View from inside the Great Southern Land gallery at the National Museum of Australia. Supplied NMA.
The National Museum of Australia has just opened the most significant redevelopment in its history.
Costing $25 million, Great Southern Land weaves 2,000 objects into a natural and cultural history to show how the Australian continent has influenced and been impacted by human decisions.
The new gallery provides a place to share and explore ideas about Australia and our place in it, and to consider what actions might be necessary to ensure the nation’s future.
The exhibition is beautiful and sophisticated. Quiet where it needs to be quiet and boisterous and fun-loving in other parts, it engages all our senses as we gaze in wonder at the life-sized orca models suspended from the ceiling and squint to see the tiny fragments in display cases at knee level.
It is a pivotal moment in the ongoing life of the museum, and the nation.
A controversial museum
Aspirations for a national museum were precisely outlined in a report presented to government in late 1975. But the fall of the Whitlam government meant the political momentum for the proposal went by the wayside.
The National Museum of Australia wouldn’t open until 2001. At its launch, then prime minister John Howard criticised it as being “un-museumlike”.
Its colourful façade and shiny features jarred against Canberra’s landscape of brutalist-designed national institutions. But the museum’s difference was more than skin-deep.
Every part of it, inside and out, represented Australian history as resulting from the entanglement of many stories. Its exhibitions provided spaces for social and political commentary and challenged the credibility of national myths, particularly around the frontier wars.
The museums colourful façade and shiny feature jarred against Canberra’s national institutions. Shutterstock
Almost as soon as it opened, the museum was engulfed in fierce controversy, attacked for being both too political and not political enough. One headline in the Daily Telegraph read “museum sneers at white history of Australia”.
In a short time, polarised views hardened into attitudes, with supporters and critics both accusing the other side of distorting history to promote a political agenda. The clash culminated in a government review in 2003.
Part of the problem was the museum didn’t explain why it was so different from more familiar 19th-century-style institutions like the Australian War Memorial.
The National Museum of Australia included artefacts from recent events, things like “the small black dress” worn by Azaria Chamberlain when she was taken from her family’s tent at Uluru in 1980.
It addressed the visitor as “you”, and tried to hook them into conversations about the nation by asking them to reflect on personal experiences.
Its peers included Te Papa Tongarewa and the National Museum of the American Indian: reflecting a global museum movement that emphasised the voice of First Nations and marginalised peoples and aimed to disrupt colonial narratives.
The museum that opened in 2001 came across as overly enthusiastic, didactic, even dogmatic in parts. Instead of showing how meaning was developed, for example, by saying something about how objects were collected, its displays jumped from spectacle to spectacle.
National museums and truth-telling
Great Southern Land is the first major redesign of the museum since 2001.
As visitors enter the new exhibition through a darkened grove of towering Bunya trees, it is clear from the outset the redeveloped gallery has better articulated the 1975 plan’s ambitions for the museum to be “bold and imaginative”.
It also realises the plan’s focus on the Australian environment, Aboriginal history, the history of Europeans in Australia and the intricate relationships between people and the environment.
The bunya forest inside the Great Southern Land gallery at the National Museum of Australia. Supplied NMA.
The Bunya forest is to scale and awe-inspiring. Kids rush to touch and try to get their arms fully around a tree trunk. It introduces all aspects of the new exhibition, including the museum’s centralisation of partnerships and consultation with First Nations people and communities.
The sprawling gallery leads to the zoological specimen of a thylacine in a bath of preserving liquid. It lies prone, in the centre of the exhibition. It is, perhaps along with the Bunya forest, the most moving object story. But the extinction icon evokes horror and sadness rather than joy and awe. It tackles the decades of wilful and unintended mistreatment the artefact has endured, including by the museum.
The thylacine reiterates the museum’s attention to interconnections between human and natural history. Felted thylacine joeys made by Trawlwoolway artist Vicki West in 2019 are also displayed, showing the shared history of exclusion and oppression.
Great Southern Land is part of the institution’s remit to “to be a trusted voice in the national conversation”.
View from inside the Great Southern Land gallery at the National Museum of Australia. Supplied NMA.
Its ambition is backed up by studies showing even despite being caught up in the culture wars, museums remain one of Australia’s most trusted institutions.
It also talks about the human side of trust. A phone box destroyed in the Cobargo 2019 bushfire sits alongside a power pole from Cyclone Tracy in 1974. A community member from Cobargo says these objects represent what happens when major infrastructure fails and community doesn’t.
In this new gallery, the museum is surer of itself. It communicates an awareness of its own responsibilities as a national museum that has had to reckon for decisions made historically by it and in its name.
It understands the gravity and necessity of its role in reaching out to people, and expects visitors to come prepared to practice intellectual curiosity, self reflection and respectful discussion.
Amazon Prime Video’s recent release A League Of Their Own has been making headlines with its frank portrayal of queer women, with the show presenting a diverse range of queer bodies and expressions. The cast features women presenting queerness from high femme to more masculinised, and each representing different ways of being queer.
The TV series is an update on the 1992 Penny Marshall film starring Geena Davis and Tom Hanks. The story follows the journey of the newly formed baseball team, the Rockford Peaches during their first season.
Set in 1943, many women’s husbands were soldiers in the second world war. Due to the men being off at war, many male teams were left without enough players and this was fundamental in the formation of the All-American Girls Professional Baseball Leage (AAGPBL) which filled the gap left by men’s baseball. The show gives a fictionalised account of the real-life formation of the AAGPBL.
The show teases out a tension between femininity and queerness. In the show, the people running the AAGPBL see the two as mutually exclusive. They demand the women conform to certain expressions of femininity because they expect it will hide any queerness.
This isn’t unique to the show: as early as 1934, people thought sport would masculinise its female players. Masculinity in a woman was feared to impact their marriageability, and was thought to suggest queerness. We now see this as misguided, but it is the reason the AAGPBL put its teams through charm school, both in real life and in the show. To play, the women must look and act in certain ways. At charm school, players learn the correct way to conduct themselves both on and off the pitch.
Fears around the masculinisation of women is central to A League Of Their Own. Failure at charm school, we see, means getting kicked off the team. A woman not wearing makeup is immediately dismissed from the Peaches. A second teammate is saved from the same fate only when her new colleagues claim that she was helping them with their own makeup.
A League of Their Own showcases different manifestations of both femininity and queerness. Anne Marie Fox/Prime Video
Gender ideals and consequences
For 1940s women’s baseball leagues, these gender ideals were thought to hide queerness in their players. By presenting the women as feminine, audiences would not suspect non-heterosexual preferences.
A League Of Their Own shows that the consequences for refusing to conform are real. Careers are on the line. To stay on the team, female players must appear to be available and heterosexual to keep attracting audiences to baseball games. The real AAGPBL claimed “the natural appeal of women in every walk of life will be brought out in this venture”, which heavily implies a marketing strategy centring on women’s objectification. The fictional AAGPBL similarly pushes this agenda of the heterosexual availability of its players.
The show is explicit in highlighting the connection between the feminine ideal and queerness. Rockford Peach, Greta Gill, explains to her teammate Carson that the beauty lessons and the AAGPBL rules are “to make sure that we don’t look like a bunch of queers”.
But queerness is not so easily eliminated. Wearing a skirt doesn’t make a person less of a lesbian. Gender and sexuality are not so easily aligned.
The show emphasises the safety precautions players must take to “pass” as straight. Greta, a queer player who appears very feminine, makes sure that she is seen “on the arm of a man” before she pursues a female love interest. She lives by a set of rules designed to keep her safe. The rules are the result of her negative past experiences.
Meanwhile, Greta’s best friend, Jo de Luca, is under suspicion of being queer by her teammates, and it is because she appears more masculine. Coach and team leader, Carson, lies to protect Jo by inventing an affair with a prominent male baseball figure.
Part of what the AAGPBL aims for in enforcing femininity holds weight. Greta doesn’t have to lie. No one suspects she’s queer, because of her feminine appearance. In contrast, more masculine players are always suspect. What the AAGPBL expects from its players is only part of what queer players do to keep their sexualities hidden and themselves safe.
Of course, we know that people have always been queer, baseball players included. Maybelle Blair, who played as part of the original AAGPBL, recently came out as gay, at the age of 95. Stereotypes about gay female sports players hold impact because players are indeed sometimes gay.
But, as A League Of Their Own shows us, hiding queerness behind a veneer of femininity doesn’t erase it. People will always find ways to be true to their authentic selves.
Mersini Karkoulas 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.
Allergic rhinitis, commonly referred to as hay fever, is a common allergic disorder affecting up to one in five Australians. Symptoms include itchy nose and eyes, excessive sneezing or clear nasal discharge and nasal congestion.
When severe or untreated, hay fever can affect your quality of life, resulting in poor sleep, impaired learning, and difficulty in concentrating at school or work.
People with hay fever usually use over-the-counter antihistamines as required. For recurrent or frequent symptoms, corticosteroid nasal sprays are preventive medications readily available over the counter, and are most effective when used regularly.
Hay fever triggers an exaggerated immune response to otherwise harmless airborne allergens such as grass pollen, house dust mite or animal dander. These can end up on the lining of the nose and eyes, which causes irritation.
When encountering these allergens as foreign molecules, the immune system generates proteins, called antibodies. These antibodies are able to accurately recognise that particular molecule as foreign.
In people with hay fever, a particular type of antibody, called IgE, is generated. These allergen-specific IgE antibodies then “prime” or prepare cells in the lining of the nose and eyes to recognise and trigger allergic responses when exposed to these allergens.
When the “primed” cells contact the allergen, they release stored molecules, such as histamine. Histamine acts on neighbouring cells to trigger symptoms such as itch, sneeze and runny nose.
Over time, the ongoing stimulation by the allergen will trigger a chronic response. This leads to nasal congestion and tissue swelling of the nasal, or eye lining.
For some people, nasal sprays don’t provide enough relief. Shutterstock
How does allergen immunotherapy work?
The first step is to ask your GP for a referral to an allergist or clinical immunologist to discuss the best treatment for you.
Your allergist or clinical immunologist will begin by identifying your triggers. This can be done through skin prick tests when you visit the allergy clinic, or through blood tests that detect and measure the proteins (antibodies) that underpin the allergic response.
Allergen immunotherapy dampens the exaggerated response to a specific allergen. It does this by developing cells and antibodies that block rather than activate the immune response against a particular allergen.
Allergen immunotherapy is administered by either injections under the skin (subcutaneous) or drops, tablets or wafers placed under the tongue (sublingual).
The treatment is started by an allergist in the clinic. Injection allergen immunotherapy may then be administered regularly by your GP, usually monthly, while sublingual allergen immunotherapy is taken daily at home.
Patients commonly ask which treatment is better. Research indicates both are effective strategies to minimise the allergic symptoms. For an individual, the choice should depend on a number of patient factors such as asthma, expected tolerability, and, importantly, time constraints (for example, the time it takes to see a GP).
While allergen immunotherapy for children can start as young as five years of age, parents should discuss the best treatment for their child with the allergist. Some children may not tolerate regular injections, while others are unable to hold the tablet under the tongue.
How much does it cost?
The cost vary depending on product as allergen immunotherapy products are not subsidised under the PBS.
The sublingual allergen immunotherapy products costs about A$120-$150 per month.
The injection costs about A$600-1200 per year (approximately A$50-100 per month).
How long does it take to work?
The allergist will determine the best time to start allergen immunotherapy, as some products would be preferable to start before spring (for example, grass pollen immunotherapy).
Effective allergen immunotherapy should minimise the allergic symptoms after re-exposure to the allergen. However, this immune “reset” does not have an immediate effect. Patients on allergen immunotherapy typically only notice improved symptoms after six to 12 months.
Hay fever is an allergic response causing symptoms such as itchy eyes. Erik Mclean
Patients who undergo treatment should expect symptom improvement within the first year, although there may be continued gradual improvements over future years of treatment.
Allergen immunotherapy may also decrease the chance of children with hay fever developing asthma.
What are the side effects?
Allergen immunotherapy through sublingual or injections may typically cause local allergic symptoms such as itch, tingling tongue/mouth or localised redness or pain at the injection site.
Significant side effects from both allergen immunotherapy routes are very rare, and can include a severe allergic reaction, particularly if you have asthma. Patients with asthma should only start allergen immunotherapy if and when their asthma is well-controlled.
For effective allergen immunotherapy, patients should receive gradual and regular administration of the trigger allergen(s) for at least three years.
The clinical benefits from allergen immunotherapy are not indefinite, but allergen immunotherapy administered regularly over three to five years will help prolong the sustained response over at least two to three years after stopping.
During this period, patients should have at least yearly reviews with their specialist to ensure the treatment is working and there are no issues with side effects.
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.
Last week, London coroner Andrew Walker delivered his findings from the inquest into 14-year-old schoolgirl Molly Russell’s death, concluding she “died from an act of self harm while suffering from depression and the negative effects of online content”.
The inquest heard Molly had used social media, specifically Instagram and Pinterest, to view large amounts of graphic content related to self-harm, depression and suicide in the lead-up to her death in November 2017.
The findings are a damning indictment of the big social media platforms. What should they be doing in response? And how should parents react in light of these events?
Social media use carries risk
The social media landscape of 2022 is different to the one Molly experienced in 2017. Indeed, the initial public outcry after her death saw many changes to Instagram and other platforms to try and reduce material that glorifies depression or self-harm.
Instagram, for example, banned graphic self-harm images, made it harder to search for non-graphic self-harm material, and started providing information about getting help when users made certain searches.
BBC journalist Tony Smith noted that the press team for Instagram’s parent company Meta requested that journalists make clear these sorts of images are no longer hosted on its platforms. Yet Smith found some of this content was still readily accessible today.
Also, in recent years Instagram hasbeenfound to host pro-anorexia accounts and content encouraging eating disorders. So although platforms may have made some positive changes over time, risks still remain.
That said, banning social media content is not necessarily the best approach.
Here are some ways parents can address concerns about their children’s social media use.
Open a door for conversation, and keep it open
It’s not always easy to get young people to open up about what they’re feeling, but it’s clearly important to make it as easy and safe as possible for them to do so.
Research has shown creating a non-judgemental space for young people to talk about how social media makes them feel will encourage them to reach out if they need help. Also, parents and young people can often learn from each other through talking about their online experiences.
Try not to overreact
Social media can be an important, positive and healthy part of a young person’s life. It is where their peers and social groups are found, and during lockdowns was the only way many young people could support and talk to each other.
Completely banning social media may prevent young people from being a part of their peer groups, and could easily do more harm than good.
Negotiate boundaries together
Parents and young people can agree on reasonable rules for device and social media use. And such agreements can be very powerful.
They also present opportunities for parents and carers to model positive behaviours. For example, both parties might reach an agreement to not bring their devices to the dinner table, and focus on having conversations instead.
Another agreement might be to charge devices in a different room overnight so they can’t be used during normal sleep times.
What should social media platforms do?
Social media platforms have long faced a crisis of trust and credibility. Coroner Walker’s findings tarnish their reputation even further.
Now’s the time for platforms to acknowledge the risks present in the service they provide and make meaningful changes. That includes accepting regulation by governments.
More meaningful content moderation is needed
During the pandemic, more and more content moderation was automated. Automated systems are great when things are black and white, which is why they’re great at spotting extreme violence or nudity. But self-harm material is often harder to classify, harder to moderate and often depends on the context it’s viewed in.
For instance, a picture of a young person looking at the night sky, captioned “I just want to be one with the stars”, is innocuous in many contexts and likely wouldn’t be picked up by algorithmic moderation. But it could flag an interest in self-harm if it’s part of a wider pattern of viewing.
Human moderators do a better job determining this context, but this also depends on how they’re resourced and supported. As social media scholar Sarah Roberts writes in her book Behind the Screen, content moderators for big platforms often work in terrible conditions, viewing many pieces of troubling content per minute, and are often traumatised themselves.
If platforms want to prevent young people seeing harmful content, they’ll need to employ better-trained, better-supported and better-paid moderators.
Harm prevention should not be an afterthought
Following the inquest findings, the new Prince and Princess of Wales astutely tweeted “online safety for our children and young people needs to be a prerequisite, not an afterthought”.
For too long, platforms have raced to get more users, and have only dealt with harms once negative press attention became unavoidable. They have been left to self-regulate for too long.
The foundation set up by Molly’s family is pushing hard for the UK’s Online Safety Bill to be accepted into law. This bill seeks to reduce the harmful content young people see, and make platforms more accountable for protecting them from certain harms. It’s a start, but there’s already more that could be done.
In Australia the eSafety Commissioner has pushed for Safety by Design, which aims to have protections built into platforms from the ground up.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Tama Leaver receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) as a chief investigator in the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Greg Barton, Chair in Global Islamic Politics, Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University
The al-Roj camp in northeast Syria.Save the Children/AAP
National security is not a zero-sum game. If the past two decades have taught us anything about breaking the cycle of terrorist violence, it is that in the longer-run, treating people well – upholding justice and acting with compassion and humanity – keeps everyone safer.
It should not be considered controversial that, three and half years after the final collapse of the Islamic State (IS) caliphate, the Australian government is finally moving to repatriate the 60-plus Australians detained in camps in Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)-controlled northern Syria.
Around 20 Australian women and 40 children born to them have been languishing in hellish conditions in two SDF camps near the Iraqi border since the SDF defeated IS and liberated territory under its rule.
When the al-Hawl camp rapidly became massively overcrowded in the first months of 2019, holding 60,000 women and children, including thousands of foreigners along with Iraqis and Syrians, the SDF began urging its western allies to repatriate their citizens to ease the load.
The al-Hawl camp in 2019, when it became massively overcrowded, holding 60,000 women and children. Tessa Fox/AAP
Other, mostly poorer, countries in the Middle East and Asia swung into action, accepting responsibility to deal with their people. Most western nations took a different approach, citing national security grounds at home to support the SDF becoming dumping grounds for people they didn’t want and problems that they didn’t want to deal with.
From the outset, their cynical behaviour was called out as being inconsistent with their legal obligations. It was also callous and short-sighted. It was not only that tens of thousands of children, born in, or taken to, IS territory by western mothers were innocent victims of terrorism deserving rescuing. There was also a compelling argument that, left without help, those who survived would grow up to become the next generation of terrorist fighters.
Australian politicians, following the lead of Britain (but not the US), doubled-down on policies designed to close the door on them ever coming to Australia. This included stripping Australian citizenship wherever possible.
This was despite almost all security practitioners and agencies speaking openly against such a move. From ASIO down, the case was made that keeping people offshore, and denying citizenship obligations, was actually counter to the interests of national security.
In February 2019, the Home Affairs Minister introduced legislation enabling temporary exclusion orders to be applied to those who had travelled overseas and associated with a terrorist organisation. This delayed their return to Australia for up to two years on the grounds they may “represent a threat to public safety”. This would appear to have been designed specifically to forestall the repatriation of Australians from SDF camps.
The brutal social dynamics of the massively overcrowded Al-Hawl are dominated by hardcore IS women enforcing control and punishing dissent. The remnant IS fighters maintain strong lines of communication within the camps. Beating and killings are common, along with high rates of death and disease. IS fighters have also launched multiple assaults on the camps to set their people free.
It is clear those who were not already radicalised are at great risk of becoming hardened and angry. And, in an era when digital communication and social media are weaponised by terrorist groups like IS, preventing radicalised Australians from returning does not eliminate the potential for them to influence and do harm in Australian society in future.
Australia is well-placed to deal with returned IS supporters
Ironically, of all countries, Australia is in one of the strongest positions to deal effectively with returning foreign terrorist fighters (FTFs) and IS supporters. Not only does Australia enjoy the natural advantage of being a wealthy island continent with well-equipped police forces and other agencies – as well as effective biometric identification measures at ports of entry – it also has one of the clearest and strongest legislative frameworks for efficient and effective prosecution.
Amendments to counter terrorism legislation in October 2014 meant that travelling to and residing in a proscribed area constituted an offence, unless it could be proven there was no association with IS. This is thought to apply to at least nine of 16 Australian women in al-Roj camp, where the majority of Australians were relocated to remove them from the control of IS hardliners in al-Hawl.
Britain, like many European countries, together with Canada, faces a difficult challenge in proving that IS returnees have been actively involved in acts of terrorism. The main challenge has been obtaining robust evidence from a conflict zone of terrorist activities that is admissible in a court of law. France, along with several other European states, has recently begun to repatriate its citizens, strengthening the case for Australian action.
The humanitarian imperative, particularly when it comes to meeting the rights and needs of children, is compelling. Their parents need to face justice, but that is vastly more manageable in Australia than in an overcrowded camp not designed for processing terrorism detainees.
Greg Barton receives funding from the Australian Research Council. And he is engaged in a range of projects working to understand and counter violent extremism in Australia and in Southeast Asia and Africa that are funded by the Australian government.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ilan Noy, Chair in the Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington
Regrettably, the goals of advancing a better environment and a flourishing economy don’t always line up. Driving greater awareness of climate-related risks among large firms and powerful financial institutions is therefore of paramount importance and urgency.
Responding to this challenge, economists, environmentalists, activists and politicians have sought ways to ensure financial decisions factor in climate change. To that end, policymakers are now considering the introduction of mandatory climate-related disclosures for firms and financial institutions.
In essence, the idea is to employ disclosures to force large financial actors to consider their impact on climate change, and the impact of climate change on them.
For example, consider the potential exposure of a bank to climate risks. Home loans may not be recoverable if houses become uninhabitable because of rising seas. Other homes may become uninsurable because of increasing flood risks.
Likewise, agricultural loans may become riskier because of the increasing intensity of droughts. All of these risks are important not only to the bank’s profitability but also to the homeowners, farmers and manufacturers who borrowed money from that bank.
disclosures about climate-related risks and opportunities that are useful to primary users when they assess, and make decisions about, an entity’s enterprise value, including information about its governance, strategy and risk management, and metrics and targets.
The rationale behind the proposed framework is that consistent, comparable and understandable disclosures will encourage better climate-related decision-making and risk management. In turn, this will encourage firms to adopt more climate-resilient strategies, smoothing the transition to a net-zero economy.
The disclosures themselves seek to inform “primary users” – defined as “existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors” – how companies respond to and consider the impacts of climate change. Armed with this knowledge, primary users are then presumed to be able “to assess the merits of how entities are considering climate-related risks and opportunities”.
But the proposed framework regards only investors, lenders and other creditors as primary users. The definition does not include employees, customers or the public. This narrow definition represents a missed opportunity.
