Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Thorpe, Professor in Sociology of Sport and Physical Culture, University of Waikato

Given recent and often sensationalist media coverage of the issue, it’s easy to overlook the fact that transgender athletes have participated in elite sport for decades – at least as far back as tennis player Renée Richards competing in in the 1976 US Open.

Transgender athletes have also been able to compete in the Olympic Games since 2004. But in the past year, the visibility of transgender women athletes such as New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard and American swimmer Lia Thomas has triggered considerable media interest and public debate.

Most recently, international water sports federation FINA has released a new policy that will only allow transgender women athletes who’ve transitioned before the age of 12 to take part in elite international swimming competitions. Some have called the policy trans-exclusionary and an “unacceptable erosion of bodily autonomy”.

Clearly, the topic raises critical questions of sex, gender and sport categorisation, requiring complex argument and nuanced understanding of transgender issues. Media coverage, however, can frame those questions in starkly oppositional terms, suggesting there are only two sides to the debate (for or against inclusion) and that “fairness” and “inclusion” are irreconcilable.

Our research, published this week (and in a forthcoming book, Justice for Trans Athletes: Challenges and Struggles), suggests news media are not neutral in their reporting of these issues and they play a powerful role in shifting public perception and shaping policy regarding transgender people’s participation in sport.

Language, framing and voice

To examine this, we analysed the written media coverage surrounding New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard’s qualification and participation in the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. We examined 620 English-language articles across three time periods, from the announcement of her qualification, during the Games and after the event.

Building on previous research into media coverage of transgender people, we started by establishing a language “codebook” that included categories such as inclusion, fairness, mis-gendering and medical transition details.

Second, we created subcategories based on content tone and implied meaning, coding for every speaker in a given article.

Read more:
Why the way we talk about Olympian Laurel Hubbard has real consequences for all transgender people

We found that despite helpful media guides produced by LGBTQI+ organisations such as Athlete Ally, GLAAD and the Trans Journalists Association, much of the coverage continued to repeat old patterns, including the use of problematic language such as “deadnaming” (using a pre-transition name).

Overall, our study revealed a common framing of the topic as a “legitimate controversy” (a term coined by communications scholar Daniel Hallin in his analysis of media coverage of the Vietnam War).

The significant majority of media in our sample framed Hubbard’s inclusion in polarising “for or against” terms, and explicitly and implicitly narrated her Olympic inclusion and participation as highly questionable, and the topic as open for public debate.

One of the more sensationalist pieces argued her participation would be a “terrible mistake that destroys women’s rights to equality and fairness – and will kill the Olympic dream for female athletes”.

Nuance and complexity

Most reports, however, took a less extreme approach, instead presenting the details of Hubbard’s life – her transition and how she met IOC criteria – in a way that invited the audience to take a position on her inclusion.

But while selectively seeking and using quotes from advocates and opponents might be perceived as balanced and good journalistic practice, it also risks stifling a more nuanced dialogue. Some media sources even used public polling, further framing this as a debate that everyone – regardless of expertise – should join.

Although Hubbard’s view was often included in the form of prepared statements from press releases or quotes from older interviews, she was presented as just one voice – not necessarily an important one – in the debate about her own inclusion.

Read more:
The debate over transgender athletes’ rights is testing the current limits of science and the law

Our research shows that what has been lacking in much media coverage is a sense of Hubbard’s humanity and her own experiences of her athletic career. In essence, she was denied the one thing she ever asked of the media: “to be treated the way that other athletes have been treated”.

Scientists’ views were given the most credence, particularly those focused narrowly on the effects of testosterone. Journalists rarely acknowledged that the scientific community itself is divided, or that research on this subject remains contested, with little focusing specifically on trans women athletes.

Previous research has demonstrated the psychological harm, including stress and depression, done by negative or stereotypical media depictions of transgender people. This includes framing their participation in society and sport as “up for debate” or “out of place”.

Read more:
A win for transgender athletes and athletes with sex variations: the Olympics shifts away from testosterone tests and toward human rights

Ethical and responsible reporting

However, a few journalists in our sample adopted more ethical approaches in their reporting on Hubbard’s inclusion. We interviewed several, who spoke of their efforts to further educate themselves and to limit harmful rhetoric. As one American sports journalist explained:

In general, this notion that journalists serve their audience by just “here’s both sides, you decide” is a fallacy. It is our job to try to sort through some of this, where there is disproportionate harm, disproportionate blame.

Another Australian journalist spoke of the need for more nuanced coverage:

I wish that there was more of a will inside the media to expand the conversation […] to paint the complexities. But unfortunately […] everything is a very quick response, often with no foundation or research, no time given to it. [So] the temptation is you just go for the headline. And I think that’s where the media is failing a lot of these more complex discussions.

We also acknowledge how challenging this issue is to write about well, accurately, non-sensationally and constructively. This is similarly experienced by many academics.

To move this conversation forward productively will require responsible journalism that considers the complexities of the subject, engages critically with science, and respects and values the voices and lived experiences of transgender athletes and those from the wider transgender community.

Jaimie Veale receives research funding from Te Apārangi The Royal Society of New Zealand.

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

– ref. Polarising, sensational media coverage of transgender athletes should end – our research shows a way forward – https://theconversation.com/polarising-sensational-media-coverage-of-transgender-athletes-should-end-our-research-shows-a-way-forward-187250

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Smith, Associate Professor in American Politics and Foreign Policy, US Studies Centre, University of Sydney

There have now been nine televised hearings of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. The main purpose of these hearings has been to publicly present evidence of former President Donald Trump’s culpability for the January 6 riot.

The mostly Democratic congressional committee, assisted by two of Trump’s fiercest Republican opponents, has made the hearings into a compellingly produced TV spectacle. The hearings drew an average of 13.1 million viewers across multiple networks, which is slightly more than the average viewership of the 2021 Major League Baseball World Series.

Surveys suggest this audience, like the committee itself, is overwhelmingly Democratic. They may have already been convinced of Trump’s responsibility for the January 6 riot, but 64% of Democrats say they have learned new information about the attacks from the hearings.

Some of the evidence presented in the hearings has been spectacular. Multiple video depositions from Trump allies and even family members showed how they tried to convince him the election was lost. This did not stop him from pressuring officials to overturn election results and trying to enact a bizarre and illegal plan to stall the vote count.

When Vice President Mike Pence refused Trump’s demands to halt the vote certification, rioters stormed the Capitol chanting “Hang Mike Pence”. They apparently believed Trump’s claims that day that Pence had the power to reject electoral college votes but “didn’t have the courage” to do it.

Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified that, when Trump heard the “Hang Mike Pence” chant, he told aides that the vice president “deserves it”. Pence’s secret service staff were so worried by the mob incursion that some of them made goodbye calls to family members.

For more than three hours, Trump watched the riot unfold on Fox News while doing nothing to stop it. Trump made a video the next day to condemn violence, but refused to say “the election is over”.

Read more:
The United States was founded on allegiance to laws, not leaders. The Jan 6 rioters turned that on its head

Is there enough evidence to indict Trump?

Many Democrats argue the evidence against Trump is now so damning that the Justice Department should charge him with obstruction of justice and official proceedings, criminally defrauding the United States, and possibly seditious conspiracy.

While there are reports the Justice Department is investigating Trump, and that Trump’s lawyers are preparing defences against criminal charges, it is far from certain he will be charged. Apart from the difficulty of proving the case to a jury, Attorney-General Merrick Garland may be concerned that prosecuting the de facto leader of the Republican Party would politicise the Justice Department – in the same way Trump himself often did during his presidency.

But even if Trump again escapes legal consequences for his actions, he may still face political consequences. More independent voters than ever now hold him responsible for the January 6 riot. And members of Trump’s own party are weighing his viability.

Congressional Republicans have mostly boycotted the January 6 hearings and tried to cast doubt on their legitimacy. The majority of Republican voters remain convinced Trump did nothing wrong on January 6. This is bolstered by a widespread belief that Democrats stole the 2020 election, which would mean the January 6 rioters were not insurgents but patriots trying to protect their country.

But there are signs a constant focus on the 2020 election and its aftermath is hurting Trump with Republicans. Two recent polls have suggested about a third of Republicans don’t want Trump to run again in 2024. These are significant increases on previous polls.

A New York Times/Siena College poll of Republicans in July found only 49% would support Trump if the presidential primary were held now. He is still far ahead of his nearest rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who is on 25%.

But Trump no longer commands the large majorities he used to have in these polls. DeSantis increasingly seems like a viable right-wing alternative to Trump, and two July polls have shown him ahead of Trump in their shared home state of Florida.

Politically, Trump may be a spent force

Trump has not been fading gradually since he left office. His standing with Republicans actually increased throughout 2021, leading many to worry that he would pay no penalty for his attempts to undermine democracy. In 2021, Trump loyalists seized hundreds of offices in state Republican organisations, creating the appearance of an “iron grip” on the party.

But there have been signs in 2022 that grip is not as strong as it looked. While many Republican candidates have sought Trump’s endorsement by declaring he won the 2020 election, Trump-backed candidates have had mixed fortunes in the Republican primaries.

Democrats have been so confident of the unelectability of some of these candidates they have actively supported them against stronger Republican moderates.

Before the January 6 hearings began, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger both won massive Republican primary victories, despite earning Trump’s continuing wrath for refusing to overturn the 2020 election result in their state.

Significantly, Trump also seems to be losing some of his most valuable media supporters in the wake of the January 6 hearings. The Rupert Murdoch-owned New York Post and Wall Street Journal both editorialised against Trump after the last televised hearing. The Post declared him “unworthy to be this country’s chief executive again”, and the Journal praised Mike Pence, a likely 2024 rival.

In late July, Murdoch’s Fox News opted to show a Pence speech live rather than a much anticipated Trump speech, continuing a recent pattern of ignoring Trump and giving airtime to his competitors.

As much as Republicans have derided the January 6 hearings, they are a reminder that nothing can unite and mobilise Democrats like Trump. Democrats and many others detested him as president; his attempts to overturn the 2020 election mean there is no chance they will develop nostalgia or even indifference towards him.

Read more:
Can Fox News survive without Trump in the White House?

Joe Biden’s approval ratings are currently so low that even large numbers of Democrats are saying he also shouldn’t run again in 2024.

But they would still turn out to vote against Trump, as would a small but significant chunk of Americans who usually vote Republican, because they see him as a threat to democracy itself. This may be a factor in the electoral calculations of many Republicans who continue to appreciate Trump, but would prefer a different candidate.

Trump is not helping his own cause by insisting that Republicans should still be fighting to overturn the 2020 election result. As recently as July, Trump contacted the speaker of Wisconsin’s State Assembly, demanding he “take back” the state’s 2020 electoral votes after a court decision restricting absentee ballot boxes.

In Trump’s mind, this should be a central issue for Republicans, and it is the main subject of most of his speeches. Trump has made his endorsements contingent on it.

In March this year Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks, a loyal ally who had spoken alongside Trump at the January 6 rally, told Republicans they should move on from 2020 and look ahead to the 2022 and 2024 elections. Trump responded by accusing Brooks of going “woke” and rescinding his endorsement. Brooks subsequently lost his primary race.

Trump would still be the heavy favourite if Republican primaries were held tomorrow. And he may announce his candidacy far sooner than anyone else, in the belief this will help shelter him from prosecution for his role in the January 6 riots. But the January 6 hearings, and continuing Republican unease about Trump’s endless relitigation of 2020, have increased the chances he will face a genuinely competitive primary race in 2024. His opponents would not be “never-Trump” pariahs, but Trump supporters who believe they can carry his agenda further than he can.

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

– ref. The January 6 hearings have been spectacular TV, but will they have any consequences for Trump? – https://theconversation.com/the-january-6-hearings-have-been-spectacular-tv-but-will-they-have-any-consequences-for-trump-187766

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Lupton, SHARP Professor, leader of the Vitalities Lab, Centre for Social Research in Health and Social Policy Centre, UNSW Sydney, and leader of the UNSW Node of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society, UNSW Sydney

People with long COVID are going online to look for support. But these valuable discussion forums, chat groups and other online peer-support networks can also spread harmful misinformation.

Online groups allow unproven therapies to be promoted, sometimes by members who believe they are sharing helpful information. Sometimes entrepreneurs are promoting their unproven therapies directly.

Health researchers admit there are few evidence-based treatments for long COVID. In the face of such uncertainty, people with debilitating symptoms can be tempted by unproven options such as “blood washing”, stem cell infusions and ozone treatments.

Some despairing people with long COVID say they are willing to try any therapy if there’s hope it improves their health.

Read more:
Long COVID: with no treatment options, it’s little wonder people are seeking unproven therapies like ‘blood washing’

The fight for recognition and medical attention

People with long COVID can suffer debilitating health problems that make it difficult to return to work or activities they once enjoyed. Symptoms include fatigue, brain fog, chronic pain, depression and anxiety.

They have had to fight to receive medical attention or recognition of their symptoms. Indeed, it was patient-led activism that first made the public and health professionals aware how symptoms can extend for months, even after an initially mild COVID infection.

Read more:
Social media, activism, trucker caps: the fascinating story behind long COVID

Online communities made a huge difference

Online discussion forums such as Reddit, as well as networks on Facebook and Twitter, have made a major difference to the long COVID community.

