan, DemosAU and Redbridge polls

A national Morgan poll, conducted November 11–17 from a sample of 1,675, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition since the November 4–10 Morgan poll.

In the November 18–24 Morgan poll (1,663 sampled), Labor regained the lead by 51–49, a two-point gain for Labor since November 11–17.

Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down two), 31.5% Labor (up 2.5), 12.5% Greens (down one), 6.5% One Nation (steady), 8.5% independents (up one) and 4% others (down 0.5).

The headline figure uses respondent preferences. By 2022 election preference flows, Labor led by 51.5–48.5, a 1.5-point gain for Labor. By this measure, the November 11–17 poll was the worst Morgan poll for Labor since August.

A national poll by new pollster DemosAU, conducted November 19–21 from a sample of 1,038, had a 50–50 tie, from primary votes of 38% Coalition, 32% Labor, 12% Greens, 7% One Nation and 11% for all Others. This poll used online methods.

A national Redbridge poll
, conducted November 6–13 from a sample of 2,011, had a 50–50 tie, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition since an August Redbridge poll. Primary votes were 39% Coalition (up one), 34% Labor (up one), 11% Greens (down one) and 16% for all Others (down one).

By 61–11, voters thought Albanese had given Qantas preferential treatment over Qatar Airways. On the Greens, 38% used one of two negative statements to describe them and 29% used one of three positive statements, with 14% opting for “the Greens are a party of protest and disruption”.

Irish election and US near-final results

I’ve been following the counting in Friday’s Irish election for The Poll Bludger. A conservative governing coalition of Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and some others is the likely outcome, with support for the left-wing Sinn Féin and the Greens slumping since 2020.

In near-final results from the November 5 US election, Donald Trump won the national popular vote by 49.8–48.3 over Kamala Harris. Republicans won the House of Representatives by a narrow 220 seats to 215 for Democrats and the Senate by 53–47. Recent European elections were also covered.

Labor gains in Tasmanian EMRS poll

A Tasmanian EMRS poll, conducted November 5–14 from a sample of 1,000, gave the Liberals 35% (down one since August), Labor 31% (up four), the Greens 14% (steady), the Jacqui Lambie Network 6% (down two), independents 11% (down one) and others 3% (steady).

Tasmania uses a proportional system, so a two-party estimate isn’t applicable. Incumbent Liberal Jeremy Rockliff led Labor’s Dean Winter as preferred premier by 43–37 (45–30 in August).

In a new question on leaders’ favourability, Rockliff was at +15 (37% favourable, 22% unfavourable), while Winter was at +14 (25% favourable, 11% unfavourable).

SA Black byelection final result

Labor gained Black from the Liberals in South Australia at the November 16 byelection by a 59.9–40.1 margin, a 12.6% swing to Labor since the 2022 SA state election. Primary votes were 47.9% Labor (up 9.7%), 34.1% Liberals (down 16.0%), 13.1% Greens (up 1.3%) and 5.0% Australian Families (new).

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

– ref. Under-16 social media ban supported by 77% as economic sentiment lifts – https://theconversation.com/under-16-social-media-ban-supported-by-77-as-economic-sentiment-lifts-243917

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanne Enticott, Associate Professor, Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University

Australian pride in our universal health system is partly derived from our belief that services should be most available to those who most need them. Logically, this should apply just as much to mental health as to other parts of the health system.

But our new research finds Australia’s mental health care system is not equitable in this way.

While Australians living in the most disadvantaged areas experience the highest levels of mental distress, they appear to have the least access to mental health services.

Mental health disparities

To understand levels of mental distress across the population, we looked at data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). The ABS has classified levels of mental distress according to the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10).

Using this information, and demographic data from the Census, we calculated 29% of working age Australian adults in the lowest income households experience elevated mental distress. This is compared to around 11% in the highest income households.

About 6% of working age adults experience “very high” mental distress, indicating serious distress and very likely a mental disorder. Our analysis showed around 14% in the lowest income households reach this threshold, compared to only 2% in the highest income households.

This clear link between mental distress and socioeconomic disadvantage exists both in Australia and globally.

Mapping inequity

We first examined federally funded Medicare mental health services, largely provided under the Better Access initiative, to establish how equitably – or not – these are distributed. These services are delivered by GPs, psychiatrists, psychologists and allied health-care professionals (social workers and occupational therapists).

Better Access showed some strong initial results in lifting overall access to mental health services in 2006–10. However, more recent data suggest this has plateaued.

We calculated the total number of Medicare-subsidised services provided in a year, and divided this by the number of people with the most need for those services. We defined this group in our study as those with “very high” mental distress according to the K10 scale. This gave us an average number of services available per person. For our calculations we assumed all services were accessed by those in most need of care.

In 2019, if all people with the most need had equal access to mental health care, on average, each person would receive 12 services. The map below highlights regions where the average is higher (darker shades) or lower (lighter shades). It shows significant inequity and service gaps.

Traditionally, comparing mental health service use between areas has been challenging due to differing levels of need for care. So as part of our research, we created something called an equity indicator.

The equity indicator allows us to compare apples with apples, focusing on a key group – those most in need of mental health services. Essentially, we can take an area with wealthy residents and another area with a poorer population and compare them to see how those most in need are accessing services.

We found the equity indicator was six for Medicare-subsidised mental health care in 2019. This means, among those in most need of care, people living in the poorest areas received six times fewer Medicare-subsidised mental health services compared with those living in the richest areas.

Looking back to 2015, the indicator was five. So inequity has increased with time.

Community mental health services

We then looked at public community mental health services. These are mostly public hospital outpatient services, and some other community services not funded by Medicare. We wanted to understand whether poorer Australians are accessing these services, evening out Medicare’s apparent inequity.

When we included these services into our calculations, the equity indicator did drop from six to three. In other words, people with the greatest need for care living in the poorest areas received three times fewer mental health services (community services and Medicare-subsidised services) compared with those in the richest areas.

In 2015, the equity indicator was 2.6, again demonstrating inequity is increasing.

How can we bridge the gap?

Rates of mental distress and demand for mental health services vary across socioeconomic areas. But our analysis paints a picture of a two-tiered mental health-care system, where the “poor” are more reliant on public community mental health services while everyone else uses Medicare.

People with the greatest need for mental health care living in the poorest areas might access fewer Medicare mental health services for a number of reasons. For example, out-of-pocket costs are increasing, which is likely to create financial barriers for many. There’s also a lack of services in a large number of rural areas, many of which are relatively disadvantaged areas.

While community mental health services appear to be partially mitigating the socioeconomic disparity in Medicare-subsidised mental health services, the two service types cannot be viewed as equal or comparable.

Medicare services are largely provided to people with less severe mental health-care needs. Conversely, public community mental health services typically treat people facing serious or complex mental illness in times of acute distress.

Community mental health services are increasingly stretched and not a replacement for Medicare-subsidised mental health care in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas.

Improving access to Medicare mental health services might even help to prevent some of these more acute episodes, potentially alleviating some of the pressure on community mental health services.

A big part of the problem is these two programs were not designed to complement each other or work together. They operate separately, mostly for different clients, rather than as part of an overall “stepped care” model.

We need to properly configure these larger elements of our mental health service jigsaw into a more contiguous design, making it less likely people will fall through dangerous cracks.

This can be achieved through better and more coordinated planning between federal and state mental health services, and funding research to better understand who actually accesses current services.

Joanne Enticott received funding from a grant awarded by Equity Trustees and Monash Partners.

Graham Meadows is a member of the Australian Labor Party.

Sebastian Rosenberg 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. For richer, but not for poorer: how Australia’s mental health system fails those most in need – https://theconversation.com/for-richer-but-not-for-poorer-how-australias-mental-health-system-fails-those-most-in-need-243370

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Dempsey, Associate Professor in Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury

Historically, gas in New Zealand traded below NZ$10 per gigajoule. When prices hit $50 per gigajoule in August this year, anyone with gas to sell could have made a lot of money.

But there clearly wasn’t much gas around. In the end, the big generators Genesis and Contact had to buy gas off Methanex to keep the lights on.

How did this happen? It’s tempting to blame the previous government’s ban on offshore oil and gas exploration. The current government has indeed listed the gas shortage as a reason for its plan to reverse the ban.

But diving into gas statistics held by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) suggests this probably wasn’t the case.

Although the ban was introduced in 2018, companies had already halted most offshore exploration two years prior. And even if a new discovery had been made around 2018, it would probably have taken too long to develop to be ready for 2024.

Why New Zealand ran low on gas

When the 2018 ban was announced, only one offshore permit had been granted during each of the previous two years. As MBIE statistics show, this was quite a drop compared to the period between 2012 and 2016, with an average of six permits per year.

Exploration drilling was down, too. During 2013 and 2014, 40 wells were drilled, but only five between 2015 and 2018. Had any major gas fields turned up, those companies would have been entitled to develop them regardless of the ban – but that didn’t happen.

Past experience in New Zealand shows offshore developments take a long time. The fastest was Pohokura, a major field in North Taranaki, which took six years from discovery to gas flowing. If exploration permits had been obtained in 2018 and successful discoveries made during a subsequent drilling campaign, it most likely wouldn’t have translated to available gas in 2024.

In January 2024, MBIE estimated New Zealand had about 8.5 years worth of gas reserves (1,300 petajoules) at 2023 rates of consumption. There’s certainly gas left, but it can’t all be accessed when needed.

Gas fields are like ATMs – you can only take out so much each day regardless of how much you have in the bank. The flow of gas has been squeezed in recent years by poor production at Pohokura and was compounded in mid-2024 by higher demand from electricity generators when hydro lakes were running low.

If New Zealand had another large offshore gas field, this arguably wouldn’t have happened. But it’s not at all obvious we would have had that capacity in 2024 even without the exploration ban.

Risky investment

Nevertheless, the ban did have some major impacts on New Zealand.

It broadcast a message of urgency and intent to tackle emissions from the fossil fuel industry. Denmark followed suit with their own ban in 2020 and Ireland in 2021. France has been more reticent, proposing a future ban from 2040 but allowing new exploration until then.

The ban also sent signals to large multinational energy companies that New Zealand is a risky place to invest. The fossil fuel industry is rightly uncertain about its future role in New Zealand. Some will see this as a good outcome in pursuit of climate goals. But how far does the uncertainty spread and what might it mean?

The spectre of political intervention creates an investment risk for companies. This is because the large capital works these companies undertake are often debt-funded over a decade or more. Hence, companies need to be confident in their future freedom to operate.

Emissions Trading Scheme distortions

In 2021, the Climate Change Commission released draft advice implying that, due to its high emissions, the Far North’s Ngāwhā geothermal power station would need to close.

The suggested closure was removed in the final advice, and Ngāwhā emissions have since been eliminated. In 2022, in the face of high carbon charges under New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), engineers worked out how to capture and inject carbon dioxide back underground.

The case of Ngāwhā is an ETS success story. Economic pressure was applied to a large emitter and, faced with going out of business, it changed its practices.

A feature of the ETS is its general ambivalence about where emissions come from. One tonne of carbon dioxide produced using natural gas to generate electricity in winter is charged the same as one tonne of carbon dioxide produced when driving freight across the country.

In theory, the market decides which activities can afford to continue and which should die out. In reality, however, the ETS is distorted because it grants free allocations to high-emmiting industries which would otherwise face trade disadvantages. Last week, the government also removed agricultural emissions from the ETS.

This is not to say that other policies aren’t useful in shoring up the deficiencies of emission pricing. But the effectiveness of the exploration ban is debatable. Offshore interest seemed to have already largely subsided and its lack of cross-party support ensured it was shortlived.

On the other hand, the political message it broadcast to major energy players may ultimately ensure its enduring legacy, by dissuading future gas investment.

Structurally, the challenges of 2024 remain. Declining gas reserves must be divided between electricity generators and exporter industries, and the hydro system is vulnerable to similar climate fluctuations.