Stakeholders versus shareholders
Focusing on a relatively narrow range of primary users undermines the potential for disclosures to bring about change. Including employees, customers and the public would make the disclosures more powerful. By increasing their impact and relevance, the disclosures would better serve their goals.
This touches on the modern concept of stakeholders and “stakeholder capitalism” rather than only shareholders. Shareholders will mostly (or only) care about one limited dimension of the firm’s impact: profits. If they own only a small share of the entity through the stock market or their superannuation or pension fund, shareholders may not even pay much attention to what the firm does.
Stakeholders, however, include the firm’s employees, customers and everyone directly affected by its activities. Unlike shareholders, stakeholders often have a long-term perspective and a more immediate and direct interest in what the entity does.
The public interest
Stakeholders will therefore typically look beyond the firm’s profits to consider the broader social and community interests at stake. Stakeholders will desire, or indeed demand, more sustainable strategies that benefit a larger set of groups (rather than just the shareholders).
Interestingly, the European Union adopted a similarly broad perspective in its “guidelines on reporting climate-related information” in 2019. These require firms to adopt a “double materiality” standard: looking at what is material for both shareholders (the financial audience) and stakeholders (the environmental and social audiences).
Considering the public’s interest in financial disclosures about climate change also aligns with other recent regulatory efforts, such as the Plain Language Bill currently before parliament. This signals that citizens have a democratic right to receive comprehensible information from government organisations.
While the bill focuses on public service and Crown agencies, it illustrates the need to put citizens at the centre of laws and communicate with them effectively.
The New Zealand External Reporting Board, which is responsible for the proposed disclosure framework, has invited responses and is now considering the submissions.
This final review and consultation stage provides a valuable opportunity to reconsider the definition of primary users.
While New Zealand is a world leader in advancing these measures, just how effective and useful they will be remains to be seen. A revised definition that will encompass all stakeholders – including customers, employees and the public at large – will increase the disclosures’ efficacy.
In New Zealand and elsewhere, governments should adopt as wide a target audience as is feasible for climate-related disclosures. Otherwise, we risk undermining the promise of disclosures to mitigate climate change and contribute to a more climate-resilient future economy.
The authors received funding from Toka Tū Ake-Earthquake Commission (EQC) to research the proposed climate-related risk disclosure framework. This article represents the authors’ views; the EQC is not responsible for the content of this article and has not endorsed it.
New Zealanders reacted with anger, confusion and disbelief at the sentencing in recent weeks of 18-year-old Jayden Meyer to home detention after his conviction for rape, sexual violation and indecent acts.
Meyer’s sentence resulted in protests as well as a petition signed by over 39,000 people demanding tougher sentencing. Crown prosecutors have since announced they will appeal the judge’s decision.
So how could such a sentence be justified in the first place? A brief look at the rules of sentencing might provide some insight.
Under the Sentencing Act, a judge is required to consider the purpose of sentencing as well as the principle of sentencing – what we are hoping to achieve with the punishment and how we sentence crimes of a similar nature.
The judge then needs to consider any aggravating factors, such as whether the offending was violent or cruel or whether the victim was particularly vulnerable, as well as whether there were any mitigating factors such as the age of the offender, their background and whether they showed remorse.
In line with the law
If this wasn’t complicated enough, each of these elements has to be given equal weight.
In Meyer’s case, the relevant purposes and principles would be to hold him accountable for his actions, to take into account the interests of the victim, to protect the community and to assist in the offender’s rehabilitation.
The judge likely considered several factors as aggravating, including that the offending involved violence, that the victims were vulnerable due to their ages (all were 15) and the circumstances surrounding the crimes (all had been drinking and one was asleep).
The mitigating factors are unclear, but would likely include his age (he was 16-years-old at the time).
The final sentence imposed was nine months home detention, during which he will be subject to 20 court-imposed conditions, followed by 12 months of post-release conditions.
Meyer’s sentence conditions included attendance at a rehabilitation programme, non-association with anyone under 16, and monitoring.
Possible reasons for home detention
Following a probation report which suggested Meyer was at “medium” risk of re-offending, the judge appears to have prioritised rehabilitation and community safety.
A sentence of home detention would enable Meyer to access rehabilitation programmes in the community. Community safety would be achieved in the short term by his sentencing conditions and, in the long term, by successful rehabilitation.
Would imprisonment achieve the same results? This is unlikely.
First, it is likely that the prison sentence would have been around 18 months. This is classified as a “short term” (less than 24 months) sentence, meaning that Meyer would be automatically released after serving half and would spend the second half in the community subject to parole conditions.
It is unlikely he would receive rehabilitation in prison due to this short sentence (waiting lists are too long). Instead, as was commented on about a similar case earlier this year, prison would merely “see him learning from more experienced sex offenders.”
On release, he would likely be ordered to undergo rehabilitation for the remaining nine months of his sentence (and for another six months after that). His chances of a successful outcome might, however, be lessened due to the delay in receiving rehabilitation and the impact of his time in prison.
Home detention arguably provides Meyer with the best chance for rehabilitation to decrease the likelihood of future offending.
Meyer’s sentence is also consistent with other recentsentences and with the data on the number of sex offenders serving home detention.
The sentence recognises that young offenders have the ability to change and become productive members of society, instead of labelling them as irredeemable and putting them in an environment where they become “better” criminals.
The place of victims
But where are the victims in this approach? By focusing on reducing future offending, this consequences-based approach minimises the impact the offending had on the victims and fails to recognise the short-term safety concerns of the community.
A retribution centred approach, on the other hand, punishes the offender for the actual offending, giving more weight to the harm done to the victim.
Both approaches are equally justified under the Sentencing Act.
Judging by the public outrage, the judge’s decision has left many wondering where the voices of the victims are in the sentencing process.
It is a strange feature of New Zealand’s criminal justice system that the victim plays only a limited role in criminal proceedings. They may be a witness or provide a victim impact statement, but, unlike the offender, they don’t have a lawyer to speak directly for them.
The feeling of being ignored by the system, coupled with sentences that appear unreasonably low may, understandably, leave victims reluctant to come forward.
While the final sentence imposed on Meyer is consistent with the Sentencing Act and other cases, it must be asked if this is all we require from our justice system.
Does this case, and the public response to it, suggest that it might be time to give a greater voice to victims? Perhaps this can be achieved by appointing a “lawyer for the victims” to ensure that their voice is not lost in the complicated sentencing process.
Debra Wilson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The heart-shaped Lake Eyre Basin covers about one-sixth of Australia. It contains one of the few remaining pristine river systems in the world.
But new research shows oil and gas activity is extending its tentacles into these fragile environments. Its wells, pads, roads and dams threaten to change water flows and pollute this magnificent ecosystem.
The study, by myself and colleague Amy Walburn, investigated current and future oil and gas production and exploration on the floodplains of the Lake Eyre Basin. We found 831 oil and gas wells across the basin – and this number is set to grow. What’s more, state and Commonwealth legislation has largely failed to control this development.
State and national governments are promoting massive gas development to kickstart Australia’s economy. But as we show, this risks significant damage to the Lake Eyre Basin and its rivers.
Mining infrastructure in the Lake Eyre Basin, here recently flooded, threatens the pristine natural wonder. Doug Gimesy
A precious natural wonder
The Lake Eyre Basin is probably the last major free-flowing river system on Earth – meaning no major dams or irrigation diversions stem the rivers’ flow.
This country has been looked after for tens of thousands of year by First Nations people, including the Arrernte, Dieri, Mithaka and Wangkangurru. This care continues today.
The biggest rivers feeding the basin – the Diamantina, Georgina and Cooper – originate in western Queensland and flow to South Australia where they pour into Kathi Thanda-Lake Eyre.
As they wind south, the rivers dissect deserts and inundate floodplains, lakes and wetlands – including 33 wetlands of national importance.
This natural phenomenon has happened for millennia. It supports incredible natural booms of plants, fish and birds, as well as tourism and livestock grazing. But our new research shows oil and gas development threatens this precious natural wonder.
Our analysis used satellite imagery to map the locations of oil and gas development in the Lake Eyre Basin since the first oil wells were established in late 1950s.
We found 831 oil and gas production and exploration wells exist on the floodplains of the Lake Eyre Basin – almost 99% of them on the Cooper Creek floodplains. The wells go under the river and its floodplains into the geological Cooper Basin, considered to have the most important onshore petroleum and natural gas deposits in Australia.
Our research also shows how quickly oil and gas mining in the Lake Eyre Basin is set to grow. We identified licensing approvals or applications covering 4.5 million hectares of floodplains in the Lake Eyre Basin, across South Australia and Queensland.
The CSIRO recently examined likely scenarios of 1,000 to 1,500 additional unconventional gas wells in the Cooper Basin in the next 50 years. It predicted these wells would built be on “pads” – areas occupied by mining equipment or facilities – about 4 kilometres apart. They would typically access gas using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
Fracking is the process of extracting so-called “unconventional gas”. It involves using water and chemicals to fracture deep rocks to extract the gas. This polluted water, known to be toxic to fish, is brought back to the surface and stored in dams.
Two locations we focused on were in South Australia at the protected, Ramsar-listed Coongie Lakes site, which was recognised as internationally significant in 1987. The other site was in Queensland’s channel country, also on the Cooper floodplain.
In total across the Coongie Lakes sites, we found a three-fold increase in wells: from 95 in 1987 to 296 last year. We also identified 869 kilometres of roads and 316 hectares of storage pits, such as those that hold water.
Some of these dams could potentially hold polluted fracking water and become submerged by flooding, particularly at Coongie Lakes.
A disaster waiting to happen?
Examples from around the world already show oil and gas exploration and development can reduce water quality by interrupting sediments and leading to elevated chemicalconcentrations. Production waste can also degrade floodplain vegetation.
The CSIRO says risks associated with oil and gas development in the Cooper Basin include:
dust and emissions from machinery that may cause habitat loss, including changes to air quality, noise and light pollution
disposal and storage of site materials that may contaminate soil, surface water and/or groundwater through accidental spills, leaks and leaching
unplanned fracking and drilling into underground faults, unintended geological layers or abandoned wells
gas and fluids contaminating soil, surface water, groundwater and air
changes to groundwater pressures could potentially reactivate underground faults and induce earthquakes.
Fracking for unconventional gas also requires drawing large amounts of water from rivers and groundwater.
Our findings raise significant questions for Australian governments and the community.
Are we prepared to accept industrialisation of the Lake Eyre Basin, and the associated risk of pollution and other environmental damage? Have the companies involved earned a social licence for these activities? Where do the profits end up, and who will bear the social, environmental and financial costs of such intense development?
Clearly, state and federal environmental protections have failed to stop unfettered development of the basin.
These policies include the Lake Eyre Basin Agreement, signed by the states, the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory, which has been in place since 2000.
Australia’s federal environment law – the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act – is supposed to protect nationally important areas such as Ramsar wetlands. Yet our research identified that just eight developments in the basin were referred to the Commonwealth government for approval and with only one deemed significant enough for assessment. This legislation does not deal adequately with the cumulative impacts of development.
And finally, gas extraction and production is associated with substantial “fugitive” emissions – greenhouse gases which escape into the atmosphere. This undermines Australia’s emissions reduction efforts under the Paris Agreement.
The governments of South Australia and Queensland should restrict mining development in the Lake Eyre Basin. And stronger federal oversight of this nationally significant natural treasure is urgently needed.
In response to this article, Chief executive of the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association, Samantha McCulloch, said in a statement:
The oil and gas industry takes its responsibilities to the environment and to local communities seriously and it is one of the most heavily regulated sectors in Australia. The industry has been operating in Queensland for more than a decade and the gas produced in Queensland plays an important role in Australia’s energy security.
Richard Kingsford received part funding for this work from The Pew Charitable Trusts as well as the Centre for Ecosystem Science, UNSW Sydney. It was also written as part of an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant on Ramsar Sites. He also receives funding from state and Commonwealth governments, non-government organisations, including Bush Heritage Australia, the Ian Potter Foundation and Nari Nari Tribal Council. He is affiliated with the Society for Conservation Biology Oceania, Ecological Society of Australia and Birdlife Australia.
In August 2021, Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced the electric car manufacturer was planning to get into the robot business. In a presentation accompanied by a human dressed as a robot, Musk said work was beginning on a “friendly” humanoid robot to “navigate through a world built for humans and eliminate dangerous, repetitive and boring tasks”.
Musk has now unveiled a prototype of the robot, called Optimus, which he hopes to mass-produce and sell for less than US$20,000 (A$31,000).
At the unveiling, the robot walked on a flat surface and waved to the crowd, and was shown doing simple manual tasks such as carrying and lifting in a video. As a robotics researcher, I didn’t find the demonstration very impressive – but I am hopeful it will lead to bigger and better things.
Why would we want humanoid robots?
Most of the robots used today don’t look anything like people. Instead, they are machines designed to carry out a specific purpose, like the industrial robots used in factories or the robot vacuum cleaner you might have in your house.
So why would you want one shaped like a human? The basic answer is they would be able to operate in environments designed for humans.
Unlike industrial robots, humanoid robots might be able to move around and interact with humans. Unlike robot vacuum cleaners, they might be able to go up stairs or traverse uneven terrain.
And as well as practical considerations, the idea of “artificial humans” has long had an appeal for inventors and science-fiction writers!
Room for improvement
Based on what we saw in the Tesla presentation, Optimus is a long way from being able to operate with humans or in human environments. The capabilities of the robot showcased fall far short of the state of the art in humanoid robotics.
The Atlas robot made by Boston Dynamics, for example, can walk outdoors and carry out flips and other acrobatic manoeuvres.
The Atlas robot, made by Boston Dynamics, has some impressive skills.
And while Atlas is an experimental system, even the commercially available Digit from Agility Robotics is much more capable than what we have seen from Optimus. Digit can walk on various terrains, avoid obstacles, rebalance itself when bumped, and pick up and put down objects.
Bipedal walking (on two feet) alone is no longer a great achievement for a robot. Indeed, with a bit of knowledge and determination you can build such a robot yourself using open source software.
There was also no sign in the Optimus presentation of how it will interact with humans. This will be essential for any robot that works in human environments: not only for collaborating with humans, but also for basic safety.
It can be very tricky for a robot to accomplish seemingly simple tasks such as handing an object to a human, but this is something we would want a domestic humanoid robot to be able to do.
Sceptical consumers
Others have tried to build and sell humanoid robots in the past, such as Honda’s ASIMO and SoftBank’s Pepper. But so far they have never really taken off.
Amazon’s recently released Astro robot may make inroads here, but it may also go the way of its predecessors.
Consumers seem to be sceptical of robots. To date, the only widely adopted household robots are the Roomba-like vacuum cleaners, which have been available since 2002.
To succeed, a humanoid robot will need be able to do something humans can’t to justify the price tag. At this stage the use case for Optimus is still not very clear.
Hope for the future
Despite these criticisms, I am hopeful about the Optimus project. It is still in the very early stages, and the presentation seemed to be aimed at recruiting new staff as much as anything else.
Tesla certainly has plenty of resources to throw at the problem. We know it has the capacity to mass produce the robots if development gets that far.
Musk’s knack for gaining attention may also be helpful – not only for attracting talent to the project, but also to drum up interest among consumers.
Robotics is a challenging field, and it’s difficult to move fast. I hope Optimus succeeds, both to make something cool we can use – and to push the field of robotics forward.
Wafa Johal receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
MP Karen Chhour, criticised for seeing things through a ‘vanilla lens’.Getty Images
The truism that the personal is political and the political personal is very much the case with Māori (identity) politics. We’ve recently seen several incidents in which Māori government ministers have criticised other Māori MPs or public figures in ways that, by implication, relate to who they are as Māori.
In May, Labour minister Willie Jackson referred to Act leader David Seymour as a “useless Māori” for his lack of advocacy for Māori. More recently, an opinion column Jackson wrote in 2010 resurfaced, in which he named several Māori media personalities and wrote, “it’s not just about a Māori face. More important is the Māori perspective.”
And last week in parliament, Labour minister Kelvin Davis accused Act MP Karen Chhour of seeing the world through “a vanilla lens” and telling her to move “into the Māori world”. He later apologised, but Chhour said the comments had offended her:
I found that quite hurtful, the personal attack on my identity and how I see the world, and I don’t think anybody should have to justify themselves like that and justify their culture and their heritage.
Measuring ‘Māoriness’
While on the surface these incidents might look like mean-spirited “Māori bashing” by Māori, there is considerably more to them. Who “counts” as Māori is something both Māori and Pākehā have been debating since the beginnings of colonisation, when Māori were first subjected to introduced concepts of race, blood quantum and racial hierarchy.
Māori were expected to justify their “Māoriness” in terms of the ratio of blood in their veins and their way of living. This was part of the settler government’s interest in monitoring their intended assimilation.
Over time, Māori came to internalise these foreign ways of seeing and measuring themselves, at the same time as experiencing the devastating losses of land, autonomy, culture and identity.
Holding onto culture was one of the ways Māori could resist their demise and even thrive. The “Māori renaissance” of the 1970s spurred on the revitalisation of te reo and tikanga Māori, and those who had retained these taonga were a source of hope. A “traditional” way of being Māori, based on knowledge of and competencies in Māori language and custom, was highly prized and revered.
Being “on the waka” or fighting for social justice and Māori advancement was also critical to the renaissance, and this particular “sociopolitical consciousness” has only grown in importance with the rise of Kaupapa Māori practices and policies, “by Māori, for Māori”.
Biology and culture
What this means is, like it or not, our Māori authenticity is measured by a number of indicators: do we “look” Māori in terms of hair, skin, eye colour and shape, and facial features? What fraction of Māori blood do we have?
Do we speak te reo Māori and do we operate according to tikanga Māori? Are we Kaupapa Māori in our personal and/or political orientation? Do we resist the colonising status quo and strive for the reinstatement of tino rangatiratanga?
Yes, there are diverse Māori realities, and therefore diverse Māori identities and positions. However, there is a clear yardstick against which Māoriness is judged.
Carla Houkamau’s and Chris Sibley’s scholarly article, The Revised Multidimensional Model of Māori Identity and Cultural Engagement, reflects this. Their model includes key indicators relating to perceived appearance, sociopolitical consciousness, cultural proficiency, spiritual beliefs, and feeling and being part of Māori collectives.
Arguably, many of these indicators are dependent on our socialisation as Māori. But there are many who have not been raised by biological (including Māori) kin. As a Māori adoptee, I share that experience with Karen Chhour, and both my experience and research have shown this makes for a very complicated Māori identity.
Those who are trans-racially adopted and fostered, racially Māori but culturally Pākehā through being brought up as Pākehā, often report feeling terminally “in between worlds”. Measuring up in some respects, but not others, can lead to deep-seated feelings of inadequacy, only reinforced by the judgements of others.
In addition, a sense of loyalty to adoptive parents or caregivers may translate into feeling more oriented towards the status quo, and acceptance of the dominant cultural narratives in which we were raised. Activism may feel unsafe and fraudulent – and most importantly, disloyal.
But we do have whakapapa. And that is one of the first things we learn – that this, in itself, means we are Māori. However, this too presents a problem. Contrary to reductionist notions of blood quantum, whakapapa has never entailed only the biological element – whakapapa also includes the relationships (and responsibilities) that build out from that biological base.
For those of us who have lived much of our lives outside of whānau and Māori communities, we are without the shared history and relationships that give whakapapa its richness and fullness. We are also without the shared history that might compel activism.
Our whakapapa, while everything, is still not quite enough. As Karen Chhour alluded to, it can be a long and difficult journey to reconnect and reclaim our whakapapa, and to stand as Māori.
It is important to note that in none of the aforementioned incidents of criticism or name-calling were individuals’ whakapapa questioned. Nor were they found lacking for their appearance or even cultural proficiency.
What was questioned was whether, from their relative positions of power and influence, their standpoint will contribute to Māori enduring and thriving as Māori. Yes, that challenge is also personal, but maybe it has to be. History has shown that our survival as a sovereign people depends on us making the personal political.
Annabel Ahuriri-Driscoll does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julaine Allan, Associate Professor, Mental Health and Addiction, Rural Health Research Institute, Charles Sturt University
The herbal formulation Kamini has been in the news with a Brisbane drug and alcohol treatment program reporting 12 men accessing the service because they could not stop taking Kamini. A second group of 12 patients in Melbourne sought help for opioid dependency from taking the herbal medicine, which is usually illegally imported from India.
Kamini Vidrawan Ras causes drug dependence in people using it regularly, because it contains opium, among other plant and mineral ingredients. Opium is a plant product refined to make prescription medications, including morphine and codeine, and illegal drugs such as heroin.
Known as Kamini, Kamini balls and Indian Viagra, Ayurvedic medicine practitioners prescribe it for men’s sexual problems including impotence, premature ejaculation and erection difficulties.
Ayurveda is a traditional Indian health system that takes a holistic approach to illness. Herbal, mineral and animal products, as well as diet, exercise and lifestyle changes, are prescribed to improve wellbeing.
It is likely many people taking Kamini are unaware it contains opium and don’t know the risks of regular use.
During digestion, the opium breaks down into “natural opiates” morphine, codeine and thebaine (a “paramorphine”). Chemical testing of Kamini has found the amount of morphine in a single tablet varies from 4% to 21% of the product.
Opium and other similar drugs can lead to repeated use because they stimulate the reward centres in the brain, causing intense feelings of pleasure and relaxation. These strong effects weaken over time as a person builds up tolerance to the drug. So, more of the drug is required to get the same feelings.
When a person has built up a tolerance and stops taking the drug, they experience withdrawal symptoms. These can be physical, such as sweating, vomiting and muscle cramps, as well as psychological, such as anxiety and cravings for the drug.
People using Kamini have described tolerance and withdrawal symptoms when they tried to stop. Typically starting on one tablet per day, within weeks use rapidly increased to 25–30 tablets per day or one bottle to experience the same initial effect. At a cost of $70–100 per bottle, daily use becomes a financial burden.
One bottle of Kamini can contain up to 4,000 milligrams of morphine. This is a significant amount of a powerful drug. In comparison, people with severe cancer pain may be prescribed up to 2,000mg of morphine per day, but most average between 100mg and 250 mg.
Kamini might contain a little or a lot of the opiate, morphine. Unsplash, CC BY
As well as for sexual problems, people have taken Kamini to try and stay awake at work. An SBS television investigation in 2016 found Southeast Asian men used Kamini to help them get through long shifts. Many worked in the transport industry.
They reported getting Kamini from Asian grocery stores around Australia, without them being prescribed or monitored by an Ayurvedic medicine practitioner.
