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

The “maybe” March 25 budget is now a definite, the government’s hand forced by cyclone Alfred.

Anthony Albanese held open his option of calling an April 12 poll this weekend until the battering winds and waves and certain flooding made totally clear on Friday what had been obvious to many people from the start. Announcing an election on the back of a cyclone would be madness.

But the prime minister couldn’t quite bring himself to admit the April poll had been in his sights, although that was widely acknowledged within the government. He told the ABC late Friday, “I have very clearly said for a long period of time that we announced last year we’d produce a budget on March 25. That certainly is my clear intention, and has been.”

Which doesn’t exactly fit with quite a few people around the government, who had been on election alert, being left discombobulated by the turn of events.

This unavoidable budget presents opportunities and risks for the government.

It will frame the campaign that follows for a May election (the options are May 3, 10 or 17), and elevate the status of measures it contains (likely to include more relief for energy bills) from campaign promises.

It will also put front and centre the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, the government’s best communicator.

On the downside, as many have said, it will highlight a string of deficits. But independent economist Chris Richardson points out these numbers would have come out anyway, either in an economic statement the government probably would have brought down if there was no budget or (compulsorily) in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook (PEFO) prepared by Treasury and Finance and released in the campaign.

Richardson also argues that, deficits notwithstanding, the government will have good news to emphasise in the budget, about falling inflation and strong employment, plus revenue improvements since the mid-year budget update in December.

The government has already been announcing big spending items this year so it can’t afford, if it is being responsible, to throw too much more money around on March 25.

The pressures on the budget will be increased by the costs imposed by Alfred. Albanese said on Saturday, “This will have an impact on the national economy – there’s no question about that. Already it’s having an impact.”

The prime minister adopted a particularly high profile in the days leading up to and during the cyclone (even though state governments carry the big loads). The message is his government is here to, and able to, support people in times of trouble and need. There is the opportunity to use the experience of the cyclone to make this a more general theme in the budget – that the government has your back. That’s assuming the aftermath of the cyclone is not filled with stories of things going wrong.

Many in the commentariat are likely to approach the budget with a mindset of scepticism, just because it will be an election budget. This means the publicity around it might be more negative than positive.

Budget week will give opposition leader Peter Dutton the traditional reply on the Thursday night. Depending on how he handles himself, this could be a useful platform for him. On the other hand, an unconvincing speech would be damaging.

Then there are the Senate estimates hearings. These can be dangerous for a government, affording the opposition a forum to pull the budget apart and in practice to range more widely in quizzing officials.

We saw last week how potent Senate hearings can be, when they exposed details around the Chinese Navy’s live-fire exercise in the Tasman Sea. The hearings revealed the extent to which Australia had been caught short.

Back in the government’s engine room at the weekend, they say most of the major decisions for the budget have been taken. The focus will turn to last minute tinkering, and the messaging and cosmetics. But before he gets to that, Chalmers on Saturday was out and about in his Brisbane community of Logan, where the preoccupation remained the aftermath of now ex-tropical cyclone Alfred.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Alfred forces Albanese into budget of risks and opportunities – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-alfred-forces-albanese-into-budget-of-risks-and-opportunities-251622

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Westrupp, Associate Professor in Psychology, Deakin University

Cyclones and floods are terrifying and unpredictable. The stress of ensuring your family’s safety, worrying about what might happen and then coping with the aftermath can feel overwhelming.

Some parents are also managing kids and young people through the crisis. You may be worrying about how these events may impact your kids going forward.

The situation is obviously very serious, but there are steps parents can take to protect their children and help them navigate the (now ex-tropical cyclone), flooding and the days that follow.

How we cope matters

Research shows the way we feel (for example, worry, fear, hope, confident) during and after traumatic events, can impact our longer-term mental health and wellbeing.

We might think distress is the most common reaction after a natural disaster. But in many cases, we can experience positive personal growth.

Research shows families do better when they actively work together, helping each other and problem-solving. Finding practical solutions together can give us a sense of control and connection.

Research also suggests if we have feelings of hope and confidence during difficult times, it can build resilience.

One way to help reduce distress is to accept the situation and acknowledge everyone’s emotions all the way through. This also helps build a sense of security and support.

Research also shows extreme reactions – such as fixating on the event/news and becoming highly distressed – or ignoring and suppressing emotions, can make it harder to cope and increase our distress.

So parents, keep calm and carry on

Parents are role models, and in stressful times, children look to us to understand the situation and how to respond.

If parents are visibly upset, fearful or anxious, it can make the situation feel out of control for children.

So while you are understandably experiencing a range of emotions, it’s helpful to process them away from young children. With older children, you can share feelings of sadness or fear, but it’s still important to remain calm to show that everything will be okay.

Sticking to familiar routines helps both you and your child feel safe. It reassures them when life continues. So, go about daily activities as best you can.

Talk things through if you need

This is not to say you should ignore the cyclone or events related to it.

Talking openly about the situation helps children understand what’s happening and gives parents the chance to reassure their kids. There’s no need to go into excessive detail – a calm, simple and factual response is usually the most effective way to comfort them.

All children are different. Some may be naturally anxious or sensitive, while others may pay less attention to what’s happening around them. In general, children are more capable of handling difficult or distressing events than we might expect.

If your child is upset or anxious, it’s important to acknowledge their emotions and listen. Empathise with your child — what has happened is frightening and their response is completely natural.

Parents may feel tempted to dismiss their child’s fears (“don’t think about it!”) to avoid making the situation worse, but emotions don’t work that way. By allowing children to express their feelings, you help them process and move through their emotions.

Read more:
How to get your kids to talk about their feelings

Restoring normal life after the storm

Once the cyclone passes, children may still feel unsettled – something big has just happened, could it happen again? It’s possible power and water are cut off, there’s flooding, or the family home is damaged, making things feel strange.

Helping them find ways to feel confident and hopeful can help speed up their recovery. Reassure your child the cyclone is over and keep offering them space to talk about what happened if they wish.

Though keep in mind, it’s important to strike a balance — while it’s helpful to let children express their emotions and connect with you, too much talk about the scary event can increase anxiety and fear.

Find things to do together to keep busy. Simple activities like arts and crafts, cooking together, or spending time outside (if it’s safe) can help restore a sense of normalcy.

If your child seems to be struggling more than expected, consider reaching out to your health professional or your child’s school for further support.

For more support and advice you can contact KidsHelpline on 1800 55 1800 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is affiliated with the Parenting and Family Research Alliance, Editor-in-Chief of Mental Health & Prevention, and is a registered clinical psychologist.

Emma Marshall was a recipient of a Fulbright Science and Innovation award

– ref. How can parents talk to their kids about Cyclone Alfred? – https://theconversation.com/how-can-parents-talk-to-their-kids-about-cyclone-alfred-251712

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steve Turton, Adjunct Professor of Environmental Geography, CQUniversity Australia

After a wet and wild night, residents of southeast Queensland and northeast New South Wales are assessing the damage wrought by Cyclone Alfred, which has been downgraded to a tropical low. While the damaging winds have dissipated, heavy rain and the potential for major flooding is the main concern now.

The low is expected to cross the mainland coast between Maroochydore and Bribie Island on Saturday morning, before moving inland and weakening later in the day.

Heavy rain and possible flash flooding is possible on Saturday and Sunday in parts of the Mid North Coast and Northern Rivers in NSW. Rivers are rising. Severe weather warnings and flood warnings are current for southeast Queensland and northeast NSW.

According to media reports, Lismore was expected to flood around noon and low-lying surrounding areas were already flooded.

Six-hourly rainfall totals between 70mm and 130mm are likely, and may reach about 200mm in Queensland’s Border Ranges. Over a 24-hour period, rainfall totals between 150mm and 200mm are likely, and may increase to between 200mm and 300mm in some areas.

As of Saturday morning, authorities had asked Queensland residents in the storm’s path to take shelter. The State Emergency Service says northern NSW is facing “three natural disasters in one”, with gale-force winds, heavy rain and widespread flooding expected over the coming days.

In short: the danger is not over. Residents in affected areas should remain cautious and heed official advice, to keep themselves safe.

High alert for heavy rain

Intense rain bands are forming between converging (or colliding) winds: warm, moist winds from the northeast, and southeast winds from the Coral Sea. As the winds converge, they push saturated air into cooler parts of the atmosphere where it condenses and may fall as torrential rain.

These rain bands can be very slow-moving, sometimes sitting almost stationary for hours. This means they can dump huge amounts of water.

That’s what we need to watch for now. If a slow-moving rain band forms over a catchment area, it could lead to dangerous flash flooding.

At the moment, a convergence zone seems to be forming over the south Sunshine Coast and north Brisbane. This may mean northern NSW may not bear the worst of the rain. However, that region has received solid rain over the past few days and is certainly not off the hook yet.

Northern NSW has already been hit by devastating flooding in recent years, most recently in February 2022. Many of its settlements, including Lismore, are along or close to major river courses. Residents are understandably anxious about what the next few days of rain may bring.

Heavy rainfall in the Brisbane catchments remains a major concern. In Brisbane, some 20,000 properties have been warned of impacts ranging from minor inundation in yards to significant flooding inside homes. Areas most at risk include Nudgee Beach, Brighton, Windsor, Ashgrove, Morningside and Rocklea.

The below flood maps were produced by Brisbane City Council earlier this week. Note, they include the potential for storm surge risk which is all but dissipated now.

Watching the winds and beach erosion

Overnight, high winds caused quite a lot of damage, including trees coming down on houses.

While the cyclonic winds have dissipated, there’s a risk that thunderstorms will drag down stronger winds from higher in the atmosphere on Saturday. Thunderstorm activity is possible from Brisbane’s south down to northern NSW. Some areas may experience damaging wind gusts as rain squalls come through.

Coastal erosion will continue for a while yet. Cyclone Alfred released a lot of energy into the ocean and that will take a while to release as damaging swells.

Swells remain high from the northern Sunshine Coast down to northern NSW, and beaches remain closed.

Beaches have been pummelled over the past few days, eating into the sand and creating cliff faces in dunes. Much work will be needed over the next few weeks and months to restore that sand.

Widespread power outages

According to the ABC, more than 200,000 homes were without power on Friday across south-east Queensland and northern NSW. The problem was set to worsen on Saturday.

Emergency officials have warned residents not to approach downed powerlines because they may be live.

What next?

The below map released by the bureau on Saturday predicts the weather system’s future movement and intensity. The grey zone indicates the range of tracks the centre of the ex-cyclone centre may follow.

It shows the system tracking west on Saturday, out to near the town of Dalby, then heading to the southwest.

This movement will take moisture with it, bringing rain to some inland catchments from Saturday evening and into Sunday.

The rainfall predictions are dependent on the movement and position of this erratic weather system.

If it slows down inland near the coast on Saturday, the ex-cyclone will keep feeding itself with moisture from the ocean.

This cyclone has already tricked scientists a few times over the past fortnight. We will continue to watch it closely.

Steve Turton has previously received funding from the federal government.

– ref. After the winds, now comes the rain and floods. Here’s what you need to know about ex-Cyclone Alfred – https://theconversation.com/after-the-winds-now-comes-the-rain-and-floods-heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-ex-cyclone-alfred-251793

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Genauer, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Flinders University

On March 3, US President Donald Trump paused all US military aid to Ukraine. This move was apparently triggered by a heated exchange a few days earlier between Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office.

In response, European Union leaders have now committed to rearm Europe by mobilising €800 billion (about A$1.4 trillion) in defence spending.

26 of the EU leaders (excluding Hungary) signed an agreement that peace for Ukraine must be accompanied by “robust and credible” security guarantees.

They agreed there can be no negotiations on Ukraine without Ukraine’s participation. It was also agreed the EU will continue to provide regular military and non-military support to Ukraine.