On a more positive note, utility solar and grid-scale batteries continue their relentless expansion. Of the 22 renewable projects applying for fast-track consent, ten are solar farms.

David Dempsey receives funding from MBIE to research underground hydrogen storage and atmospheric carbon dioxide removal.

– ref. NZ’s gas shortage was not caused by the offshore exploration ban – but it was still a flawed policy – https://theconversation.com/nzs-gas-shortage-was-not-caused-by-the-offshore-exploration-ban-but-it-was-still-a-flawed-policy-242013

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jamie Pittock, Professor, Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University

Some A$13 billion in taxpayer dollars and 30 years of policy reform have failed to arrest the devastating decline in the health of Australia’s most important river system, the Murray-Darling Basin, new research shows.

The four-year study released today involved 12 scientists from Australia’s leading universities, and draws on data from 1980 to 2023. It is the most comprehensive report card to date on government policies to protect the Murray-Darling.

We found expensive and contentious reforms, including the once-vaunted Murray-Darling Basin Plan, have mostly failed to improve outcomes for people and nature along the river system.

The result is deeply alarming for a natural asset so fundamental to Australia’s environmental, cultural and economic wellbeing. Here, we outline our findings, and present a plan to turn this situation around.

A river system in peril

The Murray-Darling river system starts in southern Queensland, winds through New South Wales and Victoria and reaches the sea near Adelaide in South Australia.

Historically, state governments have allowed too much water to be taken from the system, primarily to irrigate crops. This has caused extensive environmental damage such as toxic blue-green algae blooms, dramatic falls in bird and fish populations and undrinkable town water supplies, to name just a few.

The damage has been exacerbated by invasive species, climate change, dams that block water flows, and bush clearing which makes water running into rivers more salty.

What’s more, colonisation dispossessed the nearly 50 Indigenous nations in the basin. They now collectively have rights over less than 0.2% of surface water in the river system.

Government reform to improve the health of the basin dates back more than three decades. In 1994, Australian governments agreed to cap further licenses to extract water from the Murray-Darling. In 2008, Prime Minister John Howard’s “once and for all” reform, known as the Water Act, became law. It aimed to reallocate water from irrigation to the environment.

The reform is largely being implemented through the $13 billion Murray Darling Basin Plan enacted in 2012. The historic deal between state and federal governments was supposed to rein in the water extracted by farmers and make sure the environment got the water it needed.

Almost $8 billion was spent implementing the plan to June 2023. But has this massive taxpayer investment delivered the promised benefits for people and nature? Our new findings suggest the answer is largely no.

Applying expert eyes

When the basin plan was adopted, governments cut funding to the independent audit which monitored the river system’s environmental health. It was replaced with far less effective monitoring systems.

The new systems did not set clear targets to be achieved, or assess real-world outcomes for people and the environment. For example, a government might measure the timing and frequency of water flowing at specific river locations, rather than the numbers of threatened fish species across the basin.

The indicators are also complex
and monitored by government agencies and their consultants, so the results are not independent.

For this study, we developed our own monitoring system. It involved 27 indicators of success across the themes of Indigenous, environmental and social wellbeing, economic performance and compliance with water laws. We used publicly available data spanning more than 40 years.

The study released today reports our essential findings.

What we found

Troublingly, we found that after more than a decade of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, 74% of success indicators were not met. This means there was either no improvement or worsening conditions.

In particular, only two of 12 environmental indicators were met.

Among our findings were:

• flows required to achieve environmental outcomes were not met at 65% of river gauge sites assessed

• water returned to rivers is not effectively used to restore the environment. For example, 79% of Commonwealth environmental water releases from 2014–19 stayed in river channels rather than spilling out to rejuvenate floodplain wetlands

• the abundance of waterbirds is declining and the incidence of very large fish-kill events is increasing, as witnessed at Menindee Lakes, NSW, twice in the past decade

• Indigenous rights over water are declining as a percentage of surface water, and water flows to Indigenous-controlled wetlands has not increased. This grossly inadequate situation prevents Indigenous Peoples from managing water on Country, harming their health and wellbeing

• the basic human right to access adequate, safe drinking water is not being met in many towns, including predominantly Indigenous communities such as Wilcannia, NSW.

The findings are not all negative. We found irrigation communities are not necessarily suffering economically from federal government buy-backs of water entitlements. For example, the period of most water buybacks coincided with marked increases in profits for irrigated farms.

The finding is contrary to claims in several studies, including one commissioned by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority.

Two environmental indicators show an upward trend. Populations of large-bodied freshwater fish are improving, coinciding with the end of commercial fishing. Pleasingly, nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in the Murray River have fallen.

What does all this mean?

So what can we learn from these failures to ensure the Murray-Darling river system is brought back to health?

In 2023, the federal Labor government enacted the “Restoring Our Rivers” laws, to increase the return of water to the environment. This was a very important step, but there’s a long way to go.

The Murray-Darling Basin Plan is due for review in 2026. Clearly, monitoring to date has been inadequate. Our paper outlines ways to fix this, so real outcomes are achieved.

Among our suggestions, river ecosystems could be mapped to ensure Australia meets its international obligation this decade to restore 30% of inland water ecosystems and include 30% of these ecosystems in protected areas.

And those responsible for implementing the basin plan, primarily state and federal government agencies, should be held accountable when targets are not met.

Urgent reform is needed to ensure Australian taxpayers get a return on their investment. We must ensure the Murray-Darling basin and the communities that rely on it can prosper in the decades ahead.

Jamie Pittock is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists. He has roles on a number of government advisory committees and non-governmental environmental organisations involved in natural resources management.
This article is based on an academic paper led by Dr Matt Colloff and involving 10 other co-authors.

– ref. A $13 billion, 30-year flop: landmark study reveals stark failure to halt Murray-Darling River decline – https://theconversation.com/a-13-billion-30-year-flop-landmark-study-reveals-stark-failure-to-halt-murray-darling-river-decline-244296

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rayan Merkbawi, Lecturer, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

One of the Albanese government’s top priorities in education is to see more Australians graduating from university.

It has set a target of 80% of the workforce having a university degree or TAFE qualification by 2050, up from 60% today.

A key part of this will be raising participation rates for people from underrepresented backgrounds. Australians from low socioeconomic backgrounds make up 25% of the population, but only represent 17% undergraduate enrolments in higher education.

Immigrant families often face socioeconomic disadvantages that can effect their children’s opportunities in education. As well as lower incomes, they can have fewer resources and supports.

In our project, we looked at Punchbowl Boys’ High School in Sydney’s western suburbs, where 98% of students come from a non-English speaking background.

We interviewed parents to better understand the challenges they face and how to help them. This is because research tells us families are an important source of motivation and support for young people making post-school plans.

Our research

We interviewed parents from 23 families with immigrant backgrounds. They all had students in years 9 to 12. Most of the parents supported the idea of their children going on to further study. As one parent told us:

I push education for my kids because I want them to get somewhere.

But they also reported many obstacles when supporting their children to go to university.

‘If they could explain’

More than 50% of Australians were either born overseas or have a parent born overseas.

This means they may not have first-hand knowledge or experience of the final years of school, or the options for study and training post-school.

Some parents in our study said they were not familiar with how the higher education system works. They were also unsure about alternative pathways to enrol in university. Many parents told us they would like more specific guidance on the application process.

If they [teachers at the school] could explain how our children are going to finish school, and when we can expect they’re going to receive these emails then they would know when to accept or decline.

Others wanted more guidance on student loans, possible challenges and the “avenues [students] can go down”.

The language barrier

Language was also a “big barrier” mentioned by parents. This made it hard for parents to engage with the school and ask for help. One told us:

when I go to schools, and I want to talk to the schools, I don’t have the strong language ability to confront the school with whatever is concerning me.

Another parent talked about the difficulty of going to parent–teacher interviews:

I went to the parents’ meeting with the teacher, each teacher, one by one, and just reading his mark, not asking or not suggesting a way to improve himself. Okay, I didn’t ask them to be honest, but I felt, like, lost. Like, what should I do?

‘Strugging a lot’

Parents talked about how they often lacked help and security in their lives as they were trying to support their children:

We’re renting, we’re moving, moving too much in one year, we lived in three houses, and that was painful.

They also talked about a lack of family support:

we don’t have a lot of family around here.

Financial challenges also meant there were limited resources to help pave the way to university. They talked about not being able to afford “more tutoring” or other families they knew having to cut back on tutoring.

Some families relied on the children working after school instead of studying, noting if they were “struggling a lot,” then they “need that child to work”.

There was also an overwhelming concern about the eventual cost of a university education. Some interviewees said their child going would depend on getting a scholarship, while others worried about the eventual HELP debt:

we see university as something like that’s going to become a debt for a child later on.

‘A cultural gap’

Parents reported on how cultural differences could make it difficult to engage with their children over education and their aspirations in life. As one parent said:

It’s bit of cultural gap, I think, because the culture of this country and concern in our country is different […] the children, they feel that they are free to do whatever they like, whatever they want, and that the parents cannot stop them.

Parents also raised generational differences – they felt young people lack aspiration and are distracted by technology. As one parent said:

they’re simply controlled by it, and they’re just consumed by it, and they lose interest in other parts of life.

What can we do differently?

Previous research suggests students from migrant families can give up on further study if they don’t have support from their families. This support relies on their families understanding the complexities of the school and university systems – and all the options available to young people.

Our study suggests schools, universities and governments can do several things differently to encourage more students from migrant backgrounds to study at university. These include:

• education programs for parents: these could teach immigrant parents about Year 12 exams, ATARs, university pathways and the long-term benefits of higher education. This could be done through information sessions at school or online resources distributed by the school.

• more school-university partnerships: collaborations between schools and universities can provide early exposure and support, through campus visits and mentoring programs. This can help demystify higher education for students and their families.

• language support: enhancing language support programs already offered by education department trained staff – and making sure they start from the early years of school – is crucial to better involve parents in their children’s schooling.

• financial support: to ease financial pressures on migrant families, universities could expand their equity scholarships to specifically target students from these communities. Financial literacy programs could help families understand and access existing supports, provide guidance on government assistance and long-term financial planning for education.

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

– ref. ‘I felt lost’: immigrant parents want more support to help their children go to uni – https://theconversation.com/i-felt-lost-immigrant-parents-want-more-support-to-help-their-children-go-to-uni-244817

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stuart Richards, Senior Lecturer in Screen Studies, University of South Australia

The so-called silliest time of the year is here. But for many it can also be a stressful time. Whether you’re frantically planning for Christmas and/or New Year celebrations – or steeling yourself ahead of some longer-than-ideal interactions with the relatives – you’re going to want to let off some steam.

We can help on that front. This month’s pickings include an unashamedly gory horror flick, a captivating limited series starring Cate Blanchett, and a colourful new season of Drag Race exploring drag culture down under. Sit back and enjoy!

The Diplomat, season two

Netflix

The Diplomat is clearly a show for those of us who like political drama untroubled by reality. Its basic premise – that a scrappy career officer can be plucked out of the field, named US ambassador to London, and arrive there within 24 hours – sets the scene for a thriller that James Bond himself could have concocted.

Not only is Kate (Keri Russell) an odd choice as the ambassador, she comes with a husband (Rufus Sewell) who is himself a former ambassador and determined to advance them both. As Kate wants both a divorce and hot sex with her husband, this provides a subplot that wouldn’t be out of place in Bridgerton.

The story revolves around an attack on a British ship in the Persian Gulf, and over the two seasons a growing list of suspects are revealed – each one pared back to reveal yet more improbable events. But it allows the wonderful Alison Janney (from West Wing) to appear as Vice President, with apparently the sort of clout Dick Cheney exercised for George W Bush.

Even Australia gets a cameo role, with references to the submarine deal and the delight of the Anglosphere leaders in pissing off the French. And in Trump’s America, Kate is probably overqualified for her role.