The belief Kamini will help you stay awake is probably a misinterpretation of its original reputation for enhancing vitality. But opium products have the opposite effects to stimulants, slowing down the nervous system rather than speeding it up.
Ayurvedic websites describing the composition and reasons for using Kamini note it contains opium, the use of it should be monitored, and the dose limited to half or one tablet per day because of the risks of drug dependence.
An online market worth billions
Using herbal and natural preparations to improve wellbeing, or as remedies for physical and mental problems, is growing in popularity. Online availability facilitates access to a wide range of products.
In 2021, the global market for herbal and Ayurvedic medicines was valued at US$9.5 billion (A$14.8 billion) with an annual growth rate of 10%. India is the largest Ayurvedic market, with about 80% of the market share.
Ease of access and being derived from a plant could lead some people to think Ayurvedic medicine products and other herbal remedies are harmless. Usually identified as dietary supplements, products like Kamini do not have to provide safety or effectiveness information to drug regulators in other countries.
Following the SBS investigation, Australia’s medicines regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), banned the importation and supply of Kamini. The TGA has not assessed Kamini products for quality, safety or effectiveness. In a statement released in 2016, the TGA said
these tablets pose a serious risk to your health and should not be taken.
Herbal medicines might seem safe and ‘organic’ but that’s not always the case. Pexels, CC BY
Getting off Kamini
Dependence on Kamini can be successfully treated with medicines such as buprenorphine and supportive counselling.
Drug dependence can cause problems with health, employment, relationships and finances.
If you are experiencing problems with Kamini or any other drug, free, confidential help and support are available from state health departments and helplines or you can call the Alcohol and Drug Foundation on 1300 85 85 84 for advice.
Julaine Allan receives funding from The National Health and Medical Research Council to investigate wellbeing programs. She has also received funding from The Australian Research Council, NSW Health and the Ian Potter Foundation.
Environmental scientists see flora, fauna and phenomena the rest of us rarely do. In this series, we’ve invited them to share their unique photos from the field.
Frogs are among the world’s most imperilled animals, and much of the blame lies with a deadly frog disease called the amphibian chytrid fungus. The chytrid fungus has caused populations of over 500 frog species worldwide to plummet, and rendered seven Australian frogs extinct.
Our new research, however, has identified an endangered frog species seems to have developed a natural resistance to the disease, after having previously succumbed to it in prior decades: Fleay’s barred frog (Mixophyes fleayi).
Fleay’s barred frog grows up to 9 centimetres long, and lives near gravelly streams in the rainforests of northern New South Wales and southeast Queensland. It is not the only frog species largely resistant to the disease, with a precious few others also known to survive it, such as common mistfrogs and cascade treefrogs.
We speculate that other frog species worldwide may be on a similar trajectory. There is currently no cure for the chytrid fungus, but understanding how Fleay’s barred frog and others are fighting back may prove instrumental in helping us bring more species back from the brink.
A stream in a northern NSW rainforest, a typical habitat of the Fleay’s barred frog. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided
The amphibian chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) causes a skin disease and breached Australian borders in the 1970s. Since then, the disease has caused populations of dozens of species to severely decline, and has driven seven to extinction, including the gastric brooding frogs and southern day frogs.
It wasn’t until 1998 that two independent research teams discovered the fungal pathogen was to blame. This unfortunately meant much of the damage was already done prior to its discovery.
Cascade tree frog (Litoria pearsoniana), another species that initially declined due to chytrid fungus but has since largely recovered. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided This photo shows a cascade treefrog on top of a red-eyed treefrog (Litoria chloris) and shows a potential mode of disease transmission. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided
Similarly, Fleay’s barred frog wasn’t distinguished as being a separate species of barred frog before the chytrid fungus caused its populations to decline across its range in the 1980s. It became extinct in at least three places it once lived.
But our research suggests the Fleay’s barred frog is bouncing back. Over four years, we conducted intensive field research at several rainforest streams in northern New South Wales to investigate the prevalence and intensity of infection within Fleay’s barred frog populations.
We found while some frogs with high-level infections died, most seemed capable of clearing their infections.
Frogs are fighting back
Surveys in the late 1990s detected up to 15 Fleay’s barred frogs at the sites we studied. But during our investigations, we regularly found close to 100. Moreover, other researchers have noted that these frogs are relatively common across many rainforest streams, suggesting populations of Fleay’s barred frog have recovered.
We implanted 686 frogs with microchips and tested frogs for the chytrid fungus via a skin swab every time they were captured. This allowed us to follow these frogs over four years to learn about the population’s death rates and infection dynamics.
The Fleay’s barred frog was once common across the Border Ranges. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided Three-toed snake-tooth skink (Coeranoscincus reticulatus), another endangered species living in the Gondwana rainforests. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided
Fortunately, male Fleay’s barred frogs don’t travel far from home and are readily recaptured – we located some frogs more than 20 times.
We confirmed the prevalence of the chytrid fungus and the intensity of its infection was influenced by environmental conditions. Specifically, it was greatest with lower temperatures and higher rainfall.
This may help explain why we have witnessed mass death events in Australian frogs during recent wet winters along the eastern seaboard.
Fleay’s barred frog is also called the silverblue-eyed barred frog. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided
In addition to investigating the deadliness of a chytrid fungus infection, we also estimated the rates with which individuals were gaining and clearing infections.
We found infections were poor predictors of death. Only the highest pathogen loads were associated with an increase in rate of deaths, but frogs were very rarely infected with such high burdens.
Instead, frogs were much more likely to clear their infections than to gain them, ultimately leading to a low infection prevalence in the populations. On average, just one in five frogs were likely to be infected at any given time.
For those infected, pathogen loads were among the lowest we observed in rainforest frog communities. Some of the other species, such as the cascade treefrog, stony creek frog and giant barred frog, carried loads that were 30% higher.
Male stony creek frogs (Litoria wilcoxii) turn bright yellow in the breeding season. Matthijs Hollanders, Author provided
How this could help save frogs
So why can the frogs now deal with a disease that decimated populations just a few decades ago? This question is unfortunately still hard to answer.
Given their low pathogen loads and high rates of clearing them, we believe Fleay’s barred frogs have developed natural resistance against the chytrid fungus, meaning their immune systems are actively combating infections. We further speculate that other species worldwide may be doing the same.
A promising avenue of conservation research is to use the genetic information of some species to help others survive threats in the wild, such as disease or climate change. Fleay’s barred frogs may carry just the genes we’re looking for.
We now hope to use these resistant frogs for a reintroduction program in nearby Wollumbin (Mount Warning) in NSW, where the species disappeared from in the 1990s. This approach may help the ecosystem of this iconic World Heritage site to thrive.
The economic situation was “better than what we have experienced in years”, he wrote, and the central forecast of the OECD, representing the world’s 38 wealthiest countries, “remains indeed quite benign”. He tipped “a soft landing” in the United States and “sustained growth” in OECD economies, with “strong job creation and falling unemployment”.
That forecast – relying on the OECD’s “state of the art” economic model – proved, of course, to be spectacularly wrong. In 2008 the global financial crisis hit, the worst economic shock since the great depression.
Many critics, including myself, were not surprised. These “dynamic stochastic general equilibrium” models make assumptions that even died-in-the-wool mainstream economists can’t stomach. In 2010 the Nobel laureate Robert Solow told the US Congress they “did not pass the smell test”.
The OECD’s then secretary-general, José Ángel Gurría, took this failure of conventional economics to heart. In 2012 he established an internal think tank called New Approaches to Economic Challenges (NAEC) to explore new ways to analyse and manage the economy. He deliberately set it up outside the OECD’s economics department so it could be free to consider ideas that mainstream economics ignored.
NAEC was a breath of fresh air in the normally stale world of economic policy debate. It heard from all manner of researchers – anthropologists, neuroscientists, physicists and engineers, as well as mainstream and non-mainstream economists – who used techniques mainstream economics remained resistant to, even after its obvious failures.
Those of us who worked with NAEC or spoke at its public seminars enjoyed the freedom to think and talk outside the mainstream economic box. I spoke at several seminars, including on climate change and financial crises.
Cormann changes tack
That came to an end with Gurría’s successor, Australian Mathias Cormann.
Cormann, who took over as OECD secretary-general in June 2021, had been Australia’s finance minister from 2013 to 2020 under the the centre-right Coalition government. He had a reputation as an “economic dry”, and someone who trusted the advice of economists.
One of his first actions at the OECD was to move the NAEC unit into the economics department. He also terminated the think tank’s regular public seminars, restricting them to the OECD’s ambassadors (one from each of its 38 member countries).
We need new economic thinking for today’s many new challenges, because the record of mainstream economists on these issues is frequently terrible.
Take, for example, the work of William Nordhaus, who won the 2018 Nobel economics prize for his work on climate change. He assumed manufacturing, services and finance won’t be affected by global warming because they happen in “carefully controlled environments” – otherwise known as indoors. (I’ve written about this and the appallingly bad neoclassical economics of climate change in the journal Globalizations.)
We’re even facing problems that “conventional” economics is meant to understand, but which mainstream economists themselves admit they’re confused by.
For example, Nobel laureate and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote last week that he had underestimated the persistence of inflation, while also suggesting the US Federal Reserve was overreacting with its interest rate rises, which he said “will surely cause a major economic slowdown, quite possibly a recession”.
If economists can’t work out what to do with conventional economic problems, how likely are they to know what to do with unconventional ones such as climate change or the energy crisis facing Europe?
If ever out-of-the-box economic thinking was needed, it’s now.
Getting a response
In January we wrote to Cormann asking him to reverse his NAEC decision. Our letter said:
As academic and professional economists, we know that economic orthodoxy can be wrong. The history of economics and economic policy is one in which certain theoretical frameworks and policy approaches frequently become orthodox, and then are later superseded. This is often because the empirical evidence changes; sometimes because rival theories come to be more convincing; in some cases both. In these circumstances it is important that an organisation providing advice to governments, like the OECD, is at the forefront, not just of the present orthodoxy, but of competing views, theoretical frameworks and policy approaches.
We got no acknowledgement, let alone a reply.
Therefore we decided to publish an an open letter to Cormann on September 27. I’m happy to report Cormann has already replied to this letter. Noisy diplomacy works.
His response defends moving NAEC inside the OECD’s economics department (a decision with which we still respectfully disagree), but he also promises to invite past contributors to NAEC’s public seminars to a discussion on NAEC’s future work.
I look forward to receiving my invitation.
Steve Keen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott Davie, Deputy Head of School, Lecturer in Piano, School of Music, Australian National University
Unsplash
While restructuring a collection of historical keyboard instruments at the ANU School of Music, I’ve been led to ponder the mysterious significance that pianos can have in the human psyche.
Due to limitations of space and funds for maintenance, a decision was made to limit the university’s collection to the most valuable instruments. “Value” was considered on the basis of an instrument’s historical uniqueness, its practical utility for research and overall condition.
Yet “value”, as we know, can be understood in different ways.
Vehicles for musical expression
Pianos still proliferate in music schools, despite predictions about the decline of acoustic music. Instruments that are used day-to-day need to be relatively new and in excellent working order.
Given the rate at which they are played in busy schools, they are typically replaced every 10 to 15 years.
Many pianists view pianos like tools, as vehicles for musical expression. Like a driver searching for a faster car, less responsive models can be dispensed with little thought.
Unlike an immaculately handcrafted violin from the 17th century, the sound of a piano typically does not improve with age.
The sound of a piano typically does not improve with age. Unsplash
Yet there is much that a piano student can learn from older instruments. Our collection includes a French piano built around 1770, and it can still sing if gently coaxed. As my fingers negotiate the uneven and primitive collection of levers, shafts and felts that comprise its inner action, I wonder how many musicians long-departed have listened to its voice.
It is a sad fact, though, that homes can be hard to find for old pianos, especially uprights.
While grand pianos still signify status, and square pianos have a curiosity value (also doubling as small tables), upright pianos of the Victorian era are now unloved.
According to a local piano removal company, two to three upright pianos from this period can be delivered to landfill in any week. Partly, this is due to their ubiquity in earlier generations. It used to be the case that every home had an old piano, often passed down through family lines.
Frequently of German origin and built on massive solid frames, these instruments are not timeless. Their mechanisms wear out, their felts become infested and their tuning blocks lose structural integrity. They can no longer hold their tune.
It used to be the case that every home had an old piano, passed down through family lines. Unsplash
If you paid to restore one, the sum would be greater than the cheap new instrument which would always outperform it. The worst thing to do would be to buy a dilapidated piano for a budding student, who might presume the clunking responses to be a sign of talent-less activity.
Yet it is sometimes as if these old pianos have souls. It tugs at the heartstrings to see an instrument that has weathered over a century of faithful service get carted to the tip, or “piano heaven” as insiders say. Often there are rich memories, such as when grandma played and the family gathered around in song.
The inner connections people make with musical instruments are widely known. Indeed, pianos can seem like members of a family to some. How do we account for this unusual anthropomorphism?
I was recently touched by a story of an elderly lady, an exceptionally fine pianist and teacher in her day. She had purchased a large grand piano of Viennese design, a concert instrument of the highest order, but was now at the point of moving to residential care.
Of all the considerations that beset her family at this difficult time, finding a “home” for the instrument was of the highest concern. It was more than just a piano: it was a living part of her life.
In another instance, I was asked to help rehouse an upright piano. Shiny, relatively new and still receptive to many hours of rigorous playing, the piano’s owner was happy to give it away. But not to just anyone – it needed to be the right person.
“I will always be grateful for the beautiful black piano that became a vehicle not only for my lifetime wish to learn to play, but also to make music with my son”, she wrote.
“My longing to make music with him was fulfilled before he finished school and left home.”
Pianos often become a place of family memories. Unsplash
It’s easy to see why pianos are often more than a piece of furniture. They can embody the dreams and memories that propel us through life, sanctifying the moments in which we are united through beauty and art.
In a world which seems increasingly weighted toward the quantifiable, the measured, and the physically real, music still can catch us in its sway.
Through the process of reordering our collection, one instrument has remained. In all respects, it is neither unique nor outwardly special. Yet it carried a plaque, in loving memory of someone’s mother.
Perhaps it’s because her song still resonates within, I’ve made no plan to remove it.
Scott Davie 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.
Vladimir Putin’s bizarre ceremonies formalising Russia’s annexation of some 15% of Ukraine once again revealed the yawning chasm between Kremlin triumphalism and reality.
Never mind Russian forces didn’t even fully control the territories Putin brought under the Russian flag. Never mind Russia’s “referendums” were a blatant fabrication – with voting often held at gunpoint. Never mind that by now more people have fled Russia than the 300,000 extra troops to be “partially mobilised” in support of Putin’s flagging war effort. And never mind that Russian forces are retreating in many of their newly-acquired lands, with the key city of Lyman liberated by Ukraine less than 24 hours after its annexation was announced.
Putin’s vitriolic rantings to a decidedly subdued audience provided plenty of distasteful soundbites. He referred to the West as Satanists with “various genders”, calling for holy war against the transexual Western bogeymen. His characterisation of Americans as neo-colonialists was laughably hypocritical since Putin was literally in the process of announcing the recreation of an empire.
He made references to Catherine the Great, claimed southern Ukraine had always been Russian, and liberally invoked the imperial term “Novorossiya”. NATO expansion, supposedly the trigger for Russia’s existential security crisis that left it with no option but to invade its neighbour, barely got a mention in Putin’s tsunami of xenophobic bile.
But the real story of Putin’s latest melodrama is that he has unequivocally bet his political survival on “victory” over Ukraine and the West.
Crucially, there are now definite signs his grip on power is starting to fray, even if Putin’s demise may still be some way off.
Existential crises breed internal ones
Dictators often meet their ends through inadvertent overreach. So, too, Putin’s new fragility stems from his own choices. Obsessed with recreating a footprint over what he believes are Russia’s historical lands, and determined to blame the West as the global embodiment of moral decrepitude, Putin has created his own existential threat.
Yet his invasion of Ukraine has been an utter disaster. His conventional forces have been revealed as a chimera: poorly trained, poorly led, hopelessly corrupt, and often badly equipped.
This is now becoming an internal threat that his domestic messaging is struggling to explain.
What were sold as glorious Russian victories were repelled, got bogged down and then became embarrassing retreats, forcing Kremlin propagandists to simultaneously try to put out multiple spot fires. But spinning defeats as temporary setbacks can only work for so long. And finding others to blame, from false conspiracies about NATO forces fighting alongside Ukrainians, to criticism of field commanders for failing Russia, is also a temporary solution.
Eventually it will become patently obvious that the one man who isn’t permitted to be criticised – Vladimir Putin – is ultimately in charge of the mess.
Implicitly this is already happening. Margarita Simonyan, Putin’s chief cheerleader in Russia’s tightly controlled media landscape, has suddenly dissociated herself from politics, plaintively claiming she has no political authority.
When loyal mouthpieces start trying to look dispassionate, it’s time for dictators to worry.
Putin has been forced to abandon the political centre
The enigma of Putin and Putinism is that he has never really offered a guiding vision for Russia, despite being effectively the Kremlin’s longest serving leader since Stalin. He has tended to avoid identifying with a particular ideological position, and isn’t even a member of United Russia, the party invented to represent his interests in Russia’s parliament.
Instead, Putin has presided over a centralised authoritarian government, playing divide-and-rule with different Kremlin cliques, and elevating friends and cronies while also occasionally purging them. Indeed, Russia has a system of bureaucratic bargaining between power ministries and powerful individuals that isn’t completely alien to what we witness in the West.
But in Putin’s Russia, the strength of vertical lines of authority means major contests around policy aren’t mediated by discussion, debate or other expressions of preference. Rather, they’re decided by the will of one individual.
This has served Putin well in the past, allowing him to present the face of a political “centrist” whose choices soften the extremism of ultranationalists and communists, and keep him aloof from petty politics. But battlefield failures have now required him to lurch to the far right. That side of Russian politics has never completely supported Putin, even though it remains beholden to him to retain political influence. It is also weakly supported by the population, and many of its leaders are figures of ridicule.
Hence Putin is betting on his ability to drag popular sentiment with him. True, Russia’s phoney democracy ensures he won’t be removed at the ballot box, and appetites for public protest remain low. But he will now be expected to take actions even more unpopular than his botched partial mobilisation, which has been abruptly walked back.
His critics, like the Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, have already called on Putin to announce martial law in Russia’s border regions, and use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Doing so will not just hasten Russia’s military defeat, but will weaken Putin further domestically.
Scapegoating is tricky in the face of collective failure
In the past, Putin has been able to purge with impunity. The military, the security services, and various oligarchs who displeased him have all at some point felt Putin’s wrath.
But Russia’s failures in Ukraine cannot be isolated to a few bad generals, or bad information from Russia’s foreign intelligence service, the SVR. They are systemic, revealing flaws across Russian strategic thinking, military planning, economic management, intelligence analysis and political leadership.
The more the failures mount up, the less tenable Putin’s selective scapegoating becomes. He has replaced military leaders rapidly, and is now reportedly issuing orders directly to field commanders, including refusing to allow them to fall back and regroup.
Intelligence assessments confidently arguing Ukrainians would welcome the Russian invaders were premised on Putin’s own reading of the situation, published in a 2021 screed that painted Ukrainians as little more than wayward Russians. Moscow’s overconfidence in its sovereign wealth fund has been insufficient to insulate vital parts of the Russian economy against Western sanctions.
And Putin’s belief the West would fold in the face of weaponised Russian energy seems only to have strengthened its resolve.
Of course, none of this means Putin will be overthrown tomorrow. He retains broad and deep control over Russia’s population, and over the elites he permits to serve him. But his earnest projections of strength belie his increasing vulnerability. By mobilising his population to fight in Ukraine, Putin has broken his compact with the people. And by attempting to shift the blame for failure wholesale onto his subordinates, he has, for the first time, created an incentive for elites to unite against him.
For a stark indication of how much Putin’s political fortunes have changed, we need only look at the new confidence of Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Having survived an attempted Russian decapitating strike in February, Zelenskyy is now overtly calling for regime change in Russia.
Responding to Putin’s demand that Ukraine return to the bargaining table, Zelenskyy observed that he “will not hold any negotiations with Russia as long as Putin is the President of the Russian Federation. We will negotiate with the new President”.
The end of Vladimir Putin? It might come sooner than you think.
Matthew Sussex has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Fulbright Commission, the Carnegie Foundation and various Australian government agencies.
At least 125 soccer fans have died in Indonesia, and more than 300 injured, in what is being reported as one of the worst sports stadium tragedies in history.
The disaster happened on Saturday night at the Kanjuruhan stadium in Malang, East Java. Up to 3,000 fans reportedly streamed onto the pitch following a Premier League game in which Persebaya Surabaya defeated Javanese club Arema 3-2.
Disappointed with the loss, Arema supporters threw bottles and other objects at players and officials before storming the pitch – which eventually led to a deadly stampede. Video footage shows authorities firing tear gas, and armed with batons and shields as they chase fans in an effort to restore order.
I’m an expert on crowd safety, with a specific focus on how to boost safety at large events, including sporting tournaments. Like most tragedies of this nature, the events in Malang appears to tie into a common thread.
What went wrong
News outlets have reported Saturday’s event was filled beyond capacity. According to The Guardian, Indonesia’s chief security minister said 42,000 tickets had been issued for a stadium that holds a maximum of 38,000.
In such a densely packed venue, police’s decision to use tear gas would have only escalated an already confusing and chaotic situation.
Also, the Kanjuruhan stadium only has one exit (which is also the entry). In competitive sporting environments, crowds already have heightened emotions. So it’s not difficult to see how a frenzied crowd rushing through a single exit could lead to death and injury.
These lessons have been learnt previously with the 1989 Hillsborough disaster and the 2010 Love Parade disaster (to name a few) – where a combination of police actions, poor communication, and poor access and egress for patrons has ended in tragedy.
Cars were destroyed and torched amid the chaos, which local reports say spilled over to outside the stadium. Yudha Prabowo/AP
Could this tragedy have been avoided?
Yes – and a few techniques can be used to ensure it does not happen again.
For example, research has shown lighting up a stadium to let the audience know the show is over can help move them out in an orderly fashion. Audiences also like to leave a venue the same way they came in, so all exits should be open, accessible and well-lit.
Beyond this, Indonesia’s football crowds are well-known for their excitability. So the risk of crowds getting out of hand should be managed pre-emptively.
One way to do this would be to separate spectators into different zones – a technique already used in World Cup events. This can reduce tensions in the stadium by reducing the likelihood of fans from different teams encountering each other.