This jump in defence spending is unprecedented for the EU, with 2024 spending hitting a previous record high of €326 billion (A$558 billion).

At the same time, the United Kingdom has committed to the biggest increase in defence spending since the Cold War.

The EU’s united front will create strong defences and deter a direct attack on EU nations.

However, for Ukraine, it will not lead to a military victory in its war with Russia. While Europe has stepped up funding, this is not sufficient for Ukraine to defeat Russian forces currently occupying about 20% of the country.

For Ukraine, the withdrawal of US support will severely strain their ability to keep fighting. Ukraine will likely need to find a way to freeze the conflict this year. This may mean a temporary truce that does not formally cede Ukrainian territory to Russia.

A Trumpian worldview

The vastly different approaches of the US under Trump and the EU point to a deeper ideological divide.

While the Trump administration has acted more quickly and assertively in foreign affairs than many expected, its approach is not surprising.

Since Trump won the US presidential election in November last year, Europe and Ukraine have known that a shift in US policy would be on the cards.

Trump’s approach to Ukraine is not only about economic concerns and withdrawing US military aid. It is about a deeper, more significant clash of worldviews.

Trump (and, it appears, his core support base) hold a “great power politics” approach to world affairs.

This approach assumes we live in a competitive world where countries are motivated to maximise gains and dominate. Outcomes can be achieved through punishments or rewards.

Countries with greater military or economic strength “count” more. They are expected to impose their will on weaker countries. This viewpoint underpinned much of the colonial activity of the 19th and 20th centuries.

This worldview expects conflict – and it expects stronger countries to “win”.

Consistent with Trump’s outlook, Russia is a regional power that has the “right” to control smaller countries in its neighbourhood.

Trump’s approach to Ukraine is not an anomaly. Nor is it a temporary and spontaneous measure to grab the global spotlight.

Trump’s worldview leads to the logical and consistent conclusion that Russia will seek to control countries within its sphere of influence.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine represented an attempt to impose its will on a militarily weaker country that it considered to be in its rightful domain of control.

The EU alternative

Contrary to this view, the EU is founded on the premise that countries can work together for mutual gains through collaboration and consensus. This approach underpins the operation of what are called the Bretton Woods Institutions created in the aftermath of World War II.

This worldview expects collaboration rather than conflict. Mutually beneficial and cooperative solutions are found through dialogue and negotiation.

According to this perspective, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is about a conflict between the values of a liberal democracy and those of an oppressive authoritarian regime.

Zelensky has himself consistently framed the conflict as being about a clash of values: freedom and democracy versus authoritarianism and control.

A mix of both?

Since Trump’s second inauguration, European leaders have presented a united front, motivated by facing a world where US military backing cannot be guaranteed.

However, there is internal division within European countries. Recent years has seen a sharp rise in anti-EU sentiment within EU member states. The UK’s exit from the EU is an example of this phenomenon.

EU leaders previously followed a path of cooperation with Russia, with limited success. Following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, France and Germany helped mediate the Minsk Agreements. These agreements, signed in 2014 and 2015, were designed to prevent further incursions by Russian-backed groups into Ukrainian sovereign territory.

This did not prevent Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

In an emerging new world order, leadership might require going beyond the seeming contradiction of a focus on military strength or cooperation. Leaders may need to integrate both.

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

– ref. The EU will spend billions more on defence. It’s a powerful statement – but won’t do much for Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/the-eu-will-spend-billions-more-on-defence-its-a-powerful-statement-but-wont-do-much-for-ukraine-251710

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amy Peden, NHMRC Research Fellow, School of Population Health & co-founder UNSW Beach Safety Research Group, UNSW Sydney

Social media is awash with images of surfers chasing waves as Cyclone Alfred whips up seas off Australia’s east coast.

Queensland Premier David Crisafulli has branded beachgoers as “idiots”. On Friday morning, he said those going to the beach as the cyclone approaches put themselves and emergency services at risk, adding:

I plead to the people who might think that now is a great time to go out on the surf – it’s not. It’s not just for you I’m concerned, but for the innocent person who has to go in after you.

Sightseers have been caught in storm surges, and rescuers have been forced into the surf to help others. Up and down the coast, beaches are closed.

In Queensland, surfers have been warned they may face fines up to $16,000 for reckless behaviour.

Despite all this, surfers and others continue to enter the water. It’s important to ask why – and what will it take to get them to stop?

Only a surfer knows the feeling

I research injury prevention with a focus on drowning and safety in the water. As cofounder of the UNSW Beach Safety Research Group, I have also led research into surfing.

Surfers frequently chase waves in big surf. Research by my colleagues and I shows under normal conditions, surfers have a lower risk of dying during this activity than people taking part in other water-related activities such as swimming, wading, snorkelling and scuba diving.

Although drowning is the leading cause of death while surfing, other severe injuries are relatively rare.

Of course, injuries can occur. These include cervical spine fractures and other spinal cord injuries, head injuries and lacerations. These can be due to collision with a surfboard, a fin, or the ocean floor.

Yet most surfers usually manage to avoid serious injury. Throw some mega waves into the mix, however, and things can turn deadly, fast.

Research shows the risk of injury is almost 2.5 times higher when surfing in waves that were over head height or bigger, relative to other waves.

Despite this, the lure of experiencing record-breaking waves can be hard to ignore.

Research shows surfers are motivated by what’s known as “sensation seeking”. In other words, they are more likely to seek out intense experiences than those who participate in other, less extreme sports.

The desire to “master nature” – or go into battle with a big wave and come out on top – has been documented in analyses of surfing motivation.

For big wave surfers, the reward – and the risk – can can be even greater. The physical and mental preparation needed to take on such extremes are immense. Tragically, deaths do occur even when attempts are made to improve safety.

This desire to take risks in the water contributes to the over-representation of males in drowning statistics.

Such risk-taking behaviour often plays out on social media in aquatic locations and during extreme weather events.

Other hazards, above and below the surface

Beyond the waves, other hazards can cause increased risk of ill health and injury in stormy seas. Debris can increase the risk of blunt-force trauma, while fecal and other bacteria in stormwater can cause illness.

Sea foam should not be considered harmless either, having been implicated in rescues and tragic cases of drowning in the past.

In the long term, coastal erosion due to storm surges and powerful surf can create permanent changes, impacting infrastructure and changing the location and strength of rip currents – the number-one coastal drowning hazard.

Read more:
Can you spot a rip current? Test your knowledge with our interactive quiz

Don’t be that idiot

Having a cyclone this far south is a rare event, so it’s only natural for people to want to take a look. But sometimes there’s no safe viewing distance, and the safest place to be is at home.

Unsafe behaviours in and around the surf are rife on social media. Mainstream media outlets often model unsafe behaviours too, with reporters delivering their “piece to camera” about the importance of staying away from the beach while themselves standing on the shore.

Conditions are unpredictable. These include powerful waves and storm surges that can knock you off your feet and sweep you out to sea.

Remember, emergency services are stretched right now. If you get into trouble in the surf, there may be no one to rescue you. Or untrained bystanders may come to your aid and get into trouble themselves.

With numerous flood warnings in place and roads closed, as well as the risks present on the coast, it’s best to stay away from beaches, rock platforms and coastal areas for now. Hit the waves again when conditions have calmed down.

Read more:
Just 15 centimetres of water can float a car – but we are failing to educate drivers about the dangers of floodwaters

Amy Peden receives funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Surf Life Saving Australia and the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. She maintains an honorary (unpaid) affiliation with Royal Life Saving Society – Australia.

– ref. ‘Don’t be that idiot’: surfing in a cyclone could cost you $16,000 or your life – https://theconversation.com/dont-be-that-idiot-surfing-in-a-cyclone-could-cost-you-16-000-or-your-life-251706

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Henderson, Chief Engineer, Cyclone Testing Station, James Cook University

People in southeast Queensland and northern NSW have spent days racing to prepare their homes ahead of Tropical Cyclone Alfred, now expected to make landfall over several hours on Saturday.

It’s not possible to completely cyclone-proof a house. But there’s a lot you can do – in the short and long term – to boost the resilience of your home and reduce damage caused by future cyclones.

How winds affects pressure on and in the house

Strong winds generate pressure pushing and pulling on the outside and inside of a house.

When wind gusts hit a building, the wind is pushing on what we call the windward wall and going up and over the roof, creating a suction effect. The wind is trying very hard to peel the roof off your house, and in a cyclone is hammering the building for many hours.

If a windward window or door blows in or gets broken by debris, wind instantaneously enters the space. This almost doubles the load that the roof now has to resist.

In southeast Queensland and northern NSW, housing is not typically designed to resist that extra upward load on the roof if a door or window blows in.

Cyclone resilience is about maintaining the function of a building during severe weather, so even if there is some damage, it still can be used after the storm has passed. So it’s vital the roof stays on.

In practice, that means thinking about what’s known as the “tie down chain” – how all pieces of the house are held together to carry the wind loads from the roof to the ground.

A weak link in this tie down chain can lead to winds lifting entire roofs from homes. All the connections involved in keeping a roof on the house are exceptionally important.

Weather resistance in building codes is generally designed for rain that falls straight down and flows off the roof.

But in a cyclone, rain can come horizontally. It can get pushed under the the roof, into gutters and under sliding doors. And it’s not just a little bit – buckets and buckets of water can inundate a house.

Wind pressure can also mean water is blown into the house through gaps you may not even know existed. Wind-driven rain ingress can happen at wind speeds that don’t cause structural damage.

It comes in under doors and through windows, including holes in window sills. It can lead to buildings being unusable and a large number of insurance claims.

Dispelling major myths

You might have seen people taping a big “X” on their windows and glass doors. Unfortunately, this doesn’t really do much to improve window strength.

Some people put the tape on and then, during the cyclone, sit there watching their glass flex, falsely believing tape magically makes the window stronger. This is incredibly dangerous. If that glass shatters, the bystander would be hit by shards of glass travelling at high speed.

It is much better to tape a garbage bag or a sheet of plastic along the bottom of the window sill and tape it up about 300mm each side. It can then catch the water that seeps in the window and allows it to flow back out when the wind pressure drops.

Sometimes people open a window to reduce pressure inside the house that happens if a door or window breaks. It’s true this might reduce some pressure, but it depends which side of the house is currently being hit by wind. And given wind direction can change during a cyclone, emergency services recommend it’s better just to stay sheltered in the smallest room; they don’t want you standing in front of a window during a cyclone.

Close all internal doors so if any windows do blow in, the high pressure is restricted to just that room (not spread throughout the house).

Designing beyond the bare minimum

Building codes require buildings to build to a “wind classification” according to the “wind zone” of that area.

Buildings are often built only to the minimum standard of the Building Code. However, if we want a house to function after an extreme tropical cyclone, we should consider building beyond the minimum standard using resilience features that will keep your roof on in a cyclone and minimise the entry of rainwater.

Cyclone resilience also includes incorporating resilient building materials in your home – such as linoleum or vinyl floors instead of carpet, and ceilings from fibre-cement sheeting instead of plasterboard.

Eternal vigilance

It’s also important all elements holding your house together are well maintained through the life of the building.

That means ensuring regular inspections by a trained professional to identify any potential weaknesses such as rot, rust or UV damage.

These inspections are not something you and a mate can do yourselves. It requires a building professionals to get into the roof and look for weak spots.

Think beyond your house. What about the carport? A pergola? That shed or patio you added? Are the solar panels installed correctly with the right fixings and brackets to resist the wind forces?

If all these things are not fixed down and maintained well, strong winds can pick them up and throw them at your house or your neighbours.

Just as you get your car serviced, you should get your house checked every five to seven years. Our homes have many important parts and a failure in one can lead to disastrous and expensive problems.

David Henderson serves on committees for Standards Australia. He is a member of Engineers Australia and has done consulting work with the Resilient Building Council.

