The Solomon Islands government has threatened to ban or deport foreign journalists “disrespectful” of the country’s relationship with China, according to a statement released by the Prime Minister’s Office this week.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has condemned this “grave infringement on press freedom” and has called on Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare to ensure all journalists remain free to report on the Solomon Islands.
In the detailed statement, the office of the Prime Minister Sogavare on August 24 criticised foreign media for failing to abide by the standards expected of journalists writing and reporting about the affairs of the Solomons Islands.
The government warned it would implement swift measures to prevent journalists who were not “respectful” or “courteous” from entering the country.
The report, entitled Pacific Capture, was accused of “racial profiling” and intentionally using “misinformation” in its recent coverage of the growing influence of China in the Solomon Islands.
“ABC or other foreign media must understand that the manner in which journalists are allowed to conduct themselves in other (countries) does not give them the right to operate in the same manner in the Pacific,” the statement read.
‘Pacific not same as the US’ “The Pacific is not the same as Australia or United States. When you chose to come to our Pacific Islands, be respectful, be courteous and accord the appropriate protocols,” the statement continued.
Journalists could be blocked from Solomon islands. Video: ABC News
On August 24, ABC rejected the claim that the Four Corners programme included “misinformation and distribution of pre-conceived prejudicial information”, with the episode’s main interviewees including two prominent Solomon Islanders.
Solomon Islands has been the subject of global controversy following the signing of a wide-ranging deal with China in April to strengthen Solomon Islands’ national security and address issues of climate change.
On August 1, the government ordered the national radio and television broadcaster SIBC to censor any reports critical of the government, a major blow to press freedom.
Currently, journalists intending to enter Solomon Islands can apply for a visa on arrival. The statement did not reveal how the new restrictions would be enforced nor to whom they would apply.
“The statement released by the office of Prime Minister Sogavare is extremely concerning and, if actioned, will pose a critical threat to press freedom,” the IFJ said.
“The IFJ strongly condemns the threats made by the Solomon Islands government and urges the country to respect the right of all journalists to freedom of expression.”
On Saturday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese met with former NBA star and current TV personality Shaquille O’Neal in Sydney to enlist the sport star’s support for constitutional recognition for an Indigenous voice. O’Neal voiced his support for changes to the Australian Constitution, but is his voice the right one?
The prime minister claimed O’Neal reached out to him because “he wanted to inform himself about what this debate was about”.
Now O’Neal will be a part of the government’s campaign to change the constitution, recording a 15-second advertisement for free. He is meant to be the first of many stars, including unnamed players in the AFL, NRL basketball and netball organisations, to offer their public support for an Indigenous Voice to parliament.
Whose voice should be heard on the issue?
For many, the selection of “Shaq” as a spokesperson for the Indigenous Voice to parliament is a strange one. O’Neal is well-known for his viral and sometimes problematic performances on and off the court.
During his NBA career, O’Neal built a reputation as an overpowering post presence and a savvy media jokester. In his current job as a sports analyst on the popular television show Inside the NBA, he hosts a popular segment known as “Shaq’tin A Fool,” which features bloopers from recent games.
He has made some foolish decisions himself over the years: his feud with Kobe Bryant filled the tabloids for years, the film Kazaam was a ratings failure, and he has made and apologised for a range of racist or possibly homophobic comments.
Most Americans see O’Neal as a charismatic, even playful, person rather than as an engaged athlete activist. The prime minister claimed O’Neal had done great work in the US around “social justice and lifting people up who are marginalised” but has not followed up those comments with any specifics.
Raising awareness
Averill Gordon, Senior Lecturer in Public Relations at Auckland University of Technology, believes the choice of O’Neal will garner widespread domestic and international awareness and support for the Voice to Parliament.
“Athletes are a great way to internationalise an issue as sport and music are key themes used to drive most global PR campaigns.”
“The biggest challenge in a PR campaign is to move the people who are unaware of an issue to become aware,” she said. “Shaquille’s involvement and subsequent communication means people will become aware of this issue and may even become active. It also creates global traction that will feed back to Australia and circulate the message further, adding global interest that will ironically increase Australian awareness.”
She notes the Australian government is addressing a global issue that “affects Australia’s country branding.”
“The (Albanese) government is garnering popular international support to drive a national issue. By using a US opinion leader, it moves this national issue to be recognised as a common global issue.”
Support for conservative causes
The inclusion of O’Neal in the Voice campaign undoubtedly brings attention to the government’s position, but the choice is still considered an odd one by many. Albanese’s problem is not people’s unfamiliarity with the debate over the Indigenous voice, but rather that few people yet know the proposed language of any constitutional change.
It’s important to also note that O’Neal is not an avatar of the sort of progressive politics that encompasses issues like the Voice. In the increasingly political NBA, players such as Lebron James and general managers like Daryl Morey have opened political firestorms with their critiques of Donald Trump and the Chinese government.
O’Neal has previously been tied to more conservative causes. He is a strong supporter of police and sheriff’s departments across the United States, including in Los Angeles, Miami and, controversially, Maricopa Country, Arizona. Maricopa County’s former sheriff, Joe Arpaio, faced criticism for racial profiling, poor conditions for undocumented immigrants, and eventually received a pardon from Trump following his conviction for criminal contempt of court.
If O’Neal has become a progressive, the change happened recently, since he admitted in 2020 that he had never voted. In subsequent political commentary, he argued athletes should keep quiet in the press and social media. He told Sports Illustrated:
My thought is that if you are not an expert on it, or if you haven’t been doing it, don’t do it.
So when did he become an expert on constitutional issues in Australia?
Indigenous voices divided?
The government must also take care that any Voice spokespeople, including O’Neal, do not replace the voices of Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander people. There is a vigorous debate among Indigenous people about the shape of any Voice to parliament.
The push to get an Indigenous voice in federal parliament was a key theme at July’s Garma Festival in northeast Arnhem Land. AAP
Minister for Indigenous Australians and Wiradjuri woman Linda Burney was with Albanese and O’Neal on Saturday. She lauded O’Neal’s efforts, presenting the American with a boomerang made by Indigenous artist Josh Evans and a South Sydney Rabbitohs Indigenous round jersey.
Indigenous politicians from across the political spectrum have illustrated the complexity of this issue in Australia and the unsuitability of O’Neal as a commentator on it. On the political right, Country Liberal Party Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, a Warlpiri woman, said “I’ve no doubt Shaq’s a top bloke but it’s a bit insulting to call on a black American to help with black Australians as if this is all about the colour of one’s skin.” She followed up by calling Albanese’s move a desperate measure.
Green Party’s Senator Lidia Thorpe, of DjabWurrung, Gunnai, and Gunditjmara descent, also took aim at O’Neal. She wrote on Twitter:
‘Nothing about us without us’
In fact, there is reason to worry the selection of O’Neal as a spokesperson might overshadow the work Indigenous Australians have done in the sports space already.
In the past, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander athletes in a range of disciplines including athletics, AFL and Rugby League have used their sporting prestige to bring attention to Indigenous issues. Albanese could conceivably call on a range of beloved current and retired indigenous sports stars, such as Cathy Freeman, Adam Goodes or Ash Barty, to address this complicated issue.
Many Australian sporting institutions, including the Australian Olympic Committee, already have committees devoted to including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices. But that would require Albanese to wade into the complexities of Indigenous politics in Australia rather than take advantage of a celebrity from America.
Polling shows many Australians are already supportive of an Indigenous Voice to parliament. Many in the public, as well as in Canberra, are wary of any decision made without appropriate consultation with Indigenous people and without clear language dictating the relationship between the Indigenous Voice and parliament.
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.
Two months of scorching heatwaves and drought plunged China into an energy security crisis.
The southwest province of Sichuan, for example, relies on dams to generate around 80% of its electricity, with growth in hydropower crucial for China meeting its net-zero by 2060 emissions target.
Sichuan suffered from power shortages after low rainfall and extreme temperatures over 40℃ dried up rivers and reservoirs. Heavy rainfall this week, however, has just seen power in Sichuan for commercial and industrial use fully restored, according to official Chinese media.
The energy crisis has seen Beijing shift its political discourse and proclaim energy security as a more urgent national mission than the green energy transition. Now, the government is investing in a new wave of coal-fired power stations to try to meet demand.
In the first quarter of 2022 alone, China approved 8.63 gigawatts of new coal plants and, in May, announced C¥ 10 billion (A$2.1 billion) of investment in coal power generation. What’s more, it will expand the capacity of a number of coal mines to ensure domestic supply as the international coal market price jumped amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
China is responsible for around a third of global carbon dioxide emissions, which makes this latest rebound to fossil fuels a climate change emergency.
How did it come to this?
In 2021, China’s CO₂ emissions rose above 11.9 billion tonnes – their highest level in history and dwarfing those of other countries. And according to the International Energy Agency, rapid GDP growth and electrification of energy services caused China’s electricity demand to grow by 10% in 2021. This is faster than its economic growth at 8.4%.
China had been attempting to reduce its dependency on coal for decades, with the growth of coal consumption gradually flattening from 2014.
During its 13th Five-Year Plan (2016-2020), the government called off a number of coal power projects. Thermal power investment halved over this time, dropping from C¥ 117.4 billion in 2016 to 55.3 billion in 2020 (A$24.7-11.2 billion).
In September 2020, President Xi Jinping delivered China’s “dual carbon” goal at the United Nations General Assembly, saying China will hit peak emissions before 2030 and reach net-zero by 2060.
A few months later, this goal was moved ahead of schedule. At a summit of global leaders, Jinping promised that China’s coal use would peak in 2025.
But the downward trend of coal consumption started to rebound in 2021, with a 4.6% year-on-year increase, the highest growth rate in a decade.
Over 33 gigawatts of coal power generation, including at least 43 new power plants and 18 new blast furnaces, started construction in China in 2021. This is the highest level since 2016 and almost three times the rest of the world combined.
Then, in 2022, we witnessed the international coal market skyrocket as geopolitical tension from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and economic recovery from the pandemic boosted global demand. Beijing, in turn, increased domestic coal production with double-digit growth in the first half of 2022.
Tug of war between green energy and security
The current energy crisis is not only an unintended consequence of the drought, but also a result of its long-term net-zero emissions goal. Increased coal import costs and rash control of domestic coal production put China’s energy supply in question, and renewable energy wasn’t ready to fill the gap.
Indeed, it isn’t the first energy security crisis China has endured in recent years. Last year, dozens of provinces experienced “power cuts” partly due to long-term reductions in coal production between 2016-2020.
In response to the crisis, the People’s Daily newspaper – the mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party – stated “the rice bowl of energy must be held in your own hands”. And Chinese Energy News called energy security a matter of national destiny.
Caught between green energy promises and dwindling energy supply, Beijing turned to see green energy as a secondary goal that could be put aside after energy security is fully guaranteed.
The principle of “establishment before abolition” (establishment of energy security before abolition of coal, xian li hou po) was reaffirmed in “Two Sessions”, an important political event in China held in March this year.
Chinese premier Li Keqiang positioned energy security to the same level of importance as food security in a Two Sessions government report.
A global emergency
The push for more coal power is at odds with China’s climate goals. According to China’s 13th Five Year Plan, coal-fired plants should be capped at generating 1,100 gigawatts of electricity.
To date, China has 1,074 gigawatts of coal power in operation, but more than 150 gigawatts of new plants have either been announced or permitted, according to the Global Energy Monitor.
The China Electricity Council – the industry group for China’s power sector – recommends the country reaches 1,300 gigawatts of coal-fired power in 2030 to meet the rising demand and strengthen energy security. If this occurs, it would see more than 300 new plants built.
Without more restrictions against China’s use of fossil fuels, the world will hardly meet Paris Agreement climate targets.
China is expected to cease coal use entirely by 2050 in order to successfully meet promised climate targets. But the more resources are invested, the harder it’ll be for China to get rid of fossil fuels.
The 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025) will be crucial in determining how China meets its carbon commitments and whether the world is on track to meet the 1.5℃ target. Under this plan, China wants carbon to peak by 2030, but the action plan remains vague.
As Professor David Tyfield of the Lancaster Environment Centre asserted: “until China decarbonises, we’re not going to beat climate change.”
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Two months of scorching heatwaves and drought plunged China into an energy security crisis.
The southwest province of Sichuan, for example, relies on dams to generate around 80% of its electricity, with growth in hydropower crucial for China meeting its net-zero by 2060 emissions target.
Sichuan suffered from power shortages after low rainfall and extreme temperatures over 40℃ dried up rivers and reservoirs. Heavy rainfall this week, however, has just seen power in Sichuan for commercial and industrial use fully restored, according to official Chinese media.
The energy crisis has seen Beijing shift its political discourse and proclaim energy security as a more urgent national mission than the green energy transition. Now, the government is investing in a new wave of coal-fired power stations to try to meet demand.
In the first quarter of 2022 alone, China approved 8.63 gigawatts of new coal plants and, in May, announced C¥ 10 billion (A$2.1 billion) of investment in coal power generation. What’s more, it will expand the capacity of a number of coal mines to ensure domestic supply as the international coal market price jumped amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
China is responsible for around a third of global carbon dioxide emissions, which makes this latest rebound to fossil fuels a climate change emergency.
How did it come to this?
In 2021, China’s CO₂ emissions rose above 11.9 billion tonnes – their highest level in history and dwarfing those of other countries. And according to the International Energy Agency, rapid GDP growth and electrification of energy services caused China’s electricity demand to grow by 10% in 2021. This is faster than its economic growth at 8.4%.
China had been attempting to reduce its dependency on coal for decades, with the growth of coal consumption gradually flattening from 2014.
During its 13th Five-Year Plan (2016-2020), the government called off a number of coal power projects. Thermal power investment halved over this time, dropping from C¥ 117.4 billion in 2016 to 55.3 billion in 2020 (A$24.7-11.2 billion).
In September 2020, President Xi Jinping delivered China’s “dual carbon” goal at the United Nations General Assembly, saying China will hit peak emissions before 2030 and reach net-zero by 2060.
A few months later, this goal was moved ahead of schedule. At a summit of global leaders, Jinping promised that China’s coal use would peak in 2025.
But the downward trend of coal consumption started to rebound in 2021, with a 4.6% year-on-year increase, the highest growth rate in a decade.
Over 33 gigawatts of coal power generation, including at least 43 new power plants and 18 new blast furnaces, started construction in China in 2021. This is the highest level since 2016 and almost three times the rest of the world combined.
Then, in 2022, we witnessed the international coal market skyrocket as geopolitical tension from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and economic recovery from the pandemic boosted global demand. Beijing, in turn, increased domestic coal production with double-digit growth in the first half of 2022.
Tug of war between green energy and security
The current energy crisis is not only an unintended consequence of the drought, but also a result of its long-term net-zero emissions goal. Increased coal import costs and rash control of domestic coal production put China’s energy supply in question, and renewable energy wasn’t ready to fill the gap.
Indeed, it isn’t the first energy security crisis China has endured in recent years. Last year, dozens of provinces experienced “power cuts” partly due to long-term reductions in coal production between 2016-2020.
In response to the crisis, the People’s Daily newspaper – the mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party – stated “the rice bowl of energy must be held in your own hands”. And Chinese Energy News called energy security a matter of national destiny.
Caught between green energy promises and dwindling energy supply, Beijing turned to see green energy as a secondary goal that could be put aside after energy security is fully guaranteed.
The principle of “establishment before abolition” (establishment of energy security before abolition of coal, xian li hou po) was reaffirmed in “Two Sessions”, an important political event in China held in March this year.
Chinese premier Li Keqiang positioned energy security to the same level of importance as food security in a Two Sessions government report.
A global emergency
The push for more coal power is at odds with China’s climate goals. According to China’s 13th Five Year Plan, coal-fired plants should be capped at generating 1,100 gigawatts of electricity.
To date, China has 1,074 gigawatts of coal power in operation, but more than 150 gigawatts of new plants have either been announced or permitted, according to the Global Energy Monitor.
The China Electricity Council – the industry group for China’s power sector – recommends the country reaches 1,300 gigawatts of coal-fired power in 2030 to meet the rising demand and strengthen energy security. If this occurs, it would see more than 300 new plants built.
Without more restrictions against China’s use of fossil fuels, the world will hardly meet Paris Agreement climate targets.
China is expected to cease coal use entirely by 2050 in order to successfully meet promised climate targets. But the more resources are invested, the harder it’ll be for China to get rid of fossil fuels.
The 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025) will be crucial in determining how China meets its carbon commitments and whether the world is on track to meet the 1.5℃ target. Under this plan, China wants carbon to peak by 2030, but the action plan remains vague.
As Professor David Tyfield of the Lancaster Environment Centre asserted: “until China decarbonises, we’re not going to beat climate change.”
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The newly formed “Diocese of the Southern Cross” has broken away from the Anglican Church of Australia to form a denomination committed to a highly conservative position on sexuality and marriage equality.
Global Anglican Futures Conference (GAFCON), the association supporting the breakaway denomination, claim Anglican bishops “were unable to uphold the Bible’s ancient teaching on marriage and sexual ethics”, making their defection necessary.
One question Australians, the majority of whom support marriage equality, may ask is – why is sexuality such a significant issue for the Christians who have left to form this group, and many conservative Christians generally?
According to GAFCON, the answer is “orthodoxy”. In the sense used here, orthodoxy refers to “right teaching” (this is broader than the word’s more specific meaning in Eastern Orthodox Christianity). Permitting anything other than heterosexual relations or marriage, GAFCON argues, is a departure from Christianity’s long-held orthodox stance.
However, this understanding of orthodoxy is not “ancient teaching”, but new.
The claim that sexuality has always been central to Christianity is shaky
Historically, Christian orthodoxy had nothing to do with sexuality.
The first time there was a need for Christians to define orthodoxy was in the late third century. Around this time, a renegade priest named Arius began teaching that Jesus Christ was an important human being, but not the divine Son of God.
Beginning with the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE, seven Ecumenical Councils of the church were convened in order to establish the orthodox “doctrines and dogmata” – theological statements and principles – about the nature of God and Jesus.
The formal statements of belief were orthodox because they concerned what might be called Christianity’s “logic of salvation” – how humanity was saved from sin and death by Jesus.
“Heresy”, or false teaching, was perceived as a threat to the faith’s existence.
Not only is the claim that sexuality is central to Christian orthodoxy dubious, but it’s not certain same-sex sexuality has always been condemned by the church. Bible scholars such as William Loader and Heather R. White call into question the interpretation of Biblical passages that conservative Christians claim exclude same-sex sexuality.
Historians like John Boswell, Judith C. Brown, and Mark D. Jordan have shown that while same-sex sexuality was at times prohibited, at other times it was tolerated and even celebrated over the course of Christian history.
So the argument that sexuality has always been central to Christian orthodoxy is shaky. Yet, it seems that for some conservative Christians, this view of sexuality has become more important than doctrines that really are central to orthodoxy, traditionally understood.
So why is sexuality so important to conservative Christians now?
This leaves us with our initial question unanswered – why is sexuality so important for this group of Christians now?
One answer is to be found in the work of the 20th century French academic Michel Foucault.
Foucault was fascinated by how certain ways of understanding and speaking about the world actually shape what we can see and say – making some things very visible and important, while other things become invisible and impossible.
Foucault called this “discourse”, which for him had a broader meaning than our everyday usage. He argued discourse was more than words or discussion on a topic. Discourse includes that, but also the practices, language, techniques and overall conditions that produce the acceptable “truth” in relation to something.
In The History of Sexuality, Foucault argued sexuality was the discourse of sex, or the set of conditions that create the acceptable “truth” concerning sex. He observed two such discourses, both emerging in the mid-19th century.
The first was concerned with classifying sexual practices in order to declare some healthy and normal, and others wrong or requiring “treatment”.
The second was a “reverse discourse”, opposed to the criminalisation of homosexuality and promoting sexual freedom.
Conservative Christians tend to align with the first discourse, firmly holding that same-sex sexuality is opposed to God’s “truth” of sex. In fact, being the ones who have the authority to say what is and is not the “truth” of sexuality has become a marker of who is “really” Christian. As Church of England priest and educator Mark Vasey-Saunders puts it, “an issue that had never featured in any evangelical basis of faith came to represent the definitive mark of authentic Christian identity”.
The conflict that has led to the Diocese of the Southern Cross breaking away from the Australian Anglican church isn’t based on ancient teachings, as the new group claim. The ancient meaning of “orthodoxy” had nothing to do with sexuality, but concerned matters related to the nature of God and Christian salvation.
The position of the new denomination is the result of a modern discursive conflict over the “truth” of sex. The fact that sexuality has become central in a way it never has been before helps explain why this group decided it was important enough to leave their former church. It couldn’t be more important, as in this new “orthodoxy” the cost of giving ground is ceasing to be truly Christian at all.
Mark Jennings is employed by the Anglican Diocese of Perth
The government of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has just reached 100 days, a time to assess its performance.
Looking at foreign policy, the question is whether there has been continuity or change from the policies of prior governments. The correct answer is usually both.