Police can also form a peaceful barrier around the oval towards the end of a game, to signal to the crowd they are there to manage the situation. Importantly, they do not need to be armed. In the UK, “soft policing” is used for crowd management with great success.
And having officers wear baseball caps and hoodies instead of riot gear (as was the case in Malang) has been shown to soften the crowd’s response, and allow police to walk through and break up small skirmishes before they escalate.
The use of tear gas
Soccer’s world governing body FIFA (Federation Internationale de Football Association) specifies in its safety regulations no firearms or “crowd control gas” should be carried or used by stewards or police.
The use of tear gas irritates the eyes and excites the pain receptors, which can lead to panic. In Malang, the use of tear gas in an already emotionally heightened situation created further panic and led to a crush.
Also, while most people sprayed with tear gas recover, there is risk of long-term health consequences for those exposed to large doses and people with preexisting medical conditions.
The use of the gas was a poor decision and likely worsened the situation. FIFA president Gianni Infantino called the events “a dark day for all involved in football and a tragedy beyond comprehension”.
Indonesia’s last soccer tragedy?
In 1995, researcher and former UK policeman Alexander Berlonghi argued for the importance of understanding crowds to ensure “competent and effective action” when managing them.
He said without understanding the nuances of a crowd’s behaviour, disastrous mistakes can happen in planning and crowd control. More than two decades later, we are still seeing the same mistakes happening, and leading to a loss of life.
In the aftermath of yet another crowd tragedy, Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo said authorities must thoroughly evaluate security at matches, adding that he hoped this would be “the last soccer tragedy in the nation”.
Violence is common at soccer games in the country, with spectators reportedly beating up rivals if they are recognised as a fan from another team.
Moving forward, there should be a focus on developing pre-emptive harm reduction strategies, and ensuring police are adequately trained to handle such events. There is also an urgent need to review the overall soccer culture in Indonesia.
If history is anything to go by, authorities will have to take drastic steps to make sure Saturday’s events are never repeated.
Alison Hutton 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.
New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.
Political Roundup: TOP offering the transformation lacking in other parties
The Opportunities Party (TOP) is putting other political parties to shame with its bold and innovative policies. Yesterday TOP announced their latest tax, housing, and income policies, and they were the sort of bold and transformative innovations that supporters of parties like Labour and the Greens have been desperately wanting to see from their own parties.
TOP’s new leader, Raf Manji, held a press conference in Wellington to announce radical policies that the party will take to next year’s election in a third bid to make it into Parliament. He also announced another possible route into Parliament, with his intention to stand in the Christchurch seat of Ilam, where he came second in 2017.
Land and income tax policies
The game changer policy that could reset debates on capital gains tax and income tax is the proposal to levy an annual tax of 0.75 per cent of the value of residential land properties. The party pitches this as a superior alternative to a capital gains tax, and says it would raise $6.75b-$7.5b annually.
The tax would be fairly straightforward, and difficult to avoid. For example, a residential property with a land value of $1m would pay an annual levy of $7,500. There would be only limited exemptions – for rural, conservation and Māori land, and people over 65 years could defer their payments. The tax wouldn’t apply to the buildings on the land.
TOP says that the current “Brightline tax” on property would be axed. In addition, property owners would once again be able to deduct interest costs from their tax bills for rentals and new house builds.
TOP would also make a huge change to income tax by creating a $15,000 tax-free threshold, which means all income up to that point would be untaxed. According to Treasury research, this would cost about $5.2b. Hence TOP is selling this as a “Tax switch” – shifting the burden of taxation from income, and especially the poor, to those who own properties. Overall, TOP says the policies would be “fiscally neutral”.
The current income tax thresholds would also be adjusted. And Labour’s 39 per cent tax for top incomes would be maintained.
The overall philosophy of these tax changes, according to Manji is to “rebalance the economy” and correct unhealthy trends, particularly in terms of the housing market and inequality.
Income support policies
Poverty campaigners will be enthusiastic about TOP’s policy of extending the current “In Work tax credit” of Working for Families to those on benefits – costing about $900m. This will have a big impact on inequality, and is a policy that Labour has studiously avoided in recent years.
Perhaps more controversially, TOP is advocating for a one-off cancellation of all beneficiary debts with the Ministry of Social Development – amounting to about $2b.
In terms of inequality, Manji says: “People are caught in a vortex of unaffordable living and are unable to progress with this huge burden of debt around their necks. Meanwhile, the Government has overseen a huge upwards transfer of wealth due to their Covid-19 policies.”
Housing policies
Much of TOP’s focus is on the housing crisis – with the land tax being their prime weapon against imbalances in the market. They have also proposed spending much more on social housing for the poor, identifying that thousands of additional houses need to be built on top of what the Labour Government has planned.
To do this they are advocating a $3bn package of spending for community housing associations, to build 6-10,000 new homes. By bypassing the Government’s Kāinga Ora state housing agency, this might appeal to some on the political right that want to see more social housing but less government bureaucracy.
They also propose that all GST collected by central government from the building of new houses should be reallocated to local authorities to help pay for and incentivise the building of necessary infrastructure.
TOP’s route to power: Ilam
TOP’s policies appeal to the Zeitgeist – the need to shake up the status quo in politics, especially the lack of effective policies to deal with the big problems of housing and inequality.
And at the moment there seems to be large segment of the population who voted for Labour or the Greens in 2020 and have become disillusioned with the current government, but not convinced that a National-Act administration would be any better. There are also former voters from New Zealand First looking for an anti-Establishment option.
And so far, the current policies are getting some interesting endorsements from individuals across the political spectrum – for example, leftwing blogger Martyn Bradbury and rightwing blogger David Farrar have both expressed support for the announcements. In terms of the latter, Farrar says such a tax switch – from taxing incomes to land property instead – will make the tax system more efficient and fair: “TOP’s policy will see people rewarded more for working more, and discourage people from land banking. I support it.”
Maybe we are therefore seeing the start of a minor party rising to fulfill the need that the old parties aren’t delivering. And by positioning itself as a pivot party, TOP could hold the balance of power in 2023 and decide the next government. However, it’s worth pointing out that breaking into Parliament is astonishingly difficult, and TOP is a good example of how hard it is for new political parties.
The party was established in 2016 by wealthy economist Gareth Morgan, and despite his millions of dollars of funding the party only received 2.4 per cent of the party vote at that election. In 2020, under new management, and leader Geoff Simmons, the party managed 1.5 per cent.
The party is currently fluctuating between about 1 per cent and 3 per cent in the polls. To hit the 5 per cent MMP threshold they need to win about 140,000 votes. Getting to that has so far proved impossible for all new political parties under MMP unless they already have MPs and have split from an established party.
Manji has announced that TOP might be able to avoid the dreaded need to get to 5 per cent by winning Ilam, where he once got 23 per cent of the vote as an Independent, coming second to National. He has a strong name recognition and support base in the area, having been a Christchurch City councillor for six years.
If Manji was able to look competitive in the Ilam race, more voters might consider giving their party vote to TOP, with the idea that this vote would be less likely to be wasted. This motivation can give minor parties a real boost.
TOP’s basic electoral problems still exist
The biggest problem for TOP – one that has existed right from its origins – is a lack of clarity about why the party exists and who it exists for. It has never been able to convincingly pitch to voters a simple narrative of what it stands for or is trying to fix. Too often its ideological and voter base has been contradictory and self-defeating. This is often the plight of centre parties – they might have lots of good policies and ideas and quality candidates, but without any organic and genuine political identity and reason to exist they fail to take off.
For example, Manji’s decision to stand in the Ilam electorate is smart – he already has a strong track record there, Gerry Brownlee is not going to contest the seat, and the Labour Party incumbent, Sarah Pallett, is unlikely to hold the seat with the tide going out on the Government’s support.
But this is a true-blue seat of middle class home owners. Will they really be receptive to Manji’s new flagship policy of taxing their properties? Surely, it’s going to be extremely unpopular with many of the voters that ticked the Manji box in 2017 when he was an independent.
Will Fendalton voters really be attracted by policies to give a tax cut that disproportionately benefits those at the bottom? Will they agree with wiping the debts of beneficiaries?
So, TOP continues to be a party of middle class policy wonks with policies that perhaps should be highly attractive to those on the left of politics or the working class or dispossessed. But the party is unlikely to appeal to those on the political right or left, nor to constituencies of the rich or poor.
The party can push the idea that it is a “blue-green” party. But it’s not clear what that means anymore. Manji himself says he voted Green at the last election, and at times has been very supportive of John Key. So perhaps he does personify that ideological mashup very well.
But as the party’s fourth leader he is going to have to do much better than the first three leaders to get across that the party stands for more than just “evidence-based policy”. It needs a much stronger identity than just having bold policies.
However, bold policies are a good start. We desperately need policy innovators and disrupters in New Zealand politics. If nothing else they will hopefully give other parties a jolt, perhaps reigniting debates about progressive tax policies and ways to fix the housing crisis. As TOP correctly said yesterday, the “Status quo must go”.
This weekend marked a milestone for Western Australia’s Binar Space Program as its first satellite Binar-1 lived up to its name.
Binar is the word for “fireball” in the Noongar language spoken by the Aboriginal people of Perth. Binar-1 became a real “Binar” as it re-entered Earth’s atmosphere over the weekend. Although the chance of it being seen over Australia was low, with the right amount of luck it would have appeared as a shooting star in the night sky.
Binar-1 was built by a team of PhD students and engineers at Curtin University’s Space Science and Technology Centre. Its mission: a technology demonstration to test whether the innovative design – all systems integrated on a single circuit board at its core – would survive in space.
Although parts of the mission were not a complete success, owing to some last-minute design changes, that goal was still achieved.
Binar-1 is a 1U size CubeSat, meaning it measured just 10 centimetres across, roughly the size of a lunchbox. Don’t let the size fool you – the satellite was packed with microelectronics to optimise its volume for countless future science and education missions.
It was launched to the International Space Station on August 29 2021 aboard a SpaceX resupply mission, and deployed from the station’s Kibō module.
As a “technology demonstrator”, the spacecraft was flying its essential systems for the first time. The lessons learned from its fiery end will prepare the Binar Space Program for the next step: Binar-2, 3, and 4.
Members of the Binar Space Program watch the live streamed deployment of Binar-1 in October last year. Curtin University
Five major takeaways from Binar-1
Lock down high-level mission objectives at the beginning
From the start of the mission, the team struggled to grasp what was achievable with the time and money available. This cost us valuable time, as redesigns were necessary every time we defined a new objective. Once we realised a technology demonstration was our true target, we could nail what we were trying to deliver.
Be prepared for delays
By having a plan for delays, we can be more agile when it comes to tight launch deadlines. With Binar-1, we assumed our test schedule would stick to the timeline, but this was never likely.
For our next launch, we’ve prioritised which tests we know are essential and which tests we can drop, so we can make better choices when it’s time to meet our deadlines.
Installing the star-tracker camera payload into Binar-1. The star tracker was designed and developed by undergraduates at Curtin University. An improved version will fly on Binar-2, 3 and 4. Curtin University
Test as you fly
One of the challenges we faced was testing our designs in a manner that replicated the satellite’s behaviour in space. It may seem like an obvious lesson – but using the antennas to test your satellite systems, instead of that convenient USB port you had designed it with, makes a big difference.
Prepare for operation throughout the design process
You can’t learn this lesson without actually flying the satellite – but we certainly were not as prepared as we could have been for operations.
The number of tweaks to the ground station and command and control processes once our satellite was already flying made it clear that involving the operation plan from an early stage will prepare you for mission success.
Remove as many assumptions as you can
A few too many assumptions were made during the design, which certainly affected the assembly and testing of Binar-1. For example, we assumed the radio module we tested on the ground worked the same as the one we sent to space – but that wasn’t the case, leading to some frantic last-minute changes that eventually meant we didn’t get the images or data we hoped for from orbit.
For our future missions, all assumptions need to be vetted by the entire team to minimise the impact they can have on a mission if the assumptions are inaccurate.
Onward with the mission
The Binar Space Program and the Space Science and Technology Centre are now preparing for their first real science mission. On board our three CubeSats will be a radiation material test performed in collaboration with the CSIRO, a software experiment letting the spacecraft make decisions on its own, and a few others designed by undergraduate students at the university.
But the mission’s final piece of science won’t come until it too meets its fiery end – it’s our very own attempt to catch a falling star, a tracking system to identify exactly when each of the next spacecraft will become a Binar.
Our current spacecraft burn up before they reach the ground, but eventually, we hope to return one of our satellites to Earth in one piece, and this tracking system is just one of many small steps towards this massive goal. If you want to follow along and catch these fireballs with your own eyes in the future, you can read more on the Binar Space Program website.
Sleep is important for psychological and physiological health, but manychildren have trouble getting to sleep, or getting back to sleep when they wake in the night.
This can be exhausting for both children and parents, and some parents have turned to giving their kids lollies containing melatonin. These gummies, purchased overseas or online, are used to improve their children’s sleep.
I have spent the last 15 years researching diagnosing and treating children sleep problems and difficulties, and I’m also on the International Pediatric Sleep Association’s taskforce for melatonin use in children.
Here’s what the science says about the benefits and risks of melatonin gummies for children.
Melatonin is a naturally occurring hormone secreted in our brains. It is related to the timing and quality of our sleep and wake rhythms and determined by our internal body clock.
Melatonin makes us sleepy at certain times of the day. It starts to secrete when our bodies are getting ready to go to sleep and usually takes about 30 to 45 minutes to take full effect.
Melatonin secretion is at its highest in the middle of the night and gradually starts to decrease until we are ready to wake up and start our day.
A lack of long-term research
For children who have a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder or Smith Magenis Syndrome, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia recommends melatonin – but that this should be prescribed by a health professional only, and should only be used when sleep hygiene measures have been insufficient.
It has been shown to be very helpful, effective and with minimum side effects (mainly headaches, drowsiness and sometimes irritability).
But the TGA does not recommend melatonin for children who do not have autism spectrum disorder or Smith Magenis Syndrome.
This is mainly because there is a lack of long-term research, and because most child sleep problems can typically be managed with behavioural and psychological sleep techniques, instead of drugs.
Most child sleep problems can typically be managed with behavioural and psychological sleep techniques, instead of drugs. Photo by zhenzhong liu on Unsplash, CC BY
Melatonin sales are increasing rapidly across the US and Canada (where it is available without a prescription) and across Europe.
In Australia, prescription melatonin has historically been given to adults to treat sleep disorders, but is now available over-the-counter for adults aged 55 and above. It’s efficacy and safety has been established in adults.
This is not the case for melatonin use in all children.
Despite this, melatonin use in children without autism spectrum disorder or Smith Magenis Syndrome still occurs.
One recent yet-to-be-published study on this topic (which is yet to be peer-reviewed by other experts in the field) was by CQU researcher Alison Glass, with myself as supervisor. This study involved surveying 255 Australian parents (recruited from online groups and networks) of sleep-disordered children. Of these, about 70% used melatonin to help their children sleep.
Of those who used melatonin for their children, about 25% had children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder or Smith Magenis Syndrome. But almost 75% used melatonin for their children even though there was no autism spectrum disorder or Smith Magenis Syndrome diagnosis.
Is melatonin safe for otherwise healthy children?
There are very few long-term research studies on this question and even less on the question of quality and safety of melatonin bought online.
One Canadian study investigated 31 brands of melatonin supplements. The researchers found huge inconsistencies in the labelled amount of active melatonin and a contaminant (in this case, serotonin) in 26% of the supplements.
In other words, the exact quality or quantity of melatonin present in gummies may be unknown. That raises the question of whether giving these relatively unresearched drugs to children is warranted.
The TGA’s Advisory Committee on Medicines Scheduling said in 2017 that
Methods of deterring the increasing volume of personal imports, which are often inappropriate unregistered medicines, should be considered.
Parental sleep deprivation can be debilitating and dangerous. It is understandable parents of sleep-disturbed children will seek out the fastest way to get children to sleep. But there is a dearth of long-term research about use of melatonin by children.
So what can sleep-deprived parents do?
Talk to health-care professionals. This is crucial when considering any medication for children; continual follow up to monitor side effects and progress is important.
Before considering melatonin or any other sedative, ask your health-care provider about behavioural techniques you can use to promote healthy sleep habits.
Behavioural techniques are well documented, successful and effective in children from infancy to adolescence.
Well trained paediatric sleep psychologists and clinicians are available for referrals from health professionals. The Australasian Sleep Association lists specialist health professionals across Australia.
Sleep deprivation is exhausting and parents are understandably desperate.
However, I advise caution in buying melatonin online or without the guidance of a qualified health professional.
Sarah Blunden 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.
Victorians will be heading to the polls on November 26 to select their next state government.
This will be the first election since Labor won national government in May, and it will also be the first election in Victoria since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
There is also great interest about the “teal” independents and whether they will be able to consolidate their position in Australian politics as a potential disruptor to the established party system.
Many expect they will further challenge the established parties in the Victorian election. But there are some key differences from May’s federal election that mean it might not pan out the same way for the teals.
The political context in Victoria
The Daniel Andrews-led Labor Party was first elected to government in 2014. In 2018, Labor achieved a remarkably strong result, winning 55 of the 88 seats in the Legislative Assembly after attracting 57% of the two party preferred vote.
The Coalition, on the other hand, experienced a disastrous result in 2018, winning just 27 seats. The Liberal Party in particular had a very poor election as it lost ground across many urban electorates.
Shock losses included the seat of Hawthorn, in which incumbent John Pesutto lost his seat on live television, while the party came perilously close to losing traditionally safe seats in Melbourne’s east.
The pandemic had a profound impact on this term of parliament. In an attempt to stop the spread of the virus, the Andrews government implemented lockdowns and curfews that led Melbourne to become known in some media as the “world’s most locked down city”.
This shaped the policy debate and it appeared that Victorian politics became highly polarised between those who supported the government’s policies, and those who demanded a different approach.
Opinion polls, however, suggested the government continued to enjoy the support of Victorian voters in the midst of the pandemic.
In 2021, the Liberal Party, ostensibly concerned with these poll results, deposed Michael O’Brien as leader and reinstated Matthew Guy to lead the party to the 2022 poll.
In the federal election in May, the “teal candidates” mobilised and succeeded in winning seats from the Liberal Party. In Victoria, the Liberal Party lost its previously safe electorates of Goldstein and Kooyong to teal candidates.
Based on these results, there’s an expectation the “teals” will provide further challenges to the established parties, especially the Liberal Party.
Reported opinion polling, for example, shows the Liberal Party is in danger of losing once-safe Victorian seats such as Brighton, Sandringham, Caulfield, and Kew to teal candidates.
There are, however, some factors that differentiate the upcoming Victorian state election from last May’s federal election.
One key factor relates to fundraising rules which have changed in Victoria since the last election. Unlike the national level, Victoria now places significant constraints on political donations. As a result, political donations are capped at $4,320 over a four year period for a single donor, which makes an impact on the capacity of candidates to amass financial resources. These arrangements have been described by some commentators as a “wall to keep independents out”.
The funding rules have already had an impact on the electoral contest with one nascent party, the Victorians Party, deciding not to field candidates because of these arrangements.
Another factor that may impact on the fortunes of teal candidates relates to how voters will judge the Liberal Party. At the national level, the teals were effective in targeting the Morrison Coalition government that seemingly appeared unable, or unwilling, to respond to their policy demands effectively.
In the Victorian context, the Coalition is in a weak position. This raises the question of whether voters will enthusiastically support challengers to a Liberal Party that has been out of government since 2014.
Furthermore, service delivery and infrastructure projects have been prominent features of the political debate during the informal election campaign in Victoria. The electoral fortunes of the teals may be linked to how effectively they position themselves within this policy debate.
Implications of the 2022 election
The 2022 Victorian election will have significant implications for the party system, and policy debate, in the state.
For the Liberal Party, losing ground to either the teals or other candidates will further weaken the party in the state. The most recent opinion polls continue to show Labor to be in a commanding position. Unless the polls are off by some margin, the Coalition looks destined to be on the opposition benches for another four years.
The challenges for Labor are different. The party is expected to win, and Premier Andrews may have to continually respond to questions about succession and generational renewal throughout the campaign.
The opportunity is there for the teals to make a major impact on the Victorian Parliament. It will be up to Victorians to determine whether that impact will be as powerful as what we saw at the national level in May.
Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The government has stepped up pressure on Optus to immediately hand over the information it has on people whose data was breached by the hacking of the telecommunications giant.
Optus has also been told bluntly that it is inadequate just to use email to inform more than 10,000 people whose data was uploaded by the hacker to the internet, allowing it to be widely shared.
Minister for Government Services, Bill Shorten and Cyber Security Minister Clare O’Neil said the government needed all the information for those who have used Services Australia credentials for identification so action could be taken to protect them.
Services Australia wrote to Optus on September 27 asking for the details of those affected customers who had used Medicare cards, Centrelink Concession Cards, and the like.
It would use this information to place extra security measures on affected customer records and to prevent further fraud.
But as of Sunday morning Optus had not provided the requested material.
Shorten told a joint news conference with O’Neil he understood if Optus had to have a legal strategy but “the first priority has to be surely to protect Australians.
“I don’t know why they’re not on the phone every couple of hours telling us how they’re going, getting the data ready in a form which we can use.
“The drawbridge needs to come down.”
O’Neil said she was most worried about the 10,200 people whose data had been briefly online, declaring Optus had failed to adequately inform them.
“Optus have advised that they have told those people by email. But that is simply not sufficient under these circumstances.
“We are going to need to go through a process of directly speaking with those 10,200 individuals.”
O’Neil said she had spoken to both Optus and the Australian Federal Police on Sunday morning.
She had told Optus “an email was not going to cut it here.
“This is 10,200 people whose data is somewhere in the ether and we don’t know where and we don’t know who has it.
“I’ve talked to the Australian Federal Police Commissioner a number of times this morning and I’ve asked the two organisations to liaise to agree on what additional communication efforts need to be taken with regard to those specific people.”
O’Neil criticised the legislation passed by the former government to protect cyber security.
“There was a set of laws passed that were meant to be the be-all-and-end-all of cyber security reform.
“The instructions on the label told me that these laws were going to provide me with all of the powers that I would need in a cyber security emergency […] I can tell you that those laws were absolutely useless to me when the Optus matter came on foot.”
She was not flagging specific reforms. But “we do not have the right laws in this country to manage cyber security emergency incidents, and this is something that we are going to need to look at.”