Geoffrey Boughton serves on committees for Standards Australia. He is a member of Engineers Australia and has done consulting work with the Resilient Building Council.

– ref. How cyclones rip apart houses – and how to boost the chance your home stays standing – https://theconversation.com/how-cyclones-rip-apart-houses-and-how-to-boost-the-chance-your-home-stays-standing-251709

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Smith, Associate Professor and Discipline Lead (Paramedicine), La Trobe University

In 2011, as Cyclone Yasi approached the Queensland coast, I sat in my home in the tropical far north of the state and worried what the future would hold. Would my family be OK? Would our home be destroyed? Would my workplace be damaged and my job uncertain? Would my community be devastated?

Now, as we wait for Cyclone Alfred to make landfall, I am watching on from my new home in Melbourne. I am safe. But last night, I couldn’t sleep. I’m having intrusive thoughts, remembering what it was like when Cyclone Yasi barrelled into us. I feel agitated, distracted and anxious. The news coverage of the impending cyclone makes my heart race, so I have turned off the television.

As someone who has researched the impact of disasters for more than 20 years, I recognise what I am feeling now is similar to how I felt all those years ago. Again, I am experiencing the normal range of stress reactions common after living through a disaster, even though I am not directly impacted by this one.

This is known as retraumatisation, where we re-live stress reactions experienced as a result of a traumatic event when faced with a new, similar incident.

As a researcher in emergency responses to a broad range of disasters, I understand why I am feeling like this.

However, many people may not realise the stress they are experiencing right now is related to an earlier disaster or traumatic event in their life. That earlier disaster could be another cyclone, or a different event, such as a flood or bushfire.

Some signs and symptoms of retraumatisation might be:

• intrusive thoughts (for example, I keep remembering my fear of the predicted tidal surge of water rushing up at me in the darkness as Cyclone Yasi made landfall)

• nightmares and having trouble sleeping

• hypervigilance (for example, feeling “on edge” all day)

• sensitivity to triggers (for example, the sound of intense wind and windows creaking can trigger intense feelings because they remind me of the night we lived through Cyclone Yasi passing over the top of us)

• feeling isolated

• thinking about, planning or attempting suicide

• panic atacks

• using/abusing substances, such as alcohol and other drugs

• increase in unhealthy behaviours (for example, being more prone to aggression or violence).

For many of us, Cyclone Alfred is awakening memories and feelings, and the re-emergence of those stress reactions can be confronting. It can feel like re-opening a wound that hasn’t quite healed.

Disaster upon disaster take their toll

We are now beginning to understand the effects of being exposed to multiple disasters – bushfires, cyclones, floods, and let’s not forget the COVID pandemic – that erode our resilience.

This type of multiple exposure influences our feelings of safety, security and even our hope for the future, all increasing the risk of poorer mental health.

For people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), retraumatisation may cause people to relive their past traumas in intense detail. It can feel like past traumatic events are happening all over again.

What to do now, and in the future

However, there are steps we can take to help build our resilience in the face of multiple disasters.

For now

Right now, it is useful to understand how we respond to trauma. We may notice a range of physical responses (for example, my heart has been racing), psychological reactions (for example, I am feeling more anxious than usual) and social impacts (for example, I cancelled dinner plans last night as I did not want to leave the house).

It is also important to stay connected to our usual social supports, as they can act as a great buffer to stress reactions.

So, even though I stayed home last night, I was on a group chat discussing the Real Housewives of Sydney with friends, which helped reduce both the physical and psychological stress reactions I was experiencing.

For later

In the longer term, it is useful to develop and implement a self-care plan that includes activities to support our emotional, physical and spiritual health.

Self-care means taking the time to do things that help your wellbeing and improve your physical health and mental health. This can help you manage the stress reactions that may emerge as part of retraumatisation. Even small acts of self-care in your daily life can have a big impact.

Today, I made the time to go for a short walk in the park and listened to some of my favourite music. It helped in the moment, but it also helps me in the longer term when I routinely include these small acts of self-care in my daily life.

We also need to consider the first responders and volunteers who will be preparing for Cyclone Alfred, and communities devastated by similar disasters in the past (for example, the 2022 floods in Lismore, New South Wales). With their exposure to cumulative trauma, these groups will need ongoing, focused support.

Most importantly, we need to understand that the way we are feeling is normal. Be patient with yourself and look for small opportunities to take control of your reactions.

I am keeping the television turned off (except when the Real Housewives is on).

Some resources

The website blueknot, from the National Centre of Excellence for Complex Trauma, gives more information about how we respond to trauma. The Black Dog Institute guides you through developing a self-care plan.

If you are a first responder, you can access free treatment and support through a range of providers, including: Phoenix Australia, Fortem Australia and the Black Dog Institute.

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

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

– ref. Cyclone Alfred is already retraumatising people who’ve lived through other disasters. I’m one of them – https://theconversation.com/cyclone-alfred-is-already-retraumatising-people-whove-lived-through-other-disasters-im-one-of-them-251701

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Prema Arasu, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Minderoo-UWA Deep-Sea Research Centre, The University of Western Australia

In February, researchers from conservation organisation Condrik Tenerife were about two kilometres off the coast of Tenerife Island, looking for sharks, when they caught sight of something much stranger.

Photographer David Jara Boguñá filmed a humpback anglerfish (Melanocetus johnsonii, a species of black seadevil) swimming near the surface in sunlit waters. These fish have never before been seen alive in daylight, as they normally dwell in the “twilight zone” at depths from 200m to 600m.

The video has provoked an enormously empathetic response on social media, with some seeing the fish as a feminist icon or an Icarus-like figure who swam too close to the Sun. The reaction shows our views of the deep sea – long ignored or seen as a realm of monsters – may at last be changing.

The strange lives of anglerfish

Anglerfish are much smaller than you probably think they are. The specimen Boguñá filmed was a female, which typically grow up to 15cm long.

The creatures are named for their bioluminescent lure (or esca). This modified dorsal fin ray can produce a glow used to fish (or angle) for prey in the dim depths of the sea. The bioluminescence is produced by symbiotic bacteria that live inside the bulbous head of the esca.

Male anglerfish lack the iconic lure and are much smaller, usually reaching a length of only 3cm.

A male anglerfish spends the first part of his life searching for a female to whom he will then attach himself. He will eventually fuse his circulatory system with hers, depending on her entirely for nutrients, and live out his life as a parasite or “living testicle”.

It is unknown why this fish was swimming vertically near the surface. Researchers have speculated that the behaviour may have been related to changes in water temperature, or that the fish was simply at the end of her life.

Watchers observed the fish for several hours, until it died. Its body was preserved and taken to the Museum of Nature and Archaeology in Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where it will be further studied.

Sympathy for the seadevil

The video quickly went viral, inspiring countless reaction videos, artworks, memes, a Pixar-style animation and a poem titled Icarus is the Anglerfish.

One Reddit user commented:

I like to think she is a respected old grandmother who has dreamed her entire life of seeing the sunlight and the world above the water. She knows her time is nigh so she bade farewell to her friends and family and swam up towards the light and whatever it might hold for her as her life as an anglerfish comes to a close.

One person described the fish as her “feminist Roman Empire”, in the sense of an inspirational obsession that filled the same role for her that the Roman Empire supposedly does for many men.

Boguñá and Condrik Tenerife have since commented on the public reaction. (The original post is in Spanish, but Instagram’s automated English translation is below.)

He’s become a global icon, that’s clear. But far from the romanticisation and attempt to humanise that has been given to its tragic story, I think that what this event has been for is to awaken the curiosity of the sea to PEOPLE, especially the younger ones, and perhaps, it also serves that messages about marine ecosystem conservation can reach so many more people.

From horrors to heroes

The outpouring of empathy for the anglerfish is unexpected. With their glowing lures and fang-filled mouths, the creatures have long been archetypal horrors of the abyss.

As I have written elsewhere, the anglerfish’s extreme sexual dimorphism and parasitism, along with its unsettling anatomy, have made it the “iconic ambassador of the deep sea”. Anglerfish or angler-inspired aliens have appeared as antagonists in films such as Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999), Finding Nemo (2003), The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie (2004) and Luca (2021).

The reception of “Icarus” (as some call her) in popular culture indicates a perhaps surprising capacity for empathy toward animals that aren’t conventionally cute or beautiful. It stands in stark contrast to the fate of the deep-sea blobfish Psychrolutes marcidus, which in 2013 was voted the world’s ugliest animal.

Perhaps the name is a clue: people have seen in the fish a creature striving to reach the light, who died as a result of her quest.

But does our projection of human emotions and desires onto non-human animals risk misunderstanding scientific reality? Almost certainly – but, as US environmental humanities researcher Stacy Alaimo has argued, it may also have benefits:

Deep-sea creatures are often pictured as aliens from another planet, and I think that gets people interested in them because we’re all interested in novelty and weirdness and the surreal […] I think that can be positive, but the idea of the alien can also cut us off from any responsibility.

The deep sea and its inhabitants face growing threats from seabed mining, plastic pollution, and the effects of human-induced climate change. They need all the empathy they can get.

Prema Arasu 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. ‘Icarus of the deep’: how a dying anglerfish became a social media sensation – https://theconversation.com/icarus-of-the-deep-how-a-dying-anglerfish-became-a-social-media-sensation-251603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ramona Zharfpeykan, Lecturer, Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Despite large multinational companies such as Goldman Sachs, Paramount, Google and others removing their diversity, equity and inclusion policies, the evidence is clear: having a diverse team can help businesses make better, more empathetic decisions.

At the top level, a growing body of research shows having more women on corporate boards leads to better decision-making, stronger governance and improved environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance.

Yet, progress remains slow – even in New Zealand. Though we rank highly on the Human Development Index, the country lags behind in leadership gender equality.

Women make up 50.8% of the population and hold 40.8% of parliamentary leadership roles. But they hold only 28.5% of board seats and 26.4% of executive roles in the New Zealand’s Stock Exchange (NZX) top 50 companies (the NZX50).

And while businesses are encouraged to disclose gender diversity policies by the NZX, there are no mandatory quotas, leaving progress uneven.

However, change is happening. Our new research looked at the the percentage of female directors in NZX-listed firms between 2016 and 2022.

What we found is positive. Using information from financial infrastructure and data provider LSEG’s database on global financial markets, we identified a rise in the number of female directors on corporate boards. We also saw a corresponding improvement in the firms’ ESG performance.

Boosting performance

Between 2016 and 2022, the proportion of female directors in NZX-listed firms increased from 26% to 36%. These same businesses saw an average 33% improvement in their ESG performance.

Notably, governance – one of the key ESG pillars – improved significantly, with a 31% increase on average. Governance specifically refers to the effectiveness of the firm’s management systems, board structure and capacity to protect shareholder interests.

While it’s not possible to say outright that having more women on the board directly influenced governance outcomes, we saw a positive relationship between the two. This suggests having more women in leadership strengthens corporate oversight and ethical decision making.

Gender diversity does not have the same level of importance in all contexts. While social and environmental performance also improved, this study found no significant link between a more gender-diverse board and these higher scores in social and environmental performance.

Our findings are supported by overseas research suggesting board diversity does not strongly influence sustainability outcomes when it comes to issues and groups already covered by legislation.

Therefore, New Zealand’s proactive stance on issues such as the environment, poverty and human rights, as well as encouraging private companies to improve sustainability and transparency, may explain why board diversity had no notable impact on social and environmental performance in this study.

What women bring to the business

Our findings align with studies completed overseas.

In the US, one study found women business leaders tended to prioritise transparency, fairness and stakeholder interests. This made them strong advocates for sustainable and inclusive business practices.

