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

By withdrawing its support for the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) it helped introduce in the first place, the National Party has essentially only made a soft policy even softer.

Lauded by many as progress towards increasing urban housing supply and density, the MDRS allows land owners to develop up to three housing units, three storeys high, on most urban lots without seeking consent.

The standards and the law behind them stipulate no requirements for higher housing densities, nor do they apply additional restrictions on any other form of building. It was always unlikely the MDRS would contribute significantly to housing supply or density.

That’s because while the law enables more housing units, it does not fundamentally change how land is developed. Considering this already light approach, National’s change of heart will likely push future development even further into undeveloped “greenfield” land.

Encouraging urban sprawl

Undeveloped or very lightly developed land surrounding cities, greenfields are typically agricultural. But they can also include wetlands, forests, floodplains or any other location not yet swallowed up by urban expansion.

Developing low-density residential and commercial units on greenfields creates what is known as sprawl – something of an obscenity in urban planning circles.

Characterised by single-family, car-dominated suburbs, these developments may provide affordable housing for those willing to drive longer to work, school or shopping. But they are also extremely costly for cities and ratepayers.

Read more:
NZ cities urgently need to become ‘spongier’ – but system change will be expensive

Sprawling suburbs require a lot of new infrastructure: roads, sewers, freshwater and stormwater pipes, power and broadband connections – and sometimes new schools, police and fire stations, and other social services. All this costs a lot.

This infrastructure is already well developed within the city, and often has extra capacity. Where there is an infrastructure deficit, such as in some parts of Auckland, the costs and benefits of adding and renewing infrastructure is spread across a large population.

Adding more users to existing infrastructure only reduces service and maintenance costs (providing it is sufficient, of course). A 200-unit apartment complex, for example, spreads the cost of all this infrastructure over many users and is unlikely to affect rates.

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

When the same infrastructure is used to service single-family units spaced half a hectare or more apart, the cost per user is exponentially higher. In many cases, it is subsidised by urban ratepayers while the infrastructure investment benefits only a few households.

The government’s recent budget committed billions of dollars to repair and strengthen existing road and rail networks. So it makes little sense to encourage development in places that will need even more potentially vulnerable infrastructure.

Increasing carbon emissions

Sprawl also makes public transport inefficient or entirely impossible. In a dense urban environment, a single train or bus stop can service hundreds or thousands of potential riders. Again, the cost per rider is much lower than in sprawling, remote suburbs.

The same can be said about active transport modes. The cul-de-sac development style that characterises many modern suburbs can make it challenging to walk or cycle anywhere.

Embracing greenfield development means we are making a conscious decision that future generations must rely on cars as a primary mode of transport.

Read more:
Road to nowhere: why the suburban cul-de-sac is an urban planning dead end

Cars are a major source of carbon emissions in cities. In Auckland, vehicle emissions account for up to 35% of emissions. Pushing more housing out to the edges of the city means households will need more cars to drive longer distances more frequently.

Sprawl means locking ourselves into increased carbon emissions when the Zero Carbon Act has committed New Zealand to reduce emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030, and make the country carbon neutral by 2050.

New Zealand’s largest city has committed to reduce transport emissions by 64% by 2030, primarily by shifting to public and active transport modes. None of this is possible if it continues to grow outward rather than upward.

The medium density standards aren’t perfect. They’re probably not even very useful as a tool to grow the housing supply. But they are better than encouraging continued outward urban expansion.

Urban growth boundaries

What is missing from the MRDS, and especially from sprawling greenfield development, is true medium-density housing. Outside New Zealand, this “missing middle” in the urban equation is characterised by townhouses, row houses, and three- to five-storey apartment buildings.

This type of development is critical to providing a more plentiful and affordable housing supply in places with good existing infrastructure serviced by public transport and active mode connections.

Read more:
To get New Zealanders out of their cars we’ll need to start charging the true cost of driving

Worldwide, cities are rapidly working towards creating more density and housing supply within existing urban areas. For decades, cities like Melbourne, Portland, Vancouver, Copenhagen and even Beijing have applied urban growth boundaries to help preserve undeveloped lands.

In the US, where sprawl has long dominated urban growth, cities have worked to increase density and housing supply by removing zoning requirements for single-family housing.

All in all, the MRDS could go much further. But throwing the baby out with the bathwater isn’t the answer. Greenfield development is more costly for everyone, while burdening future generations with car dependence and excess infrastructure.

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

– ref. National’s housing u-turn promotes urban sprawl – cities and ratepayers will pick up the bill – https://theconversation.com/nationals-housing-u-turn-promotes-urban-sprawl-cities-and-ratepayers-will-pick-up-the-bill-206762

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Matthews, Senior Lecturer in Digital Media and Popular Culture Researcher, Auckland University of Technology

Fans can mourn the passing of music legends for years, the hits echoing long after the original voice is silenced. Little wonder, then, that recent advances in holographic technology and artificial intelligence have found a ready market for performances from beyond the grave.

But this ability to resurrect deceased artists in spectral form raises fascinating questions about the ethics, artistry and the economic implications of these modern revival shows.

Since a holographic Tupac Shakur headlined at Coachella in 2012, there have been similar tributes to Frank Zappa and Roy Orbison. Posthumous tours have also been staged or proposed for Whitney Houston, Amy Winehouse and Ronnie James Dio.

But it’s the holographic performance by a still-living act that stands as the landmark case. ABBA, the Swedish pop sensation that ruled the charts during the 1970s and 1980s, launched their ABBA Voyage virtual reunion tour in 2021, describing the holographic versions of themselves as “ABBAtars”.

Our recent study of the “tour” found a mixture of fan reactions, from some who found it emotionally satisfying to others who questioned its authenticity. The results suggest we need to know more about the enormous cultural implications of these holographic experiences.

Virtual success

While the music industry routinely uses the term “hologram” to describe such shows, it’s not strictly accurate. A true hologram is a 3D object produced by the intersection of light and matter, designed to be observed from all perspectives.

With the exception of ABBA’s recently developed holographic concert, today’s holograms are more akin to digital videos, where images are projected onto a translucent screen in front of real musicians, with the virtual artist seeming to interact with the band and audience. It’s similar to the theatrical optical illusion known as “Pepper’s Ghost” used by 19th-century magicians.

Creating a convincing audience experience is a challenge, however, as fans can be cynical about such events, and the technology doesn’t translate well to YouTube or in photographs. Some find these shows feel too much like watching a movie.

Still, the demand and enthusiasm for virtual concerts is rising steadily, with impressive crowd turnouts and fans paying as much as US$125 for a ticket. The Roy Orbison hologram tour sold an average of 1,800 seats per show.

Read more:
Abba and Tupac in the metaverse: how digital avatars could be the bankable future of band touring

‘Ghost slavery’

Our ABBA Voyage study confirmed the reasons for this popularity. After analysing upwards of 34,000 online comments discussing the virtual concert, we found audience members reported positive responses overall.

People mainly appreciated the opportunity to witness the legendary band “perform” once more. Two comments are indicative of the general feeling:

I don’t care if they’re avatars. Nobody expected ABBA to ever reunite in any way, shape, or form, so this is amazing!

It would be so wonderful to see them as I remember them and transport myself back to my childhood. It’s like the closest thing to time travel.

Fans also appreciated the technical wizardry responsible for recreating the band in its 1979 prime:

I find the fact they use the Abbatars instead of themselves on stage simply an amazing idea. It keeps us feeling young and them timeless.

Not everyone was emotionally moved, though, with some questioning the authenticity of the shows. This echoed previous criticism of holographic shows as lacking the essential “live” element of performance, and also being exploitative – what one critic called “ghost slavery”.

Replacing the irreplaceable

Recreating an artist is one thing, but capturing their spirit, charisma and spontaneous performance style is where motion capture and AI technologies are starting to make a real difference.

The process involves a detailed scan of the artist to create a 3D digital model which AI then refines. Next, movements are digitised through motion capture and transferred onto the model (again using AI), recreating an artist’s distinctive performance. AI is also used to analyse vast recording archives to mimic the artist’s voice.

Read more:
Holographic history is making ‘Night at the Museum’ a reality

For all that, AI’s ability to capture the spontaneity and charisma of live performances remains limited. The future of holographic concerts, then, will likely depend on continued technological progress, shifting audience reactions, and careful navigation of the ethical issues raised.

Future applications could also extend beyond music to educational displays of historical figures. Given the success of ABBA and their Voyage experience, it might even expand the touring capacity of living artists.

All this requires a delicate equilibrium: honouring the artist’s legacy, acknowledging fans’ emotions, and providing an experience that genuinely transcends present limitations. Replacing the irreplaceable may be possible at some level, but ultimately the audience will decide.

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. Holograms and AI can bring performers back from the dead – but will the fans keep buying it? – https://theconversation.com/holograms-and-ai-can-bring-performers-back-from-the-dead-but-will-the-fans-keep-buying-it-202431

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vasso Apostolopoulos, Professor of Immunology and Pro Vice-Chancellor, Research Partnerships, Victoria University

Cases of influenza (the flu) and COVID are set to rise over winter, with many Australians looking to protect themselves from both of these respiratory viruses.

For most adults, if it has been six months since you had COVID or your last vaccination, you’re likely eligible to book in your next dose.

Meanwhile, the flu vaccine is recommended for everyone over the age of six months.

But can you get both at once? Yes, you can get your flu vaccine and COVID booster safely at the same time, saving you a trip to the GP, nurse or pharmacy.

Read more:
Haven’t had COVID or a vaccine dose in the past six months? Consider getting a booster

Why has the advice changed?

When COVID vaccines were first rolled out, a gap was recommended between COVID and flu vaccines. This is because we didn’t have adequate data of the individual and long-term effects of the new COVID vaccines.

After examining the latest available evidence on safety and efficacy, the World Health Organization updated its interim guidelines. It suggests getting an influenza vaccine and any dose of any approved COVID vaccine at the same time is a practical option.

However, until more data becomes available, the WHO advises using different arms for vaccination. This is to prevent the ingredients of the vaccines mixing and to limit the initial immune response to a different group of lymph nodes.

The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation updated its vaccination guidelines in March 2022, advising that influenza and COVID vaccines can be administered on the same day.

What happens when you get two shots at once?

Getting multiple vaccinations at once isn’t new. Childhood vaccinations are routinely and safely administered at the same time.

For COVID and flu vaccines, randomised controlled trials show no significant difference in the immune responses of the people who had both vaccines at once compared to those who had them on different days.

Participants who had both vaccines at once reported the same types of side effects from the body’s inflammatory response to vaccination (injection-site pain, redness, swelling at the injection site) as well as general symptoms associated with both COVID and flu vaccines, such as fever, muscle pain and a headache.

These minor side-effects were of similar intensity and duration to those who had either vaccine administered alone.

Getting both COVID and flu vaccines is also more cost-effective, the uptake is higher when people don’t have to make multiple trips, and it saves health practitioners’ time.

Read more:
Should I get a flu vaccine this year? Here’s what you need to know

What about the viruses? Can you get COVID and the flu at the same time?

Although simultaneous infections with two different viruses are common, SARS-CoV-2 has been infecting humans for a relatively short time. We therefore have limited data on how influenza strains and SARS-CoV-2 interact with the host at the same time, and if there is any interaction between the viruses.

However, one large study in England reported that people positive for influenza had lower odds of also testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. This was attributed to possible cross-reactive immunity between viruses.

It did, however, find people infected with both viruses at the same time had worse outcomes and were twice as likely to die as those who were only infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Some experimental evidence suggested prior infection with type A influenza virus promotes SARS-CoV-2 entry and infectiousness. This could be due to a unique feature of the influenza A virus which allows COVID to take hold more easily.

Read more:
Flu, COVID and flurona: what we can and can’t expect this winter

Where can I get vaccinated and how much will it cost?

Influenza and COVID vaccines are available at GP clinics and pharmacies.

Australians aged five years and over are eligible for a free COVID vaccination. The flu vaccine is free for people at higher risk of complications, including:

• pregnant women
• people six months and older with selected chronic conditions
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

For the rest of the population, the flu vaccine costs around A$20-30. Some practitioners also charge a consultation fee.

Read more:
I’m over 65 and worried about the flu. Which vaccine should I have?

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

– ref. I need a flu shot and a COVID booster. Can I get them at the same time? – https://theconversation.com/i-need-a-flu-shot-and-a-covid-booster-can-i-get-them-at-the-same-time-204027

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Kendall, Professor, Director, Griffith Inclusive Futures, Griffith University, Griffith University

The recently released findings of the senate inquiry into reproductive health care sets the stage for potential transformative change.

Its recommendations are aimed at dismantling the barriers that have long hindered the sexual, maternal, and reproductive health care of women, non-binary, trans, and gender-diverse people, including people with disability.

Its recommendations are strong, welcome and important. For too long, people with disability have been stripped of their autonomy, self-determination and dignity when it comes to accessing sexual and reproductive health care.

But the latest recommendations are not enough to dismantle entrenched biases and stereotypes. Here’s what needs to happen next.

Read more:
Australian women’s access to abortion is a postcode lottery. Here’s what needs to change

Why this is so badly needed

The report outlined two key recommendations focused on people with disability, including:

1. improved training for health practitioners on the ways to engage and communicate with people with disability

2. developing accessible, inclusive and empowering sexual and reproductive health education programs and resources for people with disability, and their family and carers.

These recommendations came after the senate inquiry received a number of submissions that highlighted the struggle women with disability face in engaging with sexual and reproductive health care.

The most obvious and well-known barriers are inaccessible health care settings and services, lack of relevant and complete information about options available to them, and inadequately educated and trained health workers. The recommendations only partially deal with these barriers.

However, the covert, ableist barriers women with disability face are much more pervasive and harmful.

Women with disability are often stereotyped as being incapable of controlling their sexual impulses, or being non-sexual and child-like with no desire or capacity for intimate relationships. Other stereotypes include lacking capacity to care for their children, manage menstruation or control their sexuality and fertility.

These disabilist views have endured, largely unchallenged and with pervasive influence. As a result, sexual and reproductive education for people with disability and health professionals tends to adopt a narrow perspective. It disregards the diverse identities and concerns of the disabled community, driven instead by cis-heteronormative, ableist, and Eurocentric values.

Current practice often centres on disease and pregnancy prevention, with an emphasis on paternalistic safeguarding of “vulnerable” women.

The impact of these stereotypes means people with disability of diverse genders continue to experience menstrual suppression using pharmaceuticals, forced contraception, sterilisation, and forced abortion, particularly those in guardianship arrangements.

Women with disability are also disproportionately affected by sexual violence and abuse. A total of 90% of women with intellectual disability have endured sexual abuse at some time in their lives. Women with disability are nearly twice as likely as non-disabled women to experience sexual violence.

Read more:
We count what matters, and violence against people with disability matters

When it comes to expectant and new mothers with disability, appropriate and accessible health care is also hard to find. Many receive no tailored pre- and post-natal care and people with disability and are often prevented from receiving a full complement of care that non-disabled women receive.

The question remains whether the senate inquiry’s recommendations will be enough to tackle the deeply ingrained stigma and discrimination women with disability face when it comes to accessing sexual health care, unbiased fertility and reproductive information, affordable contraception, and support for sexual choices.

It’s unlikely the barriers created by inherent ableism will be easily dismantled through education alone. So, what else is needed?

Read more:
Autistic people often feel they’re ‘doing love wrong’ – but there’s another side of the story

1. Human rights legislation

Sexual and reproductive rights are inherent entitlements of every being, regardless of gender or disability. However, the right to parenthood is particularly precarious for people with disability in Australia.

Article 23 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities unequivocally upholds the right to a family, including the right to marry and have children.

Those who do have children, face additional pressures. About 15% of Australian children have at least one parent who has a disability but three out of every five of these children face the possibility of being removed from their parents.

People with disability want their right as a decision-maker over their own health, life and bodily integrity to be validated.
So we need to move beyond educating people with disability, their families and health professionals. We need a courageous examination of systemic deeply rooted stereotypes and biases in how sexual and reproductive health care is understood and delivered. And health systems need to be accountable.

We can do this partly with human rights legislation that specifically affirms and acknowledges the rights of people with disability and their health care. Establishing a legal mechanism for rights would, at a minimum, provide disabled Australians with some protection.

Little change will occur in Australia until we align with the global shift to support people with disability to make their own decisions about their health care. Australia is starting to do this, but we still lag behind many other countries.

Read more:
How a charter of rights could protect Australians’ fundamental freedoms

2. Accessible information

Accessibility – physical, sensory, cognitive – remains a major challenge to sexual and reproductive health care. Without it, we limit access to essential services. Education alone will not shift these barriers.

The success of the senate inquiry’s recommendations will also hinge on the provision of accessible and inclusive health information in various formats, such as Braille, large print Easy English, audio, with sign language interpretation.

Accessible communication and personally relevant, transparent, and complete information are critical for people with disability to feel their rights are protected, their treatment is dignified and they are supported to make informed choices and decisions.

Read more:
Sex, technology and disability – it’s complicated

3. Collaboration and commitment

Close collaboration between the government and the disability sector is needed if we are to successfully implement the senate inquiry’s recommendations. This means active involvement of disabled people’s organisations, advocates, and people with disability. Sufficient funding for genuine co-design and authentic engagement will also be essential.

4. Change attitudes

To effectively implement these recommendations and make any meaningful and lasting change, we must also invest heavily in influencing public perceptions.

That includes challenging the ableist view that sexuality is “taboo” for people with disability, and eliminating stigma, misconceptions and misunderstandings about parenting by people with disability.

This article was co-authored by Karin Swift. Karin is an Adjunct Citizen Scientist at Griffith University, President of Women with Disabilities Australia and a private consultant on disability, human rights, gender advocacy and social policy. She was Senior Engagement and Policy Consultant at Queenslanders with Disability Network.

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. People with disability face barriers to sexual and reproductive health care. New recommendations are only the start – https://theconversation.com/people-with-disability-face-barriers-to-sexual-and-reproductive-health-care-new-recommendations-are-only-the-start-206746

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Hazel, Associate Professor, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

Have you ever wondered why your dog is eating your beautifully cropped lawn or nibbling at the grass at the dog park?

Eating grass is a common behaviour in pet dogs. Some surveys show up to 80% of guardians notice their dog regularly snacking on the grass.

Grass eating isn’t a new behaviour either, or only done by our new designer dog breeds. Studies in Yellowstone National Park show plant matter (mostly grass) is found in up to 74% of wolf scats, suggesting the behaviour is possibly inherited from the beginning of doggy time.

À lire aussi :
Why do cats and dogs get the zoomies?

So why does my dog eat the grass?

A lot of people think dogs eat grass when they have a sore stomach, believing grass causes dogs to vomit. This is probably not the case; a study with 12 dogs that ate grass daily found there were few vomiting episodes and the ones that did occur came after the dog had eaten a meal.

And if a dog has a mild gastrointestinal disturbance because of something they’ve been fed, they are in fact less likely to eat grass than if they are fed a normal diet.

Other theories include that dogs eat grass because they want a laxative or that it provides roughage in their diet (get that fibre!).

Like the vomiting discussed above, there is little to no scientific proof for most of these theories. For example, in the study of 12 dogs mentioned above, all of them were wormed and had no previous digestive problems. Yet all 12 still happily ate grass (709 times).

Their main finding was that when the dog had not yet had their daily meal, they were more likely to eat grass. In short, the hungrier the dog, the more likely they were to eat some grass.

The answer to why your dog eats grass may simply be: because they like to. Your dog may be bored, and chewing on grass is something to do.

Maybe your dog just enjoys eating grass. Ripping grass from the ground can be satisfying. The texture and taste of grass offers something different to what they usually eat. You may even notice they prefer grass in certain seasons; perhaps fresh spring grass a favourite delicacy.

Is there any reason why you shouldn’t let your dog eat grass?

Well, yes, there are several. Firstly, you may not want your dog eating your neighbour’s immaculately presented fancy Kikuyu lawn.

More importantly, though, grass is sometimes treated with herbicides. Grass at the local oval or parkland may have been treated or sprayed. Some local councils use a non-hazardous dye to show where grass has been sprayed with herbicide, which is very helpful.

Lawn chemicals are frequently detected in lawn for up to 48 hours after they’re applied, and have also been detected in the urine of dogs with access to grass treated this way.

Research has suggested there may be a link between bladder cancer in dogs and exposure to herbicides.

In fact, dogs may even act as sentinels; the same chemical exposures appear in the urine of dogs and people sharing the same environment.

If you are using herbicides on your own grass, remove your dog, their toys, food and water bowls from the area prior to any application.

Make sure the pesticide has completely dried out before you allow the dog back in the area, and be certain to check the packaging for the appropriate drying time period.

This is particularly the case for granular pesticides or fertilisers that soak into the soil, as these can require up to 24 hours or longer.

If you want to reduce the risk even further, hand weeding may be a better option.

Apart from grass, many leaves, flowers and berries from common plants can be toxic to your dog. This includes plants such as oleander and arum lily; even oregano and bay leaves can cause vomiting and diarrhoea in dogs.

One of the best things you can do for your dog is take them for a walk. And if they eat some grass along the way, provided it has not been sprayed with herbicide, you have nothing to worry about.

Don’t worry if they occasionally vomit. If there is more serious vomiting or diarrhoea, however, please consult your vet.

À lire aussi :
Dogs can get dementia – but lots of walks may lower the risk

Susan Hazel is affiliated with the Dog & Cat Management Board of South Australia and the RSPCA South Australia.

Joshua Zoanetti ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Why does my dog eat grass? And when is it not safe for them? – https://theconversation.com/why-does-my-dog-eat-grass-and-when-is-it-not-safe-for-them-205658

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emerald L King, Lecturer in Humanities, University of Tasmania

Sailor Moon has been with us for over 30 years, but the cartoon series is popular enough that brands are still producing themed merchandise – everything from high end, crystal-encrusted Jimmy Choos to Black Milk leggings and speciality stationary.

As we approach the release of the final instalment of the Sailor Moon Crystal reboot, I can’t help but wonder: why are we still obsessed with fighting evil by moonlight and winning love by daylight?

Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon

Sailor Moon was not not the first “magical girl” series in anime. “Magical girl” is a genre of anime, usually a TV or comic book series with a female lead with special powers and a cute wardrobe, aimed at girls. Yet there was something about Sailor Moon that caught the public’s imagination, and changed anime in Japan – and later the rest of the world – for good.

Written by Naoko Takeuchi as a continuation of her series Code Name: V, Bishōjo Senshi Sērā Mūn (Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon) ran from 1991-97. An animated series followed in 1992 and an English-language dub was released in 1995 by DIC.

The series follows Usagi Tsukino (Serena, in the 1995 dub) and her school friends as they battle against the forces of evil, fall in love and try to get their homework in on time. Sailor Moon revolutionised magical girl series by mixing girls’ story lines with elements from the Super Sentai series, which audiences might remember as being adapted into Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers.

Sailor Moon takes stories about friendship and love and mixes them with a monster of the day format and colour-coded superheroes.

Girls comics

Sailor Moon was published as a shōjo manga or “girls comic” – but it’s important to remember this is a marketing term to indicate an intended readership. These days we can think of these terms as an indicator of genre or style.

Both shōjo (girls) and shōnen (boys) manga can include fast-paced, action-packed narratives, love stories, science fiction, high fantasy and suspense. Manga for girls and young women are more likely to be linked to fashion and will often include full body images of characters to illustrate the latest styles. Takeuchi famously referenced collections by Dior, Mugler and Christian Lacroix and has recently illustrated the 2023 Chanel Collection.

For western and Anglophone viewers in the late 1990s, Sailor Moon provided a role model alongside Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena: Warrior Princess for girls and young women, showing that being a princess didn’t preclude kicking arse.

For the 20th anniversary of the series, Sailor Moon and her friends were redrawn into something a little softer for the Sailor Moon Crystal re-release, which began in 2014. Three anime series and two films later, it is this version of Sailor Moon that perhaps resonates best with a younger generation of anime viewers.

Anniversary fancy goods

Girls magazines have a long tradition of including “fancy goods” as gifts with their magazines. These might be as simple as pre-cut cardboard toys that can be torn out and folded, or designer collaborations on bags, pencil cases and other accessories.

Over Sailor Moon’s 30-year run, there have been a number of such collaborations, such as a forthcoming UniQLO UT t-shirt release and a Sanrio team-up with Hello Kitty. There are, of course, more obvious fashion links, such as the Jimmy Choo collaboration launched in February, which centres around a made-to-order, pink crystal-encrusted boot for A$21,846.18 (¥1,975,600).

Causing more of a stir was a collaboration with lingerie company Peach John, which saw sailor collar padded bras and matching panties released as part of Sailor Moon’s 20th anniversary. At that time, 20 was the legal age of adulthood in Japan (this has recently been lowered to 18).

It seemed an odd statement to make about coming of age – especially as this occasion also marked the re-release of the Sailor Moon anime as Sailor Moon Crystal, meaning that, rather than an adult women, Usagi and her friends were once again 14-year-olds.

Read more:
Cosplay, crossplay and the importance of wearing the right underwear

Coming of age in Sailor Moon

There is something delightful about the Jimmy Choo collaboration being paired with Sailor Moon’s 30th anniversary. The characters are now at the age of shoe appreciation – as is her global audience of fans, similar to Sex and the City protagonists.

Sex and the City was very popular in Japan and it may have launched something of a sexual revolution, allowing late 1990s viewers to start having frank conversations about sex and desire.

For many though, the most surprising collaboration was a line of condoms released to help raise awareness of Japan’s syphilis and STI epidemic. While some questioned Sailor Moon’s suitability as a mascot for STI awareness, in many ways this is just another monster of the day to be vanquished.

A queer wonderland

Sailor Moon Cosmos, the final two-part film, is due to be released on June 9 and June 30. These two films cover the final season of the 1990s anime, Sailor Moon Sailor Stars, and the equivalent manga.

This arc is some of the queerest in the series. It introduces the Sailor Starlights who transform from male idols to female Sailor Scouts.

Given the on going resistance to LGBTQI+ equality in countries such as Japan, the US and Australia, it will be interesting to see how Sailor Moon Cosmos will be received.

Will she remain a bastion of 1990s Girl Power? Or will she and the Sailor Stars once again act as champions of truth and justice, righting wrongs and triumphing over evil in the name of the moon?

Emerald L King 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. 30 years of winning love by daylight: why audiences are still obsessed with Sailor Moon – https://theconversation.com/30-years-of-winning-love-by-daylight-why-audiences-are-still-obsessed-with-sailor-moon-202356

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

By coincidence, the furore around the consultancy firm PwC is raging just as the National Anti-Corruption Commission is gearing up for its start of business on July 1.

The PwC scandal, involving the use of confidential government information for financial gain, would seem an ideal probe for the NACC to cut its teeth on.

Despite this, Anthony Albanese sounded less than enthusiastic when asked by Greens leader Adam Bandt in question time this week whether he would make a referral. The police were already looking at the matter, the PM said, “so it’s gone well beyond the step that the member suggests”.

Regardless of whether the government (or anyone else) refers the matter, a decision on whether to look at PwC’s behaviour will be totally up to the NACC, which is headed by Paul Brereton (formerly of the Afghanistan war crimes inquiry). It’s an independent body and can undertake inquiries on its own initiative.

Meanwhile the Senate estimates hearings – which delve deeply into government processes – have already done a pretty good job laying bare the outrageous behaviour by the consultancy firm, although there are a lot more names to be made public.

At its heart, the PwC affair is simple, a stark example of improper behaviour by a firm taken into the government’s confidence. PwC was consulted by the Abbott government on its planned tax avoidance legislation and was privy to confidential information. It then used the knowledge obtained in discussions with Treasury to tell clients how to avoid the crackdown.

While what happened is simple, the questions arising from this egregious breach of confidentiality and ethics – which Treasury has referred to the Australian Federal Police – are less so. The affair has far-reaching and complex implications, obviously for PwC – the Australian arm of which is now on its knees – but also for government (including the public service) and how it relates to outside consultants.

In her open “mea culpa” letter this week, Kristin Stubbins, the acting chief executive of PwC Australia, listed three ways the company had “failed”. PwC had breached confidentiality, had poor governance, and had a culture at the time of “aggressive marketing” in its tax business that allowed inappropriate behaviour.

Read more:
Word from The Hill: PwC scandal, McGowan quitting politics, PM’s trip to Singapore and high inflation figure

Obviously there is always the potential for conflict of interest for firms that, on one hand, consult with government and, on the other, advise clients who are dealing with the actions of government. The question some ask is: can this dual role be tenable in one firm?

On another front, what’s happened has underscored how dependent the federal government has become on outside consultants, particularly the “big four” consultancy firms.

PwC is like a giant octopus reaching into officialdom. As canvassed in the Senate hearings this week, it is an external auditor for the Treasury, and it also undertakes work for the Reserve Bank. It deals with a large slice of defence procurement.

Under the Morrison government, ministers such as Stuart Robert were always urging the use of outside consultancies, rather than the bureaucracy, to give advice or undertake reviews. And in ministerial appointments to various agencies and the like, people who’d worked in these firms were often favoured candidates.

Read more:
PwC scandal shows consultants, like church officials, are best kept out of state affairs

Notably, the Coalition has not shown great interest in pursuing the PwC affair. In contrast, Labor senator Deb O’Neill has been a bulldog in chasing material, and Greens senator Barbara Pocock has carried the issue for her party.

In opposition, Labor strongly condemned the Coalition government’s extensive contracting-out of work that public servants would once have done. In office, Labor is now cutting back on outsourcing and beefing up the bureaucracy.

Even so, the recourse to outside expertise can’t be avoided entirely. Some issues (including relating to taxation) require tapping into non-government specialists. So stronger belts and braces will still be needed.

The government already has some initiatives under way to strengthen protections. Treasury is working on what more might be needed.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers is particularly angered by the breach of faith, not least because of the importance he puts on consultations in developing policy. Such an approach is undermined by any risk of those consulted misusing their access.

While PwC is a totally black-and-white case, there can be shades of grey in the issue of access to confidential information and government thinking, which can give recipients an inside run, even when financial advantage isn’t involved.

Read more:
Consultants like PwC are loyal to profit, not the public. Governments should cut back on using them

To an extent, the fallout from the PwC affair will itself provide a degree of protection for the future. Whatever the outcome of the police inquiry, the huge reputational and financial damage to the firm will be a powerful deterrent to such behaviour by others.

PwC itself will have difficulty getting much fresh government work for the time being. Finance Department Secretary Jenny Wilkinson reminded the public service last week that ethical considerations must be taken into account in awarding contracts.

On Wednesday Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe told an estimates hearing the bank was not ditching present contracts with PwC, but would not enter into new contracts with it until it had made a “satisfactory response”, which included “complete transparency and accountability for those involved”.

So how far should the government go in punishing PwC? Once the present crisis has passed should there be a moratorium for a specified period on the use of the firm?

Simon Longstaff, director of The Ethics Centre, suggests a temporary moratorium on government contracts while the firm gets its house in order. This time in purgatory would be followed by a period in which the firm would have to demonstrate (according to an independent assessment) that its culture underpins a genuine commitment to the public interest as a condition of obtaining contracts. This special requirement would fall away once the basis for trust had been re-established.

Barbara Pocock wants the book and more thrown at PwC. She has urged a ban on any new government contracts being awarded to the firm until it has re-established trust – “which is likely to be quite some time” – plus the termination of any existing contracts where there is a conflict of interest.

Pocock also says the NACC should investigate the extent of involvement of PwC operatives and the roles and slow action of staff at the Australian Taxation Office, the Treasury and the Taxation Practitioners Board. This should be in addition to the police investigation.

Whether or not the NACC takes up the PwC case, what’s happened there reinforces the argument for the anti-corruption body.

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: the PwC scandal should be ripe for the National Anti-Corruption Commission’s attention – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-the-pwc-scandal-should-be-ripe-for-the-national-anti-corruption-commissions-attention-206867

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ricardo Villegas, Senior Lecturer of Law, University of South Australia

Today, Federal Court Justice Anthony Besanko handed down his long-awaited judgment in the defamation case that Ben Roberts-Smith, Australia’s most decorated living former SAS soldier, brought against the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Times.

The civil trial ended in July 2022 after an astonishing 110 days of evidence and legal submissions. The case was also interrupted by COVID lockdowns.

Besanko determined the newspapers did establish the “substantial truth” of some of the allegations, though not of others. He concluded that in light of these findings, “each proceeding must be dismissed”.

In his judgment, the judge said he was satisfied the most serious imputations were proven on the balance of probabilities, which is the test in such civil cases.

Read more:
A win for the press, a big loss for Ben Roberts-Smith: what does this judgment tell us about defamation law?

This included allegations Roberts-Smith, in an area known as Darwan in 2012, kicked a handcuffed prisoner over a cliff and ordered other soldiers to shoot him.

Justice Besanko also found the papers established substantial truth in the allegations that in 2009 in the village of Kakarak, Roberts-Smith carried a man with a prosthetic leg to a place outside the Whiskey 108 compound and shot him dead.

Further claims were made that Roberts-Smith had forced a young recruit to execute an unarmed elderly man as a form of “blooding”, which Besanko also found to be substantially true.

All of these allegations were particularly galling to a man who had been awarded the Medal of Gallantry for his actions in Afghanistan in 2006, the Victoria Cross for his bravery in Tizak in 2010, and a Commendation for Distinguished Services for his outstanding leadership in more than 50 high-risk operations in 2012.

Substantial and contextual truth

The legal battle began after a series of articles were published in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Canberra Times and the Age in 2018, alleging that Roberts-Smith, a patrol commander with the Special Air Service Regiment, was a war criminal.

The allegations were based upon witnesses’ accounts of events that took place in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2012.

The newspapers also alleged he had bullied, harassed and intimidated soldiers under his command, and that he committed an act of domestic violence in 2018.

Besanko also found allegations of bullying by Roberts-Smith to be substantially true, but did not find that the newspapers had established the substantial truth of the domestic violence allegations.

The allegations of domestic violence and threats were held to warrant the defence of “contextual truth”. That is, given the newspapers had proved the most serious allegations were substantially true, they could rely on the defence of “contextual truth”. This meant Besanko was satisifed the domestic violence allegations would not further harm Roberts-Smith’s reputation, even though the claims weren’t proven to be substantially true.

The “contextual” truth changes came in a push to have uniformity in defamation laws back in 2005.

According to Australian common law, a statement is defamatory if it exposes a person to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or would tend to make right-minded observers shun or avoid that person. Saying a decorated soldier is a war criminal invariably drew the papers deep into potentially defamatory territory.

The papers had to establish a defence, and their defence was that all of what they had reported was true.

Under the law, they needed only to show the “substantial” truth of what they had alleged. A defendant is thus given some leeway; they do not have to prove every last item is completely true.

Because the papers were able to establish the substantial truth of key aspects of the reporting, Roberts-Smith’s case failed.

Roberts-Smith’s lawyers, who were funded by Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes, claimed that some of the witnesses’ testimonies could not be relied upon.

In one case, the lawyers argued this was because the claims were framed in jealousy and based upon an “obsession” with their leader, and in another case that witnesses were “fabulists” and “fantasists”.

However, the imputations supported by the oral evidence of nearly all the witnesses were held to be reliable by Besanko.

What happens next?

It will now be up to the judge, in a further hearing, to determine how much the newspapers will be able to claim back from Roberts-Smith for their reasonable legal costs.

The newspapers requested three weeks to consider how much to seek for costs and third-party costs.

There’s little doubt that both sides have each spent millions on their respective legal teams. The issue of costs may prove just as interesting for observers as the defamation case itself.

Roberts-Smith’s barrister has already raised the possibility that he will appeal.

Read more:
Friday essay: why soldiers commit war crimes – and what we can do about it

Rick Sarre is an office bearer with the SA Labor Party.

Ricardo Villegas 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. ‘Dismissed’: legal experts explain the judgment in the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation case – https://theconversation.com/dismissed-legal-experts-explain-the-judgment-in-the-ben-roberts-smith-defamation-case-191503

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Rolph, Professor of Law, University of Sydney

At the heart of the spectacular defamation trial brought by decorated Australian soldier Ben Roberts-Smith were two key questions.

Had the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Times damaged his reputation when they published in 2018 a series of explosive stories accusing him of murder and other crimes while in Afghanistan?

And could the newspapers successfully defend their reporting as true?

Today, in Sydney, Federal Court Justice Anthony Besanko found the newspapers were indeed able to establish the “substantial truth” of key allegations around killing of unarmed Afghan male prisoners.

An appeal may still be on the cards, but this is a high-profile loss for a very prominent person. The costs will be substantial. The usual rule is that the losing party pays their own costs and those of the winning party.

So, even though people say defamation law in Australia has a reputation for favouring plaintiffs, this case shows even plaintiffs do sometimes lose defamation cases in Australia.

More broadly, this case shows how hard it is to use defamation law to repair any perceived damage to your reputation. Once a case begins, you never can control what will be said in court.

Read more:
Why defamation suits in Australia are so ubiquitous — and difficult to defend for media organisations

What was this case about?

The case centred on several defamatory meanings (or, as they’re known in defamation law, “imputations”) that Roberts-Smith said the papers had made against him.

Among these were that he’d killed unarmed Afghan male prisoners and ordered junior soldiers to execute others in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2012.

Roberts-Smith denied wrongdoing, but the newspapers had pleaded a defence of truth. That means to win this case, they needed to prove the meanings conveyed by their reporting – even if those meanings were unintended – were true.

Besanko, reading a summary judgment today, said the newspapers were able to establish the substantial truth of some of the most serious imputations in the case.

For other imputations, Besanko found the newspapers were able to establish “contextual truth”.

Substantial truth means what is sounds like – that the allegation published was, in substance, true. Defamation law does not require strict, complete or absolute accuracy. Minor or inconsequential errors of detail are irrelevant. What matters is: has the publisher established what they published was, in substance, true?

Contextual truth is a fallback defence. The court has to weigh what has been found to be true against what has been found to be unproven. If the true statements about the plaintiff were worse than the unproven statements, then the plaintiff’s reputation was not overall damaged by the unproven statements, and the publisher has a complete defence.

In other words, Besanko found most of the imputations to be true. And, when considered against those which were not proven to be true, the remaining unproven imputations did not damage Roberts-Smith’s reputation.

Read more:
Lachlan Murdoch could well have won his Crikey lawsuit, so why did he drop it?

What does this case tell us about defamation in Australia?

The court heard several explosive claims during the course of this trial, including that evidence on USB sticks had been put into a lunchbox and buried in a backyard and that Roberts-Smith had allegedly punched a woman in their hotel room.

Roberts-Smith said he didn’t bury the USBs or withhold information from a war crimes inquiry and denied that he had punched the woman.

But the fact this widely scrutinised case yielded such astonishing testimony, day in and day out, shows how risky it is to use defamation law to restore perceived injury to one’s reputation.

Defamation law is seeking to correct people’s views about the plaintiff. But it’s open to doubt that defamation law is actually any good at securing its own stated purpose of changing people’s minds about the plaintiff.

The problem is the law is a very blunt instrument. It’s very hard to get people to change their minds about what they think of you.

All litigation involves risk and defamation trials are even riskier. You never can control what can come out in court, as this litigation demonstrates so clearly.

Roberts-Smith has sued to protect his reputation, but in doing so, a range of adverse things have been said in court. And whatever is said in court is covered by the defence of absolute privilege; you can’t sue for defamation for anything said in court that is reported accurately and fairly.

The 2021 defamation law reforms

The law that applies in the Roberts-Smith case is the defamation law we had before major reforms introduced in July 2021 across most of Australia.

These reforms introduced a new defence known as the public interest defence. To use this defence, a publisher has to demonstrate that they reasonably believed the matter covered in their published material is in the public interest.

As this defence didn’t exist prior to 2021, the publishers in the Roberts-Smith case used the defence of truth.

If a case like this were litigated today following these reforms, it is highly likely the publisher would use the new public interest defence.

Given the Murdoch versus Crikey case was settled, we may yet wait some time to see what’s required to satisfy the public interest test in a defamation case.

But as today’s decision demonstrates, sometimes the truth alone will prevail.

Read more:
High Court rules media are liable for Facebook comments on their stories. Here’s what that means for your favourite Facebook pages

David Rolph has received funding in the past from the ARC.

– ref. A win for the press, a big loss for Ben Roberts-Smith: what does this judgment tell us about defamation law? – https://theconversation.com/a-win-for-the-press-a-big-loss-for-ben-roberts-smith-what-does-this-judgment-tell-us-about-defamation-law-206759

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Bateson, Professor of Practice, University of Sydney

Australians’ access to a range of contraceptive options depends on where they live and how wealthy they are. A recent parliamentary inquiry recommends ways to end this “postcode lottery” for people who want to use long-acting reversible contraception.

There are several types of long-acting reversible contraception: the hormonal contraceptive implant, the hormonal intrauterine devices (IUD) and copper IUDs.

With fewer than one in 100 users becoming pregnant in a year while using them (compared to up to seven in 100 contraceptive pill users) these are the most effective contraceptives available. Once they’re inserted into the body, you don’t need to remember to carry a condom, take a daily pill or fill a new script.

So why are they so hard to access in Australia? And what needs to change?

Read more:
Australian women’s access to abortion is a postcode lottery. Here’s what needs to change

How do they work?

The contraceptive implant (known as Implanon NXT in Australia) is a small flexible rod, inserted just under the skin of the upper inner arm. It releases a progestogen hormone which prevents monthly egg release from the ovary for up to three years.

IUDs are small T-shaped devices which are inserted into the uterus. Hormonal IUDs contain a progestogen hormone and mainly work by thickening the cervical mucus and preventing sperm from swimming up into the uterus. There are two types of hormonal IUDs: Mirena and Kyleena. Both last up to five years. Kyleena is slightly smaller and contains a lower dose of hormone than Mirena.

Copper IUDs are hormone-free and last up to ten years. They work through their toxic effect on sperm and the egg to prevent fertilisation.

They have additional benefits for some users

As well as better protection from pregnancy, some long-acting reversible contraception methods have other benefits.

The hormonal IUD, Mirena, for example, reduces heavy menstrual bleeding. This can improve people’s quality of life and reduce the need for a hysterectomy.

Hormonal pills (containing estrogen) and the vaginal ring can’t be used by people with certain conditions, such as migraine with aura, or by people aged 35 years or older who smoke. This isn’t the case for long-acting reversible contraception methods, which most people can safely use.

Copper IUDs are an essential option for people who cannot or prefer not to use hormones. This includes people with hormone-driven cancers such as breast cancer, for whom any hormonal contraceptive would be considered unsafe.

Why aren’t they more available?

Access to long-acting reversible contraception is not universal in Australia.

Cost can be a considerable barrier to uptake for some people. While the implant and hormonal IUDs are subsidised by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule (PBS), this is not the case for copper IUDs, which can cost up to A$120 for the device.

Out-of-pocket IUD insertion-related costs can also vary from zero to hundreds of dollars if people don’t have access to publicly funded services.

Read more:
Considering an IUD but worried about pain during insertion? Here’s what to expect

On the supply side, too few health professionals provide these essential services.

Inadequate remuneration for insertion procedures act as a deterrent. An IUD takes 30 minutes of inserter and assistant time, and the equipment costs around A$25 per insertion. Yet the Medicare rebate is just A$72.05. Costs may be higher in rural areas, due to higher set-up costs and reduced access to things like sterilising services for procedural equipment.

Insertion and removal of long-acting reversible contraception also requires practical training. This can be costly for GPs and nurses, especially for IUD training, which also means taking around three days off work to achieve the necessary number of supervised IUD insertions. This can be even longer and more costly for rural practitioners, with additional travel time and accommodation costs.

This lack of trained inserters contributes to inequities for people who have chosen a long-acting reversible contraception but can’t find a local practitioner to insert their IUD or implant.