– Dennis Altman

What We Do In The Shadows, season 6

Binge

Celebrated mockumentary What We Do in the Shadows has always had a degree of circularity. Across five seasons, the Staten Island vampires – Nadja, Laszlo, Nandor the Relentless and energy vampire Colin Robinson – have bounced in and out of different hobbies and odd fascinations. Meanwhile, put-upon, low-status “familiar” Guillermo unsuccessfully explored various ways to advance his life. In season five he briefly fulfils his dreams of becoming a vampire proper: a disappointing experience.

In the sixth and final season, all are looking for purpose. Guillermo has quit and is looking to break his codependent relationship with Nandor, and the vampires are reevaluating their choices after realising how little they’ve achieved, given their failure to conquer anything beyond their street and half of Ashley Street.

This dissatisfaction prompts Laszlo to revisit his ambitions as a mad scientist, while pushing the remaining characters out into the workforce. Guillermo moves up the ladder quickly at a consultancy, perhaps finding a new master–familiar relationship with his obnoxious finance bro boss, both helped and hindered by the others. It’s an inspired and funny conceit that refreshes and expands the show’s world, while challenging the characters, their relationships and their worst excesses in unexpected ways.

This season also foregrounds the absurd, disruptive presence of the mockumentary camera crew to great and hilarious effect. After a strong run, the show successfully bows out on its own terms – a rare feat.

– Erin Harrington

Disclaimer

Apple TV

Disclaimer is television at its very best. Based on Renée Knight’s 2015 novel, and directed by five-time Academy Award winning Mexican director Alfonso Cuarón, it stars Cate Blanchett, Kevin Kline, Sacha Baron Cohen and Kodi Smit-McPhee.

A famous journalist, Catherine Ravenscroft (Blanchett), discovers she is the character of a novel anonymously sent to her. It reveals her darkest secret and has devastating and life-changing consequences when it emerges.

Billed as a thriller, this seven-part limited series is structured with voiceover, adding depth, character conflict and motivation. Cuarón has used this technique distinctively and evocatively before in other productions such as his acclaimed film Y Tu Mamá También (2001).

Apple TV released episodes weekly so the show couldn’t be binged – which suits its complex production. The first episode unwinds slowly to reveal the background from different viewpoints. There is an ominous atmosphere of flashbacks – even in the highly explicit sex scenes between Jonathan (Louis Partridge) and the young Catherine (played by Leila George).

It’s a high-quality production photographed in an evocative filmic style by Cuarón’s frequent collaborator, three-time Academy Award-winning cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki.

– Lisa French

RuPaul’s Drag Race Down Under, season four

Stan

RuPaul’s Drag Race is a global phenomenon. There have been 16 seasons of the US series, several all-star spin-offs and numerous international versions.

Now, Drag Race Down Under has returned for a fourth season and there are some refreshing changes to the format. RuPaul hasn’t returned as host, with Michelle Visage instead taking the lead. Her rapport with the queens feels genuine and her status as the primary judge is a milestone for cisgender women in drag culture.

Rhys Nicholson has returned as a judge and it’s fantastic to have an Australian comedian who captures the “down under” sense of humour. Other fantastic additions to the rotating judging panel this year are former Drag Race Down Under winners Isis Avis Loren, Spankie Jackzon and Kita Mean – which means local drag knowledge is always featured on the judging panel.

In fact, the cast of this season is perhaps the strongest Down Under has seen. Lazy Susan, Vybe, Mandy Moobs, Max Drag Queen and Brenda Bressed have all demonstrated a strong presence on the show and their performances are consistently impressive.

Lazy Susan’s runways have been particularly strong. In one runway, her use of an electric headdress that projected futurist faces saw her go viral. It’s wonderful to see Australian drag humour being celebrated by the Drag Race juggernaut.

– Stuart Richards

Read more:
Michelle Visage is now hosting Drag Race Down Under. It’s a milestone for cis women in drag

Ready or Not

Netflix

(Spoiler alert)

The 2019 American horror film Ready or Not, recently released on Netflix, is an occasionally amusing satire about the predatory super-rich, and all the metaphorical and literal backstabbing that goes on behind manor doors.

Girl-power protagonist Grace (Samara Weaving) looks and sounds like a privileged, blonde supermodel. But we’re led to believe she is a former foster child from the wrong side of the tracks, about to marry into the sinister Le Domas family dynasty and fortune.

The early scenes offer the slow-build, viewing pleasures of a lavish poolside wedding, followed by a deliciously dysfunctional family dinner with sneaky, old-money eccentrics. Finally, Grace realises it is she who is about to be served up and sacrificed for the amusement of her new family.

It’s downhill from there, however. The plot collapses into a predictable hunt-and-slash horror (think Scream with more upmarket interiors). The film tries too hard to be clever and progressive in a way that comes across as campy and derivative.

An ending in which the demonic in-laws implode as the Sun rises (expect buckets of blood) is so ridiculous it tips over into horror comedy. And the final scene of a dishevelled Grace smoking on the steps while the terrible place burns up behind her reminded me a lot of Heathers (1988) – another, better satire.

– Susan Hopkins

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

– ref. Aussie drag, career vampires and a bloody game of hide and seek: what we’re watching in December – https://theconversation.com/aussie-drag-career-vampires-and-a-bloody-game-of-hide-and-seek-what-were-watching-in-december-244643

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sally Hurst, Adjunct Fellow – Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University

A lot of things scientists study are part of Country – the lands, waters and skies to which First Nations peoples are connected. In Australia, there has to date been little respect for the significance or value of cultural knowledge in scientific practice.

Here is how one of us (Steve Ahoy, Anaiwan Elder and cultural knowledge holder) puts his perspective:

Everything is Country. To Aboriginal people, fossils are artefacts. We don’t see or distinguish between our artefacts and a fossil. Our artefacts come from Mother Earth; a fossil comes from Mother Earth. I come from the Earth. I walk the Earth. I die, I go back to the Earth. The Earth can continue without us. We can’t continue without the Earth.

In our new research, we explored four grassroots initiatives promoting First Nations cultural knowledge alongside Western scientific knowledge. These initiatives show these two perspectives can complement one another and together create a rich tapestry of knowledge about the past.

Institutional distrust

In Australia, especially on land that does not have exclusive Native Title claim, it is not common practice for Earth scientists to consult with local First Nations communities to seek permission before extracting materials such as fossils, rocks or minerals. Archaeologists are required to consult with First Nations communities, but the developers they advise often have no obligation to change their actions in response to the consultation.

Museums have traditionally been warehouses for both natural and cultural heritage collections. However, a history of colonial collecting practices has led to deep-rooted distrust in these institutions among First Nations communities.

As Ahoy puts it:

In my experience, I have never seen a museum freely engage with our community and say ‘Hey, we’ve got your stuff, do you want it back?’ It’s always us having to go through the authorities to […] force the return of our cultural heritage.

Grassroots initiatives represent more trusted ways to protect and communicate about heritage.

1. Found a Fossil project

Fossils and First Nations artefacts are different in their formation, preservation and significance. However, both can be found across the vast Australian landscape, and members of the general public often uncover these objects.

Legislation surrounding the protection of fossils and First Nations artefacts varies across land types and differs in each state and territory in Australia. Information about these rules can be vague, confusing and difficult to find (if it exists at all).

This situation has led to many serious misunderstandings, especially propagation of myths about land reclamation – the idea that if you find Aboriginal cultural heritage on your property, your land could be taken away. (Ironically, removal from their land was exactly what many First Nations communities have historically faced.)

In 2021, one of us (Sally Hurst) started a project called Found a Fossil to understand what members of the Australian public might do if they discovered something, and to raise awareness of heritage protection in an accessible way.

The project surveyed members of the public about their knowledge and created a guide for what to do it if you find a fossil or artefact, in consultation with First Nations peoples, palaeontologists and archaeologists.

The project is the first of its kind in Australia. It acknowledges and promotes the deep connection between natural and cultural heritage, and the need to protect it into the future.

2. Museum of Stone Tools

The Museum of Stone Tools is a digital, open-access collection of 3D models of artefacts. As an online repository, the museum allows in-depth exploration and knowledge sharing, without issues associated with managing physical collections.

The platform has allowed universities and physical museums, students, archaeologists and First Nations groups to use these digital objects for cultural training, education and managing heritage, even when an object has been returned to Country.

3. Broome dinosaur trackways

In Western Australia, on what former premier Colin Barnett once called “an unremarkable beach” near Broome in the state’s north, thousands of dinosaur footprints are preserved in rocks exposed by shifting sands.

The tracks have been a part of Dreaming stories of the peoples of the West Coast Saltwater Sun Down law and cultural group, traditionally known as Goolarabooloo, for thousands of years. Some of the tracks left by three-toed feet, for example, are associated with a creator-being known as Marala, or the “Emu-man”.

In 2015, after several years of collaborative research between palaeontologists from the University of Queensland and Goolarabooloo traditional custodians, the Dinosaur Coast Management Group was established. This is a not-for-profit collective comprising knowledge holders and other members of the Indigenous community along with professional, Western-trained palaeontologists and local dinosaur track enthusiasts.

The main purpose of the group is to inform the public about the significance of the coastline and its dinosaur tracks. The group also works with local interest groups to devise strategies to protect the area from impacts associated with greater numbers of visitors and coastal development. At the same time, the group works to create job opportunities for people in Broome, through educational activities and guided tours for visitors.

4. Rola[STONE] documentary

The documentary Rola[STONE] explores the connections between geology, landscape and cultural knowledge on Anaiwan Country around Armidale, New South Wales. One of us (geoscientist Marissa Betts), in collaboration with Anaiwan Elders, directed the film. It shows how the landscape can be read through a scientific lens and through the Dreaming stories of those who have deep connections to Country.

Valuing layers of knowledge

These case studies show the potential of positive engagement with First Nations peoples, communities and knowledge. They show there are myriad ways to dovetail multiple and different perspectives to promote mutual, two-way benefits.

In Ahoy’s words:

We want people to work with us, instead of us being forced to work with them. Building transparent, educational partnerships is the only way we can guarantee the free two-way flow of information.

Scientists and others working in Western institutions have the opportunity to create meaningful collaborations with First Nations peoples to promote their voices, and share cultural knowledge for the benefit of both parties. In this way we can weave together not just a rich story of the past, but of our future.

Sally Hurst created and works for the Found a Fossil project.

Marissa Betts directed the documentary Rola［STONE］ discussed in this article.

Steve Ahoy featured in the documentary Rola［STONE］ discussed in this article.

– ref. ‘Everything is Country’: these 4 projects blend First Nations knowledge and science to rewrite our understanding of the past – https://theconversation.com/everything-is-country-these-4-projects-blend-first-nations-knowledge-and-science-to-rewrite-our-understanding-of-the-past-243578

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanna Mendelssohn, Honorary Senior Fellow, School of Culture and Communication. Editor in chief, Design and Art of Australia Online, The University of Melbourne

In 1974, when a local Sydney newspaper wrote on the success of two local artists, they were introduced using their husband’s names. Ruth Faerber, who has died aged 102, was named as “Mrs Hans (Ruth) Faerber of Castle Cove”.

This was later expanded to indicate the “housewife, mother of two is the wife of Hans Faerber, a design engineer”, before describing her prizewinning work and noting she was also the art critic of the Jewish Times.

Ever polite, always elegant, Faerber never vocally contested such categorisations. However, from girlhood until her extreme old age, she was first and foremost an artist.

A young interest in art

Ruth Levy was born in the Sydney suburb of Woollahra, on October 9 1922. After a less than pleasant experience at Sydney Girls High with an art teacher she later described as an “absolute whacko”, she became a boarding student at Ravenswood.

Here, she was inspired by her teacher Gladys Gibbons and introduced to printmaking as an art. When Ruth told her father she wanted to leave school and be an artist, he agreed on the condition that “you’ve got to be able earn your own living”.

She enrolled at Peter Dodd’s Commercial Art School. Dodd’s friends included the radical modernists Frank and Margel Hinder, recently arrived from the United States, giving the students a surprisingly radical art education.