Commentators will rightly say there has been great continuity on international policy with no revolutionary change in direction. As Minister for Foreign Affairs Penny Wong recently said,
I have made clear that our national interests, our strategic policy settings haven’t changed – but obviously the government has, and how the government approaches engaging with the world and articulating those interests has changed.
The first change is in the simple volume of international engagement. The day after he was sworn in, Albanese was in Tokyo for the Quad Leaders’ Summit, quickly followed by his first bilateral visit to Indonesia.
(Left to right) Anthony Albanese, U.S. President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, pose for a photo during the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), May 2022. AP
Minister for Defence Richard Marles has visited Singapore, India, the United States and the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Rwanda. And Minister for Trade Don Farrell was busy in Geneva with the WTO Ministerial Conference and bilateral meetings.
Some of this activity is due to the fortuitous timing of international meetings, but the rest is a conscious choice to prioritise international engagement. It suggests a certain amount of pent-up energy among new ministers with much on their agendas after so long in opposition.
The overall impression is of a government focused on international matters, which has perhaps adopted the mindset that external policy is as important as domestic policy. Albanese defended his trip to the NATO summit and Ukraine saying,
we can’t separate international events from their impact on Australia and Australians.
Resetting key relationships
The second change is a reset in some key relationships. Every new government should use the opportunity to get rid of barnacles that have attached themselves to the ship of state.
This was most notable in the reset in relations with France, still seething from the cancellation of its submarine construction deal in favour of AUKUS, the trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The diplomatic freeze with China was broken by the two ministers for defence meeting at the Shangri-La Dialogue and the ministers for foreign affairs meeting soon after. This was presented as “stabilising the relationship”, with the government stressing that there has been no change in policy position.
Changes in climate, Pacific and South-East Asia
Third, there has been a substantive policy change on climate action. This has had an impact on Australia’s international relations, particularly in the Pacific, where there had been no secret about Pacific leaders’ disappointment in Australia’s lack of climate ambition.
Only four days after being sworn in, Wong spoke to the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat to herald “a new era in Australian engagement in the Pacific” based on standing “shoulder to shoulder with our Pacific family” in response to the climate crisis.
Pacific leaders including the prime ministers of Samoa and Tonga welcomed this policy shift. While it won’t all be plain sailing ahead – with Australia likely to continue to face pressure around the speed of its transition away from fossil fuels – relations are much more positive.
Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, right, holds a joint press conference with Samoa’s Prime Minister Fiame Naomi Mata’afa. AP
Fourth, there has been a change in tone on some issues. For example, in South-east Asia former Prime Minister Morrison’s framing around an “arc of autocracies” was viewed as proposing a binary choice between democratic and authoritarian blocs. The Albanese government’s messaging emphasises “strategic equilibrium” where “countries are not forced to choose but can make their own sovereign choices, including about their alignments and partnerships”.
The government has also committed to building the capability of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade after decades of declining funding. Allan Gyngell, National President of the Australian Institute of International Affairs (AIIA), sees this as a significant change:
“After years of marginalisation, foreign policy has been restored to a more central part of Australian statecraft.”
Long-term goals
Overall, after the flurry of early visits, the Albanese government gives the impression of a government settling in for the long-term.
Looking back on nine years of the previous government – with three prime ministers creating a sense of constant campaign mode – domestic politics often seemed to dominate. The new government gives the impression it is building relationships for the long-term – three, six or more years.
In its first frenetic days, the Albanese government took the opportunity to reset some key relationships. Now it’s all about steadily building these relationships and the capability to enable Australia to pursue its national interests in the long-term.
Melissa Conley Tyler is Executive Director of the Asia-Pacific Development, Diplomacy & Defence Dialogue (AP4D), a platform for collaboration between the development, diplomacy and defence communities. It receives funding from the Australian Civil-Military Centre and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Arthritis causes pain and disability and commonly reduces quality of life. In Australia in 2015, about 54,000 people aged 45–64 couldn’t work due to severe arthritis. Their median income was only a quarter of the income of full-time workers who did not have arthritis.
So it is not surprising some people want to try different diets, supplements or therapies to see if they alleviate symptoms or help them gain a sense of control over their condition.
However, a major review found specific supplements or food components were unlikely to lead to significant improvements in arthritis outcomes such as stiffness, pain and function.
The main nutrition recommendation was to adopt healthy eating patterns.
Remind me, what causes arthritis? And what are the symptoms?
Risk factors for developing arthritis include ones you can’t control – such as genetics, sex, and age – and some you may be able to, such as smoking, repetitive injuries, body weight, occupation and some infections.
Types of arthritis include osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, juvenile arthritis, gout, systemic lupus erythematosus (lupus) and scleroderma.
Less specific symptoms include tiredness, weight loss or feeling unwell.
So what does the evidence say about supplements?
The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology, the expert European group on arthritis, recently published a detailed critique on diet and supplement use in arthritis. It synthesised findings from 24 systematic reviews of existing research as well as an additional 150 extra studies, covering more than 80 different dietary components and supplements.
The alliance identified there were limited studies on each individual product with the majority of studies being of low quality. This means that for most supplements they couldn’t make recommendations about whether or not to use them.
However, for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, although most studies were of low or moderate quality, a few supplements had positive effects.
Vitamin D, chondroitin and glucosamine
For osteoarthritis, there was moderate-quality evidence supporting a small positive effect on pain and function for taking vitamin D, chondroitin and glucosamine (both compounds found in cartilage) supplements.
Here, moderate quality means although the studies had some limitations and their results should be interpreted with caution, they can be used to guide recommendations.
This suggests people could choose to try these common supplements for a few months and see whether they get any benefit, but stop taking them if there is no improvement in their symptoms.
Fish oil
For rheumatoid arthritis, there was moderate quality evidence for a small positive effect on pain for omega-3 (fish) oils.
Again, people could try these supplements for a few months and see whether they get any benefit, but stop taking them if there is no improvement.
Other supplements
For all other arthritis categories, and other specific dietary components or supplements, the evidence was rated as low to very low (see tables 1–5 in this link).
This means any improvements in arthritis outcomes could be due to chance or bias, with positive results more likely to be published, or potential bias occurring when a trial was sponsored by a supplement manufacturer.
So how do you improve your health and wellbeing? Here are five key things to consider:
1. Eat a healthy, varied diet
Prioritise eating healthy food, rather than taking supplements. Brooke Lark/Unsplash
Eating food – rather than taking supplements – means you get the other nutrients that foods contain, including healthy sources of fat, protein, dietary fibre and a range of vitamin and minerals essential to maintain a healthy body.
This is why the recommendation for people with arthritis is to eat a healthy diet, because vegetables, fruit, legumes and wholegrains contain a range of phytonutrients needed to help dampen down oxidative stress triggered by inflammatory processes associated with arthritis.
A healthy diet includes foods rich in omega-3 fats such as fatty fish (salmon, tuna, sardines), chia seeds, flaxseed oil, walnuts, canola oil, and vitamin D (eggs, fish, and milk or margarine fortified with vitamin D). And don’t forget sun exposure, which allows the body to produce vitamin D.
2. Avoid alcohol
Alcohol intake should be discussed with your doctor as it can interact with other treatments.
Aiming for a healthy weight can help arthritis by reducing the load on affected joints such as hips and knees, and by boosting your intake of healthy foods rich in phytonutrients.
Ask your doctor for support to achieve well managed, intentional weight loss if you’re carrying excess weight. You may need referral to an accredited practising dietitian for personalised medical nutrition therapy or to a physiotherapist or exercise physiologist for specific help to improve mobility and physical activity.
If you decide to try specific complimentary therapies or dietary supplements, discuss potential side-effects or interactions with your regular medicines with your doctor and pharmacist.
Try the products for a few months (or as long as one container lasts) so you can monitor any side-effects versus your sense of wellbeing, reduction in use of pain medications and the cost. If you’re not getting any benefit then spend that money on more healthy foods instead.
Clare Collins is a Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, HMRI, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update and the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns.
The global dairy industry is changing. Among the disruptions is competition from alternatives not produced using animals – including potential challenges posed by synthetic milk.
Synthetic milk is produced without animals. It can have the same biochemical make up as animal milk, but is grown using an emerging biotechnology technique know as “precision fermentation” that produces biomass cultured from cells.
More than 80% of the world’s population regularly consume dairy products. There have been increasing calls to move beyond animal-based food systems to more sustainable forms of food production.
Synthetic milks offer dairy milk without concerns such as methane emissions or animal welfare. But it must overcome many challenges and pitfalls to become a fair, sustainable and viable alternative to animal-based milk.
Synthetic milks offer dairy milk produced without animals. Dean Lewins/AAP
Not a sci-fi fantasy
My recent research examined megatrends in the global dairy sector. Plant-based milks and, potentially, synthetic milks, emerged as a key disruption.
Unlike synthetic meat – which can struggle to match the complexity and texture of animal meat – synthetic milk is touted as having the same taste, look and feel as normal dairy milk.
Synthetic milk is not a sci-fi fantasy; it already exists. In the US, for example, the Perfect Day company supplies animal-free protein made from microflora, which is then used to make ice cream, protein powder and milk.
In Australia, start-up company Eden Brew has been developing synthetic milk at Werribee in Victoria. The company is targeting consumers increasingly concerned about climate change and, in particular, the contribution of methane from dairy cows.
CSIRO reportedly developed the technology behind the Eden Brew product. The process starts with yeast and uses “precision fermentation” to produce the same proteins found in cow milk.
CSIRO says these proteins give milk many of its key properties and contribute to its creamy texture and frothing ability. Minerals, sugars, fats and flavours are added to the protein base to create the final product.
US food-tech company Perfect Day makes ice cream and other ‘dairy’ products without using animals. Perfect Day
Towards a new food system?
Also in Australia, the All G Foods company this month raised A$25 million to accelerate production of its synthetic milk. Within seven years, the company wants its synthetic milk to be cheaper than cow milk.
If the synthetic milk industry can achieve this cost aim across the board, the potential to disrupt the dairy industry is high. It could steer humanity further away from traditional animal agriculture towards radically different food systems.
All G foods wants its synthetic milk to be cheaper than cow-based milk. All G Foods
A 2019 report into the future of dairy found that by 2030, the US precision fermentation industry will create at least 700,000 jobs.
And if synthetic milk can replace dairy as an ingredient in the industrial food processing sector this could present significant challenges for companies that produce milk powder for the ingredient market.
Some traditional dairy companies are jumping on the bandwagon. For example, Australian dairy co-operative Norco is backing the Eden Brew project, and New Zealands largest dairy cooperative, Fonterra last week annouced a joint venture to develop and commercialise “fermentation-derived proteins with dairy-like properties”.
Synthetic milk: the whey forward?
The synthetic milk industry must grow exponentially before it becomes a sizeable threat to animal-based dairy milk. This will require a lot of capital and investment in research and development, as well as new manufacturing infrastructure such as fermentation tanks and bioreactors.
Production of conventional animal-milk in the Global South now outstrips that of the Global North, largely due to rapid growth across Asia. Certainly, the traditional dairy industry is not going away any time soon.
Demand for animal milk in Asia has grown rapidly. RICHARD VOGEL/AP
And synthetic milk is not a panacea. While the technology has huge potential for environmental and animal welfare gains, it comes with challenges and potential downsides.
For example, alternative proteins do not necessarily challenge the corporatisation or homogenisation of conventional industrial agriculture. This means big synthetic milk producers might push out low-tech or small-scale dairy – and alternative dairy – systems.
What’s more, synthetic milk could further displace many people from the global dairy sector. If traditional dairy co-ops in Australia and New Zealand are moving into synthetic milk, for example, where does this leave dairy farmers?
As synthetic milk gains ground in coming years, we must guard against replicating existing inequities in the current food system.
And the traditional dairy sector must recognise it’s on the cusp of pivotal change. In the face of multiple threats, it should maximise the social benefits of both animal-based dairy and minimise its contribution to climate change.
Milena Bojovic 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.
Australia’s national parks in several states are under siege from privatisation by stealth. Developers are using the lure of ecotourism to build posh private lodges with exclusive access deep inside many iconic parks.
The problem is, not everyone can afford private lodges. There’s a real danger in letting developers take over precious parts of nature. We know nature is good for our mental health – and the wilder the better. One in five Australians report at least one episode of mental illness in the previous year.
Our new research shows protected areas in Australia boost the mental health of visitors, seen in productivity gains of up to 11% for people who visit at least once a month. Nationwide, that means our national parks give us a productivity gain of 1.8% and cut healthcare costs by 0.6%. We found the therapeutic effects of nature for mentally unhealthy park visitors are 2.5 times greater than for mentally healthy visitors.
Access to nature in national parks is one of the few free mental health boosts available to the less well-off as well as the wealthy. If creeping privatisation takes root in our parks – replacing campsites with expensive accommodation – those who most need the boost from nature will find it harder to get.
Public opinion is in favour of national parks remaining wild, as in this picture of the Noosa River from the north shore. Timothée Duran/Unsplash, CC BY
The public doesn’t want private development in parks
In national parks, the public wants signs, tracks, toilets, and tent sites, run by parks agencies and available to everyone. The public almost always opposes permanent accommodation in parks, whoever owns it, based on the belief private lodges and camps should be on private land.
But state governments in New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania and South Australia have enabled this regardless. Think of the pristine Ben Boyd National Park near Eden in NSW, slated for eco-tourism cabins at the expense of campers. Or of the Cooloola Recreational Area in Queensland’s Great Sandy National Park near Noosa, where luxury cabins are planned.
The examples go on: ecotourism cabins in Main Range National Park in Queensland, Tasmania’s private Three Capes walk in Tasman national park and a resort in Freycinet National Park, as well as Kangaroo Island in South Australia.
While visitors to ecotourism developments report improved wellbeing and mental health, the issue is about who gets access. Private developments exclude the wider public, both physically and financially.
Some 70% of Australians visit a national park at least once a year. These visits reduces our healthcare costs by A$12.3 billion a year, and increases economic productivity by A$35 billion a year.
Worldwide, we have estimated the money saved through better mental health deriving from visits to protected areas to be around A$8.5 trillion per year.
Privatisation of public areas like campgrounds could make it harder for many to camp in national parks. Jonathan Forage/Unsplash, CC BY
Socialise the costs?
Private lodges impose costs on cash-strapped parks agencies, due to their fixed footprints, permanent occupation and need for new access roads and paths. Lodges can also increase management costs for park staff through weed control, pathogens, feral animals, noise, bushfires and water pollution.
When some in-park enterprises collapse, they can leave large clean-up costs for the taxpayer, as we’ve seen at Queensland’s Hinchinbrook Island.
Parks agencies sometimes have to buy back rights given away free, such as after the collapse of the Seal Rocks centre on Victoria’s Phillip Island.
Private development also comes with increased legal and financial risks for the state, such as after the Thredbo landslide in 1997.
All these costs cut into funds allocated for conservation.
If we let the tourism industry take greater control over park access for private profit, we risk turning famous natural places into exclusive havens for people with money.
This is not to say tourist ventures have no place. Commercial nature tourism businesses can benefit, and contribute, by guiding inexperienced visitors to visit national parks. But the parks themselves, and all their facilities, should remain publicly owned and accessible to all.
National parks are a major tourism drawcard. Commercial enterprises benefit from visitor spending along access routes, in gateway settlements outside park boundaries, and by operating mobile guided tours inside parks under similar conditions to independent visitors. Private lodges inside parks compete with these existing businesses.
We don’t have to give private interests everything they ask for
While some other countries do allow private lodges in national parks, the models are very different from those in Australia.
In Botswana, for example, private leases in protected areas are short, facilities are fully removable, and private tour operators pay 80% of the parks agency budget.
For comparison, proposals for a private island heli lodge in Tasmania’s Lake Malbena offered only A$4,000 a year.
In the US, the National Parks Service subcontracts visitor services to private concessionaires, but owns the facilities, requires bonds equal to 100% of capital value, and sets all conditions and prices.
In India, luxury lodges must generally be located outside park gates, while private hotels inside parks in China have been removed by the parks agency.
The quiet privatisation of access to national parks risks restricting nature’s mental and physical health benefits to the well-heeled. We need to protect public access to wild places meant for the public.
Funding for published research as cited here, declared in publications. Ralf Buckley 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.
Alienor Chauvenet 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.
After 45 years together the B-52’s have announced they are unplugging and de-wigging for their final US tour. “No one likes to throw a party more than we do, but after almost a half-century on the road, it’s time for one last blowout with our friends and family… our fans,” said Fred Schneider.
Who was to know that an impromptu jam session in 1976 in the American college town of Athens, Georgia, would be the foundation of a 45-year career?
The innovative band that formed in 1976 originally consisted of Cindy Wilson (vocals and guitar), Kate Pierson (vocals and keyboards), Fred Schneider (vocals), Ricky Wilson (guitar) and Keith Strickland (drums).
The world’s introduction to the B-52’s was the almost seven-minute song Rock Lobster. An unexpected hit, this uplifting musical concoction is comprised of a baritone-tuned Mosrite electric guitar riff, interspersed with stabbing Farfisa organ accents, and an array of vocal interplay with jazz-esque backing vocal parts.
These are interspersed with Pierson’s dolphin like vocal sounds while Schneider’s unique lead vocal spoken delivery offers lyrics about a crustacean. The accompanying video presented a mixture of pop culture’s past with 1950’s cartoonist hair styles, surf culture, combined with uniquely erratic choreography, but musically there are elements that serve as a disruption to pop music.
Rock Lobster reached number one in Canada, three in Australia, 37 on the UK singles charts and 56 on the US Billboard Hot 100.
Influences and scene
The band’s influences draw from diverse sources across pop culture, such as B-grade movies, Captain Beefheart, 60’s dance moves, Dusty Springfield, comic books, animated cartoons, the composer Nino Rota (Fellini films), pulp science-fiction and Yoko Ono.
This is perhaps best illustrated in the song Planet Claire (1978) which opens instrumentally with intermittent radio frequencies that fade to a central guitar riff derived from Mancini’s Peter Gunn theme, then bongos and keyboards stabs, and Pierson’s mesmerising unison singing (chromatic long notes) with the DX7 keyboard part. This is followed by witty, farcical lyrics with an abundance of sci-fi references: satellites, speed of light, Mars.
The B-52’s emerged from the 1970’s New Wave (rock) scene with their own combination of non-threatening post-punk and alternative surf rock musical aesthetics. Subversion was in the form of less musical dissonance and less density, more freedom, more harmonies, more play. Less aggressive, more diva, with an infectious enthusiasm.
Back stage at the Mudd Club, NYC, 1979. IMDB
They created their own niche that was unquestionably southern, and importantly broke new ground as LGBTIQ+ icons, by infusing an uncompromisingly camp and queer sensibility into pop culture.
From 1979 to 1986, the band recorded four studio albums that were best known for dance grooves, featuring the distinctive vocals of Schneider using sprechgesang (a spoken singing style credited to Humperdinck in 1897 and Schoenberg in 1912), the highly experimental vocal approaches of Pierson, growls and harmonies by Wilson, and Strickland’s surf guitar riffs.
They made novel instrumentation choices: toy pianos, walkie talkies, glockenspiels, and bongos, coupled with the innovative use of up-cycled fashion and costumes evoking individuality and liberation.
The exception was the EP Mesopotamia (1982) produced by David Byrne, a significant departure from their previous song production. Most noticeable is the slower tempo of Mesopotamia, 119 beats per minute (BPM) compared with Rock Lobster’s (1978) 179 BPM and Private Idaho’s (1980) driving 166 BPM tempo. Mesopotamia features additional synthesizer parts, poly-rhythmic beats (the combination of two or more different rhythms following the same pulse) and world beat influences.
On the surface the B-52s lyrics could be misconstrued as merely comedic, or nonsensical, however there are deeper underlining lyrical meanings that speak for the marginalised, referencing the band’s political ideology: environmental causes, feminism, LGBTIQ+ rights, and AIDS activism.
Late 1980s and early 1990s
Bouncing Off The Satellites took three years to complete and was released in 1986. Sadly, Ricky Wilson died from HIV/AIDS related illness in 1985 just after the recording sessions were complete. The B-52s reshaped the band with Strickland switching from drums to lead guitar. Later, the band also added touring members for studio albums and live performances.
The B-52s album with the greatest commercial success was Cosmic Thing (1989) co-produced by Don Was and Nile Rodgers. The single Love Shack, went double platinum, reached number 1 for eight weeks, and sold 5 million copies.
The song opens with engaging drum sounds at an infectious dance tempo of 133 BPM (beats per minute). Schneider’s distinctive vocal enters, then the bass and guitar parts. The arrangement places the hooks at the front in the song, with chorus vocal parts in 4ths.
Adding to the infectious groove is the live band sound featuring real brass section, and bass guitar and a bluesy guitar riff with crowd noises in the background. The alluring backing vocal parts on the lyrics “bang, bang, bang, on the door baby” are clearly reminiscent of the Batman television theme music.