Nurses and midwives could ably fill this gap. There are multiple successful models of nurse-led long-acting reversible contraception services and postpartum insertion of implants by midwifes nationally and internationally.

However, most nurses aren’t able to access Medicare remuneration, which creates additional barriers for this highly skilled workforce to provide these services.

What are the recommendations for reform?

The Senate inquiry has recognised these barriers and recommends making contraception universally affordable, and specifically, subsidising copper IUDs.

It also recommends adequate remuneration through Medicare for GPs, nurses and midwives to provide long-acting reversible contraception insertion and removal, and collaborative efforts between the government and medical colleges to improve access to workforce training.

While the recommendations are welcome, they now need to be turned into actions through adequate funding.

The government also needs to fund every Primary Health Network (which plan services) across Australia to identify local gaps and ensure the contraceptive needs of the communities they serve are met equitably, affordably and transparently.

While one size does not fit all, and people must be provided with sufficient and accessible information to make an informed choice, no one who wants an IUD or implant should be denied this choice based on where they live and how much they can pay.

Read more:
How effective is the pill?

Deborah Bateson has received honoraria for attending advisory committees and providing education to health professionals sponsored by Organon and Bayer, and has received untied research support from Organon.

Kathleen McNamee’s employer, Sexual Health Victoria, receives funding from Organon, Mayne Pharma, and Bayer Australia and New Zealand to train and support doctors and nurses in the provision of contraception. She has not received any personal remuneration for these activities.

– ref. Want long-term contraception? There are more effective options than the pill. But they can be hard to find – https://theconversation.com/want-long-term-contraception-there-are-more-effective-options-than-the-pill-but-they-can-be-hard-to-find-206503

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

The Coalition’s decision to oppose the Voice to Parliament has put its moderate members in a jam. Some moderates are active yes advocates, while others are trying to keep low profiles.

Bridget Archer, the outspoken Liberal MP for Bass, is a vocal yes campaigner. More generally, she is also taking a lead in urging the Liberal party to undertake root-and-branch reform.

Archer is pushing for extensive change in a party that is electorally on the ropes, out of office everywhere except her home state of Tasmania.

Since entering parliament in 2019, Archer has crossed the floor on 27 occasion to vote against her party. She admits there are those colleagues who avoid her, but says her decisions are always based on what is in the best interest of her community, and argues the strength of the Liberal Party historically has been for members to be able to sometimes disagree and to do so respectfully.

Her independent stance on a range of issues has brought varied feedback from her local community. “It’s mixed, but generally positive. If I get negative feedback, it is sometimes from Liberal Party members or conservative voters that say ‘I think that you should toe the line’ – there’s this idea that if you have a divergent view, that you’re not a team player.”

But Archer believes “it is possible to be part of a team and to have differences of opinion (sometimes), and that it’s my job to represent to the best of my ability everybody in the electorate, even the people who don’t or didn’t vote for you, I guess.”

In a recent Good Weekend profile Archer called for a “revolution” in the Liberal Party, claiming it is currently “unelectable”. She tells the podcast: “I think this was again borne out in the 2022 election with the rise of community independents […] where people, particularly in some of those metropolitan seats, are not feeling that the party is representing their views anymore […] In regional areas that is not necessarily the case. And we’ve seen with the Coalition, of course, the Nationals holding the seats that they had.

“The great challenge for us is to get back to what I think was the strength of the Liberal Party at one stage, which is the ability to speak across the country, to talk to middle Australia.

“And I think that we’ve lost our way in that.”

Archer also argues Liberal Party values need to shift with the times, particularly its ideology on “the family and home ownership”.

“We have historically talked a lot about home ownership, but we don’t focus so much on rental affordability. […] It’s front of mind for many people in those metropolitan areas and for younger people as well, who have also deserted us in droves.”

The moderates in the party were decimated at the 2022 election. It has left the moderate faction in tatters, and Archer often finds herself isolated when she speaks out against the party line.

“I think it’s a bit frustrating for me sometimes that I feel that I know that there are other people who share my views on some things, but they don’t speak up, which I think sometimes does leave me sort of hanging there as this rogue person when I know that that’s not necessarily the case.”

“I also think it really goes to the heart of some of the reasons why those colleagues did lose their seats at the last election and why we have seen a rise of the teals. In those seats, in many cases people were wanting to vote for Liberals, and they were looking around [to] have a reason to vote for Liberals and they were coming up empty handed.”

Asked if she thought the party was “walking off a cliff,” she doesn’t jeritate.

“Oh, absolutely. Yeah, absolutely.”

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Liberal MP Bridget Archer urges other moderates to speak up as she presses for party change – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-liberal-mp-bridget-archer-urges-other-moderates-to-speak-up-as-she-presses-for-party-change-206856

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Klugman, Research Fellow, Institute for Health & Sport, member of the Community, Identity and Displacement Research Network, and Co-convenor of the Olympic Research Network, Victoria University

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains mention of the Stolen Generations.

On April 18, a Ngarra Jarra Noun Healing Ceremony was held to mark the 30th anniversary of the most famous response to racism in the Australian Football League – the moment Noongar man Nicky Winmar lifted his top, pointed to his skin and declared that he was Black and proud. The Indigenous-led ceremony was a deeply moving instance of community care, love and solidarity.

Tuesday’s announcement by the AFL of the termination of the investigation into allegations of racism at Hawthorn was the antithesis of such healing.

After eight months of an inquiry there are “no adverse findings” against former coaches Alastair Clarkson and Chris Fagan, and ex-welfare manager Jason Burt. (Clarkson, Fagan and Burt have all strenuously denied any wrongdoing.)

The outcome is at once shocking and not surprising of a league that still refuses to make any attempts to redress the systemic racism that remains a foundational aspect of Australian Rules football.

The Age reports that the complainants at the centre of the allegations are preparing to take their cases to the Australian Human Rights Commission. The AFL has also hinted it may charge Hawthorn with bringing the game into disrepute over its handling of the internal report.

Read more:
As the 2022 AFLM season comes to a close, the game must ask itself some difficult questions – especially on racism

Sorry timing

It’s hard not to be cynical about the release of this news after the conclusion of the Sir Doug Nicholls “Indigenous round”, and Sorry Day. Only after the celebration of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander players and culture, and the commemoration of Indigenous children stolen from their families, did the AFL announce it was ending its investigation.

Indeed, the claims at the centre of the investigation resonate disturbingly with the histories of stealing Indigenous children and associated genocidal actions in the lands of this continent and the surrounding islands.

Namely, the allegations that Hawthorn officials actively sought to separate Indigenous players from their partners, pressured them to break up and in at least one instance allegedly pushed a couple to terminate a pregnancy for the sake of the player’s career, according to reporting by the ABC.

If the allegations are true, it could be argued the Hawthorn officials who were involved thought they were acting in the “best interests” of the players.

However, the theft of children, including Doug Nicholls’ sister, was frequently justified in such terms. As was the tearing apart of Indigenous families and placing them in reserves for their own “protection”.

To break Indigenous couples up, to remove Indigenous players from their cultural support and to then place these players in houses with only white people – all of these would be heinous acts if true, and can be understood as a form of cultural genocide. That is, acts of “assimilation” that destroy the relationships, connections and practices which allow people to continue to be part of a broader cultural group.

How could the AFL not wish to find out the truth of the matter when the allegations concern such egregious conduct?

The AFL claims it shut down the investigation in accordance with the wishes of the players willing to participate in the inquiry. But after eight months, these players had not even been interviewed.

Outgoing AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan also claimed that the defendants had been “cleared” and the complainants “feel heard”. Yet, their voices were starkly missing from the AFL’s announcement.

(Not) listening to Indigenous voices

On March 17, the AFL announced it supported the “Yes” vote for the forthcoming referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, stating:

The AFL is privileged to have a long history of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership in our game, from the grassroots in every state and territory, through to the AFL and AFLW competitions.

Yet, in electing to set up its own investigation into the allegations of racism at Hawthorn, the AFL was clearly going against the voices of key Indigenous women at the centre of these allegations. They had called for an inquiry that was fully independent of the AFL.

And in declaring Clarkson, Fagan and Burt to have been cleared – without even having interviewed the players participating in the inquiry – the AFL is ignoring the voices of players and partners who have spoken out publicly, as recently as this past weekend.

Such behaviour is similar to that of the colonial governments on this land who have still not implemented most of the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, and who continue to remove Indigenous children from their families and incarcerate Indigenous kids and adults at ever-increasing rates.

The erasure of Indigenous women’s voices and experiences is also emblematic of life on this continent. Indigenous women in Australia are eight times more likely to be murdered than non-Indigenous women, yet the violence they experience receives far less attention.

Truth-telling

McLachlan’s tenure as CEO of the AFL has been marked by a stream of scandals regarding racism, yet he has never opened up the whole league to full independent scrutiny regarding past and present racism.

What’s clearly needed is for the AFL to engage in a full process of truth-telling. The AFL Players Association is the most recent group to note that the AFL’s investigation into Hawthorn was “not truly independent”.

Colonial institutions cannot be relied upon to provide justice when investigating themselves. The lack of even one conviction related to the more than 500 Indigenous deaths in custody since the Royal Commission published its findings and recommendations is testament to that.

Instead, a form of truth-telling overseen by an independent Indigenous-run organisation is paramount. The Yoorook Justice Commission – set up to examine the “impacts of colonisation on First Peoples in Victoria” – is an excellent model of what such a process could look like.

Incoming AFL chief executive Andrew Dillon has proclaimed he is not part of a (white) boys club. A test of this claim lies in whether he is willing to take the necessary steps to help turn the AFL from being a place of systemic injustice to an organisation that creates the conditions for systemic justice and healing.

Matthew Klugman has received funding from the Australian Research Council, and currently receives funding from VicHealth.

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

– ref. The antithesis of healing: the AFL turns away from truth-telling again, ending Hawthorn investigation – https://theconversation.com/the-antithesis-of-healing-the-afl-turns-away-from-truth-telling-again-ending-hawthorn-investigation-200722

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sudyumna Dahal, PhD Student, Australian National University

The human costs of tobacco and smoking worldwide are huge. 1.3 billion people use tobacco, mostly in low- and middle-income countries. More than 8 million people die prematurely because of tobacco, at an annual economic loss of at least US$1.4 trillion. And you don’t have to be a smoker to be harmed: secondhand smoke exposure kills nearly 400,000 women every year.

Asia is home to seven of the world’s top 10 countries with the highest number of smokers: Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, and Viet Nam. Yet, according to our recent research for the United Nations Development Programme, not enough being done to reduce tobacco’s harms.

That’s why it’s worth pointing out a solution that really works, yet not enough Asian nations have acted on it: raising tobacco prices through higher taxes.

As the Philippines, Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand have shown, doing that – coupled with other policy changes – can make a real difference.

The pay-off for higher taxes

Increasing tobacco taxes costs relatively little, but yields a high impact.

In our study of six Asia-Pacific countries, we found that for every unit of local currency invested in increasing tobacco taxes, the countries would gain between 20 and 1,057 units in return over 15 years. That’s a remarkable return on investment ratio of between 20:1 and 1,057:1.

One direct benefit is a substantial increase in government revenue. In Cambodia alone, the projected additional government revenue would be US$230 million over five years from the recommended levels of tobacco tax increases.

And it would be pro-poor, pro-development, and pro-women.

Who would benefit most?

Smoking is responsible for nearly half of the difference in death rates between wealthy and poor people, meaning measures that reduce smoking disproportionately benefit poor people.

People with low incomes – both men and women – are more likely to use tobacco than their wealthier counterparts. In Myanmar, for example, 41% of men and 4% of women in the lowest income group smoke, compared with 25% of men and 0.4% of women in the highest group.

It is true that tax increases initially make the low earners who don’t cut back worse off, but over time the health gains to low earners become more important.

Although the reductions in smoking-related deaths from higher taxes are concentrated in men, the financial benefits appear to flow to women.

As smokers quit, household budgets become easier, facilitating what a study in the British Medical Journal describes as an income transfer from male smokers to females and other family members.

Lower smoking rates also protect female non-smokers from exposure to second-hand smoke at home and work.

How the Philippines became an Asia-Pacific leader

In the Philippines, half of the excise tax collected from tobacco products and sugar-sweetened beverages, and 80% of the excise tax collected from alcohol and vaping products is used to fund healthcare services.

The remaining 20% of alcohol and vaping excise revenue is allocated to social development, while 5% of tobacco excise tax revenue is earmarked to support tobacco farmers, including to help them switch crops.

Among its many reforms, the Philippines also instituted a whole-of-public sector code of conduct to prevent tobacco industry interference in its public policymaking.

Between 2012 and 2015, substantial tax increases in the Philippines cut cigarette sales by 28% and cut the number smokers by 3 million, with the largest reductions among the poorest parts of the population.

Yet despite the Philippines’ example and the clear benefits of significant tobacco tax increases, tobacco tax rates in most low income countries remain low. On average, tax accounts for only 19% of the retail price of cigarettes in low-income countries, compared to 51% in high-income countries.

Higher taxes, fewer smokers in Australia & NZ

Among other Asia-Pacific nations, Australia’s rate of tobacco excise has climbed from 19 cents per cigarette in 1999 to A$1.16, and will climb again by 5% per year for each of the next three years in addition to normal indexation.

Over that time the proportion of Australians aged 14 and over who smoke daily has plummeted from 22% to 11%. The Australian government says it wants to get it below 10% by 2025 and to 5% by 2030.

Aotearoa New Zealand has gone even further with its “Smokefree 2025” policy, with a goal that by 2025, fewer than 5% of New Zealanders will be smokers. This strategy includes banning the sale of tobacco products to anyone born after Jan 1, 2009.

The NZ government increased the tobacco excise tax by inflation plus 10% each year between 2010 and 2020. Decades of efforts in tobacco control, including tobacco taxation, have resulted in smoking rates declining from 36% in 1976 to 13% in 2020.

Read more:
New Zealand is introducing law to create a smokefree generation. Here are 6 reasons to support this policy

Even smokers back higher tax – if it goes to health

Higher taxes on cigarettes are overwhelmingly supported by non-smokers.

But a US study has found that when the extra tax revenue is directed to healthcare programs, they are also overwhelmingly supported by smokers: 60% of those surveyed, up from 25% if the extra revenue is unallocated.

The tax gap between rich and poorer countries might be partly due to myths such as that increasing tobacco taxes

• disproportionately hurts poor people,

• leads to massive job losses, and

• substantially diminishes government revenue.

Our policy brief debunks these myths with evidence.

Read more:
NZ’s smokefree law will reduce the number of tobacco retailers – here’s what people who smoke think of that

Economic stress is brewing in many Asia-Pacific countries, with many under unprecedented pressure from stagnating revenue and growing needs for spending on health, education and social protection.

The United Nations’ Human Development Index has declined for two consecutive years for the first time since data became available.

These extraordinary circumstances offer an extraordinary opportunity to act decisively. Taxation on tobacco and other harmful products should be one of them.

* This article was co-authored with Kazuyuki Uji, Policy Specialist, Health and Inclusive Development, United Nations Development Programme Bangkok Regional Hub.

This article was co-authored with Kazuyuki Uji, Policy Specialist, Health and Inclusive Development, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Bangkok Regional Hub. He has a long experience working on non-communicable diseases, including tobacco control, universal health coverage, access to health technologies, and disability rights. Sudyumna Dahal and Kazuyuki Uji both work for the UNDP.

– ref. How raising tobacco taxes can save lives and cut poverty across the Asia-Pacific – https://theconversation.com/how-raising-tobacco-taxes-can-save-lives-and-cut-poverty-across-the-asia-pacific-197912

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alice Clement, Research Associate in the College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University

Palaeontology is the study of evolution and prehistoric life, usually preserved as fossils in rocks. It combines aspects of geology with biology and many other scientific disciplines.

But a lot of palaeontology really is about rocks. For 200 years, hammers and chisels have been some of its most commonly used tools.

However, advances in modern scanning technology are revolutionising the way we do palaeontology. Precise scans of the internal and external features of fossils let us see them in new ways.

And these digitised scans can readily be made available to the public online. At the new Virtual Australian Museum of Palaeontology, we offer free access to 600 million years of digital Australian fossils, from enigmatic early lifeforms to gigantic extinct marsupials.

How do palaeontologists learn about the past?

There are many different types of fossils. For example, a dinosaur leg bone can become a fossil, but so can a leaf from a tree, the footprint of an extinct kangaroo, poo from a shark, or even geochemical traces preserved in ancient soils.

The field of palaeontology was formally solidified into scientific enquiry by people such as Georges Cuvier (1769-1832). Cuvier was a French naturalist and zoologist sometimes referred to as the “founding father of palaeontology”. Others such as the Scottish geologist Charles Lyell (1797-1875) gave us the geological framework through which fossils could be classified and compared.

Palaeontology has come a long way in the past 200 years.

Records of long-extinct animals also survive in the rock art and oral traditions of First Nations peoples. These are increasingly being recognised as an important complement to traditional Eurocentric approaches.

Read more:
Of bunyips and other beasts: living memories of long-extinct creatures in art and stories

How to scan a fossil

Different kinds of scanning technology are playing an increasing role in palaeontology. Computed tomography, or CT scanning, uses x-rays to create three-dimensional models of the internal and external features of dense objects.

Other imaging methods include photogrammetry, or surface scanning using lasers or projected patterns of light. These methods capture the external three-dimensional shape of an object or site, sometimes with colour and textural detail. They also have the advantage of being more portable and can often be taken directly to the fossil.

The most powerful scanning methods are the synchrotron and neutron imaging. A synchrotron works on the same principles as CT scanning, using radiation to look inside an object, but uses much stronger radiation. Neutron imaging uses neutrons instead of x-rays or other radiation, and it can be useful for particularly dense or large objects.

These advances in scanning technology are opening up whole new avenues for exploring, sharing and analysing Australia’s unique fossils. Now what to do with all our digital palaeontology data?

That’s where the Virtual Australian Museum of Palaeontology comes in.

About the museum

We are a group of researchers at Flinders University, working with the South Australian Museum, the Western Australian Museum, and the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory. Between us, we have spent many hours scanning, processing and uploading hundreds of three-dimensional virtual models.

Australia is geologically old with a rich fossil heritage. We are fortunate to have captured high-quality examples spanning nearly 600 million years of evolution on our continent.

We have scans of some of the earliest complex life from Ediacaran and Cambrian sites from over 500 million years ago. We have exquisite examples from the best ancient fish deposit in the world, and many amazing extinct megafauna not known from anywhere else.

Examples include the marsupial lion Thylacoleo, the giant wombat-like Diprotodon, and huge short-faced kangaroos such as Sthenurus.

In the pilot phase of this project we have digitised more than 500 fossils across more than 30 genera. Some highlights include:

1. one of the world’s most complete marsupial lion skeletons (almost every bone from the skull to the toe bones)
2. one of the only known bones of a pterosaur (flying reptile) from South Australia
3. scans of one of the oldest known sharks in the world
4. fossil mammal footprints that are now known only from our digital data, as the original trackways have been destroyed.

You can explore the VAMP website yourself. All you need to dig into a world of 3D fossil scans is a computer or a smartphone.

Alice Clement receives funding from the Australian Research Council and is employed by Flinders University.

Aaron Camens works for Flinders University.

Jacob van Zoelen is employed by Flinders University.

– ref. A new virtual museum reveals 600 million years of Australian fossils in unprecedented 3D detail – https://theconversation.com/a-new-virtual-museum-reveals-600-million-years-of-australian-fossils-in-unprecedented-3d-detail-205409

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Timothy Bennett, PhD Student, School of Computing, Australian National University

Doomsaying is an old occupation. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a complex subject. It’s easy to fear what you don’t understand. These three truths go some way towards explaining the oversimplification and dramatisation plaguing discussions about AI.

Yesterday outlets around the world were plastered with news of yet another open letter claiming AI poses an existential threat to humankind. This letter, published through the nonprofit Center for AI Safety, has been signed by industry figureheads including Geoffrey Hinton and the chief executives of Google DeepMind, Open AI and Anthropic.

However, I’d argue a healthy dose of scepticism is warranted when considering the AI doomsayer narrative. Upon close inspection, we see there are commercial incentives to manufacture fear in the AI space.

And as a researcher of artificial general intelligence (AGI), it seems to me the framing of AI as an existential threat has more in common with 17th-century philosophy than computer science.

Was ChatGPT a ‘breaththrough’?

When ChatGPT was released late last year, people were delighted, entertained and horrified.

But ChatGPT isn’t a research breakthrough as much as it is a product. The technology it’s based on is several years old. An early version of its underlying model, GPT-3, was released in 2020 with many of the same capabilities. It just wasn’t easily accessible online for everyone to play with.

Back in 2020 and 2021, I and many others wrote papers discussing the capabilities and shortcomings of GPT-3 and similar models – and the world carried on as always. Forward to today, and ChatGPT has had an incredible impact on society. What changed?

In March, Microsoft researchers published a paper claiming GPT-4 showed “sparks of artificial general intelligence”. AGI is the subject of a variety of competing definitions, but for the sake of simplicity can be understood as AI with human-level intelligence.

Some immediately interpreted the Microsoft research as saying GPT-4 is an AGI. By the definitions of AGI I’m familiar with, this is certainly not true. Nonetheless, it added to the hype and furore, and it was hard not to get caught up in the panic. Scientists are no more immune to group think than anyone else.

The same day that paper was submitted, The Future of Life Institute published an open letter calling for a six-month pause on training AI models more powerful than GPT-4, to allow everyone to take stock and plan ahead. Some of the AI luminaries who signed it expressed concern that AGI poses an existential threat to humans, and that ChatGPT is too close to AGI for comfort.

Soon after, prominent AI safety researcher Eliezer Yudkowsky – who has been commenting on the dangers of superintelligent AI since well before 2020 – took things a step further. He claimed we were on a path to building a “superhumanly smart AI”, in which case “the obvious thing that would happen” is “literally everyone on Earth will die”. He even suggested countries need to be willing to risk nuclear war to enforce compliance with AI regulation across borders.