Two years later, as the impact of World War II led to young women being encouraged to take the jobs of departed men, the 17-year-old worked as a junior commercial artist.

At the Market Printery she was introduced to photogravure printing and made her first experimental etching.

Ruth continued her studies at East Sydney Technical College. In 1944 she enrolled in Desiderius Orban’s Rowe Street Studio. The refugee Hungarian artist taught that rules were to be broken, that artists must experiment, and to have faith in her creativity.

These were lessons she never forgot.

Making a life as an artist

In 1946, Ruth married Hans Faerber, a young design engineer who had escaped from Germany in 1938.

Despite postwar cultural pressures prescribing that women should solely devote themselves to their families, Ruth continued to paint, turning the garage into her studio and running children’s art classes from home. She wanted to learn printmaking but in Sydney this was not possible: the only lithography course was limited to printing apprentices, and only men were eligible to apply.

In 1961 Joy Ewart donated her lithography press to create Sydney’s first public access print workshop at the Willoughby Arts Centre. Faerber became one of its most active participants.

In 1963, the year of her first solo exhibition, the family moved to a house on Sydney’s north shore. Her new studio was built into the base of the cliff. To provide safe access without the bother of planning permission, Hans removed the floor of the broom cupboard and placed a ladder down to the studio.

Faerber’s ability to disappear into a cupboard straight after dinner did sometimes disconcert her children and visitors, but it gave her time to make art as she worked through the night.

Continual experiments

By 1968 her prints had been acquired by the National Gallery of Victoria and the Art Gallery of NSW, but she knew she needed to learn more.

She received a scholarship for New York City’s Pratt Center. In New York, she saw Rauschenberg’s Experiments in Art & Technology and remembered Orban’s dictum to constantly experiment. She started to use spray paint as a medium and to incorporate photographic images in her work. One print includes a newspaper photograph of Leonard Cohen, made after she saw him perform.

Her return to Australia saw continual experiments. She also began to write, becoming the art critic for the Australian Jewish News. Her reviews were characterised by a generosity of spirit, especially noticing artists at the beginning of their careers. Women and printmakers were favoured subjects.

One of the most significant costs for printmakers is the cost of imported handmade paper. In 1980, Faerber was invited to attend the first hand paper-making workshop at the Tasmanian School of Art’s Jabberwock Mill.

There she realised the possibilities of paper as a medium rather than as a surface.

She abandoned standard shapes. Her experiments with paper became irregular, then sculptural. Paper began to be made with different materials, including tapioca flour and cold tea. She found if she sprayed a paper sculpture with the kind of aerosol paint designed for cars, she could simulate an impression of aged stone.

While she kept a close eye on the latest technical developments, her best tools of trade were sometimes found in the home. Electric frying pans, food processors and a microwave oven were repurposed to make art. An ironing board with a mesh base was used as a press for making paper. She had a long fascination with archaeological sites, realising how fragile civilisations and human life may be.

As she became physically frail, Faerber changed her practice towards making digital prints, seeing how far she could stretch the new media to her ends.

Joanna Mendelssohn has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council

– ref. Australian printmaker Ruth Faerber has died aged 102. She never stopped making art – https://theconversation.com/australian-printmaker-ruth-faerber-has-died-aged-102-she-never-stopped-making-art-230119

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Greste, Professor of Journalism and Communications, Macquarie University

Earlier this year, the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor (INSLM), Jake Blight, compared the sheer volume of Australia’s secrecy laws to works of literature.

“You’d be looking at about 3,000-plus pages. That’s about the same as the complete works of William Shakespeare, War and Peace, and the three volumes of the Lord of the Rings – added together,” he told the ABC.

Of course, secrecy laws are necessary in an increasingly dangerous world. And since the September 11 2001 attacks, Australia has passed more than any other country on Earth – more than 90 by a 2021 count (though the number is now closer to 100).

But as Blight went on to point out, when these laws also smother the transparency that legitimate whistleblowing and investigative journalism bring to a democracy, they can wind up damaging the very system they are designed to protect.

That is why Attorney General Mark Dreyfus’ announcement this week that he has accepted six of the INSLM’s 15 recommendations to reform Australia’s secrecy laws in full, and six others in part, is an important break from the direction of travel.

When classified information causes harm

In Blight’s review of the secrecy offences in the Criminal Code, some of those making submissions (including my own organisation, the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom) argued that many of the laws are inconsistent with the rule of law and human rights principles.

Critics also argue the laws unnecessarily penalise legitimate whistleblowing and criminalise the very journalists, lawyers and activist groups that are essential to the effective functioning of our democracy.

As it stands, the law makes it an offence to “deal with” classified information – a phrase so broad that a journalist or lawyer cannot open an envelope containing a classified document without risking prison. The government has agreed that merely receiving information should not be an offence alone.

The law also assumes that if a document is stamped “classified”, it would be harmful if it were released. It is what the law describes as “deemed” harm.

Instead, the government has agreed that what matters is the actual harm that might be caused if a document is released, rather than the stamp at the top of it.

In his review, Blight agreed the current system of classifying documents depended on secret policies and anonymous public servants rather than the courts. He said, however, that should not form the basis for criminal prosecutions that could send people to prison for years.

He told journalists on Wednesday:

My concern is in taking a policy document and trying to enshrine it in the criminal law. Criminal laws need much more precision than a policy like that can provide.

‘The most extreme secrets’

Dreyfus also agreed to invite the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions to revise the policy to consider press freedom when the office is dealing with journalists or publishers in cases involving classified documents.

But the government did not go as far as Blight had asked, particularly with regard to narrowing the scope of what is considered harmful information about intelligence agencies.

Currently, it is an offence to publish any information from an intelligence agency. Blight had recommended it be restricted to information about the data they handle, their operations, capabilities, technologies, methods and sources.

While Dreyfus agreed the scope of protected information is broad, he said Blight’s recommendation would “remove protections from categories of information which would cause harm if disclosed”.

Blight called that decision “unfortunate”.

Many of our intelligence agencies now do important work, but actually isn’t intelligence work, and I think our laws need to be tailored to that. Extreme secrecy should be focused only on the most extreme secrets.

Government lacking action

Broadly, though, Blight and other groups, including the Human Rights Law Centre and the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, have welcomed the government’s response as an important step towards improving transparency and press freedom.

But accepting the recommendations is not the same as implementing them. The government has a record of promising improvements in transparency, but falling short in terms of passing legislation.

In 2020, the parliament’s intelligence and security committee published a report into the impact of the law enforcement and intelligence agencies on the freedom of the press.

The report included 16 recommendations, and both the government and the opposition accepted 15 of them. Dreyfus, who was the shadow attorney general at the time, went even further. He described the recommendations as “the bare minimum”.

So far, five years on, only one has been implemented.

Peter Greste is Professor of Journalism at Macquarie University and the Executive Director for the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom. The AJF made both written and oral submissions to the INSLM inquiry into secrecy laws. He was also a researcher on a University of Queensland project between 2018 and 2021 that studied the intersection of press freedom and national security.

– ref. The government agrees Australia’s secrecy laws need to change. Now comes the hard part – taking action – https://theconversation.com/the-government-agrees-australias-secrecy-laws-need-to-change-now-comes-the-hard-part-taking-action-244823

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa French, Professor & Dean, School of Media and Communication, RMIT University

The Future & Other Fictions, ACMI’s flagship summer exhibition, explores where storytelling imagines and rethinks the future.

It is an original show co-curated by ACMI’s Amanda Haskard (Gunai/Kurnai) and Chelsey O’Brien, in collaboration with director, featured artist and futurist Liam Young.

Featuring the work of 19 creatives, it brings together an impressive 180 works, showcasing film, videogames, screen-based art, costumes, paraphernalia from movies, video essays, textiles, fashion activism and new commissioned works.

The future, according to Young, “rushes over us like water”. It doesn’t just “happen to us” – “we can all be active participants in shaping and defining it”.

At the opening he described the exhibition as a “call to arms”, challenging visitors to imagine or be empowered to shape a more optimistic world. Young’s analogy with water is present throughout the exhibition.

Moving through the maze

The first part of the exhibition has a video essay that offers a provocative history of future worlds as seen on screen. As you explore, you encounter popular items from Marvel Studios’ Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022) to a miniature from Blade Runner 2049 (2017).

As visitors move through, the set design wraps around us, directing us – a bit like a maze drawing one forward.

Birth of Dawn, by Queensland-based artist Hannah Brontë, uses the pregnant form and water to represent the embodiment of her Country.

This work is mesmerising and tranquil. The experience includes the smell of an earthy blue gum scent, which I identified as suggesting the earth sweating. The exhibition label for this work observes “there is nothing more science fiction than nature itself”.

Another commission, After the End, is designed and directed by Young and written and narrated by Ngarrindjeri, Narungga, Kaurna and Noongar actor Natasha Wanganeen.

It is described in the publicity as reimagining “a world in which fossil fuel production has ceased, and communities return to rebuild the landscape”.

Much of the work evokes the sensation of floating in water. I found it utterly hypnotic. Viewers can recline on bean bags and let the experience gently wash over them.

Other works have this same imagining of speculative (hypothetical) futures, resistance and rebellion, including the idea Indigenous people reclaim sovereignty and Country.

Nigerian-born United States artist Olalekan Jeyifous’s Shanty Megastructures imagines “Anarchonauts”: an advanced and empowered African identity who turn neglected spaces into innovation and sustainability centres.

These works remind the viewer of Mad Max films, initially conjuring up dystopian ideas of society having gone wrong.

But Jeyifous’ vision feels utopian. We observe harmony realised by calm expressions, an image of a mother, child and technology (the latter creatively made wearable). The beaming face of a smiling child tells us that these shanty towns, usually places of extreme poverty, might be optimistic places of social ingenuity.

It flips the Max Max narrative. This society is resilient and thriving.

Screen culture and the future

Screen culture (which is everything a screen community does, from production, to this article, and to exhibitions) has always engaged in futurism, from Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) through to the new commissions described above.

As the exhibition’s introductory wall text offers, many of the innovations of today, from “driverless cars, smart phones, virtual reality – first appeared on screen”.

From this perspective, this exhibition showcases a vision of the transformative power of screen culture for shaping the future. Throughout the exhibition, we are shown how screen productions of the past imagined the future, juxtaposed against contemporary creators speculating about futures they want to live in.

The environment and Indigenous cultures

Many of the works in the exhibition come from the Asia Pacific.

The fashion activist collective the Pacific Sisters celebrate Indigenous identities and mana wāhine (a concept from Māori culture in Aotearoa New Zealand that refers to the power, authority and prestige of women).

Their aim is to preserve culture through costume design and speculative storytelling.

Artwork that dramatically represents their sustainable approach is seen in Kaitiaki with a K; Tauleolevai: Keeper of the Water (Tuna).

There are three imposing fashion artworks, one made from VHS video tape. Due to a lack of materials, they recycled the tape, removing it from cassettes and plaiting it using a technique usually applied to palm leaves for making kikau brooms.

Videotape has its own qualities, shimmering in the light as if it were alive. This is a metaphor; VHS is considered obsolete but, as the wall text reminds us, in Māori and Pacific cultures, “the past lives in the present”.

Interactivity

The exhibition is mentally and physically interactive. It poses thought-provoking questions about our future selves, exploring how artificial intelligence will reshape cinema and whether screen culture predicts the future or merely reflects the fantasies and social realities of the era in which it is created.

It also has lots of interactive features from making posters to using the barcode on the entry ticket to capture things and take them home.

Visitors who’ve ever wondered what sci-fi renegades, afrofuturists, fashion activists, anarchonauts, Indigenous futurism, cyberpunks and screen culture have in common will be enlightened by the end of the show.

Each of these are woven into the story of the exhibition which has a positive message about how screen culture and environmental care can imagine and potentially create a future where human and nature thrive together.

It has something for audiences of all ages and will be a welcome cultural addition to the hot days of Melbourne’s forthcoming summer.

The Future & Other Fictions is at ACMI until April 27 2025.