She pointed to the need for mandating timely reporting to customers when their data has been breached. This was just one of a “plethora” of things the federal government should be able to do in a situation like the Optus one.
Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said companies should not store personal information forever, indicating urgent action on privacy. “I may be bringing reforms to the Privacy Act before the end of the year to try and both toughen penalties and make companies think harder about why they are storing the personal data of Australians,” he told the ABC.
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.
New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.
Analysis by Dr Bryce Edwards.
Political Roundup: Te Pāti Māori and vested interests
Political scientist, Dr Bryce Edwards.
Controversial Māori politician and president of Te Pāti Māori, John Tamihere, is in hot water over large financial donations relating to his 2019 Auckland Mayoral campaign and Te Pāti Māori’s 2020 election campaign. For him and his supporters, the allegations are “inherently racist”. For others, they illustrate that there are a lot of vested interests and wealth in te ao Māori, and this influence has the potential to have a strong impact on government decisions.
Is Te Pāti Māori a vehicle for vested interests?
Contrary to the myth that Te Pāti Māori only pursue the interests of working class or poor Māori, the party has historically often represented the interests of Māori middle class and business. In fact, this was why MP Hone Harawira split so spectacularly from the party in 2011 to set up his more working class orientated Mana Party. He complained that Te Pāti Māori had become dominated by the elite forces of te ao Māori. The two parties have now reunited, but the underlying tension that caused the split remains.
Similarly, there is a myth that, unlike other political parties, Te Pāti Māori doesn’t have access to wealthy backers. But records show that for many years the party, and its current president John Tamihere, have received large donations from wealthy individuals and organisations to use for campaigning.
Some of these large donations have been in the spotlight recently, and questions raised about their legitimacy. The latest is an investigation by Herald journalist Matt Nippert into donations given to Te Pāti Māori and Tamihere by two charitable organisations that Tamihere himself controls.
The Herald’s allegations about Tamihere’s charities
Matt Nippert’s story, published on the front page of the Herald this week, highlighted that charitable organisations are given tax-free status which saves them huge amounts of money, but this privilege is given on the basis that they do not side with political parties or give donations to election campaigns. In the case of Tamihere’s organisations, this rule appears to have been broken.
Here’s the opening paragraph from Nippert’s report: “Charities connected to Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere are under investigation after financial reports showed nearly $500,000 in charitable funds had been used to bankroll his mayoral and general election campaigns.”
Tamihere was advanced $82,695 from the National Urban Māori Authority (NUMA) and $385,307 from Te Whānau o Waipareira Trust Group. Tamihere is the chief executive of both organisations, which endorsed his campaigns for office in 2019 and 2020.
Nippert’s article quotes Natasha Weight, the general manager of Charities Services, the agency that regulates tax-free charities, saying the rules are very clear: “a charity must not support or oppose a political party or candidate. This includes making a donation to a political party or a candidate’s election campaign, endorsing a party or candidate, or allowing a party or candidate to use a charity’s resources”.
As political finance researcher Max Rashbrooke wrote this week, “this looks terrible for Tamihere and the Trust. How can a registered charity be lending (and in effect donating, since it’s interest-free) their money to a political candidate? That’s not a ‘charitable’ purpose!”
The University of Auckland’s Peter Davis, a long-time Labour Party activist, also commented this week on Tamihere and Te Whānau o Waipareira: “He has always run the trust as a bit of a personal fiefdom and this has not been transparent until now. It was possible to forgive the early likely and anecdotal transgressions because the Trust was doing necessary work, but this crosses a line that no longer earns such sympathy.”
According to Nippert, Charities Services has issued a formal warning to Te Whānau o Waipareira, and is now engaged in negotiations over how to proceed with the alleged breach of the law. Te Whānau o Waipareira could be de-registered and Nippert says it could lose its lucrative tax-free status, which he calculates could cost it $16m.
Tamihere’s charities – which are clearly partisan – also contract to the Government to provide Whānau Ora services. When the donations first came to light last year, political commentator Shane Te Pou called for the minister of Whānau Ora to bring in the Auditor-General to investigate.
Nippert has also raised a discrepancy in the amounts that have been provided to Tamihere and Te Pāti Māori: “Tamihere declined to explain the difference between the sum recorded in accounts as being advanced by the charities for his political campaigns ($468,002), and the figure recorded as donations from them and him for the mayoral and general elections ($387,604).”
Racism allegations and defence
Tamihere and Te Whānau O Waipareira have reacted strongly to the Herald news story, accusing the newspaper of racism. Tamihere called it an example of the media demonising Māori, labelling it “a hit on the Māori”.
Talking about Nippert’s story, Tamihere says “This is a pogrom”, and likens the experience to that of the Jews facing persecution. And he says that Te Pāti Māori will no longer work with or write for the Herald, which raises important issues for media freedom and holding politicians to account.
In announcing the boycott, Tamihere states: “I will never write another word to try and educate ignorant pakeha about Māori matters for the New Zealand Herald. Nor will any Māori Party member ever be either interviewed or write anything for the New Zealand Herald or ZB radio – let’s leave it for what it is – ‘white man’s radio’, ‘racist radio’, and a racist rag… We will just go on our own platforms. We will talk on iwi radio, because we no longer need white men to define us”.
Tamihere also appealed to pakeha to intervene to curtail the questions being asked, saying Nippert’s story was fake news and a smear: “good Pākehā friends need to know what some of their kinfolk get up to and they just have to stop it and stop them. It’s not for Māori to correct things all the time and defend themselves all the time from malicious framing of us always in a negative way.”
The charity is also now crowdsourcing material from supporters in an attempt to prove that the journalist is racially motivated, using the social media hashtag #dobinaracistlikeMattNippert
The ethnicity element is centrally important to this issue, and is likely to have continued reverberations. For instance, in Parliament it caused one of the biggest political scuffles of the week, with Whanau Ora minister Kelvin Davis reacting to questions about the scandal by accusing Act MP Karen Chhour of having a “vanilla lens” and needing to get acquainted with the Māori world.
Davis’ comments were made in response to the following question in Parliament: “So does the Minister agree with John Tamihere when he says his charity and Oranga Tamariki are in a partnership and not a contract, and if Te Whānau o Waipareira is struck off the Charities Register, will the Minister guarantee that this partnership will end?”
Past issues with the Te Pāti Māori and vested interests
Matt Nippert’s revelations of the donations aren’t entirely new. His story is important because they highlight the investigations of Charities Services into the partisan activities of the two trusts.
Last year the Electoral Commission announced it was concerned about a breach of electoral law by Te Pāti Māori because they failed to declare the donations from the two charities during the election – as well as another $120,000 donation from the mysterious Aotearoa Te Kahu Limited Partnership.
The Electoral Commission made a complaint to the Police, and then the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigated. This week we learned that the SFO have closed their investigation and decided not to prosecute. The agency won’t provide further details of what they learned about the breach and why they’ve made their decision, simply stating: “The SFO has closed this matter and will not be taking any further steps”.
What is unknown is whether knowledge of the donations would have changed voters’ opinions of the party at the 2020 election. Te Pāti Māori kept the details secret, and then got back into Parliament when Rawiri Waititi captured the Waiariki electorate, beating Labour incumbent Tāmati Coffey by 836 votes.
Vested interests operate amongst all ethnicities
Te Pāti Māori and John Tamihere have been entirely dismissive of any questions about their financial backers and whether they are following the rules meant to make politics more transparent. This suggests they don’t take issues of corruption and vested interests seriously.
Although the party has only two MPs, there is a strong chance that Te Pāti Māori will hold the balance of power at the next election. Some in the Labour Party clearly see Te Pāti Māori as the Ardern Government’s lifeline to power at the next election should the National Party and Act win more votes than Labour and the Greens combined. Tamihere and his colleagues could have huge leverage over the next government.
When political figures are powerful they need to be held to account, regardless of race. Allegations of racism are extremely powerful, precisely because of the history of appalling discrimination towards Māori in this country. But such allegations should not be used to shield those in power from scrutiny. Te Pāti Māori is a product of our democratic political system and, as such, has to be held to account in the same way as other political parties, especially on an issue so important and fundamental as the funding of political campaigns. Double standards can’t be accepted by anyone wanting clean and fair politics – especially those of us worried about vested interests looking for ways to leverage their political donations.
Source: Council on Hemispheric Affairs – Analysis-Reportage
Alina Duarte Mexico City
Evo Morales, former President of the Plurinational State of Bolivia and President of the Six Federations of the Tropic of Cochabamba, was a special guest of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) during festivities marking the 212th anniversary of Mexico’s independence. The other international guests included John and Gabriel Shipton, father and brother of journalist Julian Assange; family of the late farmworker and activist César Chávez; Aleida Guevara, daughter of Che Guevara; and former Uruguayan President “Pepe” Mujica.
On September 15 Morales witnessed President Andrés Manuel López Obrador calling out the cry for independence. In addition to the traditional “¡Viva México!” of the heroes of independence, AMLO yelled, “Death to corruption! Death to racism! Death to classism!”
The former President of Bolivia also stood on a balcony of the National Palace, where he received a standing ovation from the thousands of people attending the festivities. The next day, Morales was just a few yards away from the Mexican President when AMLO called for a five-year worldwide truce.
During his short visit, Evo Morales gave me a few minutes of his time to talk about Mexico, Latin America, lithium, and the present and future of our region.
Journalist Alina Duarte speaks to Evo Morales (Photo credit: Devadip Axel Meléndez)
After meeting with the Mayor of Mexico City, Claudia Sheinbaum, Morales met with me at his hotel. He was in a hurry since his flight back to Bolivia was departing in a couple of hours. He gave a rushed greeting, sat down, took a breath, and while he was getting settled, I thanked him for taking the time to answer my questions.
Not one minute into the interview he said that he is in Mexico because he was invited by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
-Let’s cover that first, Evo. You are here precisely by invitation of President López Obrador. You were one of the big-name special guests to attend the Independence Day festivities. You were present when he issued the Cry of Independence—actually two events—the “cry” the night of September 15th, and the parade on September 16th, when President López Obrador gave a speech before a military parade, calling for a worldwide truce. The night before he had also called out “Death to Racism! Death to Classism!” etc. What do you think of all that?
-Andrés, the President of Mexico, is Andrés. This president has long been very humanistic, in solidarity, committed to poor families and their social programs. I met this President at his inauguration, and he greeted me saying, “my indigenous brother,” or something like that. After the coup d’etat he saved my life, he helped me, he helped us to return to democracy, along with other presidents such as the president of Argentina, Venezuela, Cuba, President [Ernesto] Samper, [José Luis Rodríguez] Zapatero, even the President of Paraguay. And now I have been invited alongside my brother, Pepe Mujica. He invited me together with Julian Assange’s father and Che’s daughter, Aleida Guevara, and other guests. I am honored to participate and attend the Independence Day activities in Mexico.
On September 15th he surprised us by yelling “Death to racism! Death to Corruption! Death to Classism!” That is a strong message, but also a message of integration. I continue to think that some day we will have a plurinational Americas, of peoples for the people. Not America in the sense that the Americans say: “All of Latin America is the backyard of the United States.” What did we hear from the US Southern Command two or three weeks ago? They are concerned about Lithium. But what is more, they consider Latin America to be a neighborhood of the United States. It pains us to still hear these kinds of messages in the 21st century. There are new leaders, such as my brother Andrés with his proposals. We heard an interesting message, a proposed [global] truce to avoid conflict, and above all, the financial crises that are leading the United States to use NATO to intervene militarily and surround Russia, provoking that armed conflict.
Left to right: Luis Cresencio Sandoval, Secretary of Defense; José Rafael Ojeda, Secretary of the Navy; Pepe Mujica, former President of Uruguay; Evo Morales, former President of Bolivia; Aleida Guevara, daughter of Ernesto “Che” Guevara; Gabriel Shipton and John Shipton, brother and father of Julian Assange (Photo credit: Government of Mexico)
-And in that speech, Evo, President López Obrador said that he proposes a five-year worldwide truce “to address the major, serious economic and social problems that afflict and torment our peoples.” The proposal, which he says Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard will formally present to the UN, “seeks the immediate suspension of military actions and provocations as well as military and missile tests.” It would seek to form a committee to foster dialogue between Russia and Ukraine, for which he even said he would propose the inclusion of Pope Francis and Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, and on behalf of the UN, Secretary General Antonio Gutérrez.” What message does this send outside Mexico?
-First, it shows that our brother and President of Mexico is concerned about the situation with food and energy, that he is concerned with life and humanity. It is a good proposal deserving of our admiration. In fact, it surprised me and I think it surprised everyone, the idea of a truce with mediators from India, Pope Francis, the United Nations, and surely Mexico would also be with the initiative. We salute it and support it and hopefully the whole world will listen to it. I wish that NATO would stop attacking and encircling countries when they do not submit to the empire—that is the underlying issue. I heard that there was a big meeting today with China, India, I’m not sure whether it is with Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, and Russia. Hopefully it will go well and some light will be shed on how to attain peace, but with social justice.
-I think that these invitations President López Obrador is extending to you and other people are important. He might not have been able to do so four years ago when he came into office, but things have changed regionally. What is your assessment of the role that Mexico is playing in the region with all these issues you have put on the table, including at the global level?
-I feel that there is a democratic rebellion underway throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. Two, three years ago there was the Lima Group to overthrow [Nicolás] Maduro. Where is the Lima Group today? Who made up the Lima Group? The former presidents of Peru, Argentina, Mexico, Chile, and particularly of Colombia.
-Now they are all gone…
-There is no more Lima Group. Look, after we founded UNASUR (Union of South American Nations) with [Hugo] Chávez, with Lula [da Silva], with [Rafael] Correa, and with [Néstor] Kirschner and other presidents (I very much regret that some parties have become submissive to the Empire), the Lima Group was able to, I would say temporarily, paralyze UNASUR. But together with [Hugo] Chávez and Fidel [Castro] we created CELAC (the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States). But [Barak] Obama and other U.S. presidents responded to this integration proposal by organizing the Pacific Alliance to maintain the policies of the Washington Consensus or the FTAA.
Now I am wondering, where is the Pacific Alliance? These institutions or organizations that only serve to uphold U.S. policies have been defeated with this democratic rebellion.
-Such as the OAS [Organization of American States]…
-Of course, but in addition, imagine it! I am almost certain that our brother Lula will win (in Brazil) in next month’s election; plus Mexico—that is a great strategic alliance for all the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. It gives us great hope.
Fifty or 60 years ago, at least, we saw how Cuba was expelled from the OAS. Then countries were afraid of getting expelled from the OAS. Now it is a source of dignified pride to leave the OAS. We have a responsibility to relaunch CELAC in order to truly ensure integration—but not just of heads of state—of their peoples.
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador greets Evo Morales and other guests at the Independence Day ceremony in Mexico. (Photo credit: Government of Mexico)
-Speaking of Latin America, I want to explore this further because some people call it the second cycle of progressive governments. Others talk about some unique characteristics. The truth is that there is a trend, not only in their discourse, but also in their actions, that are clearly anti-neoliberal and anti-imperialist. We see this with the victory of Gustavo Petro together with Francia Márquez in Colombia. It is important that figures like yourself pointed out that the two of them together made the victory possible, not just Petro. We also have elections in just a few days in Brazil and we see Lula da Silva with great chances of returning. How do you perceive today’s Latin America?
-First, all of the doctrines of empire have collapsed. Where is the Cold War? Where is the War on Terrorism? Why am I saying this? Now, parties of political movements, social movements with socialist tendencies and principles, with communist doctrines, are getting elected to the presidency. This did not exist before; it was only Cuba.
Terrorists… for the Empire, who are the terrorists? Social movements. I recall in 2002 U.S. Ambassador Manuel Rocha telling people “Don’t vote for Evo Morales; Evo Morales is an Andean Bin Laden and the coca growers are the Taliban.” He said, “Don’t vote that way, if you vote for Evo, there will be no aid or investment.” What a lie! In 2005 government expenditure was US$1.6 billion. In the last years I was in office before the coup, we programmed more than US$8 billion in government expenditure.
So we “terrorists” are now presidents. [Gabriel] Boric was a student leader; Pedro Castillo who was a rural patrolman or “rondero” and a leader of the teachers’ union, is now president. It was hard, but we won. I feel that the U.S. doctrine is falling to pieces. Look, some of our brothers even took up arms for their liberation 200 years after the founding of their republics, and now they are presidents, such as Daniel Ortega and Gustavo Petro. And some of us organize in social movements and some even took up arms, which I don’t support so much, but the people make it right and time will tell. But what is the danger that I see? When the Empire is in decay it resorts to violence. I do not want to think this but it is what happened to Cristina Fernández a few weeks ago. When the Empire loses its hegemony, it resorts to weapons. For that reason, I think we need to take advantage of this moment to armor ourselves, so that right-wing governments submissive to imperialism never return.
-At another point in time, talking about U.S. interference in the region was viewed as conspiracy theory, a myth, although how they orchestrate destabilization and coups d’etat has been extensively documented. We saw the social uprising in Chile; in Brazil they were liberating Lula but at the same time they were cooking up a coup d’etat in Bolivia. It is now three years since that coup. What is your view of the recovery of democracy in Bolivia, and what are the specific challenges of a right-wing which, as we have seen, has not given up its attempts to destabilize a democratically elected government, in this case, the government of Luis Arce?
-I look at the consciousness of the people. The MAS-IPSP (Movement Toward Socialism-Political Instrument for Sovereignty of the Peoples) has a political, economic, and social agenda beyond the bicentennial. The MAS-IPSP is the largest movement in the history of Bolivia, and it is headed by the indigenous movement. We in the indigenous movement have inherited our history; we have inherited the struggle going back to colonial times. We were threatened with extermination and hated during the days of the Republic, even though we engaged in a political movement to liberate all of Bolivia. I remember perfectly well that in 2005 our platform was based on three points: politically, the re-founding of the nation through the Constitutional Assembly; economically, the nationalization of natural resources and also basic resources; and socially, the redistribution of wealth. We made a lot of history in a short period of time. But there, the underlying theme, sister journalist, is that in addition to being gringos against Indians, the coup was against two things. First, it was against our economic model. The Empire does not accept new economic models that are better than the economic model of neoliberalism as dictated by capitalism. So, it was against our economic model.
And what was the basis of our economic model? The nationalization of our natural resources, but it also started with their industrialization, above all, the industrialization of lithium. You as a journalist know how many messages and evidence there was that the United States caused a coup d’etat over lithium. England had financed the coup over lithium. Elon Musk, the owner of Tesla, acknowledged his interests in the Uyuni Salt Flats and there was a coup d’etat.
What is happening should unite all of us much more. It is not only over lithium, over petroleum, over gas, or over natural resources. This is the struggle of humanity. Who do the natural resources belong to? Private parties to loot them for their transnational corporations? Or to the peoples of the world to exploit them for our States, for our governments? Of course, we need to tap into our natural resources while caring for the environment.
-Talking about the United States, Evo, you point out that the coup against you was to get the lithium, something that has been demonstrated, and this is nothing new for the United States to come after the natural resources of Latin America. But the people of Mexico are much more interested in this now that the López Obrador administration has decided to create its own company to industrialize lithium. In early August we read the news that the Bolivian and Mexican governments were trying to establish a partnership, not to sell lithium as a raw material—which is what the major powers want—but a partnership, essentially, to industrialize lithium. What did all of this mean for your administration and particularly what role did it play in the coup d’etat?
-I am a witness to that. In 2010 I was invited to visit South Korea. The job of the president is to do good business for the people. We signed some big agreements and they invited me to look at a new lithium battery industrial plant, which was beautiful. I asked them how much it cost, and the answer was “US$300 million.” At that time, our reserves were growing and we had US$10, US$11 billion in international reserves. I thought, “I can guarantee the US$300 million.” I told the Koreans, “We can build a plant just like it in Bolivia and I can guarantee the investment.” They said, “No, no, no.” And I have many other such memories. That was when I realized that, unfortunately, the industrialized countries only like us if we guarantee raw materials for them.
So then what did I do with Alvaro [García Linera], the vice-president? We started with laboratories, with a pilot plant in the great lithium industry. We hired experts for the laboratories. By the time we did the pilot plant, the young people had already learned and we had a beautiful project. And we decided that foreigners could not be involved in the extraction. Regarding markets, there are agreements and there is no problem.
Journalist Alina Duarte with Evo Morales (Photo credit: Devadip Axel Meléndez)
-(Evo leafs through various media reports around the time of the coup d’Etat against him in 2019 and reads off some of the headlines.)
–Where is that article? November 20, 2019, a few days after the coup d’Etat, “Coup in Bolivia Smells of Lithium,” first-hand report. “Trump Applauds Departure of Morales under Pressure from the Army.” Unfortunately, then the military commanders turned. “Why might the United States be behind the coup in Bolivia?” Senator Richard Black explains that it is over lithium. “U.S. Senator assures that the United States intervened over Lithium.” And that is why the owner of Tesla, the electric car company, said, “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it.” This shows who financed the coup mongers in Bolivia. Last year it was reported, “United Kingdom supported the coup in Bolivia to access its ‘white gold,’” lithium. And they had invested, they had financed it; it was not just their verbal support. That is why in the days of coup the British ambassador was in continuous meetings with the opposition, with the coup plotters.
We have a gold mine here, “The price of lithium went up from US$4,450 per ton of lithium carbonate in 2012, to US$17,000 per ton in 2021,” last year. [Now,] in just a ten-year period it has reached US$78,000 per ton of lithium carbonate!
-In this regard, what message can you send to the government and people of Mexico, thinking that one of the paths chosen has been to nationalize lithium?
-I salute my brother President and the government of Mexico for saying that the lithium belongs to the Mexican people. I understand that it has now been nationalized. How beautiful it would be if Bolivia, Mexico, Argentina, and Chile were together on this. But in Chile it is totally in private hands; in Argentina, hopefully they can recover it. But in Bolivia and Mexico we should form a strategic partnership to industrialize our lithium.
And I remain convinced, sister journalist, that some countries of Latin America will become powerhouses in something, and we could become lithium powers, with tremendous prices. And they are going to continue to go up. Each of us and our governments have this task. I celebrate the fact that President “Lucho” Arce of Bolivia met with President Andrés Manuel López Obrador of Mexico. The technical teams are at work. They were asking me what technical people we have. We must share work experiences. We have good technicians; we have learned a lot. We have to come together to launch our industrialization of lithium, but it must be led by our governments. A State controlled by the people, not the usual way of turning it over to transnational corporations; we do not agree with that. In our experience, the nationalization of our natural resources and of strategic companies, helped us change the image of Bolivia quite a bit.