Into the 21st century
In 2008 the band re-emerged from a 16-year recording absence with the 11-track album Funplex. There are notable modifications to the B-52s signature sound. Funplex is not the frenetic and spontaneous party music of previous albums. There are a few adaptations vocally too, with a change of roles with spoken word from Wilson and Pierson.
Fred Schneider, Cindy Wilson, centre, and Kate Pierson, right, of The B-52’s perform during a stop on the True Colors Tour at Radio City Music Hall Tuesday, June 3, 2008 in New York. Jason DeCrow/ AP Photo
The band has toured every summer, with a variety of other bands on the circuit, the Tubes, Go-Go’s, Psychedelic Furs and KC & The Sunshine Band building new audiences.
Their appeal is still broad. In 2020, Rock Lobster was used in Australia for an Optus ad.
The farewell tour billed as “their final tour ever of planet Earth” commences in August this year in Seattle.
Leigh Carriage 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 Matthew Hall, Senior Researcher, Environmental Law Initiative and Visiting Scholar, Faculty of Law, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington
Shutterstock/ACEgan
Hundreds of endangered sea turtles have been caught in New Zealand’s commercial fisheries since 2002, according to a recent report released by the Department of Conservation (DOC).
At least 80% are leatherback turtles, most likely from their western Pacific subpopulation which is considered critically endangered. The captures occur overwhelmingly in the surface longline fishery off the east coast of the North Island between January and April.
Most of the sea turtles caught in New Zealand’s surface longline fishery are leatherbacks. Shutterstock/Tara Lambourne
Although this DOC report is recent, the authors make it clear the underlying data have been known to the New Zealand government for years.
The lack of action to reduce the turtle bycatch risks damaging the reputation of New Zealand’s seafood industry.
The DOC report summarises observer and fisher data. It found 50 leatherback turtles were reported during 2020-2021.
Reporting of bycatch species by fishing vessels is known to under-represent actual capture numbers and observers are only onboard a small percentage of the time.
A 2021 report for the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) extrapolated data from vessels with observers across the rest of the fishing fleet and estimated that the average number of turtles caught across the New Zealand fleet each year ranges between 23 to 127.
To put these bycatch numbers in perspective, the estimated population of western Pacific leatherback turtles is as low as 1,000 nesting females per year.
All sea turtle species found in New Zealand waters – leatherback, green, hawksbill, loggerhead and olive ridley – are listed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list of threatened species, but the leatherback western Pacific subpopulation is listed as critically endangered, due to a large and continuing drop in population size.
The DOC report cites other studies of what happens to turtles once they’ve been caught on a fishing line. About 5% are dead on capture, but many will die later from their injuries.
One study concluded 27% of turtles hooked externally or with line left attached die after release. This increases to 42% for those hooked in the mouth or ingesting the hook. Leatherback turtles are thought to suffer a slightly higher mortality rate than other turtle species.
The US government authority on marine management, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), acknowledges the impact on turtles from fishing bycatch. It states:
The primary threat to sea turtles is their unintended capture in fishing gear which can result in drowning or cause injuries that lead to death or debilitation.
New Zealand lacks bycatch mitigation measures
New Zealand currently has no mandatory mitigation measures to prevent the bycatch of turtles. DOC has a protected species liaison programme that issues guidance to fishers, but the measures are voluntary and unenforceable.
In fact, New Zealand has an exemption from the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) mitigation measures on the basis of a low rate of turtle bycatch.
However, as the DOC report details, a rate is a questionable way to decide whether mitigation measures should apply – total numbers are what matter to the turtle population. Regardless, the DOC report also suggests that New Zealand has frequently breached the rate below which the exemption applies.
The main threat to sea turtles is their unintended capture in fishing gear. Shutterstock/IrinaK
The turtle bycatch figures provided by New Zealand at a recent WCPFC meeting in August paint a different picture to the DOC and MPI reports described here. Only turtle captures from when an observer was onboard are included.
Observer coverage in these fisheries in New Zealand is low – at only 5.8%, according to a 2016 DOC report. The same report also recommends a review of observer coverage as it is essentially in the wrong time and place to monitor turtle captures.
US mitigation and legislation
The lack of mitigation in New Zealand contrasts strikingly with other countries. For example, Hawai’i has reduced its turtle bycatch by 90% using a suite of measures, including hook and bait restrictions, a total fishery cap (16 leatherbacks), individual vessel limits, 100% observer coverage, oceanographic modelling to predict turtle location and closure of high-risk areas.
The US doesn’t focus solely on what happens in its own fisheries. Laws exist in the US in part to protect their own fishers from being undercut by seafood products from countries with lower environmental standards. The intention of these laws is to lift the performance of countries wanting to use US ports or to sell their seafood products in the US market.
One such law is currently being tested by the environmental organisation Sea Shepherd in relation to Māui dolphins. The group is challenging the US government under the Marine Mammals Protection Act (US) for its failure to ban seafood imports from New Zealand fisheries known to affect Māui dolphins.
Another law, the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act is relevant as well. It requires NOAA to identify countries whose fishing vessels catch protected marine life shared with the US and whose measures are less protective than those of the US.
NOAA undertakes a three-step process of identification, consultation and certification that can result in denial of US port access and potential import restrictions on fish or fish products.
The US takes a particular interest in the bycatch of turtles. US researchers have estimated that without concerted conservation measures Pacific leatherbacks could be extinct by the end of this century. Last year, NOAA identified Mexico and 28 states that fish for tuna under the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas for not having measures “comparable in effectiveness to those of the US to reduce or end the bycatch” of sea turtles.
New Zealand has traditionally prided itself on having a world-leading fisheries management system. But unless it takes fast and concerted mitigation action on a par with that found in the US, the New Zealand government is placing itself at significant legal and reputational risk.
The fate of the Pacific leatherback turtle also hangs in the balance.
Matthew Hall is a Senior Researcher at the Environmental Law Initiative.
Ingrid O’Sullivan is a Senior Researcher at the Environmental Law Initiative.
The Victorian election will be held in three months, on November 26. A Victorian state Newspoll, conducted August 22-25 from a sample of 1,027, gave Labor a 56-44 lead (57.3-42.7 at the 2018 election). Primary votes were 41% Labor (42.9% at election), 36% Coalition (35.2%), 13% Greens (10.7%) and 10% for all Others (11.2%).
Labor Premier Daniel Andrews had a 54% satisfied and 41% dissatisfied rating, for a net approval of +13, while Liberal leader Matthew Guy was at 49% dissatisfied, 32% satisfied (net -17). Andrews led Guy as better premier by 51-34. Newspoll figures are from The Poll Bludger.
Labor has a large poll lead, and would easily retain its majority in the Victorian lower house if this poll were replicated at the election. There are still three months to go, and Coalition parties in the states should do better with a federal Labor government.
At the federal election, independents won ten of the 151 House of Representatives seats, an increase of seven from the 2019 election, and six of those seven new independents were “teals”. It will be interesting to see whether the teals succeed at the state election; a teal candidate has nominated for the normally safe Liberal seat of Kew.
A Victorian state Resolve poll for The Age, conducted with the federal Resolve poll last week that gave Labor a massive lead, had Labor leading the Coalition by 42-21 on best party to govern with integrity and honesty.
By 53-18, voters expected Labor to win the election. As this poll was a subsample of the national poll, the sample was only “more than 500” – not enough for a voting intentions poll.
Before the federal election campaign, Resolve was giving voting intentions from Victoria and NSW every two months based on state subsamples from their national monthly polls that averaged two months’ data. If Resolve does a national poll in September, I expect Victorian voting intentions from an average of that poll and this one.
Federal Essential: leaders’ favourability ratings
A federal Essential poll asked respondents to rate several party leaders on a scale from 0 to 10. Scores of 0-3 were counted as negative, 4-6 as neutral and 7-10 as positive. As well as neutral, there were “unsure” and “never heard of” categories. Ratings for Albanese and Dutton should not be compared with standard approve or disapprove questions.
Albanese was at 43% positive and 23% negative, Dutton was at 34% negative and 26% positive and Nationals leader David Littleproud was at 27% negative, 21% positive. Greens leader Adam Bandt was at 37% negative, 23% positive, Jacqui Lambie was at 27% positive, 27% negative and Pauline Hanson was at 48% negative, 22% positive.
80% thought the government should have an active role in shaping the economy, while 20% thought the government should stay out and leave it up to the market. 58% thought Australia’s economic system is broken and the government needs to make fundamental changes, while 42% thought our economic system is basically sound and only minor changes are required.
By 57-9, respondents thought small business views of the economy aligned with their best interests. Community organisations were at 51-9, unions at 36-28 and big business at 31-29 against alignment. This Essential poll was taken in the days before August 23 from a sample of 1,065.
There has not been a federal Newspoll since August 1. After a long break following the 2019 federal election, Newspoll usually appeared once every three weeks until it was ramped up early this year prior to the election. During the election campaign there was a Newspoll every week. It’s plausible the long gap between Newspolls now is to offset the intense campaign period.
Federal parliament resumes for two weeks on September 5. Labor will aim to pass their climate legislation through the Senate. The Greens supported it in the House of Representatives after Labor made changes. Labor has 26 of the 76 senators and the Greens 12, so Labor needs one more vote, most likely from either David Pocock or the Jacqui Lambie Network.
Dynata conducted surveys about China in both Taiwan and Australia for the left-wing Australia Institute, from samples of just over 1,000 in both countries. The Poll Bludger reported that 47% of Australians expected a Chinese attack on Australia soon (9%) or sometime (38%), with just 19% opting for never and 33% uncommitted.
By 60-21, respondents did not think Australia would be able to defend itself from such an attack without international assistance. 57% thought support would come from the US, 11% thought not and 19% said “it depends”. 35% thought the US and Australia would defeat China, 9% that China would win and 24% a draw of some sort.
The surveys were conducted August 13-16, after US Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan on August 2, and China responded with military exercises from August 4 to 7.
Tasmanian EMRS poll: Liberals regain ground
A Tasmanian state EMRS poll, conducted August 8-11 from a sample of 1,000, gave the Liberals 41% of the vote (up two since June), Labor 31% (up one), the Greens 13% (steady) and oll Others 15% (down three). Liberal incumbent Jeremy Rockliff led Labor’s Rebecca White as preferred premier by 47-35 (47-34 in June).
A Tasmanian upper house byelection will occur in the Labor-held Pembroke on September 10. According to analyst Kevin Bonham, the upper house currently has an 8-7 left majority, so a Liberal win would see the right gain control.
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.
With weather conditions currently at 80% favourable, NASA is launching the Artemis 1 mission today from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The launch window opens at 8.33am EDT (10.33pm AEST).
This milestone mission will usher in a new era of human space exploration beyond low Earth orbit, and the first step in getting humans back to the Moon.
The 42-day uncrewed mission will test the capabilities of the new heavy lift Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, as well as the space readiness and safety of the Orion spacecraft. Orion is designed to send humans further into space than ever before.
In addition, Orion will launch ten small satellites called CubeSats for both scientific and commercial purposes.
These will be used to investigate different areas of the Moon, look at sustainability in the use of spacecraft, and even send one spacecraft to a near-Earth asteroid. All these CubeSats have been built by industry (small and large) and/or scientific groups in the effort to expand space exploration.
NASA has already started the two-day countdown for Artemis I launch.
A fitting name for a long-awaited step
A lunar deity, Artemis is the Greek goddess of the hunt, and Apollo’s twin sister. It’s a fitting name for the program that will send the first woman and first person of colour to the Moon by 2030.
The Artemis program will build capacity in steps, similar to how the Apollo program worked in the 1960s. Each mission will build on the knowledge gained from the previous one to test equipment and instruments under controlled conditions, until finally, all is ready for a crewed landing on the Moon.
With the Artemis program, Earth as a global community has the opportunity to participate and push back the frontiers of human knowledge and innovation.
Humans were last on the Moon nearly 50 years ago, when the Apollo 17 astronauts spent 12 days roving and exploring an area known as the Taurus-Littrow Valley.
Since that time, most human exploration of space has been from the International Space Station, which orbits about 400km above the surface of Earth. For comparison, the Moon is around 950 times further (around 385,000km) away, representing a much more significant challenge.
As a global community, we have already learned much from using robotic missions to the Moon and other planets in our Solar System. The Moon has been imaged at a resolution of roughly 5 metres per pixel, therefore we can see and pick safer landing areas in heavily cratered areas like the south polar regions.
The Indian Chandrayaan-1 mission discovered water ice, and China’s Chang’e 5 mission recently brought samples back to Earth that come from the youngest known area of the Moon. We will apply this information to our next steps.
The 20th century “space race” that drove humans to the Moon in the 1960s and ‘70s was fuelled by competition between the two global superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, with the rest of the planet experiencing the excitement of visiting a world other than Earth.
Chinese officials recently announced an International Lunar Research Station jointly planned with Russia, a project that includes a new crew launch vehicle and the heavy lift rocket Long March 9, but details on this program are relatively scant for now.
While NASA leads the charge this time around, the Artemis program will be an international effort. It will take lessons from the success of the International Space Station, which was built by five, and has been used by astronauts from, 20 countries.
For this first Artemis mission, several European countries are involved in both the SLS and Orion. More (including Australia) will contribute to building and operating a base and rovers on the Moon in the future. Global collaboration is at the forefront of this effort.
The benefit is for all
Space exploration leads to new scientific discoveries, significant economic benefits, and inspiration for people to reach farther and higher. It is not just financial expenditure with no return – it earns back in spades and sometimes in ways we can’t predict.
The invention of cordless tools and velcro are often associated with NASA and space exploration; in reality, those were invented before the Apollo program (NASA did, however, make good use of them).
Although those weren’t invented because of space exploration, there are plenty of things that have been – from memory foam to suits for race car drivers, to cancer-sniffing instruments. A landing on the Moon also provided a unique view of Earth that showed our big blue marble in space. We are a connected community.
The Blue Marble is an iconic 1972 photograph taken during the Apollo 17 mission as the astronauts were travelling toward the Moon. NASA
We, the humans of this planet, need to go back to the Moon for many reasons, but the most important one is the challenge – to extend ourselves to innovate and progress.
The effort put into this will lead to new ways to look at and solve problems not only for living and working in Space, but for improving how we live and work on Earth.
Gretchen Benedix is a member of the Space Science and Technology Centre, in the School of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Curtin University. She is also a (unfunded) senior scientist at the Planetary Science Institute (based in Arizona, in the US). She receives funding from the Australian Research Council to conduct research on Mars and meteorites.
Average fuel prices in Australian capital cities remain well below the peaks seen in March and June. Recent data reveal fuel is around 30-35 cents per litre lower than the highs of two months ago. As of last week, the average price of 95 octane unleaded across eight capitals stood at A$1.90 per litre.
The question on the minds of many motorists and businesses relying on road transport to deliver goods and services is: have we seen the last of $2 petrol for a while?
Given this year’s trends in international oil prices (a key component of Australia’s petrol prices), the answer would be: “It depends on the fuel excise”.
In March this year, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began to drive international oil prices up. Image by Markus Spiske from Pixabay, CC BY
A fuel excise is a tax on fuel levied by the Australian government.
In March this year, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began to drive international oil prices up, the previous federal government announced a 50% cut in fuel excise for six months. In other words, it would charge less tax on fuel until September (in an effort to soften the impact of soaring international oil prices on Australian consumers). After this decision, the cost of petrol reduced by 22 cents per litre.
While the general trend is downwards in recent months, crude oil prices have ranged between US$92 and US$123 per barrel – much higher than the norm in recent years.
With Australia’s halved fuel excise, this price range translates to average 95 octane unleaded petrol prices across eight capitals of between A$1.90 and A$2.25 per litre.
Globally, crude oil is down about 25% from the June high of US$123 per barrel. That’s in part due to growing fears a global economic slowdown would affect consumption, as central banks around the world raise interest rates to combat spiralling inflation.
The potential revival of a deal between Iran and Western countries that could lead to more Iranian oil exports has also helped drive oil prices down. This is generally good news for petrol prices in Australia.
What next for the fuel excise in Australia?
However, a lot will depend on what the Australian government does about the fuel excise.
It is uncertain whether the new government will extend the fuel excise cut brought in by their predecessors in March.
The excise cut is set to expire in September, right in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis in Australia.
We’ve tried to be upfront with people and say they shouldn’t expect that petrol price relief to continue forever.
According to the federal budget, the six-month excise cut has resulted in a A$3 billion hit on the economy.
Recent news reports indicated the prime minister was “examining” a fuel excise cut extension, but remains adamant the cut is a temporary measure.
If the cut is not extended, average petrol prices in Australia will almost certainly return to the above $2 territory by early October.
However, the solution to Australians being held hostage to volatile global prices and geopolitical developments will not come from extending the fuel excise cut.
The solution will come from reducing demand for oil-based fuels through policies promoting local energy generation and switching to low-emissions vehicles.
The longer-term outlook
Over the longer term, there is hope oil and petrol prices will not affect the pockets of Australian motorists and the Australian economy to the same extent as they have earlier this year.
The new Australian government has acknowledged the country is “significantly behind the pack when it comes to electric vehicles.”
Only 2% of cars sold in Australia are electric, five times lower than the global average.
The government recently released some detail on plans to set up a National Electric Vehicle Strategy, with a discussion paper on the matter due to be released soon for consultation.
At the heart of the strategy will be a plan to grow the Australian electric vehicle market, in a bid to improve uptake of electric vehicles and improve affordability and choice.
Australia is the only OECD country to not have, or be in the process of developing, mandatory fuel-efficiency standards for road transport vehicles.
The new government will seek to introduce vehicle fuel efficiency standards to help increase the supply of electric cars, improve affordability for motorists and drive down emissions.
Vlado Vivoda 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 Frank Bongiorno, Professor of History, ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
The Albanese government’s Jobs and Skills Summit this week owes something to Hawke government precedent and inspiration. Held in in April 1983 in what is now Old Parliament House, the National Economic Summit enacted one of the slogans of the campaign that had recently carried Bob Hawke’s Labor Party to victory in a federal election: “Bringing Australia Together.” The National Economic Summit was all about “consensus”, another buzzword of the day.
The implied point of contrast was with the outgoing prime minister, Malcolm Fraser, seen as a divisive figure since the Whitlam dismissal of 1975. “Consensus” was also a contrast with the confrontational industrial relations of Fraser’s time in government. In 1981 alone, a bad year for industrial relations, over four million working days were lost through workplace disputes. By the time Hawke came to office, unemployment, inflation and interest rates were all in double-digits. The economy was in recession. The country was in drought.
In February 1983, before the election, the Labor opposition and the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) had signed the Prices and Incomes Accord. Its basic concept was that unions would agree to wage restraint in return for social and economic benefits – a “social wage”. Labour governments in Britain had experimented with such a compact in the 1970s, with disappointing results for the unions that signed up to it. Still, in Australia the accord had widespread support, including on the left of the union movement.
The National Economic Summit was an effort by the Hawke government to turn the accord into a tripartite agreement also involving employers. And amid a sea of men in suits, he largely succeeded.
The economic journalist Max Walsh thought Hawke was “justified in seeing the summit as a stunning political success”. In contrast with government and unions, business leaders were divided. Some wanted future wage increases to be disconnected from the inflation rate, and to be limited to improvements in productivity. Others were more willing to play ball.
By the time Bob Hawke came to power in March 1983, the country was in recession and stricken with drought. National Archives of Australia/AAP
The ACTU vice-president, Simon Crean, warned that in the absence of support for centralised wage determination, there would be a push by individual unions for wage increases – and they were likely to succeed. It was the kind of thing a union leader could say when his members still had serious industrial clout. That is not an asset the current ACTU leadership has at its disposal.
The young ACTU secretary, Bill Kelty, his hair “everywhere”, emerged as the summit’s star. The ACTU would practice wage restraint and accept higher taxes, he promised. Geoffrey Barker of The Age thought the ACTU leaders had “taken all the points as public performers”.
Business bosses soon saw that, in the face of such an assault of sweet reasonableness, they would need to be more conciliatory. Sir Keith Campbell, who had chaired a ground-breaking enquiry into the financial system for the Fraser government, said things that were music to the ears of the ACTU and new Labor government. He told the summit that unemployment and inflation should be fought together.
In the United States and the United Kingdom, governments of the right and central bankers were pursuing a policy of fighting inflation first, thereby throwing millions out of work. The National Economic Summit endorsed a different approach, at the same time as it provided cover for the Hawke government in moving away from election promises and what were then considered traditional Labor policies such as higher wages and higher spending.
It also seems remarkable today that in his opening address, Hawke could declare those present as “the representatives of the Australian people”. His critics were unimpressed. Some thought the summit an exercise in “state corporatism”, a threat to “representative democracy”. There was no place at the table for the sick, poor or old, for women, ethnic groups or Aboriginal people, or for consumers.
Peter Beilharz, in the Marxist journal Arena, saw the summit as committed
to the principle that those who do not work productively should be maintained by the state, but are to be effectively excluded from political processes.