RMIT is ACMI’s major research partner.

– ref. At ACMI’s The Future & Other Fictions, artists challenge us to imagine a more optimistic world – https://theconversation.com/at-acmis-the-future-and-other-fictions-artists-challenge-us-to-imagine-a-more-optimistic-world-243911

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Girardi, Lecturer in Speech Pathology and Researcher at the Centre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland

Children, especially toddlers and preschoolers, have an uncanny ability to surprise adults. And one of the more alarming discoveries parents can make is their child has stuck a small object, such as a Lego piece, up their nose.

Queensland Children’s Hospital recently reported more than 1,650 children with foreign objects up their nose had presented to its emergency department over the past decade. Lego, beads, balls, batteries, buttons and crayons were among the most common objects.

With the Christmas season approaching, it’s likely more of these small objects will be brought into our homes as toys, gifts or novelty items.

But why do children stick things like these up their nose? Here’s how natural curiosity, developing motor skills, and a limited understanding of risk can be a dangerous combination.

1. Kids are curious creatures

Toddlers are naturally curious creatures. During the toddler and preschool years, children explore their environment by using their senses. They touch, taste, smell, listen to and look at everything around them. It’s a natural part of their development and a big part of how they learn about the world.

Researchers call this “curiosity-based learning”. They say children are more likely to explore unfamiliar objects or when they don’t completely understand how they work. This may explain why toddlers tend to gravitate towards new or unfamiliar objects at home.

Unfortunately, this healthy developmental curiosity sometimes leads to them putting things in places they shouldn’t, such as their nose.

2. Kids are great mimics

Young children often mimic what they see. Studies that tracked the same group of children over time confirm imitation plays a vital role in a child’s development. This activates certain critical neural pathways in the brain. Imitation is particularly important when learning to use and understand language and when learning motor skills such as walking, clapping, catching a ball, waving and writing.

Put simply, when a child imitates, it strengthens brain connections and helps them learn new skills faster. Anecdotally, parents of toddlers will relate to seeing their younger children copying older siblings’ phrases or gestures.

Inserting items into their nose is no different. Toddlers see older children and adults placing items near their face – when they blow their nose, put on makeup or eat – and decide to try it themselves.

3. Kids don’t yet understand risk

Toddlers might be curious. But they don’t have the cognitive capacity or reasoning ability to comprehend the consequences of placing items in their nose or mouth. This can be a dangerous combination. So supervising your toddler is essential.

Small, bright-coloured objects, items with interesting textures, or items that resemble food are especially tempting for little ones.

What can I do?

Sometimes, it’s obvious when a child has put something up their nose, but not always. Your child might have pain or itchiness around the nose, discharge or bleeding from the nose, and be upset or uncomfortable.

If your child has difficulty breathing or you suspect your child has inserted a sharp object or button battery seek immediate medical care. Button batteries can burn and damage tissues in as little as 15 minutes, which can lead to infection and injury.

If your child inserts an object where they shouldn’t:

• stay calm: your child will react to your emotions, so try to remain calm and reassuring

• assess the situation: can you see the object? Is your child in distress?

• encourage your child to blow their nose gently. This may help dislodge the object

• take your child outside in the Sun: brief exposure for a minute or two might prompt a “Sun sneeze”, which may dislodge the object. But avoid sniffing, which may cause the object to travel further in the airways and into the lungs

• never try to remove the object yourself using tweezers, cotton swabs or other tools. This can push the object further into the nose, causing more damage.

If these methods don’t dislodge the item, your child is not distressed and you don’t suspect a sharp object or button battery, go to your GP. They may be able to see and remove the item.

Prevention is better

Preventing these incidents starts with keeping small, shiny, tempting objects out of reach of children, and teaching them not to place objects in their noses or mouths.

Supervision is key. Parents and caregivers can also be stringent about what they bring into their home. If there’s an alternative item, for example, a similar product that doesn’t need a button battery, consider buying that instead.

Curiosity is a hallmark of children and a key learning process in the early years. However, this curiosity, combined with a limited ability to identify danger, can be a risky combination. With awareness of the dangers, supervision, and appropriate action when incidents happen, parents can keep their children safe, while they explore the world.

Anna Girardi works for Ramsay Health Care and Food Solutions Diet Consultants as a speech pathologist. She is affiliated with Speech Pathology Australia.

– ref. 3 reasons why kids stick Lego up their nose – https://theconversation.com/3-reasons-why-kids-stick-lego-up-their-nose-244729

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Baker, Professor of Public Health, University of Otago

The rising threat of epidemics and pandemics adds urgency for the government to act on the recommendations of the long-awaited inquiry into New Zealand’s COVID response.

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into COVID-19 report found New Zealand – like most other countries – was not well prepared for a pandemic of COVID’s scale and duration.

To prepare for the next inevitable pandemic, the report says New Zealand must build public health capacity to increase the range of response options and tools available to decision makers.

The big question is when and how the government will implement these recommendations, particularly in the context of job cuts and downsizing of public health capacity.

Te Whatu Ora/Health NZ is set to cut 1,500 more jobs (on top of more than 500 voluntary redundancies), including positions in the national public health service and its digital and data teams.

These capabilities are critical for any future pandemic response, so there is a strong argument to halt the cuts while New Zealand is implementing the recommendations of the COVID inquiry.

Strategy is key

The report concludes that New Zealand’s adoption of an elimination strategy was highly successful, but had wide-ranging impacts on all aspects of life.

The strategy required early use of border controls, lockdowns and other restrictions which helped prevent widespread infection until most of the population was vaccinated. This response gave New Zealand one of the lowest COVID mortality rates globally.

The report also found that as the pandemic progressed into late 2021, the negative impacts increased. Controlling the pandemic was focused on mandates, including restrictions on public gatherings, quarantine and isolation, contact tracing, masking and vaccination requirements.

The effects included declining trust in government within some communities and loss of social cohesion. Vaccine hesitancy emerged as a growing challenge to the vaccine rollout, fed by exposure to misinformation and disinformation.

The prolonged pandemic and lack of a clear exit strategy from elimination added to the difficulties, according to the commission’s report.

A road map for pandemic planning

The report identifies how COVID expanded international understanding of pandemic pathogens, which require a different kind of response from most other emergencies because of their scale and duration.

This challenge benefits from clear strategic leadership coupled with strong social cohesion and trust. Pandemics require anticipatory governance, and long-term planning and investment. This conclusion is consistent with those of the first published module from the UK’s COVID inquiry.

The report’s 39 recommendations provide a welcome and needed road map for future pandemic planning. It calls for a central agency function to coordinate all-of-government preparation and response planning for pandemics and other national threats, supported by strengthened scenario planning and modelling.

This planning would integrate sector-specific plans. The Ministry of Health would be responsible for the most substantial sector planning linked with the all-of-government plan.

This greatly expanded pandemic plan would set out a range of public health strategies (such as elimination, suppression and mitigation) and associated public health and social measures, as well as guidance on how they might be deployed.

The plan would cover quarantine and isolation measures, contact tracing, testing, vaccination, infection prevention and control, and information and data capability to deliver a pandemic response.

The recommendations also include improving the way public sector agencies work alongside iwi during a pandemic to support the Crown in its relationship with Māori under te Tiriti o Waitangi.

However, the report doesn’t say much about reducing the long-term effects of COVID infection, notably the large burden of long COVID. The pandemic is still continuing and ongoing vaccination and efforts to reduce infections remain important. This is an area where Australia’s COVID inquiry report had a stronger focus.

Challenges of implementation

The report’s final recommendation is critical. It calls for assigning a government minister to lead the implementation process, and for six-monthly reporting on progress to be made publicly available. This is where we need a clear response from the coalition government.

Implementation should begin immediately, the report proposes. However, it’s possible action could be delayed until the first half of 2026 while we wait for an additional phase 2 of the inquiry. This will review aspects of our COVID-19 response in greater detail.

But the major logistical barrier to implementation is the downsizing of key government agencies needed to do this work. The situation in New Zealand is in stark contrast with Australia where the release of their report coincided with an announcement of a A$251 million investment in establishing a national centre for disease control.

Building New Zealand’s pandemic capabilities would also help control the current pertussis epidemic and prevent a likely national measles epidemic.

Meanwhile, the risk of future pandemics is increasing. Modelling suggests an 18-26% chance of another COVID-magnitude pandemic within the next decade.

There is a long and growing list of infectious agents with pandemic potential. High on that list is influenza, with the risk from bird flu (influenza H5N1) increasing as it adapts to new mammalian hosts like cattle, and now humans in North America.

We have the plan, now all we need is a rapid government response, proactive leadership and anticipatory decision-making to give New Zealand the pandemic preparedness it urgently needs.

Michael Baker’s employer, the University of Otago, has received funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand and the New Zealand Ministry of Health for research he has carried out on COVID-19 epidemiology, prevention and control.

Amanda Kvalsvig’s employer, the University of Otago, has received funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand and the New Zealand Ministry of Health for research she has carried out on COVID-19 epidemiology, prevention and control..

Collin Tukuitonga and Nick Wilson 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. The COVID inquiry report is an excellent guide to preparing for the next pandemic – health cuts put that at risk – https://theconversation.com/the-covid-inquiry-report-is-an-excellent-guide-to-preparing-for-the-next-pandemic-health-cuts-put-that-at-risk-244820

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

The just-ended COP-29 in Baku, and the election of Donald Trump, have put the global response to climate change in the spotlight. Meanwhile back home, Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen this week reported Australia is on track to meet its 2030 target to reduce emissions as part of the Paris Climate Agreement.

But the government won’t say whether it will reveal its 2035 target before the election. It points out it is awaiting advice from the Climate Change Authority. The head of that authority, former New South Wales Liberal treasurer Matt Kean, joins the podcast to talk about COP, Australia’s energy transition, and the challenge of preparing that advice on the 2035 target.

Kean says COP left him more encouraged than he’d expected:

I arrived at COP incredibly pessimistic. It was on the back of Trump’s election victory where he basically called climate change a hoax. He said his energy policy was going to be “drill, baby, drill”. And it was clear that there was going to be an absence of American leadership in the climate discussion over the next four years. So, I arrived with not high hopes.

But I left optimistic and positive, and the reason for that is that this is the world’s most important climate conference. It’s the world’s biggest climate conference. It brings together people from all over the globe, be it governments at the national level or sub-national level, businesses, private enterprise, NGOs. And the message that I received from all those actors is, yes, there is a setback, but the effort required and the determination to continue the trajectory that we were on was very, very clear.

It’s an opportunity to collaborate and come up with new ways to solve this challenge. I mean, the world coming together in a global effort to limit global warming by 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels is one of the great challenges of our times. No country alone is going to solve it, and my message to your listeners is this: the fight for a cleaner, safer and better planet by tackling dangerous climate change is bigger than one election cycle in one country at one point in time.

Australia had hoped to get the nod during COP to host (together with Pacific countries) the 2026 COP but a decision has been deferred until June. Kean describes where things are up to and why it’s an important event not just for Australia’s reputation but also for its economy:

I was led to believe that there was a strong indication that other countries might pull out of the race. But clearly that didn’t happen. We arrived in Baku to hear the president of Turkey making a strong and forceful argument as to why Turkey should be the host of that COP. And I think that caught a few people by surprise, to be honest.

But […] hopefully, Australia will be chosen as the country that can host this world-class huge event which will bring lots of economic benefits.

Over 70,000 people descended on Baku. So, regardless of the importance of bringing people together to collaborate and try and solve this challenge, it is a huge economic boon for the city and the country that hosts it. I mean, I can’t think of many events that could attract 70,000 people to Australian shores.

On the Climate Change Authority’s progress report, released this week, Kean highlights a key opportunity for new renewable energy capacity:

Take, for example, one of the recommendations around using more business rooftops to meet our energy needs. Australia has the potential for an extra 28GW of solar capacity using the commercial and industrial rooftops of Australia. That’s bigger than the size of the New South Wales energy system alone.