I don’t consider AI an imminent existential threat

One aspect of AI safety research is to address potential dangers AGI might present. It’s a difficult topic to study because there is little agreement on what intelligence is and how it functions, let alone what a superintelligence might entail. As such, researchers must rely as much on speculation and philosophical argument as evidence and mathematical proof.

Read more:
Has GPT-4 really passed the startling threshold of human-level artificial intelligence? Well, it depends

There are two reasons I’m not concerned by ChatGPT and its byproducts.

First, it isn’t even close to the sort of artificial superintelligence that might conceivably pose a threat to humankind. The models underpinning it are slow learners that require immense volumes of data to construct anything akin to the versatile concepts humans can concoct from only a few examples. In this sense, it’s not “intelligent”.

Second, many of the more catastrophic AGI scenarios depend on premises I find implausible. For instance, there seems to be a prevailing (but unspoken) assumption that sufficient intelligence amounts to limitless real-world power. If this was true, more scientists would be billionaires.

Cognition, as we understand it in humans, takes place as part of a physical environment (which includes our bodies) – and this environment imposes limitations. The concept of AI as a “software mind” unconstrained by hardware has more in common with 17th-century dualism (the idea that the mind and body are separable) than with contemporary theories of the mind existing as part of the physical world.

Why the sudden concern?

Still, doomsaying is old hat, and the events of the last few years probably haven’t helped. But there may be more to this story than meets the eye.

Among the prominent figures calling for AI regulation, many work for or have ties to incumbent AI companies. This technology is useful, and there is money and power at stake – so fearmongering presents an opportunity.

Almost everything involved in building ChatGPT has been published in research anyone can access. OpenAI’s competitors can (and have) replicated the process, and it won’t be long before free and open-source alternatives flood the market.

This point was made clearly in a memo purportedly leaked from Google entitled “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”. A moat is jargon for a way to secure your business against competitors.

Yann LeCun, who leads AI research at Meta, says these models should be open since they will become public infrastructure. He and many others are unconvinced by the AGI doom narrative.

Notably, Meta wasn’t invited when US President Joe Biden recently met with the leadership of Google DeepMind and OpenAI. That’s despite the fact that Meta is almost certainly a leader in AI research; it produced PyTorch, the machine-learning framework OpenAI used to make GPT-3.

At the White House meetings, OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman suggested the US government should issue licences to those who are trusted to responsibly train AI models. Licences, as Stability AI chief executive Emad Mostaque puts it, “are a kinda moat”.

Companies such as Google, OpenAI and Microsoft have everything to lose by allowing small, independent competitors to flourish. Bringing in licensing and regulation would help cement their position as market leaders, and hamstring competition before it can emerge.

While regulation is appropriate in some circumstances, regulations that are rushed through will favour incumbents and suffocate small, free and open-source competition.

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

Michael Timothy Bennett 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. No, AI probably won’t kill us all – and there’s more to this fear campaign than meets the eye – https://theconversation.com/no-ai-probably-wont-kill-us-all-and-theres-more-to-this-fear-campaign-than-meets-the-eye-206614

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Antje Deckert, Associate Professor (Criminology), Auckland University of Technology

When TVNZ cancelled reality TV show Police Ten 7 earlier this year, it certainly rattled some law-and-order cages.

The show’s former host Graham Bell, who described suspects variously as “creeps, halfwits, low-lifes, mongrels and lunatics”, claimed “wokeness killed Police Ten 7”. New Zealand First leader Winston Peters blamed “cancel culture”. One radio host said “the whingers have won”.

But Police Ten 7 – TVNZ’s longest-running reality series – was already controversial for its depiction of criminal behaviour as popular entertainment, and for an alleged over-representation of Māori and Pacific offenders or suspects.

In 2021, Auckland Councillor Efeso Collins was threatened after tweeting that the show should be scrapped because it “feeds on racial stereotypes”. TVNZ subsequently commissioned an independent review of the show and renamed it Ten 7 Aotearoa, but eventually decided to end its run.

The controversy inspired us to analyse Police Ten 7 more closely and measure its treatment of Māori, Pasifika and European suspects – as well as police officers. Our soon-to-be-published findings support claims the show was not evenhanded in its depiction of these groups.

Framing the ‘bad guys’

We focused on the calendar year previous to Collins’ criticism of Police Ten 7, and critically analysed 12 episodes that aired between September and December 2020. Among other data, we recorded the range of alleged offences and the airtime spent on each suspect.

Because people tend to recognise faces more readily when they belong to the same racial group (so-called “cross-race bias”), one of the two Māori members on the research team recorded the racial identity of suspects and officers.

Read more:
Racist cop shows and biased news fuel public fears of crime and love for the police

He identified “brown people” based on information provided directly in the show (“our offender tonight is of Polynesian descent”) or by making a holistic assessment of people’s looks, names, culturally significant tattoos, accents and so on.

We then compared our data with 2020 police data on types of crime and ethnicity (including ethnicity of officers). Our findings confirm US research on reality TV police shows, which has found a tendency to portray non-white people as the “bad guys”.

While TVNZ’s independent review found Police Ten 7 was “reflective of the reality of patterns of crime and offending in Aotearoa”, our analysis found otherwise.

Suspect airtime

Of all actual New Zealand police suspects in 2020, 53% were Polynesian. However, Māori and Pasifika made up 71% of suspects featured in the episodes of Police Ten 7 we sampled.

In comparison, Europeans made up 36% of actual police proceedings, and 29% of suspects on the show. (The remaining 11% in police statistics covers other ethnicities.)

We also looked at the airtime Police Ten 7 gave different suspects, compared to how often police dealt with them according to the data. Of the total airtime spent on suspects, 62% was spent on Māori or Pasifika, compared to 53% of total police proceedings in 2020.

In comparison, the portion of airtime spent on European suspects (38%) more closely reflected how often police proceeded against Europeans in 2020 (36%).

Types of crime

Police Ten 7 also portrayed Māori and Pasifika as more violent than police statistics show. Over the 12 episodes sampled, 100% of those suspected of violent crime (homicide, sexual assault, endangering persons, property damage) were Polynesian. This compares to 40% in police statistics.

By contrast, police statistics show Māori and Pasifika made up 43% of traffic offence suspects, compared to only 6% on Police Ten 7.

Police data show Europeans made up 34% of suspects for violent crime. Yet Police Ten 7 tended to disproportionately portray Europeans as lower-level offenders or suspects.

Read more:
Australia – US alliance research project announced

According to police statistics, Europeans made up 26% of traffic offence suspects compared to 41% on the show. Europeans constituted 35% of public order offenders, compared to 67% on Police Ten 7.

We argue that over-representing Europeans in less serious offence categories suggests to TV audiences that any harm Europeans cause is somewhat unintended or easily explained.

Finally, we found the same disparities applied to the police officers featured in the sampled episodes. While Māori and Pasifika officers constitute nearly 20% of the NZ police force, they made up only 6% of the officers on Police Ten 7.

Others and ourselves

Most people have little first-hand experience of crime and rely on media for information. Consequently, news and entertainment programmes help shape views of the criminal justice system and those involved in it.

Based on our sampled episodes, a case can be made that Police Ten 7 did reinforce racial stereotypes of Māori and Pasifika as more criminal and violent. We argue this stereotyping was exacerbated by the under-representation of violent European suspects.

Read more:
How cop shows serve to reinforce the racism at the heart of our culture

We also suggest the under-represention of Māori and Pasifika police officers would not have helped police recruitment efforts, given the police themselves later acknowledged the need to remove barriers to wahine Māori in particular.

After all, the media shape not only how we see others, but also how we see ourselves. Any future New Zealand reality TV crime or police show would need to be mindful of these pitfalls and effects.

The authors acknowledge the assistance of postgraduate student Wairua Busby-Pukeiti in gathering the data for this article.

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. Did ‘wokeness’ cancel Police Ten 7? New research suggests racial stereotyping was the real culprit – https://theconversation.com/did-wokeness-cancel-police-ten-7-new-research-suggests-racial-stereotyping-was-the-real-culprit-206494

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Pang, Research Fellow in Psychology, Monash University

The human brain is made up of around 86 billion neurons, linked by trillions of connections. For decades, scientists have believed that we need to map this intricate connectivity in detail to understand how the structured patterns of activity defining our thoughts, feelings and behaviour emerge.

Our new study, published in Nature, challenges this view. We have discovered that patterns of activity in our neurons are more influenced by the shape of the brain – its grooves, contours, and folds – than by its complex interconnections.

The conventional view is that specific thoughts or sensations elicit activity in specific parts of the brain. However, our study reveals structured patterns of activity across nearly the entire brain, relating to thoughts and sensations in much the same way that a musical note arises from vibrations occurring along the entire length of a violin string, not just an isolated segment.

Function follows form

We uncovered this close relationship between shape and function by examining the natural patterns of excitation that can be supported by the anatomy of the brain. In these patterns, called “eigenmodes”, different parts of the brain are all excited at the same frequency.

Consider the musical notes played by a violin string. The notes arise from preferred vibrational patterns of the string that occur at specific, resonant frequencies. These preferred patterns are the eigenmodes of the string. They are determined by the string’s physical properties, such as its length, density, and tension.

In a similar way, the brain has its own preferred patterns of excitation, which are determined by its anatomical and physical properties. We set out to identify which specific anatomical properties of the brain most strongly affect these patterns.

A tale of two brains

According to conventional wisdom, the brain’s complex web of connections fundamentally sculpts its activity.

This perspective views the brain as a collection of discrete regions, each specialised for a specific function, such as vision or speech. These regions communicate via interconnecting fibres called axons.

An alternative view, embodied by an approach to modelling brain activity called neural field theory, eschews this division of the brain into discrete areas.

This view focuses on how waves of cellular excitation move continuously through brain tissue, like the ripples formed by raindrops falling into a pond. Just as the shape of the pond constrains the possible patterns formed by the ripples, wavelike patterns of activity are influenced by the three-dimensional shape of the brain.

Comparing the two views

To compare the two views of the brain, we tested how easily the conventional, discrete view and the continuous, wave-based view can explain more than 10,000 different maps of brain activity. The activity maps were obtained from thousands of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments as people performed a wide array of cognitive, emotional, sensory, and motor tasks.

Read more:
Electricity flow in the human brain can be predicted using the simple maths of networks, new study reveals

We attempted to describe each activity map using eigenmodes based on the brain’s connectivity and eigenmodes based on the brain’s shape. We found that eigenmodes of brain shape – not connectivity – offer the most accurate account of these different activation patterns.

Brain waves and icebergs

We used computer simulations to confirm that the close link between brain
shape and function is driven by wavelike activity propagating throughout the brain.

The simulations relied on a simple wave model that is widely used to study other physical phenomena, such as earthquakes and ocean currents. The model only uses the shape of the brain to constrain how the waves evolve through time and space.

Despite its simplicity, this model explained brain activity better than a more sophisticated, state-of-the-art model that tries to capture key physiological details of neuronal activity and the intricate pattern of connectivity between different brain regions.

We also found that most of the 10,000 different brain maps that we studied were associated with activity patterns spanning nearly the entire brain. This result again challenges conventional wisdom that activity during tasks occurs in discrete, isolated regions of the brain. In fact, it indicates that traditional approaches to brain mapping may only reveal the tip of the iceberg when it comes to understanding how the brain works.

Together, our findings suggest that current models of brain function need to be updated. Rather than focusing solely on how signals pass between discrete regions, we should also investigate how waves of excitation travel through the brain.

In other words, ripples in a pond may be a more appropriate analogy for large-scale brain function than a telecommunication network.

A new approach to brain mapping

Our approach draws on centuries of work in physics and engineering. In these fields, the function of a system is understood with respect to the constraints imposed by its structure, as embodied by the system’s eigenmodes.

This approach has not been traditionally used in neuroscience. Instead, typical brain mapping methods rely on complex statistics to quantify brain activity without any reference to the underlying physical and anatomical basis of those patterns.

The use of eigenmodes offers a way to use physical principles to understand how diverse patterns of activity arise from brain anatomy.

Our discovery also offers immediate practical benefits, since eigenmodes of brain shape are much simpler to quantify than those of brain connectivity.

This new approach opens possibilities for studying how brain shape affects function through evolution, development and ageing, and in brain disease.

Read more:
Illuminating the brain one neuron and synapse at a time – 5 essential reads about how researchers are using new tools to map its structure and function

Alex Fornito receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the Australian Research Council, and the Sylvia and Charles Viertel Charitable Foundation..

James Pang 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. Have we got the brain all wrong? A new study shows its shape is more important than its wiring – https://theconversation.com/have-we-got-the-brain-all-wrong-a-new-study-shows-its-shape-is-more-important-than-its-wiring-206573

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Gapps, Historian and Conjoint Lecturer, University of Newcastle

Note of warning: This article refers to deceased Aboriginal people, their words, names and images. Words attributed to them and images in the article are already in the public domain. Also, historical language is used in this article that may cause offence.

As we head toward the referendum on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament later this year, it is worth considering the long history of how governments have tried and failed to authentically listen to First Nations people.

And not just post-federation governments. During Australia’s colonial period in the 19th century, the office of the Protector of Aborigines was established in an effort to hear to the “wants, wishes and grievances” of Aboriginal people, as the secretary for the colonies, Lord Glenelg, put it in 1838.

However, this office not only failed to genuinely listen to First Nations peoples, it led to policies that actually underpinned the erasure of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people from the Australian Constitution of 1901.

Spotlight on the treatment of Indigenous people

During the 1830s, slave rebellions in Britain’s colonies and a growing humanitarian movement in the UK pushed the government to abolish slavery. The spotlight was then turned on the treatment of Indigenous peoples, both within and on the edges of the rapidly expanding British Empire.

In 1836, the British government established a Select Committee of the House of Commons on Aborigines to hear testimony from church leaders, missionaries and colonial officials about the situation of Aboriginal people in the Australian colonies.

The hearings focused particular attention on the conduct of militia forces in the so-called Black War in Tasmania, where roving parties of white men hunted down and killed Palawa people and massacres were seen as part and parcel of occupying Aboriginal lands.

In January 1838, Glenelg wrote to the governor of New South Wales, Sir George Gipps, that the British government

[had] directed their anxious attention to the adoption of some plan for the better protection and civilisation of the native tribes.

Glenelg told Gipps that as part of the scheme, the British government had decided to “appoint a small number of persons qualified to fill the office of Protector of Aborigines”. The chief protector, a non-Indigenous person, was to be aided by four assistant protectors and to “fix his principal station at Port Phillip” (later to become Melbourne), only recently occupied by the British.

According to Glenelg, George Augustus Robinson was bestowed with the office of chief protector as he had

shewn [sic] himself to be eminently qualified by his charge of the Aboriginal Establishment at Flinders Island.

Robinson’s so-called “Friendly Mission” – a series of journeys around Tasmania in the early 1830s to convince Palawa of Governor George Arthur’s humane intentions – was lauded by Gipps as a success, as it had peacefully convinced some people to move to a reserve at Flinders Island. Historians now consider this mission to be nothing more than ethnic cleansing.

For Glenelg, appointing Robinson to the new position of chief protector appeared to be the only plan available that did not involve military or police, or armed settlers dispensing their own “justice”.

An aim to convey ‘wants, wishes or grievances’

The plan for establishing Aboriginal protectorates followed Robinson’s Friendly Mission model in Tasmania.

Protectors were to “watch over the rights and interests of the natives” and protect them from “acts of cruelty, of oppression or injustice”. The protector was also to be a kind of conduit to express the “wants, wishes or grievances” of Aboriginal peoples to the colonial governments. For this purpose, each protector was commissioned as a magistrate.

Protectors were encouraged to learn the “language of the natives” and “obtain accurate information” on the “number of the natives within his district”.

On paper at least, the “plan for the better protection and civilisation of the native tribes” seemed a remarkable step forward from previous years. Indeed, there was no plan prior to this that attempted to deal with the situation in Aboriginal lands beyond the official boundaries of the colonies – boundaries that were being increasingly crossed by hundreds of squatters and stockmen, and tens of thousands of cattle and sheep.

The establishment of the role of protectors, who would live among Aboriginal people and learn their languages, was arguably an early attempt at a conduit for an Aboriginal voice to government.

Read more:
90 years ago, Yorta Yorta leader William Cooper petitioned the king for Aboriginal representation in parliament

A failure from the beginning

But the scheme did not stop the conflicts and massacres. Shortly after the commission’s report appeared in print in Australia, dozens of Gamilaraay people were killed at Waterloo Creek and Myall Creek in northern inland New South Wales in January and June 1838.

The scheme also did little to stop the resistance warfare that broke out across the entire length of the frontier in the late 1830s and early 1840s – a counteroffensive that has been described by some contemporary observers as a “general uprising”.

The protectorates scheme was also bound up in the supposed superiority of the colonisers’ race and Christian religion. The ultimate goal was for Aboriginal people to become “civilised” and Christian – just like white people apparently were. It was a paternalistic concept that ultimately turned humanitarian ideals into an even more violent and coercive colonial system.

The protectors, as they had been directed to, could report to the government the “grievances” of Aboriginal people. These were often found to be, as one observer at the time wrote,

[an] explosion of long-pent feelings of revenge and hatred towards the whites, resulting from a long course of violence and injustice.

The attempt by the colonial authorities to understand the “wants, wishes and grievances” of Aboriginal people, however, failed in its mission to actually protect people. The system was abandoned in 1849.

From the 1860s, the various colonial governments developed even more coercive policies of “protection”, which controlled peoples’ lives and corralled them into missions and reserves, so their lands and children could be taken from them.

Read more:
Capturing the lived history of the Aborigines Protection Board while we still can

How this history feeds into failed policies today

The Protector of Aborigines office was an important historical moment that embedded this idea of government control over First Nations’ people’s lives into the social and political fabric of this nation. These supposedly moral standards around “protection” and “civilisation” ultimately forced Indigenous people to become less Indigenous.

These beliefs continue to permeate our government today through failed paternalistic policies such as Closing the Gap. Such racialised policies draw on Australia’s history of containment of Aboriginal land and the ongoing colonial violence of “protection”.

Because of this, we have yet to generate new possibilities of truly meaningful dialogue.

The long struggle for rights and recognition by Aboriginal people has been punctuated by (all too few) moments of support by non-Aboriginal people. As the referendum for the Voice approaches, another such moment beckons. Will this be history repeating itself?

Stephen Gapps is an Historian with Artefact Heritage Services and a member of The Greens.

Lynda-June Coe is a current member of the Greens NSW.

– ref. In the 1800s, colonisers attempted to listen to First Nations people. It didn’t stop the massacres – https://theconversation.com/in-the-1800s-colonisers-attempted-to-listen-to-first-nations-people-it-didnt-stop-the-massacres-204538

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Magdalena Plebanski, Professor of Immunology, RMIT University

Influenza, or the flu, is a virus transmitted by respiratory droplets from coughing and sneezing. It can cause the sudden onset of a fever, cough, runny nose, sore throat, headache, muscle and joint pain.

In Australia, the flu is responsible for more than 5,000 hospitalisation and 100 deaths a year. The highest rates are among those over 65, whose immune systems aren’t as effective as they used to be, and children under five, whose immune systems are yet to mature.

To combat the decline in immunity as we age, specific vaccines are available for people aged 65 and over. So how do they work, and why exactly are they needed?

À lire aussi :
Should I get a flu vaccine this year? Here’s what you need to know

Remind me, how does the immune system work?

The immune system uses multiple mechanisms to fight viral infections, which can be divided into two major arms of the immune system, called innate and adaptive immunity.

Innate immunity involves multiple inflammatory cells and chemicals that are triggered immediately, or within hours of encountering an infection. They activate the immune system to clear the infection.

Adaptive immunity takes a little longer (weeks) to work and involves memory T cells and antibody-producing B cells, which can be reactivated when the body encounters a virus or other pathogen.

The combined innate and adaptive immune response determines how well we respond to an invading virus like influenza.

Why are older people more at risk from the flu?

Generally, as we age past 65, the innate cells become less effective at their job of clearing infections. They also start producing more inflammation.

New T and B cell numbers also decrease with increasing age and hence the adaptive immune response is also not as effective as when we are younger. This immune system decline is called immunosenescence, which leads to increased susceptibility, hospitalisation and death from influenza.

Certain medical conditions, such as cancer and heart and lung conditions, increase susceptibility to severe influenza, with older people being more likely to have additional medical conditions than younger people.

What flu vaccines are available?

Annual flu vaccines are recommended to protect against the common circulating strains of influenza, which can differ from year to year.

The standard flu vaccines offered to adults aged under 65 consist of surface proteins of the virus or inactivated (killed) virus from four influenza strains: two A strains (H1N1 and H3N2) and two B strains.

When you’re vaccinated, your immune system makes antibodies from B cells which protect you if you become exposed to these strains of the virus.

However, the standard influenza vaccine is less effective in older people.

Two stronger or augmented vaccines have been made targeting this age group. They contain the same components as the standard vaccine, but one vaccine – called Fluad – uses a strong adjuvant (an agent used to increase the immune response to vaccination) called MF59 to stimulate better immunity.

The other augmented vaccine, called Fluzone, uses a four-fold higher dose of each influenza strain to increase immunity.

À lire aussi :
Why can you still get influenza if you’ve had a flu shot?

How do they compare?

Studies comparing Fluad and Fluzone show both vaccines stimulate stronger immunity against influenza than the standard flu vaccine and are therefore likely to provide better protection.

Studies directly testing for improved clinical outcomes with vaccines for over-65s show a small benefit of receiving either of the vaccines over the standard vaccine, including a modest decrease in lab-confirmed influenza, hospitalisations and emergency department visits compared to the standard influenza vaccine.

They are however yet to show and impact on flu-related deaths.

In the few studies comparing Fluad and Fluzone directly, there is little evidence of a difference between them in reducing influenza and serious flu outcomes. The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation therefore recommends using either Fluad or Fluzone.

While both have been Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) approved since 2020, only Fluad is available for free on the National Immunisation Program for people aged 65 and over.