-And, finally, Evo, I do not want to let you go without saying that I saw your arrival in Zacatecas, where you were given a Doctorate Honoris Causa from the University of Zacatecas. We can now call you “Dr. Evo.” Tell me about it.
-Last year they invited me to come and receive some recognition. This year, with this invitation from President Andrés Manuel, I decided to take advantage of my visit to go to Zacatecas. Thanks to the Autonomous University of Zacatecas I was able to meet with the social movements, the peasant Indigenous movement, teachers, some political parties, and also the governor of Zacatecas. The recognition that I received is for the social movements and the Indigenous movement in particular. Without them, I would never have become president, and I thank the university and several comrades for taking this initiative. We talked quite a bit and I visited a mining area. In addition, it is a very interesting colonial town and we have a good relationship. I hope I never lose those relationships of so much trust, to open them up to humble people. Thank you very much.
-Thank you so much for your time, Evo. We hope that you will come back for other occasions, and more often. Thank you for this dialogue.
Alina Duarte is a journalist and Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, COHA.
This interview was edited by COHA Director Patricio Zamorano.
Translation by Rita Jill Clark-Gollub, COHA Assistant Editor/Translator
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC Principal Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney
COVID is an exceptional disease and was at its deadliest this year, causing more deaths in Australia between June and August 2022 than at any other time. There have been 288 deaths from influenza so far this year compared to more than 12,000 deaths from COVID.
The number of deaths from COVID in Australia in the first nine months of 2022 is more than ten times the annual national road toll of just over 1,000 – but we are not rushing to remove seat belts or drink-driving laws so people can have more freedom.
Isolation flattens the COVID curve by stopping infectious people from infecting others, and is a key pillar of COVID control.
Workforce shortages have been felt in every sector during the pandemic. Shortages of health workers have resulted in the need to import workers from overseas, and deadly outcomes for patients in some cases.
During epidemic peaks this year, the workforce was so badly affected that supermarket shelves could not be stocked. Removing the isolation period is hoped to ease workforce shortages – but any relief will be short-lived.
During epidemic peaks this year, the workforce was so badly affected, supermarket shelves could not be stocked. Mari Nelson/Shutterstock
At times when COVID numbers are increasing, allowing infectious people to mingle freely at work and socially will create epidemic growth and make the crisis even worse. At the current time, when cases are relatively low, removing isolation mandates will not materially benefit the workforce, but will make the workplace and schools less safe.
Eliminating isolation rules provides the opportunity for governments to save costs. Without mandatory isolation support, payments for workers needing to isolate will end.
While politicians spin this as trusting Australians to take “personal responsibility”, sadly many Australians will simply not have the means to take time off work. With elimination of mandatory isolation periods, essential workers in low paying jobs will find themselves at even more risk of contracting COVID in the workplace.
Newer variants of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, are more immune-evasive than ever. Immunity from vaccines wanes within two to three months, and so too does immunity from infection. Hybrid immunity is cited as a reason for abandoning isolation, but is unlikely to eventuate.
Indeed, we saw this with the recent BA5 wave leading to more hospitalisations and deaths than the January/February BA1 wave, despite the presence of much higher vaccine and infection-based immunity in the community. While no doubt this immunity prevented an even worse outcome, it clearly did not keep pace with virus evolution.
While it was hoped hybrid immunity from vaccines and prior infection would reduce subsequent infections, this has not been the reality. Reinfection is becoming more common with variants that are increasingly distant from the original virus. And evidence is accruing that reinfection can cause severe disease.
The most vulnerable may be forced to withdraw from society and from unsafe workplaces to protect themselves. But it is a misconception that COVID is trivial for everyone else. People who are happy and healthy today could become disabled or chronically ill from COVID.
The long-term complications of COVID-19 are substantial, and can include effects on the lungs, heart, brain and immune system. At 12 months after infection, the risk of heart attacks, strokes, blood clots and other complications including sudden death are about double compared to people who were never infected. Chronic complications can occur even after mild infection – including heart failure, strokes and dementia.
Dropping isolation will increase COVID transmission and result in an increase in serious chronic illness. It could be a mass disabling event and so drive major economic and societal losses.
The availability of treatments has been cited as a reason to cease isolation – but these are restricted to limited subgroups, and not available to everyone.
COVID is an epidemic disease and has behaved in a predictable way since 2020, causing recurrent epidemic waves.
Ceasing isolation will hasten the onset of the next wave. Allowing mass infection also creates favourable conditions for emergence of new variants which have been more contagious or more vaccine or treatment resistant.
What we need to do instead
To maximise productivity, health and social success, instead of ignoring COVID, we should tackle it with a layered approach to mitigation of transmission. This includes raising rates of boosters, widening access to antivirals and other treatments, masks, safe indoor air, and widely accessible testing.
Making isolation a rule, and supporting people financially to do so, has been a key pillar of our defences. This is still needed as viral evolution continues to outpace immunity.
We just had our worst wave and there is nothing to suggest the next won’t be similarly bad. Workplace absenteeism is a function of transmission, so better control of SARS-CoV-2 will result in greater productivity, less disruption to families and businesses, and a more successful way forward to living with COVID.
C Raina MacIntyre receives funding from NHMRC and MRFF. She is currently receiving funding from Sanofi for research on influenza and pertussis. She is on the WHO COVID-19 Vaccine Composition Technical Advisory Group and the WHO SAGE Monkeypox and Smallpox ad hoc working group.
Brendan Crabb and the Institute he leads receives research grant funding from the National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia and other Australian federal and Victorian State Government bodies. He is the Chair of The Australian Global Health Alliance and the Pacific Friends of Global Health, both in an honourary capacity. And he serves on the Board of the Telethon Kids Institute.
The School Nancy Baxter leads receives research grant funding from the National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia, Australian Research Council, and other Australian federal and Victorian State Government bodies. She serves on the Advisory Board of The Australian Global Health Alliance and on the Board of the Nossal Institute. She has been an unpaid participant in an Advisor Board meeting for MSD Australia.
AGL Energy – Australia’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases – announced this week it will shut the Loy Yang A power station in Victoria’s LaTrobe Valley in 2035, a decade earlier than planned.
This is significant for the Australian electricity industry. Loy Yang A provides around 30% of Victoria’s power and is Australia’s largest single emitting industrial facility.
But while the announcement has made headlines, it comes as no surprise. The power station burns brown coal which, while cheap, is an inefficient and emissions-heavy source of electricity. Brown coal-fired power stations are also failing to compete with the gathering pace of renewables.
AGL promises to replace the electricity provided by Loy Yang A with large-scale renewables and firming generation (such as batteries). This is, in my view, the most important commitment, because it’ll help ensure Australians have reliable electricity in the decades to come.
A big week in energy
AGL emits more than 40 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent each year. Its announcement to bring forward Loy Yang A’s closure is no doubt largely in response to consumer and shareholder views that the electricity sector must decarbonise.
Consumers are voting with their feet and increasingly demanding electricity sourced from renewable generation. Indeed, Woolworths, BHP and Aldi are just a few high profile brands that have committed to buying 100% renewable energy.
The announcement comes amid a big week of energy news. The Queensland government released its Energy Plan, which promises to shift the state to 70% renewable energy by 2032 and 80% by 2035. The plan involves an estimated A$62 billion of investment in the energy system up to 2035.
Meanwhile, the Victorian government announced plans for 2.6 gigawatts of new energy storage capacity by 2030, jumping to 6.3 gigawatts by 2035.
This is all against the backdrop of the federal government’s commitment to have 82% renewables in the Australian grid by the end of the decade.
Loy Yang A is in the Latrobe Valley, which has enormous reserves of very cheap brown coal. Brown coal is physically difficult to export, so the cost of brown coal electricity generation remains very low, even at times of high international energy prices.
But these advantages are more than offset by brown coal’s major disadvantage: it is one of the least efficient and most emissions intensive types of electricity generation.
The Victorian government has a legislated target of 50% renewable energy for the state by 2030. Such significant investments in new renewables have undermined the viability of brown coal fired power stations.
And the wave of investment is set to intensify. The Victorian government has committed to 2 gigawatts of offshore wind by the end of the decade, and a total of 9 gigawatts by 2040. In terms of energy output, this is the equivalent of two Loy Yang A power stations.
But it is Australia’s love for rooftop solar that has really undermined the economics of brown coal.
Around 30% of homes in Australia have rooftop solar panels. In fact, the total capacity of rooftop solar is now almost equal to the entire remaining capacity of coal fired generation.
When the sun is shining, rooftop solar significantly reduces the amount of electricity demand from the national grid. This forces coal-fired generators to reduce their energy output significantly. In the evening, when electricity demand peaks, coal-fired generators must then ramp up their generation again.
Coal generators weren’t built to be ramped up and down to meet demand. They were built to be switched on and left operating at their maximum output, all day every day. Operating them like a yo-yo effectively ages them prematurely, bringing forward major maintenance expenditure and the likely end of their operating lives.
The impact on grid-based electricity demand in South Australia is shown in the chart below. It is clear that over the past ten years, grid demand in the middle of the day has fallen substantially due to the impact of solar, making it very hard for inflexible older coal plants to compete.
Changes to South Australian electricity demand over the past decade. This new shape of electricity demand is called the ‘duck curve’ (or in Australia, the ‘emu’ curve!) Tim Nelson
AGL’s even more important commitment
While the focus has been on the closure of Loy Yang A, the more important commitment relates to AGL building the new generation required to replace it. In its Climate Transition Action Plan, AGL stated:
We will seek to supply our customer demand with [around 12 gigawatts] of additional renewable and firming capacity, requiring a total investment of up to $20 billion, before 2036.
Our initial target is to have up to 5 GW of new renewables and firming capacity in place by 2030, funded from a combination of assets on our balance sheet, offtakes and via partnerships.
In other words, AGL will replace Loy Yang A with a mix of wind, solar, battery storage and other firming generation that, when combined, do the same job Loy Yang A does now – provide electricity all day every day.
This is exactly what energy consumers need: a commitment to not only close a large coal-fired power station, but a complementary commitment to build the two types of technologies required to replace it on a like-for-like basis.
Some may argue AGL’s announcements are long overdue. But with Origin Energy and AGL both indicating that the future is firm renewable energy, it’s becoming ever more likely that 100% renewable electricity in Australia’s electricity grid could be achieved by the end of the decade. That’s fantastic news for consumers, and for the climate.
Tim Nelson is an Associate Professor at Griffith University and the EGM, Energy Markets at Iberdrola Australia, that develops renewable projects and batteries. Tim was the Chief Economist at AGL up until 2018.
Australian Sean Turnell, economic adviser to Myanmar’s democratically elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi, has been in prison since the military coup of February 2021, awaiting trial for the supposed crime of stealing state secrets.
This week a puppet court sentenced him to three years in prison, alongside Suu Kyi, who has already been sentenced to 20 years’ jail in other sham court cases.
Both pled not guilty to the charge of holding confidential secret government documents. Turnell has said all he had were economic papers needed for his work as a technical economic adviser to Myanmar’s government.
The trial was held behind closed doors. Australian consular officials attempted to attend but were denied access. Foreign affairs minister Penny Minister has issued a statement rejecting the legitimacy of the trial and calling for Turnell’s release.
The Myanmar regime has agreed to take into account the 20 months Turnell has already spent in prison. So he is due for release in January 2024.
It is possible, however, that he could be released and deported early. There is a precedent for this. In November 2011 US journalist Danny Fenster was sentenced to 11 years with hard labour but released just a day later. Bill Richardson, a former New Mexico governor and US ambassador to the UN, was appointed as a special envoy and negotiated his release.
How Turnell ended up in Myanmar
I’ve known Turnell as a family friend and colleague for many years.
A working-class kid from Macquarie Fields in south-west Sydney, he attended Macquarie University, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in economics, then a PhD and ended up as an associate professor.
Turnell went on to become an expert on the links between banking systems and economic performance in developing countries, particularly in South-East Asia.
He wrote some important academic articles on Myanmar discussing how, after decades of isolation under military rule, economic reforms could rebuild the nation’s agriculture and tourism sector.
His work gained the attention of Aung San Suu Kyi. They first met in the early 1990s, before Suu Kyi was sentenced to house arrest. After her release in 2010 the junta (temporarily) allowed democratic reforms and she invited him to become her economic adviser.
Turnell’s economic competence was widely admired. He became a sort of John Maynard Keynes of Myanmar. I witnessed this in 2017 when he gave the keynote address to an Australian Myanmar Institute conference in Yangon. It was a full house with an enthusiastic audience.
On February 1 2021 the miltary staged its coup. Turnell was arrested, along with other prominent advisers to Suu Kyi, a few days later.
Is it time for sanctions?
It has been suggested that Australia should appoint a special envoy help get Turnell released, just as the US did for Danny Fenster. Former prime minister Kevin Rudd might be suitable given his good relationships in Asia.
In the meantime it is pleasing to see that foreign minister Penny Wong has been more vigorous than her predecessor Marise Payne in advocating for Turnell, and Myanmar generally.
Last month Wong raised the issue of Myanmar at a meeting of ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Myanmar is one of ASEAN’s ten members, and its neighbours have been divided over the forum’s longstanding policy of “constructive engagement” versus taking a harder line.
But will the Australian government back up its rhetorical support for Myanmar’s democracy movement with the type of sanctions the movement wants from the international community?
Observers have suggested Turnell’s fate may have influenced the former government’s lack of enthusiasm for sanctions.
That still appears the case, with Wong adopting a similar stance to Payne in saying only that sanctions against members of Myanmar’s military regime “are under active consideration”.
But there’s a paradox at play here. If Turnell’s predicament really is behind the government’s reluctance to impose sanctions, that gives Myanmar’s junta an incentive to keep Turnell locked up.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne
The United States midterm elections will be held in six weeks, on November 8. All 435 House of Representatives seats are up for election, as well as 35 of the 100 senators. Democrats won the House by 222-213 in 2020, and hold the Senate on a 50-50 tie with Vice President Kamala Harris’ casting vote.
Currently the FiveThirtyEight forecasts give Democrats a 68% chance to hold the Senate, but Republicans have a 69% chance to gain control of the House of Representatives.
That means there’s about a 31% chance of either Republicans or Democrats sweeping both chambers of Congress, and a 38% chance of Republicans winning the House while Democrats retain the Senate.
Democrats’ chances of holding the Senate are up from 67% when I last covered US politics four weeks ago, but down from 71% on September 20. Their chances of holding the House are up from 24% four weeks ago, but Democrats’ gains have slowed.
In the national vote for Congress, Democrats lead Republicans by 1.3% in the FiveThirtyEight aggregate, up from 0.8% four weeks ago. President Joe Biden had gained much ground in my last article, but his ratings gains in the FiveThirtyEight aggregate have stalled since: he’s now at 52.2% disapprove, 42.0% approve.
The 35 Senate seats up for election at this year’s midterms are 21 Republicans and 14 Democrats. As Republicans are defending more Senate seats, the FiveThirtyEight forecasts give Democrats a greater chance to hold the Senate than the House.
At the last two presidential elections in 2016 and 2020, polls overstated Democrats. But Donald Trump’s name won’t appear on the ballot paper this year, and polls at the last midterm elections in 2018 were accurate. FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver said on September 16 that the polls at these midterm elections could be wrong in either direction.
But September’s economic data on inflation was poor. And from an August 16 peak over 34,000, the Dow Jones has suffered falls this month to crash to just over 29,000 on Tuesday – about a 15% decline.
In my opinion, a greater focus on the economy is stalling Democrats’ gains in the FiveThirtyEight forecasts.
At every midterm election since 2006, the non-presidential party has easily won control of the House. It will be difficult for Democrats to defy this history.
Economic data: jobs and inflation
The US August jobs report was released September 2. While 315,000 jobs were created, the unemployment rate rose 0.2% from July to 3.7%. The increase in unemployment was due to a 0.3% increase in the participation rate, with the employment population ratio – the share of eligible Americans employed – up 0.1% to 60.1%.
However, both the participation rate and employment population are about 1% below their levels in February 2020, before the COVID pandemic began.
The US August inflation report was released September 13. Headline inflation increased just 0.1% after an unchanged July; the last two months were far below the 1.3% increase in June. However, headline inflation has moderated due to falls in energy prices.
Inflation excluding food and energy (“core” inflation) increased 0.6% in August after a 0.3% increase in July. Core inflation is what central banks focus on controlling, so this high reading increased interest rate expectations.
Real earnings account for inflation. In August, real hourly earnings were up 0.2% after a 0.6% increase in July, though these gains followed a 0.9% drop in June. Real weekly earnings decreased 0.1% in August after a 0.8% increase in July. However, in the 12 months to August, real weekly earnings are down 3.4% and real hourly down 2.8%.
Are Trump’s legal woes significant?
Former US President Donald Trump has been experiencing legal woes. Trump’s problems may assist Democrats in the midterms as he is still unpopular, with the FiveThirtyEight aggregate giving him a 54.0% unfavourable, 41.9% favourable rating.
Trump has continued to be heavily involved with politics, making it difficult for voters to move on from him.
For the 2024 presidential election, I don’t think Trump’s troubles with the law matter so much. If he’s unable to run, Republicans will nominate someone who is also very right-wing – the favourite would be current Florida governor Ron DeSantis.
UK Labour seizes huge poll lead after ‘horror’ budget
On September 23, new United Kingdom Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng delivered a budget that would greatly reduce taxes to the benefit of the already well-off. Rather than cut spending, the tax cuts would be funded by borrowing. Owing to this borrowing, the UK pound plummeted on the financial markets.
Financial market turmoil has continued this week, and has been responsible for the Dow tanking.
There were four UK national polls conducted between Tuesday and Thursday this week. In three of these polls, the opposition Labour led the governing Conservatives by 17 to 21 points.
In the fourth, a YouGov poll, Labour led by 33 points, 54% to 21%. Labour’s lead is up from high single to low double digits before the budget.
The good news for the Conservatives is that the next UK general election isn’t due until late 2024.
Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
National cabinet has agreed to lift the five day mandatory isolation period for people contracting COVID, with the Commonwealth’s chief medical officer declaring “it is time to move away from COVID exceptionalism”.
In a landmark step federal, state and territory governments have essentially moved to treating COVID like the flu and similar illnesses.
The isolation requirement will be lifted on October 14. The pandemic payment, designed to compensate workers without sickness leave entitlements and so encourage them to stay at home, will be removed at the same time.
But to protect people at high risk of COVID, national cabinet agreed to continue targeted financial support for casual workers in the aged care, disability care, Aboriginal healthcare and hospital care sectors. The new payment will be on the same basis as the leave payment has been and funded 50:50 between the two levels of government.
Notably, the body that advises national cabinet, the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC), made up of federal and state health officers, was not asked for advice. Instead Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly provided written advice, at the request of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
Several weeks ago Kelly had push back from the AHPPC over the proposal to reduce the isolation period from seven to five days. There was division among the state health officers, and no recommendation from the committee, which is supposed to operate by consensus. National cabinet cut the number of days anyway.
Having the advice come just from Kelly this time avoided any prospect of divided health advice.
But it will still be a controversial decision in some quarters, with epidemiologists and other medical experts split.
Australian Medical Association president Steve Robson said those pushing for the isolation periods to be cut were “not scientifically literate and are putting the public at risk”.
The strongest push for liberalisation has come consistently from the NSW government. Albanese said the national cabinet decision was unanimous.
Explaining the move from “COVID exceptionalism” Albanese told a joint news conference with the other first ministers that as decision makers “we have a responsibility to listen to the health advice but we’ve also got a responsibility to make decisions which are proportionate. That is what we have done.”
“We are changing our position based upon changing advice and changing circumstances. And that has to occur. There’s not a role for government in running every bit of people’s lives for ever. And that is my firm position.”
He said “the nature of emergency measures is that they’re not there with no end date in sight”.
“The flu has existed, and health issues have existed, for a long period of time, and the government hasn’t always stepped in to pay people’s wages while people have health concerns. It is not sustainable to have in place a system whereby the government steps in permanently.”
Kelly, sitting beside Albanese at the news conference, said “Isolation itself cannot be seen in isolation”.
It needed to be seen in the context of Australia’s high vaccination rate, high previous infection giving further protection, the availability of treatments, and measures in place to protect the vulnerable.
“It is time to move away from COVID exceptionalism, in my view, and thinking about what we should do to protect people from any respiratory disease.”
Kelly provided his advice on Thursday. The first ministers discussed the change over dinner on Thursday night.
In his letter of advice Kelly said: “In the current Australian context of low community transmission and high hybrid immunity from vaccination and recent infection, it is my view that removing mandated isolation requirements in the current period would not materially detract from Australia’s pandemic response and would be consistent with the current aims of that response.
“We have seen a rapid and substantial decrease in cases, hospitalisations and ICU admissions, and the number and size of Residential Aged Care outbreaks since the peak of the most recent BA.5 wave at the end of July 2022.
“Whilst we are closely monitoring new sub-variants of the Omicron variant which continue to emerge, at this stage the situation in Australia is stable.
“In contrast to earlier stages in the pandemic response, Australia now has a number of readily accessed pharmaceutical measures (vaccines and treatments), rapid diagnostic capability, adequate personal protective equipment and appropriate infection prevention and control procedures to protect those at higher risk of severe COVID-19 and to limit outbreaks in high-risk settings.
“On the basis of these current epidemiological and pandemic control settings, in the context of high underlying immunity within the population, as well as readily available pharmaceutical interventions, I consider that a change in mandated isolation periods at this time is a reasonable approach.”
However Kelly stressed new waves of COVID were highly likely and constant vigilance was needed. He urged a detailed transition plan to “adequately prepare Australia to respond to a surge in cases”.
Business, anxious to ensure the economy is as open as possible, especially in light of the worsening economic head winds, welcomed the decision.
The Ai Group (Australian Industry Group) said scrapping the mandatory isolation period “gets the balance right between the health of the community and the desperate need for workers facing so many businesses”.
Meanwhile the Australian Defence Force assistance to aged care facilities to help with COVID ended on Friday. This support has been provided throughout the pandemic, with reinforced efforts announced in February, after Omicron surged.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The leading causes of death in England and Wales are dementia and Alzheimer’s disease; heart disease; cerebrovascular diseases (such as stroke); cancer; and COVID. Other notable causes include chronic lower respiratory diseases (such as asthma); influenza; and pneumonia.
In fact, “old age” as a cause of death – alongside the vague description of “frailty” – is often categorised under “symptoms, signs, and ill-defined conditions”.