It’s clear that addressing the gender gap in corporate New Zealand isn’t just about fairness. It’s about economic success. Businesses that embrace diversity perform better, attract top talent and enhance their reputations.

The solution isn’t simply about enforcing quotas, but ensuring more qualified women are placed in leadership roles. Companies need to move beyond a “compliance mindset” and recognise true diversity strengthens governance, reduces risk and drives long-term success.

As the world celebrates International Women’s Day on March 8, businesses need to realise that increasing female representation at the top isn’t just the right thing to do – it’s the smart thing to do.

Ramona Zharfpeykan 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. Diversity helps: a new study shows more women on boards can improve how businesses are managed – https://theconversation.com/diversity-helps-a-new-study-shows-more-women-on-boards-can-improve-how-businesses-are-managed-251473

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Gaunson, Associate Professor in Cinema Studies, RMIT University

Some 50 years ago, on March 1 1975, Australian television stations officially moved to colour.

Networks celebrated the day, known as “C-Day”, with unique slogans such as “come to colour” (ABC TV), “Seven colours your world” (Seven Network), “living colour” (Nine Network) and “first in colour” (0-10 Network, which later became Network Ten). The ABC, Seven and Nine networks also updated their logos to incorporate colour.

For most viewers, however, nothing looked much different. The majority owned a black and white TV, while a coloured broadcast required a colour TV set.

Advertisers were initially reluctant to accept the change, which required them to re-shoot black and white commercials with colour stock at a significantly higher cost.

Many reasoned viewers were still watching the ads in black and white. And initially this assumption was correct. But by nine months later, 17% of Australian homes had a colour receiver. This rose to 31% by July 1976.

By 1978, 64% of Melbourne and 70% of Sydney households owned colour TV sets, making Australia one of the world’s fastest adopters of colour TV.

According to the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations (FACTS) annual report for 1975–76, colour TV increased overall viewership by 5%, with people watching for longer periods.

The 1976 Montreal Olympics also led to an increase in TV sales, with the colour broadcast shared between the ABC, Seven and Nine.

A late start

With the United States introducing colour TV from 1954, it’s peculiar that Australia took so long to make the transition – especially since conversations about this had been underway since the 1960s.

In 1965, a report outlining the process and economic considerations of transitioning to colour was tabled in parliament.

Feedback from the US highlighted problems around broader acceptance in the marketplace. Colour TV sets were expensive and most programs were still being shot in black and white, despite the availability of colour.

Networks were the most hesitant (even though they’d go on to become one of the most major benefactors). In 1969, it was estimated transitioning to colour would cost the ABC A$46 million (the equivalent of $265,709,944 today) over six years.

The federal government, led by then prime minister Robert Menzies, decided to take a cautious approach to the transition – allowing manufacturers, broadcasters and the public time to prepare.

The first colour “test” broadcast took place on June 15 1967, with live coverage of a Pakenham country horse racing event in Victoria (although few people would have had coloured TV sets at this point).

Other TV shows also tested broadcasting in colour between 1972 and 1974, with limited colour telecasts aired from mid-1974. It wasn’t until March 1975 that colour TV was being transmitted permanently.

The cinema industry panics

Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam War created further urgency to televise in colour. With the war ending in April 1975, Australians watched the last moments in colour.

Other significant events broadcast in colour that year included the December federal election, in which Malcolm Fraser defeated Gough Whitlam after the latter was dramatically dismissed as prime minister on November 11.

With the public’s growing interest in colour TV, local manufacturers began lobbying for higher tariffs on imports to encourage domestic colour TV production.

In the mid 1970s, a new colour set in Australia cost between $1,000 and $1,300, while the average full-time annual income was around $8,000. Still in the throes of a financial recession, customers began seeking out illegally-imported colour TV sets – which were appearing at car boot markets across the country.

The government also created an advertising campaign warning the public of scammers who would offer to convert black-and-white TVs to colour. These door-to-door “salesmen” claimed to have a special screen which, when placed over a TV, would magically turn it colourful.

By 1972, the estimated cost of upgrading broadcasting technology to colour had reached $116 million. The cinema industry, in a panic, even questioned whether colour TV could damage a viewer’s eyesight.

The industry had previously suffered huge losses in cinema attendance with the introduction of black-and-white TV from 1956. Cinemas had a monopoly on colour and were petrified over what the introduction of colour to television could do to their attendances.

Such fears were founded. In 1974 Australia had 68 million admissions to the cinema. By 1976, there were just 28.9 million admissions. Never again would yearly cinema admissions reach above 40 million.

But despite the complaints – from the cinema industry, advertisers, broadcasters and manufacturers – audiences were ready for colour. And any network that dared to program in black and white would subject itself to a barrage of annoyed viewers.

Colour TV was here to stay.

Stephen Gaunson 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 late start, then a big boom: why it took until 1975 for Australians to finally watch TV in colour – https://theconversation.com/a-late-start-then-a-big-boom-why-it-took-until-1975-for-australians-to-finally-watch-tv-in-colour-251363

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Boedker, Professor, Business School, University of Newcastle

The opposition wants to call time on letting public servants work from home. In a speech to the Menzies Research Institute this week, shadow public service minister Jane Hume said, if elected, a Coalition government would require public servants in the office five days a week:

While work from home arrangements can work, in the case of the [Australian Public Service], it has become a right that is creating inefficiency.

Hume said Labor had given public servants a “blank cheque” to work from home, creating an “unsustainable” system that was no longer working.

She stressed that exceptions “can and will be made”, but only “where they work for everyone rather than be enforced on teams by an individual”.

Few workplace issues have drawn such heated debate as whether people should be allowed to work from home. The Coalition’s latest election promise, with parallels to a similar move by Donald Trump in the United States, has brought these questions back into the spotlight.

What impact do work from home arrangements have, not only on performance and productivity but also employee wellbeing? Is it really wise to reverse course?

Our research has examined these questions in detail – and we’ve found a changing picture.

Read more:
Dutton hints he’ll sack 36,000 public servants. Voters deserve to know what services will be affected

Our research

We have examined the impacts of working from home on staff performance and productivity in Australian workplaces as part of the Australian Workplace Index, surveying 2,932 Australian employees across 2022 and 2024.

This is a research collaboration project between Australian National University and University of Newcastle.

An Australian Workplace Index 2022 working paper (which has not been peer-reviewed) actually suggested working from home was linked with a number of negative impacts.

In 2022, we saw that compared to those who didn’t, employees who worked from home three to four days a week experienced lower wellbeing, higher depression and anxiety, and higher loneliness.

They also experienced more administrative hassles, higher pressure to meet targets and increased levels of conflict with supervisors and colleagues.

We found working from home was also associated with a reduction in staff productivity, job-target performance and an increase in staff turnover intentions.

A changing picture

We have recently completed analysis for a similar study based on data from 2024, to be published in an upcoming working paper. And it paints a very different picture.

We found the negative impacts of working from home, originally found in 2022, had reversed in 2024.

In the most recent 2024 Australian Workplace Index employment data, we see no significant difference in productivity between employees who work from home and those in the office.

In fact, the latest data suggest numerous benefits.

For example, staff who worked from home one or more days a week had 9.9% more autonomy in how they carried out their work. Those with higher job autonomy were up to 16.8% more productive in their work when compared to those with low job autonomy.

We found staff who work from home also save on average 100 minutes in commuting time each day.

But on top of this, staff who worked from home one or more days a week were 10.6% less burnt out from work compared to those who never did, and had reported lower intention to quit their jobs.

Better support for employees

This positive trend likely reflects investment by employers in improving support for staff who work from home.

In 2024, we found a majority of organisations (69%) now had a work-from-home policy in place.

There was also an increase in the physical, technological and psychological infrastructure support available to staff who work from home. For example:

• Physical: 82% of staff have a dedicated workspace, 93% have their own desk, and 93% have air conditioning.
• Technological: 85% of staff have access to IT support, 94% have access to collaborative technology and 95% have internet access.
• Psychological: 80% of staff have access to psychological support from their supervisor and 72% have access to counselling services.

Importantly, employees still value the opportunity highly. Our 2024 data show 38% of Australian employees chose to work from home for 50% or more of their work hours.

32% of Australian employees would prefer to exclusively work from home, 41% prefer a hybrid option, while 27% prefer to work exclusively from the office.

Christina Boedker has received research grant funding from the University of Newcastle’s RSP Stimulus Funding Scheme and from The Australian National University for this research project.

Kieron Meagher received research grant funding from the University of Newcastle’s RSP Stimulus Funding Scheme and from The Australian National University for this research project.

Aeson Luiz Dela Cruz 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. More than two-thirds of organisations have a formal work-from-home policy. Here’s how the benefits stack up – https://theconversation.com/more-than-two-thirds-of-organisations-have-a-formal-work-from-home-policy-heres-how-the-benefits-stack-up-251598

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

The Western Australian state election will be held on Saturday, with polls closing at 9pm AEDT. A Newspoll, conducted February 27 to March 5 from a sample of 1,061, gave Labor a 57.5–42.5 lead, a 1.5-point gain for Labor since an early February WA Newspoll.

Primary votes were 44% Labor (up two), 29% Liberals (down three), 5% Nationals (up two), 10% Greens (down two), 3% One Nation (down one) and 9% for all Others (up two).

Labor Premier Roger Cook’s net approval was down one point to +17, with 55% satisfied and 38% dissatisfied. Liberal leader Libby Mettam’s net approval was up three to +1. Cook led as better premier by 53–34 (54–34 previously).

The Poll Bludger reported Friday that a DemosAU poll for The West Australian, conducted March 4–5 from a sample of 1,126, gave Labor a 57–43 lead. Primary votes were 43% Labor, 30% Liberals, 5% Nationals, 11% Greens and 11% for all Others. Cook led as preferred premier over Mettam by 47–32. By 49–31, voters thought WA was headed in the right direction.

At the March 2021 WA election, Labor won 53 of the 59 lower house seats on a two-party vote of 69.7–30.3, a record high for either major party at any state or federal election. Labor won 59.9% of the primary vote.

Labor was never going to match the 2021 result at this election, but if the results on Saturday reflect the Newspoll and DemosAU polls, they will exceed their 2017 result, when Labor won 41 of the 59 seats on a two-party vote of 55.5–44.5.

Upper house reforms

Prior to this election, WA had six upper house regions that each returned six members. From the ABC’s 2021 WA election pages, there were three Perth regions and three non-metro regions. Perth had 75% of WA’s enrolled voters, but only 50% of upper house seats.

Furthermore, the Mining & Pastoral region and Agricultural region had far fewer enrolled voters than the South West region. Combined, these two regions had just 10.1% of WA’s enrolled voters, but 33.3% of upper house seats.

Labor’s huge 2021 win gave them a majority in the upper house for the first time in WA history, with 22 of the 36 seats. Labor used this opportunity to convert the upper house into a single statewide electorate that will return 37 members by proportional representation with optional voter-directed preferences.

Under these reforms, a quota for election will be 1/38 of the vote or 2.63%. Parties that win about half the quota have a reasonable chance of winning a seat, so 1.3% could be enough to win. Labor also abolished group ticket voting (GTV), leaving Victoria as the only Australian jurisdiction that still uses this discredited system.

The Poll Bludger reported on February 23 Liberal leader Libby Mettam has promised to try to revert back to the old very malapportioned system if the Liberals win the election, rejecting the principle of one vote, one value. The old system was biased towards the Liberal and National parties. Analyst Kevin Bonham has condemned the Liberals.

ABC election analyst Antony Green said there will be 13 groups on the upper house ballot paper and a total of 146 candidates. To get a group box above the line, at least five candidates for that group were required. The number of candidates has been more than halved from 2021, when there were 325 upper house candidates. Group ticket voting encouraged a proliferation of micro parties and candidates.