By the following year, he had joined with another academic of the left, Rob Watts, in arguing (in the magazine Australian Society) that Hawke’s leadership had
produced, at best, a right-wing Labor government and, at worst, a Tory government whose policies are indistinguishable from those of its predecessors.
The summit, some complained, had accepted the continuation of high unemployment, and it marginalised ideas for stimulatory spending or investment in high-tech industry, such as advocated by the new science minister Barry Jones.
This year’s summit is dealing with very different economic conditions from those of 1983, with nowhere near the sense of crisis or malaise. Mick Tsikas/AAP
The Albanese government is unlikely to attract similar criticisms. Its summit will have greater diversity than that of 1983. The nation has its economic problems, but unemployment is low and neither the sense of crisis nor of malaise is anywhere near as deep as forty years ago.
The National Economic Summit was intended to lower public expectations of government. Anthony Albanese has shown interest in modestly raising them in the wake of years of declining political trust. At the very least, his summit continues the orderly, systematic and constructive approach to governing that stands in stark contrast to the confirmed style of his predecessor.
Frank Bongiorno 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 Henry Cutler, Professor and Director, Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie University
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
The greatest workforce challenge Australia faces is in health, an issue that will likely be with us for another decade.
Shortages of health workers reduce access to care, increase waiting times and reduce patient safety. They can even increase avoidable deaths.
However, we don’t need the upcoming Jobs and Skills Summit to solve this problem. There is already low-hanging fruit to pick.
We need to broaden the scope of practice for some health workers, engage in better workforce planning, and reform how existing and new resources are deployed.
While much of this is due to the unprecedented nature of COVID, Australia has had problems staffing its health-care system for years. The workforce shortage is particularly acute in rural and remote regions.
The natural response is to throw money at the problem but the Australian government has little spare cash. Its budget deficit is projected to be more than A$800 billion by 2025-26. State governments are also cash-strapped.
More immigration of skilled health workers may also have limited success. Australia will be competing with countries including New Zealand, Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, which are looking to fill their own health worker shortages.
Health worker registration, along with standards and protocols, are essential for ensuring safe and effective care. However, this also stops health workers taking on new roles typically performed by others.
The potential for broadening health workers’ roles has been discussed for more than two decades. There has been some progress. Pharmacists now administer some vaccines, which was traditionally the domain of GPs and nurses.
A broader scope of practice for some health workers can increase people’s access to care, create more job satisfaction for the health worker, and lead to more efficient health care. It could also help the health-care system respond better and quicker to future pandemics or large-scale reform.
Overall, peak organisations and specialist colleges have effectively protected their turf. This may have resulted in more expensive care for the public and the government because it has stopped less-costly health workers from delivering care.
We are now faced with a more serious problem. A broader scope of practice for some health workers is needed to secure timely access to care. That stronger message will help government bash through future turf wars.
Health workers in other countries are becoming more flexible in the scope of tasks they perform.
The UK’s National Health Service has “extended roles”, such as nurses being more involved in managing chronic diseases. There are also “advanced roles”, which require a master’s degree in advanced practice. One example is allowing advanced nurse practitioners to manage people with mental health issues in the community, under the guidance of a psychiatrist.
Australia is also starting to think differently. The ten-year National Medical Workforce Strategy released in 2021 seeks to re-balance from sub-specialisation to a more generalist workforce to improve access to care. The hope is to create more GPs and specialists with additional skills, such as emergency care, and other select specialist skills.
There are opportunities to expand the roles of paramedics, especially in rural and remote regions without enough GPs and nurses.
Paramedics have evolved from delivering emergency care to managing chronic disease, mental health and social care. Additional paramedic education to understand diagnostic tests, prescribe some medicines and deliver wound care could increase patients’ access to health care.
Physiotherapists could be the first point of contact for musculoskeletal conditions. They could give steroid injections and refer patients to orthopaedic specialists.
Pharmacists could also take a greater role, administering medicines over the counter rather than requiring a prescription from GPs.
Sexual health is one area. Allowing women to access the oral contraceptive pill without a prescription would be cost effective with minimal risk. Viagra requires a prescription in Australia but is sold over the counter in the UK.
How do we fund this?
Any health workforce reform to address shortages must ensure quality and safety are maintained and provide at least as good an experience to patients compared to current practice.
It must also be accompanied by supportive funding models.
Nurse practitioners provide a good example. They were introduced in Australia in 1998 to fill doctor shortages, allowing registered nurses with additional education to diagnose, perform procedures and prescribe drugs – within tightly defined parameters.
Today, most nurse practitioners work in public health, particularly emergency departments.
More nurse practitioners aren’t in private practice for a number of reasons, including restricted access to Medicare and pharmaceutical item numbers.
With appropriate funding models, expanding nurse practitioner roles could substantially increase access to care and reduce health-care costs.
Health workforce shortages are an endemic, multifaceted, cross-jurisdictional problem. COVID has amplified shortages, but poor planning and limited government investment are mostly to blame.
There is an under-supply of specialists in some areas, and oversupply of specialists in others. Redistributing the health workforce, from metropolitan regions to rural and remote regions, would fill some shortages.
Australia also needs another independent agency such as Health Workforce Australia. This was established to support workforce reform initiatives in 2009 but abolished in 2014.
Roles of a new agency should include independently identifying workforce needs across the health-care system, helping coordinate investment in education and training, and providing evidence for broadening workforce scope, retention and reform.
What policies would we need?
The health-care system must also reform to reduce waste and redeploy valuable resources more effectively.
Digital health and other technology advancements offer opportunities to improve workplace productivity, alongside reorganisation of care models.
Reducing bureaucracy and better allocating administration tasks to non-clinical staff can also create more time for clinical care.
Henry Cutler 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.
Recent genetic research has shed new light on the long-running debate about the evolutionary origins of some of New Zealand’s quirkiest plants.
More than one in ten native trees and shrubs have small leaves spaced far apart on wiry interlaced branches, often growing in a zig-zag pattern. Once the preserve of botanists, some of these plants have recently gained popularity as ornamentals.
Nowhere else on Earth has this “divaricate” growth form arisen independently in so many plant families.
The broad-leaved Coprosma robusta or karamū (left) and the closely-related divaricate C. propinqua or mingimingi (right). Author provided
It is a spectacular case of convergent evolution in response to environmental pressures. But what environmental pressures? The answer might help us decide how to manage New Zealand ecosystems.
Climate or moa?
The 19th-century German botanist Ludwig Diels noted that small-leaved shrubs are typical of dry climates. He thought the divaricate form might have arisen in response to cold, dry conditions during the Ice Ages.
In the 1970s, the competing “moa browsing” hypothesis emerged, arguing the divaricate form is a now-anachronistic defence against browsing by the large flightless birds that went extinct shortly after Polynesian settlement.
Experiments have since lent support to the browsing hypothesis. Yet the concentration of divaricate plants in frosty and droughty districts suggests climate is also somehow involved.
So does evidence that the small leaves of divaricates are less vulnerable to chilling than large leaves. But climate does not seem to explain the unusual toughness of the branchlets of divaricate plants.
A synthetic hypothesis
Corokia cotoneaster (korokio, wire-netting bush) is a widespread divaricate shrub. Wikimedia Commons
Molecular dating shows most divaricate plant species arose within the last five million years. But fossils and genetic evidence show moa have been here much longer than that. This means moa browsing alone does not explain the evolution of divaricate forms in so many plant families.
The evidence seems more consistent with a newer synthetic hypothesis that moa browsing had more impact when plants were exposed to a new combination of circumstances: worldwide cooling, the development of frosty, droughty climates in the lee of the recently uplifted Southern Alps, and fertile new soils derived from glacial outwash.
Frosty and droughty climates posed direct physiological challenges to plants, but they also left them more exposed to browsing by preventing them from growing quickly out of reach of moa. Climatic restrictions on growth thus probably made anti-browsing defences more important for plant survival.
Support for this hypothesis comes from a recent experiment, which found climate influenced the impact of deer browsing on competition between divaricate plants and their broad-leaved relatives growing in treefall gaps.
Furthermore, the fertile new soils created by outwash from glaciers would have enhanced the nutrient content of plant tissues, probably resulting in increased browsing pressure. Studies of African savannas show that thorns and divaricate-like growth forms are typical of fertile soils with abundant browsing mammals.
Do deer act as moa surrogates?
For several centuries after the extinction of the moa, there were no large browsers in New Zealand, until European settlers introduced deer and other hoofed animals. Although valued as game animals and a food source, deer are also considered pests because of their impact on native vegetation.
Feeding experiments have shown both avian and hoofed herbivores are unenthusiastic about eating divaricate plants if alternatives with large soft leaves are available. The spacing of small leaves far apart along wiry branchlets reduces bite size and makes it difficult for browsers to meet their nutritional needs.
Scientists have studied ancient moa diets by identifying pollen grains in fossilised poo (coprolites). Data interpretation is hampered by our inability to identify pollen to species level in plant groups that include both divaricate and broad-leaved species. But it would seem likely that divaricate plants presented similar nutritional challenges to moa.
Analysis of moa coprolites suggests forest understories a millennium ago were more diverse than those we see today, after more than 150 years of browsing by deer. This suggests moa had less impact on vegetation than deer do today.
Factors limiting the impact of moa on vegetation
Unlike deer in contemporary New Zealand, moa faced a deadly predator throughout the entire country: the now-extinct Haast’s eagle. Although moa could safely browse under forest canopies, they would have been at risk at watering sites and in open areas.
Haast’s eagle (Hieraaetus moorei), the scourge of moa. Wikimedia Commons
In contrast, although deer face strong hunting pressure in some areas, recreational hunting has little impact in remote and rugged areas like the Kaweka ranges, where uncontrolled populations of sika deer threaten regeneration of even relatively unpalatable trees like mountain beech.
Fast-growing palatable shrubs and small trees like karamū, patē and māhoe probably got their best chance to escape moa browsing when treefalls let in enough light to enable them to grow quickly out of reach, at least in warmer districts where such plants can grow more than a metre in one growing season.
Treefall gaps must have offered two other advantages for palatable plants. The remains of fallen trees can hamper access by large herbivores, and canopy openings would have exposed moa to attack by Haast’s eagle.
Moa were probably less able to exploit vegetation on steep slopes than deer and goats are today. The impact of moa across New Zealand landscapes would therefore probably have been less pervasive than the current impact of hoofed browsers.
Lastly, moa probably had a more sluggish metabolism than mammalian browsers of comparable size, implying lower energy requirements and hence lower feeding rates. Close living relatives of moa (kiwis and emus) burn less energy than herbivorous mammals of similar body weight or large flighted birds like swans and geese.
The future of deer in New Zealand
Deer could act as imperfect surrogates for moa, but only if subject to effective control throughout the country.
Aerial 1080 drops to control rats, stoats and possums also usually kill deer, though the mortality rate varies widely. That is one way deer populations could be kept to acceptable levels in remote and rugged areas, where recreational hunting pressure is insignificant. Aerial culling by shooting has also shown potential.
Commercial hunting cannot be relied on to control deer, because of the vagaries of the market. When the price of venison falls, there is little incentive to hunt deer. Aerial 1080 or aerial culling therefore currently seem the only realistic ways to curb the impact of deer in remote and rugged areas.
Chris Lusk receives funding from the Marsden Fund, administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gretta Pecl, Professor, ARC Future Fellow & Director of the Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania
As the planet heats up, many marine plants and animals are moving locations to keep pace with their preferred temperatures. In the Southern Hemisphere, this means species are setting up home further south.
This shift alters what we see when we go snorkelling, and when and where we catch our seafood. Crucially, it also changes sensitive marine ecosystems.
But it’s not always easy for scientists to know exactly what’s happening below the ocean’s surface. To help tackle this, we examined tens of thousands of photographs taken by Australian fishers and divers submitted to citizen science programs over the last decade.
They revealed climate change is already disrupting the structure and function of our marine ecosystems – sometimes in ways previously unknown to marine scientists.
The authors examined tens of thousands of photographs taken by Australian fishers and divers, such as this image of a bonefish found off Western Australia. Redmap
Species on the move
Warming over the Pacific Ocean has strengthened the East Australian Current over the past several decades, as the below-right animation shows. This has caused waters off Southeast Australia to warm at almost four times the global average.
Animated map of sea surface temperatures in southeast Australia from 2004 to 2022. Data sourced from NASA. Barrett Wolfe
There is already irrefutable evidence climate change is causing marine species to move. Understanding this phenomenon is crucial for conservation, fisheries management and human health.
For example, if fish susceptible to carrying toxins start turning up where you go fishing, you’d want to know. And if an endangered species moves somewhere new, we need to know so we can protect it.
But the sheer scale of the Australian coastline means scientists can’t monitor changes in all areas. That’s where the public can help.
Fishers, snorkelers and divers often routinely visit the same place over time. Many develop strong knowledge of species found in a given area.
When a new or unusual species appears in their patch, these members of the public can excel at detecting it. So our project set out to tap into this invaluable community knowledge.
This sighting of a sea sweep – recorded in May this year off Kangaroo Island by a member of the public – may indicate the species is extending its range. Redmap/Daniel Easton
The value of citizen science
The Redmap citizen science project began in Tasmania in 2009 and went national in 2012. It invites the public to share sightings of marine species uncommon in their area.
Redmap stands for Range Extension Database and Mapping project. Redmap members use their local knowledge to help monitor Australia’s vast coastline. When something unusual for a given location is spotted, fishers and divers can upload a photo with location and size information.
The photos are then verified by a network of almost 100 marine scientists around Australia. Single observations cannot tell us much. But over time, the data can be used to map which species may be extending their range further south.
The project is supported by the University of Tasmania’s Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, together with other Australian universities and a range of Commonwealth and state-government bodies.
Screenshot of the Redmap website highlighting a recent coral sighting. Redmap
We also examined data from two other national marine citizen science programs: Reef Life Survey and iNaturalist Australasian Fishes Project. The resulting dataset encompassed ten years of photographed species observations made by almost 500 fishers, divers, snorkelers, spearfishers and beachcombers.
The citizen scientists recorded 77 species further south than where they lived a decade ago. Many were observed at their new location over multiple years and even in cooler months.
For example, spearfisher Derrick Cruz got a surprise in 2015 when he saw a coral trout swimming through a temperate kelp forest in his local waters off Sydney, much further south than he’d seen before. He submitted the below photo to Redmap, which was then verified by a scientist.
Spearfisher Derrick Cruz, pictured with a Coral Trout off Sydney. Redmap
Citizen scientists using Redmap were also the first to spot the gloomy octopus off Tasmania in 2012. Subsequent genetic studies confirmed the species’ rapid extension into Tasmanian waters.
Similarly, solo eastern rock lobsters have been turning up in Tasmania for some time. But Redmap sightings recorded dozens of individuals living together in a “den”, which had not been observed previously.
Using the citizen science data, we produced a report outlining the assessment methods underpinning our study. We’ve also produced detailed state-based report cards for Western Australia, Tasmania and New South Wales, where coastal waters are warming much faster than the global average.
We also generated a map of the species shifts this revealed, and a downloadable poster summarising the findings. This allows the public – including those who contributed data – to see at a glance how climate change is affecting our oceans.
Left, a downloadable poster summarising the species shifts in distribution. Right, the state-based report cards.
Citizen science has benefits beyond helping us understand changes in natural systems. Projects such as Redmap open up a community conversation about the impacts of climate change in Australia’s marine environment – using the public’s own knowledge and photos.
Our research suggests this method engages the community and helps get people involved in documenting and understanding the problems facing our oceans and coasts.
A better understanding – by both scientists and the public – will help ensure healthy ecosystems, strong conservation and thriving fisheries in future.
Gretta Pecl receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), the Fisheries Research & Development Corporation (FRDC), the Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment through the National Environmental Science Program (NESP), and the Department of Primary Industries NSW. She is also a Lead Author on the recent IPCC assessment report, and received funding from the Department of Environment and Energy to support travel to IPCC meetings.
Barrett Wolfe receives funding from the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, the Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment through the National Environmental Science Program, Department of Primary Industries NSW and NRE Tasmania. He has received past research funding from Seaworld Research and Rescue Foundation and PADI Foundation.
Curtis Champion receives funding from the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. He works for the NSW Department of Primary Industries.
Jan Strugnell receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC), the Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment through the National Environmental Science Program (NESP) and the Queensland Government through the Queensland Citizen Science Grants.
Sue-Ann Watson receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), the Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment through the National Environmental Science Program (NESP) and Queensland Government through the Queensland Citizen Science Grants.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dan Andrews, Visiting Fellow and Director – Micro heterogeneity and Macroeconomic Performance program, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University
Shutterstock
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
After 20 years of declining educational standards, as well as recent disruptions to migrant flows, discussions at this week’s jobs summit will rightly emphasise the importance of growing skills.
But reforms to education policy can take a long time to reap benefits, and there is no guarantee that changes to migration policies can rapidly return Australia to pre-pandemic population intakes.
This means discussions at the summit should focus not only on growing our stock of
talent, but also on allocating our existing talent more efficiently.
We find there aren’t enough people changing jobs, there aren’t enough new firms being created, and there isn’t enough competition between firms.
What we need is for Australians to be resigning from jobs and seeking new ones along the lines of the great resignation that was said to be taking place in the United States.
We find the industries that are the least dynamic (where there are the least resignations) are the ones where the rate at which productivity growth is turned into wages growth has slipped the most, probably because of a decline in worker bargaining power.
The probability that the average Australian worker switches jobs has fallen from 12.8% in the mid-1990s to 9.5%.
Workers that do switch jobs get an 8% pay bump on average. And it’s better for their mental health. Switching from a poorly-matched to a well-matched job gives a boost to reported mental health equivalent to getting married. Singles: take note.
We also have fewer new companies. The rate at which new companies were being created fell from 13% in the mid-2000s to 11% in the mid-2010s.
Industry concentration has increased. The share of industry revenue going to the four biggest companies has doubled since 2010.
Those at the top are safer than ever. The probability of a market leader being displaced from the top has declined by about seven percentage points since the mid-2000s.
So, what can we do to make Australia more dynamic? It needs to be easier to change jobs. There’s lots we could look at.
Easier job switching
We could harmonise and reduce occupational licensing restrictions across states (something the states and the Commonwealth are working on) and remove taxes like stamp duties that make it expensive for people to relocate.
We could reduce barriers faced by new firms. Non-compete clauses, planning and zoning laws, and visa quotas are ripe areas for reassessment.
And we could shift our tax breaks for small business supports towards new small businesses. It is young employers, not small employers, that most create jobs. Old employers (taken together) destroy them.
Penalties for anti-competitive conduct and laws restricting mergers in already concentrated markets ought to be strengthened, as suggested by Assistant Treasurer Andrew Leigh last week.
But we need to acknowledge that market dynamism is not great for everyone.
Most workers benefit from dynamic markets, in jobs, in wages and in choice. But more dynamism would mean more workers would lose jobs and struggle to get new ones.
An improved safety net
The decline in reported mental health that follows the loss of a job is equivalent to that following a serious injury or illness. Lost earnings take years to recover.
We need to consider reforms to our income support system. Our present system of unemployment benefits offers support, but not much insurance for workers considering a change of jobs.
To meaningfully help workers, the summit will need a plan to fix Australia’s stagnant economy. Anything less will be addressing the symptoms, not the cause.
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the e61 Institute.
The e61 Institute is a not for profit economic research institute whose foundation partners include the Macquarie Business School, the Becker Friedman Institute, and the Susan McKinnon Foundation.
Adam Triggs and Gianni La Cava 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.
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
Skills shortages are set to be a key theme at this week’s jobs summit. With the unemployment rate at its lowest level in a generation, employers and consumers are looking for solutions.
To understand where the shortages are, researchers can survey employers or count the number and duration of job vacancies. These methods are useful for establishing where shortages exist, but not so helpful in anticipating where new shortages might emerge.
At Victoria University we have created a model-based analysis in which likely paths for supply and demand of many types of jobs are forecast. This will be useful in anticipating where shortages might emerge over the next couple of years.
For jobs where supply is not keeping up with demand, the model finds that wages increase relative to the average wage. And for jobs where growth in supply is exceeding demand, the model finds that wages fall relative to the average.
Although business groups are calling for an increase in immigration, we don’t consider this in the analysis. Instead, we focus on how to organise the people we have (which already factors in plenty of immigration) into the jobs that can best deliver the goods and services consumers want or need.
Forecasting the economy through to mid-2024, we put the occupations most likely to run into shortages or surpluses into four groups.
1. Supply struggles to keep up
Jobs with high wage growth and high employment growth are where we traditionally think of labour shortages.
For these jobs, demand is strong and supply will struggle to keep up. Most of the jobs in this group will be in demand from local consumers as our spending returns to normal after the pandemic.
They include jobs like education aides who assist teachers in schools, personal carers and assistants in disability care and aged care, and several construction-related roles, which require certificate-level qualifications.