This latter category is in the top ten causes of death. But this currently trails well below COVID, and on average over a five year period, below influenza and pneumonia.
Old age, as a category for causing death, has a long history. It was a leading cause of death in the 19th century, alongside the vague description of “found dead”.
In the mid-19th century, registering someone’s death moved from clerical to secular, with the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1836 (UK).
Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking wrote that dying of anything other than what was on the official list was “illegal, for example, to die of old age”.
We may say this is a bit hyperbolic. Surely, by the end of the 19th century, it was not illegal to die of old age?
What this suggests is that providing a precise cause of death is important because it’s a valuable tool for tracking mortality trends at different levels of the population.
Eventually, “old age” became a last resort phrase to describe an unknown cause of death. Or it became useful where a person may have died from a number of complications, but where it was not practical or ethical to order an autopsy to find the precise underlying cause of death.
The other reason why “old age” has been seldom used as the cause of death in the 20th and 21st centuries was that it doesn’t provide any closure to families of the deceased.
Research shows families want information about how their loved one died, not only because it can be useful for managing their own health concerns, but also because it provides a resolution to their loved one’s death.
An unknown cause of death can exacerbate grief and trauma, particularly if the death was sudden or unexpected. Researchers have long argued families form continuing relationships with their loved one after they die. Ascertaining how they died is one part of how the family members left behind manage their grief and memorialise the deceased.
A good death
We may decide that asking for more information about how the queen died at the age of 96 is just macabre titillation. We may decide the royal family deserves privacy surrounding intimate details of the queen’s death.
However, a specific cause of death of someone who lived a privileged life and who died at an old age, for instance, can tell us much about how to lead a healthy life and plan for a good death.
Among the many questions raised by the Optus data leak – cybersecurity experts are confident it wasn’t a hack, but that may have to be decided by a court – is why the company was storing so much personal information for so long.
Optus had a legitimate need to collect that data – to verify customers were real people and potentially to recover any debts later. This is known as a “know your customer” (or “KYC”) requirement.
But the reason about 4 million former customers along with 5.8 million current customers are now worrying about their driver’s licences, passport numbers and Medicare numbers ending up in the hands of criminals is due to Optus hanging on to it for six years.
It is required by the Telecommunications Consumer Protections Code, the industry code of practice overseen by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, to provide customers (or former customers) billing information for “up to six years prior to the date the information is requested”.
But your name, address and account reference number should be all it needs for this, not your passport, driver’s licence or Medicare details. If it needs to confirm your identity it could simply ask for documents again.
The only clear legal requirement for it to keep “information for identification purposes” comes from the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979, which requires that identification information and metadata be kept for two years (to assist law enforcement and intelligence agencies).
The big problem with Australia’s data retention laws is that there’s really no limit on how long a company can keep personal data.
The federal Privacy Act says only that information must be destroyed “where the entity no longer needs the information for any purpose for which the information may be used or disclosed by the entity”.
That’s a loose requirement. A company could theoretically argue it “needs” to keep customer information for anything – such as defending against a civil claim in court, as part of its corporate records, or for marketing. This is especially the case when we have consented to those uses when we sign up for the services, another practice the Privacy Act allows.
This is a serious weakness with our privacy laws. Consumer data is big business. Companies are collecting – and keeping – much more personal information than they need without a truly legitimate commercial or legal purpose.
I call this trend “hyper-collection”. It’s turning companies into goldfields for hackers. Once personal information is stolen there is often little authorities can do.
Australia needs to get more serious about unnecessary data collection and retention. As technology gets more interwoven into our daily lives, protecting personal data presents massive challenges.
The need for vigilance should have been made clear to the federal government in 2020, when its own myGov website was hacked.
The usernames and passwords of thousands of accounts were made available for sale on the dark web. Anyone buying those details would have had access to Medicare, Centrelink, National Disability Insurance Scheme and tax office records.
The Australian government’s MyGov website was hacked in 2020. Shutterstock
Privacy laws are too weak both in obligations and penalties. The fines for “serious interference with privacy” are $444,000 for individuals and $2.2 million for companies – hardly enough for a corporation the size of Optus to sit up and take notice. Nor do they offer comfort to those affected.
Legislative action is needed to clarify what information companies can collect, how they can collect it, and what they can do with it.
There are two obvious opportunities for the federal government to act.
The first is in its response to recommendations arising from the Attorney-General’s Department’s long-running review of the Privacy Act (which has yet to deliver its final report). Ironically Optus made a submission to the review that actually suggested weakening privacy protections.
The intention of this plan appears to be to treat data as a national asset. If so, it should strengthen policy and legislation around security, ensure Australians know their rights and responsibilities, and ensure consistent responses to cybercrime.
We need to scrutinise every company – not just Optus, and not just after the fact – and ask questions about their data collection. Why do they need to know things? What information are they keeping, how long for and why?
Without action, the next breach at this kind is a matter of when, not if.
We asked Optus to clarify the reasons it needs to keep identification data for six years but received no response.
Brendan Walker-Munro receives funding from the Australian Government through Trusted Autonomous Systems, a Defence Cooperative Research Centre funded through the Next Generation Technologies Fund.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ariadna Matamoros-Fernández, Senior Lecturer in Digital Media at the School of Communication, Queensland University of Technology
Viviana Rishe/Unsplash
We live in deeply unequal societies where certain groups, such as racial and sexual minorities, continue to experience structural oppression. Humour targeted at these groups can cause individual harm through its cumulative effects, and contribute to broader social harms too.
Much of our social interaction today takes place online. So it makes sense that significant attention is paid to issues such as online hate speech, harassment and misinformation.
However, a more challenging problem is the conduct of users who aren’t necessarily trying to harm others, but still participate online in ways that can do so. For example, TikTok users have participated in viral parody challenges that trivialise police brutality, domestic violence and even the Holocaust.
The COVID-19 health crisis pushed digital platforms to curb the spread of misinformation, but it seems they did less to minimise anti-Asian content – despite signs the pandemic was being “racialised”.
In our research, we investigated how the “humorous” racist stereotyping of people of Asian descent emerged on TikTok during the pandemic, and how such behaviour should be addressed.
TikTok and racial humour
TikTok has become hugely popular across generations. Its “use this sound” feature allows users to remix audio from other videos, making it a unique platform to study racist stereotyping.
For our research we collected TikTok videos posted from January to June in 2020, with the hashtag #coronavirus, and other hashtags relevant to our research (such as “#asian” and “#funny”, for example).
We also included videos tagged with keywords related to China (#china, #chinacoronavirus, #wuhan) and with #Australia, to potentially collect examples from within the country (which has a history of anti-Asian racism).
Once we removed duplicates, unavailable videos, and videos in a language other than English, we obtained a dataset of 639 TikTok videos. After closely analysing these, we found 93 videos displayed examples of racist humour.
‘Yellow peril’ memes
Among the videos were “yellow peril” memes. These were about people or objects being “contaminated” with coronavirus by extension of their connection to China, or other Asian countries. The “yellow peril” trope dehumanises people from Asian countries by posing them as a threat to Western countries.
Three types of “yellow peril” memes were noticed in our sample:
memes targeting people of Asian descent as being the cause of coronavirus spreading
memes where people react in horror or disgust when they receive packages or goods from China
memes that blame the coronavirus on practices such as eating wild animals.
We also found a form of “digital yellowface”. In these videos users applied the “use this sound” feature to parody Asian accents in English or say “Asian sounding words” by speaking gibberish, or words like “Subaru” (the Japanese car brand) in an exaggerated way.
Some users dramatised their face to further embody the offensive caricature they were trying to portray.
Scholars researching racist stereotyping online have warned that “certain dialects, vocal ranges, and vernacular are deemed noisy, improper, or hyperemotional by association with blackness”.
During COVID-19, non-Asian users appropriated “Asian sounds” on TikTok in a similar way. They portrayed people of Asian descent as irrational or overly emotional, reducing an entire racial group to a mere caricature.
Actor Mickey Rooney did ‘yellowface’ in the 1961 film Breakfast at Tiffany’s – a depiction that’s now rightly considered very racist. Wiki Commons
What has TikTok done?
TikTok has enabled users to willingly or unwillingly contribute to racist discourse that dehumanised Chinese people, and other Asian people, over the course of the pandemic.
We are not claiming a direct causal link between this racist stereotyping and real-world violence. But research has shown attaching an illness to an historically marginalised group has immediate and longer-term negative social effects in societies.
Although TikTok joined the European Commission’s Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online in 2020, its policies still do not provide a detailed explanation of when humour can have the capacity to harm.
To improve the moderation of harmful humour, TikTok could modify its community guidelines and reporting processes to acknowledge the way humour targeted at historically-marginalised groups can have severe consequences.
This would be similar to Facebook’s expansion of its hate speech policy in 2020 to include harmful stereotypes (which came after the platform consulted with advocacy groups and experts).
TikTok’s moderation of racialised harmful humour doesn’t necessarily have to entail takedowns and user bans. There are several other remedies available. The platform could:
educate users by tagging or labelling dubious or potentially harmful content
reduce the visibility of content through algorithmic demotion
restricting engagement functionalities on “humorous” content that’s likely to cause harm.
One thing’s for sure: we can no longer excuse racism under the guise of humour. Beyond individuals, social media platforms have a responsibility to make sure they address racist humour, since it can and does cause real harm.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathleen McPhillips, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Social Science, University of Newcastle
Catholic women across the world are calling for a wide range of reforms to the church, according to the results of our survey of more than 17,000 Catholic women from over 100 countries published this month.
A substantial majority were concerned about the prevalence of abuse, racism, and sexism in church contexts, and many raised issues relating to transparency and accountability in church leadership and governance.
The International Survey of Catholic Women is one of the most extensive surveys of Catholic women ever undertaken, and its findings should inform lasting and genuine change in the Catholic Church.
The aim of the survey was to gather feedback on the experiences of Catholic women. It provides insights into the complex realities of Catholic women’s lives, the ways in which they express their faith, and their relationships with the institutional church. We devised and managed the survey along with Professor Tina Beattie from the University of Roehampton, London.
The large number of responses clearly indicates a desire by Catholic women to share their aspirations and frustrations, and to make their views on the situation of women in the Catholic Church known to the Synod.
Respondents identified themselves as women from all walks of life – single, married, divorced, LGBTIQ, and religious. While the findings cannot claim to be representative of all Catholic women, they articulate the diverse hopes and struggles of women in the worldwide church.
The views of Catholic women reflect the cultural and communal contexts within which their faith is experienced and practised. This diversity is rarely represented in church documents or theology, and many women struggle to see the relevance of church teachings to the complex realities of their lives.
Many women ‘conflicted’ with the Catholic Church
The survey found that even when women have considerable struggles with Catholic institutions, nearly 90% said their Catholic identity is important to them. Many continue to practise their faith despite ongoing difficulties with the institutional church.
Several respondents used words like “frustrated”, “hurt”, “angry”, and “conflicted” when describing their relationship with the church.
Most respondents said they would welcome reform in the Catholic Church, especially – but not exclusively – regarding the role and representation of women.
One woman from Australia observed “we walk the line of being valuable members of society but voiceless in many elements of the church”. Another, from Nicaragua said, “stop making women invisible”.
A minority of respondents expressed a preference for church reform based on a pre-Vatican II model of authority, priesthood, and liturgy. Vatican II was an important meeting of all Catholic bishops held in Rome between 1962-1965 who made progressive decisions about the future of the worldwide church.
Respondents consistently identified the sexual, physical, and emotional abuse of women, children, and other vulnerable people as a central problem for the church.
Some respondents disclosed experiences of abuse and harassment, while others expressed disappointment at the lack of effective action to address the crisis of sexual abuse.
One woman from Canada wrote:
they have a long way to go in dealing with the scandal and cover up. I know this firsthand. I feel as betrayed by the institutional betrayal as I do by my abuser […] This is coming from a committed lifelong Catholic who has never left the church.
Many respondents were deeply concerned about transparency and accountability in church leadership and governance. There was agreement that a less hierarchical and authoritarian model of the church was urgently needed, with greater collaboration and sharing of authority between clergy and laity (lay people).
A substantial majority of respondents identified clericalism as having a negative impact on church life. Clericalism is the idealisation of male clerics and subsequent abuses of power.
A respondent from Panama remarked, “I wish that women had more voice and that we were not abused by clericalism that excludes us and takes away our dignity”.
Most respondents linked their Catholic identity with social justice, and wanted church leaders to address poverty and marginalisation. Several raised the issue of economic justice in church affairs, including the lack of adequate pay for female church workers, both lay and religious.
The challenge for the Synod is to demonstrate that the many concerns raised by respondents in the survey are carefully listened to and addressed.
Kathleen McPhillips receives funding from the Fidel Götz Foundation
Tracy McEwan receives funding from the Fidel Götz Foundation.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bronwyn Carlson, Professor, Indigenous Studies and Director of The Centre for Global Indigenous Futures, Macquarie University
Moratorium for Black rights Sydney from the film NINGLA ANA
This year, we acknowledge the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, the site of the longest protest for Indigenous land rights, sovereignty and self-determination in the world.
Now, a documentary made at the time of the Embassy’s establishment, Ningla-A’Na (“hungry for our land”), has been restored and is being re-released in Australian cinemas.
Gary Foley, one of the people who established the Embassy, calls it “the single most important film on the Aboriginal political struggle in the last 50 years”.
Director Alessandro Cavadini was the only filmmaker who was able to get up close and film intimate footage of the organisation and thinking behind the establishment of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy. The film also looks at the Aboriginal Medical Service, the Aboriginal Legal Service and the National Black Theatre.
The documentary features some of our most militant political organisers well known for their involvement in the Black Liberation movement, with footage of Foley, Paul Coe, Roberta Sykes, Isabelle Coe, Bob Maza, Shirley Smith – more fondly known as “Mum Shirl” – and many other significant Aboriginal voices from the 1970s.
But watching the film 50 years on, it feels to me we are still having the same conversations we did in the 1970s.
A protest embassy
The Aboriginal Tent Embassy was established as a protest to prime minister Billy McMahon’s announcement his government would never grant Aboriginal land rights.
This left Aboriginal people little choice other than to mobilise and become strategically politicised. The Black Liberation movement was, and continues to be, focused on the oppressive systems that operate to harm Aboriginal peoples and deny human rights.
As I watched Ningla-A’Na, I felt a great sense of pride at the staunch stand made by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, even as they faced violent police intervention.
In one moment in the film, Mum Shirl steps forward with determination to ensure her grandchild bears witness to the Black leadership driving the movement.
While set around the establishment of the Tent Embassy, Ningla-A’Na places this into the broader political conversation of the time.
The film captures the absolute frustration Aboriginal people felt with decades of inaction by governments to address the high levels of discrimination and racism, including the high rates of Aboriginal child mortality.
Protesters outside Old Parliament House, July 1972 from the film NINGLA ANA.
Fred Hollows features, speaking to the disgraceful state of healthcare Aboriginal people were suffering.
Hollows speaks about trachoma in Aboriginal communities, and how it had been eradicated in non-Indigenous communities. Trachoma is one of the major causes of preventable blindness in the world. In Australia it is solely a disease of Aboriginal people.
The neglect of the government to provide adequate healthcare and address racism is an ongoing battle seen recently in the ABC Four Corners report highlighting the ongoing deaths of Aboriginal people from preventable diseases.
Throughout the documentary, Aboriginal people are told to approach the situation politely and not swear or be angry.
But the people at the heart of this story have had enough of being told to be polite to appease the people and structures that continue to oppress them.
Police making arrests in George St from the film NINGLA ANA.
Anger circulates throughout the film. Anger can be an immensely effective force. This is why oppressed groups are almost inevitably discouraged from expressing anger.
Aboriginal people’s anger, their refusal to move on, their refusal to “reconcile” can clearly be understood as hope for a different future.
Ningla-A’Na shows people imagining a future without their children dying young or being removed from their families. A future where Aboriginal people are not killed in custody and have access to healthcare. A future in which Aboriginal lives matter.
Black liberation
In one scene, Isabelle Coe is talking about the white women who are trying to convince Aboriginal women to join the feminist movement. “Blacks have to liberate ourselves” she says.
I am reminded of the contemporary work of Jackie Huggins and Aileen Moreton Robinson, who have both challenged white feminism and its lack of consideration or inclusion of Aboriginal women.
Aboriginal women are discriminated against for being both a woman and for being Aboriginal.
Embassy protesters from the film NINGLA ANA.
Interviewed in the film, Gary Foley talks about his frustrations that the broader population is completely devoid of any knowledge of the basic principles that are at stake.
Aboriginal people have never been idle when it comes to defending our lands and fighting for land rights.
From the resistance to British colonisation recently highlighted in the documentary The Australian Wars to coordinated protests to “abolish the monarchy” to the #LandBack movement using digital technologies, Aboriginal people continue to call for action and land to be returned.
Ningla-A’Na is a must-watch. It is a glimpse into the past with all too much relevance to contemporary struggles.
Bronwyn Carlson no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
With more of us living into old age than at any other time, dementia is increasing steadily worldwide, with major individual, family, societal and economic consequences.
Treatment remains largely ineffective and aspects of the underlying pathophysiology are still unclear. But there is good evidence that neurodegenerative diseases – and their manifestation as dementia – are not an inevitable consequence of ageing.
COVID and other viral infections are centrally involved in insults to the brain and subsequent neurodegeneration. COVID-positive outpatients have a more than three-fold higher risk of Alzheimer’s and more than two-fold higher risk of Parkinson’s disease.
A study of almost three million found risks of psychiatric disorders following COVID infection returned to baseline after one to two months. But other disorders, including “brain fog” and dementia, were still higher than among controls two years later.
Among more than six million adults older than 65, individuals with COVID were at a 70% higher risk than the uninfected for a new diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease within a year of testing positive for COVID.
More than 150,000 people with COVID and 11 million controls have been involved in a study of long-term consequences of acute COVID infection. A year after infection, there was an overall 40% higher risk (an additional 71 cases per 1000 people) of neurologic disorders, including memory problems (80% higher risk) and Alzheimer’s disease (two-fold higher risk). These risks were elevated even among those not hospitalised for acute COVID.
SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID, can invade brain tissue. Other viruses can also cause direct damage to the brain. A study of almost two million people showed the risk of Alzheimer’s was markedly lower in those who had been vaccinated against influenza.
The cost of dementia
Dementia is characterised by progressively deteriorating cognitive function. This involves memory, thinking, orientation, comprehension, language and judgement, often accompanied by changes in mood and emotional control.
It is one of the major causes of disability among older people. Worldwide prevalence exceeds 55 million and there are almost ten million new cases annually. It is the seventh leading cause of death. In 2019, the estimated global cost of dementia was US$1.3 trillion and rising.
The best known form of dementia – Alzheimer’s – was first described in 1907. Dementia is generally described as developing in three stages:
impairment of memory, losing track of time and becoming lost in familiar places
further deterioration of memory with forgetfulness of names and recent events, becoming confused at home, losing communication skills and personal care habits, repeated questioning, wandering
increased difficulty walking, progressing to inactivity, marked memory loss, involving failure to recognise relatives and friends, disorientation in time and place, changes in behaviour, including lack of personal care and emergence of aggression.
There are no cures and no resounding treatment successes. Management involves support for patients and carers to optimise physical activity, stimulate memory and treat accompanying physical or mental illness.
But we do know about many of the causes of dementia and therefore about prevention. In addition to viral infections, there are at least four other contributing causes: cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes (especially if untreated), traumatic brain injury and alcohol.
In the absence of effective treatment, prevention is an important goal. The association with viral infections means we should pay careful attention to vaccine availability and uptake (for influenza, COVID and any future variants) and place greater emphasis on combatting misinformation regarding vaccines.
The association with atherosclerosis and stroke, as well as diabetes, supports primary prevention that involves healthier diets (plant-based diets low in salt and saturated fats), physical activity and weight control.
Alcohol consumption is a major problem globally. We have allowed high intake to be normalised and talk about no more than two glasses per day as though that is innocuous. Despite the myth of some beneficial aspects of alcohol, the safest intake is zero drinks per week.
This requires a complete national rethink around the availability and acceptability of alcohol as well as assistance with alcohol addiction and treatment of alcohol-related disorders.
Traumatic brain injury is associated with sport and, more importantly, falls and car crashes. It is recognised as a global priority and there is increasing awareness of the preventability of falls among older people. The management of head injuries is being ramped up in contact sports.
However, data on the impact of best management of the initial injury on subsequent risk of dementia are lacking and risk remains elevated even 30 years after the initial trauma.
The evidence that dementia has preventable causes, including viral infection, should better inform policy and our own behaviour.
John Donne Potter 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.
Eliud Kipchoge crosses the line to win the Berlin Marathon on September 25, 2022.Christoph Soeder/AP
Sixty-nine seconds.
In that time, you could reheat a cuppa in the microwave or get halfway through brushing your teeth. But for Eliud Kipchoge, the greatest men’s marathoner of all time, his life’s work has come down to a cruel clutch of seconds.
After surpassing his own world record in Berlin on Sunday, 69 seconds is all that separates him from breaking the historic “sub-2” barrier – that is, completing a full marathon (42.195 kilometres) in under two hours.
Kipchoge’s new world record of 2h, 1m and 9s was an astonishing achievement, even by his own lofty standards. It was 30s faster than his previous record (also set in Berlin, in 2018) and the second-largest lowering of the world record since 2003 (Kipchoge himself has the largest margin).
Is Kipchoge well on the way to breaking the elusive sub-2 hour marathon barrier?
The moment Eliud Kipchoge broke his world record in Berlin, on September 25, 2022. Omer Messinger/AP Images for Abbott
But wait, didn’t he already go sub-2?
First, let’s go back a step.
Back in October, 2019, Kipchoge took part in a commercial enterprise set up entirely to see him make history. Running 4.4 laps around Vienna’s Prater Hauptallee, behind a phalanx of elite distance runners set out in exquisite formation, Kipchoge kept up an alarming pace of 2m and 52s per kilometre for 42.195km.
The clock stopped to euphoric crowds and a seemingly transcendental Kipchoge; he’d smashed the sub-2 barrier with a time of 1h 59m and 40s. But as Kipchoge himself knew, an asterisk forever sits next to this time.
Kipchoge celebrates his sub-2 record in Vienna in 2019. EPA/Christian Bruna
The International Association of Athletics Federation’s rules stipulate the event must be a sanctioned race, pacers can’t substitute in and out of the event at whim, and nutrition must be taken from stationary tables (not bikes riding next to the runner as Kipchoge did in Vienna). Each of these rules was set aside for the “historic” attempt in 2019.