In the lower house, there will be a total of 398 candidates for the 59 seats, down from 463 in 2021. Labor, the Liberals and Greens will contest all seats, the Nationals will contest 20, the Australian Christians 54 and One Nation 41.

Labor has huge lead in a SA state poll

The next South Australian state election will be held in March 2026. A DemosAU poll, conducted February 18–23 from a sample of 1,004, gave Labor a 59–41 lead (54.6–45.4 to Labor at the March 2022 election). Primary votes were 43% Labor, 30% Liberals, 10% Greens and 17% for all Others.

Labor incumbent Peter Malinauskas led the Liberals’ Vincent Tarzia as preferred premier by 51–23. By 53–33, voters thought SA was headed in the right direction.

The Poll Bludger reported Monday electoral reforms have passed parliament that will allow postal and pre-poll votes to be counted on election night. At previous SA elections, only votes cast at ordinary election day booths were counted on election night, with other types of votes taking at least a few days to count.

In the federal part of this poll, Labor led by 53–47 in SA (54.0–46.0 to Labor in SA at the 2022 federal election). Primary votes were 35% Coalition, 34% Labor, 11% Greens, 6% One Nation and 14% for all Others. Anthony Albanese led Peter Dutton as preferred prime minister by 39–33, and by 46–39 voters did not think Australia was headed in the right direction.

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. Two polls predict a thumping victory for Labor in WA election, the first with a reformed upper house – https://theconversation.com/two-polls-predict-a-thumping-victory-for-labor-in-wa-election-the-first-with-a-reformed-upper-house-250264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tara Lind, PhD Candidate, La Trobe University

The 2025 AFL season is just around the corner and fans are pondering the big questions: who will play finals? Who will finish in the top four? Who’s getting the wooden spoon?

The start of a new season brings with it many unknowns, hopes, and in some cases, trepidation.

Hawthorn finished 2024 playing some of the most exciting footy in the competition – can they keep that momentum going?

Collingwood enters 2025 with the oldest and most experienced list – will that be the key to another deep finals run? Or are they over the hill?

Can Carlton finally break its premiership drought? Can West Coast, North Melbourne, or Richmond get back on track? What can Fremantle do with its young list and high expectations?

With so many unknowns, we turned to data.

Simulations and predictions

In La Trobe University’s Master of Sport Analytics, students need to build their own footy tipping algorithms and use them to simulate future matches.

We’ve seen lots of different approaches to this problem. Each comes with its own set of assumptions and blind spots.

One straightforward way to try to forecast what will happen in the upcoming season is to just look at history: how often does a team that finishes first on the ladder stay on top the next?

That’s happened seven times since 1990, so about 20% of the time.

We can model probabilities like this for every ladder position to get a gauge on how rankings typically shift from season to season, and apply this to the end-of-season 2024 ladder to predict the 2025 standings.

This approach does not take into account last year’s finals results, the different age profiles of teams, the 2025 fixture, or other team changes such as trades, retirements, or injuries.

Taking age into account

How about if we consider player ages as well? This should give us a better sense of a team’s expected change between seasons.

Research has suggested AFL players reach their peak performance levels at around 24-25.

A quick look at team median ages since 1990 agrees: teams with a median player age over 25 typically have a worse winning percentage the following year, and teams younger than 24 usually improve (with plenty of exceptions).

Combining last year’s ladder with age profiles gives a different view of the upcoming season.

There is more shuffling, with older teams like Collingwood and Melbourne expected to fall, while the younger Fremantle, Gold Coast and Adelaide lists are given higher probabilities of finishing near the top.

We’re still left with some important blind spots though: information from last year’s finals (Brisbane performed far better than a typical fifth-place finisher), and the difficulty of the upcoming fixture, have not been considered.

The Elo rating system

To take the full 2025 fixture into account, we need to simulate the entire season game by game.

That can be done if we use the Elo rating system to get a “strength” rating for each team.

Elo ratings track team strength over time: ratings go up with a win and down with a loss. The amount it changes depends on the opponent – beating a strong team boosts the rating more than beating a weak one, and the ratings update after every game played.

We’ll use the Elo ratings that each team ended up on at the end of last year (including finals) as a baseline for 2025.

With these ratings, we can calculate the probability of one team beating another in any given matchup. The method also considers home ground advantage by giving the home team a small rating boost.

Once we have probabilities for each match outcome, we can simulate the entire season. Here’s how it works:

• Each game needs a winner. To decide, we use a computer function that picks a winner based on probability, kind of like flipping a weighted coin. If a team has a 70% probability of winning, it’s more likely to be chosen, but there’s still a 30% chance they lose
• This is done for every game in the season
• We then repeat this 10,000 times – simulating 10,000 different versions of the season
• In each version, we create an end-of-season ladder, based on the simulated games results
• After all the simulations, we can see how often each team finishes in each ladder position. This gives us a prediction for their chances of finishing first, second, third and so on.

The Elo approach favours Brisbane much more and is less kind to West Coast (35% chance of finishing last).

It does not predict the decline of Collingwood and Melbourne because, although it takes into account the finals and fixture, it doesn’t have an age component.

The ‘wisdom of the crowd’

If each approach comes with its own set of limitations, then we might expect to get a better forecast by combining lots of predictions from different sources because of the “wisdom of the crowd”.

The idea is that you get more accurate predictions if you combine multiple independent sources.

Luckily for us, each season, several AFL stats experts build models to estimate the probability of each match outcome and generously post them online.

What goes into each model is not always known, but they consider a mixture of different factors such as attacking and defending strengths, in-game statistics, home ground advantage, player lists and trades, last season’s performance and more.

For our analysis, we’ll combine the Elo model with the average of all these expert tips to get a “wisdom of the crowd” prediction for each game’s probability. The ladder can then be simulated using the same method as above.

Four groups emerge from the wisdom of the crowd:

• Brisbane, Hawthorn, Geelong and the Western Bulldogs are predicted to lead the pack, surpassing last year’s top three
• Sydney, Port Adelaide, GWS, Carlton, Fremantle, Collingwood and Adelaide have a wide spread of predicted finishes, skewed more towards finishing in the top eight – but there won’t be enough room for all of them
• Essendon, Melbourne, St Kilda and Gold Coast might challenge for a spot in the finals, but the models are less confident in their chances
• West Coast, North Melbourne and Richmond are hard to separate from each other, a cut below the rest.

Uncertainty and excitement

Each table tells a potentially different story but the most universal theme is uncertainty.

Team sports are hard to predict, especially before we’ve had a chance to observe any games, and even the most confident predictions are under 40% (meaning they are more likely not to happen).

Uncertainty leads to excitement, and this data only makes us more excited to see what will play out this season.

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. We simulated the upcoming AFL season four different ways – here’s what was predicted – https://theconversation.com/we-simulated-the-upcoming-afl-season-four-different-ways-heres-what-was-predicted-249475

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexandra Allen-Franks, Senior Lecturer; Co-director of the New Zealand Centre for Human Rights Law, Policy and Practice and Co-director of the New Zealand Centre for Intellectual Property Law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Journalist Paddy Gower’s attempts to trademark his brand have highlighted what is still considered offensive in New Zealand when it comes to trademarks. But should a government agency be the arbiter of what might offend?

In March 2024, Gower applied to trademark the name of his news entity “This Is The Fucking News”.

The application stalled at the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ), likely because the Trade Marks Act 2002 doesn’t allow people to register trademarks which are “likely to offend a significant section of the community”.

“THIS IS THE F#$%ING NEWS” however, was apparently okay. Gower applied for that mark in June last year and it was registered in December. He now has exclusive rights to use this phrase for specified goods and services.

A changing definition

New Zealand law first prohibited the registration of “scandalous” marks in 1889. The language used in the trademark statute has been “likely to offend” since 2002.

The current rules cover swear words, as in Gower’s case, but also hate speech and material which is culturally offensive.

IPONZ’s current guidance says a “distinction should be drawn between marks that are offensive and marks that would be considered by some to be in poor taste”. Offensive trademarks are said to be those that would create “justifiable censure or outrage”.

But the standards of offensiveness can and do change.

In 1999, Red Bull applied to register “BULLSHIT”. Registration was rejected on the basis that it contained scandalous matter and was contrary to morality (under the wording in the older law).

Perhaps Red Bull wouldn’t face the same difficulty if it tried again today. There is now a registration for “Shit You Should Care About”. It appears that the word shit is not considered one that’s “likely to offend a significant section of the community” anymore.

From a review of the register, it seems reasonable to conclude that IPONZ thinks that certain swear words do remain likely to offend, though. Several applications have been abandoned, including for “THE FUCKING GOOD BOOK” and “no fucks given”.

Whether a mark is offensive is supposed to be determined objectively from the perspective of the “right-thinking” member of the public. But outcomes can appear inconsistent and perhaps arbitrary — why is “F#$%ING” ok, but the proper spelling not?

Limits on freedom of expression?

Some applicants may also decry that their freedom of expression is being curtailed by a refusal to register.

The common justification for protecting freedom of expression is that we should have an open marketplace of ideas, where both good and bad ideas are shared with the public.

New Zealand is not alone in considering these issues.

In the United States, for example, Simon Tam was refused registration for “THE SLANTS” (the name of his rock band) because the law at the time prohibited registration of marks which may be disparaging. Slant is considered a racist term by some and Tam had wanted to reclaim the slur as an anti-racist statement.

In another case, designer Erik Brunetti was refused registration of “FUCT” for clothing, because the law said that immoral or scandalous marks couldn’t be registered.

Both marks have since been registered for reasons related to the fact that the US Constitution’s First Amendment allows for the right to freedom of speech.

The US trademarks register now contains a pending application for “NAZI KAZI” and a pending application for a symbol described as “roughly resembling a swastika”, as well as two pending applications for marks containing the word “N*GGER”.

These marks may not ever be registered, but the barriers against their registration aren’t what they once were.

Limiting offence or limiting rights?

New Zealand obviously has a different constitutional context than the US, but there are similarities in the underlying question about what is, and isn’t offensive – and the role of the government in determining the rules.

One big difference between the US cases and those in New Zealand, however, is that New Zealand’s Bill of Rights allows for limits on rights, if those limits are reasonable, set out in law (like the Trade Marks Act) and justifiable in a free and democratic society.

So, is there a compelling justification for the prohibition on registering offensive marks?

One argument for the prohibition is to protect the public from exposure to these kinds of marks. However, the denial of registration doesn’t prevent the marks from being used in the marketplace.

Refusal means that an applicant misses out on the benefits of a formal trademark registration (such as being able to sue others for trademark infringement). But there’s nothing stopping a person using an unregistered mark. And, refusing registration may actually free up the mark for more people to use it as it doesn’t belong to just one person or business.

Perhaps a more compelling argument for prohibition is that registration should be refused to avoid giving an official (governmental) seal of approval to offensive marks. This may be a very high bar, but it seems important that a registrar consider the likelihood of deep offence, even if the standard is not often reached.

Putting justifications for any bar aside, it remains hard to draw a line as to what is and isn’t okay. It seems in relation to “THIS IS THE F#$%ING NEWS”, that line is razor thin.

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. What the f#$%? The surprising legal rules about brand trademarks of sweary phrases – https://theconversation.com/what-the-f-the-surprising-legal-rules-about-brand-trademarks-of-sweary-phrases-251474

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Naomi Lightman, Associate Professor of Sociology, Toronto Metropolitan University

As Canada prepares to close the book on the Justin Trudeau era, some will be happy to watch him go. But in Canada’s haste to see him out the door, let’s not forget his government’s significant achievements.

His strong performance in the ongoing showdown with United States President Donald Trump, for example, may have led Canadians to view him in a distinctly more positive light.

But what’s undoubtedly been his single greatest achievement — prodded in no small part by the NDP — was the introduction of a national child-care program: The Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) system, colloquially known as $10-a-day child care.