In the face of a lack of medical knowledge about long COVID and sometimes denial it exists, these peer networks offer emotional support and share important information about symptoms and treatments.

Reddit has a forum with tens of thousands of members discussing supplements and treatments for long COVID. This approach has been called “crowdsourced medicine”.

Read more:
Long COVID: female sex, older age and existing health problems increase risk – new research

But there are pitfalls

However, there are pitfalls and potential dangers of this kind of online networking and crowdsourced medicine – the potential for spreading misinformation.

This issue has been a problem for a long time, particularly with other “contested illnesses” the medical profession has often dismissed. These include the chronic pain condition fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis (chronic fatigue syndrome).

We’ve also seen the spread of health misinformation in online patient forums and social media content about earlier infectious diseases, such as Zika virus, as well as throughout the current pandemic on topics including masks and vaccines.

Read more:
Explainer: what is fibromyalgia, the condition Lady Gaga lives with?

The misinformation

Medical science is attempting to research long COVID and find treatments, but this kind of research takes time.

Meanwhile, people wanting answers and help for their symptoms are forced to turn to online sources, where the testing and review of treatments are under far less expert scrutiny.

On Reddit and other sites, the volume of content members must somehow make sense of is overwhelming.

Individuals, doctors and pharmaceutical company representatives are among those who have promoted experimental therapies that have not been thoroughly tested with clinical trials.

Some individuals or groups are exploiting people’s desperation, using long COVID support networks to attempt to profit from offering treatment plans or alternative therapies such as vitamin supplements and ozone treatment.

Some long COVID groups are are still recommended drugs such as the now scientifically discredited COVID treatment ivermectin.

Some patients have spent large sums of money on dubious therapies. Serious ethical concerns are raised by these actions, including the potential for these therapies to cause harm and worsen people’s health.

Read more:
A major ivermectin study has been withdrawn, so what now for the controversial drug?

How could we improve things?

People with long COVID

People with long COVID should carefully weigh any anecdotal recommendations about treatment they come across online and think twice before sharing it.

Some have suggested a code of conduct for long COVID support groups that prohibits members from recommending treatments while allowing them to discuss their own experiences. This could help limit the spread of false information. A code of conduct could also ban the promotion of for-profit treatment programs to remove the risk of members being scammed.

However, this would require close moderation and not all sites or social media groups have such resources.

Hunting down the source of information about long COVID treatments and seeing if there’s any links to published scientific evidence is another way to exercise caution.

Health workers

There are important lessons for health-care providers in understanding the needs of people with long COVID.

This includes the importance of providing a timely diagnosis and access to up-to-date valid medical information as well as acknowledging the uncertainties and distress many people feel.

Partnering with patients by acknowledging their lived expertise and together working for a solution would go a long way to help people who feel unheard and want to play an active role in improving their health.

The medical profession is beginning to recognise these issues and has also begun to identify how a better understanding of long COVID could cast light on better recognition and treatment for other contested illnesses.

Information about long COVID is available on websites from the federal and state health departments; you can find a support group via the Lung Foundation of Australia; or try the covidCAREgroup, which brings together patient-led expertise with evidence-based medical knowledge from around the world.

Deborah Lupton is affiliated with the independent expert advisory group OzSAGE.

– ref. Ivermectin, blood washing, ozone: how long COVID survivors are being sold the next round of miracle cures – https://theconversation.com/ivermectin-blood-washing-ozone-how-long-covid-survivors-are-being-sold-the-next-round-of-miracle-cures-186047

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julie Sonnemann, Principal Advisor Education, Grattan Institute

This Friday, state and federal education ministers will meet for the first time since the federal election.

The stakes are high. Ministers meet as teacher shortages and workload pressures are dominating education headlines and severely stressing schools. We need to address teacher supply concerns and better support the teachers who are already in schools.

But as our new research shows, we can’t just focus on teachers. We also need to look at teaching assistants, who often fly under the radar, but represent a significant part of the workforce.

Read more:
Growing numbers of unqualified teachers are being sent into classrooms – this is not the way to ‘fix’ the teacher shortage

Who are teaching assistants?

Teaching assistants work across all school sectors – government, independent and Catholic.

They can do a variety of tasks, from helping teachers prepare lessons and delivering targeted literacy and numeracy support to maintaining student records and supporting students with additional intellectual, physical or behavioural needs.

Teaching assistants are generally required to have a certificate III or IV in school-based education support (or similar), which takes between six to 12 months to complete and can be done at TAFE or other registered training organisations. Their titles vary by state and territory and include education aides, integration aides, school learning support officers or school services officers.

They are mostly female, work part-time, and are typically in their mid-40s.

Our research

Our new analysis, based on Australia Bureau of Statistics data, shows Australia spends more than A$5 billion on teaching assistants each year. This is about about 8% of recurrent school expenditure.

Today there are more than 105,000 teaching assistants working in classrooms across the country. This is almost a four-fold increase since since 1990 and is well above the increase in students and teachers over that period.

It’s not clear why teaching assistant numbers have expanded so rapidly. However, a possible reason could be they have been hired to help with increasing numbers of students with additional needs in mainstream schools. Along with this, there has been greater school autonomy in recruitment and increased administrative loads.

What do they do?

We know teaching assistants are permitted to perform a wide variety of tasks, but we don’t know exactly which tasks they are given, or how tasks are being carried out. Governments have not paid close attention to their work.

So, we know what teaching assistants do in theory, but very little about what they do in practice.

And we need to make sure we are using them well. They can have huge benefits. But when used poorly, through no fault of their own, they can slow down student learning.

The upsides of teaching assistants

The evidence shows teaching assistants can certainly help and be a cost-effective way to ensure students catch-up.

Targeted literacy and numeracy interventions can see teaching assistants help struggling students achieve an extra four months of learning over the course of a year.

Some studies show teaching assistants can also achieve similar results to teachers when delivering these targeted interventions, especially in literacy, provided the interventions are well structured.

Beyond academic learning, teaching assistants can chase permission slips, keep records, coordinate extra-curricular activities, or help with yard duty. This can free up teachers to focus on planning, assessment, and teaching in class.

We know teachers need more support

Australia’s teachers are crying out for more time to teach. A 2021 Grattan Institute survey of 5,000 Australian teachers found that around nine in ten teachers say they “always” or “frequently” do not get enough time to prepare for effective teaching, or to effectively plan their lessons.

Teachers we surveyed estimated they could save an extra two hours a week to focus on teaching if non-teaching staff took on their extra-curricular activities, such as supervising sports and student clubs, or doing yard duty.

The potential risks

Alongside the benefits, we also need to understand the dangers if teaching assistants are not use intelligently.

The United Kingdom invested heavily in teaching assistants in the early 2000s, but this did not boost student learning. Teaching assistants were often given poorly structured tasks, working primarily with struggling students. This cut the amount of time these students spent with their teacher and lead to worse academic results. These risks can be avoided with better planning and training.

Currently, we don’t know enough about how teaching assistants are used in Australia, but there are some worrying signs. A 2016 study of four schools in the ACT found students with a learning difficulty or disability were primarily receiving instruction from a teaching assistant, and spending less time with their teacher.

What should happen next

Education ministers and Catholic and independent school leaders need to ensure Australian students are getting the most from our large teaching assistant workforce.

First, governments should investigate how teaching assistants are being deployed in schools today – exactly how they work with teachers and students, and what tasks they are (or are not) being given.

Second, governments should fund pilot programs to evaluate the best ways for teaching assistants to support teachers and students. We need to identify what works best, and then spread that practice across all schools.

Some states and territories have done more on this issue than others. The NSW government’s recent commitment to trial new administrative staff in schools, including a detailed study of which staff members are best placed to do different tasks, is a step in the right direction.

So, teaching assistants should be on the agenda at Friday’s meeting. And any new commitments could go into the next National Schools Reform Agreement – which sets out nationally agreed changes for the next five years – due to be signed in late 2023.

Julie Sonnemann is a board director of two not-for-profit organisations, The Song Room which provides arts learning in disadvantaged schools and The Ochre Foundation which provides free curriculum resources across Australia.

Dr Jordana Hunter is the Director of the Education Program at the Grattan Institute, an independent, not-for-profit think tank. Grattan received funding from the Origin Energy Foundation to support Grattan’s Making Time for Great Teaching report series.

– ref. Australia spends $5 billion a year on teaching assistants in schools but we don’t know what they do – https://theconversation.com/australia-spends-5-billion-a-year-on-teaching-assistants-in-schools-but-we-dont-know-what-they-do-187918

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Simpson, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, Macquarie University

Crown Resorts’ striking new A$2 billion casino on Sydney’s Barangaroo Point opens its doors to gamblers for the first time this week. But only if they are “VIPs”.

Its licence to operate remains conditional, after being found unfit to run a casino by the inquiry headed by former Supreme Court judge Patrica Bergin.

Victorian and Western Australian inquiries into Crown’s Melbourne and Perth casinos reached the same conclusion. Agreements have been made, directors have resigned, major shareholder James Packer has divested, and US private equity player Blackstone Group has taken over.

But will this be enough to stop the major reason Victoria’s inquiry found Crown had engaged in illegal, dishonest, unethical and exploitative practices; its complicity in money-laundering potentially worth billions of dollars?

This is not unique. The NSW inquiry into rival casino Star Sydney has also heard allegations of billions of dollars being funnelled through the casino in contravention of anti-money-laundering rules.

If Crown’s experience is anything to go by, being found unfit to hold a casino licence is still not enough for governments to revoke a licence.

This fact appears to be an implicit acceptance that illegality comes with legal casinos. Which is true. Gambling, whether illegal or legitimate, will always attract criminals.

Why criminals love gambling

When casinos were illegal they were a lucrative revenue stream for those prepared to take the risk.

A 1974 study of Sydney’s dozen or so illegal casinos estimated they made annual profits of about A$15 million – equivalent to A$130 million now – even after paying out about A$1.4 million (about A$12 million now) in bribes to police and politicians.

Licensing and regulating casinos was meant to free the industry from criminal associations and protect public institutions from corruption.

But as the revelations of the four casino inquiries in the past two years show, legal casinos remain plagued by associations with crime and criminals because of their value – knowingly or not – as sites for laundering money.

Have money, need laundering

Significant proceeds from crime, be it drug trafficking or fraud, have to be “washed” before criminals can spend it.

Why? Because law-abiding citizens are expected to declare their income, and pay tax on it. Any individual with no obvious income source but lots of assets will attract attention.

Read more:
How Sydney’s Barangaroo tower paved the way for closed-door deals

Making “dirty money” appear as if it comes from a clean source is a massive global industry. The United Nations’ Office on Drugs and Crime estimates up to US$4.2 trillion (A$6 trillion) is laundered globally each year – 2-5% of global GDP.

In Australia the value of local crime proceeds laundered each year is estimated to be more than A$13 billion, plus billions more in foreign crime proceeds.

Australia has “become one of the world’s most attractive destinations for money launderers”, according to financial crime expert Nathan Lynch, author of The Lucky Laundry (HarperCollins, 2022).

How to launder dirty money

There are a variety of ways to launder money. One is to own a legitimate business, such as a car wash, and declare the dirty money as revenue.

Another is to buy real estate using obfuscatory legal mechanisms. Federal agencies estimate tens of billions of dollars are laundered through Australia’s property market each year.

But the easiest is through gambling.

In 2018, an estimated A$25 billion flowed through Australia’s gambling industry – one of the highest amounts per capita in the world. Of this, almost A$5 billion was spent in casinos.

Laundering money in a casino is surprisingly simple. Walk in with a bag of “dirty” cash. Convert it into chips. Play for a while – win a bit, lose a bit – then cash out.

Now all that dirty money you walked in with is clean. If anyone asks, say you won it – and who’s to say different?

Regulations are not enough

Australia has some of the toughest anti-money-laundering regulations in the world – and those rules are getting tougher.

Since 2020, any transaction greater than A$10,000, and the recipient’s identity, must be recorded and reported to Australia’s anti-money-laundering agency, AUSTRAC.

But this has only narrowed the ability to launder vast sums at a time. With every change, criminals respond.

Even poker machines in the local pub or club can be used to launder money.

The NSW Crime Commission is currently inquiring into the nature and extent of money laundering through the state’s poker machines.

Of chief concern is the lack of transparency. Tickets from poker machines are anonymous if less than $5,000 is claimed. Anyone can place up to $4,999 of “dirty cash” into these pokies, place one $5 bet, then redeem the rest as “clean winnings”.

With more than $85 billion pouring into the state’s 95,000 machines dispersed across 4,000 venues each year, policing them is next to impossible.

What can be done?

In her damning report, Commissioner Bergin raised the possibility of a statewide scheme to combat money laundering through mandatory use of a “gambling card” that would enable the tracking of cash through a casino.

She made the point that casinos were already free to introduce their own mechanisms “of a similar kind for their own patrons”.

NSW appears to have cooled on the idea, in yet another sign that Australian governments aren’t serious enough about tackling the collateral damage associated with gambling.

Until things change, the implicit message will remain that if you want to launder dodgy money, head to your most convenient gambling venue.