Nursing is another job where supply will struggle to keep up. Nursing requires at least a bachelor degree qualification, which means new nurses cannot be trained quickly.
2. Jobs nobody wants
Then there are the “jobs nobody wants” (at least, as indicated by this analysis). These are jobs employers will struggle to fill, even though demand growth isn’t terribly strong.
Most of these roles require either a certificate qualification or no post-school qualification at all, and may be physically arduous or have inherently difficult working conditions.
This category includes prison security guards, truck drivers, food preparation assistants (who do dishwashing, prepare fast foods and assist chefs with ingredient preparation) and bricklayers.
3. Attractive jobs
Jobs with low wage growth are the attractive jobs. Remember that in the modelling, if supply to an occupation is strong, it will depress wage growth.
We find attractive jobs are those requiring bachelor degrees or higher qualifications. Young people are twice as likely to have these qualifications than older Australians. Three in ten people aged between 25 and 34 hold a bachelor degree, compared to just three in 20 people aged over 55.
As the older cohort retires and the younger cohort enters the job market, the supply of workers with bachelor degrees will grow, creating a strong supply of lawyers, engineers, accountants and architects.
Although these jobs are modelled to have relatively slow wage growth, these are generally high-wage white collar jobs offering good conditions and fulfilling work.
4. Attractive but declining jobs
These are jobs for which demand is expected to grow relatively slowly over the next two years, for a variety of reasons.
Unlike the jobs nobody wants, these jobs should not be difficult to fill. Demand for these roles will grow slowly due to workplace change. For example, hardly anybody uses typists these days. There are also fewer jobs for personal assistants, which have been replaced by more general roles such as “general clerk” who perform a range of administrative tasks. This is one of the roles where we find supply struggles to keep up.
While international travel remains in the doldrums, pilots are also on this list.
What to do next?
Labour shortages in some occupations make it difficult for businesses and governments to deliver the goods and services society wants. To address the shortages without changing the overall size of the population forecast (which already includes a large contribution from migration), increases in some types of jobs will mean reductions in others.
This makes the task more complicated than simply declaring we need more workers in the jobs that are in short supply.
Here are three suggestions:
encourage and enable people to qualify quickly and cheaply for occupations where supply is not keeping up – in particular, personal carers, education aides and the construction-related occupations. This may require more places to be offered in existing courses at TAFEs or other vocational education providers, and it may require design of new, shorter qualifications. Fees for these qualifications should be reduced or removed altogether
offer more domestic bachelor degree places for students to study nursing and midwifery. These students may be diverted from other bachelor degree courses. These courses necessarily take time to complete, so including nurses in our migration intake will also need to play a role
allow wages to climb in low-skilled, less fulfilling jobs such as checkout operators and sales assistants, until such time as automation becomes worthwhile. After that, people who would have been doing these jobs can instead address shortages in hospitality, which is more difficult to automate, or undertake a small amount of training to qualify as personal carers and assistants or education aides.
Janine Dixon 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.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says the biggest outcome he wants from this week’s jobs and skills summit “is the beginning of a new culture of co-operation”.
In a Monday speech to mark his first 100 days in office, Albanese will say he is looking for progress on skills and training, wages and apprenticeships, and hopes there will be “some immediate actions” out of the summit.
But the basic aim is “a renewed understanding – between unions and industry and small business and government and community groups – that building a stronger, fairer and more productive economy is our shared responsibility, and our common interest.
“This is how we get employers and employees and small business negotiating for genuine win-win outcomes,” Albanese says in his speech, excerpts of which were released ahead of delivery.
“It’s how we make the federation work better, lifting efficiency, improving services and boosting productivity.
“This is how we sweep aside the persistent, structural barriers that prevent women from securing decent jobs and careers and enjoying financial security over their lives.”
The sharpest issue in the lead up to the Thursday-Friday summit, to be attended by about 140 participants, is the ACTU’s bid for the wages system to allow multi-employer bargaining – that is, bargaining across sectors.
This sectoral bargaining, which could be accompanied by industrial action, would strengthen the hands of unions and employers in winning pay rises.
The government has said it is very interested in the proposal but there has been push back from employers.
Albanese in his speech stresses the end of the summit is not the end of the story. Summit ideas would feed into an Employment White Paper expected to take about a year to complete.
Participants will hope some more immediate initiatives that the government accepts could be included in the October budget.
In a joint statement on skills and training, the ACTU and business groups at the weekend called for the budget to include more funding to reinvigorate the apprenticeship system.
“Investment must increase apprentice wage subsidies, provide incentive completion payments for both employers and apprentices, and payments for mentoring programs for apprentices.”
The groups also called for the Albanese government to work with unions and employers and state and territory governments to “guarantee foundational skills, including digital literacy, for all Australians”, and “support lifelong learning”.
The business groups that signed the joint statement were the Australian Industry Group, the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
Asked about the union push for multi-employer bargaining. Treasurer Jim Chalmers told Sky: “We don’t kid ourselves that everybody’s got an identical view about it. But if there’s a view about fixing enterprise bargaining, then it should be heard and it should be teased out on the floor at the summit for sure.”
Chalmers said:
We’re not looking for unanimity. We’re just looking for those areas of broad common ground so that we can move forward together, whether it be on getting wages growing again after a decade of stagnation, whether it’s boosting productivity by investing in our people and their skills, whether it’s dealing with these skills and labour shortages.
“We’ve been really energised and really enthused by the genuine spirit of collaboration and cooperation that has emerged in the lead up to the Summit.”
NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet expressed concern that “it seems to be that the jobs summit to many degrees has been overtaken by the unions”.
On the pandemic, Albanese in his speech spells out the phases the government sees. “We’ve been through the pandemic response. We are in the middle of the recovery.
“And reform will be the key to renewal. From response and recovery, to reform and renewal.” This would be “the guiding focus of government action for the coming years”.
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.
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
Investing in Australians’ education is far more important than immigration in resolving the nation’s skills shortages, according to leading economists surveyed in the lead-up to this week’s jobs and skills summit.
The 50 top Australian economists polled by the Economic Society of Australia and The Conversation are recognised by their peers as leaders in their fields, including economic modelling, labour markets and public policy.
Asked to select from a list of topics to be discussed at the summit, and which offered the most promise of delivering better outcomes, two-thirds picked “education and skills”. Only one-third picked “migration policy”.
The biggest concerns among those who picked “education and skills” relate to school and vocational education.
The Australian National University’s Bruce Chapman, who designed Australia’s higher education loans scheme (HECS) in the late 1980s, described funding for vocational education as a “mess”.
Vocational training is a “mess”
“There are up-front fees alongside no-charge regimes, both of which are poor and inequitable,” Chapman said. “A small number of courses offer income-contingent loans along the lines of the university scheme, but most do not.”
Universities have income-contingent loans that don’t require payments until the recipient’s income climbs above A$48,361.
If applied to all vocational education courses (including TAFE courses), it would allow reasonable charges and protect students from hardships and default.
“Governments should have been aware of this for the 34 years that HECS has existed, but have shown no leadership in the area,” Chapman said.
High school outcomes remain poor
Saul Eslake said all levels of Australian education – from primary school, up to vocational education and universities – are “failing to equip Australians with the skills required for the jobs of both today and the future”.
Among the many causes of that failure were inequities in how education funding is distributed, which have led to sustained gaps between Australia’s high and low socio-economic students’ results.
Paul Frijters suggested levelling the playing field between private and public schools by ditching subsidies to private schools, banning mobile phones in schools, and allowing children with low grades to repeat years instead of setting standards so low they were generally promoted.
Almost half of those surveyed wanted measures to promote productivity. Julie Toth, formerly with the Australian Industry Group and now with the digital property settlement company PEXA, suggested shifting governments’ focus away from “creating local jobs” to automating tasks wherever possible.
“We should be aiming to reduce the need for lower-skill and lower-value tasks and jobs, rather than simply seeking more bodies to do them,” she said.
Full working rights for refugees
Of those who nominated “migration policy” as a priority, two warned against using more migration to fix skills shortages. Labour market economist Sue Richardson said she knew of no evidence that migration increased either productivity or the living standards of pre-existing Australians.
“It does increase aggregate gross domestic product,” she said. “But that is just because the population is bigger”. It enabled Australia to avoid a close examination of why it did not generate the skills it needed itself.
Margaret Nowak of Curtin University pointed to the absurdity of not giving refugees and those awaiting determination an unfettered right to work. She said it would be an “easy early win”.
“We already have in this country a ready and willing supply of labour,” Nowak said. “We should get rid of the paranoia and ideology inherent in the current administration of the policy and welcome our resident refugees into full participation and education rights.”
Many economists also nominated workforce participation, care jobs and equal pay for women as key priorities for the summit.
Calibrating care
Several, including RMIT University’s Leonora Risse, called for more accurate measurement of the benefits generated by the care sector, “in the same way as we compute the cost/benefit dividend of government investments in other infrastructure”.
Risse said a proper measure of the economy-wide value of the care sector could be factored into the budget, and used to provide a mechanism to lift the wages and status of care workers.
Macquarie University’s Lisa Magnani said the pandemic had shown Australia has a crisis of care work “manifested in the shortage of teachers, in overworked hospital workers, in exhausted parents”. Traditional measures of labour productivity failed to capture the impact of care jobs on wellbeing, as well as their economic value.
Alison Preston of Macquarie University said health care and social assistance had become Australia’s biggest employing industry, eclipsing, retail and construction.
Specific measures to assist the health care and social assistance sector’s 76% female workforce included extending parental leave, minimising the need to hold multiple jobs, and setting and monitoring employment standards.
One of the 50 surveyed economists nominated a summit priority that was not on the proffered list. John Quiggin of the University of Queensland nominated “full employment”, which he thought had been the original idea for the summit.
Regardless of the present state of the labour market it was important to renew to full employment in the 1945 Employment White Paper, and to consider measures along the lines of the proposed Green New Deal in the United States.
Detailed responses:
Peter Martin 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.
In July this year the NSW government released a draft bill outlining a proposed standalone offence of coercive control for NSW.
Under the proposed law, repeated abusive behaviours such as controlling an intimate partner’s finances, isolating them from their family, or monitoring their movements, could amount to a criminal offence attracting up to seven years in prison.
Like NSW, Queensland has also committed to introducing coercive control as an offence. However this will only be done after it undertakes wider systemic reforms. This includes conducting an inquiry into domestic violence policing.
Both states have committed to criminalise coercive control despite First Nations women expressing ongoing concerns about it. These advocates have stated introduction of a coercive control offence could lead to further criminalisation of First Nations victim-survivors of violence.
There is an ongoing problem with police misidentifying victim-survivors of violence as perpetrators. Various Aboriginal-led organisations have expressed concerns this will worsen with the introduction of a new coercive control offence.
The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service has observed:
as well as experiencing […] general risk factors [for victim misidentification] at a higher rate, Aboriginal women are also more likely to be misidentified simply because they are Aboriginal, as a result of racism and bias among police and service providers.
Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women’s Legal Centre also detailed this issue in their submission to the NSW Joint Select Committee on Coercive Control:
[if an] Aboriginal woman is uneasy or unable to persuade a police officer that she is the primary victim of physical violence [under the current law] what hope, or incentive is there to persuade a police officer that she has experienced ongoing psychological and economic abuse [under the new law]?
Sisters Inside and the Institute for Collaborative Race Research described in 2021:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are routinely misidentified as “offenders” rather than “victims”. Not only will Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and girls not be afforded protection by this legislation, they will be squarely targeted.
First Nations organisations and communities have repeatedly identified the role of racism in victim-misidentification by police. This needs to be addressed before governments proceed with implementing coercive control as an offence.
Concerns of racism and perpetrator misidentification are reinforced by co-author Emma Buxton-Namisnyk’s recent research. This analysis found almost a third of First Nations women killed in domestic violence homicides had been previously identified by police as domestic violence perpetrators.
This research also identified police were likely to describe First Nations women as “uncooperative” or “unwilling” to work with police.
Police had used terminology such as this to describe victims in almost three quarters of domestic violence homicides where police had previously been involved in relation to domestic violence. In many cases police used this language to justify their decision to not provide protection or assistance for First Nations women when they experienced abuse.
Queensland’s ongoing domestic and family violence-related policing inquiry has also highlighted racism and sexism within the Queensland Police Service. This has included failures to properly investigate domestic violence-related deaths of First Nations women, and common victim misidentification.
In addition to entangling victim-survivors in the criminal justice system, victim misidentification can expose women to increased child protection intervention and the threat of child removal.
First Nations womens’ children already enter out of home care at an unacceptable rate.
Victim misidentification can also limit women’s access to support services and enable perpetrators to use legal systems to further abuse victim-survivors. For example, a perpetrator may attempt to draw out legal proceedings to intimidate or financially harm a victim-survivor.
‘Unintended’ but not unanticipated consequences
Both the Queensland and NSW inquiries have acknowledged there may be “unintended consequences” in criminalising coercive control, especially for First Nations women.
Saying these consequences are “unintended” implies these outcomes are also unanticipated. In this case, the consequences of criminalising coercive control for First Nations women are far from unanticipated. They have been repeatedly, explicitly identified and acknowledged during the law reform process. Using the language of “unintended consequences” seems to be a way to avoid accountability in law and policy making.
A similar example of law reform negatively impacting First Nations people can be found with previous changes to bail laws in Victoria. The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service observed:
changes to bail laws introduced in 2018 were opposed by expert stakeholders, including The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service, on the basis that they would disproportionately affect Aboriginal people. This expertise was disregarded, and the changed bail laws have resulted in Aboriginal women – including victim-survivors of domestic violence – being remanded in custody at alarming rates.
Both the NSW and Queensland governments have been told repeatedly what could happen if they proceed with criminalising coercive control. Instead they are pursuing a “tough on domestic violence” stance risking significant harm to its most marginalised victims.
Governments must listen and respond to First Nations womens’ lived experiences, advocacy and evidence-based concerns before proceeding down this path. Because it is First Nations women who will suffer the “unanticipated consequences” of these new laws.
Peta MacGillivray is affiliated with the Community Restorative Centre (CRC NSW) as Chair of the Board of Directors.
Althea Gibson and Emma Buxton-Namisnyk do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Traditional Owner and co-author Clinton WalkerCity of Karratha
An application from Traditional Owners to block the construction of a fertiliser plant near ancient rock art in the Pilbara was denied by the federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek this week. This decision is deeply concerning, and points to a much larger problem with Indigenous heritage management.
Plibersek says she went with the views of the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation in making her decision, calling it the “most representative organisation on cultural knowledge” in the region. Yet, she also acknowledged that these views don’t represent all Traditional Owner perspectives in the area.
Save Our Songlines, a separate organisation of Murujuga Traditional Owners, oppose the fertiliser plant, which they say poses a threat to sacred rock art sites. They say the minister’s decision is “based on faulty reasoning and false conclusions”.
In 2020, the world reacted in horror when Rio Tinto lawfully destroyed Juukan Gorge – sacred Aboriginal rock shelters in the Pilbara some 46,000 years old. Broader community understanding of the value of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledges for looking after Country can help us avoid repeating this tragedy. Tourism and community education is an important way to do that.
‘Enough is enough’
The A$4.5 billion Perdaman fertiliser plant will be constructed in the World Heritage nominated Murujuga National Park in Western Australia. It is home to the world’s largest rock art gallery, with more than 1 million images scattered across the entire Burrup Peninsula and Dampier Archipelago.
As many as 20 sacred sites may be impacted by the plant, according to Save Our Songlines.
In an interview with ABC Radio National, Plibersek said the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation have agreed that some of these rock carvings can be moved safely, and others can be protected on site even if the plant goes ahead.
However, the situation isn’t so clear cut. For example, the ABC revealed on Thursday that the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation refused permission to move the rock art sites multiple times, preferring they remain undisturbed. Elders finally agreed after receiving advice that this wasn’t possible.
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen issues regarding consultation processes with Traditional Owners, such as during the notorious battle for the Kimberley against a major gas plant in 2012.
Traditional Owner and co-author Clinton Walker has been sharing his intimate knowledge of the Pilbara with visitors through his tourism venture Ngurrangga Tours for the past 11 years. He has the cultural authority and capacity to speak for his Country.
This hill is a very very sacred site to my people. If they build their plant here we’re not gonna have the same access we do now to go visit our rock art and teach our kids and family their culture.
This impact is going to damage our culture and it will damage us as the Traditional Owners because we’re connected to these sites in a spiritual way. I want people to know how important these sites are. We need to protect them. Enough is enough.
The inquiry also called for the removal of so-called “gag clauses” from land-use agreements, which prevent Aboriginal people from speaking out against developers.
We find it deeply problematic that Plibersek did not acknowledge these concerns around gag clauses in announcing her approval of the fertiliser plant. It is the role of the government to keep industry accountable for their obligations to abide by Indigenous heritage laws and to ensure proper consultation processes are undertaken.
This decision is also not in line with the federal government’s vocal commitment to the environment and to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs prior to winning the election.
If the Lawful Laws which are awful, are enabled as lawful, what chance do Indigenous people and our lands, water, lifeways, and livelihoods stand against destruction?
Non-Indigenous people need to better understand the importance of Country for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Classrooms are a good place to start.
Tourism is one context where the visibility and recognition of Indigenous people as knowledge-holders can be promoted and celebrated.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tourism operators are delivering truthful accounts of Australian history and telling their stories of their connection to Country and culture. This work is an emotional labour as they challenge entrenched colonial narratives.
Indigenous tourism operators are agents of reconciliation. Operators speak about wanting to educate visitors to build awareness of social and environmental issues facing their communities. The potential destruction of cultural sites at Murujuga is one such issue.
Ongoing research from lead-author Nicole Curtin involves conversations with Aboriginal tourism operators and their visitors. It finds that deep listening is required for visitors to interrogate their own biases and privileges during their tourism experience. Visitors must be willing to “go and sit and learn” about Indigenous sovereignty and knowledges in their own lives.
Indeed, an enhanced sense of connection to our local communities may help to drive people to speak out about the destruction of sites of environmental and cultural significance.
Raising community awareness to fuel social momentum is one way of exerting pressure on decision makers to protect Australia’s rich cultural heritage and environment.
We acknowledge the Bininj, Larrakia, Noongar, Ngarluma, Yindjibarndi and Yawuru peoples as the Traditional Owners of Country where this article, and our research, was conducted and written. We pay our respects to Elders past and present.
Nicole Curtin is an associate member of the Western Australian Indigenous Tourism Operators Council. She is also a member of Reconciliation WA.
Clinton Walker is the owner of Ngurrangga Tours. He is a board member of Brida and the Western Australian Indigenous Tourism Operators Council.
Tracy Woodroffe is affiliated with Charles Darwin University and a lecturer in the College of Indigenous Futures, Arts & Education (CIFEA). Tracy is an associate supervisor for the author Nicole Curtin.
Ruth Wallace is affiliated with Charles Darwin University and the Director of the Northern Institute, a social and policy research institute in the Northern Territory. Ruth is an associate supervisor for the author Nicole Curtin.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tania Lewis, Professor of Media and Communication and Co-Director, Digital Ethnography Research Centre, RMIT University
Author provided, Author provided
In 2020, propelled by the pandemic and the push to work from home, thousands of Australian households made the decision to move from the city to the country. A significant swathe of these internal migrants were “e-changers”, workers holding on to their city jobs and working remotely.
During the thick of the lockdown period, as growing numbers of city slickers swapped their urban lifestyles to work in remote and rural settings, we undertook online interviews with householders in e-change coastal hotspots and “lifestyle towns” in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. We were interested in their experiences of lifestyle migration, including the challenges facing these pioneers of remote working and living. We then spoke to our e-changers one year later to see how they fared.
One of the early pandemic e-changers was Charles and his partner. They relocated to a coastal location two hours’ drive from Melbourne in March 2020.
Before the pandemic Charles was a busy librarian in a large inner-urban university. Working in the buzzing heart of the city, his day job involved regular face-to-face engagement with academic staff and students in the library and across the campus.
Fast forward to today and Charles’s daily routine when working remotely looks very different. His workday – now largely spent online – is still extremely busy, but it might start with a surf and end with a walk on the beach.
These days a workday for Charles might start with a surf and end with a walk along the beach. Author provided
To many, this scenario probably sounds like a dream lifestyle, especially for those of us who spent large chunks of the past two years under lockdown. But is the shift to remote regional work as idyllic as it seems? What kinds of people decided to become e-changers? And what have their experiences been?
The e-changers in our study were a diverse group of people with various motivations for moving to the country. We found three broad groups of e-changers, marked by different stages of life.
The first group – represented by older couples like Charles and Di – had often been planning a lifestyle change for some time, in early anticipation of retirement.
The second group were younger couples and singles. They were often motivated by a desire to live closer to natural amenities such as beaches, forests or mountains. Research manager Irene and her partner, for instance, moved from inner Melbourne to Mt Macedon in Victoria in May 2020. Irene recalled:
We’d been talking about this for a while because we’re both from regional areas.