As scholars of social policy — as well as a mother and grandfather — we believe this program is the biggest improvement to Canada’s welfare state since the initial implementation of medicare in 1966-67, updated via the Canada Health Act in 1984.

Somehow, however, amid all the negative Trudeau headlines, this major contribution has been seemingly forgotten.

Gender equality

Trudeau’s child-care program is a massive advancement for gender equality and should be celebrated by all women, parents and — more broadly — people who care about reducing social inequalities.

By freeing parents — mostly women — from the need to stay home with their children or from having to rely on ageing and often frail grandparents, evidence suggests Canada will experience substantial benefits to children, parents and society as a whole.

The program allows highly skilled and motivated workers to join the paid labour force and could also affect fertility decisions in some cases if, for example, families decide to have more children due to reduced child-care costs.

Just as importantly, formal child care benefits children developmentally, particularly in the case of disadvantaged and single-parent households.

In purely fiscal terms, study after study shows that a dollar invested in child care yields a greater financial return over a lifetime than any other expenditure of public funds.

Massive uptake rates

The CWELCC program committed more than $30 billion federally to support early learning and child care, with specific funds dedicated to Indigenous child care.

To date, it has created 150,000 new spaces, with a goal of creating an additional 100,000 new spaces by March 2026. All provinces and territories have participated, with uptake rates among child-care centres starting at 92 per cent in Ontario and rising higher elsewhere across the country.

Notably, the road to implementing national child care in Canada has neither been short or easy.

In 2004, Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin was unable to bring national child care to fruition, despite gaining bilateral child-care agreements with all 10 provinces.

When Stephen Harper replaced Martin in 2006, among the first acts of his Conservative government was to cancel these agreements. Instead, he offered the Universal Childcare Benefit that delivered $100 per child to parents monthly, but did nothing to address the lack of available child-care spaces.

It did, however, ensure that a rhetoric of “choice” and cash in hand for in-home care for children was prioritized over women’s equal participation in the labour market. Internationally, there is consistent evidence that care allowances offered in lieu of a publicly funded child-care services reinforce traditional gendered divisions of labour and reduce female employment rates.

All provinces/territories signed up

By contrast — and no small feat in terms of negotiation skills — Trudeau’s team was able to persuade each and every province and territory to sign an Early Learning and Child Care Agreement.

Major reductions in child-care fees for eligible families followed, with all territories and four provinces at $10-a-day as of 2024 (with New Brunswick and Alberta only slightly higher, while Nova Scotia] will be at $10-a-day as of March 1, 2026.)

Even in Ontario, where rates are higher, costs now average about $23 a day.

Trudeau managed to carry out this program by starting his efforts early in his tenure, unlike with the dental and pharmacare initiatives, and building consensus across a diverse and often contentious Canadian landscape.

Supply issues

It’s not all roses, of course. Some Canadians are frustrated about the slow expansion of subsidized child-care spaces. And the program remains plagued by serious supply (availability) issues, especially in rural and remote communities.

Early childhood educators still do not receive fair pay for the essential work they do, and staff retention is a serious issue.

But as we look towards the next federal election, Conservative Leader Pierre Polievre has had little to say about the national child-care program except for vague references to “flexibility” and a suggestion about replacing it with tax credits. This should set alarm bells ringing across the country.

Read more:
The baffling indifference of Canadian voters to child-care proposals

Fortunately, Trudeau has set up a framework that will be difficult to dismantle in the future. There has been massive buy-in from users, providers, funders and much of the general public.

We urge whoever replaces Trudeau as prime minister to highlight what’s been accomplished in child care over the last few years, and to prioritize the further expansion of the program in the years ahead.

This would be Trudeau’s proudest legacy.

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. Trudeau’s record may be spotty, but his biggest accomplishment was a national child-care program – https://theconversation.com/trudeaus-record-may-be-spotty-but-his-biggest-accomplishment-was-a-national-child-care-program-251318

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Veronika Poniscjakova, Deputy Director, Porstmouth Military Education Team, University of Portsmouth

After publicly belittling Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky in a White House meeting, Donald Trump has suspended US military aid to Ukraine and paused intelligence sharing. It is now clear that Ukraine is in trouble in both its political and military situations, and the latter will only worsen as the effects of the US aid suspension hit.

Trump’s outburst has, to some extent, reinvigorated European support for the war-torn country. But Zelensky’s recent statement that “Ukraine is ready to negotiate about an end to the conflict” suggests that he recognises how precarious the situation has become.

In Trump’s address to the US Congress on February 4, the US president welcomed this shift, and claimed that Russia was also ready for a truce.

What would a negotiated peace look like? The side that holds the upper hand, both politically and militarily, will have a stronger position at the negotiating table.

At the moment, the advantage is overwhelmingly with Russia, which is striving to press home its battlefield advantage and occupy as much territory as it can before a potential ceasefire. This is likely to mean a freezing of the conflict on its current lines of contact.

The war has now lasted more than three years, and since Ukraine’s failed summer 2023 counteroffensive, there have been no major changes on the battlefield, except for Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region in August 2024. Kyiv had hoped that seizing this territory could serve as a bargaining chip in future peace negotiations.

But even this has not gone according to plan, as Russia has been steadily reclaiming the area, aided by North Korean troops.

Recent battlefield developments reaffirm the ongoing stalemate. According to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) (as of March 4), Russian forces continued offensives along various key strategic points in the east and south. While Russian advances continue to be slow, it’s a situation that could change quickly, particularly with the dramatic shutdown of US assistance.

One of the key areas where Russia is now putting intense pressure on Ukrainian troops is in the Kherson oblast in the south of the country. Russian forces are reportedly attempting to cross the Dnipro river, aiming to establish footholds on the west (right) bank at four locations to allow them a clear run at the strategically important port city of Kherson.

Russia has successfully negotiated river crossings during the three-year war, but this time, the situation seems more challenging. Recent reporting from the frontlines has described Russian assaults on Dnipro crossings as “suicide missions”, causing heavy Russian casualties.

A high Russian body count is nothing new in this conflict. But why is Russia willing to sacrifice so many of its soldiers, particularly when the political prospects favour Putin and the Russians?

Oleksandr Prokudin, the governor of Kherson, suggests that Russia is desperate to establish a foothold as crossing the Dnipro would open up Kherson oblast for further advances and could be used in negotiations to strengthen Russia’s claim over the entire region. The occupation of Kherson was listed by Russian defence minister, Andrei Belousov, as a key strategic goal for 2025.

Strategic barrier

Crossing the Dnipro will not be easy. Ukraine has tried and failed in the opposite direction on several occasions for example, in April and August 2023.

At that stage, as part of the (ultimately unsuccessful) spring-summer offensive, Kyiv hoped crossing the river would be a major breakthrough that would lead to easier access to Crimea. This now looks like a lost cause – at least militarily.

The Dnipro is not only a natural barrier dividing the country into two parts. It’s also vital as a transport artery through the country and its dams provide energy.

Russia realises this, and it has seen the river as one of Ukraine’s “centres of gravity”. On day one of the invasion, Russian forces made a beeline for the Dnipro, crossing and taking up positions that they were later forced to abandon as Ukraine fought back.

Now, as Prokudin observed, Russia is once again throwing its troops at the river. A series of assaults in December 2024 were successfully repelled, but things have changed even in the few months since. Ukraine is in an increasingly difficult position.

Ukraine’s military is facing increasingly critical troop shortages and has a far smaller population to draw on than Russia – something which is beginning to tell.

And each day seems to bring further bad news. The US decision to pause intelligence sharing will mean its forces in the field will be virtually deaf and blind and at the mercy of Russian attacks on their positions (although there is reason to believe the pause may be reasonably shortlived).

But, with the decision to halt military aid, it’s an indication of the Trump administration’s determination to force Kyiv into a peace deal – whether or not it’s acceptable to Ukraine.

At this stage it looks almost inevitable that Ukraine will be unable to reclaim all the territory it has lost to Russia since 2014. Its best chance may be to secure what it still does control and go all-out to prevent further Russian advances. One of the ways it needs to do that right now is to ensure Russia does not establish a foothold across the Dnipro river.

Veronika Poniscjakova 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. Russia launching ‘suicide missions’ across strategic Dnipro river as pause in US aid hampers defence – https://theconversation.com/russia-launching-suicide-missions-across-strategic-dnipro-river-as-pause-in-us-aid-hampers-defence-251439

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allison Stanger, Distinguished Endowed Professor, Middlebury

The Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, has secured unprecedented access to at least seven sensitive federal databases, including those of the Internal Revenue Service and Social Security Administration. This access has sparked fears about cybersecurity vulnerabilities and privacy violations. Another concern has received far less attention: the potential use of the data to train a private company’s artificial intelligence systems.

The White House press secretary said government data that DOGE has collected isn’t being used to train Musk’s AI models, despite Elon Musk’s control over DOGE. However, evidence has emerged that DOGE personnel simultaneously hold positions with at least one of Musk’s companies.

At the Federal Aviation Administration, SpaceX employees have government email addresses. This dual employment creates a conduit for federal data to potentially be siphoned to Musk-owned enterprises, including xAI. The company’s latest Grok AI chatbot model conspicuously refuses to give a clear denial about using such data.

As a political scientist and technologist who is intimately acquainted with public sources of government data, I believe this potential transmission of government data to private companies presents far greater privacy and power implications than most reporting identifies. A private entity with the capacity to develop artificial intelligence technologies could use government data to leapfrog its competitors and wield massive influence over society.

Value of government data for AI

For AI developers, government databases represent something akin to finding the Holy Grail. While companies such as OpenAI, Google and xAI currently rely on information scraped from the public internet, nonpublic government repositories offer something much more valuable: verified records of actual human behavior across entire populations.

This isn’t merely more data – it’s fundamentally different data. Social media posts and web browsing histories show curated or intended behaviors, but government databases capture real decisions and their consequences. For example, Medicare records reveal health care choices and outcomes. IRS and Treasury data reveal financial decisions and long-term impacts. And federal employment and education statistics reveal education paths and career trajectories.

What makes this data particularly valuable for AI training is its longitudinal nature and reliability. Unlike the disordered information available online, government records follow standardized protocols, undergo regular audits and must meet legal requirements for accuracy. Every Social Security payment, Medicare claim and federal grant creates a verified data point about real-world behavior. This data exists nowhere else with such breadth and authenticity in the U.S.

Most critically, government databases track entire populations over time, not just digitally active users. They include people who never use social media, don’t shop online, or actively avoid digital services. For an AI company, this would mean training systems on the actual diversity of human experience rather than just the digital reflections people cast online.

The technical advantage

Current AI systems face fundamental limitations that no amount of data scraped from the internet can overcome. When ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini make mistakes, it’s often because they’ve been trained on information that might be popular but isn’t necessarily true. They can tell you what people say about a policy’s effects, but they can’t track those effects across populations and years.

Government data could change this equation. Imagine training an AI system not just on opinions about health care but on actual treatment outcomes across millions of patients. Consider the difference between learning from social media discussions about economic policies and analyzing their real impacts across different communities and demographics over decades.

A large, state-of-the-art, or frontier, model trained on comprehensive government data could understand the actual relationships between policies and outcomes. It could track unintended consequences across different population segments, model complex societal systems with real-world validation and predict the impacts of proposed changes based on historical evidence. For companies seeking to build next-generation AI systems, access to this data would create an almost insurmountable advantage.

Control of critical systems

A company like xAI could do far more with models trained on government data than building better chatbots or content generators. Such systems could fundamentally transform – and potentially control – how people understand and manage complex societal systems. While some of these capabilities could be beneficial under the control of accountable public agencies, I believe they pose a threat in the hands of a single private company.