Read more:
Responsible gambling – a bright shining lie Crown Resorts and others can no longer hide behind

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

– ref. Crown Sydney casino opens – another beacon for criminals looking to launder dirty money – https://theconversation.com/crown-sydney-casino-opens-another-beacon-for-criminals-looking-to-launder-dirty-money-184253

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Giuffre, Senior Lecturer in Communication, University of Technology Sydney

Judith Durham, one of Australia’s most recognisable voices, has passed away at 79.

An icon of the Australian music industry as lead singer for The Seekers and a solo artist, hers was an enduring female voice in an industry still dominated by men. Georgie Girl, A World of Our Own and The Carnival Is Over are just a few of the songs that will always ring best with her vocals.

Her artistry and approach was an alternative to the swinging 60s in popular music. There were no gimmicks to her art – just a soaring voice delivered with precision.

Born Judith Mavis Cock in the Melbourne suburb of Essendon in 1943, she studied classical piano at the University of Melbourne Conservatorium. Through connections at the university and in the local scene, she continued as a gifted musician and developed a following in the jazz community.

Using her mother’s maiden name she released her first EP, Judy Durham, with Frank Traynor’s Jazz Preachers. The liner notes introduced her as “the most promising and talented vocalist today”. She was 19.

Around this time Durham also began an office job where she met Athol Guy. After a quick introduction, Durham was invited to play with Guy, Keith Potger and Bruce Woodley at a local coffee shop.

From here, The Seekers were born.

For a short time Durham recorded with both Frank Traynor and The Seekers for W&G Records, providing, as jazz historian Bruce Johnson described in The Oxford Companion to Australian Jazz, an important link between jazz, folk and what would become pop mainstream.

Read more:
The Australian Music Vault moves the canon beyond pub rock

The Seekers

Originally considered a folk and gospel group, The Seekers sound soon became distinct – in A World of Our Own, as their 1965 song declared.

Their debut album, Introducing the Seekers, was released in 1963. In 1964, the group travelled to the UK.

Soon after arriving, The Seekers recorded the single I Know I’ll Never Find Another You at Abbey Road Studios. When it was released in 1965 it made them the first Australian act to gain number one in the UK.

When The Seekers’ impact was examined by the National Film and Sound Archive, curator Jenny Gall quoted another Australian popular music legend, Lillian Roxon, who described the band as “one cuddly girl-next-door type […] and three sober cats who looked like bank tellers”.

Like journalist Roxon, Durham was a pioneering woman making it in and for Australian music in the epic pop culture centres of the US and UK in the booming 1960s.

Although apparently unassuming, she was not just “the girl next door”, but a fundamental talent who worked hard for her achievements.

International fame

Durham said the band had originally only planned to go overseas for “an adventure […] with no idea we would stay in England and become popstars”.

Intentionally or not, they became some of the biggest artists in the world during the 1960s. When they won the 1965 NME award for Best New Group they beat The Rolling Stones and The Beatles.

In the US they earned similar attention. Georgie Girl became the number one single in the US in 1967, beating Tom Jones, The Supremes and The Monkees.

The band were named Australians of the Year in 1967. In 1968 Durham respectfully called it quits.

A goodbye concert, Farewell the Seekers, was broadcast live on the BBC. It was watched by more than 10 million people. Their inevitable “best of” album appeared on the British charts for 125 weeks.

In the 1970s Durham continued as a solo artist, often recording standards and covers.

She returned to jazz as part of the Hot Jazz Duo in 1978 with husband Ron Edgeworth.

The pair continued to work together in the years to come on a variety of projects until he died of motor neurone disease in 1994.

Since that time Durham has been a patron of the Motor Neurone Disease Association of Australia and continued to fundraise for the organisation. It was one of many charities she supported.

Read more:
Why is there so little space for women in jazz music?

Musical storytelling

She returned to The Seekers periodically for anniversary tours, as well as continuing to record her own work and with others.

From jazz to folk to classical and even contemporary pop as a cameo on silverchair’s B-side English Garden, even after a stroke in 2013 she continued to work.

Her last release, the single All in a day’s work with Lance Lawrence in 2020, was yet another display of a love of musical storytelling.

In an industry that often demands specific types of sparkle in women especially, she was physically small with a voice that loomed large.

A constant in so many households of a certain age, there was nothing quite like hearing Turn Turn Turn, Morningtown Ride or The Carnival is Over on an old radio or well loved turntable.

When I was lucky enough to finally see her live a few years ago it was like we were all little kids singing along for the sheer joy. Her enthusiasm and skill, even in her later years, radiated off the stage and out of the speakers.

May she rest well at the never ending carnival in the sky.

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

– ref. Vale Judith Durham, the cuddly Aussie ‘girl-next-door’ whose soaring voice found international fame – https://theconversation.com/vale-judith-durham-the-cuddly-aussie-girl-next-door-whose-soaring-voice-found-international-fame-188343

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Morris, Professor, Institute for Public Policy and Governance, University of Technology Sydney

People who flee domestic violence desperately need safe, affordable and secure housing. Our study of people on housing waiting lists in New South Wales, Tasmania and Queensland found private rental housing isn’t an option when leaving domestic violence.

Besides the cost, most people fleeing domestic violence aren’t able to provide rental histories and credit ratings. That makes it very difficult to be accepted as a tenant.

The obvious solution is social housing – affordable rental housing provided by government or not-for-profit agencies. However, our interviews with people who fled their homes because of domestic violence revealed they had great difficulty accessing social housing.

Their marginal housing status or homelessness then contributed to some interviewees’ children being taken away. Knowing this risk, others asked extended family to care for their children until they found a secure home.

Read more:
Australia’s social housing system is critically stressed. Many eligible applicants simply give up

The agony of years of waiting

Susan* has two kids under seven. Two years after escaping a violent relationship, she’s still waiting for social housing.

We run from 20 years of domestic violence and we went to a women’s shelter […] and was put on high priority. And then we were there for nearly a year and then they got cranky with me going to [Department of] Housing. Yeah, I went every day, twice a day, sometimes for a whole year. And then they gave me transitional housing and they said we’ll be there for four months. It’s nearly been a year.

She was terrified every time she went outside:

I said to them, “You don’t get us out […] he’ll shoot us. We’ll be the next ones on the news.”

After fleeing a violent partner, Theresa and her six-year-old son were moving between friends and her uncle. She had been on the NSW housing register (waiting list) since her son was born.

Because her initial application was apparently missing some documentation (applications can be challenging) Theresa was not on the priority list. People on the general waiting list can wait many years to be housed.

Read more:
‘Getting onto the wait list is a battle in itself’: insiders on what it takes to get social housing

Theresa finally got onto the priority list in 2020. But she is still waiting.

Theresa was approved for the NSW RentStart program, which supports people in the private rental market. However, our interviewees told us it was nearly impossible to find a property and be approved by the landlord or agent. As Theresa said:

I had no success with [RentStart] at all […] I think it’s almost impossible […] There’s just nothing out here like housing-wise, rental market-wise.

Mothers and children separated

Interviewees lived in fear of their children being taken into care because of their lack of secure housing. Jen told us:

Now because of all the instability DOCS [Department of Community Services, now called Department of Communities and Justice] has removed them from my care because I was, I guess, somebody who suffered from domestic violence on a regular basis. So I had issues with my ex finding them and then it’d start all over again. So in the last three months I’ve had my [two] children removed from my care because I’m waiting for a house, a safe house […]

I just feel so saddened by the whole process. I just want to hide […] I’ve had DCJ just rip my life apart pretty much as well as being homeless.

She alleged Housing NSW had never offered her permanent housing despite being on the waiting list for seven years and having periods of homelessness:

I’ve been homeless three times with children. It’s the worst. I live out of a car basically – that’s if I’ve had one at the time […] I’ve had a car on two occasions. The children become very unsettled.

In between, Jen has had temporary accommodation. Although a step up from sleeping in her car, she felt it contributed to her children being removed.

We could be going hotel to hotel. They could just move us in a whole new area completely […] They actually put me into an area where there’s a lot of disadvantage and my children’s behaviour slid down even worse […] to the point where I wasn’t able to control them anymore. […] Just what got DOCS, DCJ involved. So it’s been a horrible domino cycle.

Kylie also had a real fear of losing her child:

I didn’t choose to be homeless and then I had the fear like they [Housing Department] were going to call child protection service on me for no reason. I looked after my son completely. He was my world. I would do anything for him and because I went there for a little bit of help I was threatened with they’re going to call child protection services on me because I can’t find a stable home.

Some interviewees relied on relatives, usually their mothers, to look after their children. Josie had three children.

I left with the kids and ended up homeless with them, and I couldn’t have them on the street because that’s not what kids deserve […] I just sent them to mum, thinking that was the best thing for me to do, which it was.

Read more:
‘All these people with lived experience are not being heard’: what family violence survivors want policy makers to know

Secure housing can turn lives around

All of the women were adamant that secure social housing would transform their lives. As Kylie said:

[A] stable place, you know, can bring so many opportunities […] for someone to get a better quality of life [they need] stable accommodation.

That people fleeing violence languish in unacceptable conditions for months or even years is a sad indictment of our social housing system. Mothers and children who are forced apart to manage the risks of both violence and homelessness are likely to suffer lasting trauma.

Prompt access to affordable long-term housing could pave the way for women and children to recover and flourish together. Instead of investing in high-cost practices of family separation and child removal, let’s invest in secure, affordable housing.

The Albanese government has pledged to set aside a proportion of new social housing for survivors of domestic violence. State governments have also announced various initiatives. It remains to be seen if these can satisfy the growing demand.

* All names are pseudonyms and details may be slightly changed to ensure confidentiality and protect the individuals.

Alan Morris receives funding from The Australian Research Council.

Catherine Robinson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is also a board member of Homelessness Australia.

Jan Idle is employed at UTS through funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. ‘I left with the kids and ended up homeless with them’: the nightmare of housing wait lists for people fleeing domestic violence – https://theconversation.com/i-left-with-the-kids-and-ended-up-homeless-with-them-the-nightmare-of-housing-wait-lists-for-people-fleeing-domestic-violence-187687

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Micah DJ Peters, Senior Research Fellow / Director – Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) National Policy Research Unit (Federal Office), University of South Australia

Former Health Department Chief Martin Bowles has reportedly proposed “virtual nurses” could help address the shortage of nurses in aged care.

This might involve remote, possibly artificial intelligence-assisted, virtual care, rather than physical nurse presence, to assist nursing homes to meet new legislative requirements to have a registered nurse present 24/7.

There are clear opportunities for technological innovations to improve the care, health, and wellbeing of older people. However, substitution of face-to-face nursing and human interaction with remote care is not the answer.

This seriously risks perpetuating the status quo where many older people suffer from isolation, neglect and lack of human engagement.

Eroding requirements to properly staff nursing homes with registered nurses could make it even harder to attract and keep staff.

À lire aussi :
Our ailing aged care system shows you can’t skimp on nursing care

What are ‘virtual nurses’?

“Robot nurses” already exist in some contexts, helping to move patients, take vital signs (such as blood pressure), carry medicines and laundry, and even engage with patients.

However, “virtual nursing” likely refers to more familiar technology where a real nurse provides a limited range of care via telehealth (by phone and/or video).

While some might appreciate when robots can assist with certain tasks, much of what nurses do cannot and should not be performed remotely (or by robots).

Indeed, older people, their loved ones, and staff are calling out for more physically present staff and more time to care and interact, not virtual interfaces and remote consultations.

The benefits of technology in health care are unquestionable and many innovations have improved care for older people. Artificial intelligence shows promise in helping prevent and detect falls, and socially assistive robots such as PARO (a baby harp seal), have been shown to reduce stress, anxiety and antipsychotic use in people with dementia.

Technology should not, however, be introduced at the expense of care quality or supporting and sustaining a suitably sized and skilled aged care workforce. We still need to adequately staff nursing homes to provide safe, dignified care.

À lire aussi :
Before replacing a carer with a robot, we need to assess the pros and cons

We need adequate staffing

The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety heard a vast quantity of evidence regarding insufficient staffing, particularly of nurses who have the education and skills to deliver high quality clinical and personal care.

This expertise is why nurses cannot be replaced with remote care, and why the Commission recommended 24/7 registered nurse presence; this has now been legislated.

À lire aussi :
‘Fixing the aged care crisis’ won’t be easy, with just 5% of nursing homes above next year’s mandatory staffing targets

More than half of Australian aged care residents live in nursing homes with unacceptably low levels of staffing and around 20% do not have a registered nurse onsite overnight.

Insufficient staffing results in workers not having time to interact with residents meaningfully and compassionately and also contributes to avoidable hospitalisations, worse quality care and outcomes, and poor working conditions for staff.

As social beings, human interaction is fundamental to health, wellbeing, and best practice care. This is particularly true for older people in nursing homes who are less able to engage with others and is especially vital for those living with mobility challenges and dementia.

Partly due to nurse low staffing levels, loneliness, isolation and mental ill health are widespread in aged care and have become more common due to pandemic related restrictions on visitors and staff.

À lire aussi :
Working conditions in aged care homes are awful, largely because the work is done by women

Care experiences are shaped by human interaction and contact; the touch of a hand, a smile, eye contact, and being able to take the time to genuinely listen.

These actions are central to how nurses and other staff build effective and meaningful relationships with residents.

Seeking to replace human contact with virtual interfaces seems both inconsistent with the Royal Commission’s findings and possibly cruel.