Fluzone is only available with a private prescription if you’re 60 years and over, at a cost of around A$65-70.

If neither augmented vaccine is available, a standard influenza vaccine is also acceptable for older people, since any influenza vaccine is preferable to receiving none.

Flu vaccines can also be given at the same time as COVID vaccines.

How else can we protect against the flu?

While influenza vaccination is the single most effective way of preventing influenza, other measures such as social distancing and wearing a mask or N95 respirator can also provide some community protection.

Wearing a mask or N95 respirator significantly reduces the risk of infecting others when infected.

The evidence for protecting oneself against infection is less conclusive, mainly because it’s linked to early, consistent and, importantly, the correct use of masks.

À lire aussi :
Over half of eligible aged care residents are yet to receive their COVID booster. And winter is coming

Magdalena Plebanski receives Grant funding from National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) to conduct fundamental immunology research on Flu and DTP vaccines in older adults. She conducts research on ovarian cancer, including a Phase II human trial part funded by Astrazeneca and ANZGOG (Australia and New Zealand Gynecological and Oncological Group).

Katie Louise Flanagan receives funding from NHMRC, MRFF, BMGF and Clifford Craig Foundation. She was previously on Vaccine Advisory Boards for Seqiris (2016-19) and Sanofi-Pasteur (2016-18). She is President of the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases and a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation. These are her own personal views.

Jennifer Boer et Kirsty Wilson ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur poste universitaire.

– ref. I’m over 65 and worried about the flu. Which vaccine should I have? – https://theconversation.com/im-over-65-and-worried-about-the-flu-which-vaccine-should-i-have-204810

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steven J Lade, Resilience researcher at Australian National University, Australian National University

People once believed the planet could always accommodate us. That the resilience of the Earth system meant nature would always provide. But we now know this is not necessarily the case. As big as the world is, our impact is bigger.

In research released today, an international team of scientists from the Earth Commission, of which we were part, identified eight “safe” and “just” boundaries spanning five vital planetary systems: climate change, the biosphere, freshwater, nutrient use in fertilisers and air pollution. This is the first time an assessment of boundaries has quantified the harms to people from changes to the Earth system.

“Safe” means boundaries maintaining stability and resilience of our planetary systems on which we rely. “Just”, in this work, means boundaries which minimise significant harm to people. Together, they’re a health barometer for the planet.

Assessing our planet’s health is a big task. It took the expertise of 51 world-leading researchers from natural and social sciences. Our methods included modelling, literature reviews and expert judgement. We assessed factors such as tipping point risks, declines in Earth system functions, historical variability and effects on people.

Alarmingly, we found humanity has exceeded the safe and just limits for four of five systems. Aerosol pollution is the sole exception. Urgent action, based on the best available science, is now needed.

So, what did we find?

Our work builds on the influential concepts of planetary boundaries by finding ways to quantify what just systems look like alongside safety.

Importantly, the safe and just boundaries are defined at local to global spatial scales appropriate for assessing and managing planetary systems – as small as one square kilometre in the case of biodiversity. This is crucial because many natural functions act at local scales.

Here are the boundaries:

1. Climate boundary – keep warming to 1℃

We know the Paris Agreement goal of 1.5℃ avoids a high risk of triggering dangerous climate tipping points.

But even now, with warming at 1.2℃, many people around the world are being hit hard by climate-linked disasters, such as the recent extreme heat in China, fires in Canada, severe floods in Pakistan and droughts in the United States and the Horn of Africa.

At 1.5℃, hundreds of millions of people could be exposed to average annual temperatures over 29℃, which is outside the human climate niche and can be fatal. That means a just boundary for climate is nearer to 1°C. This makes the need to halt further carbon emissions even more urgent.

2. Biosphere boundaries: Expand intact ecosystems to cover 50-60% of the earth

A healthy biosphere ensures a safe and just planet by storing carbon, maintaining global water cycles and soil quality, protecting pollinators and many other ecosystem services. To safeguard these services, we need 50 to 60% of the world’s land to have largely intact natural ecosystems.

Recent research puts the current figure at between 45% and 50%, which includes vast areas of land with relatively low populations, including parts of Australia and the Amazon rainforest. These areas are already under pressure from climate change and other human activity.

Locally, we need about 20-25% of each square kilometre of farms, towns, cities or other human-dominated landscapes to contain largely intact natural ecosystems. At present, only a third of our human-dominated landscapes meet this threshold.

3. Freshwater boundaries: Keep groundwater levels up and don’t suck rivers dry

Too much freshwater is a problem, as unprecedented floods in Australia and Pakistan show. And too little is also a problem, with unprecedented droughts taking their toll on food production.

To bring fresh water systems back into balance, a rule of thumb is to avoid taking or adding more than 20% of a river or stream’s water in any one month, in the absence of local knowledge of environmental flows.

At present, 66% of the world’s land area meets this boundary, when flows are averaged over the year. But human settlement has a major impact: less than half of the world’s population lives in these areas. Groundwater, too, is overused. At present, almost half the world’s land is subject to groundwater overextraction.

4. Fertiliser and nutrient boundaries: Halve the runoff from fertilisers

When farmers overuse fertilisers on their fields, rain washes nitrogen and phosphorus runoff into rivers and oceans. These nutrients can trigger algal blooms, damage ecosystems and worsen drinking water quality.

Yet many farming regions in poorer countries don’t have enough fertiliser, which is unjust.

Worldwide, our nitrogen and phosphorus use are up to double their safe and just boundaries. While this needs to be reduced in many countries, in other parts of the world fertiliser use can safely increase.

5. Aerosol pollution boundary: Sharply reduce dangerous air pollution and reduce regional differences

New research shows differences in concentration of aerosol pollutants between Northern and Southern hemispheres could disrupt wind patterns and monsoons if pollutant levels keep increasing. That is, air pollution could actually upend weather systems.

At present, aerosol concentrations have not yet reached weather-changing levels. But much of the world is exposed to dangerous levels of fine particle pollution (known as PM 2.5) in the air, causing an estimated 4.2 million deaths a year.

We must significantly reduce these pollutants to safer levels – under 15 micrograms per cubic metre of air.

We must act

We must urgently navigate towards a safe and just future, and strive to return our planetary systems back within safe and just boundaries through just means.

To stop human civilisation from pushing the Earths’s systems out of balance, we will have to tackle the many ways we damage the planet.

To work towards a world compatible with the Earth’s limits means setting and achieving science-based targets. To translate these boundaries to actions will require urgent support from government to create regulatory and incentive-based systems to drive the changes needed.

Setting boundaries and targets is vital. The Paris Agreement galvanised faster action on climate. But we need similar boundaries to ensure the future holds fresh water, clean air, a planet still full of life and a good life for humans.

We would like to acknowledge support from the Earth Commission, which is hosted by Future Earth, and is the science component of the Global Commons Alliance

Steven J Lade receives funding from the Australian Government (Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT200100381) and the Swedish Research Council Formas (Grant 2020-00371). He is affiliated with Future Earth and the Stockholm Resilience Centre at Stockholm University. This work is part of the Earth Commission, which is hosted by Future
Earth and is the science component of the Global Commons Alliance. The Global Commons Alliance is a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, with support from the Oak Foundation, MAVA, Porticus, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Tiina and Antti Herlin Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Global Environment
Facility. The Earth Commission is also supported by the Global Challenges Foundation and the Frontiers Research Foundation.

Ben Stewart-Koster receives funding from Future Earth for his role in the Earth Commission under the Global Commons Alliance. The Global Commons Alliance is a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, with support from the Oak Foundation, MAVA, Porticus, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Tiina and Antti Herlin Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Global Environment Facility. The Earth Commission is also supported by the Global Challenges Foundation and the Frontiers Research Foundation..

Stuart Bunn receives funding from Future Earth for his role in the Earth Commission under the Global Commons Alliance. This is a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, with support from the Oak Foundation, MAVA, Porticus, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Tiina and Antti Herlin Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Global Environment Facility. The Earth Commission is also supported by the Global Challenges Foundation and the Frontiers Research Foundation.

Syezlin Hasan receives funding from Future Earth for her role in the Earth Commission under the Global Commons Alliance. The Global Commons Alliance is a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, with support from the Oak Foundation, MAVA, Porticus, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Tiina and Antti Herlin Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Global Environment Facility. The Earth Commission is also supported by the Global Challenges Foundation and the Frontiers Research Foundation.

This paper was made possible through the voluntary commitment of
time and research by the Earth Commissioners and the support of the
researchers and secretariat from the Global Challenges Foundation;
the Global Commons Alliance, a sponsored project of Rockefeller
Philanthropy Advisors (with support from Oak Foundation, MAVA,
Porticus, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Herlin Foundation and
the Global Environment Facility).

– ref. It’s not just climate – we’ve already breached most of the Earth’s limits. A safer, fairer future means treading lightly – https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-climate-weve-already-breached-most-of-the-earths-limits-a-safer-fairer-future-means-treading-lightly-206678

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vera Weisbecker, Associate Professor, Flinders University

Australia’s dingo fence is an internationally renowned mega-structure. Stretching more than 5,600 kilometres, it was completed in the 1950s to keep sheep safe from dingoes. But it also inadvertently protects some native species.

This makes the fence an unintentional experiment in the relationship between predators and prey. Our new research examined how the fence affects a favourite prey of the dingo: red kangaroos.

We found young kangaroos on the side exposed to dingoes grew more quickly than their protected counterparts. This has potentially big repercussions for the health of these juveniles.

The merits of the dingo fence are hotly debated, and there have been calls to pull it down or move it. That’s why we must seek a better understanding of how the fence affects the animals that live along it.

‘Stressful’ lives

The dingo fence, formally known as the “wild dog barrier fence”, runs through Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia. It protects sheep and cattle to the southeast.

Extensive fencing can fragment habitats and disrupt ecosystems. Maintaining the fence costs about A$10 million per year. For these and other reasons, some have suggested the fence be pulled down.

But how would removing the fence affect kangaroos that have lived without dingoes for up to 70 years? Our research sought to answer this question.

We assessed 166 red kangaroos from two isolated populations on either side of the fence in far northwest NSW. We did this using data collected as part of a licensed shooting program. We compared population size, age structure, sex ratio, growth rate and skull shape.

We expected kangaroos north of the fence – those hunted by dingoes – to differ from their dingo-free cousins to the south. That’s because their lives are more stressful, especially for young kangaroos and females that are killed by dingoes more often than adult males.

À lire aussi :
Killing dingoes is the only way to protect livestock, right? Nope

What we found

As anticipated, we found more young and female kangaroos in the dingo-protected population south of the fence. But the story is more complex than that.

Young kangaroos south of the fence, up to about the age of four years, grew more slowly than those in the north. They were substantially smaller and lighter than their dingo-exposed counterparts.

This raises an exciting possibility: that the growth of kangaroos south of the fence has slowed in the absence of the dingo threat.

But maybe there was just more plant food available in the north, where there are fewer kangaroos compared to the south. Was this the reason the northern kangaroos grew more quickly?

As it turns out, no. We assessed the vegetation on each side of the fence using a decade of satellite measurements. We found there was probably less, not more, food overall for kangaroos in the north compared to the south.

More detailed investigation is needed into whether the types of plants differed on each side of the fence. But our results suggest the different growth rates were driven by predators, not food availability.

À lire aussi :
The dingo fence from space: satellite images show how these top predators alter the desert

This raises important questions

The differences between populations are even more striking considering the dingo fence in the area we studied was in disrepair until 1975. Before then, dingoes and kangaroos probably moved freely. So the changes we observed could have come about in as little as 17 kangaroo generations.

This would be unusually fast for an evolutionary adaptation. Instead, we suspect it’s the result of a more immediate response to the absence of dingoes, such as lower concentrations of stress-related hormones. These affect the health of mammals, and might have affected kangaroo growth rates in this case.

After about the age of four, the protected kangaroos had caught up and were the same size as their unprotected counterparts. But the unprotected kangaroos would have invested a lot more bodily resources into growing so quickly.

This would have left less energy for the animals to develop important functions such as their immune or reproductive systems. Or they might have had less fat reserves.

Conversely, protected kangaroos might have been healthier, or more fertile, because of their slower growth rates.

À lire aussi :
New DNA testing shatters ‘wild dog’ myth: most dingoes are pure

Understanding the mammal response

Our study involved only a single sample at one point in time. But it’s the first to comprehensively assess differences in a dingo prey species on either side of a fence.

Our results provide an insight into how prey populations might fare if the dingo fence is removed. But the implications are potentially even broader.

We must now investigate whether other native mammal species share similar differences across the fence. If so, this could help us predict how animals elsewhere in Australia are coping with rapid environmental change.

Vera Weisbecker receives funding from the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage (CABAH; CE170100015) and Future Fellowship FT180100634. She is a member of the Greens Party.

Corey J. A. Bradshaw receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Frédérik Saltré receives funding from the Australian Research Council

D. Rex Mitchell receives funding from Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage (CABAH).

– ref. ‘An exciting possibility’: scientists discover markedly different kangaroos on either side of Australia’s dingo fence – https://theconversation.com/an-exciting-possibility-scientists-discover-markedly-different-kangaroos-on-either-side-of-australias-dingo-fence-206752

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Reza M. Monem, Professor of Accounting, Griffith University

In 2008 Australia’s federal, state and territory governments set the goal of halving the employment gap between First Nations Australians and others within a decade. That required, by 2018, lifting the employment rate for First Nations Australians from 48% to 60%, with the rate for other Australians being 72%.

So how are things going? Not well.

At the 2021 census the employment rate for First Nations Australians was 51%, while the rate for other Australians was 74%.

Assuming the employment rate for other Australians does not change, the rate of incremental gains in First Nations employment since 2008 suggests that closing the employment gap is going to take 100 years.

We have analysed the employment data published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics to get a more granular picture of why so little progress has been made.

Our results show the ongoing problems of low educational attainment and lack of employment opportunities in rural and remote areas, where the majority of First Nations Australians live.

What these statistics show

Before we continue, it’s important to note the following statistics use a slightly different way to measure employment (and unemployment) rates than that used in the Australian government’s Closing the Gap reports, referenced above.

The Closing the Gap methodology measures employment as a percentage of all people aged 15 to 64. We’ve adopted the approach used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics for its unemployment data. This approach measures the employment rate as the percentage of people employed in the labour force – the labour force being anyone working or registered as looking for work.

The rationale for the Closing the Gap methodology is that the bureau’s measure overstates Indigenous employment, because First Nations Australians have a lower labour-force participation rate. That is, there is a greater proportion of Indigenous Australians that don’t have jobs but are not counted as unemployed because they aren’t registered as unemployed.

There are pros and cons to both approaches. We’re using Australian Bureau of Statistics data, so we’ve stuck with the bureau’s approach. It doesn’t substantially change the results, but it’s important to acknowledge the subtle distinction.

Educational attainment matters

Our first two graphs demonstrate the importance of educational outcomes.

Almost half of the First Nations Australians (49%) do not have a qualification beyond secondary education, compared with 31% of other Australians. About 12% of First Nations Australians attain university qualifications of a bachelor’s degree and above (graduate diploma or postgraduate), compared with about 37% of other Australians.

These differences in educational attainment are reflected in employment outcomes.

For the 6.7% of First Nations Australians who leave school before year 10, the unemployment rate is more than 25%. For those with no qualification beyond year 10 to 12 of secondary school, the rate is 16.7%.

Unemployment rates begin to equalise only with university qualifications.
For every level of educational attainment less than a diploma, First Nations unemployment rate is at least double that of other Australians.

Location counts

There are likely multiple reasons for these stark differences in employment outcomes by education, including discrimination. But one clear factor is geographic location.

First Nations Australians in remote and very remote locations are twice more likely to be unemployed than their peers in major cities (where the unemployment rate is still double that of other Australians). The more remote, the higher the rate of unemployment.

Why do the unemployment rates for other Australians show the opposite trend, with lower rates the more remote? Our best guess is this disparity reflects a combination of the effects of educational attainment, job opportunities available and labour mobility.

Non-Indigenous Australians in remote regions are more likely to have moved to these areas only after securing jobs upon attaining their schooling and qualifications in a big city. Governments often provide incentives for those with the right skills to relocate to these regions.

This disparity presents a stark challenge for employment programs, given almost 60% of First Nations Australians live outside the major cities, compared with only a quarter of other Australians.

Commonwealth employment programs for remote regions have a vexed history, with the most recent program, known as the Community Development Program, being cancelled in 2021. The Albanese government announced a replacement remote jobs program in the May federal budget.

Read more:
Albanese government announces $424 million to narrow a gap that is not closing fast enough

Employment by occupation

The unemployment-related factors lead to differences in the occupational profile of First Nations Australians. They are more likely than other Australians to be employed in community and personal services or manual labour, and significantly less likely to be in a professional or managerial role.

Different approaches needed

These statistics show that, with the exception of those achieving postgraduate qualifications, First Nations Australians face multiple disadvantages in employment.

Read more:
Why we aren’t closing the gap: a failure to account for ‘cultural counterfactuals’

The lack of any significant progress in the past 25 years suggests just continuing with the same policies will achieve little.

Something has to change. Listening to those closest to the problem, and giving First Nations Australians a greater say in designing and implementing solutions would be a good start.

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. Closing the First Nations employment gap will take 100 years – https://theconversation.com/closing-the-first-nations-employment-gap-will-take-100-years-205290

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Barrett, Associate Professor in Commercial Law and Taxation, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

It’s no secret that Revenue Minister David Parker has long been interested in tax reform in New Zealand. In 2022, he announced plans for legislation requiring future tax policy changes to be measured against a set of tax principles, notably fairness.

The Taxation Principles Reporting Bill, just released for public submissions, is the result of Parker’s ambition. But while it is reasonable to support a tax system that is fairer than the current system, I believe the bill is confusing, unnecessary and pointless.

Unlike the Tax Working Group, which clearly and adequately stated tax principles that most people could understand, the bill introduces highly technical ideas that could exclude ordinary people from the debate.

The bill also attempts to tie the hands of future governments by legislating principles that are not accepted across the political spectrum.

My main concern, then, is that the bill appears to close down democratic debate about taxation by claiming certain viewpoints are universally accepted. Secondly, the tax principles, as they are stated, are vague and poorly explained.

Horizontal equity

The bill introduces the concept of “horizontal equity” and defines this as meaning “people with similar levels of income should pay similar amounts of tax”.

But a more accurate way to explain horizontal equity would be to say “people who are in similar situations should be treated similarly”.

For instance, tax systems often view people with young children as being in a different situation from people with adult or no children. The Working for Families (WFF) programme is an example of such a distinction based on a political value judgment.

À lire aussi :
New Zealand’s tax system is under the spotlight (again). What needs to change to make it fair?

The principle of horizontal equity as outlined in the bill is incompatible with the Income Tax Act because people with similar levels of income won’t pay similar levels of tax due to programmes like WFF.

If the principle of horizontal equity needs to be stated, it should be that “taxpayers in similar circumstances should pay a similar amount of tax”.

Time and money

There is also no concept of income that everyone accepts. A standard tax textbook distinguishes between legal, accounting and economic conceptions of income.

According to the bill, “the time value of money matters when considering horizontal equity”. I presume the authors of the bill mean that some will get a tax benefit by deferring their tax liability when others with a similar income can’t.

But the phrasing in the bill makes it difficult to understand. A set of principles that affect everyone should be understandable by as many people as possible.

À lire aussi :
Why a proposed capital gains tax could mean tax cuts for most New Zealanders

The bill also introduces the phrase “economic income”, but again a clear definition isn’t included.

The bill’s authors then appear to endorse a particular conception of comprehensive income – that is, the increase in economic capacity during the tax assessment period.

Understood broadly, this conception of income not only includes increases in wealth that a taxpayer hasn’t received (unrealised gains), but also capital gains and capital transfers. But New Zealand doesn’t currently tax capital gains or capital transfers.

This means there would be a significant gap between the ideas set down in the principles and how most people think of income.

Vertical equity

The bill also states: “The tax system should be progressive. Tax is progressive if people with higher levels of economic income pay a higher proportion of that income in tax.” This is in line with the principle of “vertical equity”, which requires people in different circumstances to be treated differently.

It is not uncommon for countries to lock in the ability to pay tax, which traditionally includes both horizontal and vertical equity, within their constitutions. But the bill is not a constitutional document and represents the opinion of one government – and perhaps just one minister – at a particular point in time.

À lire aussi :
Forget a capital gains tax – what New Zealand needs is a tax on inherited wealth

Using the word “economic” in the explanation of vertical equity is unnecessary. The OECD defines progression as meaning “an increasing proportion of income must be paid in tax as the income increases”.

The inclusion of “economic” in this context could be seen as an attempt to neutralise debate about a particular theory of income that isn’t universally accepted.

The bill doesn’t solve our tax problems

The bill then states: “A progressive tax system does not mean that every tax should be progressive (e.g. GST is regressive) but the overall system ought to be.”

This is a reasonable and pragmatic approach to including GST in the tax mix. But the following sentence is problematic: “In practice, wealthy people should at the very least pay no lower a rate of tax on their economic income than middle-income New Zealanders already do.”

Why “in practice” and not in principle? The income of so-called “middle-income New Zealanders” is most likely fully taxed under the current provisions of the Income Tax Act.

Certainly, some wealthy people may engage in arrangements to reduce their income tax liabilities. But most don’t pay “enough” tax because successive governments have lacked the courage to tax capital gains, wealth, and gifts and inheritances.

The Tax Principles Reporting Bill does nothing to remedy this.

Jonathan Barrett ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Making NZ’s tax system fairer is a good idea – but this proposed new law isn’t the answer – https://theconversation.com/making-nzs-tax-system-fairer-is-a-good-idea-but-this-proposed-new-law-isnt-the-answer-206745

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lily Moore, PhD Candidate in Classics and Archaeology, The University of Melbourne

The ancient Romans venerated wine.

It was accessible to the masses, a fundamental staple of mainstream life and an indispensable part of the Roman economy and trade. It was utilised in a range of practices: a remedy in medical treatments, a common ingredient in cooking, and customarily used in religious ceremonies as libation to the gods.