Medicare and Medicaid databases contain records of treatments, outcomes and costs across diverse populations over decades. A frontier model trained on new government data could identify treatment patterns that succeed where others fail, and so dominate the health care industry. Such a model could understand how different interventions affect various populations over time, accounting for factors such as geographic location, socioeconomic status and concurrent conditions.

A company wielding the model could influence health care policy by demonstrating superior predictive capabilities and market population-level insights to pharmaceutical companies and insurers.

Treasury data represents perhaps the most valuable prize. Government financial databases contain granular details about how money flows through the economy. This includes real-time transaction data across federal payment systems, complete records of tax payments and refunds, detailed patterns of benefit distributions, and government contractor payments with performance metrics.

An AI company with access to this data could develop extraordinary capabilities for economic forecasting and market prediction. It could model the cascading effects of regulatory changes, predict economic vulnerabilities before they become crises, and optimize investment strategies with precision impossible through traditional methods.

Infrastructure and urban systems

Government databases contain information about critical infrastructure usage patterns, maintenance histories, emergency response times and development impacts. Every federal grant, infrastructure inspection and emergency response creates a data point that could help train AI to better understand how cities and regions function.

The power lies in the potential interconnectedness of this data. An AI system trained on government infrastructure records would understand how transportation patterns affect energy use, how housing policies affect emergency response times, and how infrastructure investments influence economic development across regions.

A private company with exclusive access would gain unique insight into the physical and economic arteries of American society. This could allow the company to develop “smart city” systems that city governments would become dependent on, effectively privatizing aspects of urban governance. When combined with real-time data from private sources, the predictive capabilities would far exceed what any current system can achieve.

Absolute data corrupts absolutely

A company such as xAI, with Musk’s resources and preferential access through DOGE, could surmount technical and political obstacles far more easily than competitors. Recent advances in machine learning have also reduced the burdens of preparing data for the algorithms to process, making government data a veritable gold mine – one that rightfully belongs to the American people.

The threat of a private company accessing government data transcends individual privacy concerns. Even with personal identifiers removed, an AI system that analyzes patterns across millions of government records could enable surprising capabilities for making predictions and influencing behavior at the population level. The threat is AI systems that leverage government data to influence society, including electoral outcomes.

Since information is power, concentrating unprecedented data in the hands of a private entity with an explicit political agenda represents a profound challenge to the republic. I believe that the question is whether the American people can stand up to the potentially democracy-shattering corruption such a concentration would enable. If not, Americans should prepare to become digital subjects rather than human citizens.

Allison Stanger receives funding from the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, Harvard University.

– ref. DOGE threat: How government data would give an AI company extraordinary power – https://theconversation.com/doge-threat-how-government-data-would-give-an-ai-company-extraordinary-power-250907

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Johnston, Associate Professor, China Studies Centre, University of Sydney

Since taking office, US president Donald Trump has implemented policies that have been notably hostile towards China. They include trade restrictions. Most recently, a 20% tariff was added to all imports from China and new technological restrictions were imposed under the America First Investment Policy. This isn’t the first time US-China tensions have flared. Throughout history the relationship has been fraught by economic, military and ideological conflicts.

China-Africa scholar and economist Lauren Johnston provides insights into how these dynamics may also shape relations between Africa and China.

How has China responded to hostile US policies?

First, China tends to have a defiant official response. It expresses disappointment, then states that the US policy position is not helpful to any country or the world economy.

Second, China makes moves domestically to prioritise the interests of key, affected industries.

Third, China will sometimes impose retaliatory sanctions.

In 2018, for instance, China imposed a 25% tariff on US soybeans, a critical animal feed source. The US Department of Agriculture had to compensate US soybean farmers for their lost income.

Another example is how, following US tech sanctions, China took a more independent technology path. It has channelled billions into tech funds. The goal is to make financing available for Chinese entrepreneurs and to push technological boundaries in areas of US sanction, such as semiconductors. These efforts are backed up by subsidies and tax reductions. In some cases, the Chinese state will invest directly in tech companies.

More recently, China retaliated to the US trade war by
announcing tariffs on 80 US products. China is set to place 15% tariffs on certain energy exports, including coal, natural gas and petroleum. An additional 10% tariffs will be placed on 72 manufactured products including trucks, motor homes and agricultural machinery.

Agricultural trade has been hard hit. The day the US announced a 10% tariff on Chinese imports, China announced “an additional 15% tariff on imported chicken, wheat, corn and cotton originating from the US”. Also, “sorghum, soybeans, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables and dairy products will be subject to an additional 10% tariff”.

How have these Chinese responses affected Africa?

We can’t say for certain that China’s response to US trade tensions has explicitly affected its Africa policy, but there are some notable coincidences.

Less than one month after Trump’s return to the White House in 2025, and soon after the first tariffs were slapped on China’s exports to the US, China announced new measures to foster China-Africa trade efforts. The policy package aims to “strengthen economic and trade exchanges between China and Africa.”

This is the latest in a series of Chinese actions.

In January 2018 trade hostilities began to escalate after Trump imposed a first round of tariffs on all imported washing machines and solar panels. These had an impact on China’s exports to the US.

Later the same year, China imposed 25% tariffs on US soy bean imports and took steps to reduce dependence on US agricultural products. China also took steps to expand trade with Africa, agricultural trade in particular.

In September 2018, Beijing hosted the Forum on China and Africa Cooperation summit, a triennial head of state gathering. It was announced that China would set up a China-Africa trade expo and foster deeper agricultural cooperation. In the days after the summit, China’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs was already acting on this. A gathering of African agricultural ministers took place in Changsha, Hunan province.

Hunan province has since taken centre stage in China-Africa relations. It’s now the host of a permanent China-Africa trade exhibition hall and a larger biennial China-Africa economic and trade exhibition (known as CAETE).

Hunan also hosts the pilot zone for In-Depth China-Africa Economic and Trade Cooperation. The zone has numerous initiatives designed to overcome obstacles to China-Africa trade and investment, like support in areas of law, technology and currency, and vocational training.

Finally, the zone is located in a bigger free-trade zone that is better connected to Africa by air, water and land corridors. African agricultural exports to China pass through Hunan, where local industry either uses these imports or distributes them across the country to retailers.

Companies in Hunan are well placed to play a key role in supporting China-Africa trade, capitalising on the opportunities left by China-US hostilities.

Hunan’s agritech giant Longping High-Tech, for instance, is investing in Tanzanian soybean farmers.

Hunan is also home to China’s construction manufacturing and electronic transportation frontier. This includes global construction giant Sany, which produces heavy industry machinery for the construction, mining and energy sectors. China’s global electronic vehicle manufacturing BYD and its electronic railway industry are also in Hunan. They have deep and increasing interests in Africa and can also support China’s key minerals and tech race with the US.

As US-China hostility enters a new era, what are the implications for China-Africa relations?

As my new working paper sets out, African countries are, for example, responding to the new opportunities from China.

At the end of 2024, while the world waited for Trump’s second coming, various African countries made moves to strengthen economic ties with China, Hunan province especially.

In December 2024, Tanzania became the first African country to open an official investment promotion office in the China-Africa Cooperation Pilot Zone in Changaha.

In November 2024, both the China-Africa Economic and Trade Expo in Africa and the China Engineering Technology Exhibition were held in Abuja, Nigeria. Equivalent events were hosted in Kenya.

Early in 2025 in Niamey, Niger, a joint pilot cooperation zone was inaugurated , and which is direct partner of the China-Africa Pilot zone in Hunan.

As China moves away from US agricultural produce, for instance, African agricultural producers can benefit. Substitute African products and potential exports will enjoy a price boost, and elevated Chinese support.

China’s newly elevated interest in African development and market potential will bring major prospects. The question will be whether African countries are ready to grasp them, and to use that potential to foster an independent development path of their own.

Lauren Johnston 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. US trade wars with China – and how they play out in Africa – https://theconversation.com/us-trade-wars-with-china-and-how-they-play-out-in-africa-249609

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Johnson, Professor, Geology, Curtin University

We have discovered the oldest meteorite impact crater on Earth, in the very heart of the Pilbara region of Western Australia. The crater formed more than 3.5 billion years ago, making it the oldest known by more than a billion years. Our discovery is published today in Nature Communications.

Curiously enough, the crater was exactly where we had hoped it would be, and its discovery supports a theory about the birth of Earth’s first continents.

The very first rocks

The oldest rocks on Earth formed more than 3 billion years ago, and are found in the cores of most modern continents. However, geologists still cannot agree how or why they formed.

Nonetheless, there is agreement that these early continents were critical for many chemical and biological processes on Earth.

Many geologists think these ancient rocks formed above hot plumes that rose from above Earth’s molten metallic core, rather like wax in a lava lamp. Others maintain they formed by plate tectonic processes similar to modern Earth, where rocks collide and push each other over and under.

Although these two scenarios are very different, both are driven by the loss of heat from within the interior of our planet.

We think rather differently.

A few years ago, we published a paper suggesting that the energy required to make continents in the Pilbara came from outside Earth, in the form of one or more collisions with meteorites many kilometres in diameter.

As the impacts blasted up enormous volumes of material and melted the rocks around them, the mantle below produced thick “blobs” of volcanic material that evolved into continental crust.

Our evidence then lay in the chemical composition of tiny crystals of the mineral zircon, about the size of sand grains. But to persuade other geologists, we needed more convincing evidence, preferably something people could see without needing a microscope.

So, in May 2021, we began the long drive north from Perth for two weeks of fieldwork in the Pilbara, where we would meet up with our partners from the Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA) to hunt for the crater. But where to start?

A serendipitous beginning

Our first target was an unusual layer of rocks known as the Antarctic Creek Member, which crops out on the flanks of a dome some 20 kilometres in diameter. The Antarctic Creek Member is only 20 metres or so in thickness, and mostly comprises sedimentary rocks that are sandwiched between several kilometres of dark, basaltic lava.

However, it also contains spherules – droplets formed from molten rock thrown up during an impact. But these drops could have travelled across the globe from a giant impact anywhere on Earth, most likely from a crater that has now been destroyed.

After consulting the GSWA maps and aerial photography, we located an area in the centre of the Pilbara along a dusty track to begin our search. We parked the offroad vehicles and headed our separate ways across the outcrops, more in hope than expectation, agreeing to meet an hour later to discuss what we’d found and grab a bite to eat.

Remarkably, when we returned to the vehicle, we all thought we’d found the same thing: shatter cones.

Shatter cones are beautiful, delicate branching structures, not dissimilar to a badminton shuttlecock. They are the only feature of shock visible to the naked eye, and in nature can only form following a meteorite impact.

Little more than an hour into our search, we had found precisely what we were looking for. We had literally opened the doors of our 4WDs and stepped onto the floor of a huge, ancient impact crater.

Frustratingly, after taking some photographs and grabbing a few samples, we had to move on to other sites, but we determined to return as soon as possible. Most importantly, we needed to know how old the shatter cones were. Had we discovered the oldest known crater on Earth?

It turned out that we had.

There and back again

With some laboratory research under our belts, we returned to the site in May 2024 to spend ten days examining the evidence in more detail.

Shatter cones were everywhere, developed throughout most of the Antarctic Creek Member, which we traced for several hundred metres into the rolling hills of the Pilbara.

Our observations showed that above the layer with the shatter cones was a thick layer of basalt with no evidence of impact shock. This meant the impact had to be the same age as the Antarctic Member rocks, which we know are 3.5 billion years old.

We had our age, and the record for the oldest impact crater on Earth. Perhaps our ideas regarding the ultimate origin of the continents were not so mad, as many told us.

Serendipity is a marvellous thing. As far as we knew, other than the Traditional Owners, the Nyamal people, no geologist had laid eyes on these stunning features since they formed.

Like some others before us, we had argued that meteorite impacts played a fundamental role in the geological history of our planet, as they clearly had on our cratered Moon and on other planets, moons and asteroids. Now we and others have the chance to test these ideas based on hard evidence.