Personal interactions also help staff, as the Royal Commission highlighted:

Knowing those they care for helps care staff to understand how someone would like to be cared for and what is important to them. It helps staff to care – and to care in a way that reinforces that person’s sense of self and maintains their dignity. This type of person-centred care takes time.

Rather than circumventing reforms to ensure more nurses provide face-to-face care in nursing homes, we need to address the range of challenges contributing to widespread and tenacious workforce shortages.

There are clear challenges for growing and retaining a sufficiently sized and skilled aged care workforce. However, government reforms, such as better pay, mandated care time, and greater accountability and transparency regarding the use of funds all work together to make aged care a feasible and attractive sector to work in.

This is one where staff are supported to provide the high quality and safe aged care all Australians deserve and where older people receive best practice, human care.

Micah DJ Peters works for and is affiliated with the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) Federal Office.

– ref. Could ‘virtual nurses’ be the answer to aged care staffing woes? Dream on – https://theconversation.com/could-virtual-nurses-be-the-answer-to-aged-care-staffing-woes-dream-on-188215

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Megan Munsie, Professor Emerging Technologies (Stem Cells), The University of Melbourne

In what’s reported as a world-first achievement, biologists have grown mouse embryo models in the lab without the need for fertilised eggs, embryos, or even a mouse – using only stem cells and a special incubator.

This achievement, published in the journal Cell by a team led by researchers from the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel, is a very sophisticated model of what happens during early mouse embryo development – in the stage just after implantation.

This is a crucial stage: in humans, many pregnancies are lost around this stage, and we don’t really know why. Having models provides a way to better understand what can go wrong, and possibly insights into what we may be able to do about it.

The tiniest cluster

What’s particularly interesting about the newly published model is its very complex structure; not only does it mimic the cell specification and layout of an early-stage body plan – including precursors of heart, blood, brain and other organs – but also the “support” cells like those found in the placenta and other tissues required to establish and maintain a pregnancy.

The earliest stages of pregnancy are difficult to study in most animals. The embryos are microscopic, tiny clusters of cells, difficult to locate and observe within the uterus.

But we do know that at this stage of development, things can go awry; for example, environmental factors can influence and interfere with development, or cells fail to receive the right signals to fully form the spinal cord, such as in spina bifida. Using models like this, we can start to ask why.

However, even though these models are a powerful research tool, it is important to understand they are not embryos.

They replicate only some aspects of development, but not fully reproduce the cellular architecture and developmental potential of embryos derived after fertilisation of eggs by sperm – so-called natural embryos.

The team behind this work emphasises they were unable to develop these models beyond eight days, while a normal mouse pregnancy is 20 days long.

Are ‘synthetic embryos’ of humans on the horizon?

The field of embryo modelling is progressing rapidly, with new advances emerging every year.

In 2021, several teams managed to get human pluripotent stem cells (cells that can turn into any other type of cell) to self-aggregate in a Petri dish, mimicking the “blastocyst”. This is the earliest stage of embryonic development just before the complex process of implantation, when a mass of cells attach to the wall of the uterus.

Researchers using these human embryo models, often called blastoids, have even been able to start to explore implantation in a dish, but this process is much more challenging in humans than it is in mice.

Growing human embryo models of the same complexity that has now been achieved with a mouse model remains a distant proposition, but one we should still consider.

Importantly, we need to be aware of how representative such a model would be; a so-called synthetic embryo in a Petri dish will have its limitations on what it can teach us about human development, and we need to be conscious of that.

Read more:
Researchers have grown ‘human embryos’ from skin cells. What does that mean, and is it ethical?

Ethical pitfalls

No embryonic modelling can happen without a source of stem cells, so when it comes to thinking about the future use of this technology, it is vital to ask – where are these cells coming from? Are they human embryonic stem cells (derived from a blastocyst), or are they induced pluripotent stem cells? The latter can be made in the lab from skin, or blood cells, for example, or even derived from frozen samples.

An important consideration is whether using cells for this particular type of research – trying to mimic an embryo in a dish – requires any specific consent. We should be thinking more about how this area of research will be governed, when should it be used, and by whom.

However, it is important to recognise that there are existing laws and international stem cell research guidelines that provide a framework to regulate this area of research.

In Australia, research involving human stem cell embryo models would require licensing, similar to that required for the use of natural human embryos under law that has been in place since 2002. However, unlike other jurisdictions, Australian law also dictates how long researchers can grow human embryo models, a restriction that some researchers would like to see changed.

Regardless of these or other changes to how and when human embryo research is conducted, there needs to be greater community discourse around this subject before a decision is made.

There is a distinction between banning the use of this technology and technologies like cloning in humans for reproductive use, and allowing research using embryo models to advance our understanding of human development and developmental disorders that we can’t answer by any other means.

The science is rapidly advancing. While mostly in mice at this stage, now is the time to discuss what this means for humans, and consider where and how we draw the line in the sand as the science evolves.

Megan Munsie receives funding from Australian Research Council, Medical Research Future Fund and the Novo Nordisk Foundation. She is the Vice President of the Australasian Society for Stem Cell Research, non-executive director of the National Stem Cell Foundation of Australia and a member of ethics and policy advisory committees for several national and international organisations including the International Society for Stem Cell Research.

– ref. World’s first ‘synthetic embryo’: why this research is more important than you think – https://theconversation.com/worlds-first-synthetic-embryo-why-this-research-is-more-important-than-you-think-188217

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

University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and University of Canberra Associate Professor Caroline Fisher discuss the week in politics.

Michelle and Caroline discuss the first fortnight sitting of the new parliament, with the government’s emissions reduction bill passing on the final day, leaving the opposition looking divided and with the big challenge of forging a credible climate policy for the next election.

This week also saw Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek indicate she will block the development of a new coal mine, backed by Clive Palmer, that she says would have had an adverse impact on the Great Barrier Reef.

Michelle and Caroline also canvass the prospects and difficulties for the referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, after Anthony Albanese released the draft wording at the weekend.

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

– ref. VIDEO: Government’s climate win, Plibersek says no to coal mine, Albanese moves forward on referendum – https://theconversation.com/video-governments-climate-win-plibersek-says-no-to-coal-mine-albanese-moves-forward-on-referendum-188281

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matt King, Director of the ARC Australian Centre for Excellence in Antarctic Science, University of Tasmania

Atomic clocks, combined with precise astronomical measurements, have revealed that the length of a day is suddenly getting longer, and scientists don’t know why.

This has critical impacts not just on our timekeeping, but also things like GPS and other technologies that govern our modern life.

Over the past few decades, Earth’s rotation around its axis – which determines how long a day is – has been speeding up. This trend has been making our days shorter; in fact, in June 2022 we set a record for the shortest day over the past half a century or so.

But despite this record, since 2020 that steady speedup has curiously switched to a slowdown – days are getting longer again, and the reason is so far a mystery.

While the clocks in our phones indicate there are exactly 24 hours in a day, the actual time it takes for Earth to complete a single rotation varies ever so slightly. These changes occur over periods of millions of years to almost instantly – even earthquakes and storm events can play a role.

It turns out a day is very rarely exactly the magic number of 86,400 seconds.

The ever-changing planet

Over millions of years, Earth’s rotation has been slowing down due to friction effects associated with the tides driven by the Moon. That process adds about about 2.3 milliseconds to the length of each day every century. A few billion years ago an Earth day was only about 19 hours.

For the past 20,000 years, another process has been working in the opposite direction, speeding up Earth’s rotation. When the last ice age ended, melting polar ice sheets reduced surface pressure, and Earth’s mantle started steadily moving toward the poles.

Just as a ballet dancer spins faster as they bring their arms toward their body – the axis around which they spin – so our planet’s spin rate increases when this mass of mantle moves closer to Earth’s axis. And this process shortens each day by about 0.6 milliseconds each century.

Over decades and longer, the connection between Earth’s interior and surface comes into play too. Major earthquakes can change the length of day, although normally by small amounts. For example, the Great Tōhoku Earthquake of 2011 in Japan, with a magnitude of 8.9, is believed to have sped up Earth’s rotation by a relatively tiny 1.8 microseconds.

Apart from these large-scale changes, over shorter periods weather and climate also have important impacts on Earth’s rotation, causing variations in both directions.

The fortnightly and monthly tidal cycles move mass around the planet, causing changes in the length of day by up to a millisecond in either direction. We can see tidal variations in length-of-day records over periods as long as 18.6 years. The movement of our atmosphere has a particularly strong effect, and ocean currents also play a role. Seasonal snow cover and rainfall, or groundwater extraction, alter things further.

Why is Earth suddenly slowing down?

Since the 1960s, when operators of radio telescopes around the planet started to devise techniques to simultaneously observe cosmic objects like quasars, we have had very precise estimates of Earth’s rate of rotation.

A comparison between these estimates and an atomic clock has revealed a seemingly ever-shortening length of day over the past few years.

But there’s a surprising reveal once we take away the rotation speed fluctuations we know happen due to the tides and seasonal effects. Despite Earth reaching its shortest day on June 29 2022, the long-term trajectory seems to have shifted from shortening to lengthening since 2020. This change is unprecedented over the past 50 years.

Read more:
We found the first Australian evidence of a major shift in Earth’s magnetic poles. It may help us predict the next

The reason for this change is not clear. It could be due to changes in weather systems, with back-to-back La Niña events, although these have occurred before. It could be increased melting of the ice sheets, although those have not deviated hugely from their steady rate of melt in recent years. Could it be related to the huge volcano explosion in Tonga injecting huge amounts of water into the atmosphere? Probably not, given that occurred in January 2022.

Scientists have speculated this recent, mysterious change in the planet’s rotational speed is related to a phenomenon called the “Chandler wobble” – a small deviation in Earth’s rotation axis with a period of about 430 days. Observations from radio telescopes also show that the wobble has diminished in recent years; the two may be linked.

One final possibility, which we think is plausible, is that nothing specific has changed inside or around Earth. It could just be long-term tidal effects working in parallel with other periodic processes to produce a temporary change in Earth’s rotation rate.

Do we need a ‘negative leap second’?

Precisely understanding Earth’s rotation rate is crucial for a host of applications – navigation systems such as GPS wouldn’t work without it. Also, every few years timekeepers insert leap seconds into our official timescales to make sure they don’t drift out of sync with our planet.

If Earth were to shift to even longer days, we may need to incorporate a “negative leap second” – this would be unprecedented, and may break the internet.

The need for negative leap seconds is regarded as unlikely right now. For now, we can welcome the news that – at least for a while – we all have a few extra milliseconds each day.

Read more:
Curious Kids: could the Earth ever stop spinning, and what would happen if it did?

Matt King receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, and the Australian National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS). He has previously received funding from the Centre for Southern Hemisphere Oceans Research.

Christopher Watson receives funding from the Australian National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. The length of Earth’s days has been mysteriously increasing, and scientists don’t know why – https://theconversation.com/the-length-of-earths-days-has-been-mysteriously-increasing-and-scientists-dont-know-why-188147

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

The SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID, originated from bats and then, probably after passing through an intermediary host, gained the ability to infect humans.

Many new viruses that emerge in this way, like SARS-CoV-2, maintain the ability to infect both animals and humans.

It’s well documented the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects a number of different animals. Cases of COVID have been recorded in animals as different as hamsters, ferrets, lions, tigers, mink and non-human primates.

However the question that concerns many of us in our cosy domesticated worlds, is what sort of threat does the virus pose to cats and dogs, the animals we have the closest relationship with?

Can cats and dogs get COVID?

Yes, cats and dogs can get COVID.

Both cats and dogs have been found to have been infected with the virus. A number of studies that involved the testing of domestic pets have confirmed the presence of these infections.

One of the more interesting suggestions from a pre-print study (one that is yet to be reviewed by other scientists), is that cats and dogs were less susceptible to the BA.1 Omicron variant compared to previous variants.

It was speculated the mutations in this variant which we know made it more transmissible in humans may have made it less able to bind to cellular receptors in cats and dogs.

Read more:
Understanding how animals become infected with COVID-19 can help control the pandemic

Who gives it to whom?

Although it’s theoretically possible for COVID to be transmitted in any direction – that is, from humans to cats and dogs, from cats and dogs to humans, and from these pets to each other – the current belief is the virus is primarily transmitted from humans to these pets.

There are a number of possible explanations for why transmission generally occurs in this direction.

However, the most likely explanation is that these animals, when infected, generate much lower viral loads than humans and they may shed the virus for only a short time, which makes them less likely to transmit the virus onwards.

How common is it in pets?

The question of how common COVID is in animals generally, and in domestic pets, is one being actively explored.

In terms of how common it is in cats and dogs, there are methodological challenges to answering this question in large studies. Try taking a nasal swab from your cat and see how this works out!

Despite the practical obstacles, a study published in June suggests these infections may be more common than initially thought. The researchers studied the blood samples of 59 dogs and 48 cats in Ontario, Canada, which lived with people who’d tested positive to COVID.

They found 52% of the cats, and 41% of the dogs, had antibodies targeted to SARS-CoV-2, suggesting they’d been previously infected with the coronavirus. Cats were more likely than dogs to have contracted COVID in this study, but the authors note there’s a lot of variability in the studies looking into the prevalence of infection in animals.

Read more:
Deer, mink and hyenas have caught COVID-19 – animal virologists explain how to find the coronavirus in animals and why humans need to worry

How severe is it in pets?