You may think this is overreaching by officials. But the fact is ignoring these rules does confer an advantage. And at this end of the competition, seconds determine the whole ball game.
So for all the wonder of that day, the official record remained that which Kipchoge set in 2018 in Berlin: 2h 1m and 39s. That is, until Sunday.
Using statistical tools, we can estimate not only the average tendency for the fastest marathon time to drop over the course of history, but also the likelihood that a given time will be run on a given day.
The approach I take is to fit a mathematical model to the trend of marathon records improving over time, as shown in the figure below. I can not only make predictions (by extending the fitted trend forward), but can also calculate the likelihood of a new record appearing below the average fitted trend.
It’s here the statistics get interesting.
In one previous prediction, I calculated the official sub-2 barrier would not be broken until May 2032.
Specifically, in this scenario I assumed it would be set by a highly exceptional runner even more talented than Kipchoge. This fictional runner, let’s call them runner X, would have not only accumulated the performance gains of previous generations, but would be exceptional within their own generation too.
In likelihood terms, runner X is assumed to be a “1 in 10” runner – forever navigating the 1 in 10 likelihood line of marathon progression as shown in the figure below. Runner X improves their time and gets a little faster every week, eventually crossing the sub-2 barrier in May, 2032.
Modelling the historical male marathon WR progression, before adding in the new WR set on 25 Sep 2022. Author created
Importantly, this figure shows predictions before Kipchoge’s newest record is added to the modelling, though we place his record on the figure (as “+”) to contextualise his performance.
Based on this modelling, if runner X turned up in Berlin on Sunday they would already be skating closer to the sub-2 line than Kipchoge managed – finishing at 2h 32s or better (about 37s faster than Kipchoge). You can see this time marked as the square in the figure.
But marathoners are not robots. And the monumental cog of any grand human endeavour moves forward in exhilarating leaps, not metronomic steps.
When will we see an official sub-2?
Until now, I’ve discussed predictions based on records from before Sunday’s run. What happens if I add Kipchoge’s newest record run into the annals of records past, and let the model reassess?
Here are the results.
Modelling the historical male marathon WR progression. Author created.
Two insights fall out of this new analysis. First, the goalposts have moved – substantially.
With Kipchoge’s new record included, runner X’s chance of breaking sub-2 has moved forward nine years from May 2032 to April 2023 – next year! A single data point has shifted the expectations significantly.
The second observation is also important. Have a look at the world records (the blue markers) in the plot and you’ll notice since the 1980s they all fall within the main alley, near the bold grey line.
This model tells us no runner has broached the 1 in 4 likelihood line in more than 40 years. Kipchoge runs near it, but even he falls closer to the average than to the “extraordinary”.
In other words, when trying to realistically predict when we might see a runner break the sub-2 barrier, perhaps we should look at when this would happen for someone like Kipchoge who runs close to the 1 in 4 line – rather than someone like runner X.
That brings us back to the important question: when would a runner of Kipchoge’s calibre break the sub-2 barrier?
Based on the current world record data, a runner as extraordinary as Kipchoge will demand the world’s patience, with an estimated time of November, 2031.
The statistics present us with a choice. Either we look to a runner in the mould of Kipchoge and expect the official sub-2 breakthrough in 2031, or we hold onto the hope of a seemingly impossible runner X to emerge and achieve this in the next 12 months.
Perhaps Kipchoge is teaching us something important: there is such a thing as extraordinary enough.
Life is full of the extraordinary. With elite marathon running, we can attempt to quantify it. In this rarefied realm Kipchoge is king, and perhaps the most extraordinary aspect of all is his unfettered joy in the running.
Simon D Angus receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation, the Judith Neilson Institute, and the Defence, Science & Technology Group (Department of Defence). He is a co-founder of SoDa Laboratories, Monash Business School, and co-founder and the Director of the Monash IP Observatory, Monash University, and co-founder and director of KASPR Datahaus Pty Ltd. He serves on the board of City on a Hill Movement Pty Ltd.
Common colds are caused by viruses. There are no effective cures, and antibiotics do not work on viruses, so treatment is targeted at managing the symptoms until your immune system has cleared the cold.
So why might someone go to a doctor at all for a cold?
Well, occasionally a cold might turn into something more serious requiring assessment and specific treatment, and a GP visit could be warranted. Or you may just want reassurance and advice.
Problems arise when there too many unwarranted visits to GPs for cold symptoms.
Studies have shown antibiotics are still prescribed widely for viral colds, even though they don’t help, and this contributes to antibiotic resistance. It hastens the arrival of an era when many antibiotics simply don’t work at all.
Some people are more prone to colds, but we don’t know exactly why.
The usual cold persists about one week, although 25% last two weeks. In one study with 346 adults, the infection lasted 9.5 to 11 days.
Cold symptoms may last longer in younger children. One study showed an average duration of colds ranged from 6.6 to 9 days. But symptoms lasted more than 15 days in 6.5% of 1-3 year old children in home care, and 13.1% of 2-3 year old children in day care.
A cough tends to last longer than other symptoms, and often beyond the actual viral infection. The average duration of a cough is about 17.8 days.
Discoloured mucus in snot or cough is a common trigger for requesting antibiotics from a GP. But as we know, antibiotics are useless against a virus. They only work against bacterial infection.
In fact, thick or coloured nasal mucus secretion is common following colds. Only a tiny proportion involve bacterial infection.
When it happens, this is termed acute rhinosinusitis. But antibiotics are not recommended unless it lasts more than ten to 14 days and there are signs of bacterial sinusitis infection, such as:
symptoms worsening after improvement in the original cold
return of fever and
strong facial pain.
A prolonged cough after colds is usually caused by an irritated throat or the clearing of sticky mucus coming down from the nose. The cough may sound moist (so wrongly called “chesty”) due to the phlegm, but only small amounts of phlegm are coughed up.
Yellow or green coloured mucus is often interpreted as a sign of bacterial infection.
But yellow or green sputum alone does not mean you have a serious bacterial infection. One study found being prescribed antibiotics under these circumstances failed to shorten recovery time.
Nasal saline sprays and washes can be used to rinse out the nose and sinuses and possibly shorten rhinosinusitis and cough after colds.
Could it just be hayfever, or another underlying issue?
Hayfever or allergic rhinitis is a common cause for prolonged symptoms after a cold, especially cough and nasal congestion and maybe also sneezing.
The damage in the upper airways following a viral infection may allow airborne allergens to trigger hayfever. Self-medicating with antihistamines, nasal saline spray or intranasal steroids is worthwhile if allergic rhinitis is suspected.
There may be other reasons for persistence of cough, such as exacerbation of underlying asthma or chronic lung disease. If so, this may require a visit to your GP.
What about bronchitis or pneumonia?
Many people worry about developing a chest infection after a cold.
Acute bronchitis is a self-limiting infectious disease characterised by acute cough with or without sputum but without signs of pneumonia (such as high temperatures and feeling breathless). Most acute bronchitis cases are caused by viruses. Antibiotics are often prescribed, but produce no significant clinical improvement compared with placebo, so are not recommended.
Pneumonia is a potentially serious secondary disease that may follow an episode of flu in a small number of cases, but is relatively rare following a cold. Symptoms and signs of pneumonia feature heavily in the list of warning signs that signal the need for a medical assessment.
Sometimes, contacting your GP is a good idea. Shutterstock
When should I seek medical help for a cough or a cold?
Contact a GP if you experience:
shortness of breath or trouble breathing
feeling faint or dizzy
chest pain
dehydration
fever or cough symptoms that improve but then return or worsen
worsening of chronic medical conditions such as asthma.
This is not a complete list, but may guide you on what to expect and what to watch out for.
You might also contact your GP (perhaps for a telehealth consult) if you are finding your symptoms very unpleasant, or are concerned your condition is more serious or prolonged than expected. You might just need reassurance and education about self care options.
David 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.
The oceans absorb more than 90% of all extra heat trapped by the emissions we’ve produced by burning fossil fuels. This heat is enormous. It’s as if we exploded an atom bomb underwater, every second of every day.
The ocean isn’t warming at the same rate everywhere. We know the heat is concentrated in the fast, narrow currents that flow along the east coasts of the world’s continents and funnel warm water from the tropics down towards the poles.
In the Southern Hemisphere, these currents – known as the western boundary currents – are warming faster than the global average at their southern limits, creating ocean warming hotspots.
Until now, we haven’t known exactly why. These western boundary currents are particularly important in the Southern Hemisphere, which is more than 80% ocean compared to just 60% for the Northern Hemisphere.
Our new research has found a vital part of the puzzle: strong easterly winds in the mid-latitudes are moving south, driving the western boundary currents further south and leading to faster ocean warming in these areas.
What are these currents and why do they matter?
These streams of warm water are like fast-flowing rivers in the oceans. They flow rapidly in a narrow band along the western side of the world’s major ocean basins, passing densely populated coastlines in South Africa, Australia and Brazil where hundreds of millions of people live.
These currents often play a role in regulating local climates. Think of the most well known of these currents, the Northern Hemisphere’s Gulf Stream, which has for millennia ensured Europe is much warmer than it would otherwise be given its latitude.
In the Southern Hemisphere, we have three major sub-tropical western boundary currents, the Agulhas Current in the Indian Ocean, the East Australian Current in the Pacific Ocean and the Brazil Current in the Atlantic Ocean.
Ocean currents tend to move in very large circles, with currents running down the western boundaries ferrying heat from the tropics. NASA, CC BY-SA
In recent decades, these currents have become hotspots for ocean warming, carrying larger and larger amounts of heat south. Since 1993, the East Australian Current has moved southward at around 33 kilometres per decade, while the Brazil Current is moving south by around 46 kilometres per decade. The currents send heat and moisture into the atmosphere as they flow. In their southernmost reaches, the heat they carry displaces the colder ocean and warms it rapidly. These areas of the ocean are warming two to three times faster than the global average.
As the currents carry more heat energy, they also generate more ocean eddies – large rotating spirals of water spinning off from the main current. If you’ve looked closely at the way a fast flowing stream flows, you’ll see small eddies forming and dissolving all the time.
Why do these eddies matter? Because they’re the way heat actually ends up in the cold seas. As the eddies get faster and more loaded with heat, they act as path-breakers, carrying heat further south and eventually into the deep ocean. This is why NASA is soon to launch a new satellite to track these eddies, responsible for up to half of all heat transfer to the deep.
Our team have a research cruise planned for September next year aboard RV Investigator, Australia’s research vessel, to explore eddies under the path of this new satellite. This will shed new light on eddy processes in the warming ocean.
Western boundary currents are driven by large-scale winds blowing across ocean basins.
You might have heard of the trade winds. These are the winds traders and mariners used for centuries to go from east to west, taking advantage of winds blowing constantly from the southeast across the tropics and subtropics.
Further south, the strongest winds are the prevailing westerlies, better known by sailors as the Roaring Forties. These westerly winds carry cold fronts and rain, and often stray north to dump rain over Australia.
These westerlies can change track over time, shifting northwards and southwards, depending on a pattern known as the Southern Annular Mode.
At present, this belt of strong westerly winds has strengthened and moved southward in what’s known as the mode’s positive phase. Since 1940, this climate pattern has increasingly favoured this positive phase, which tends to bring drier conditions to Australia.
When we analysed changes in the tropical trade winds over the past three decades, we found they too had shifted poleward 18 km per decade since 1993.
So what does this mean? The trade winds have been pushed further south while the Southern Annual Mode is increasing. As they move south, they drive the western boundary currents further southward.
Even though these currents are carrying ever-warmer water southwards from the tropics, they have not actually become stronger. Rather, they’ve become less stable in their southern regions as they’ve elongated. As the currents are pushed south, they transfer heat energy into the cold seas through chaotic eddies mixing the warmer water with the cold. These eddies aren’t small – they’re between 20 and 200 kilometres wide.
This visualisation shows the Eastern Australian Current and eddy currents spinning off it. NASA, CC BY-SA
What does this mean for people and nature?
Western boundary currents have long played a key role in stabilising our climate, by carrying heat southwards and moderating coastal climates. As these currents warp and become less predictable, they will change how heat is distributed, how gases are dissolved in seawater, and how nutrients are spread across the oceans. In turn, this will mean major changes to local weather patterns and marine ecosystems.
More intense eddies are likely to warm our coastal oceans, too, by moving warm waters closer to shore.
For many people, these currents are out of sight, out of mind. They won’t stay that way. As these vital currents change, they will change the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people who live along the coasts of South Africa, Australia and Brazil.
You’re probably familiar with the sight of a lillipilly bush. This hardy Australian staple – a glossy evergreen bearing powder-puff flowers and clusters of bright berries – features in many a garden hedge.
But you may not know this humble native has spread across the globe in waves of emigration, adaptation and evolution. Almost 1,200 species of lillipilly are now found in rainforests across the tropics and subtropics of Africa, Asia and the Pacific.
Our research helped reconstruct the evolutionary history of lillipillies in unprecedented detail. We show how lillipillies evolved in Australia and now form the largest genus of trees in the world.
Lillipillies are one of Australia’s great gifts to the natural world. But the story of these homegrown heroes may be taking a grim turn.
Show off: the lillipilly is a glossy evergreen bearing clusters of bright berries. Shutterstock
A plant on the move
Lillipillies began their international adventures about 17 million years ago. At that time, the Australian continent (which together with New Guinea is known as the Sahul Shelf) was colliding with Southeast Asia (known as the Sunda Shelf) following its breakup with Antarctica. This breakup was the final dramatic act of the fragmentation of Gondwana.
The collision provided opportunity for biotic exchange between the northern and southern hemispheres. Many plants and animals moved south to the Sahul Shelf and prospered in the new lands. Lillipillies are one of the few lineages that moved in the other direction.
Along with our songbirds, lillipillies stand as a rare example of an Australian group that set out from these shores and achieved major evolutionary success abroad.
Lillipillies are a magnet for pollinators. Shutterstock
Lillipillies light up our lives when they flower and fruit. Their showy white, cream or red flowers are followed by succulent red or purple berries. They’re a magnet for pollinators, helping fill our gardens with the songs of insects and birds.
The riberry, Syzygium luehmannii, is one of the most commonly grown and stunning garden species. It produces heavy crops of delicious fruit rich in antioxidants and prized by chefs.
Many species in the genus are used as food and medicine by Indigenous people, and potent antibacterials have been identified in the leaves of some species. Cloves, a favourite spice of home bakers, are the dried flower buds of an Indonesian lillipilly – the aptly named Syzygium aromaticum.
About 75 species of lillipilly are native to all Australian states and territories except South Australia and Tasmania.
The greatest concentration of species is in the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area of northeast Queensland. About 50 species are found there, half of which occur nowhere else on Earth.
And almost 1,200 species of lillipilly are now found in rainforests across the tropics and subtropics of Africa, Asia and the Pacific, including Australia.
As is common in the tropics, species new to science are regularly discovered and named. For example, almost 30 new species of lillipilly have been named from New Guinea in the last two years – and many more are likely awaiting scientific discovery.
But how did lillipillies achieve such international success? Our research team decided to find out.
The powder-puff flowers of lillipillies light up our lives when they flower. Shutterstock
Peering into the past
The research, led by colleagues in Singapore, involved analysing the genomes of hundreds of living species of lillipillies.
Similarities and differences in the structure of genomes can reveal how closely related the species are. Using that knowledge, we can build up a picture of their genealogy – the “family tree” that connects ancestral species and their descendants.
These techniques also allow us to estimate the amount of genetic change that has occurred along the branches of the genealogy. And, if we’re lucky enough to have an accurately dated fossil of an ancestral species – as we do for lillipillies – we can calculate the rate of genetic change even more accurately.
All this allowed us to peer deeply into the past and reveal the events that set the lillipillies on their global journey.
We already knew lillipillies evolved in Australia and emigrated into the rainforests of Africa, Asia and the Pacific. Our research showed this dispersion occurred in at least a dozen distinct waves.
Each emigrant lineage diversified rapidly and successfully in its new environment. This resulted in the nearly 1,200 lillipilly species found worldwide today – more than any other tree genus. In contrast, their relatives the eucalypts have largely remained only a local success story.
Australia’s eucalypts haven’t conquered the world as lillipillies have. Shutterstock
A sad twist?
Lillipillies may be one of Australia’s most successful botanical exports, but their future, like that of many rainforest plants globally, is threatened by habitat degradation and climate change.
The Magenta Cherry (Syzygium paniculatum), for example, is endangered by coastal development in New South Wales. And the Brotherly Love Lillipilly (Syzygium fratris), found only on Queensland’s highest mountain, is highly vulnerable to climate change.
Myrtle rust – seen here on lillypilly leaves – may be the most potent threat of all. Wikimedia
But a devastating disease – myrtle rust – may be the most potent threat of all. It’s caused by an introduced fungal pathogen and kills new foliage, flowers and fruits of plants in the family Myrtaceae, to which lillipillies belong.
Myrtle rust arrived in Australia in 2010 and spread rapidly in the wind and via human activity. Already, it threatens some plant species with extinction. Lillipilly species have been damaged by this serious disease, though none are under immediate extinction threat yet.
Lillipillies are an Australian origin story. They’re a major contributor to rainforest biodiversity and important to Indigenous cultures. And they’ve endeared themselves to generations of gardeners and cooks.
Given all this, lillipillies deserve to be recognised – and protected – as Aussie icons.
Though they’d be the last to admit it, Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton have more in common than you might expect. They’re both unapologetic pragmatists.
Albanese, a left fighter in the distant past, is the prime minister who looks for consensus where it’s possible and useful, including with his opponent.
Dutton, who built a reputation as a head kicker of the right, as the opposition leader is seeking to reinvent himself as a more nuanced player, willing to negotiate when circumstances or interests demand or justify it.
Hence the two have met on the middle ground over the government’s planned National Anti-Corruption Commission (the NACC).
Even before the legislation was introduced on Wednesday, the government effectively had Dutton’s backing, coming out of direct discussions between him and Albanese.
One aspect on which they’re in accord is the issue that’s brought the sharpest negative reaction from critics: when the commission can hold public hearings.
The NACC would have open hearings only in “exceptional circumstances”. That’s the Victorian Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) model, rather than the wider discretion given to the NSW’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).
Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, saying NACC hearings would be mostly private, points out that’s actually the case with ICAC – only 5% of its hearings are public. (We might get a different impression because ICAC’s public hearings have been so spectacular – think those involving Gladys Berejiklian.)
The government has taken on board the “reputational damage” public hearings can do, even before, or in the absence of, adverse findings.
Those wanting a less restrictive approach include a number of crossbenchers.
The small players might look more principled, but they also have less at risk. Among politicians, it’s those in government (at present, and in the past and future) who are potentially most likely to be in the frame to face investigations.
The major parties have a common interest in putting limits on the circumstances in which there are public hearings. (Remember that only a few years ago both Labor and Liberals were against a federal integrity body, while the Greens were early advocates.)
Some on the crossbench are also annoyed at being effectively marginalised by what amounts to a government-opposition agreement because (assuming the consensus holds) crossbench votes won’t be needed in the Senate.
Dreyfus says the government will look carefully at what comes out of the parliamentary inquiry into the legislation. He says he welcomes suggestions on who should head the commission, insisting the government doesn’t have a name for the job.
Given the amount of power the commission will have, it is vital its head has bipartisan support.
That power will extend to whether and when it might look at “rorts” involving ministerial behaviour in grants schemes.
Dreyfus declines to be drawn on the NACC’s remit here, saying “there’s a spectrum in these discretionary grant programs.
“At one end of the discretionary grant programs what you might have is no more than a minister choosing to disagree with a recommendation of a senior public servant. At the other end of the spectrum you’ve got absolute corruption occurring. Whether or not that’s a proper description is going to be a matter for the National Anti-Corruption Commission.”
He refuses to say where the former government’s sports rorts scheme might fall on that spectrum.
After the short parliamentary inquiry, we’ll likely see a repeat of what happened on the climate legislation. With that, the government accepted crossbench tinkering – to be seen to be consultative – but did not make significant changes.
Dutton’s effort to redefine himself is somewhat more sophisticated than when, launching a coup against Malcolm Turnbull in 2018 (which ended in Scott Morrison becoming leader), he talked about smiling more.
His supporters argue that in government Dutton was more flexible than he appeared, citing his drive for a solution on same sex marriage, but his public image was unrelentingly negative.
As leader Dutton is picking his fights (he opposed the government’s climate legislation) while being willing to co-operate in some areas.
He’s not going out of his way to defend certain aspects of the Morrison government, made easier by the fact he did not have a great deal of time for Morrison as prime minister.
He’s also on the front foot with the media, despite much of it being rugged territory for him. He gave an interview for this week’s Four Corners profile, which probably meant the program worked better for him than if he’d boycotted it.
It’s notable that with the NACC Dutton declared a position ahead of the legislation going to the Coalition party room. Earlier, he had acted pre-emptively on the climate legislation (for which he received some criticism internally).
While he has to be careful with the party room, Dutton is also in a strong position within his own side. He can’t be too high handed – that could trigger white-anting. But the parlous state of the opposition frontbench means he doesn’t have to look over his shoulder – there are no challengers.
By the same token he probably has only one election shot, so he might as well lead from the front.
But both the attempted reinvention, and the challenge of bridging the broad divide within his own ranks, will be extremely difficult for him.
He is in a near impossible position in handling the government’s referendum for an Indigenous Voice to Parliament. Opinions in the Coalition range across the board. A trenchant critic is high-profile new Indigenous senator Jacinta Price.
There has been some speculation the opposition could adopt no formal position. That would reduce the chances of the referendum getting through but put less strain on Coalition unity.
As it ended on Wednesday the last sitting before the October 25 budget, the government had every reason to be pleased with how parliament is going. It has a number of main items from its election agenda introduced and some of them already passed. The NACC is set to go through in November.
It has the blessing of a benign Senate, where it needs the Greens and one more vote to pass contested legislation. The Greens are noisy critics and independent David Pocock, the progressive to whom the government looks for support, is politely vocal. But in the end, on most issues the pivotal votes in the Senate have nowhere else to go.
Politically, the government is travelling as smoothly as it could hope. But politics is only part of the story.
This week the OECD downgraded its forecasts for Australian and world economic growth next year, and those with mortgages braced for another interest rate rise next week. As welcome and important as the NACC reform is, those economic realities will be more front of mind for most Australians.
Michelle Grattan ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