[The Australian Energy Market Operator] predicts only 5% of the commercial and industrial customer demand will be met by rooftop solar and batteries and that’s compared to 50% for households. So we’ve got a huge opportunity to install more capacity into the grid, ensure that our system is more reliable and able to manage the exit of these unreliable coal fired power stations without adding a huge cost to consumers.

On when Australians will learn about our 2035 targets, and his authority’s advice on them, Kean says Australia will need to submit its targets before next year’s COP, but is coy about when the authority’s advice will be coming:

Let me firstly say what matters most is the quality of the target and the strength of the evidence and analysis that underpin it. So we want to give the Australian people confidence that Australia’s next target is ambitious, achievable and in our national interest.

As far as we’re aware, all countries intend to submit their next targets before the next climate conference in 2025. We will provide our advice in plenty of time for Australia to submit before then.

I’m not going to be rushed by domestic political timetables. I’m an independent voice in this process and as I said, what matters most is the quality of the target and the strength of the evidence and analysis that underpin it.

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: Climate Change Authority head Matt Kean says ‘put more solar panels on commercial rooftops’ – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-climate-change-authority-head-matt-kean-says-put-more-solar-panels-on-commercial-rooftops-244827

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yucong Wang, Lecturer, University of Newcastle

Earlier this month, China declared new “baselines” around Scarborough Reef, a large coral atoll topped by a handful of rocks barely above sea level in the South China Sea.

By doing so, China reaffirmed its sovereignty claim over what has become a global flashpoint in the disputed waters.

This was a pre-calculated response to the Philippines’ enactment of new maritime laws two days earlier that aimed to safeguard its own claims over the reef and other contested parts of the sea.

This legal tit-for-tat is a continuation of the ongoing sovereignty and maritime dispute between China and the Philippines (and others) in a vital ocean area through which one-third of global trade travels.

The Philippines rejected China’s declaration as a violation of its “long-established sovereignty over the shoal”. Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro said:

What we see is an increasing demand by Beijing for us to concede our sovereign rights in the area.

As the tensions continue to worsen over these claims, there is an ever-increasing risk of an at-sea conflict between the two countries.

What is the Scarborough Reef?

Scarborough Reef is called Huangyan Dao in Chinese and Bajo de Masinloc by the Philippines. It is located in the northeast of the South China Sea, about 116 nautical miles (215km) west of the Philippine island of Luzon and 448 nautical miles (830km) south of the Chinese mainland.

At high tide it is reduced to a few tiny islets, the tallest of which is just 3 metres above the water. However, at low tide, it is the largest coral atoll in the South China Sea.

China asserts sovereignty over all of the waters, islands, rocks and other features in the South China Sea, as well as unspecified “historic rights” within its claimed nine-dash line. This includes Scarborough Reef.

In recent years, the reef has been the scene of repeated clashes between China and the Philippines. Since 2012, China has blocked Filipino fishing vessels from accessing the valuable lagoon here. This prompted the Philippines to take China to international arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 2013.

Three years later, an arbitration tribunal ruled that China has no historic rights to maritime areas where this would conflict with UNCLOS. The tribunal also concluded China had “unlawfully prevented Filipino fishermen from engaging in traditional fishing at Scarborough Shoal.”

China refused to participate in the arbitration case and has strongly rejected its ruling as being “null and void” and having “no binding force”.

What did China do this month?

China declared the exact location of the base points of its territorial claim around Scarborough Reef with geographical coordinates (longitude and latitude), joined up by straight lines.

The declaration of so-called “baselines” is standard practice for countries that want to claim maritime zones along their coasts. Baselines provide the starting point for measuring these zones.

A country’s “territorial sea” is measured from this baseline outward to as far as 12 nautical miles (22km). Under the UNCLOS treaty, a country then has full sovereignty rights over this zone, covering the seabed, water, airspace and any resources located there.

Countries want their baselines to be as far out to sea as possible so they can maximise the ocean areas over which they can reap economic benefits and enforce their own laws.

China is no exception. Along with other countries (especially in Asia), it draws the most generous baselines of all – straight baselines. These can connect distant headlands or other coastal outcrops with a simple straight line, or even enclose nearshore islands.

China is especially fond of straight baselines. In 1996, it drew them along most of its mainland coast and around the Paracel Islands, a disputed archipelago in the South China Sea. China defined additional straight baselines this March in the Gulf of Tonkin up to its land border with Vietnam.

China says these actions comply with UNCLOS. However, its use of straight baselines around Scarborough Reef conflicts with international law. This is because UNCLOS provides a specific rule for baselines around reefs, which China did not follow.

Based on our review of satellite imagery, however, China has only advanced the outer limit of its territorial sea by a few hundred metres in two directions. This is because its straight baselines largely hug the edge of the reef.

These new baselines around Scarborough Reef are therefore fairly conservative and enclose a dramatically smaller area than the US had feared.

China’s declaration signals that it may have abandoned its much larger “offshore archipelago” claim to what it calls the Zhongsha Islands.

China has long asserted that Scarborough Reef is part of this larger island group, which includes the Macclesfield Bank, a totally underwater feature 180 nautical miles (333 km) to the west. This led to concern that Beijing might draw a baseline around this entire island group, claiming all the waters within exclusively for its use.

The South China Sea arbitration tribunal ruled that international law prohibits such claims. There will be a collective sigh of relief among many countries that China decided to make a much smaller claim over Scarborough Reef.

Significance and future steps?

However, China’s clarification of its baselines around the reef signals it may be more assertive in its law enforcement here.

The China Coast Guard has said it will step up patrols in the South China Sea to “firmly uphold order, protect the local ecosystem and biological resources and safeguard national territorial sovereignty and maritime rights”.

Given the long history of clashes related to fishing access around Scarborough Reef, this sets the scene for more confrontation.

And what about the biggest prize of all in the South China Sea – the Spratly Islands?

We can now expect China will continue its long straight baselines march to this island group to the south. The Spratlys are an archipelago of more than 150 small islands, reefs and atolls spread out over around 240,000 square kilometres of lucrative fishing grounds. They are claimed by China, as well as the Philippines and several other countries.

These countries can be expected to protest any attempted encirclement of the Spratly Islands by new Chinese baselines.

Clive Schofield served as an independent expert witness appointed by the Philippines in the South China Sea arbitration case.

Warwick Gullett and Yucong Wang 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. Drawing lines in the South China Sea: what Beijing’s new claims over a disputed coral reef mean – https://theconversation.com/drawing-lines-in-the-south-china-sea-what-beijings-new-claims-over-a-disputed-coral-reef-mean-244197

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

On Thursday night, after a whirlwind day in Canberra, the Senate finally passed the federal government’s long-delayed amendments to the Reserve Bank Act.

The reforms will create two separate boards for the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) – one will be focused on monetary policy, the other on governance.

The idea of having two boards emerged from a landmark independent review of the Reserve Bank, which reported back in March last year.

But only a couple of months ago, such reforms were feared “dead” after the government had failed to strike a deal with either the Coalition or the Greens.

The government’s stunning recent turnaround – which required it to make some concessions – will have important implications for the way the Reserve Bank operates.

Whether it will ultimately translate to different kinds of monetary policy decisions is less clear.

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Albanese gets down and dirty in deal making and breaking as Senate rushes to Christmas finish

What will the new board look like?

Under the reforms, the current functions of the Reserve Bank board will be split across two new boards.

The first will be a specialist monetary policy board, dedicated to setting the “target for the cash rate”. This is the interest rate on overnight loans between banks.

Controlling this rate is how the Reserve Bank affects the interest rates charged by banks to households and businesses, and how it exerts its influence on the economy.

Like the current board, the new monetary policy board would have nine members. These would include a governor, deputy governor, treasury secretary and six external members.

Creating this board was a key recommendation of the 2023 review. It would bring the RBA into line with some other central banks, such as the Bank of England.

There is no evidence, however, that having a separate board has led to a superior performance.

Monetary policy experts

Monetary policy board members are likely to be selected for being monetary policy experts, rather than corporate executives and other non-economists.

The six external members will not be RBA staff, public servants or bankers. But they will be expected to spend the equivalent of a day a week on monetary policy considerations.

This is a significant time commitment, meaning it may be difficult to find qualified outsiders who are willing to perform the role.

That’s led some commentators, including former Reserve Bank board member John Edwards, to suggest the board risks becoming dominated by academics.

The other board will concentrate on governance and operational issues, such as staffing decisions, premises, IT and so on. It will be more like the board of a company.

Splitting off monetary policy decisions from this board may mean governance matters get more attention.

Why create a separate board?

It’s important to understand why the government had been pursuing these reforms in the first place.

One key argument that emerged from the independent review of the Reserve Bank was the board wasn’t challenging the governor enough on interest rate decisions – that it was simply “rubber-stamping” decisions.

That would be a problem if true, because providing quality scrutiny is supposed to be one of the board’s key roles.

According to the review’s final report, the board had:

not voted against a recommendation of the RBA executive in at least the last decade.

It said the board was “not always fully involved in decisions” and there was a need to “shift the nature of the board from what is in effect an advisory body to one that proactively shapes policy decisions”.

Differing views

That assertion was soon challenged, however, by then-Governor Philip Lowe, who said in April 2023:

The idea that the board members sit there meekly and accept the recommendation that I put to them is very far from the reality that I’ve lived as the governor.

Recent board member Mark Barnaba echoed Lowe’s sentiment, reflecting:

In my experience, the way this board operates is diametrically opposed to a simple rubber-stamping.

It is difficult to be definitive on this. We have not been in the room during the board’s deliberations – but neither had the review panel members.

It is therefore hard to know just how much the proposed changes will reduce the influence of the RBA governor and staff.

Under the current system, there have not been formal votes on the RBA board. But this does not necessarily mean the governor always gets their way. They may just not bring to the table a recommendation likely to be rejected.

Would a separate board have made a difference earlier?

Australia’s target cash rate has now been held at 4.35% for over a year, its highest level since 2011. That begs the question: if we’d had a separate specialist board of experts earlier on, would we have a different cash rate?

One way of assessing how much difference a panel of monetary policy specialists might have made is to look at the record of the nine-person “RBA shadow board”.

This was established by the Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis. Since 2011, it has been asked to report on what it thinks that the RBA should do. This is distinct from market economists, who concentrate on predicting what it will do.

In 105 out of 130 instances, it has made the same recommendation as that adopted by the actual board.

The average difference between the cash rate target set by the RBA and that suggested by the economists on the shadow board was less than 0.05%.

This would support the conjecture by academics Ross Garnaut and David Vines and journalist John Kehoe that had the separate boards been in place, recent policy settings would not have been very different.

Employment and inflation outcomes would likely to have been similar, too.

What had to be dropped?

To get the legislation through the Senate, the government had to drop two suggestions from the review. One was a proposal to remove the ability of the treasurer to overrule the RBA.

It is important to note this veto has existed in central bank legislation since 1945. It was introduced by a Labor government and retained by the subsequent Coalition government.

But it has never been used, despite having been considered on some occasions. In each case, one side backed off or a compromise was reached between the government and the Reserve Bank.

Actually exercising it would likely come at a large political cost to the government of the day. But that doesn’t automatically mean it shouldn’t be available.

There is a democratic principle around whether a central bank should be able to exercise total “unelected power”.

Back in the 1930s, the chair (this was before the governor became the ex officio chair) of the Commonwealth Bank (the Reserve Bank’s predecessor), arguably exacerbated the Great Depression by refusing to help the Scullin Labor government fund public works.

Another abandoned recommendation was to a plan to remove the Reserve Bank’s power to direct lending policies of banks.

This power has not been used for decades and is highly unlikely to be revived for monetary policy purposes.

Some other changes suggested by the review did not require legislation and have already been implemented.

John Hawkins was formerly a senior economist at the Reserve Bank of Australia.

Selwyn Cornish is the Official Historian, Reserve Bank of Australia.