Despite its centrality to the everyday life of the Romans, the ancient sources continuously attest it was a problematic drink when consumed by women.

Ancient Rome was a patriarchal society in which women were perceived as the objects of men.

Roman law and tradition sustained an immense fixation with regulating the bodily autonomy of women. Ancient male writers appraised and contextualised the boundaries of feminine morality in direct relation to notions of male auctoritas (social standing and authority) and dignitas (reputation and worth).

One of the ways in which this control over women was codified was through their drinking practices.

À lire aussi :
A newly uncovered ancient Roman winery featured marble tiling, fountains of grape juice and an extreme sense of luxury

Punishment for drinking

In the customary laws of early Rome, the discipline of female sobriety was instilled through punishment.

During the earliest periods of Rome’s history and up until the Middle Republican period, it was a socially sanctioned custom for husbands to punish their wives for drinking. Many Ancient Roman sources speak of female drinking and adultery concurrently.

In 2 BCE, Julia, daughter of Emperor Augustus, was exiled from Rome by her father on the grounds of her adulterous behaviour. One of the noted prohibitions placed by Augustus upon Julia was the denial of wine.

In this act of banning wine in direct response to her adultery, Augustus was underlining an ideological and historical precedent that was fundamentally Roman.

It was a common belief women’s drunken desire led to debauchery. In some cases, to death.

In one of the most well known Roman exemplum, or moral anecdotes, various sources attest Egnatius Mecenius (a contemporary of Romulus) bludgeoned his wife to death for drinking wine.

The list of such stories goes on: a wife starved to death for pilfering the keys to her family’s wine cellar, another fined the amount of her dowry for having been found to have drunk wine in excess.

An enforced sobriety was equated with virtuous feminine propriety.

Some sources maintain it was a common practice for women to be kissed by their male kinsfolk for the purpose of detecting traces of wine upon their breath, a discernible odour validating the subsequent punishment.

À lire aussi :
Ancient Rome didn’t have specific domestic violence legislation – but the laws they had give us a window into a world of abuse

Acceptable drinking

According to some Ancient Roman historians, wine was banned from women altogether. But recent scholarship demonstrates ancient Roman women did in fact consume wine.

Archaeological evidence attests to their drinking practices as far back as the ancient written sources state otherwise.

In recent years, excavations throughout Italy have uncovered numerous female burial sites containing amphorae (jars) of imported wines and drinking paraphernalia, dating back to the Archaic period.

It is now believed women did drink wine, but only specific varietals and alcoholic strengths.

Certain types of wine, such as passum, a type of sweet raisin wine, were perhaps acceptable in the strict confines of gendered drinking parameters.

Women were actively known to drink at the festival of Bona Dea (the “Good Goddess”), a religious female-only cult in which wine was ceremoniously offered to the goddess and consumed by women in this ritual celebration.

Yet even here drinking wine was shrouded in innuendo, invariably described as “milk” and carried in a “honey-pot”.

The titular goddess could not escape the brutal consequences of her own mythologised inebriation: according to the myth, Bona Dea was beaten to death by the god Faunus for her conspicuous consumption of wine.

A socially acceptable drink

Our knowledge about women’s drinking practices during the early periods of Roman history comes from both Greek and Latin sources composed centuries later. The male authors of these texts heavily mythologised the past, often to convey the inferred wickedness of their present day.

In constructing a past practice of female sobriety where drinking resulted in dire consequences, the ancient writers underlined a direct correlation between the act of drinking and the social conduct expected of women.

By the time of the transition from Republic to Empire (around the first century B.C.E), it was customary for women to drink wine. With the popularisation of Roman convivium (a type of banquet or dinner party) and increasing cultural appreciation of viticulture, female participation in these practices signalled a social acceptance of their drinking.

Livia, wife of Emperor Augustus, is said to have credited her longevity to a wine varietal from Istria. For the women of ancient Rome, drinking wine was not something of considered indifference.

Lily Moore ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. A kiss to detect wine on her breath: the violent policing of women drinking in Ancient Rome – https://theconversation.com/a-kiss-to-detect-wine-on-her-breath-the-violent-policing-of-women-drinking-in-ancient-rome-202039

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Drum, Professor of Politics and International Relations, University of Notre Dame Australia

With the withdrawal of his principal challengers and the implicit endorsement from key factions within the Labor party, Roger Cook will become Western Australia’s 31st premier. We can expect final endorsement from the Labor caucus and a formal swearing-in from the WA governor in the coming days.

Cook is the Member for Kwinana, in the southern suburbs of Perth, and was elected to the seat in 2008, defeating a popular local mayor by just 300 votes.

Just ten days later, he was elected deputy leader of the Labor Party, a position he has remained in since. For the entire eight and a half years of opposition he held the portfolio of health, and he was appointed health minister when Labor came to power in 2017.

À lire aussi :
Mark McGowan quits in his own time, after dominating Western Australian politics

It was in this role that he became the second most visible minister in government when the COVID pandemic hit in 2020. From March 2020 until the end of 2021, Cook was often standing next to Premier Mark McGowan when the latter announced crucial decisions that affected every Western Australian.

At the end of 2021, Cook stepped aside as health minister in a cabinet reshuffle. This could be seen as a demotion, but his new portfolio of state development, jobs and tourism still allowed him to maintain a significant role in steering the economic direction of the state.

Twenty-four hours of drama

Monday’s bombshell resignation of Mark McGowan as premier left his cabinet and party colleagues scrambling to determine who should replace him.

Three candidates were initially mentioned: Cook, Rita Saffioti and Amber-Jade Sanderson. As minister for transport and planning, Saffioti was central to all major infrastructure projects since the Labor government’s election in 2017. She was especially known for her role in overseeing the rollout of Metronet, the expansion of the public transport system in Perth, which was the government’s signature project. Not being aligned to a faction, Saffioti did not have a natural support base in caucus, making her pathway to victory more complicated.

Sanderson was a first-term minister who has enjoyed a meteoric rise, starting in the environment portfolio before being catapulted into the hot seat of health. She was a member of the United Workers Union (UWU), the largest left faction.

While Cook was also a member of the UWU, Sanderson enjoyed the support of the union’s secretary and won the majority of UWU caucus members at a vote on Tuesday morning. At that point, Cook’s chances looked dim. But Saffioti agreed to join forces with Cook, while the other left faction, the Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), backed Cook.

Given Cook also appeared to have support among Progressive Labor (also known as the Right faction), Sanderson withdrew by the end of Tuesday, leaving Cook as the only candidate.

What remains to be seen is whether the split among the left factions in the Labor party at such a critical juncture is an enduring one. Cook may need to work to build support and collegiality from Sanderson’s supporters within his own UWU faction. There is also the inevitable question around whether anything was promised to the other factions in return for their support.

À lire aussi :
Word from The Hill: PwC scandal, McGowan quitting politics, PM’s trip to Singapore and high inflation figure

So who is Roger Cook?

Cook had a long initiation in politics, having been engaged in student politics during his time at university in the 1980s, rising to the position of national president for the National Union of Students. He spend time as a political adviser in the offices of well-known Labor figures in WA including Stephen Smith, Chris Evans and Jim McGinty.

Cook is known for his passion and enthusiasm for the causes of Indigenous Australians, and he worked in several advocacy roles in that area. Indigenous people featured prominently in his inaugural speech. He voiced his strong support for his wife who attended a Black Lives Matter protest in June 2020 during a period when the government was discouraging mass gatherings.

The new premier will face a range of challenges when entering the role. Perth is experiencing a housing shortage, which has exacerbated broader rises in the cost of living and contributed to a blowout in the waiting list for public housing. This is coupled with a general skills shortage, especially in the construction industry, which will make resolving the housing crisis more difficult.

There are acute problems in the juvenile justice system and health is a perennial trouble area. Finally, Cook finds himself in a struggle with other premiers (mostly Labor) over the GST allocation. This will ensure that any honeymoon is likely to be short-lived.

Martin Drum was a member of the Ministerial Expert Committee that advised the WA government on electoral reform.

– ref. After 24 hours of drama, Roger Cook becomes the next premier of Western Australia – https://theconversation.com/after-24-hours-of-drama-roger-cook-becomes-the-next-premier-of-western-australia-206754

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.

In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss the PwC scandal, where the consulting firm broke a confidentiality agreement relating to planned taxation legislation by the Abbott government. They also canvass Mark McGowan’s quitting politics, Anthony Albanese’s trip to address the Shangri-la Dialogue, and the higher-than-expected inflation figure released from the Bureau of Statistics, which comes just before the Reserve Bank’s meeting on interest rates next Tuesday.

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. Word from The Hill: PwC scandal, McGowan quitting politics, PM’s trip to Singapore and high inflation figure – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-pwc-scandal-mcgowan-quitting-politics-pms-trip-to-singapore-and-high-inflation-figure-206769

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Breunig, Professor of Economics and Director, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

The Morrison government’s decision to give a special deal to Western Australia for the distribution of the income from the goods and service tax is one of the worst public policy decisions made in Australia in the past two decades.

The departure of the WA premier and treasurer, Mark McGowan, this week gives us an opportunity to fix the mistake.

Under a deal struck by McGowan and then-federal Treasurer Scott Morrison in 2018, WA gets a much greater share of the centrally collected goods and services tax (GST) than it is entitled to under the formula administered by the Commonwealth Grants Commission.

At the time, the formula awarded the state only 45% of what it would have gotten if it had received all of the GST collected from its citizens, in recognition of its lesser need for support because of its high iron ore royalties.

Morrison and McGowan’s deal placed a floor on how much of the GST each state could get. This climbed to 70% of what was collected from its citizens in 2022-23, and will climb further to 75% from 2024-25.

The other states that miss out because WA gets more than it should receive a top-up from the Commonwealth government, originally costed at $293 million in 2021-22, but now estimated to be $4.1 billion. But this is not “free”. The extra billions have to be paid for by Australian taxpayers.

Who collects, who spends?

All federal systems have to decide who should collect each tax – the states or the government at the centre.

In Australia, we mostly let the federal government raise taxes, and this has several virtues. One is that it provides consistent rules for all Australians no matter where they live. Another is that it keeps down administrative costs – it gives us one personal income tax system instead of six.

Strong arguments can be made that we should move closer towards such a system, allowing the federal government to collect all of the tax and the states to provide most of the services.

The arrangement generates two problems.

The first is called vertical fiscal imbalance, which is the imbalance between the federal government’s extensive ability to raise revenue and the responsibility of the states to provide services. In Australia, we address it by transferring funds (including all of the GST revenue) from the federal government to the states and territories.

Read more:
Chalmers has a $70 billion a year budget hole: here are 13 ways to fill it

The second is horizontal fiscal imbalance. Different states have different needs and different capacities to meet those needs. NSW has a greater landmass than Victoria, for example, and requires more roads per resident.

In Australia, we deal with both of these problems through the Commonwealth Grants Commission, which distributes the money from the federal government to the states through a formula that determines what’s “fair”.

Here’s how it works. If one state is poorer and has less ability to raise revenue, it receives more money. If another state is richer and needs less, it gets less.

The commission also looks at how expensive it is to deliver services to its population. Health, education and infrastructure are much easier and cheaper to deliver in densely populated areas and temperate climates.

Australia has long been a shining example to the rest of the world in how to make this work. The grants commission is seen as an efficient organisation not subject to political influence. As a result, Australians have good access to opportunities and services irrespective of where they live.

Morrison’s decision, backed by the then Labor opposition, ruined this and injected politics into what had been a world-leading system for making federal revenue distributions fair and efficient.

Sharing Western Australia’s wealth

Western Australia got rich during the mining boom. The grants commission process implicitly takes the extra income it gets from mining royalties and shares it with the others.

The state hasn’t liked it. It felt it was sacrificing more than its “fair share”. What is particularly funny is that throughout most of its history, WA received more from the rest of Australia than the rest of Australia has received from it.

Western Australia received special grants from the Commonwealth continuously from 1933 through 1968, and from 1981 to 2000. Victoria and NSW never got more than their citizens put in.

Read more:
What Australia’s new gas tax will mean for new projects, the economy and the climate

The 2000s mining boom changed that. Suddenly WA was paying money to the other states rather than getting it from them. And it wanted none of it.

It developed the mentality of a job seeker who was happy to get benefits when times were tough and expected them in retirement, but didn’t want to pay income tax while working. It was as ridiculous as that.

In defence of WA, it must be acknowledged the state takes the view that its mineral resources belong to it and not to other Australians, so at least it is consistent.

Sharing Australia’s mineral wealth

But in my view, this isn’t defensible. Why have a horizontal equalisation scheme if what each state has belongs only to it? Our system has always, at least implicitly, treated Australian resources as belonging to the entire country.

This is as true of the wealth generated through human capital in the form of education as it is for resources.

If we don’t want this to be the case, we should move to a system where each state raises as little or as much as it wants and spends it and no more, regardless of need. It would give the grants commission less to do.

And it would be a bad idea. It would be better to seize the moment created by McGowan’s departure and undo a bad decision that never seemed to be about anything other than politics.

And even on that level, it didn’t work. The Coalition won just five of the 15 federal seats in WA in the last election – a record low.

Last year, Morrison described his arrangement with McGowan as a “forever deal”. It should not last as long as that.

Robert Breunig is on the board of the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia.

– ref. It’s time to end Western Australia’s $4 billion-per-year GST bonus – https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-end-western-australias-4-billion-per-year-gst-bonus-206663

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Freestone, Professor of Planning, School of Built Environment, UNSW Sydney

Australia has not had a national urban policy since the Rudd government. A troika of Liberal PMs followed. Tony Abbott wasn’t interested. Malcolm Turnbull didn’t quite live up to the hype but delivered cross-governmental City Deals and the Smart Cities and Suburbs Program. Scott Morrison at best presided over a business-as-usual approach lacking any resolve, urgency or innovation.

Will this Labor government do any better? Australian cities and regions were not front and centre in the 2022 federal election campaign. But there were signs a Labor government would reinstate a concern for urban policy issues.

The federal budget confirmed the government’s focus on urban policy. It set aside funding for a “national approach for sustainable urban development” and a “cities program”. Last week the government appointed the expert members of the Urban Policy Forum announced in the budget.

These are vehicles for delivering a promised National Urban Policy. The government says this policy “will bring together a vision for sustainable growth in our cities”.

Read more:
Hopes of a new urban age survive minister’s fall

Why focus on cities?

Two in three Australians live in a capital city. Our 21 largest cities are home to 80% of the population.

Cities account for 80% of economic activity in Australia. As globally connected hubs, they are crucial sites for community, commerce, infrastructure, biodiversity, governance and democratic processes. Our cities are central to meeting the challenges of a changing climate.

Read more:
Urban planning is now on the front line of the climate crisis. This is what it means for our cities and towns

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has skin in the game. He was the minister for infrastructure and transport in the Gillard government. He oversaw the first truly national urban policy, Our Cities, Our Future, in 2011.

In 2021, Albanese declared that “cities policy has been one of the abiding passions of my time in public life”. He foreshadowed a new national policy framework.

The budget papers specifically refer to the National Cabinet agreement on April 28 on national priorities. Among these is “Better Planning for Stronger Growth reforms to support a national approach to the growth of cities, towns, and suburbs”.

The budget commits nearly A$400 million over four years in new grants and investments in “Thriving Suburbs” and “Urban Precincts and Partnerships”. Some $11 million goes to a Cities and Suburbs Unit to deliver a National Urban Policy. The policy is required to:

address urgent challenges facing our major cities – from equitable access to jobs, homes and services, to climate impacts and decarbonisation.

Read more:
State of the Environment report shows our growing cities are under pressure – but we’re seeing positive signs too

An overdue development

Urban development has been “undervalued in national discussion” globally, not only in Australia. But in recent years various bodies, inquiries and forums have pushed for a new-look national urban policy.

The Planning Institute of Australia has long called for a coherent governance framework for spatial plans, infrastructure, growth management and urban renewal. Without a national cities plan, a 2018 report by the institute said, “all jurisdictions will be disadvantaged when making resource allocation decisions and planning for basic enabling infrastructure”.

In the same year, a federal parliamentary inquiry into the Australian government’s role in city development called for “a national plan of settlement, providing a national vision for our cities and regions across the next 50 years”.

In 2019, Future Earth Australia, based at the Australian Academy of Sciences, advanced a ten-year national strategy for sustainable cities and regions. This strategy is aligned with the Australian achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

New ideas for Australian cities and regions

We must take seriously the economic, social and environmental impacts of long-term population growth and development. To become a more equitable and sustainable country, action on the uneven experiences of Australian cities and regions must be a government priority.

In 2021, an Australian Academy of Social Sciences workshop on Australian Urban Policy: Achievements, Failures, Challenges was undertaken jointly at the City Futures Research Centre, UNSW, and Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University. More than 50 researchers and practitioners explored the many issues competing for urban policy attention at the national level.

Key areas included water, climate change, Indigeneity, transport, migration, population settlement and new cities. Urban green space, biodiversity, digital technologies, economic productivity, social inclusion and affordable housing supply were also identified as issues that cut across national policy agendas.

Read more:
If we want liveable cities in 2060 we’ll have to work together to transform urban systems

Constitutional constraints mean states must play a leading role in national urban policy. Fortunately, these constraints don’t rule out inter-governmental partnerships. There are many, often poorly integrated policies, programs and initiatives across all levels of government.

There was consensus at the workshop on the need to transcend the political ideology and expediency that have led to fragmented urban policies. A different kind of national politics focused on sustainability, resilience and regeneration is required.

The “secret” to sustainability lies in an integrated national framework of policies and strategies for city-regions. All three tiers of government need to buy into it.

National urban policy redux

There is a “back to the future” quality in some of the Albanese moves. They re-invent Rudd-Gillard initiatives, and Turnbull’s City Deals remain. Action on affordable housing supply and urban inequalities has been less forceful to date.

Sitting alongside what seem like far-reaching environmental actions, including a new Net Zero Authority, the revival of urban policy at the national level is welcome. So too would be the discussion, consultation and research required to secure a resilient and sustainable future.

A national urban policy offers opportunities for cities, towns and regions.
It’s also essential if Australia is to meet its national and international obligations, notably the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Australian Urban Policy: Prospects and Pathways is a report on the UNSW-RMIT workshop edited by the authors and with over 30 contributors. It will be published by ANU Press in late 2023.

Robert Freestone receives funding from The Australian Research Council. He is affiliated to the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia, the Australian Academy of Humanities, and the Planning Institute of Australia.

Bill Randolph receives funding from The Australian Research Council. He is affiliated to The Academy of the Social Sciences Australia, the Planning Institute of Australia, and the Australasian Housing Institute.

Wendy Steele receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Australian Academy of Social Sciences. She is affiliated with the Australasian Cities Research Network (ACRN), Planning Institute of Australia and Future Earth Australia.

– ref. A sustainable Australia depends on what happens in our cities – that’s why we need a national urban policy – https://theconversation.com/a-sustainable-australia-depends-on-what-happens-in-our-cities-thats-why-we-need-a-national-urban-policy-204685

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

After a marathon debate, the House of Representatives on Wednesday morning passed the bill for the referendum for an Indigenous Voice to Parliament to be inserted into the Constitution.

The bill now goes to the Senate where it is assured of passage in June.

The final vote was 121 in favour and 25 against.

Most of the Liberals voted for the bill. The Liberals had indicated that although they oppose the Voice, they would not impede the people having a vote on the issue.

The Nationals were solidly against. Ten Liberals were authorised to vote against the bill, so they could participate in preparing the no case which will go into the yes/no pamphlet to be sent to all voters. The crossbencher all voted for the bill except Bob Katter, who did not vote.

Over several days some 118 MPs spoke on the bill in the house.

The government has not yet announced a date for the referendum, which will be held in the last quarter of the year.

Liberal MP Julian Leeser, who quit as spokesman for Indigenous Australians in order to to support the yes case, unsuccessfully proposed amendments to remove the power of the Voice to advise executive government.

Leeser said his amendments were “about securing the support of the Australian people” for the referendum.

“Winning a referendum is hard, and I want the Voice to win – the alternative is too dreadful to contemplate,” Leeser said.

Summing up the debate on Tuesday night, Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said: “Australians can have confidence in this constitutional amendment – and confidence that constitutional recognition through a Voice will work.

“The Voice as proposed in this bill would amplify the voices of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.”

Dreyfus said after a successful referendum a public consultation process would be undertaken to settle the Voice’s design, “including how it will connect with communities and work alongside existing organisations.

“The Voice will represent the diversity of views and needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to the national parliament and government.”

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. House of Representatives passes Voice referendum legislation, which is assured of Senate passage – https://theconversation.com/house-of-representatives-passes-voice-referendum-legislation-which-is-assured-of-senate-passage-206751

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Louise Hull, Professor and Endometriosis Group Leader, The Robinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide

Human reproduction is completely dependent on the healthy function of an underestimated but vital organ: the endometrium. This is the spongy tissue that lines the inner surface of the womb.

In the first half of the menstrual cycle, a healthy endometrium expands in response to the estrogen produced by a growing egg. The endometrium is then shed each month during menstruation.

Or, in the case of pregnancy, the endometrium accepts and nurtures the embryo.

So you’re trying to get pregnant. What happens?

When ovulation is triggered, the ovary starts to produce the hormones estrogen and progesterone. Progesterone causes the endometrial cells to prepare to accept an embryo, in a unique transition called “decidualisation”.

During decidualisation, endometrial cells display proteins that indicate it’s receptive for embryo attachment. After attachment, the junctions between endometrial cells loosen so an embryo can move beneath the endometrial surface.

Endometrial cells secrete substances that nurture the embryo, while immune cells protect the embryo and the endometrium while they move together and the placenta develops.

Read more:
Health Check: how to get pregnant

The surface of the endometrium is covered by a shield of glycoproteins (proteins attached to sugars) which protects it from bacteria and viruses. This shield can also prevent an embryo from attaching to the lining.

Progesterone helps to remove this glycoprotein shield about five days after ovulation. This is carefully timed so a fertilised egg will have developed into a blastocyst-stage embryo and be starting to hatch from its shell ready to interact with the exposed endometrial cells.