But after the first Melbourne lockdown, we thought ‘let’s just do it’, so we found a rental here. For us it was about having greater access to the outdoors – we both enjoy biking, hiking, running and climbing.
The third and largest group were households with dependent children. They were generally seeking more affordable and larger homes with space for their children to spend time outdoors. Kevin, an engineer whose family relocated from Sydney to Wollongong, is a good example of these aspirations:
When we had our second child […] we wanted to buy a family house but were priced out of Sydney, so we cast our net around remote and regional areas – the Blue Mountains, the Central Coast, but Wollongong came top of the list based upon distance to my office, a more relaxed lifestyle, closer to beach and bush, good schools, good health care, wasn’t too small, wasn’t too large.
When Mick, a senior manager, and his wife moved to the country from Melbourne, he converted part of a farm shed into an office space. Author provided
We spoke with our e-changers one year later. How were they finding the experience of living a significant distance from the cultural life and amenities of a major city?
While they miss the cosmopolitanism and vitality of the city, Charles and Di are still enjoying the calmness, daily encounters with wildlife and close connection to neighbours in their small coastal locale. But they now rent an Airbnb in Melbourne for a couple of nights a week. These regular commutes enable them to reconnect with colleagues and get a dose of urban vibrancy.
By contrast, Irene and her partner have returned to Melbourne from Mount Macedon. While the e-change experience was a “fun break from the city and an experience of regional life”, Irene’s commitment to her career meant she wanted to be near her office. Lengthy commutes on the train – made worse by service cancellations and delays – made her city workdays long and tiring.
Long-term e-changers Kevin and his family have no regrets about the move. They cannot imagine returning to the city. For Kevin, the flexibility of working from home has enabled him to share more of the role of home care, such as cooking dinner and doing school drop-offs, with his partner, a busy healthcare worker.
It’s [working from home] the way forward. I don’t think anyone’s gonna go back.
However, for professionals like Kevin, living and working remotely still has some limitations in terms of access to transport and airports.
We have to have access or a link to a major centre, whether through rail, public transport, so we never lose that ability to be able to go into a meeting in the city if they need to. And I think Australia is going to get better at that.
Kevin enjoys working from home but hopes public transport access to the city will improve. Author provided
Tania Lewis received funding from The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) to conduct this research.
Andrew Glover received funding from The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) to conduct this research.
Julian Waters-Lynch received funding from The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) to conduct this research.
University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and Associate Professor of journalism Dr. Caroline Fisher talk about this week in politics.
They discuss the government’s announcement of a royal commission into Robodebt, and the inquiry into former prime minister Scott Morrison’s power grab, when he was secretly appointed to multiple ministries.
They also canvass the coming jobs and skills summit, where a “broken” industrial relations system and the push by employers for more migrants will be central and contentious issues.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Brian Tamaki with Destiny Church members and supporters leading the anti-government march to parliament on August 23.Getty Images
The final act in this week’s protest on the lawns of parliament was the announcement by Destiny Church leader Brian Tamaki of a new political party. Perhaps this was the whole point of the event, as it was never entirely clear what the protest was actually against in the first place.
According to Tamaki, the proposed Freedoms NZ party (which has yet to be formally registered) would be a coalition of three existing fringe parties: the New Nation Party (which is keen to leave the United Nations), Vision NZ (which promotes the idea “Kiwis will once again be First, no longer playing the runner up to immigrants or refugees”), and the anti-5G Outdoors and Freedom Party.
Given the fractious nature of extreme-right politics, it was perhaps not surprising when the last of that triumvirate announced it had not agreed to any alliance. But tempting though it might be to dismiss the latest attempt by extremists to take their place in the very institutions they publicly denounce, there are important reasons we should not be complacent.
While extremist parties have historically struggled at general elections in New Zealand, the political landscape has altered significantly in the past two years. Recent polls are now registering support for those on the extreme right.
It is true this support is fragmented across small parties, which have a terrible track record of cooperation. And at this point none is close to the 5% threshold (or single constituency seat) required to secure a place in parliament. But even if it seems unlikely Tamaki will be able to persuade other prominent figures on the right to hand their own platforms to him, it won’t be for lack of effort.
Strange bedfellows
More importantly, by refusing to rule out working with them in the next parliament, National Party leader Christopher Luxon has potentially given Tamaki and his fellow travellers a sniff of credibility.
Luxon’s equivocation is slightly mysterious. Tamaki has said he believes COVID was the work of Satan and that Christians would be protected from the virus. He has compared life in Auckland under lockdown with concentration camps. And his views on migrants, family values and the place of women in public life have seen him compared with Hungary’s autocratic leader Viktor Orban.
It’s hard to imagine this sitting comfortably with at least some of Luxon’s own caucus colleagues – particularly its women MPs.
And while it might also be easy to agree with Luxon that fringe parties have little chance of clearing electoral thresholds, this also minimises the threat such movements pose to the fabric of liberal democracy in Aotearoa New Zealand.
No laughing matter? Christopher Luxon at the unveiling of his puppet caricature at Wellington’s Backbencher Pub, August 3. Getty Images
Lessons from Europe
There are two lessons about the influence of right wing populists in other countries that should be heeded.
The first is that it is reckless to glibly assume such parties cannot enjoy electoral success. In the 1980s, no European government required the support of populists to take or remain in office. But during this century, as many as 11 European governments have relied for their existence on coalition with right wing populist parties.
Moreover, once the dust had settled on the 2019 European Parliament elections, the populist/right-wing nationalist bloc held 112 (15%) of the 751 seats.
The term “bloc” suggests a degree of ideological, strategic and policy coherence that doesn’t necessarily characterise Europe’s populists. But that shouldn’t obscure the fact they are emphatically there.
What’s more, populists do not need to be in office to have an impact. They can exert significant influence indirectly in a number of ways: by occupying the news cycle (thereby securing public visibility), by shaping the political agenda, by pushing mainstream parties to the right, and by moulding the language with which politics is transacted.
Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage addresses supporters on the eve of the UK’s exit from the European Union in 2020. Getty Images
Rise of the far right
In the United Kingdom, the influence of Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party on the Conservative Party’s sharp tilt to the right in recent times is just one example.
And Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament to force through a “no deal” Brexit, while unsuccessful, was widely seen as a tactic to bring back voters who had deserted the Tories at the European elections.
Not so many years ago people laughed at the idea that extreme right populists could win parliamentary seats. No one’s laughing any more. In many parts of the world, populist parties are no longer constitutional oddities – they are institutionalised features of party politics and acceptable partners in government.
By refusing categorically to rule out a political accommodation with Tamaki and his followers, Luxon is keeping alive the possibility – however faint – this may also come to pass in New Zealand. Until we hear otherwise, not ruling them out means they could be ruled in.
Richard Shaw 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.
You want your superannuation savings to be invested in things that also serve the planet’s long-term interests. But how can you be sure your fund’s values align with yours – or even its own claims?
This question has become increasingly pertinent as demand for environmentally and socially sustainable investments grows – and with it incentives for financial institutions to put the best spin on their offerings.
One consultancy specialising in “responsible investment” reckons 10% of the funds it has examined do not have the sustainability orientation they claim.
Among those accused of greenwashing in recent months is one of Australia’s biggest super funds, HESTA (the industry fund for health and community service workers), which has promoting its “clean energy” credentials while still holding shares in fossil-fuel companies Woodside and Santos.
So how can you check what your superannuation fund invests in?
Super funds are legally obliged to disclose how they invest your money in two different disclosure documents – a Product Disclosure Statement and a Portfolio Holdings Disclosure.
Both will be available on a super fund’s website, though how easily you can find them will vary.
The rest of this article is going to explain what information these documents provide, how useful this information is likely to be, and your best bet to ensure your super fund reflects your values.
The Product Disclosure Statement
Product disclosure statements are required by the financial regulator (the Australian Securities and Investments Commission) for all financial products.
This document outlines the most basic but important information of an investment product’s features, benefits, risks and costs, including fees and taxes. The format is standardised, with one section (Section 5) covering with “How we invest your money”.
The information it contains is broad. At best you’ll learn how the fund splits its investments between safe and riskier assets, and between different asset classes – Australian shares, international shares, property trusts, infrastructure trust, cash and so on.
Examples of the ‘how we invest your money’ sections in product disclosure statements from the REST and HESTA super funds. REST; HESTA, CC BY
Portfolio Holding Disclosure
For a comprehensive look at where your money is invested in, you can consider the Portfolio Holdings Disclosure.
This document lists a fund’s complete holdings – including the percentage and value of every single company stock held.
Portfolio holdings disclosures are relatively new, being obligatory only since March 2022 under legislation meant to improve transparency in the sector.
However, super funds aren’t obliged to provide this information in a consistent, easily understandable way.
For a non-expert who doesn’t know what to look for, the level of detail can be mind-boggling. You may find yourself scrutinising a spreadsheet listing thousands of items.
The Australian Retirement Trust’s Portfolio Holdings Disclosure for its “Lifecycle Balanced Pool”, for example, has more than 8,000 line items.
Some super funds have made the effort to provide this information in a more user-friendly format. An example is Future Super, which allows you to search and filter portfolio holdings by asset class and country of origin.
But if your concern is to avoid investing in some specific activity such as in mining fossil fuels or gambling, you’ll need to know the companies and other assets you want to avoid for this to be helpful.
This is not to say portfolio holding disclosure obligations are useless. They are incredibly useful – a huge leap forward in the sector’s accountability. They just aren’t designed for consumers.
So there is still much work to be done to make the sector truly transparent.
What would really help is independent certification and ratings of super products, similar to government websites and programs that certify energy efficiency and allow comparison of electricity plans.
In the meantime, I can offer you one big tip.
Choose a specific superannuation product that markets itself on its environmental or social sustainability credentials. Most super funds now provide these choices alongside their more traditional investment options.
There is a variety of “screening” approaches to ethical investments. Some exclude entire sectors. Others include the best environmental and social performers even among “sinful” industries such as tobacco or weapons.
So just because a super product is marketed as “ethical” or “sustainable” doesn’t guarantee you will agree with all its investments.
But there is a much higher likelihood of it living up to its claims due to greater scrutiny by third parties such as environmental groups as well as the financial regulator.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission put super funds on notice earlier this year with a “guidance note” about the growing risk of greenwashing in sustainability-related financial products.
It reminded funds that “making statements (or disseminating information) that are false or misleading, or engaging in dishonest, misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to a financial product or financial service” is against the law.
So super funds know their portfolios are being scrutinised.
Switching your investment option or fund is simpler than you think. You only need to fill out and lodge a form. Just be sure to compare fees and performance, and seek a second opinion from trustworthy adviser before “voting with your wallet”.
Natalie Peng 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 Emma Beckett, Senior Lecturer (Food Science and Human Nutrition), School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle
Coffee – one bean with many possibilities. A big choice is how to brew it: espresso, filter, plunger, percolator, instant and more. Each method has unique equipment, timing, temperature, pressure, and coffee grind and water needs.
Our choices of brewing method can be cultural, social or practical. But how much do they really impact what’s in your cup?
Which is the strongest brew?
It depends. If we focus on caffeineconcentration, on a milligram per millilitre (mg/ml) basis espresso methods are typically the most concentrated, able to deliver up to 4.2 mg/ml. This is about three times higher than other methods like Moka pot (a type of boiling percolator) and cold brewing at about 1.25 mg/ml. Drip and plunger methods (including French and Aero-press) are about half that again.
Espresso methods extract the most caffeine for a few reasons. Using the finest grind means there is more contact between the coffee and water. Espresso also uses pressure, pushing more compounds out into the water. While other methods brew for longer, this doesn’t impact caffeine. This is because caffeine is water soluble and easy to extract, so it’s released early in brewing.
But these comparisons are made based on typical extraction situations, not typical consumption situations.
So, while espresso gives you the most concentrated product, this is delivered in a smaller volume (just 18–30ml), compared to much larger volumes for most other methods. These volumes of course vary depending on the maker, but a recent Italian study defined a typical final serve of filter, percolator and cold brews as 120ml.
Based on this maths, cold brew actually comes out as the highest dose of caffeine per serve with almost 150mg – even higher than the 42–122mg totals found in finished espresso. Although cold brew uses cold water, and a larger grind size, it is brewed with a high coffee to water ratio, with extra beans needed in the brew. Of course, “standard serves” are a concept not a reality – you can multiply serves and supersize any coffee beverage!
With the rising price of coffee, you might also be interested in extraction efficiency – how much caffeine you get for each gram of coffee input.
Interestingly, most methods are actually pretty similar. Espresso methods vary but give an average of 10.5 milligrams per gram (mg/g), compared to 9.7–10.2mg/g for most other methods. The only outlier is the French press, with just 6.9mg/g of caffeine.
The French press or coffee plunger was actually invented in Italy, despite its modern name. Rachel Brenner/Unsplash
The oils responsible for the crema – the rich brown ‘foam’ on top of the brew – are also extracted more easily with high temperatures, pressures, and fine grinds (another potential win for espresso and Moka). These methods also give higher levels of dissolved solids, meaning a less watery consistency – but, again, this all depends on how the final product is served and diluted.
To further complicate matters – the receptors that detect caffeine and the other bitter compounds are highly variable between individuals due to genetics and training from our usual exposures. This means the same coffee samples could invoke diverse perceptions of their bitterness and strength in different people.
There are also differences in how sensitive we are to the stimulant effects of caffeine. So what we are looking for in a cup, and getting from it, is dependent on our own unique biology.
The Moka pot, another iconic Italian invention, brews coffee at high temperatures on a stovetop. Ccu.bat/Shutterstock
Is there a healthier brew?
Depending on the headline or the day, coffee might be presented as a healthy choice, or an unhealthy one. This is partly explained by our optimism bias (of course we want coffee to be good for us!) but may also be due to the difficulty of studying products like coffee, where it is difficult to capture the complexity of brewing methods and other variables.
This link might be a coincidence, based on other habits that coexist, but there is some evidence that filter coffee is healthier because more diterpenes (a chemical found in coffee which might be linked to raising levels of bad cholesterol) are left in the coffee and the filter, meaning less make it to the cup.
The bottom line?
Each brewing method has its own features and inputs. This gives each one a unique profile of flavour, texture, appearance and bioactive compounds. While the complexity is real and interesting, ultimately, how to brew is a personal choice.
Different information and situations will drive different choices in different people and on different days. Not every food and drink choice needs to be optimised!
Emma Beckett 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.
Heard about the chia seed-lemon juice “internal shower” drink? It’s going viral on TikTok and is being hailed as a digestion booster, constipation and bloating buster (particularly after travelling), detox drink and hangover cure.
Advocates recommend you mix two tablespoons of chia seeds in a cup of water, add lemon juice, wait till the seeds start to absorb the water and form a gel, drink it on an empty stomach, and wait.
Chia seeds are edible seeds from a flowering plant of the mint and sage families. These tiny seeds (1,000 seeds weigh about 1.3 grams), pack a nutritional punch and are rich in dietary fibre, polyunsaturated fat and protein. They also contain B vitamins (thiamin, riboflavin, niacin and folic acid) and minerals (calcium, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus).
Before you rush out to get some chia seeds, be wary. The National Capital Poison Center in the United States urged caution, following the case of a person needing surgery after the gelled chia seeds became stuck and blocked his oesophagus.
Let’s break down the ‘internal shower’ claims
1) Digestion booster
Chia seeds can’t “boost” digestion. For most people, digestive processes run automatically, just like breathing and blood flow. So you can’t speed up the enzymatic processes that help with food breakdown, digestion and absorption.
This claim is likely to be mixed up with constipation, which affects the time in takes for undigested food to travel though your gut and to your large bowel where it gets processed and turned into poo.
There are medical conditions, such as cystic fibrosis, where digestive enzymes can’t mix with food adequately and medicinal enzymes have to be taken orally. But this is very rare.
2) Constipation buster
This claim is likely to be true, due to the very high fibre content of chia seeds.
Dietary fibre content of chia seeds varies from 23% to 41%, depending on the variety. Of that, 85% is insoluble fibre that adds bulk to stools and helps increase the transit time of bowel motions through your intestines. The other 15% is soluble fibre, meaning that it dissolves in water and remains intact until it gets to the large bowel. There, it is fermented by the gut microbes. This produces water that helps to keep your bowel motions soft.
Two tablespoons of chia seeds weigh about 20-25 grams, providing 9-10 grams of fibre, which is a lot compared to adult daily intake targets of 25-30 grams per day.
But chia seeds aren’t the only fibre-rich food.
So what are the signs you need to have a closer look at your diet?
If, over the past few months, you have experienced symptoms including lumpy or hard stools, incomplete emptying of bowels, straining to pass a bowel motion or having fewer than three bowel motions per week, you could be constipated.
To address this, drink enough water so your urine is the colour of straw.
Next, boost you intake of foods high in fibre such as psyllium, wholemeal and wholegrain breads and legumes (chickpeas, lentils, four-bean mix, red kidney beans, baked beans), as well as foods such as prunes, kiwi fruit, leek, onion, beetroot, Brussel sprouts, peaches, watermelon and honeydew melon, and of course chia seeds. These high-fibre foods have all been shown to manage constipation.
If your bowel habits don’t improve, or have changed, see your GP.
Bloating is the feeling your abdomen is under pressure due to gas retention.
Recent research has shown both people with a healthy gut and people with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) had similar responses following consumption of a test meal, in terms of gas production and retention of contents in the stomach.
However, the researchers found people with IBS reported more symptoms related to the gas production, meaning their guts were more hypersensitive.
This suggests people with IBS may find gas production due to a chia “internal shower” uncomfortable or even painful.
There is no evidence chia or lemon juice, vitamins or other remedies can cure a hangover.
Chia seeds contain thiamin and alcohol reduces thiamin absorption from the gut. However, a hangover occurs after you have had too much alcohol and so thiamin from chia seeds arrives too late to be used during alcohol digestion.
Chia seeds are high in fibre. You can use them in recipes that taste better than the “internal shower” drink, such as chia banana pudding or a berry chia smoothie and that don’t pose a choking risk.
Just drink your water separately. There’s no special benefit in combining the two.
Clare Collins is a Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, HMRI, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update and the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns.
Review: Tell Me I’m Here, directed by Leticia Cáceres, Belvoir.
Released in 1991, the memoir Tell Me I’m Here remains a landmark examination of the experience of mental illness in Australia. Journalist Anne Deveson offered a raw and painful account of her eldest son Jonathan’s experience with schizophrenia, her family’s attempts to weather the storms of his illness, and her research into the condition.
In his mother’s memoir, Jonathan is funny and loving. He also has terrifying episodes of psychosis. He hits his mother and spits at his siblings. He cycles through the mental health and criminal justice systems, multiple times.
It is not, as you can imagine, a story with a happy ending.
Deveson’s candour was enormously important in helping to destigmatise mental illness. In transforming her unbearable tragedy into memoir, she performed a powerful act of empathy and advocacy. At the book’s close she wrote:
For too long, mental illness has been kept in the shadows. Instead of rejection, we need acceptance. Instead of shame, we need love. Instead of despair, we need solid and unwavering support. It is time to come out of the shadows and into the light.
Deveson spent the rest of her life trying to bring mental illness into the light through her media work and her involvement with the Schizophrenia Australia Foundation, now known as SANE Australia.
This stage adaptation extends Deveson’s legacy of public advocacy for a new audience.
Adapted by Veronica Nadine Gleeson and directed by Leticia Cáceres, it is a vivid and deeply moving theatrical experience.
The staging (set design by Stephen Curtis) is spare and inventive. An elegant set of shelves full of books and a large dining table signify this is the home of an educated middle-class family.
This is the home of an educated, middle-class family. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
The play begins with Jonathan’s birth and early years, deftly staged. The bond between mother and son is quickly established.
At the time of her son’s first serious episode of ill-health, Deveson had recently divorced from her children’s father, the journalist Ellis Blain (a droll performance by Sean O’Shea).
With her three children, Anne had moved to Adelaide to start a new relationship, but in effect, she was a single mother who had to travel overseas to make documentaries about famines and war zones to support her family.
Nadine Garner captures Anne Deveson’s no-nonsense appearance, as well as her warmth, wit and love. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
In the demanding lead role of Anne, Nadine Garner captures Deveson’s elegant, patrician voice, her no-nonsense appearance, as well as her warmth, wit and love. The play relies heavily on Deveson’s narration, maintaining a brisk pace. In this, it resembles the Joan Didion play The Year of Magical Thinking: both are stories of tragedy, both adapted from memoirs, both centre on a woman’s experience.
While Didion’s play is a one-woman show, in Tell Me I’m Here Anne shares the stage with others.
Tom Conroy is electrifying. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
This is the great advantage and benefit of moving the story from page to stage: while Deveson offered a powerful portrait of Jonathan in her book, Tom Conroy’s embodiment of Jonathan on stage is, simply, electrifying.