When a cat or dog gets COVID symptoms, they get pretty much the same symptoms as humans.

They generally don’t feel well and the symptoms they experience include coughing and sneezing, lethargy and loss of appetite.

But the good news is, available data suggests most of the time infection results in either no symptoms or very mild disease. And the duration of their symptoms, if they get them, may be very short.

Although it’s possible for a pet to get more severe symptoms, this seems to be uncommon.

So what should we make of this?

The strong message from what we know so far is that we humans pose much more of a threat to our cats and dogs than they pose to us when it comes to COVID.

Therefore, if you get infected it’s probably sensible to limit contact with your pets, particularly while you’re at your most infectious. Just like you probably do anyway, you should treat your pet as you would any other member of your family when you’re ill and do everything you can to reduce the likelihood of infecting them.

Trying to get your pet to wear a mask, however, is definitely a step too far…

The good news is that even if you were to give your pet COVID, chances are they will either get no symptoms or only mild symptoms. And even if they do experience more severe illness, the evidence suggests they will bounce back quickly.

Of course, if you do suspect your pet has COVID and you are unsure about what to do, you should seek professional advice.

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

– ref. Should we be worried about our pet cats and dogs getting COVID? – https://theconversation.com/should-we-be-worried-about-our-pet-cats-and-dogs-getting-covid-186486

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zoe Richards, Senior Research Fellow, Curtin University

In what seems like excellent news, coral cover in parts of the Great Barrier Reef is at a record high, according to new data from the Australian Institute of Marine Science. But this doesn’t necessarily mean our beloved reef is in good health.

In the north of the reef, coral cover usually fluctuates between 20% and 30%. Currently, it’s at 36%, the highest level recorded since monitoring began more than three decades ago.

This level of coral cover comes hot off the back of a disturbing decade that saw the reef endure six mass coral bleaching events, four severe tropical cyclones, active outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish, and water quality impacts following floods. So what’s going on?

High coral cover findings can be deceptive because they can result from only a few dominant species that grow rapidly after disturbance (such as mass bleaching). These same corals, however, are extremely susceptible to disturbance and are likely to die out within a few years.

The data are robust

The Great Barrier Reef spans 2,300 kilometres, comprising more than 3,000 individual reefs. It is an exceptionally diverse ecosystem that features more than 12,000 animal species, plus many thousand more species of plankton and marine flora.

The reef has been teetering on the edge of receiving an “in-danger” listing from the World Heritage Committee. And it was recently described in the State of the Environment Report as being in a poor and deteriorating state.

Read more:
This is Australia’s most important report on the environment’s deteriorating health. We present its grim findings

To protect the Great Barrier Reef, we need to routinely monitor and report on its condition. The Australian Institute of Marine Science’s long-term monitoring program has been collating and delivering this information since 1985.

Its approach involves surveying a selection of reefs that represent different habitat types (inshore, midshelf, offshore) and management zones. The latest report provides a robust and valuable synopsis of how coral cover has changed at 87 reefs across three sectors (north, central and south) over the past 36 years.

The results

Overall, the long-term monitoring team found coral cover has increased on most reefs. The level of coral cover on reefs near Cape Grenville and Princess Charlotte Bay in the northern sector has bounced back from bleaching, with two reefs having more than 75% cover.

In the central sector, where coral cover has historically been lower than in the north and south, coral cover is now at a region-wide high, at 33%.

The southern sector has a dynamic coral cover record. In the late 1980s coral cover surpassed 40%, before dropping to a region-wide low of 12% in 2011 after Cyclone Hamish.

The region is currently experiencing outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish. And yet, coral cover in this area is still relatively high at 34%.

Based on this robust data set, which shows increases in coral cover indicative of region-wide recovery, things must be looking up for the Great Barrier Reef – right?

Are we being catfished by coral cover?

In the Australian Institute of Marine Science’s report, reef recovery relates solely to an increase in coral cover, so let’s unpack this term.

Coral cover is a broad proxy metric that indicates habitat condition. It’s relatively easy data to collect and report on, and is the most widely used monitoring metric on coral reefs.

The finding of high coral cover may signify a reef in good condition, and an increase in coral cover after disturbance may signify a recovering reef.

But in this instance, it’s more likely the reef is being dominated by only few species, as the report states that branching and plating Acropora species have driven the recovery of coral cover.

Acropora coral are renowned for a “boom and bust” life cycle. After disturbances such as a cyclone, Acropora species function as pioneers. They quickly recruit and colonise bare space, and the laterally growing plate-like species can rapidly cover large areas.

Fast-growing Acropora corals tend to dominate during the early phase of recovery after disturbances such as the recent series of mass bleaching events. However, these same corals are often susceptible to wave damage, disease or coral bleaching and tend to go bust within a few years.

Inferring that a reef has recovered by a person being towed behind a boat to obtain a rapid visual estimate of coral cover is like flying in a helicopter and saying a bushfire-hit forest has recovered because the canopy has grown back.

It provides no information about diversity, or the abundance and health of other animals and plants that live in and among the trees, or coral.

Cautious optimism

My study, published last year, examined 44 years of coral distribution records around Jiigurru, Lizard Island, at the northern end of the Great Barrier Reef.

It suggested that 28 of 368 species of hard coral recorded at that location haven’t been seen for at least a decade, and are at risk of local extinction.

Lizard Island is one location where coral cover has rapidly increased since the devastating 2016-17 bleaching event. Yet, there is still a real risk local extinctions of coral species have occurred.

Read more:
Almost 60 coral species around Lizard Island are ‘missing’ – and a Great Barrier Reef extinction crisis could be next

While there’s no data to prove or disprove it, it’s also probable that extinctions or local declines of coral-affiliated marine life, such as coral-eating fishes, crustaceans and molluscs have also occurred.

Without more information at the level of individual species, it is impossible to understand how much of the Great Barrier Reef has been lost, or recovered, since the last mass bleaching event.

Based on the coral cover data, it’s tempting to be optimistic. But given more frequent and severe heatwaves and cyclones are predicted in the future, it’s wise to be cautious about the reef’s perceived recovery or resilience.

Zoe Richards receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Record coral cover doesn’t necessarily mean the Great Barrier Reef is in good health (despite what you may have heard) – https://theconversation.com/record-coral-cover-doesnt-necessarily-mean-the-great-barrier-reef-is-in-good-health-despite-what-you-may-have-heard-188233

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

University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and University of Canberra Associate Professor Caroline Fisher discuss the week in politics.

Michelle and Caroline discuss the first fortnight sitting of the new parliament, with the government’s emissions reduction bill passing on the final day, leaving the opposition looking divided and with the big challenge of forging a credible climate policy for the next election.

This week also saw Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek indicate she will block the development of a new coal mine, backed by Clive Palmer, that she says would have had an adverse impact on the Great Barrier Reef.

Michelle and Caroline also canvass the prospects and difficulties for the referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, after Anthony Albanese released the draft wording at the weekend.

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

– ref. VIDEO: On the first week of the new parliament – https://theconversation.com/video-on-the-first-week-of-the-new-parliament-188281

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lorinda Cramer, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Australian Catholic University

The question of what counts as professional dress for Australia’s politicians loomed large again this week.

New Greens MP Max Chandler-Mather rose to speak in question time. He wore a neat navy suit and a crisp cotton shirt, intending to pose a question about social housing.

But his shirt was unbuttoned at the neck, and a real problem – as Nationals MP Pat Conaghan saw it – was the fact that Chandler-Mather wore no tie.

“I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised the Coalition care more about ties than people waiting years for social housing,” Chandler-Mather wrote on Twitter.

The member for Griffith’s apparent affront to professional dress is the latest in a string of debates around what those leading the country wear.

But what exactly should our politicians wear, does it really matter, and is it time to accept “the tie is dead”?

Dressed for Australian politics

Speaker Milton Dick let Max Chandler-Mather’s tie-free ensemble pass.

Although Australia’s male MPs generally wear ties in the chamber, the House of Representatives Practice (the definitive guide to procedure and practice) says dress “is a matter for the individual judgement of each Member”.

The opening of the first Commonwealth Parliament in 1901 was a lavish affair. As the Argus reported it, men decked themselves out in their finest formal wear, in “sombre shades” of mourning for Queen Victoria, “softened by splashes of purple here and there”. The scarlet uniforms of governors and officers provided a “touch of brightness”.

In 1977, safari suits – expressly made to be worn without a tie – were ruled as acceptable to wear in the chamber.

And few could forget the pink shorts famously worn by South Australian Premier Don Dunstan in 1972. Dunstan sparked a media frenzy when he turned up at Adelaide’s Parliament House, the bold bright colouring of his shorts set off with a fitted white t-shirt and long white socks worn to his knees.

Five years earlier, Dunstan’s casual clothing had been photographed for the Bulletin as a “summertime example” for employees in government departments, with the article predicting the tie was “slowly but reluctantly on the way out”.

When the Bulletin named Australia’s best- and worst-dressed men in 1976, flamboyant federal politician Al Grassby received the worst-dressed title. Dunstan topped the best-dressed list.

Known for wearing bold, unconventional suits against the grey uniformity of his colleagues, the Bulletin likened Grassby to “something out of Guys and Dolls”. Others appreciated his irrepressible style: his purple suit, worn while being sworn in to parliament, or his loud patterned ties.

From 1983, federal MPs have been encouraged to dress with “neatness, cleanliness and decency”, as former Speaker Harry Jenkins put it.

Read more:
Dressed for success – as workers return to the office, men might finally shed their suits and ties

Loosening the (global) ties

Last year, Māori MP Rawiri Waititi was ejected from the debating chamber of the New Zealand Parliament for refusing to wear a tie.

Evocatively describing it as a “colonial noose”, Waititi insisted the hei tiki greenstone pendant he wore at his neck represented a necktie for him, while tying him to his people, culture and Māori rights.

Fierce debate followed. Were ties shorthand for masculinity, status or oppression? Ties were subsequently removed from “appropriate business attire” in the New Zealand Parliament.

Last week, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez fronted the media without neckwear. He encouraged his ministers and other workers to ditch their ties to save energy running air-conditioning in the searing summer heat.

Read more:
The politics of the necktie — ‘colonial noose’, masculine marker or silk status symbol?

Staying smart with easing dress standards

“This is not a barbeque,” Conaghan insisted to justify his objection this week.

Conaghan’s comment, likely unintentionally, echoed one made in the press 100 years ago.

In 1922, Fred Wright wrote to the editor of Sydney’s Daily Telegraph. He worried about what constituted smart, professional work attire when some suggested it was time for standards to ease.

Wright outlined the challenges faced by young men who were expected to “look respectable” by their employers, but who knew going without collars and ties was considered unbusinesslike.

“A young man cannot come to work dressed as if he were going to a picnic,” Wright explained.

Fewer men donned suits and ties for the office in years to follow, reflecting these shifting standards. This had to do with the Australian climate as much as the availability of new items of dress. Sportswear and separates looked smart, menswear experts assured, although some still held up the suit and tie as the pinnacle of power and professionalism.

Despite Conaghan’s objections, Australian men have been going tie-less while still looking professional for decades. And most politicians are alert to clothing’s rich potential to communicate a range of other messages: through a high-vis vest and hard hat, or a North Face jacket.

Should we hold our politicians to high sartorial standards – or just let them get on with the job?

Read more:
Politicians in high-vis say they love manufacturing. But if we want more Australian-made jobs, here’s what we need

Lorinda Cramer receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. ‘This is not a barbeque’: a short history of neckties in the Australian parliament and at work – https://theconversation.com/this-is-not-a-barbeque-a-short-history-of-neckties-in-the-australian-parliament-and-at-work-188213

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bruce Glavovic, Professor in Natural Hazard Planning, Massey University

New Zealand’s first climate adaptation plan, launched his week, provides a robust foundation for urgent nation-wide action.

Its goals are utterly compelling: reduce vulnerability, build adaptive capacity and and strengthen resilience.

Recent reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have underscored the need for effective and transformative efforts to cut emissions urgently while also adapting and preparing for inevitable impacts of climate change.

But this national adaptation plan is just the beginning. The hard work is yet to come in its implementation. It is regrettable that proposed new law that would provide the institutional architecture for climate adaptation has been delayed until the end of next year.

Based on my experience as an IPCC author and working with communities around Aotearoa New Zealand and overseas, there are five key areas that need sharper focus as we begin to translate the intentions of the plan into practical reality.

Reducing risk for people on the ‘frontline’ of impacts

First, climate change will affect every aspect of life. These impacts will often be the result of climate-compounded extreme events that are already becoming more frequent and intense.

The people hardest hit are invariably those who are more vulnerable. We need to pay more focused attention to the root causes and drivers of vulnerability – and actions to reduce vulnerability and, ultimately, climate risk.

Read more:
IPCC report: Coastal cities are sentinels for climate change. It’s where our focus should be as we prepare for inevitable impacts

This means addressing poverty, marginalisation, inequity and other structural causes of vulnerability. Historically, much risk-based work has centred on calculations based on a formula that considers risk as a product of hazard and vulnerability. This approach is too technical.

We need to focus on reducing social vulnerability to climate change impacts, especially for those on the “frontline” of exposure to climate impacts, such as coastal communities facing rising sea level. Every region and locality needs to be able to identify and prioritise who is most exposed and vulnerable and catalyse proactive actions to reduce this vulnerability.