Who knows how many ancient craters lay undiscovered in the ancient cores of other continents? Finding and studying them will transform our understanding of the early Earth and the role of giant impacts, not only in the formation of the landmasses on which we all live, but in the origins of life itself.

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. Earth’s oldest impact crater was just found in Australia – exactly where geologists hoped it would be – https://theconversation.com/earths-oldest-impact-crater-was-just-found-in-australia-exactly-where-geologists-hoped-it-would-be-250921

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

Issues sometimes “come at you”, Anthony Albanese declared on Thursday at the end of a news conference, held at Canberra’s National Situation Room, about Cyclone Alfred.

The cyclone is a disaster for millions of people in its path. For the prime minister, it is a major political disruptor.

Albanese cancelled his visit to Western Australia: he’d wanted to be there when Labor has its anticipated certain win at Saturday’s election.

His own election planning – which seemed headed for an April 12 election called this weekend – has been thrown into some disarray (although this is contested by those involved).

Then there was the good news that was crowded out. Wednesday’s national accounts finally showed some of the much hoped-for positive trends, especially an end to the per capita recession, which had been running for seven consecutive quarters. But with the cyclone naturally dominating attention, who noticed?

Albanese’s response to the new circumstances was to place himself at the centre of the planning for the cyclone. He stood side by side with Queensland Premier David Crisafulli at his news conference on Wednesday and was early to the Situation Room on Thursday morning, promising to give regular updates.

To questions about whether he’d abandoned any thought of calling an election at the weekend, the PM insisted (unconvincingly) that politics was furthest from his mind. Though announcing an election would appear near impossible in the circumstances, and attention had already begun turning to a May date (and a budget beforehand), Albanese on Thursday wouldn’t be drawn. Basically, he was waiting to see what happened with the weather.

The cyclone will be a passing disruptor. The disruption from the Trump administration will be with Australia (and the world) for the foreseeable future.

Next week Australia will know whether its intense lobbying for an exemption from the US tariffs on aluminium and steel has been effective. Those around the government are not optimistic.

More concerning than the immediate impact on Australia if we fail to win the exemption is the effect of US protectionism more generally.

Reserve Bank deputy Governor Andrew Hauser confirmed this week that “from a macroeconomic perspective, Australia’s direct exposure to US tariffs levied on our exports is limited”.

“[But] Australia is heavily integrated into, and reliant on, the global economy more broadly – and particularly China. Hence the bigger macroeconomic risk for us would be if the imposition of US tariffs on third countries triggered a global trade war that impaired our trade and financial linkages more broadly.

“As Australia’s long history has shown, we thrive when trade, labour and assets flow freely in the global economy, but we suffer when countries turn inwards.”

How disruptive this new world will be to the Australian economy can’t be known but it could make things very difficult for a second term Albanese government or a first term Dutton one.

As Trump tries to force a settlement on Ukraine, there’s been increasing attention on the Europeans’ plans to boost their defence expenditure. This week, we started to feel the heat on Australia to do the same.

Trump’s nominee for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Elbridge Colby told the US Senate Committee on Armed Services, in a written answer during his confirmation hearing, that “Australia is a core U.S. ally. […] The main concern the United States should press with Australia, consistent with the President’s approach, is higher defense spending. Australia is currently well below the 3% level advocated for by NATO Secretary General Rutte, and Canberra faces a far more powerful challenge in China.”

Presently Australia’s defence spending is about 2% of GDP, projected to increase to 2.4% by 2033–34.The Coalition has said it would spend more than Labor (but has not specified how much more).

Defence Minister Richard Marles said he could “obviously understand the US administration seeking for its friends and allies around the world to do more. That’s a conversation that we will continue to have with the US administration. […] But it’s really important to understand we are increasing that spending right now.”

It’s also important to understand that if Australia must ramp up defence further or faster than present plans, that will suck funds from other priorities, putting another squeeze on future governments.

Trump’s bullying of Ukraine and its leader Volodymyr Zelensky has not weakened the bipartisan support in Australia for Ukraine.

But a difference has emerged over whether Australia should (if asked) take part in any peacekeeping force. Peter Dutton said this role should be left to the Europeans. But Albanese flagged his government would consider it, pointing to the many other peacekeeping operations we have participated in.

Former prime minister Scott Morrison got on well with Trump during the president’s first term and has become even more signed up since. The Morrisons were at Mar-a-Lago for New Year’s eve.

Morrison was distinctly sympathetic to Trump’s approach when talking this week about Ukraine. He told an Australian Financial Review dinner, “Do we just keep fighting this war every day? The alternative is to find a peace that can be secured.

“There was no conversation, no real conversation, about peace in Ukraine up until now.” Zelensky had the “most to gain” from negotiating to end the war, he said.

Morrison is affiliated with lobbying firm American Global Strategies, which has links to the Trump administration. Colby is listed as a senior adviser. The chairman and founder of the group, Robert C. O’Brien, was formerly a national security adviser to Trump.

Morrison is one of a number of former senior Australian political figures who have a current professional or commercial lock-in to Washington politics.

Former Liberal treasurer Joe Hockey, who was close to the Trump White House when Hockey was ambassador in 2016-20, is founder and global president of Bondi Partners, a lobbying firm that operates between the US and Australia.

Another former Australian ambassador to Washington, Arthur Sinodinos, is based in Washington as a partner in the Asia Group, a strategic advisory firm.

Meanwhile former PM Kevin Rudd, as Australian ambassador in Washington, is trying to amplify Australia’s official voice with the administration.

Speculation continues about Rudd’s future if the government changed. Dutton says that would depend on how effective Rudd was, saying his present instinct would be leave him in the job.

Others are sceptical this would happen, and raise Morrison’s name as a possible replacement. Morrison has reportedly told people he would not want the post. But you couldn’t rule it out.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Anthony Albanese beset by disruptors, from Cyclone Alfred to Donald Trump – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-anthony-albanese-beset-by-disruptors-from-cyclone-alfred-to-donald-trump-251258

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Harrington, Associate Professor, School of Communication, Queensland University of Technology

It’s hard to keep track of US President Donald Trump’s many notable acts since returning to the White House. His recent pro-Russia stance on the war in Ukraine has, rightly, received a lot of attention.

But for every big moment, there are others that fly under the radar. One such issue is the politicisation of the Department of Justice (DoJ).

Although there is longstanding precedent that the DoJ remains politically neutral in its operations, recent events have indicated a dramatic break from that tradition.

And, importantly, Trump has been laying the groundwork to justify this for nearly two years, using a propaganda tactic that’s been employed by authoritarian governments throughout history.

Strategic sidelining

The current administration has attempted to fire or sideline anyone at the DoJ who was involved with prior investigations and prosecutions of the now-president.

This includes special counsel Jack Smith’s investigations into several aspects of Trump’s wrongdoing, which have since ended. Several lawyers have been fired, ostensibly because “the Acting Attorney-General does not trust these officials to assist in faithfully implementing the President’s agenda”.

This action is not only vindictive, but likely designed to intimidate would-be investigators and make them think twice before further examining any wrongdoing by Trump or his associates.

Equally noteworthy has been the department’s attempts to drop corruption charges against New York mayor Eric Adams.
The official reason is that pursuing the charges might “interfere” with Adams’ reelection campaign.

In reality, however, Adams has been accused of cutting a deal with the administration: he agrees to assist with Trump’s immigration crackdown in return for having the charges against him withdrawn (although not dropped entirely).

Adams denies the existence of a quid pro quo, but he did joke about it on national television with Tom Homan, Trump’s “Border Czar”.

So deeply problematic was all this that two US attorneys for the Southern District of New York opted to resign in protest, rather than be party to what they saw as a nakedly corrupt act.

The whole scenario is eerily reminiscent of 1973’s “Saturday Night Massacre”, when President Richard Nixon ordered his Attorney-General Elliot Richardson to fire the special prosecutor investigating the Watergate scandal.

Nixon eventually had his way, but not before refusals and resignations from both Richardson, and the Deputy Attorney-General William Ruckleshaus.

But, where Nixon’s move dramatically hastened his own downfall, Trump’s actions have barely raised an eyebrow. Why?

The propaganda play

The answer lies in a propaganda technique known as “accusation in a mirror”, which entails accusing one’s opponents of the very wrongdoing one plans to commit.

As one legal scholar explains, it’s:

a rhetorical practice in which one falsely accuses one’s enemies of conducting, plotting, or desiring to commit precisely the same transgressions that one plans to commit against them.

Accusation in a mirror has been used in the past, including in the Rwandan genocide. There, trusted voices claimed the Tutsi wanted to “exterminate” the Hutu. Tragically, it helped bring about the exact opposite circumstance.

Similarly, in February 2022 Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the Ukrainian government of committing genocide against Russian-speaking populations in the Donbas region. This baseless accusation provided a justification for invading Ukraine, which mirrored Russia’s own indiscriminate shelling of Ukrainian civilians.

We suggest Trump has been using this technique since he was first criminally indicted, in early 2023, on 34 felony charges related to the falsification of business records. He and his supporters have insisted the department, under President Joe Biden, was “weaponised” against him.

Trump repeatedly claimed those charges – and subsequent indictments – were a politically motivated “witch hunt”. He reiterated these claims in his first speech to Congress.

Many elected Republicans have also supported and amplified that narrative.

These claims of victimhood have helped prime Trump’s base to appraise any subsequent legal scrutiny of him as purely partisan, and therefore invalid.

In reality, the facts were straightforward. Prosecutors were sure there was enough proof to proceed with the case, including evidence Trump illegally kept classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence, and obstructed attempts to retrieve them.

In a functioning legal system, nobody is “above the law”. This means even former presidents can be prosecuted if there’s enough evidence.

Yet Trump’s accusations of a partisan DoJ completely reframed legitimate investigations into alleged political vendettas. In doing so, it effectively justified his subsequent decisions.

A self-fulfilling prophecy

The idea that “if they did it to me, I’m entitled to do it back” was made explicit by Trump in late 2023.

When asked if he would use the DoJ to go after his political rivals, Trump argued he would only be levelling the playing field, stating:

they’ve already done it, but if they want to follow through on this, yeah, it could certainly happen in reverse.

In short, Trump’s false claim of being victimised by a politicised DoJ served as moral cover for his own politicisation of it.

This is a textbook example of how accusation in a mirror can help manufacture the reality it pretends to condemn.

Addressing the problem

This tactic has long been a play by totalitarian and authoritarian leaders.

Foundational propaganda scholars such as Hannah Arendt and Jacques Ellul highlighted how authoritarian rulers often repeat falsehoods – flipping the aggressor and victim – until the masses become desensitised, alienated and confused.

Once enough people believe the system is already corrupt and untrustworthy, they are less likely to be shocked by an actual purge (such as firing DoJ officials).

The implications of such tactics extend internationally, not just to the US.

History cries out to us about the risks of this sort of public discourse. It erodes trust in institutions and liberal democratic processes, paving the road for leaders to undermine them further, corrupting the system in the name of rooting out corruption.

Ultimately, one of the best antidotes is awareness. By exposing these tactics, we can better safeguard against disinformation, protect the rule of law and hold leaders accountable.

Stephen Harrington receives funding from the Australian Research Council, for the Discovery Project ‘Understanding and Combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘.

Timothy Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) for his Discovery Early Career Researcher Award, ‘Combatting Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour on Social Media’. He also receives ARC funding for the Discovery Project, ‘Understanding and Combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘.

– ref. How Trump is weaponising the Department of Justice, and the ‘dark’ tactic he’s using to get away with it – https://theconversation.com/how-trump-is-weaponising-the-department-of-justice-and-the-dark-tactic-hes-using-to-get-away-with-it-250760