It prevents the body rejecting the father’s sperm

The endometrium must also retrain its immune cells to accept an embryo that contains the father’s foreign biological material, or “antigens”.

Tissues bearing these foreign antigens would usually provoke an immune rejection response, but the endometrium has adapted its immune response so an embryo can be accepted, and implant and grow, without rejection.

Although not essential for pregnancy, prior contact with the father’s semen primes the mother’s immune response and promotes acceptance of an embryo. Sexual activity enables paternal antigens, which are present in the fluid around sperm, to interact with the mother’s immune cells in the cervix and endometrium.

Read more:
What’s the point of sex? It’s communication at a biological level

Paternal antigens are taken to lymph glands in the pelvic cavity where they are processed in a way that encourages the mother’s immune response to tolerate – not reject – these paternal antigens.

When paternal antigens on the embryo are next seen by the mother’s endometrial immune cells, they accept the embryo and nurture it. Implantation and placental development can then occur, maximising the chance of progression to a healthy pregnancy.

Then what happens?

For an embryo to grow beyond being a blastocyst, it must secure access to a robust blood supply. Oxygen and nutrients are sourced from the mother’s endometrium (called decidua in early pregnancy) during implantation via the placenta which is formed from outer cells of the embryo.

The process of implantation involves a complex sequence of cellular steps that must progress correctly for pregnancy to occur.

The endometrial tissues have to be reorganised so the blood vessels grow towards the embryo. These vessels then open up to allow blood to flow into blood-filled spaces (called lacunae) that bathe the surface of the placenta. This allows oxygen and nutrients to move from the mother’s to the fetus’s blood supply.
As these connections form, there can be minor bleeding a few days before a menstrual period is due. This is called “implantation bleeding”.

If any of these steps go awry, the embryo may fail to implant, there may be a brief interaction between the embryo and the endometrium that becomes disrupted (a “biochemical pregnancy” or very early miscarriage), or there may be implantation faults that cause a miscarriage some weeks later.

What can go wrong?

The events at implantation have consequences for the rest of the pregnancy.

Even minor defects in the embryo or endometrial interaction at implantation can increase the risk of common pregnancy conditions such as:

• preterm labour
• high blood pressure (preeclampsia)
• sub-optimal fetal growth
• premature delivery
• pregnancy loss.

What conditions affect the endometrium?

Inflammation is the hallmark of an unhealthy endometrium and contributes significantly to implantation disorders and miscarriage.

Endometritis (infection of the endometrium) and inflammatory fluid from blocked fallopian tubes (hydrosalpinx) can damage endometrial cells.

Dying and damaged cells attract immune cells that attack and engulf them. When damaged or dying cells are in the endometrium (decidua), the placenta doesn’t grow well and the pregnancy can be affected.

Endometriosis (endometrial tissue outside the uterus) and adenomyosis (endometrial tissue in the muscle of the uterus) also increase inflammation. In these conditions, endometrial cells in the wrong location grow and then die in response to cyclic menstrual cycle hormones. The immune system then has to be activated to clear the dead cells, creating an inflammatory environment.

Autoimmune conditions and metabolic disorders such as diabetes and insulin resistance also activate the immune system and create an inflammatory endometrial environment. These conditions have been linked to recurrent miscarriage.

How can you improve your endometrial health?

There are several things you can do to support a healthy endometrium.

First, manage the lifestyle factors that increase stress on cells and promote inflammation. This will decrease the chances of implantation problems and miscarriage.

Cutting down on smoking, marijuana, too much coffee or alcohol, and avoiding sugary and processed foods will make it easier for the endometrium to stay healthy.

For some women, the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions that cause inflammation, such as diabetes and autoimmune problems, ensures treatments can start. Treating these conditions can reduce the risk of miscarriage and pregnancy complications.

Read more:
Considering using IVF to have a baby? Here’s what you need to know

Louise Hull is Professor and leader of the endometriosis and endometrium group at and at the Robinson Research Institute at the University of Adelaide.
She works as a Fertility Specialist (FRANZCOG, CREI) and is also the Medical Director / Owner of Embrace Fertility, Adelaide.
Louise has previously received funding from the Federal Government Grant for the EndoZone project and MRFF Funding for Imagendo.
Louise Hull also works as a Staff Specialist Consultant at the Women’s and Children’s Hospital Adelaide

Sarah Robertson receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Trying for a baby? What you need to know about a vital part of your womb (and how to look after it) – https://theconversation.com/trying-for-a-baby-what-you-need-to-know-about-a-vital-part-of-your-womb-and-how-to-look-after-it-202854

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kyla Raby, PhD candidate researching the role of consumers in eradicating modern slavery in supply chains, University of South Australia

A highly anticipated independent review of Australia’s Modern Slavery Act has found it has not brought “meaningful change” to the lives of people living in conditions of modern slavery since its passage more than four years ago.

The final report makes 30 recommendations which, if implemented, would mean thousands more businesses need to take stronger action to prevent the goods and services they sell being made with slavery.

These findings come at a time when new global research on the prevalence of modern slavery reflects the rapidly growing nature of the issue. It is estimated that, on any given day in 2021, almost 50 million people worldwide were victims of modern slavery. This is an increase of 10 million people from research conducted in 2016.

Despite its name, Australia’s Modern Slavery Act doesn’t address the diverse forms of exploitation that can constitute modern slavery. Instead, it aims to combat labour exploitation in the private economy.

It does so by requiring companies and other entities with annual revenues greater than A$100 million to identify how slave labour may be present in their global operations and supply chains. Companies are also required to report on actions taken to ensure they are slavery-free.

According to current government advice, modern slavery is now so prevalent, there is a “high risk” it may be present in these companies’ operations and supply chains.

However, of the more than 3,000 companies required to report, the review found only a handful have identified incidents of modern slavery. None of these were in Australia. And very few companies have taken steps to remedy the harm caused by slavery when it has occurred or given workers specific protections.

These findings are no surprise to those who have been following the implementation of the Modern Slavery Act, which came into force in January 2019.

Several evaluations of corporate reporting since then have all reached similar conclusions about the weakness of the law.

Just last month, a coalition of human rights organisations and academics published research on the impact of the act involving nearly 90 business groups. It found that, in the best case, it “is generating widespread awareness, but in the worst case, it provides a shiny veneer for a business model that contributes to modern slavery”.

Stronger penalties and greater oversight

The review tabled in parliament last week attempts to remedy the act’s shortcomings. It recommends requiring companies to implement a due diligence system to address the modern slavery risk in their direct operations and supply chains.

This would make it unacceptable for businesses to simply say they are doing something. Instead they would be required to “walk the talk”.

Since its inception, the act has been criticised for not including penalties for companies that fail to comply, as well as any mechanism for independent oversight. This has left consumers and investors with the responsibility of holding companies to account.

Read more:
Australia’s world-first repository of ‘modern slavery statements’ a step in the right direction

The review found it is time for these oversights to be addressed. It recommends introducing offences for companies that either fail to report or report false information, as well as an offence for not having an appropriate due diligence system in place.

It also makes several recommendations as to what role a future Commonwealth anti-slavery commissioner could play in overseeing and enforcing compliance with the act. Such a position was introduced last year in New South Wales through a state-based Modern Slavery Act.

The view of the Albanese government on such changes is already known. Labor went into last year’s federal election with a promise to amend the Modern Slavery Act to impose penalties for non-compliance and to appoint an independent anti-slavery commissioner. In this month’s budget, the government allocated A$8 million to establish a commissioner.

The review also suggests enabling the Australian public and civil society to play a greater oversight role by establishing procedures for people to submit complaints about the reporting done by companies under the Modern Slavery Act.

Given complaints from NGOs have been filed against companies like Ikea and Amazon under similar laws in Germany, such a change may be an important step towards real corporate accountability.

Addressing the drivers of modern slavery

Although the government’s response to the review won’t be known for some time, it’s clear change is coming.

Our country is at a pivotal point in how we address the sourcing, producing and consuming of goods and services made with exploited labour. To have a chance of reversing, or even just slowing, the proliferation of modern slavery, actions that go well beyond the review’s recommendations are needed.

The review acknowledges that even a stronger, more effective, corporate reporting mechanism alone cannot effectively tackle an issue as complex as modern slavery. And it reiterates the widely held view that the Modern Slavery Act has not addressed any of the drivers of modern slavery such as “poverty, gender inequality, exploitative business practices, weak governance and regulatory inadequacy”.

Truly combating modern slavery will require a courageous government response that addresses these things head-on.

Read more:
Canada’s Modern Slavery Act is the start — not the end — of efforts to address the issue in supply chains

Kyla Raby receives funding from the Australian Government for her doctoral research on the Modern Slavery Act. She works with the Australian Red Cross, who are a Modern Slavery Act reporting entity and support survivors of modern slavery.

Katherine Christ has previously received funding from CPA Australia and AFAANZ. She is affiliated with the South Australian Modern Slavery Network.

– ref. Australia’s modern slavery law is woefully inadequate – this is how we can hold companies accountable – https://theconversation.com/australias-modern-slavery-law-is-woefully-inadequate-this-is-how-we-can-hold-companies-accountable-206605

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacob van Zoelen, PhD Candidate, Flinders University

Today, 80% of Australia is arid, but it was not always that way. In the early Pliocene, 5.4 to 3.6 million years ago, Australia had a greenhouse climate, widespread forests and diverse marsupial animals.

As the climate dried out in the late Pliocene, open woodland, grassland and shrubland spread across Australia. How did large marsupials cope with these changes?

In 2017, Flinders University researchers uncovered a skeleton eroding from a cliff face on the Warburton River, at the Australian Wildlife Conservancy’s Kalamurina Station in northern South Australia. The skeleton belongs to a species in the family Diprotodontidae – a group of four-legged herbivores that were the largest marsupials to ever exist.

In a new study published in Royal Society Open Science today, we describe this fossil finding in detail, providing new insights into how the animal lived and moved.

Exceptional preservation

Wombats are the closest living relatives of diprotodontids, but the two are as distantly related as kangaroos are to possums. As a result, palaeontologists have had a hard time reconstructing these large, long-gone animals, especially since most diprotodontid species have been described mainly from jaws and teeth.

But the common, widespread nature of diprotodontid remains indicates they were an integral part of Australian ecosystems until the last species, including the rhino-sized Diprotodon optatum, became extinct about 40,000 years ago.

It is rare to find multiple bones belonging to a single skeleton in the fossil record. Only a handful of studies have described parts of the limbs of a post-Miocene diprotodontid. As such, the newly described skeleton is of great importance and is even more special, as it is the first to be found with associated soft tissue structures.

We also compared the specimen to more than 2,000 diprotodontid elements from museums across the globe, making this the most comprehensive appraisal of a diprotodontid skeleton to date.

Our comparisons revealed the skeleton belongs to a new genus we named Ambulator, meaning walker or wanderer. We chose this name because the locomotory adaptations of the legs and feet of this quarter-tonne animal would have made it well suited to roaming long distances in search of food and water, especially when compared to earlier relatives.

We 3D-scanned the specimen, and the files are freely available for anyone to download and look at online.

Read more:
Giant marsupials once migrated across an Australian Ice Age landscape

Walking marsupials

We don’t often think of walking as a special skill – but when you’re big, any movement can be energetically costly, so efficiency is key.

Most large herbivores today, such as elephants and rhinoceroses, are unguligrade, meaning they walk on the tips of their toes, with their wrists or ankles not touching the ground.

Diprotodontids are what we call plantigrade, meaning their heel-bone contacts the ground when they walk – similar to human feet. This stance helps distribute weight and reduces energy loss when walking, but uses more energy for other activities such as running.

Many diprotodontids also have so-called extreme plantigrady in their hands – a wrist bone modified into a secondary heel. This “heeled hand” made early reconstructions of these animals look bizarre and awkward.

Development of the wrist and ankle for weight-bearing meant the digits became essentially functionless and likely did not make contact with the ground while walking. This may be why no finger or toe impressions are observed in the trackways of diprotodontids.

Climbers, walkers and grabbers

Diprotodontids have limb-bone shapes that can be grouped into three main types. There are those adapted to tree climbing, such as Nimbadon lavarackorum and Ngapakaldia tedfordi; and those adapted to more efficient locomotion and travelling great distances, such as Diprotodon optatum and Ambulator keanei (we call these “walkers”).

There are also diprotodontids that were terrestrial and probably could not climb. However, unlike the walkers, their forelimbs were not as specialised for walking and were able to perform a range of functions. These were “grabbers” such as Neohelos stirtoni, and likely Kolopsis torus and Plaisiodon centralis.

Walkers do not show up in the fossil record until we get to the Pliocene (3.5 million years ago). In fact, A. keanei is the earliest diprotodontid we know of that had these specialised walking adaptations.

During the Pliocene, when A. keanei was around, there was an increase in grasslands and open habitat as Australia became drier. Diprotodontids likely had to travel much greater distances to obtain enough water and their preferred food, which was the soft leaves of shrubs and trees, not grass.

Animals such as Ambulator may have evolved to traverse great distances more efficiently. This may also have allowed diprotodontids to get bigger and support more weight. This would eventually lead to the evolution of the giant and relatively well-known 2.7 tonne Diprotodon.

Unfortunately, we will never get to see great migrating mobs of diprotodontids. But it’s amazing to know such a thing may have once been commonplace across the continent.

Jacob van Zoelen received funding from by the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship (Excellence). Travel to collections was partially funded by the Royal Society of South Australia small grant scheme 2018, the University of California Museum of Paleontology Doris O. and Samuel P. Welles Fund 2019, Flinders University Higher Degree Research International Conference Travel Grant 2019 and the North American Paleontology Conference Student Travel Grant.

Gavin Prideaux receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Australia Pacific Science Foundation, Hermon Slade Foundation, Australian Geographic and National Geographic.

Aaron Camens 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. Newly described enormous marsupial wandered great distances across Australia 3.5 million years ago – https://theconversation.com/newly-described-enormous-marsupial-wandered-great-distances-across-australia-3-5-million-years-ago-206492

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeremy Wyatt, Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, University of Waikato

When Academy Awards boss Bill Kramer recently applauded comedian Chris Rock for speaking “his truth” about being slapped by Will Smith at the 2022 Oscars ceremony, he used a turn of phrase that is fast becoming a part of everyday speech around the world.

Take Oprah Winfrey’s interview with Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle, for example. Oprah asked, “How do you feel about the palace hearing you speak your truth today?”

Or consider Samantha Imrie, a juror in the civil lawsuit over Gwyneth Paltrow’s role in a 2016 ski accident with Terry Sanderson. Asked about Sanderson’s testimony, Imrie replied, “He was telling his truth […] I do think he did not intend to tell a truth that wasn’t his truth.”

But what does it mean for someone to speak “their truth”? Perhaps it’s time to reconsider how we use this expression, given it can be easily misinterpreted as endorsing a problematic view of what it takes for a claim to be true.

Truth relativism

On its face, speaking about “my truth” or “your truth” suggests that truth is relative to an individual. Philosophers call this view “truth relativism”. It says that when someone makes a claim, that claim is made true or false by what they believe or how they feel, rather than by the way the world actually is.

A problem with relativism is that it seems to leave reasoned debate without any clear goal. Suppose, for example, we are discussing whether the New Zealand government’s Three Waters Reform Programme will “maintain and improve the water service infrastructure”.

Read more:
Why can’t Americans agree on, well, nearly anything? Philosophy has some answers

Presumably our goal is to determine whether it’s true that the reform will maintain and improve the water service infrastructure. However, if there is no truth to identify here – only “your truth” and “my truth” – then it isn’t clear why we should have this discussion at all.

What’s the alternative to truth relativism, then? To reject relativism is to grant that at least some of our claims are true or false because the world – which exists independently of our minds, languages and cultures – is a particular way.

For instance, because lemons are more acidic than milk chocolate, the claim that lemons are more acidic than milk chocolate is true, and the claim that milk chocolate is more acidic than lemons is false. Likewise, since vaccines don’t cause autism, the claim that vaccines cause autism is false, and the claim they don’t cause autism is true.

Truth and respect

You can stick with this straightforward view about truth and still recognise that everyone deserves to be heard and respected. As John Stuart Mill pointed out in his book On Liberty (1859), if we fail to consider a wide range of perspectives, even those views that may ultimately turn out to be false, it is more likely we will be unable to discover important truths about the world.

This means that valuing truth should actually encourage you to engage with points of view that differ from yours.

It’s also worth noting that, in some cases, people who claim to speak “their truth” may not actually be endorsing relativism. This might be said of the announcement by Meka Whaitiri that she intended to join Te Pāti Māori.

Read more:
‘Always sticking to your convictions’ sounds like a good thing – but it isn’t

Offering a heartfelt explanation of her reasons for the decision, she concluded by directly addressing her Ikaroa-Rāwhiti constituents: “I have spoken my truth.” But she also explained:

The point here, whanau, is Māori political activism. It’s part of being Māori. It comes from our whakapapa. And we as Māori have a responsibility to it. Not others — we. Today, I’m acknowledging that whakapapa. I’m acknowledging my responsibility to it, and it’s calling me home.

This suggests that in speaking “her truth”, Whaitiri was in fact outlining her reasons for joining Te Pāti Māori. Her main objective was to underscore the significance of whakapapa, rather than to defend truth relativism.

Read more:
‘Alternative facts’: A psychiatrist’s guide to twisted relationships to truth

Whaitiri’s reasons are certainly strong ones, though framing them in terms of “my truth” could lead others to misinterpret them. Moreover, if Pākehā responded to Whaitiri by saying “this is her truth, not our truth”, then we would be back again with the problem of relativism.

We need to value people’s unique identities, experiences and reasons for doing things, and we also need to value truth. Truth is a central goal of reasoned debate, and that’s something we will certainly need when addressing the many pressing issues currently facing Aotearoa New Zealand and the world.

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. With so many people speaking ‘their truth’, how do we know what the truth really is? – https://theconversation.com/with-so-many-people-speaking-their-truth-how-do-we-know-what-the-truth-really-is-205388

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kyllie Cripps, Professor, Director Monash Indigenous Studies Centre, School of Philosophical, Historical & International Studies (SOPHIS), School of Social Sciences (SOSS), Faculty of Arts, Monash University

Readers please be advised this article mentions acts of intimate partner violence against First Nations people.

Indigenous women are eight times more likely than non-Indigenous women to be murdered, according to national statistics. Figures compiled by the Australian Institute of Criminology show a significant proportion of these are attributable to intimate partner violence.

I conducted a study, published this week, that examined the deaths of 151 Indigenous women and girls from across Australia over a 20-year period beginning in 2000. Almost all of these women and girls were subjected to intimate partner violence, whether at the hands of their husband or de facto spouse (72.2%), boyfriend (15.9%) or ex-partner (5.9%). The offenders were both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.

While these statistics paint a grim picture, they provide little insight into the full extent of the violence experienced, and its impact on women, children and families. Their stories, unfortunately, become muted in the numbers.

My research also revealed that in almost all of these instances, Indigenous women experiencing intimate partner violence had engaged with police to help them in their situations. However, a lot of women did not receive the support that potentially could have saved their lives.

The women being lost behind the numbers

The people subjected to violence in the cases we investigated had died, so we relied heavily on coronial records. These records provided insight into their experiences of violence in the period leading up to and including their deaths.

We found the average age of Indigenous women who died from intimate partner violence was 35. The youngest was in her teens and the oldest was in her 60s.

These records also provide graphic details of the nature of these deaths, leaving little doubt as to the suffering the women endured.

Of those women whose stories we studied, 61.6% died from blunt force trauma assaults that went on for hours. The offenders used not only their bodies to inflict injury, but also whatever was at their disposal, such as rocks, pieces of concrete, fence palings and pieces of furniture.

The significance of this finding is that it speaks to the possibility of witnesses (other household members, neighbours, passersby) having the opportunity to intervene by calling 000 on behalf of the victim. Certainly there was evidence of this in the cases we examined.

At the time of writing, 106 offenders among the 151 cases have been held accountable through the justice system for the deaths of these women. However, it should be noted not all were convicted of murder or manslaughter.

We know from the case files that 41.7% of the cases we investigated are mothers. Seven of the women were also pregnant at the time of their deaths.

The records also show 25% of these women’s children witnessed violence in the home, potentially including the murder itself. This finding is important, as it reinforces the need for trauma-informed care for children in these situations.

Police involvement – or lack thereof

It takes immense courage for our women to reach out for support, with many having to weigh up the risks and benefits of reporting the violence to police.

For example, a domestic violence report to police now means mandatory reporting to child protection services for those who have children. This fear is due to First Nations people being disproportionately affected by child protection services, with 42.2% of children in out-of-home care being Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander.

Indigenous women have also been arrested when they have called for help, either through being misidentified as the perpetrator, or due to other matters such as overdue fines.

In one instance, Yamatji woman Tamika Mullally was beaten almost to death by her partner, but police arrested her and her father, who had come to help her. Her baby Charlie was later killed by her partner while she and her father were in police custody.

Many will remember the case of Roberta, featured in the ABC 4 Corners program How Many More? in 2022. This showed video footage of police not taking Roberta’s injuries seriously, and also telling her in no uncertain terms not to call again.

Our study found there was a consistent practice of non-compliance with police general orders relating to domestic violence. For example, officers were not doing background checks on whether restraining orders were in place to determine the level of risk a victim may be in.

We also found police often did not follow through on victims’ requests for domestic violence orders to protect them. Some officers asked the victim whether they really wanted their partner to go to court, forcing victims to second-guess their own decisions about their safety.

A similar reluctance by police to act on breaches of domestic violence orders was also found in the case files. This pattern of actions and inaction means crucial opportunities to prevent tragic outcomes can be lost.

A coroner (name witheld) who conducted 17.9% of the inquests and investigations into the cases in this study reported that in his experience if it was not institutional racism that was confounding the actions of police, “it was lazy policing”.

Just trying to find the easiest way to wind up an investigation. Or perhaps, it is cultural ignorance.