A climate-resilient future

Second, the plan clearly recognises the vital role of all governance actors in implementing it. However, in practice, local government will carry an especially significant responsibility in translating this plan into action.

There does not appear to be sufficient attention focused on how the adaptive capacity of local government will be built in this first stage of implementation. Local government will be the fulcrum for enabling – or hampering – adaptation at the local level.

Transformational capability building, from the political to operational level of local government, is imperative and needs to happen in partnership with tangata whenua, central government, the private sector (which receives scant attention in this plan) and civil society.

Third, introducing the concept of climate-resilient development is a welcome framing. This is an emerging concept, highlighted in a chapter of the IPCC report on adaptation. Climate-resilient development recognises the inherent intertwining of mitigation and adaptation efforts to advance sustainable development.

The plan limits the concept to climate-resilient “property development”. There is work to be done to deepen and extend this framing along the lines of the IPCC work.

Who should pay if people have to move?

Fourth, managed retreat looms large with so many New Zealanders living along rivers and the shoreline. We can only enable proactive retreat from imminent danger if the government determines who should pay.

At present, the trigger for retreat is usually an extreme event, often at huge cost to those impacted. In many cases, those in harm’s way cannot afford to retreat without government support. Often they are in localities approved by governing authorities.

Who should contribute to measures that reduce risk and enable retreat from climate-compounded hazards? What proportion of costs should be borne by those exposed or impacted and what proportion should be contributed by local and central government? And who makes the call for managed retreat and whether it should be voluntary or compulsory?

The “who pays” question is a tough call. The plan doesn’t provide an answer but we can’t avoid it if it is to be implemented.

Read more:
When climate change and other emergencies threaten where we live, how will we manage our retreat?

Fifth, it is inevitable there will be “winners” and “losers” in the ongoing struggle to adapt to a changing climate. Values and interests will collide and contestation will escalate as climate impacts become more intense and frequent.

We’ll need to find more constructive ways to resolve climate-compounded conflict. At times government will be only one of several parties involved and won’t be in a position to enable or guide conflict resolution. For this, we’ll have to develop institutional processes and capabilities to facilitate independent mediated negotiation solutions for escalating climate conflicts.

Bruce Glavovic receives funding from MBIE.

– ref. New Zealand has launched a plan to prepare for inevitable climate change impacts: 5 areas where the hard work starts now – https://theconversation.com/new-zealand-has-launched-a-plan-to-prepare-for-inevitable-climate-change-impacts-5-areas-where-the-hard-work-starts-now-188221

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew King, Senior Lecturer in Climate Science, The University of Melbourne

The Bureau of Meteorology recently announced a negative Indian Ocean Dipole event is underway.

But what does that mean and how does it affect Australia’s weather? Will we get a reprieve from the flooding rains of recent months?

For many places across the east coast, the answer is no. Spring won’t bring a clean break from this year’s very wet winter.

Read more:
Why is it so cold right now? And how long will it last? A climate scientist explains

Warmer waters around Australia equals more rain

The negative Indian Ocean Dipole, or IOD, has been declared because ocean temperatures are warmer in the tropical east Indian Ocean than in the west Indian Ocean.

The Indian Ocean Dipole is a type of year-to-year climate variability, a bit like the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, but in the Indian Ocean rather than the Pacific.

Once it goes into a particular phase, it usually remains in that phase for a few months. This persistence in sea surface temperature patterns results in predictability in Australian climate conditions.

When we have negative Indian Ocean Dipole conditions we tend to see more rain over southern and eastern Australia.

The Indian Ocean Dipole relationship with Australian rainfall is strongest in September and October, so we’re likely to see wet conditions over the next few months at least.

Warm waters in the east Indian Ocean, like we’re seeing at the moment, increase the occurrence of low pressure systems over the southeast of Australia as well as the amount of moisture in the air.

This means there’s a higher likelihood of rain generally and an increased chance of extreme rain events too.

When will the rain stop?

Another wet outlook is alarming for many people in eastern Australia who have suffered through wetter than normal conditions since 2020.

We’ve seen back-to-back La Niña events and a negative Indian Ocean Dipole in 2021’s winter.

The negative Indian Ocean Dipole is showing its influence in the Bureau of Meteorology’s seasonal predictions. Wetter than normal conditions are forecast for the coming months throughout the east of the continent.

This also happens to be the time of year when seasonal outlooks tend to be most skilful. In the summer, more rain falls in storms and small-scale systems that are harder to forecast well in advance. In winter and spring the outlooks tend to be a bit more accurate but are not always perfect.

Unfortunately, after two consecutive La Niña summers it is also looking increasingly likely we’ll see another La Niña form later this year.

Three La Niña events in a row is not unprecedented but it is unusual. The increased chance of another La Niña raises the odds of wetter conditions persisting for a few more months at least.

Have we seen the end of the cold weather?

We saw a cold start to winter in the southeast of Australia. Since then temperatures have been below normal across much of northern Australia.

Nationally, we had the coldest July for a decade, but in the past this would have been an unremarkable event as it was only slightly cooler than historical averages.

As we leave the coldest part of winter behind the temperatures will inevitably rise, although we could still have another cold spell.

The Bureau’s seasonal outlook suggests warmer than average daytime temperatures are likely for the north and southern coastal areas. Other areas may be cooler than normal as increased cloud cover and rain are likely to suppress temperatures.

On the other hand, minimum temperatures are likely to be above normal across the country. Increased cloud cover and rain tends to be associated with warmer nights as the cloud prevents the ground from cooling rapidly overnight. This reduces the chance of frost.

Is the constant rain a result of climate change?

For parts of New South Wales, the news of wet conditions being on the cards could not come at a worse time. Sydney and other areas of the eastern seaboard have already received record-breaking rain totals so far this year, including in July. Catchments remain saturated so further rainfall may well lead to more flooding.

Australia has highly variable rainfall and we have seen multi-year spells of persistent wet conditions before – notably in the mid-1970s and 2010-2012.

There isn’t a strong trend in rainfall in the areas that have been devastated by floods and it’s only three years since we saw the driest year on record in New South Wales.

The jury is still out on how climate change affects rainfall over most of Australia.

It is vital we build a better understanding of rainfall changes under global warming so we can plan better for our future climate.

Read more:
‘One of the most extreme disasters in colonial Australian history’: climate scientists on the floods and our future risk

Andrew King receives funding from the National Environmental Science Program.

– ref. A wet spring: what is a ‘negative Indian Ocean Dipole’ and why does it mean more rain for Australia’s east? – https://theconversation.com/a-wet-spring-what-is-a-negative-indian-ocean-dipole-and-why-does-it-mean-more-rain-for-australias-east-188167

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Lont, Professor of Accounting and Finance, University of Otago

When record-breaking heatwaves cause train tracks to bend, airport runways to buckle, and roads to melt, as happened in the United Kingdom last month, it is likely that business performance will suffer.

The problem is not going away, either. Businesses will need to better manage extreme heat risk. But are investors sufficiently informed on the economic toll caused by the increasing frequency of extreme weather?

It is becoming clearer that extreme heat can have devastating and costly effects. People are dying, energy grids are struggling to cope, transport is disrupted, and severe drought is straining agriculture and water reserves.

While the frequency of these events is increasing, more worrisome is that heat intensity is also increasing. Clearly, businesses are not immune to the need to adapt, though their silence might make you think otherwise.

Rising temperatures affect everything

Keeping cool, transporting goods, and scheduling flights as runways melted were just some of the challenges people and businesses have faced during the current European summer.

As it became apparent that our workplaces and infrastructure might not be able to cope with extreme heat, we also saw unions call for workers to stay home. But could workers take the day off? The UK’s Home and Safety Executive stated:

There is no maximum temperature for workplaces, but all workers are entitled to an environment where risks to their health and safety are properly controlled.

Are these rules sufficient in this new normal? Some EU countries already have upper limits, but many do not. The Washington Post reported US federal action might be coming due to concerns over extreme heat for workers. Mitigation of these factors will no doubt be costly.

While media reports highlight the toll on workers and businesses, there is little empirical evidence on the financial hit to business. Here is where our research comes into play: how much of an impact does extreme heat have on business profitability?

Heat hitting the bottom line

We focused on the European Union and the UK because the region has a diversity of climate and weather extremes. They are a major economic force, with strong policies on decarbonising their economies, but also rely on coal, gas, and oil for many sectors.

When it’s hot, these countries are forced to burn more fossil fuel to cool overheated populations, contrary to the need and desire to do the opposite.

With detailed records on heat events at a local level, we connected weather data to a large sample of private and public companies in the EU and the UK. We focused on two critical aspects of a firm’s financial performance around a heat spell (at least three consecutive days of excessive heat): the effect on profit margin and the impact on sales. We also examined firms’ stock performance.

Read more:
How likely would Britain’s 40°C heatwave have been without climate change?

We found that businesses do suffer financially, and the effects are wide ranging.

For the average business in our sample, these impacts translate into an annualised loss of sales of about 0.63% and a profit margin decrease of approximately 0.16% for a one degree increase in temperature above a critical level of about 25C.

Aggregated for all firms in our sample, UK and EU businesses lose almost US$614 million (NZ$975 million) in annual sales for every additional degree of excessive temperature.

Impact bigger than the data shows

We also found the intensity of a heat wave is more important than its duration.

This financial effect might sound small, but remember, this is an average effect across the EU and the UK. The localised effect is much larger for some firms, especially those in more southern latitudes.

Read more:
Unnatural disasters: how we can spot climate’s role in specific extreme events

The stock market response to extreme heat is also muted, perhaps for the same reason. We find stock prices on average dropped by about 22 basis points in response to a heat spell.

These average annualised effects include businesses’ efforts to recoup lost sales during heat spells. They also include businesses in certain sectors and regions that appear to benefit from critically high heat spell temperatures, such as power companies and firms in northern European countries.

While we show a systematic and robust result, our evidence probably further underestimates the total effects of heat waves. That’s because businesses disclose very little about those effects due to lax disclosure rules and stock exchange regulations relating to extreme weather.

Financial data part of climate change

Without a doubt, better disclosure will help untangle these effects.

Ideally, financial data needs to be segmented by climate risk and extreme heat dimensions so investors are better able to price the risk. Regulators need to pay attention here. Investors must be able to price material risk from extreme weather.

A good example is New Zealand, which is about to mandate climate risk disclosures with reporting periods starting in 2023. Such mandates recognise that poor disclosure of climate risk is endemic, and we don’t have the luxury of time.

Read more:
Extreme heat is a threat to lives in Africa, but it’s not being monitored

For those businesses negatively affected, disclosing the number and cost of lost hours and the location of the damage would be helpful. However, it is not yet clear if climate disclosure standards effectively capture these risks, as companies have significant discretion about what to disclose.

It is not necessarily all about cost – some sectors might even benefit. While power companies, for example, might report increased sales from increased energy consumption, they are also constrained by the grid and the increased cost of production.

And our evidence suggests there is little overall benefit to the energy sector. This doesn’t rule out some windfall profits, so we need to understand more about both the positive and negative effects on each industry.

Finally, this July saw temperatures in the United Kingdom soar to 20C above normal. Can businesses cope? Next time you feel the heat, pause to ask if this is also hitting the bottom line of your workplace or investment portfolio.

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.

– ref. Business can no longer ignore extreme heat events – it’s becoming a danger to the bottom line – https://theconversation.com/business-can-no-longer-ignore-extreme-heat-events-its-becoming-a-danger-to-the-bottom-line-188151

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Euan Ritchie, Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University

What is the apex predator of the world? – Mahmood, age 11, Brisbane

Hi Mahmood, thanks for this interesting question!

Well, what sorts of animals do you typically imagine when you think about apex predators? Great white sharks, polar bears, killer whales, crocodiles, African lions, anacondas … perhaps a wedge-tailed eagle?

To determine what the apex predator of the world is, we first need to understand what types of “predators” there are, and what we mean by “apex”.

Different types of predators

Contrary to popular belief, predators aren’t just species with large sharp teeth or fangs, hooked beaks, or razor-sharp claws. A “predator” is any species that eats part of, or all of, another living species – or in some cases its own species (which is called “cannibalism”).

Predators can be:

Carnivores

These animals eat the flesh of other animals. Cannibalism is a special form of carnivory, and is widespread across the animal world. It has been recorded in several hundred species, including spiders, insects, fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians and mammals (including humans).

Herbivores

These are animals that eat plants, but they’re still considered predators. So yes, kangaroos are predators too, but they simply eat plants rather than animals. Although it appears this wasn’t always the case in Australia – beware Balbaroo fangaroo!

Parasites

These are animals or other organisms that live on (ectoparasites) or in (endoparasites) another species. They feed on this “host” for nutrients. Ticks, leeches and hookworms are all examples of parasites.

Parasitoids

These are organisms whose young develop on or inside another host organism, feed on it, and end up killing the host as a result. The iconic movie Alien features such a scenario, albeit fictional (although you might want to wait a few years before watching it). This group includes species of wasps, flies, beetles and worms.

It all depends on the environment

Apex predators are often referred to as “top predators” because they sit at the top of their food chain and are typically considered to be dominant and without predators of their own.

It’s important to note apex predators don’t have to be particularly large. Although they often are, it’s more about how their size compares with the species they interact with, and how they behave within their own ecological community.