– ref. The Reserve Bank will now have a separate board just to set interest rates. Here’s why that’s significant – https://theconversation.com/the-reserve-bank-will-now-have-a-separate-board-just-to-set-interest-rates-heres-why-thats-significant-244833

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Hickey-Moody, Professor of Intersectional Humanities, Maynooth, National University of Ireland, RMIT University

I’m not sure if you remember Kaitlyn and Leah […] they are social media famous and they’re a couple. That was the first time I’d seen representation in a positive way, ‘cause of my dad being so conservative about it […] And then I just saw a happy couple together. And I was like this actually doesn’t seem like the terrible thing that I am taught it is, you know.
– Sam

This quote is taken from a recent interview one of us (Anna) conducted with a trans teen living in Melbourne. It was the beginning of what turned out to be a detailed learning journey highlighting the role of internet access in trans youths’ education – and the importance of Instagram in creating safe spaces for them.

The Albanese government has passed a bill that will introduce a minimum age of 16 for most social media platforms, in a bid to protect children from social harm.

But our research has found social media platforms can play a very specific and much-needed role in the lives of Australia’s transgender youth, who face significantly higher rates of suicide and mental health challenges compared with their cisgender peers.

Transgender youth have symptoms of depression at nearly ten times the rate of the general young population, and anxiety disorders at ten to 13 times the average rate. A 2021 study also found nearly half of Australia’s transgender individuals had attempted suicide at some point in their lives.

Poor mental health is not inherent to trans people; it is caused by experiences of societal hostility, stigma, discrimination and a lack of support. Their wellbeing can be significant improved through supportive environments and access to appropriate resources.

Social media can be a lifeline for trans youth

Sam is a university student who lives at home with mum and dad. They have been brought up in a highly conservative Christian environment and speak a lot about their father campaigning against the gay marriage plebiscite.

Sam grew up being told – and believing – that being gay was a sin. They also had no formal education about being transgender. Like so many other young people, they learned about being trans through peer networks and online exploration. As Sam explains:

After somebody had told me their [gender/pronoun] label, I was like what is a label? So I googled it, and I was like what are all these labels? And that’s how I learnt it. And then I also tried to memorise it. I kind of know a lot of them off by heart by now. That’s how the internet has kind of guided me to it.

Sam’s choice to memorise the various gender identities beyond male and female goes some way to explain how important this information was to them.

While exploring their most positive life experiences, Sam focused almost entirely on Instagram accounts. They explained how various pages helped them learn about gender and sexuality and how the transgender accounts they followed helped boost their confidence.

Instagram is Sam’s safe and happy place of belonging. In contrast, Sam struggled – even with significant encouragement – to list happy “offline” places.

Sam’s story is just one of several examples that emerged from our research on how online platforms function as vital safe spaces for trans youth growing up in conservative religious households — which are often hostile to their identities.

Through virtual communities, many young people can navigate their faith while also exploring their gender identity. Online, they can find support networks and access mental health resources that would otherwise be unavailable.

A host of challenges

The government’s legislation will prevent people under 16 from creating accounts on sites such as Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok. But social media experts have raised concerns that this may cause more harm than good.

Many have raised questions about what platforms will be included in the ban, and how “high-risk” platforms will be differentiated from exempt “low-risk” ones.

The ban’s feasibility has also been challenged, as young people may find workarounds to continue accessing banned platforms. Some experts have even said the ban may be unconstitutional.

While these legislative moves to regulate social media seem well-intentioned, they risk cutting off a vital lifeline for trans youth. These young people need nuanced policies that will support them, rather than isolate them.

For the trans youth we speak to, social media sites can be healthy and life-giving spaces – and they ought to be kept available.

Anna Hickey-Moody receives funding from the Australian Research Council. This article arises from research that is funded through Discovery Project DP220100159 ‘Youth, religion and sexuality: digital media, school cultures, exemptions’.

Lizzie Maughan 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. Trans youth are already among Australia’s most marginalised people. The social media ban could make this worse – https://theconversation.com/trans-youth-are-already-among-australias-most-marginalised-people-the-social-media-ban-could-make-this-worse-244657

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharina Doehring, Freshwater Scientist, Cawthron Institute

Water is the lifeblood of our planet. But in Aotearoa New Zealand, a staggering two-thirds of the rivers monitored for water quality are classified as unswimmable. Only 2% of large lakes are deemed to be in “good health”.

Unfortunately, this decline is due to the human impacts of urbanisation, intensive agriculture and poor land management. Many communities that depend on freshwater sources have witnessed this deterioration firsthand.

To address this critical issue, numerous catchment care groups have emerged over the past decade, championing sustainable land management to enhance the health of New Zealand’s rivers, lakes, aquifers and wetlands.

These groups engage in activities such as planting native vegetation along waterways, erecting fences to keep livestock at bay and altering farming practices to be more environmentally friendly. Many people care deeply about the land and water, and their intricate, collective knowledge is a powerful force for change.

Collective storytelling as a tool for freshwater restoration

Over the past few years, we have been listening to these communities and exploring a tool that might elevate their efforts and empower those who haven’t yet started on their river restoration journey. It’s a simple and ancient tool rooted deeply in human history and embedded in our social identities today: collective storytelling by trusted storytellers.

Rural communities, including food producers, identify with trusted peers. When they share their experiences, others can learn from them. We saw that this kind of trust motivates people to get involved in caring for waterways, for the benefit of generations to come. It is independent of changing governments and policies, and grows stronger when passionate people come together, united by their shared sense of place.

Our research highlighted an absence of collective storytelling in national freshwater restoration efforts and pioneered a way to develop this at scale.

To this end, we have been working with the Land Air Water Aotearoa (LAWA) environmental reporting platform. Communities can now share their restoration knowledge as “Actions for Healthy Waterways” in the form of stories. Beyond reporting facts and figures alone, stories represent more meaningful narratives that others striving for healthy waterways can relate to.

We interviewed 23 land managers and met with five catchment care groups across Aotearoa New Zealand. We discussed why knowledge sharing is important, how knowledge should be shared and who may be best placed as knowledge brokers.

Based on those conversations, we highlight three guiding principles of collective storytelling that can enhance the restoration of rivers, lakes, wetlands and aquifers.

1. Respected storytellers

Trust is crucial. It influences who is believed and who inspires action. When peers share their experiences, particularly farmers discussing restoration efforts, collective responsibility is created and drives others to participate.

One food producer encapsulated this sentiment, noting:

If you start creating that collective responsibility, then you can go, ‘Oh yeah, you’ve put a hundred [trees in] – we’ll do a hundred, too.

Catchment champions – locally respected individuals who are driving restoration activities and encouraging others – are immensely important in amplifying these stories. We found authentic storytellers could be individuals or an entire catchment group, as long as they held this trust.

In the New Zealand context we would say they had the mana (authority, prestige, status, charisma). One participant shared:

I’m a newcomer, so I was learning what’s gone well and what works. I don’t want to make someone else’s mistake, I can’t afford to already, so if I go “Oh this works well”, I will do that, too.

2. Authenticity in storytelling

The content of stories is as vital as the tellers. It needs to be genuine and honest.

Catchment care groups emphasised that restoration stories need to include failures as well as successes. Celebrating successes, like the return of a fish species, while also acknowledging challenges, such as vegetation die-off, creates a more genuine narrative. This unconditional storytelling fosters connection through shared experiences.

As one participant highlighted:

It is important to share what we know about land management and restoration: the things that worked and the things that didn’t work.

3. Future generations motivate action

The motivation behind restoration efforts is a crucial aspect of knowledge sharing.

Our research shows that rural communities expressed a profound responsibility to act triggered by a concern for future generations.

Farmers frequently voiced a desire to leave rivers in better condition for their children and grandchildren, saying:

We acknowledge that we are only passing through, so that whatever we do now should have long lasting impacts for our children.

This inter-generational perspective fosters a long-term commitment to restoration. While our study participants were Pākehā (New Zealanders of European ancestry), this view aligns well with kaitiakitanga, the integral Māori principle of environmental stewardship. It illustrates a shared deep sense of responsibility for future generations.

Given that reversing damage to freshwater systems will require sustained effort over time, collective storytelling that emphasises inter-generational goals helps cultivate patience and resilience within communities. It also possibly avoids disappointment when improvements are not seen as quickly as hoped.

We advocate for the broader integration of collective storytelling as a valuable strategic tool in restoring the health of waterways globally. At the same time, we emphasise that restoration is only one part of improving freshwater health.

Substantial changes in land use will also be needed in New Zealand and elsewhere to prevent further degradation. Authentic, local and collective storytelling can help both the transition in land use and restoration.

Katharina Doehring receives funding from MBIE, MFE and MPI. She is affiliated with the Motueka Catchment Collective (Steering Group member), Wai Connection (Governance Group member), New Zealand Advisory Group for Freshwater Citizen Science (member), Freshwater Champions Awards (Judge).

Cathy Cole is affiliated with the Graduate School of the Environment, at the Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT) in Wales. She is a former Lecturer in Science Communication at the University of Otago in New Zealand.

Nancy Longnecker receives funding from MBIE, Marsden, Health Research Council, and Lotteries Environmental Heritage. She is a member of the Green Party. Before her work as a practicing and academic science communicator, she conducted research on nutrient efficiency in agriculture.

– ref. How sharing stories about river restoration can inspire others to take care of waterways – https://theconversation.com/how-sharing-stories-about-river-restoration-can-inspire-others-to-take-care-of-waterways-241359

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amelia Leavesley, Research Fellow in Urban Sustainability, The University of Melbourne

Earlier this week, the mining magnate Andrew Forrest made headlines calling for a global “polymer premium” – or plastic tax – to be placed on every tonne of newly manufactured plastics. A tax like this could form part of the Global Plastic Treaty being hammered out right now in Busan, South Korea. In fact, a treaty aimed at stopping plastic waste will have to have strong measures such as a plastic tax or a cap on plastic production to shift the status quo.

In economics, taxing things you don’t want should mean fewer get made. What Forrest is pitching is a way to curb the seemingly unstoppable rise in plastic production and tackle the plastic waste crisis at its source. While we may think recycling is all we need to solve the plastic waste problem, it’s nowhere near enough. Plastic is steadily choking seas and rivers, while toxic microplastics damage our health.

Forrest isn’t the first. Environmental groups and think tanks are also calling for a global tax on plastic producers and importers.

Many plastic products are designed to last for a long time. But manufacturers are increasingly churning out cheap plastics such as single-use items and food packaging which almost inevitably become waste.

Introducing a tax would add an additional cost to making virgin (new) plastic, to deter manufacturers from producing and selling as much non-recyclable and non-reuseable products as possible. If introduced, they would go some way to cut the overproduction of plastic.

What would a plastic treaty do?

Over this week and next, negotiators from more than 170 United Nations member states are working towards a Global Plastic Treaty at the fifth and final set of talks.

Work on this treaty has progressed rapidly. It was only in 2022 that 175 nations voted to adopt a historic resolution to negotiate a legally binding international treaty to end plastic pollution. In recognition of the danger posed by unchecked plastic production, nations set an accelerated timeline. If a treaty is agreed, it could come into effect as soon as 2025.

It would operate much like the legally-binding Paris Agreement on climate change, which requires nations to regularly report their greenhouse gas emissions and efforts to cut them. A Global Plastics Treaty would include binding measures requiring signatories to commit to action on plastic pollution. But exactly what will be covered and how is yet to be decided.

Nations have already agreed on measures to improve waste management and recycling as well as new design standards for plastic products.

While positive, the hardest part is yet to come.

These final negotiations wraps up on Sunday. Still to come is a decision on the most contentious issue: whether to introduce limits on how much plastic a company can produce. Plastic industry lobbyists are arguing strongly against any cap to plastic production.

Recycling isn’t enough

Plastic pollution has been a problem for decades. But to date, our efforts to respond have hardly made a dint. Today, there are about 7 billion tonnes of plastic waste in the world. So far, just 9% has been recycled.

The rest ends up burned in incinerators, in landfills, or in rivers, seas and forests. Plastics can also damage our health in many different ways.