This is significant in light of recent statements by the Victorian police commissioner to the Yoorrook Justice Commission. The commissioner admitted “our policing of Aboriginal persons is influenced by systemic or structural racism”, which has “gone undetected, unchecked, unpunished or without appropriate sanctions” and “caused significant harm across generations of Aboriginal families”.

Other police jurisdictions have stated they “don’t believe that we have systemic racism” but equally recognised that members of their force were “exchanging racist and sexist, misogynist views”.

The inquiry into the Queensland Police Service’s responses to domestic and family violence found there is a lack of understanding of the dynamics of, and power imbalances within, domestic violence relationships.

The report stated there is a significant under-resourcing in this area, which leads to reactive and sometimes short-lived reform. And on the frontline, it can lead to confusion as to expectations in police practice.

Read more:
Four Corners’ ‘How many more?’ reveals the nation’s crisis of Indigenous women missing and murdered

Police need to do better

Coroners will continue to investigate and report on our women’s deaths. So, too, will domestic and family violence death reviews that are now being instituted in most jurisdictions across the country.

Indigenous experts need to be included in the teams reviewing this data to further investigate the racism, sexism and misogyny our women experience.

Police need to build in more effective accountability processes and measures so there is an appreciation that their actions and inaction impact lives. Indigenous women and girls who have experienced violence deserve to be treated with humility, respect and dignity. Working with and for them to achieve safety must always be at the centre of the work we do. This article and research reminds us we can and must do better.

These women’s lives mattered. They were loved and valued by our families and communities. We need to honour them by ensuring future victim-survivors are not let down as they were.

Kyllie Cripps receives funding from the Australian Research Council for projects unrelated to this specific project.

The author thanks UNSW Faculty of Law and Justice and the UNSW Scientia program for their support to complete this study.

– ref. New research reveals harrowing stories of murdered Indigenous women and the failure of police to act – https://theconversation.com/new-research-reveals-harrowing-stories-of-murdered-indigenous-women-and-the-failure-of-police-to-act-205655

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Danielle Mazza, Director, SPHERE NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health in Primary Care and Professor and Head of the Department of General Practice, Monash University

When the American legal precedent protecting women’s right to an abortion in the United States, Roe versus Wade, was overturned last year, women around the world felt anxious.

In Australia, despite abortion being legal, there was increasing concern about women’s ability to access abortion. This led to a Senate inquiry into universal access to reproductive health care.

This inquiry has now concluded. A key recommendation is that:

all public hospitals within Australia […] provide surgical pregnancy terminations, or timely and affordable pathways to other local providers.

This recommendation has been welcomed by abortion advocates around the country. But why is a recommendation like this necessary? Why don’t hospitals already provide abortions?

A safe, common procedure

Abortion is a safe, routine procedure that nearly one in five Australian women who have ever been pregnant will undergo by the age of 45.

Abortions can be provided either medically or surgically. A medical abortion is a medically induced miscarriage. In Australia, the medication needed to have an abortion is registered for use until a woman is nine weeks’ pregnant.

Many women prefer a medical abortion as the medication can be taken and the abortion occurs in the woman’s own home.

But a medical abortion is not for everyone. Some women may not be able to manage it at home, don’t have a safe and private space, or have health issues that preclude a medical abortion.

Some women miss the nine-week cut-off for a medical abortion because they don’t realise they are pregnant, or they make the decision to abort after nine weeks (this sometimes happens because of a relationship breakdown when the woman finds out she is pregnant), or because of other issues such as domestic violence, rape, drug use or mental health issues.

Surgical abortions usually involve a woman having a suction curette to remove pregnancy related tissue from the uterus under sedation in a hospital or day surgery centre.

Some women prefer this approach as it’s quicker. A surgical abortion also gives women the opportunity to have an intrauterine device (IUD) inserted for future contraception.

Read more:
Here’s why there should be no gestational limits for abortion

It’s important for women to have a choice about the type of abortion they have and for surgical abortion to be also be available for women who find out later in the pregnancy there is a serious problem with the fetus.

So why is access so patchy?

Many hospitals, particularly those outside major metropolitan areas, don’t currently provide any abortions, let alone surgical ones.

Our research has found many hospitals discourage referrals from general practitioners.

There have also been reports of hospitals turning away women who need care in the uncommon event of complications following a medical abortion.

The reasons for this are complex. Abortion remains very stigmatised in our community. Few gynaecologists want to perform the procedure.

Training on how to provide abortion has not been a routine part of gynaecology or GP training and there is a shortage of trained providers, particularly for complex cases.

Hospitals haven’t felt obligated to provide abortions. To date, no-one has held them accountable for providing this essential service. There has also not been any regional-level planning to ensure services are locally available.

Some health professionals are also conscientious objectors who believe they should not be forced to provide abortions.

What does it mean for women needing an abortion?

As the Senate inquiry report states, it’s a postcode lottery. Many women don’t know how to get an abortion, what’s available or where to go. Some will look online or go to their GP.

Read more:
Abortion is no longer a crime in Australia. So why is it still so hard to access?

If they decide on a surgical abortion, their local public hospital may not offer this and so their only option is a private clinic. Many of these clinics have closed in recent years and more are open very limited hours or staffed by fly-in-fly-out teams, which means they can be very difficult to access.

Women may need to travel long distances to get a surgical abortion. This means taking time off work, organising childcare (as many women who have an abortion already have children and arranging accommodation. This all comes with significant out-of-pocket costs.

How can we fix the system?

The Senate inquiry recognises many public hospitals, particularly women’s hospitals, that receive public funding are faith-based and will not allow abortions to be delivered at their premises, even if the doctors and nurses want to offer them.

The inquiry’s key recommendation seeks to ensure all public hospitals provide surgical abortions – and if not, at least ensure women in their catchment can access timely and affordable care via other local providers.

The inquiry also recommends that contraception and abortion access (particularly for rural and regional women) is made available via publicly funded community and hospital-based services, with regional-level planning, training and accountability.

To make this a reality, there has to be consequences if it doesn’t happen. Funding should be tied to provision. For full transparency, hospitals should also be made to issue public reports that spell out how many and what type of abortions they provide each year.

Read more:
One in six Australian women in their 30s have had an abortion – and we’re starting to understand why

Funding also needs to be offered to train health professionals to deliver the services to ensure that now and into the future, we have a health workforce capable of delivering the services needed.

GPs need to know that if they provide a medical abortion, their local public hospital will provide support and see patients if and when needed.

GPs also need to have clear referral pathways so women can get into surgical abortion services in a streamlined and timely way.

Finally, women need assistance to navigate to abortion services when they need to. The inquiry recommends governments develop coordinated campaigns and education materials to improve women’s knowledge of their rights and options for accessing effective contraception and abortion care. It also recommends establishing a national information services like the Victorian 1800myoptions hotline.

While the recommendations are a step in the right direction, action is needed to translate these recommendations into actual services on the ground. The government’s response is eagerly awaited.

Danielle Mazza receives funding from the NHRMC and the MRFF and non government organisations such as the RACGP and RANZCOG. She has previously received research funding from Bayer and Organon. Professor Mazza is the Chair of the SPHERE Coalition which consists of key stakeholders, health professionals and consumers who together are advocating for improved women’s sexual and reproductive health care quality and access.

– ref. Australian women’s access to abortion is a postcode lottery. Here’s what needs to change – https://theconversation.com/australian-womens-access-to-abortion-is-a-postcode-lottery-heres-what-needs-to-change-206504

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Margaret Young, Professor, The University of Melbourne

A free trade agreement between Australia and the United Kingdom begins on Wednesday. When it was announced in 2021, then-prime ministers Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison cheerily exchanged packets of chocolate biscuits. Meanwhile, one British newspaper celebrated the prospect of cheaper steaks.

The agreement eliminates tariffs on a range of Australian exports, including beef and lamb, and makes it easier for Australians to work in the UK. British exporters of cars, whisky and confectionery will also benefit. But the deal is notable for another reason.

As our research has found, it does relatively little to tackle climate change. In the context of growing damage from climate change – internationally, in Australia and in the UK – this is a missed opportunity.

The Albanese government inherited this free trade agreement, and describes it as “gold standard”. It is not, however, gold standard on climate action. Both the Australian and UK governments must now ensure the deal does not damage efforts to keep global warming at safe limits.

Hopes were high

Trade is vital to the global economy. It is also inextricably linked to climate change.

Trade increases greenhouse gas emissions. And climate change can damage trade when severe weather disrupts supply and distribution networks.

Free trade agreements can be used to tackle climate change. For example, they can lower the cost of goods needed in the low-carbon transition, such as solar panels and bicycle parts. And trade partners can provide leadership on emissions reduction.

When the UK hosted the COP26 climate conference in 2021, it sought to establish a reputation as a global leader on climate action. The nation seemed well-placed to ensure emissions reduction was on the agenda when it negotiated a post-Brexit trade deal with Australia.

But the free trade agreement with Australia failed to put climate change at the forefront.

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

‘Regrettable’: the deal lacks climate ambition

The final text of the deal acknowledges each nations’ commitment to addressing climate change and notes “the role of global trade and investment in these efforts”. It also recognises the Paris Agreement.

However, a report last year by a British parliamentary committee noted the agreement’s lack of climate ambition, saying:

Given the UK’s generous tariff offer, it could have pressed [Australia] for more ambitious commitments on climate change, stronger enforcement provisions, and for an explicit reference to the Paris temperature goals.

The report also noted:

it is regrettable that the agreement did not include any references to reducing or reviewing Australia’s reliance on coal.

There was speculation that the UK government prioritised securing the agreement over holding Australia to account on climate action.

In Australia, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade analysed the impact of the free trade agreement with the United Kingdom and did not raise concerns over its climate ambition.

What the deal should have done

So how might the trade pact have properly addressed climate change? There are many options.

A UK-New Zealand trade deal, for example, signals that in some circumstances, it may be justifiable for climate action to affect trade. The European Union has proposed such action, in its plan to impose reporting – and potentially, a financial charge – on emissions-intensive imports.

The UK-NZ agreement also takes steps to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, in recognition that government support for the coal, oil and gas industries distorts prices and discourages climate action.

And the pact between the European Union and Canada requires the development of climate-friendly labelling and certification standards on products.

The Australia-UK deal seeks to ensure that each nation encourages high levels of environmental protection. These provisions could be strengthened with respect to climate change – for example, by tying them to each party’s emissions-reduction commitment under the Paris Agreement.

The agreement requires Australia and the UK to promote trade and investment in environmental goods and services, such as low-emissions technologies and renewable energy infrastructure. Yet the UK-NZ deal goes further. It eliminates customs duties on listed environmental goods, such as bicycle parts and plants.

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

The Australia-UK deal might have had stronger climate provisions if it incorporated a wider range of public views.

Public participation is key to good environmental decision-making. But the Australia-UK trade deal has been criticised by non-government organisations for its lack of public input.

In Australia, a parliamentary committee last year examined the deal. It said while peak business groups were often satisfied with the level of consultation on free trade agreements, others – including civil society groups and unions – were frequently not.

Looking ahead

The Albanese government was elected on a platform of enhanced climate action and has since entrenched temperature targets in national legislation. While the Australia-UK trade deal was finalised when it took office, opportunities exist to strengthen its climate ambition.

The agreement establishes a working group to review and monitor environmental provisions relating to matters such as marine pollution from ships, ozone-depleting substances, illegal logging and the wildlife trade. This group could also work to better integrate the climate and trade goals of both nations.

This might involve monitoring land-use change caused by agricultural trade between the countries and exploring prospects for sustainable food systems. It could mean removing customs duties for low-emissions goods and discussing ways to constrain subsidies on fossil fuels.

Doing so would help ensure this agreement, and others to come, meet the urgent need to avert dangerous global warming.

Read more:
Listen to The Conversation’s climate podcast Fear and Wonder

Margaret Young receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Georgina Clough 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 new trade deal delivers cheaper Australian beef and British sweets – but does little to avert dangerous global warming – https://theconversation.com/a-new-trade-deal-delivers-cheaper-australian-beef-and-british-sweets-but-does-little-to-avert-dangerous-global-warming-206394

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Johan Barthélemy, Developer Relations Manager, NVIDIA and Honorary Senior Research Fellow, University of Wollongong, University of Wollongong

The Antarctic continent conjures visions of white ice and blue sky. But not far from Australia’s Casey Station, 3,880km due south of Perth, moss beds emerge verdant and green.

Sadly, the health of these moss beds is declining due to changing climate conditions, ozone depletion and heatwaves. Yet our understanding of the problem is limited. Conducting research in Antarctica is difficult. Periods of data collection are short, and there can be years between each research opportunity. Fortunately, new technology offers solutions.

In December 2022, we travelled to Casey Station. We spent two months in the field – combining our skills in biology, flying drones, programming and artificial intelligence – to learn more about the moss and find better ways to remotely monitor biological changes.

We mapped large moss beds and trialled a new sensor system that can deliver continuous, year-round moss data. While this research is ongoing, we’re thrilled to share the early results with you here.

Read more:
An epic global study of moss reveals it is far more vital to Earth’s ecosystems than we knew

Miniature forests, bustling with life

Plants need sunlight, warmth and liquid water. Antarctic plants face months of darkness, freezing temperatures and drought from frozen water – but moss has adapted to this hostile environment.

Moss is the dominant plant life in Antarctica. It provides habitat for invertebrates, microbes and fungi, which make up more than 99% of Antarctica’s land biodiversity. The moss beds resemble miniature forests, bustling with life.

Antarctic moss creates its own warm microclimate, using pigments to absorb sunlight. This warmth aids photosynthesis and helps the mosses to melt snow to obtain liquid water. The tiny hills and valleys across moss beds determine the amount of light mosses receive and creates differences in their microclimates and health.

Once we reached the moss, we’d carefully balance on rocks to take samples and place data loggers. These consisted of four sensors that measured canopy temperatures at different positions in the moss bed. We also measured photosynthesis and collected moss samples for pigment analysis, which indicates health and stress levels.

The below photo depicts a moss bed with our equipment attached. You can see the complex micro-topography and a mosaic of healthy and stressed mosses. Healthy moss is green and velvety. Stressed mosses are red and eventually turn grey.

Mosses growing just centimetres apart can experience vastly different microclimates. In the photo below, some mosses had warmed up to 19℃ (next to the red marker), while only about 30cm away the moss was at 0.6℃ (next to the white marker).

Collecting this data enables us to explore connections between the physical structure of the moss beds, microclimates and indicators of moss health.

Read more:
Antarctica’s ‘moss forests’ are drying and dying

Smart sensors, cameras and transmitters

While in Antarctica, we also tested the first prototype of an intelligent, autonomous and long-term sensing platform. It offers scientists more information than previous data-collection devices as it can collect and transmit data over an extended period outside regular summer field campaigns, including winter time.

The prototype monitored the moss bed near Casey Station for a month and a half. Its sensors captured light intensity, ambient air temperature and humidity, moss canopy temperature and, finally, energy exchanged between soil and air. A webcam, affectionately nicknamed MossCam, captured regular images of the moss bed.

We also installed the first antenna in Antarctica for the LoRaWAN wireless network. This network is low power, long range and free to use. This allowed us to send data back to Australia in near real-time and display it on a website dashboard that is visible to Australians only.

After some early bug fixes, the platform performed better than expected. We brought it home at the end of the season for further refinement and deployment next season.

Drones and hyperspectral imaging

We sent drones on 25 flights, collecting data from two Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs 135 and 136).

Operating drones in the Antarctic presents significant challenges. The proximity to the magnetic pole disturbs the GPS navigation, and strong winds make it difficult to fly. Severe cold reduces battery life – and it’s also tough on the operator’s fingers. We customised drones with RTK (real-time kinematics, a technique to eliminate position errors) GPS, multiple redundancies and battery warmers to increase their resilience to harsh conditions.

Our drones could capture 5,000-10,000 images on each flight. They were also equipped with high-tech sensors. These sensors are programmed to record “spectral signatures”, which is a term we use to describe a kind of optical identity or visual “DNA” that differentiates landscape features like moss, rock and snow within the image.

These images will be stitched together and mapped to their ground coordinates. Using machine learning, we will train a model to identify vegetation, including moss, lichen and cyanobacteria. We will also develop vegetation and hydrology maps, 3D fly-throughs and virtual reality experiences to support decision-making around conservation and management.

Read more:
Drones help scientists check the health of Antarctic mosses, revealing climate change clues

One journey ends, while another is just beginning

Often while we were working, curious penguins wandered over to see what we were doing. Making friends with these locals was always the highlight of the day.

But after a couple of fantastic months in the field, it was time to pack up and head home. On the 60km journey inland to Wilkins Aerodrome we ventured into the Antarctic Circle. We waited in -20℃ to watch our plane land on the blue ice runway before boarding and flying back to Tasmania. There, it felt like we’d just woken up from a dream.

Our Antarctic adventure was over, but we all felt so grateful for the experience.

Now we’re exploring the data, to see what stories it can tell, while further developing our moss sensing platform. We hope to return to Antarctica to deploy it at the end of the year.

The authors travelled to Casey Station as part of the Australian Research Council Special Research Initiative Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF).

Read more:
Toughness has limits: over 1,100 species live in Antarctica – but they’re at risk from human activity

Dr Johan Barthélemy received funding from Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF), an Australian Research Council Special Research Initiative. He currently works at NVIDIA.

Barbara Bollard receives funding from Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF), an Australian Research Council (ARC) Special Research Initiative (SRI).

Juan Sandino is affiliated with the QUT Centre for Robotics (QCR), Australia, and receives funding from Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF), an Australian Research Council (ARC) Special Research Initiative (SRI).

Dr Krystal Randall is affiliated with the Centre for Sustainable Ecosystem Solutions (CSES) in the School of Earth, Atmospheric and Life Sciences at the University of Wollongong (UOW). Krystal has previously received funding from the Antarctic Science Foundation, and currently receives funding from Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF), an Australian Research Council (ARC) Special Research Initiative (SRI).

– ref. Photos from the field: spying on Antarctic moss using drones, MossCam, smart sensors and AI – https://theconversation.com/photos-from-the-field-spying-on-antarctic-moss-using-drones-mosscam-smart-sensors-and-ai-204114

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tracey Muir, Professor in Education (STEM), Australian Catholic University

Australian students’ performance and engagement in mathematics is an ongoing issue.

International studies show Australian students’ mean performance in maths has steadily declined since 2003. The latest Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2018 showed only 10% of Australian teenagers scored in the top two levels, compared to 44% in China and 37% in Singapore.

Despite attempts to reform how we teach maths, it is unlikely students’ performance will improve if they are not engaging with their lessons.

What teachers, parents, and policymakers may not be aware of is research shows students are using “non-thinking behaviours” to avoid engaging with maths.

That is, when your child says they didn’t do anything in maths today, our research shows they’re probably right.

What are non-thinking behaviours?

There are four main non-thinking behaviours. These are:

• slacking: where there is no attempt at a task. The student may talk or do nothing

• stalling: where there is no real attempt at a task. This may involve legitimate off-task behaviours, such as sharpening a pencil

• faking: where a student pretends to do a task, but achieves nothing. This may involve legitimate on-task behaviours such as drawing pictures or writing numbers

• mimicking: this includes attempts to complete a task and can often involve completing it. It involves referring to others or previous examples.

Peter Liljedahl studied Canadian maths lessons in all years of school, over 15 years. This research found up to 80% of students exhibit non-thinking behaviours for 100% of the time in a typical hour-long lesson.

The most common behaviour was mimicking (53%), reflecting a trend of the teacher doing all the thinking, rather than the students.

It also found when students were given “now you try one” tasks (a teacher demonstrates something, then asks students to try it), the majority of students engaged in non-thinking behaviours.

Australian students are ‘non-thinking’ too

Tracey Muir conducted a smaller-scale study in 2021 with a Year ¾ class.

Some 63% of students were observed engaged in non-thinking behaviours, with slacking and stalling (54%) being the most common. These behaviours included rubbing out, sharpening pencils, and playing with counters, and were especially prevalent in unsupervised small groups.

One explanation for students slacking and stalling is teachers are doing most of the talking and directing, and not providing enough opportunities for students to think.

How can we build “thinking” maths classrooms and reduce the prevalence of non-thinking behaviours?

Here are two research-based ideas.

Form random groups

Often students are placed in groups to work through new skills or lessons. Sometimes these are arranged by the teacher or by the students themselves.

Students know why they have been placed in groups with certain individuals (even if this is not explicitly stated). Here they tend to “live down” to expectations.
If they are with their friends they also tend to distract each other.

Our studies found random groupings improved students’ willingness to collaborate, reduced social stress often caused by self-selecting groups, and increased enthusiasm for mathematics learning.

As one student told us:

I’m starting to like maths now, and working with random people is better for me so I don’t get off track.

Read more:
Curious Kids: how was maths discovered? Who made up the numbers and rules?

Get kids to stand up

Classroom learning is often done at desks or sitting on the floor. This encourages passive behaviour and we know from physiology that standing is better than sitting

But we found groups of about three students standing together and working on a whiteboard can promote thinking behaviours. Just the physical act of standing can eliminate slacking, stalling, and faking behaviours. As one student said:

standing helps me concentrate more because if I’m sitting down I’m just fiddling with stuff, but if I’m standing up, the only thing you can do is write and do maths.

The additional strategy of only allowing the student with the pen to record others’ thinking and not their own, has shown to be especially beneficial. As one teacher told us:

the people that don’t have the pen have to do the thinking […] so it’s a real group effort and they don’t have the ability to slack off as much.

Simple changes can work

While our studies were conducted in maths classrooms, our strategies would be transferable to other discipline areas.

So, while parents and educators may feel concerned about Australia’s declining maths results, by introducing simple changes to the classroom, we can ensure students are not only learning and thinking deeply about mathematics, but hopefully, enjoying it, too.

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. From whiteboard work to random groups, these simple fixes could get students thinking more in maths lessons – https://theconversation.com/from-whiteboard-work-to-random-groups-these-simple-fixes-could-get-students-thinking-more-in-maths-lessons-203059