Imagine a terrarium in your home with some plants and various insects, including a praying mantis; the praying mantis is most certainly the apex predator here.

Now imagine letting them all loose in a field somewhere. The praying mantis is now potentially on the menu for a spider, frog, bird, or other larger predator.

A predator that is below other predators in the “pecking order” can be referred to as a mesopredator. For example, wolves are often considered apex predators, and are known to compete with and even kill coyotes (mesopredators).

In areas without wolves, however, coyotes might ascend to the apex position. They are known to kill cats, which can indirectly benefit songbirds.

In Australia, dingoes are considered apex predators. They hunt and eat a wide range of animals including kangaroos, emus, feral goats and feral deer.

But dingoes, similar to many predators around the world, are frequently killed by humans.

Danger in numbers

Because our question is concerned with determining the world’s main apex predator, we’ll need to consider how widespread a species is.

There are some “apex” predators that are found throughout much of the world, including grey wolves, blue whales, killer whales and great white sharks.

In my mind, however, humans are clearly the overall apex predator of the world. We’ve even been called the super-predator!

Human impact spans the entire globe – from the land to sea, and the south pole to the north pole.

Compared to other predators, we use a much larger percentage of the world’s food resources, as well as water and other natural materials. In doing so, we cause widespread environmental harm.

Humans are having a devastating effect on some other apex predator populations, threatening their chances of long-term survival.

For instance, although there are situations where large sharks have killed humans, it’s estimated humans kill more than 100 million sharks per year. Many shark species are at risk of extinction as a result.

The good news is we can all make choices to help reduce our environmental footprints and help protect other species – predator or otherwise.

Read more:
Curious kids: why don’t whales have teeth like we do?

Euan G. Ritchie is the Chair of the Media Working Group of the Ecological Society of Australia, Deputy Convenor (Communication and Outreach) for the Deakin Science and Society Network, and a member of the Australian Mammal Society.

– ref. Curious Kids: what is the apex predator of the world? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-what-is-the-apex-predator-of-the-world-187616

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Kemish, Adjunct Professor, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, The University of Queensland

Counting is still underway following Papua New Guinea’s national elections, and there is still some hope that at least one woman might be elected to the country’s 118-seat parliament. At this point, Kessy Sawang may yet emerge as the winner in the Rai Coast electorate in Madang province. However, the overall picture is very disappointing. There were only 167 women out of more than 3000 candidates, and as its current term nears the end, PNG’s parliament is at the bottom of global rankings for female representation, with no women at all among its membership.

Things have been marginally better at some points in the past. Three women were elected in 2012, but Papua New Guineans have only sent seven women to their national parliament since the country achieved independence in 1975.

Why increased representation matters

The case for more women in PNG’s legislature is clear. A parliament that includes women is more likely to do something about the unacceptable conditions faced by many women across the country.

Women’s rights are severely restricted by poverty, poor access to education and health care, and patriarchal cultural practices. Gender based violence (GBV) is a serious problem and is generally under-reported. PNG is ranked 161 out of 162 countries on the United Nations gender inequality index.

Research also confirms that electing more women to public office strengthens democratic institutions and improves both the quality of government spending and the overall health of the national population.

Read more:
The more women in government, the healthier a population

And let’s face it – the men running PNG aren’t doing very well. Administrative weakness and corruption are serious challenges, and the economy is in bad shape. Health and education services are woefully inadequate for the country’s rapidly growing population, and people are dying in significant numbers from preventable diseases. The nation desperately needs a more thoughtful, mature approach from its elected leaders.

Efforts over time to address the huge gender imbalance in the national parliament have centred on advocacy for “temporary special measures” to boost women’s participation such as introducing reserved seats for a limited but undefined period. The rationale is to help build a base on which women’s representation can win acceptance and begin to be “normalised”, and for these measures to be withdrawn when the playing field levels out.

Women in PNG are leading the way

The UN, Australia and other donors have worked in the background to support this advocacy, with PNG women leading the way. External partners are anxious to avoid a perception that these are “foreign” ideas being pushed on PNG’s traditional society. They tend to combine this support with programs that address other challenges for women, such as combating GBV, education, and supporting economic empowerment.

There have been moments of hope in PNG’s recent history. Dame Carol Kidu, the only woman in parliament between 2007 and 2012, drove a strong campaign to establish 22 reserved seats for women – one for each of the country’s provinces. This proposal won the backing of then Prime Minister Peter O’Neill, which parliament voted to support in the December 2011 Equality and Participation Act.

But by the time the required enabling legislation came to parliament the following year, misgivings had grown about this challenge to male dominance, and it was voted down.

There have been other moments when a breakthrough seemed possible. In 2019 a special parliamentary committee recommended the establishment of five reserved seats, but Prime Minister James Marape decided the focus should be on supporting and encouraging women to engage in the existing, “open” electoral process. The political will to make systemic changes remains elusive.

Areas of success

The women of PNG can look internationally for success stories. In 2003, Rwanda reserved 24 out of 80 seats in the Chamber of Deputies for women; today, more than 60% of its members are women.

In Samoa, a provision in the national constitution, inserted in 2013, holds that at least 10% of the parliament should be women. Arguments over the interpretation of this clause did not, in the end, prevent Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa from becoming her country’s first female prime minister last year.

And New Caledonia is covered by the French constitutional requirement, passed in 1999, that women must constitute fifty percent of the candidacy lists for certain legislative and executive posts.

Read more:
The case for quotas in politics: the absence of women isn’t merit-based

Papua New Guineans don’t even need to look that far for inspiration. There are three reserved seats for women in the 39-member regional parliament of PNG’s autonomous region of Bougainville. Some may argue Bougainville’s culture is different from the rest of PNG, but a key factor was that Bougainvillean men came to recognise the contribution women made to end the region’s bloody civil war.

Some Papua New Guineans have expressed concerns that these reserved Bougainvillean seats would prove to be a ceiling, rather than a floor, for women’s participation. In fact, several women have lined up to contest “open” seats in the parliament, and so far, two of them have overcome a field of men to win these contests. One of them, Theonila Matbob, is the region’s education minister today.

It may not sound like much, but it is better than PNG’s national parliament has managed in recent years.

Ian Kemish AM is a former Australian diplomat who served, among other roles, as Australian High Commissioner to Papua New Guinea from 2010 to 2013. He chairs the Kokoda Track Foundation, which receives Australian Government support for its work in PNG, and is the Pacific representative for the Global Partnership for Education. He is a nonresident fellow with the Lowy Institute, and represents Bower Group Asia in the region

– ref. Why Papua New Guinea urgently needs to elect more women to parliament – https://theconversation.com/why-papua-new-guinea-urgently-needs-to-elect-more-women-to-parliament-188058

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Hermens, Professor of Youth Mental Health & Neurobiology, University of the Sunshine Coast

Despite the best efforts of clinicians and researchers for decades, we still do not fully know why some people develop mental disorders and others do not. However, changes in the brain are very likely our best clues to future mental health outcomes.

The adolescent brain is particularly important in this pursuit as changes during this period are rapid and dynamic, sculpting our individual uniqueness. Furthermore, most mental disorders emerge during adolescence, with more than half occurring by 14 years of age, and three quarters by age 25.

By monitoring and tracking brain changes as they happen, we can tackle emerging mental health problems in adolescence and target early treatment. The challenge is accurately predicting the likelihood of a person developing a mental disorder, well before it happens.

We are researchers with the world-first Longitudinal Adolescent Brain Study (LABS). We have been tracking adolescent brain development, using MRI scans, for several years. Our recent paper is the first to show the uniqueness of an adolescent’s brain (or their “brain fingerprint”) can predict mental health outcomes.

Brain fingerprinting could be the future of mental disorder prevention, allowing us to identify signs of concern in teenagers through brain imaging, and intervene early before illness develops.

Read more:
Brain activity is as unique – and identifying – as a fingerprint

Our unique brains in action

Just as fingerprints are unique, each human brain has a unique profile of signals between brain regions that become more individual and specialised as people age.

To date, our study involves 125 participants, from 12 years of age, with over 500 brain scans among them. Our research captures brain and mental health development in adolescents over five years. It uses four-monthly brain imaging (MRI and EEG), and psychological and cognitive assessments.

We looked at each individual’s functional connectome – their brain’s system of neural pathways in action. We discovered that how unique these characteristics are is significantly associated with new psychological distress reported at the time of subsequent scans four months later. In other words, the level of uniqueness seems to be predictive of a mental health outcome.

The MRI scans were undertaken during a resting state, as opposed to task-based functional MRI. It still tells us a lot about brain activity, such as how the brain keeps connections running or gets ready to do something. You could compare this to a mechanic, listening to a engine idling before it’s taken for a drive.

In the 12-year-olds we studied, we found unique functional whole-brain connectomes do exist. But a more specific network – involved in controlling goal-directed behaviour – is less unique in early adolescence. In other words, this network is still quite similar across different people.

We found the extent of its uniqueness can predict anxiety and depression symptoms that emerge later. So those with less unique brains had higher levels of distress down the line.

Read more:
We’ve been tracking young people’s mental health since 2006. COVID has accelerated a worrying decline

Rich insights

We suspect the level of maturation in this brain network – the part that involves executive control or goal-directed behaviours – may provide a biological explanation for why some teens are at increased vulnerability of mental distress. It may be that delays in the “fine tuning” of such executive function networks lead to increased mental health issues.

By doing brains scans and other assessments at regular intervals – up to 15 times for each participant – LABS not only provides fine-grained information about adolescent brain development, but it can also better pinpoint the emergence and onset of mental ill health.

Our approach allows us to better establish the occurrence and sequence of changes in the brain (and in behaviours, lifestyle factors, thinking) and mental health risks and problems.

In addition to unique brain signatures to predict psychological distress, we expect there will be other ways (using machine learning) we can interpret information about a person’s brain. This will get us closer to accurately predicting their mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Data rich, studies over a long time period are the key to finding this “holy grail” of neuroscience.

Identifying mental health risk in teenagers means we may be able to intervene before adulthood, when many mental health disorders become embedded and more difficult to resolve.

Read more:
How you can talk to your toddler to safeguard their well-being when they grow into a teenager

Worth it

This vision for the future of mental health care offers hope in the wake of recent statistics from the 2020–21 National Study of Mental Health and Wellbeing. They revealed two in five Australians aged 16 to 24 had a mental disorder within the previous year, the highest rate of any age group. This is a jump of 50% since the last national survey in 2007.

With A$11 billion spent on mental health-related services in Australia every year, better prevention via early detection should be an urgent priority.

Daniel Hermens receives funding from the Australian Commonwealth Government – Prioritising Mental Health Initiative – and the National Health & Medical Research Council.

Jim Lagopoulos receives funding from the Australian Commonwealth Government – Prioritising Mental Health Initiative – and the National Health & Medical Research Council.

Zach Shan receives funding from the NHMRC and Mason Research Foundation.

– ref. ‘Brain fingerprinting’ of adolescents might be able to predict mental health problems down the line – https://theconversation.com/brain-fingerprinting-of-adolescents-might-be-able-to-predict-mental-health-problems-down-the-line-187765

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Wilson, Associate Professor in Education, University of Sydney

This week, teachers in New South Wales learned they were going to get a “helping hand” preparing lessons from the start of term 4.

The state’s education minister Sarah Mitchell announced teachers will be given curriculum lesson plans, texts and learning materials to ease the pressure on their workloads. This will come via a “bank” of “high-quality, sequenced curriculum resources”.

Mitchell said this “game changer” has been developed off the back of teachers’ concerns. A 2021 Grattan Institute survey found 88% of teachers said they could save time each week by having access to high-quality curriculum and lesson planning materials.

But the reaction from some teachers has been white hot, describing the change as “offensive”, “another gimmick” and “not enough”.

As education researchers who have been been surveying teachers about their heavy and increasing workload, we can understand why they are angry.

Our research

In 2018, we surveyed more than 18,000 NSW teachers to get a better understanding of workloads in schools.

Noting this was done well before COVID and the new pressures that increased teachers workloads, classroom teachers in our survey reported working 55 hours a week. Nearly 90% of respondents said teaching and learning was hindered by their heavy workload.

Teachers said they wanted more time for their core work, which included lesson planning. Developing strategies to meet the needs of students and planning new lessons and programs were the top ranked work activities needing more time and resources. About 97% said administrative demands, including data work, reporting and compliance paperwork, had increased in recent years, causing their excessive workload.

It is important to note that wanting more time for lesson planning is not the same as wanting lesson plans to be provided.

In fact, teachers ranked “planning and preparation of lessons” as their most important, necessary and desired work activity. This was echoed by one teacher on Facebook this week, responding to the NSW government announcement:

This is like banging our heads against the wall. We don’t need lesson plans made for us. We like doing this, planning awesome lessons is one of my favourite things to do.

What do teachers want?

When we asked teachers what strategies they wanted to ease their workloads provision of lesson plans did not rate a mention. Instead, they said they wanted more time to collaborate with each other, and less time on unnecessary paperwork. They also wanted their professional judgement to be acknowledged.

Or, as another frustrated Facebook commenter interpreted this week’s change:

Teachers: “we want to spend less time doing admin tasks and more time planning our classes”

NSW gov: “here. Have some lessons. Now go do some more admin”

Who will plan lessons now?