Alternately vulnerable and frightening, he and Garner fight and rage, but also have a tender, loving relationship, beautifully conveyed by the performers.
In the play’s opening scenes, Jonathan draws a large rectangle on the stage. It is the shape and size of a grave. For those who know this story, it foreshadows what is to come. For those who don’t, the shape is quickly obscured by the other doodles and drawings Jonathan makes on the stage. The graffiti he draws on the walls is a powerful visualisation of his psychosis.
At one despairing moment, he writes “Don’t Harm Anne” in large letters. It is at once terrifying and achingly sad.
The play shows how the entire family suffered. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
Anne struggles to get Jonathan the help he needs, often without success. A doctor tells a police officer at her house there is “no such thing as schizophrenia”; Jonathan’s medication has awful side-effects which encourage him to abandon it.
The play shows how the entire family suffered as they grappled with the unpredictability of Jonathan’s ill-health. Georgia (Jana Zvedeniuk), in particular, rails against the ways her brother consumes all her mother’s time and energy.
Yet the play also conveys the terror and torment Jonathan endured, as, in Deveson’s words, he suffered “the loss of his promise, the loss of himself”.
Affirmation and recognition
In 1991, Tell Me I’m Here struck a chord with many Australians. In Anne Deveson’s personal papers, held at the National Library of Australia, there are thick folders of anguished letters from people who had similar experiences.
Telling her story helped ease the burden of shame so many felt about mental illness.
This play tells Anne and Jonathan’s story for a new audience, and a different time.
It is tragic the story remains so relevant, more than 30 years later.
Tragically, the play remains relevant more than 30 years since Anne Deveson’s memoir. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
For anyone who has experienced the frustration and torment of supporting a loved one while they struggle with mental illness, Tell Me I’m Here will offer affirmation and recognition.
In the play’s closing moments, it even offers hope. It is a wrenching and beautiful work.
Tell Me I’m Here is at Belvoir until September 25.
If this article has raised issues for you or you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Michelle Arrow is currently receiving funding from the Australian Research Council to write a biography of Anne Deveson.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martien Lubberink, Associate Professor of Economics, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington
Getty Images
With the transfer this week of Kiwibank’s assets to a state-owned company, the New Zealand crown has now taken full control of the bank. At an estimated cost of NZ$2.1 billion, the change of ownership has all the hallmarks of a government bailout.
Former owners NZ Post, the Accident Compensation Corporation and the New Zealand Superannuation Fund could be considered justified in wanting to get out. It was an ailing bank in the making.
The main capital ratio dropped from a healthy 13% in 2018 to 10.5% this June – the minimum level the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority requires banks to meet in order to be seen as unquestionably strong.
Return on equity lingered at around 6% per year, while the bank’s larger competitors offered a return twice as high. Added to this were the high capital requirements announced by the Reserve Bank in 2019 and which are now being phased in.
Kiwibank has struggled since its inception. The government says its takeover will help prop-up the bank in the competitive sector. Fiona Goodall/Getty Images
Too important to fail?
The government has promised to recapitalise the bank to help it grow. Whatever the bailout is called officially, it was the only realistic option. That said, the government cited several reasons for its decision to transfer control.
One was to keep the bank in New Zealand hands. The government has also pledged its full commitment to support Kiwibank to be a genuine competitor in the banking industry. And lastly, the transfer allows “all future profits to stay in the country – unlike the Australian-owned banks.”
But these justifications should not be taken at face value, and it is worth looking at them one by one.
Keeping profits in the country
The idea that keeping profits in the country automatically creates value for New Zealanders is by no means a given.
Kiwibank’s latest reported profits were $136 million, or $25 per New Zealander. This pales in comparison to the profits reported by the big four Australian-owned banks: in total, about $6 billion, or $1,200 per head of population.
Other banks either keep their profits or they pay them out to their owners and shareholders. In practice, these are institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies – some of them New Zealand-based.
Moreover, New Zealanders who own shares in Australian banks will receive dividends. Unlike the owner of Kiwibank, these Kiwi investors will benefit directly from their investments.
Lastly, it should be noted that banks have accumulated profits in New Zealand because of the increasing capital requirements. Since 2018, the four Australian-owned banks in New Zealand retained profits worth $12 billion. These would otherwise be transferred to their parents across the Tasman.
Again, these banks contribute to a stable financial system, keep profits in the country and do not need support.
Local ownership
In practice, all New Zealand banks are locally incorporated because of Reserve Bank requirements. Foreign-owned banks operate largely independently from their parents. This has led to inconveniences.
For example, ASB bank cannot freely use new technologies developed by its owner Commonwealth Bank, even though there would be efficiencies of scale if they were allowed to do so.
Also, creditors cannot hold a foreign parent bank liable when its New Zealand subsidiary fails. It’s therefore unlikely that foreign ownership would significantly change Kiwibank’s operations.
But the prospect of foreign ownership could add value. It could encourage its management to step up efforts to grow and compete.
Viability and competition
With a 5% market share, Kiwibank is small and lacks the critical mass required to thrive and compete effectively. Its small size is already problematic, as the bank cannot serve large clients. The government, for example, does not rely on Kiwibank for its banking.
The growth opportunities for Kiwibank are further limited because the New Zealand banking market is tightly regulated and conservative. European banks, for example, are much further ahead when it comes to the adoption of new technologies. Money transfers between European bank accounts are executed in real time, while such transfers still take hours in New Zealand.
The government claims that the banking market has become more competitive since the establishment of Kiwibank. According to Finance Minister Grant Robertson, Kiwibank continues to put pressure on the big four.
That may be so, but other small competitors would do that too. Rabobank, for example, is competitive in farm lending. Other small banks remain well-capitalised and don’t face the same challenges as Kiwibank.
The risks ahead
The most likely way forward for Kiwibank is to further increase lending to riskier clients. Robertson has already alluded to this, arguing Kiwibank could be a disruptor in the industry by focusing on small and medium-sized enterprises.
The problem is that Kiwibank needs the expertise to do this. Adding capital is not enough. And the government will want to avoid Kiwibank taking on too much risk because that will put the future of the bank itself at risk.
On top of this is the risk of Kiwibank’s owner wanting to meddle with its operations. While the present government promises to respect operational independence, who knows what a future government might do.
Finally, there is the question of moral hazard – setting a precedent for other banks. What if one of the other, smaller banks finds itself in trouble? Will the government step in? Again, the decision to save Kiwibank suggests the future could be uncertain indeed.
Martien Lubberink 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.
Royal Australian Navy sailor working on an anti-aircraft gun aboard the HMAS CanberraAAP
Recent comments by Defence Minister Richard Marles about Australia, China and the international law of the sea raise the spectre of Australia acting as an Indo-Pacific “deputy sheriff” for the United States, enforcing the rules-based international order.
According to Marles, China’s live-fire military operations encircling Taiwan have breached the UN Law of the Sea, which requires countries to ensure peace and security in international waters. Marles is calling for China to cease its operations around Taiwan and has asserted that Australia will continue its own peaceful military operations in the region.
Marles was responding to Taiwan Strait tensions following the recent visit of US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and resulting Chinese military exercises in and around Taiwan including the launching of ballistic missiles. Australia’s military chiefs have also implied Australia will not go backwards in its South China Sea operations and will continue surveillance and other activities.
China increasingly asserts itself in the region
Throughout the year, China has taken an increasingly robust approach towards American, Australian, and Canadian military activities in the South China and East China Seas.
In May a RAAF P-8A Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft was challenged by Chinese military aircraft near the Chinese claimed Paracel Islands. In July, HMASParramatta was subject to surveillance and monitoring by a number of Chinese aircraft and naval vessels, including a nuclear submarine, while passing through the South China and East China Seas.
A RAAF P-8A Poseidon supports sea trials for the NUSHIP Hobart off the coast of Adelaide. Royal Australian Air Force
In both instances, the official Chinese position has been that the Australian ships and aircraft were unnecessarily and illegally intruding into Chinese waters and airspace. China justifies its actions as seeking to expel a foreign military force from an area over which it exercises sovereignty.
Australia’s response is that it is acting consistently with the international law of the sea. Its position has been that its ships are exercising freedom of navigation and its aircraft the freedom of overflight.
Each of these encounters occurs within a wider geopolitical and legal space which the recent tensions over Taiwan have further sharpened. They align with three distinct types of recent actions.
First, China has increasingly taken a much more assertive position throughout the region with respect to its territorial claims to both the South China Sea islands and Taiwan.
Second, China is seeking to exercise sovereign control over the waters and much of the airspace in the South China Sea.
Finally, China wishes to expel all foreign militaries from the region, especially the United States.
The United States has for 50 years conducted freedom of navigation operations (FONOPS) around the world to ensure the freedom of navigation for American merchant ships and warships. US FONOPs originally challenged sweeping Cold War claims by the former Soviet Union and evolved to challenge excessive maritime claims, or claims inconsistent with international law, by any country.
FONOPs in Asia-Pacific
These FONOPs are a Congressionally-approved and fully transparent military operation designed to advance a number of US national security interests.
There is a large number of ships assigned to FONOPs as part of the Seventh Fleet, the largest of the US Navy’s forward-deployed fleets, based in Japan. There are 50-70 ships and submarines, 150 aircraft, and more than 27,000 sailors and marines regularly deployed to the Seventh Fleet.
Recently, FONOPs have begun to focus on the South China Sea, sending multiple assets to respond to China’s actions. In July, an encounter between the USS Benfold_= and the Chinese military was soon followed by the US deploying an aircraft carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan, with accompanying support ships and aircraft. Australia does not have that level of back up and support, let alone an aircraft carrier.
U.S. Navy destroyer USS Benfold conducts routine underway operations in the Philippines Sea. AP
Australia’s position
The official Australian position is that it does not conduct US-style FONOPs. Australia has consistently claimed under both Coalition and Labor governments that it seeks to assert the freedom of navigation and strongly supports the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The Albanese government has stated Australia’s formal position has not changed and any South China Sea operations – whether at sea or in the air – are routine.
The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) says its operations are often associated with port visits within the region to Vietnam, Korea, or Japan. The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) notes they are undertaking regular surveillance operations throughout the region in cooperation with regional partners.
Future Australian operations?
Port visits and surveillance operations are all legitimate grounds for the Australian military to be operating in the South China Sea. However, it is the pattern of conduct and the support that Australia is showing for the Americans that needs more attention.
That Defence Minister Marles is standing by his 2016 comments proposing Australia conduct its own FONOPs, including within 12 nautical miles of the artificial islands China has built, may indicate further Australian military operations in the region.
Already, the 2022 maritime patrols and interactions with the Chinese military give the appearance Australia is acting as an American “deputy sheriff” enforcing the rules-based order of the law of the sea. If this is what the Australian government intends, there needs to be more transparency about Australia’s ultimate regional goals and objectives, the consequences of these tactics towards the bilateral relationship with China, and the back-up Australia can expect from the Americans if miscalculations arise and incidents occur during encounters with the Chinese military.
Donald Rothwell receives funding from Australian Research Council.
When asked to write the numbers from one to ten in a sequence, how do you order them? Horizontally? Vertically? Left to right? Top to bottom? Would you place them randomly?
It has been often been assumed, and taught in schools in Western countries, that the “correct” ordering of numbers is from left to right (1, 2, 3, 4…) rather than right to left (10, 9, 8, 7…). The ordering of numbers along a horizontal dimension is known as a “mental number line” and describes an important way we represent number and quantity in space.
Studies show humans prefer to position larger numbers to the right and smaller numbers to the left. People are usually faster and more accurate at comparing numbers when larger ones are to the right and smaller ones are to the left, and people with brain damage that disrupts their spatial processing also show similar disruptions in number processing.
But so far, there has been little research testing whether the horizontal dimension is the most important one we associate with numbers. In new research published in PLOS ONE, we found that humans actually process numbers faster when they are displayed vertically – with smaller numbers at the bottom and larger numbers at the top.
Not just humans
Our associations between number and space are influenced by language and culture, but these links are not unique to humans.
Tests on three-day-old chicks show they seek smaller numbers with a leftwards bias and larger numbers with a rightwards one. Pigeons and blue jays seem to have a left-to-right or right-to-left mental number line, depending on the individual.
Even three-day-old chicks have something like a mental number line. Jason Leung / Unsplash
These findings suggest associations between space and numbers may be wired into the brains of humans and other animals.
However, while many studies have examined left-to-right and right-to-left horizontal mental number lines, few have explored whether our dominant mental number line is even horizontal at all.
How we test for these spatial-numerical associations
To test how quickly people can process numbers in different arrangements, we set up an experiment where people were shown pairs of numbers from 1 to 9 on a monitor and used a joystick to indicate where the larger number was located.
If the 6 and 8 were shown on the screen, for example, the correct answer would be 8. A participant would indicate this by moving the joystick towards the 8 as fast as possible.
To measure participant response times as accurately as possible, we used fast-refresh 120 Hertz monitors and high-performance zero-lag arcade joysticks.
Testing how participants show preferences for either horizontal or vertical mental number lines by indicating the larger number with a computer gaming joy stick.
What we found
When the numbers were separated both vertically and horizontally, we found only the vertical arrangement affected response time. This suggests that, given the opportunity to use either a horizontal or vertical mental representation of numbers in space, participants only used the vertical representation.
When the larger number was above the smaller number, people responded much more quickly than in any other arrangement of numbers.
This suggests our mental number line actually goes from bottom (small numbers) to top (large numbers).
Why is this important?
Numbers affect almost every part of our lives (and our safety). Pharmacists need to correctly measure doses of medicine, engineers need to determine stresses on buildings and structures, pilots need to know their speed and altitude, and all of us need to know what button to press on an elevator.
The way we learn to use numbers, and how designers choose to display numerical information to us, can have important implications for how we make fast and accurate decisions. In fact, in some time-critical decision-making environments, such as aeroplane cockpits and stock market floors, numbers are often displayed vertically.
Our findings, and another recent study, may have implications for designers seeking to help users quickly understand and use numerical information. Modern devices enable very innovative number display options, which could help people use technology more efficiently and safely.
There are also implications for education, suggesting we should teach children using vertical bottom-to-top mental number lines as well as the familiar left-to-right ones. Bottom-to-top appears to be how our brains are wired to be most efficient at using numbers – and that might help getting our heads around how numbers work a little easier.
Luke Greenacre receives funding from the NHMRC. He is affiliated with Monash University and the University of South Australia.
Adrian Dyer receives funding from The Australian Research Council and The Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.
Scarlett Howard receives funding from Monash University and the Hermon Slade Foundation. She is affiliated with Pint of Science Australia.
Jair Garcia 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.
Now entering its seventh month, Vladimir Putin’s war against Ukraine shows no sign of resolution.
It has become a grim battle over territory between dug-in forces, resembling the conflicts of last century instead of the complex melange of covert operations and hybrid warfare that supposedly characterise contemporary “grey zone” contests.
Both sides are playing to their strengths: Russia to its dominance in firepower, and Ukraine to its ability to corrode the invader by targeting its supply lines.
Yet this is only part of the picture. Putin is actually waging three wars, each of them undeclared. He simultaneously seeks to control Ukraine, to dominate Russia’s region, and to hasten the fall of the West. And is there an internal struggle on the horizon?
Russian expansion
Putin’s “Special Military Operation” is an undeclared war of imperial expansion seeking to enlarge Russian territory by, as Putin himself put it, taking back “our lands”.
Depending on how we assess its war aims – which have pivoted from conquest and regime change to “protecting” the people of Donbas and back again – Russia’s performance is mixed. Certainly it has succeeded in bringing Ukraine to the brink of state failure. It has already left a reconstruction burden that will take decades to overcome.
Despite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s perfectly understandable desire to keep fighting until all Russian invaders leave its territory, in even the most optimistic outcome for Kyiv the complete restoration of Donbas or Crimea is far from assured.
But Putin has also decimated Russia’s conventional forces for surprisingly little gain in six months. Along the way, he has blunted his own rhetoric about Russian power, demonstrated a callous disregard for human rights, and revealed his armed forces to be corrupt, poorly managed, and deficient in doctrine, discipline and capabilities.
Struggle for regional primacy
Putin’s second undeclared war is aimed at consolidating control over a sphere of influence stretching from Central Asia to Central Europe.
It is most certainly a war: Russia destroyed Georgia’s armed forces in five days during 2008 over the disputed territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It has threatened Moldova with invasion if it abandons neutrality. And it has intervened with military forces in Kazakhstan, and in the conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Putin is badly losing his struggle for regional primacy. Russia’s diminishing influence relative to China – especially in Central Asia – has long been recognised. But the war against Ukraine shows just how much the Kremlin’s reach has slipped.
Kazakhstan has called the Russian invasion a war, and sent aid to Ukraine. Moldova is actively seeking to join the EU. With the exception of Belarus, all the states that were once part of the USSR abstained in the United Nations instead of supporting Russia’s invasion.
Putin’s stated desire to prevent Ukraine becoming an “anti-Russia” has failed utterly. Even Belarus’ President Alexander Lukashenka, beholden to Putin for his political survival, has resisted attempts to lure him directly into the conflict. And the decision by Finland and Sweden to join NATO has brought the military alliance closer to Russia, lengthening its border with the alliance by some 1,300 kilometres.
War with the West
Putin’s third undeclared war is his most nebulous, taking the form of a global struggle against the West, with an eye on resetting Europe’s strategic map.
It has three main components:
political warfare designed to fragment European and North American societies from within
exploiting dependencies for strategic purposes
and seeking to weaken Western influence by courting the parts of the world where its reach is weakest.
Putin’s war with the West is important for his great power vision of Russia as a Eurasian Third Rome. It also carries the most risk for those who seek to contain him. The spectre of Putin running rampant in Europe under the indifferent eye of a second Trump administration should underline the urgent task of healing America’s fractured society.
A looming hard winter for many Europeans will reinforce the lesson that deterrence comes with costs, as does over-dependence on resource giants who can weaponise energy for strategic leverage. The West must also recognise that comfy rhetoric about Russia being a global pariah is untrue: there are plenty of nations sympathetic to Kremlin disinformation about NATO’s historic culpability for today’s events in Ukraine.
The West’s future credibility also relies on how well it withstands Russian pressure at home and abroad. It will need to resist the temptation of inward-looking statism and continue supplying Ukraine with the weapons and assistance it needs. It will also need to actively counter false Russian narratives currently flooding India, Africa, and parts of South-East Asia.
But is another undeclared war on the horizon for Putin?
The car-bomb killing of Darya Dugina, daughter of Russia’s neofascist philosopher Alexander Dugin, has prompted an outpouring of bile from the Russian extreme right.
With it has come the first hint of domestic fragility in Russia since February’s invasion, which saw 15,000 anti-war protesters arrested.
Both Dugin (who is neither Putin’s “brain” nor his muse) and Dugina (who promoted far-rightpropaganda) are bit players in Russian politics at best. However, the targeting of an ultranationalist is a rare event in Russia, where assassinations, poisonings and “accidental” deaths overwhelmingly afflict moderates.
Russia’s Federal Security Service (shortened to FSB) took a lightning-fast 36 hours before unconvincingly announcing it had cracked the case. Displaying a Ukrainian National Guard ID card (likely faked) it claimed the perpetrator was Natalya Vovk, a member of the Azov Regiment, which Russia falsely claims to be a Nazi-dominated military unit. According to the FSB, Vovk had moved into Dugina’s apartment block, followed her for weeks, carried out the bombing, and then escaped to Estonia with her young daughter and her cat.
While we will probably never discover the true identity of Dugina’s killer, any remotely plausible explanation is damaging for Russia. If Ukraine was indeed to blame, how did Russian security fail to stop Vovk at the border, since deep background-checks of all Ukrainians entering the country are supposedly routine? And why was she permitted to leave?
Alternatively, if the killing was carried out by the FSB itself, was it a rogue anti-Putin faction, or acting on Putin’s orders to whip up flagging support for the war? If the former, it points to a deep rift in Russia’s elite. If the latter, Putin has cynically targeted Russia’s ultra-right, which has criticised him for not being tough enough on Ukraine.
Finally, very few observers believe the hitherto-unknown National Republican Army, which claimed responsibility for the killing, was to blame. But if it were, then it points to the real possibility of organised domestic terrorism in Russia.
So any way you cut it, the killing of Darya Dugina brings Putin’s own leadership into question. This is something he has scrupulously avoided. He is obsessed with control, and enjoys the support of a massive propaganda machine to turn defeats into triumphs and blame others for his mistakes.
That’s a common vehicle for autocrats to deflect criticism, and has certainly worked for Putin. But unlikely though a Russian revolution from below may be, history is replete with examples – including the breakup of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR itself – where lies, repression and personalised power eventually revealed the Emperor’s nakedness.
So perhaps three undeclared wars are not enough for Putin. Has he just lit the spark of another, personally more dangerous one?
Matthew Sussex has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Carnegie Foundation, the Lowy Institute and various Australian government agencies.
Dogs get dementia too. But it’s often difficult to spot. Research published today shows how common it is, especially in dogs over ten years old.