Plastic production doubled between 2000 and 2019, reaching 460 million tonnes a year. By 2060, production is projected to almost triple that figure, to 1.2 billion tonnes a year.

An increasing proportion of plastic production is single-use packaging, which is cheap to make and almost impossible to recycle.

Researchers have found recycling and waste management will only cut plastic pollution by 7% in the long term. These tools won’t be enough.

Plastic taxes are not new

In 2021, the European Union introduced a levy on non-recycled plastic packaging waste created by its member states. Set at €0.80 (A$1.30) per kilo, the cost is borne by national governments, who in turn can pass the cost on to producers. The levy is expected to generate A$11.3 billion per year when fully implemented.

Nations in Europe have already begun to pass on the cost. Last year, Spain imposed a tax on producers and importers of single use plastic packaging, while Hungary expanded an existing scheme to include plastic products. Earlier this year, Bulgaria, Portugal and the United Kingdom introduced their own fees for single-use plastics.

Because these taxes are new, it’s difficult to fully assess their impact. But over time, these incentives should reduce plastic pollution and boost government revenue, which can be used to drive better recycling and resource recovery.

Australia’s government is consulting on new standards for packaging in a bid to phase out dangerous chemicals and boost use of recycled plastics, while some state and territory governments have introduced bans on single-use plastics. But plastic waste researchers and environmental advocates argue that stronger measures are needed to curb plastic waste.

Taxing single-use plastic packaging in Australia could raise $1.5 billion, according to one study. These funds could be used to accelerate progress on plastic pollution.

A global treaty needs teeth

Over the last 70 years, plastics have become ubiquitous. But the convenience of cheap plastics comes at a cost to our health and the health of the natural world.

Tackling plastic pollution will take concerted effort and financing to reduce plastic production.

As Andrew Forrest and others point out, taxing virgin plastic could discourage overproduction of plastics and encourage more investment in recyclable and reusable plastic products.

But for plastic taxes to work, they need to be widely adopted. That could be as part of the Global Plastic Treaty, or done on a national level. Plastic taxes could work as an alternative to capping plastic production, if negotiators can’t reach agreement in Busan.

Plastic taxes are not a silver bullet. We would still need a suite of measures addressing plastics throughout their lifecycle, from design and production to recycling and disposal. But putting a price on plastic would help.

Amelia Leavesley 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. A tax on new plastic would slash waste – if built into the global treaty on plastics – https://theconversation.com/a-tax-on-new-plastic-would-slash-waste-if-built-into-the-global-treaty-on-plastics-244517

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Glenys Oberg, PhD candidate in education and trauma, The University of Queensland

Teachers’ jobs involve more than just teaching the required curriculum. A significant part of their role includes providing emotional support to their students

And with many students facing mental health challenges and experiencing trauma, meeting these emotional needs has become increasingly difficult.

My research investigates compassion fatigue among Australian teachers. This condition — which involves a reduced ability to empathise with others — can develop when people face ongoing emotional and psychological strain.

How is compassion fatigue impacting our teachers? And what can be done to address it?

What is compassion fatigue?

Compassion fatigue is a term for the physical, emotional and psychological impact of helping others who are under stress or experiencing trauma.

While this condition is commonly associated with healthcare workers, first responders and psychologists, teachers are also at risk.

Compassion fatigue involves two related conditions: burnout and secondary traumatic stress.

Burnout is characterised by emotional exhaustion, de-personalisation and a reduced sense of personal accomplishment.

Secondary traumatic stress mirrors symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It occurs when teachers hear about or witness their students’ trauma and begin to experience symptoms like emotional numbing, intrusive thoughts or avoidance behaviours.

What is happening in Australian schools?

Children with trauma and poor mental health make up a significant part of Australian classrooms.

A 2023 Australian Bureau of Statistics study found 38.8% of 16-to-24-year-olds had experienced a mental disorder within the last 12 months, an increase on previous studies.

That same year, a Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne survey revealed one in three children between eight and 13 experienced symptoms of a mental health problem.

The Australian Child Maltreatment Study also found 40% of young Australians aged 16–24 had experienced more than one type of abuse, such as physical violence or neglect. Other research shows during 2019 and 2020 about 3% of Australian children received child protection services.

Managing outbursts and trauma

This means teachers are regularly managing emotional and behavioural crises in classrooms. This might include student meltdowns, violent outbursts or other disruptive behaviours.

Teachers are also exposed to their students’ traumatic experiences while trying to provide support. Research shows these interactions significantly contribute to stress and anxiety among educators.

Australian research has highlighted how compassion fatigue, burnout and secondary traumatic stress are significant factors pushing teachers out of the profession.

These issues don’t just impact teachers they also affect students. When teachers are highly stressed, research shows students are more likely to behave poorly in the classroom and record lower academic performance.

My research

In early 2023, I surveyed 1,612 Australian teachers to understand how compassion fatigue affects their emotional wellbeing. I also conducted interviews with 57 teachers later in the year to gain deeper insights in a study, which is yet to be published.

Teachers in my study worked across the country, though most were from Queensland primary schools. More than 93% of respondents were women.

I found 73.9% of respondents had moderate-to-high levels of burnout when compared to the general population, while 71.5% were exhibiting signs of secondary traumatic stress. These results align with findings from other research. For example, a 2024 study on Victorian teachers reported similar rates.

While additional research is needed to fully understand the scope of this problem in different types of schools and different locations, these findings suggest compassion fatigue and related issues are affecting a significant proportion of Australian teachers.

‘Extreme and very real’

Teachers who had compassion fatigue, spoke about how their emotional state was deeply influenced by the emotional needs and behaviours of their students. As one teacher told us:

The students that I am caring for at the moment are a very hard cohort. My compassion fatigue is extreme and very real at the moment. I am exhausted.

Another teacher noted how they could gauge how the day would go, based on the mood of their students.

When they’re struggling, I find it hard to keep my own emotions in check.

One teacher explained the difficulty of managing student behaviour while dealing with emotional exhaustion:

When behaviour blows up, which it does several times a day, I just don’t know if I have the energy to respond compassionately.

‘It’s frustrating’

Teachers described a tension between providing emotional support to students and needing to teach the required curriculum and meet administrative responsibilities.

It’s frustrating knowing what the students need emotionally, but the curriculum and administrative demands don’t leave room for that kind of support.

This also reflects a broader issue for teachers – who increasingly note how the pressure to constantly provide data about what they are doing limits their ability to focus on their students in general.

Impossible to switch off

Because of the intensity of the issues they encounter, teachers find it difficult to leave their work at work. As one interviewee told us:

The emotional load from school often follows me home. I find it hard to stop thinking about my students, even when I’m supposed to be relaxing.

Some teachers also feel like they should not be relaxing (out-of-hours) when their students need help.

It’s hard to focus on self-care when I know my students are struggling. I feel guilty taking time for myself when I should be helping them.

What can we do?

Supporting teachers who experience compassion fatigue requires a combination of three things.

1. Trauma-informed training: this can equip teachers with strategies to address trauma in their classrooms while also protecting their own mental health. Studies have shown trauma-informed approaches can improve teacher resilience and reduce burnout.

2. Mental health support: teachers should have access to counselling services and peer networks where they can share their experiences and receive guidance. Programs like “reflective circles”, which offer structured opportunities to process emotional challenges have been shown to be particularly effective in reducing stress and improving wellbeing for teachers.

3. Systemic changes: schools can reduce workloads, offer better administrative support and recognise the emotional labour involved in teaching. Research shows these changes help teachers manage their stress and enhance “compassion satisfaction”. This is the opposite of compassion fatigue and is the rewarding feeling of making a difference in students’ lives.

Understanding the toll of compassion fatigue and supporting teachers’ wellbeing ensures they can continue providing essential care and guidance to students.

Glenys Oberg 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. ‘I am exhausted’: Australian teachers speak about how compassion fatigue is harming them and their work – https://theconversation.com/i-am-exhausted-australian-teachers-speak-about-how-compassion-fatigue-is-harming-them-and-their-work-244519

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Toohey, Professor of Law, UNSW Sydney

This article is part of The Conversation’s “Business Basics” series where we ask experts to discuss key concepts in business, economics and finance.

Thanks to US President-elect Donald Trump, the term “trade war” is back in the headlines. Trump campaigned successfully on a platform of aggressive trade policies, and since being elected, has only doubled down on this posture.

On Tuesday, he threatened Mexico and Canada with new 25% tariffs on all goods, and a separate “additional” 10% tariff on China “above any additional tariffs”.

While the term might conjure up dramatic images of battlefield tactics, the real economic impact of any looming trade war is likely to hit much closer to home – both for Americans and the rest of the world.

Global supply chains are deeply interlinked. That means a major trade war initiated by the US could push up the prices of all kinds of goods – from new cars to Australian-inspired avocado on toast.

To understand where we might be headed, it’s worth unpacking the metaphor. What exactly is a trade war? What are the “weapons” countries use? Perhaps most importantly – can either side win?

The weapons of war

There are many “weapons” available to a country in a trade war, but tariffs are often a popular choice. This is simply an extra tax put on a product as it crosses a border as an import.

For example, all else equal, Trump’s proposed 25% tariff on goods from Canada would bump the price of a $32,000 Canadian-built car up to $40,000.

Tariffs are usually paid by whoever is importing the product and paid to the government of the importing country.

That means the extra cost is almost always passed on to consumers.

Why would any government want to force prices up like that? Because it gives locally produced goods without the tariff a cost advantage.

That might seem like a reasonable way to protect local industries, but tariffs can backfire in unexpected ways. Consider how many foreign parts go into “American-made” products.

When a car rolls off a US assembly line, it’s built from thousands of components – many of which have to be imported from other countries. If those parts face tariffs, manufacturing costs rise for domestic producers, and prices rise further for domestic consumers.

Read more:
What are tariffs?

Limiting what comes in

There are other trade restrictions, too, referred to as non-tariff measures.
Quotas are one example. These place limits on how many units of something can be imported during a specific time period.

Returning to our earlier example, the US could choose to set an import quota on that same Canadian-made car of one million per year. Once that limit had been reached, no more Canadian cars could enter the country, even if consumers wanted to buy them.

This artificial scarcity can drive up prices because demand stays the same while supply is restricted. Like tariffs, the theory is that those higher prices for imports will cause consumers to favour locally manufactured goods.

More covert weapons

Some other trade restrictions are more covert – arguably easier to conceal and deny.

Imagine your export permit was cancelled without explanation or your shipment of lychees was left rotting in a foreign port for reasons that seem to be political.

Or your country suddenly disappears from another country’s electronic export system, meaning that you now cannot export anything there at all (this happened to Lithuania, which was removed from China’s customs database).

These are the sorts of trade war tactics that my research team and I have been studying in our Weaponised Trade Project.

We have collected nearly 100 examples of coercive trade weapons over the past decade, used by a wide range of countries against their competitors.

Today’s tariff is tomorrow’s trade war

Once deployed, trade weapons can cause political tensions to escalate rapidly. Other countries often retaliate with their own tit-for-tat measures. From there, they can escalate into full-blown trade wars.

The new president of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, has already warned this may happen, in response to Trump’s threats earlier this week.

One tariff would be followed by another in response, and so on until we put at risk common businesses.

We’ve had some nasty trade wars before. One of the most notorious examples from history were the “beggar-thy-neighbour” tariffs and other protectionist policies of the interwar years, which deepened the Great Depression.

You might remember this from the classic movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off:

When countries restrict trade, prices typically rise for consumers, jobs can be lost in industries dependent on foreign materials, and trade and economic growth slow on both sides.

Politicians might claim victory when their foreign competitors make concessions, but economists generally agree that trade wars create more losers than winners.

Lisa Toohey receives funding from the Australian Government for a research project on Weaponised Trade, funded under the Defence Strategic Research Grants Program.

– ref. What’s a trade war? – https://theconversation.com/whats-a-trade-war-244750