Here are some behavioural changes to watch out for in your senior dog and when to consult your veterinarian.
What is doggy dementia?
Doggy dementia, or canine cognitive dysfunction, is similar to Alzheimer’s disease in humans, a progressive brain disease that comes with behavioural, cognitive and other changes.
It is generally seen in dogs over eight years old, but can occur in ones as young as six.
Pet owners may dismiss many behaviour changes as just a normal part of ageing. So it’s likely there are more dogs with it than we realise.
Veterinarians can also find it difficult to diagnose. There is no accurate, non-invasive test for it. And, just like humans, senior dogs are likely to have a number of other health issues that can complicate diagnosis.
Dogs with dementia can often get lost in their own backyard or home. They can get stuck behind furniture or in corners of the room, because they forget they have a reverse gear. Or they walk towards the hinge side of a door when trying to go through.
Sixteen-year-old Sheedy ‘stuck’ behind the foot rest, unable to figure out how to walk around. Used with permission, Samantha Hobbs
Dogs’ interactions with people and other pets can change. They may seek less or more affection from their owners than before, or start to get grumpy with the other dog in the home where once they were happy housemates. They may even forget faces they have known all their lives.
They also tend to sleep more during the day and be up more at night. They may pace, whine or bark, seemingly without purpose. Comfort does not often soothe them, and even if the behaviour is interrupted, it usually resumes quite quickly.
Senior dogs may get confused. Editor supplied, CC BY
Sometimes caring for a senior dog with dementia is like having a puppy again, as they can start to toilet inside even though they are house-trained. It also becomes difficult for them to remember some of those basic behaviours they have known all their lives, and even more difficult to learn new ones.
Their overall activity levels can change too, everything from pacing all day, non-stop, to barely getting out of bed.
Lastly, you may also notice an increased level of anxiety. Your dog may not cope with being left alone any more, follow you from room to room, or get easily spooked by things that never bothered them before.
Watch for gradual changes in behaviour. Editor supplied, CC BY
I think my dog has dementia, now what?
There are some medications that can help reduce signs of doggy dementia to improve quality of life and make caring for them a little easier. So, if you think your dog is affected, consult your veterinarian.
Our group is planning research into some non-drug treatments. This includes looking at whether exercise and training might help these dogs. But it’s early days yet.
Unfortunately there is no cure. Our best bet is to reduce the risk of getting the disease. This latest study suggests exercise might be key.
Researchers asked pet dog owners to complete two surveys. One asked about the dogs, their health status and physical activity. The second assessed the dogs’ cognitive function.
Some 1.4% of the dogs were thought to have canine cognitive dysfunction.
For dogs over ten years old, every extra year of life increased the risk of developing dementia by more than 50%. Less-active dogs were almost 6.5 times more likely to have dementia than dogs that were very active.
Keeping your dog active could help prevent doggy dementia. Used with permission from Lauren Bevan
While this might suggest regular exercise could protect dogs against dementia, we can’t be sure from this type of study. Dogs with dementia, or with early signs of dementia, may be less likely to exercise.
However, we do know exercise can reduce the risk of dementia in people. So walking our dogs may help them and us reduce the risk of dementia.
Caring for a dog that has dementia can be hard, but rewarding. In fact, our group is studying the impact on carers.
We believe the burden and stress can be similar to what’s been reported when people care for someone with Alzheimer’s.
We also know people love their old dogs. One research participant told us:
I love my girl so much that I am willing to do anything for her. Nothing is too much trouble.
Susan Hazel is affiliated with RSPCA South Australia and the Dog & Cat Management Board of South Australia.
Tracey Taylor 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.
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
Next Thursday, union, business and political leaders will meet in Canberra for the jobs and skills summit. One of the key issues Treasurer Jim Chalmers has listed for discussion is “addressing skills shortages”.
We hear the term “skills shortages” all the time in media and policy debates about jobs and the economy. But what skills do we need, and more importantly, how do we get them?
While Australia must also think about longer-term planning, we suggest some solutions to train people for the vacancies we have now.
What skills do we need?
Australia’s unemployment rate is only 3.4%, and is currently at a 48-year low. There are more than 480,000 job vacancies, and many employers struggling to find and retain suitable workers.
Both treasury’s pre-summit issues paper and National Skills Commission show the most in-demand jobs are in nursing, disability care, accounting, retail and cafe work. These have a wide range of skill requirements: nursing jobs need at least 18 months for the relevant diploma, it is possible to get a disability care qualification in 12 weeks, while you can train on the job for retail.
We also know, 42% of technician and trade occupations are facing a skills shortage compared to 19% of other occupations that require skills assessed by an outside body. In a worrying trend, completion rates for trade apprenticeships declined to 54% for those who started in 2017, five percentage points lower than completion rates for those who started in 2013.
How do we fix this?
Many of these issues are well-known. Two major recent reviews have looked at Australia’s skills and training system. The Morrison government commissioned the 2019 Joyce review into vocational education and in 2020, the Productivity Commission did a study on skills and workforce development.
When it comes to quick fixes about jobs, migration is often seen as the answer. We have previously argued this does not position Australia well for the mid- or long term, rather we need to make changes to our education and training systems.
With this in mind, here are three ideas or changes that can bring about quick change to fill immediate gaps, but do not rely on migration.
3 ideas to fix the skills shortage now
1. Micro-credentials
Based on our research, industry, vocational education and university providers should do “micro-credentialling”. These are mini qualifications that can meet the current, specific gaps in a shorter amount of time.
Both Australian universities and TAFEs have begun doing this in recent years. This could include topics from business leadership and coding to disability support. If the job and skill requirements are higher, these micro-credentialed offerings can be upgraded to micro-apprenticeships.
The summit should look at fast-tracking micro-credential schemes. Our research shows the lengthy process required to recognise and accredit training package skill sets – the formal mechanism for micro-credentials in the Australian VET system – makes it hard to adjust program offerings to meet changes in demand.
If we are going to respond quickly to market or technology changes, employers and managers also need to be flexible.
This may include changing their mindsets from only employing “fully qualified” employees, to hiring people that will require ongoing support for life-long learning.
2. Stop the tertiary education wars
While many education providers want a clear delineation between different skill levels and qualifications, and who can deliver what, these demarcations are artificial and restrict the ability to meet the needs of employers.
In many of the jobs facing shortages, there is not a clear line between what employees trained at different skill levels can and should do. For example, in hospitality and tourism, university graduates and VET sector diploma holders are all trained similarly in business operations and how to use industry-standard technology, while incorporating international and cultural perspectives.
Our research has shown that one of the largest challenges facing making the Australian skills and training system more flexible is the lack of cooperation between the vocational education and university sectors. Both often see each other as competitors for school leavers and government funding.
The TAFE and university sectors have already proven they can work together through a series of “test labs” that focus on manufacturing skills. The model could be applied for industries facing critical staffing and skills shortages such as health and disability care.
3. Stop the state wars
States and territories are also parochial and competitive when it comes to skills and this doesn’t help us fill shortages as a national level.
For example, the Western Australian government and mining sector have been enticing eastern states-based FIFO workers to relocate permanently to the west, with large financial incentives.
Meanwhile fee-free TAFE courses are set by state and territory governments, with a mind to which skills are needed locally, rather the bigger, national picture. This is in keeping with the traditional Australian view that skills training and education is mainly to meet local needs.
The Albanese government has already pledged to provide 465,000 fee-free TAFE places in areas with a critical skills gap. There is an opportunity here. If these places are created immediately, they will help states and territories train more workers for each other – instead of just for themselves.
Provided there is also a free flow of workers between states, this will reduce skill mismatches between employers and employees across the nation and boost productivity.
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.
As of next year, a Melbourne private school will open to online-only enrolments for years five to 12.
It will cost A$18,000 per year in fees, and parents will have to supervise their child the whole time they are “at school”. It is billed as giving families flexibility and providing opportunities for those who live far away from the school. This comes as new data shows there has been a 44% rise in students homeschooling in Victoria since 2019.
There are good reasons why the mainstream school system does not work for some students. And there are multiple options for families to explore if they are considering learning from home.
At-home education in Australia
With a small population spread across a vast continent, Australia has a long history of distance and at-home education. There are public distance education schools in all states and territories.
Access, and pricing, depends on your state or territory. In Queensland, for example, anyone can access state distance education. Those who are “homeschooling by choice” are required to pay around $1,600 for the service; those who are “homeschooling by limited choice” don’t have to pay. In Western Australia, it is also available to students who require more “flexibility” or who want to study subjects not available at their school.
A student works at home during lockdowns in May 2020. Dan Peled/ AAP
It may also suit students who are geographically isolated or whose circumstances mean they are unable to access school on a regular basis, perhaps because of health issues or extracurricular commitments such as elite sports training.
We also know in-person learning may not suit students with special education needs, such as those with autism or ADHD, students who are bullied, or those who feel the school system does not suit them.
Learning away from the mainstream system can also help accelerate gifted students.
In the wake of COVID lockdowns, many of these children have drifted toward homeschooling or private, often Christian, distance education offerings instead of going back to in-person learning at school.
Homeschooling enrolments have been rising
Mainstream school has been losing enrolments for a number of years – even before COVID. Home education/homeschooling is the fastest-growingeducation cohort in the world.
A recent study found that, in Australia, it’s grown 53% compared with the next closest alternative, independent schools. There were around 26,000 young people home educating in Australia in 2021 out of about four million school students overall, and that number has grown since then.
But at-home learning is not limited to home educators, nor is it new. Distance education, particularly by choice and among those in city or regional areas, has also seen significant growth in the past few years.
There is some evidence that many parents would like to keep their children home, at least some of the time, if they could. Some parents report they wanted more time with their children, or they want more control over they way their children learn.
The issues faced by many young people in mainstream schools, as well as high rates of anxiety diagnosed among young people, suggests there is a market for more flexibility at school. School refusal also appears to be on the rise.
While it requires a lot of parental support, those families who can find the flexibility in their lives to support this school enrolment might find it suits their child, even for a limited period of time.
Some studies suggest this approach is effective because it allows parents and educators to better meet the child’s learning needs.
What options do you have?
Most parents and students prefer the mainstream system, but for some, it doesn’t meet their needs or they want something different.
If you would like to enrol your child in an online-only school, but don’t have the time to supervise your child all day or $18,000, there are some alternatives.
In Victoria, parents can enrol their child part-time in school and keep their child home the rest of the time. This option is at the principal’s discretion and needs to be negotiated with the school.
There are also other, private distance education schools that do not charge as much as this Victorian school. These include some secular options.
If your child is around 15 or older, TAFE might be an option and it may also provide avenues into higher education.
And there is always homeschooling, in which parents take full responsibility for their child’s learning, independent of a formal educational institution.
Whatever parents decide, if in-person, mainstream school is not working for your child, the chances are, if you look around, you’ll find something that might work better. Your options might be a lot cheaper than $18,000, too.
Rebecca English 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jim Stanford, Economist and Director, Centre for Future Work, Australia Institute; Honorary Professor of Political Economy, University of Sydney
Shutterstock
This article is part of The Conversation’s series looking at Labor’s jobs summit. Read the other articles in the series here.
The Treasury issues paper published in the lead-up to the Albanese government’s Jobs and Skills Summit runs to 11 pages of text. It mentions productivity 21 times.
It’s a safe bet that increasing productivity – put simply, looking at how Australia’s workers can produce more from the same inputs – will be a dominant theme in the summit’s crowded agenda.
That’s certainly the emphasis business groups want. Their pre-summit messaging has stressed that productivity is the secret to prosperity and higher wages.
It’s an equally safe bet the summit will hear a familiar list of business-friendly measures – deregulation, lower business taxes, liberalised immigration – as the means to that end.
Productivity growth is important. It is a vital dimension of economic success. It creates the possibility for higher living standards. But it doesn’t automatically deliver them.
Yes, we want work to be as productive as possible, but always within the bounds of safety, quality and fairness.
An uncritical obsession with productivity threatens to distract us from the deeper problems Australia must solve to make economic and social progress in the 21st century.
The wrong idea about productivity
Productivity has gained a bit of a bad name after decades of technocratic inquiries and pompous browbeating about how workers are unfocused or even lazy.
It is commonly misunderstood as anything that cuts costs, tightens belts or speeds up work. Some employers laughably describe wage cuts as a “productivity initiative” – turning economic theory on its head.
Properly measured, productivity means getting more out of what we put into the economy – first and foremost among these inputs is our labour.
It means valuing work and investing in workers, not cheapening and intensifying labour. It entails quality as much as quantity. Doubling pupil-student ratios in schools, or loading up nurses with extra patients, hardly improves genuine productivity.
In the decade prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia’s productivity performance was certainly poor by historical standards. Labour productivity grew at an average annual rate of less than 1% – the slowest in the postwar era.
Australia’s productivity growth has been poor relative to other industrialised economies too, being below the OECD average over the past two decades.
But this poor performance needs to be kept in perspective.
First, productivity growth, even if slower than in the past, has still been positive. Hence the level of productivity demonstrated by the average Australian has never been higher.
In the three months to March (the most recent data available), an average hour of expended labour produced A$110 worth of gross domestic product (GDP). Even after adjusting for inflation, that’s a 13% gain in the past decade. (Workers, on average, receive less than half of that in compensation.)
The productivity slowdown of the 2010s reflected a complex set of causes. Likely culprits include the growth of insecure, relatively unproductive service jobs; very weak business investment in capital and innovation; and falling productivity in resource extraction (due to the exhaustion of more economical reserves).
Nevertheless, productivity growth remained positive.
There are signs of improvement
Second, there are encouraging signs productivity has picked up since the pandemic.
Huge swings in employment and output during the lockdowns complicate productivity measures, but despite these ups and downs, labour productivity was 6% higher in March 2022 than before COVID. That’s an annualised growth rate of 2.6%, rivalling the most exuberant years of the postwar boom.
A post-COVID improvement in productivity is visible in other countries too.
There is no consensus yet on its causes, or whether it will be sustained. Possible explanations include productivity benefits of working from home, and the fact that tight labour markets force employers to try harder to get more value from each worker (as it’s no longer easy to hire new staff).
Yet wages continue to lag
These two points demonstrate that productivity is no magic bullet for the other challenges facing Australia’s labour market.
Nor is it credible to blame lack of productivity for another big issue on the summit agenda: the historically weak growth in wages over the past decade.
Business leaders like to insist wage increases aren’t possible without productivity growth. But the actual problem for the past decade has been the opposite: productivity grew while real wages stagnated – and are now falling rapidly due to the surge in inflation.
Consequently, the gap between productivity and real wages has widened dramatically.
In fact, the relationship between the two (which many economists assume to be automatic) has been broken for much longer.
Since the mid-1970s, economic and labour market policy in Australia deliberately undermined wage growth through measures such as weakening collective bargaining, downgrading the award system to a safety net, vilifying and policing unions, and (for many public sector workers) simply dictating minimal wage gains.
Not surprisingly, all this kept wage growth well behind productivity. As a result, the share of labour compensation in GDP has fallen by 13 percentage points since the mid-1970s, reaching an all-time low of 45% this year.
The share of corporate profits in GDP, not coincidentally, increased by a similar margin, and is now at record highs.
These tectonic shifts in national income distribution refute the common assumption that workers are automatically paid according to their productivity.
Workers can be rightly sceptical that a generic commitment to revitalising productivity growth will automatically solve the problems they face – falling real wages, endemic insecurity and the erosion of collective representation.
To build a genuine consensus on productivity, therefore, the jobs summit must also advance a convincing vision for how the gains from productivity growth will be more fairly shared.
Jim Stanford is a member of the Australian Services Union.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kristie Patricia Flannery, Research Fellow, Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences, Australian Catholic University
HBO
House of the Dragon chronicles the fall of the Targaryen dynasty some two centuries before life on the continent of Westeros is upended by war and a mini ice age – the events dramatised in HBO’s Game of Thrones.
The new series’ first episode powerfully suggests that political instability and dynastic decline begin with disease and health crises.
The ruling Targaryen King Viserys I suffers from a large and painful puss-filled open wound on his back. He dismisses this injury as a minor one he sustained from sitting on the famous Iron Throne forged with the swords of the vanquished.
His wife, the heavily-pregnant Queen Aemma Arryn, who has endured multiple miscarriages and infant losses in her lifetime, is worried about the health of their unborn baby. The childbirth depicted in this episode is extremely traumatic.
The diseases and medical afflictions that plagued the ruling houses of Westeros – pregnancy complications, madness and genetic disorders – affected the real royal families of Europe during the medieval and early modern periods. And just as in House of the Dragon, these afflictions shaped real dynastic struggles.
Genetic disorders
Like the fictional Targaryens, real European royals frequently married close relatives, contributing to genetic disorders in their families.
Spain’s last Habsburg king, Charles II, is a poster child for royal incest. He suffered from multiple health problems before his death at 38, including an extreme case of the so-called Habsburg jaw or badly misshapen mandible that made it very difficult to speak and to chew food. His parents were uncle and niece. Geneticists have argued that consanguinity, or parents being descended from the same ancestors, caused this condition.
King Charles II of Spain by John Closterman. Wikimedia, CC BY
Queen Victoria of England passed the gene that caused the recessive blood disease hemophilia to the royal families of Russia, Spain and Germany through the marriages of her children.
Victoria’s great-grandson, Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia, inherited this disease. The holy man Rasputin, who was brought into the palace to treat the Russian Tsar, came to meddle in government affairs, leading to rising tension within the aristocracy and public distrust of the royal family. In this roundabout way the “royal disease,” as hemophilia is known, contributed to the revolution that ended the Romanov monarchy.
Pregnancy and fertility
The primary goal of royal marriage, in both early modern Europe and Westeros, was to bring together powerful families and produce living heirs who would carry on the dynasty.
House of the Dragon’s creators have been criticised for the graphic childbirth scene in episode one, yet they were correct in portraying pregnancy as dangerous for royals. Seven queens and princesses of Asturias (heirs to the Spanish throne) had children between 1500 and 1700. Four died of pregnancy-related causes.
While childbirth could prove fatal to royal women, failure to produce an heir could also see the end of a dynastic house. The history of the island of Westeros, which looks incredibly similar to the British Isles, mirrors much of Britain’s history too. The desire for a male heir could tear apart royal families.
In 16th-century England, King Henry VIII (who also sported an ulcerated wound on his leg, perhaps serving as inspiration for Viserys I’s back wound), would famously break away from the Catholic Church in Rome and marry six times to secure male heirs that would sustain the Tudor dynasty. Ironically, it was eventually Henry’s daughters Mary I and Elizabeth I who took the throne after their brother, Edward VI, died at the age of 16.
Queen Anne famously endured at least 17 pregnancies in 17 years. She gave birth to 18 children, many were stillborn and only one lived to the age of 11. Without an heir, the throne was passed to the Stuart’s German cousins, the Hanovarians.
Anne (centre) and her sister Mary (left) with their parents, the Duke and Duchess of York, painted by Peter Lely and Benedetto Gennari II. Wikimedia, CC BY
Mental illness
King George III of England suffered from manic episodes that lead to government instability and regency crises, just like the mad King Aerys Targaryen in the world of Game of Thrones. Various medical conditions have been offered to explain the historic monarch’s madness, including porphyria, a genetic blood disease that can lead to anxiety and mental confusion, or more recently, bipolar disorder.
George was subsequently portrayed as a mad tyrant king and the reason for England’s loss of its American colonies in the American Revolution. However, in reality the British monarchy was constitutional by this point and George had little direct influence on the colonies.
Engraving by Henry Meyer of George III in later life (1817). Wikimedia, CC BY
Treatments
Historians might expect to see more religion combined with medicine in Kings Landing if the creators of The House of the Dragon wanted to create a royal household that closely resembled those of early modern Europe.
Sick and injured Catholic monarchs sought out the healing powers of sacred objects. In the 17th century, pregnant queens of Spain were loaned the “santa cinta” or the “holy belt”, a relic that was believed to have belonged to Mary, the mother of Jesus. Wearing or touching this item of clothing was believed to give protection to pregnant queens and their fetuses.
The corporeal remains of deceased holy men and women who were known as saints also played a part in healing Catholic monarchs and their families.
When Prince Don Carlos of Asturias, heir to Spain’s King Philip II, sustained a life-threatening head injury in 1562, Franciscan friars brought the corpse of Fray Diego de Alcalá to the prince’s bed chamber and placed it in his bed. Early moderns attributed Don Carlos’s recovery to this relic and the cranial surgery that doctors performed to save his life.
In a protestant country like England by the late 18th century, treatments were far more conventional to modern eyes, if not more brutal as well.
Treatment of mental illness, including George III’s mania, involved straitjackets and restraining chairs, the latter of which George, who still retained his humour, often called his “coronation chair”. Not quite the Iron Throne, but a throne for a
“mad king”, nonetheless.
Sarah Bendall receives funding from Australian Research Council and Pasold Research Fund.
Kristie Patricia Flannery 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.