The plan, according to the NSW government, is for “qualified organisations to partner with” the Department of Education to create this online curriculum content. There is already a competitive tender process to find external providers for the lesson plans. The resources need to ready by the start of next term, in early October.

This taps into existing concerns about commercialisation of schools, and teachers having less autonomy over what to teach and how to teach it. It also strikes at the heart of teachers’ core professional identity.

Read more:
Why is tech giant Apple trying to teach our teachers?

This is not helped by Mitchell’s comment that the new curriculum resources bank is about “about providing teachers with a basic recipe for student success, while allowing them to contextualise how they use the ingredients to get the best outcomes for their students.”

This “basic recipe” concept undermines the complexity of teaching and the lesson planning process. Lessons need be planned and tailored to individual classes and individual students within them.

As another teacher noted on Facebook:

Having access to high quality resources is great. But we’ve all used the same resource with two different classes and had different levels of success. What works for one class or even one student, doesn’t necessarily work for another.

What should be happening instead

In education circles there has been discussion of the need for national libraries for online teaching resources and assessments for more than a decade. The national Scootle database is one such example, with a wide range of resources and lesson ideas that can be developed into lesson plans.

There is potential for repositories to strengthen the profession, but surely that is only if they are produced and quality-assured by teachers.

Read more:
No wonder no one wants to be a teacher: world-first study looks at 65,000 news articles about Australian teachers

We know Australian teachers have an unreasonable and unsustainable workload. But we can’t fix this issue by diminishing their professional standing.

Teachers want less time on administration and more time to do their actual jobs. They also deserve better pay.

Ultimately, they want their skills and profession to be acknowledged and respected.

As part of a formal University research contract Rachel Wilson received research funding from NSW Teachers Federation to conduct the study reported here

As part of a formal University research contract Susan McGrath-Champ received research funding from NSW Teachers Federation to conduct the study reported here.

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

– ref. ‘This is like banging our heads against the wall’: why a move to outsource lesson planning has NSW teachers hopping mad – https://theconversation.com/this-is-like-banging-our-heads-against-the-wall-why-a-move-to-outsource-lesson-planning-has-nsw-teachers-hopping-mad-188081

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lucinda O’Brien, Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne

Cigno is exactly the sort of business the Australian Securities and Investments Commission had in mind when it asked for stronger powers to ban the sale of harmful financial products.

Cigno offers short-term loans (commonly called payday loans) of as little as $50 to people with what it calls “bad credit”. Its customers reportedly include disability pensioners, teenagers and people affected by mental illness or addiction.

It describes itself as an “emergency cash specialist”, offering help to people who can’t get loans from any other source. Consumer advocates call it a predatory lender, targeting desperate and vulnerable consumers.

Critics say Cigno traps its customers in a “debt spiral”, forcing them to take out new and higher loans to pay off their old ones.

Payments straight out of bank accounts

In most cases, Cigno takes payments straight out of customers’ bank accounts, along with any late fees or dishonour fees. Many customers find themselves without enough money left over for food or rent.

In a 2019 consultation paper, ASIC found Cigno’s fees were much higher than those of other payday business models.

The paper included case studies of customers who ended up owing Cigno almost 10 times what they originally borrowed, due to fees and charges.

In one case, a disability pensioner who borrowed $350 ended up owing $2,630, including late fees and ongoing weekly “account-keeping” fees. In another, an unemployed woman who borrowed $120 ended up with a debt of $1,189.

Operating outside the credit law

Cigno can charge these extraordinary fees because it operates outside the scope of the consumer credit laws that apply to ordinary payday loans, making use of gaps in the National Credit Act.

In 2020 the corporate regulator took legal action against Cigno in the Federal Court, alleging its loans broke the law.

It lost the case, but then won on appeal to the full bench of the court. Now Cigno wants to challenge this outcome in the High Court.

The regulator asked the federal government for a new, wide-ranging product intervention power
to avert such costly and drawn-out legal battles.

In 2019 it was given the power to make a product intervention order, banning or limiting the sale of a financial product that causes “significant detriment” to consumers.

Such orders can remain in force for up to 18 months. Breaches can result in civil and criminal penalties. So far ASIC has made three product intervention orders aimed at Cigno’s lending practices.

Read more:
What 1,100 Australians told us about living with debt they can’t repay

The first order, in 2019, banned a Cigno lending model that took advantage of the National Credit Code’s “short term credit” exemption.

Under this exemption, the National Credit Act does not apply if a loan is offered for 62 days or less, the associated fees are no more than 5% of the amount lent, and the effective annual interest rate is no higher than 24%.

Before making the order, the corporate regulator was required by law to undertake a lengthy consultation process.

New model for Cigno

During this time Cigno launched a new lending model that took advantage of a separate, “continuing credit” exemption under the Credit Code. This exemption applies to certain loans for which the only charge is a periodic or other fixed charge of up to $200.

The short term credit order came into effect on September 14 2019. Within two days, according to ASIC, Cigno was issuing loans using the new model.

Consumer advocates say the transition was so smooth some Cigno customers were unaware of the change, and Cigno’s business “hardly skipped a beat”.

New order against Cigno

In July 2020 the corporate regulator began consulting on a second order aimed at Cigno’s new lending model, which took advantage of the exemption for “continuing credit” contracts under the National Credit Code.

However, it didn’t issue this order until July 2022. This was partly because Cigno mounted a challenge to the first order in the Federal Court. It lost this challenge in April 2020, and again on appeal in June 2021.

In the meantime, in March 2021, the regulator’s “short term credit” order lapsed.

Another lending model

ASIC says it understands that companies related to Cigno may have begun to issue new loans, using the original lending model.

The regulator issued the continuing credit order in July 2022. At the same time, it issued a third order, closely based on the original short term credit order.

Yet Cigno continues to offer loans via its website.

This has raised suspicions that it has moved to yet another lending model, again dodging the regulator.

Read more:
Loan shark regulators need a lesson in behavioural economics

It seems likely that the regulator’s product intervention orders will have limited success against persistent, well-resourced lenders like Cigno.

To address the harmful impacts of high-cost lending we need stronger consumer credit laws – including broad anti-avoidance clauses to prevent lenders from using gaps in the law to target vulnerable consumers.

The Conversation contacted Cigno for a response but received no reply by publication deadline.

Lucinda O’Brien’s current research at Melbourne Law School is funded by the Australian Research Council.

Ian Ramsay receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Paul Ali receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. How ‘bad credit’ lender Cigno has dodged ASIC’s grasp – https://theconversation.com/how-bad-credit-lender-cigno-has-dodged-asics-grasp-187887

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Thomasson, Lecturer in Theatre, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

After two years of pandemic programming, with performers and audiences moved into virtual online venues, the Edinburgh International Festival celebrates its 75th anniversary this year with the best possible birthday present – the return of a full programme of live performances.

Part of Edinburgh’s immense cultural legacy has been to inspire similar events around the world to innovate to sustain their infrastructure – including in Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia, whose own festivals are modelled on the Scottish original.

But COVID has had a massive impact. All arts festivals have had to quickly cancel and “unproduce” live events, or offer online alternatives, as restrictions on mass gatherings and international travel undermined their very reason for existence.

While organisers and performers have shown ingenuity and resilience, they are very aware that digital technology cannot replicate the joy of live performance. All the more reason to celebrate its return 2022.

A launch pad for talent

As the world’s leading festival city, Edinburgh today hosts 11 events throughout the year, six of them in summer. These have launched the careers of countless unknowns who have gone on to become household names.

The playwright Tom Stoppard premiered Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead in 1966, and British theatre greats Peter Cook, Dudley Moore, Alan Bennett and Jonathan Miller all appeared in a single year, 1960, in their Beyond the Fringe production.

Read more:
Edinburgh festivals: how they became the world’s biggest arts event

Two decades later, in 1981, Hugh Laurie, Stephen Fry and Emma Thompson, along with their Cambridge Footlights peers, received a Perrier Award (precursor to the Edinburgh Comedy Awards). More recently, in 2013, Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s Fleabag received a Fringe First award for new writing before being reinvented as the hit television series.

Consequently, Edinburgh has come to be seen as a necessary rite of passage for theatre, circus and comedy performers from around the world, including Australia and New Zealand. Each year, the Fringe lures artists hoping to become the next Rose Matafeo or Hannah Gadsby.

Edinburgh’s global influence

Edinburgh’s reputation as a festival city began with the Edinburgh International Festival of Music and Drama in 1947. Conceived as a cultural salve to the social wounds of WWII, its founders aimed to rejuvenate European culture, restore postwar diplomatic relations and rebuild the Scottish economy.

Its success soon prompted a wave of similar events around the world, including the original Auckland Festival (1949-82), its successor the Auckland Arts Festival/Te Ahurei Toi o Tāmaki (2003), and Wellington’s Aotearoa New Zealand Festival of the Arts (1986).

In his foreword to the 1956 programme, mayor John Luxford hailed Auckland’s festival as following “a less ambitious but no less worthy pattern” to Edinburgh’s. In Australia, too, the founders of the Adelaide Festival in 1960 promoted their festival as a “more modest” version of Edinburgh.

(Fittingly, perhaps, the 75th festival opens with a performance of Macro by Adelaide’s contemporary circus performers Gravity & Other Myths and Australian First Nations dance-theatre troupe Djuki Mala.)

International arts festivals are now annual events in most Australian state and territory capitals. In most cases they are scheduled alongside other arts and sporting events to capitalise on the festive atmosphere and draw visitors to the city.

Read more:
A tale of two festivals: the history of the Edinburgh Fringe

Cancelled culture

Nowadays, Edinburgh’s success is largely due to its most famous summer festival, the Edinburgh Festival Fringe. Begun in opposition to the perceived elitism and lack of Scottish representation in the “official” festival, it has since pioneered an open-access model that welcomes any artist who can find a venue to host them.

The festivals are economically important, too. Edinburgh’s summer festivals saw a record-breaking 4.4 million attendances in 2019. In total, the festivals had an estimated £313 million benefit to the Scottish economy when last measured in 2015.

Read more:
What 70 years of the Edinburgh Festival has done for the arts – and the economy

But with success comes inevitable problems. The festivals have also seen complaints from residents about access to public spaces and blocked views of Edinburgh Castle. There has also been criticism of the Fringe for alleged mismanagement, the high cost of participation, and the risk of normalising precarious labour practices.

In 2018, a Fair Fringe campaign successfully pressured the City of Edinburgh Council to adopt charters to improve pay and conditions. But it was the pandemic that presented a genuine existential threat when Edinburgh’s summer festivals were cancelled for the first time in 2020.

Live performance returns

Internationally, arts festivals responded creatively to support artists, venues and crews whose livelihoods have been affected. The expansion of outdoor venues and reduced seating capacities helped provide audiences with cultural connection during an unsettling time.

In 2021, Edinburgh made tentative steps to open up, presenting a restricted programme supported by a free digital “At Home” offering to 350,000 online viewers from 50 countries. In Auckland and Sydney, border closures saw festivals prioritise and highlight local work with their “100% Aotearoa” and “Australian Made” seasons.

Read more:
Without visiting headliners, can local artists save our festivals?

Fringe festivals, too, experimented with online alternatives, although their ability to adapt was largely determined by the level of government support they received. In the end, though, digital festival offerings are largely make-do measures born of extraordinary circumstances.

Not all shows translate well online and not all audiences have adequate digital access. These necessary experiments have sustained the festival ecosystem through the pandemic, but enthusiasm for them inevitably wanes.

As festival goers return to the venues and streets of Edinburgh this month, they will celebrate the magic of being together – performers and audiences – in a shared space for a short time.

The joy of live performance is about presence, the ability to eyeball the performer in front of you, or feel anticipation spread through a crowd. These festivals have offered this experience for 75 years. This year, more than ever, we will cherish it.

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

– ref. Cancelled culture comes back: the Edinburgh Festival turns 75, alive and well after two years of pandemic disruption – https://theconversation.com/cancelled-culture-comes-back-the-edinburgh-festival-turns-75-alive-and-well-after-two-years-of-pandemic-disruption-187519

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

Perhaps not since the marriage equality vote has the passage of a bill in the House of Representatives carried such a combination of substantive and symbolic import as the Albanese government’s climate legislation.

While not actually necessary for the implementation of Labor’s policy, Thursday’s vote on the 2030 43% emissions reduction target sent multiple signals.

It marked a hinge-point in Australia’s climate policy, although it would be naïve to see it as the end of our “climate wars”, or to underestimate the challenges of turning the policy into reality.

It sent a crucial message to investors. Without the legislation – which will go through the Senate in September – the encouragement to shyer investors would be that bit weaker.

It showed, in the government’s prior negotiations with the Greens, that Labor would resist pressure from the minor party. The government rejected their demand for a ban on new coal and gas projects.

However on Thursday the Environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, did reject one new venture, announcing she proposed to block a Queensland coal mining project, backed by Clive Palmer, which would have “unacceptable impacts” on the Great Barrier Reef.

Given it was such a signature Labor policy, the climate vote put a stamp of action and delivery on the new government.

And it reinforced the point to the opposition that it has a massive task ahead in renovating its climate policy into something halfway saleable for the next election.

Indeed, the debate over the legislation has highlighted and exacerbated the bad place the Coalition is in.

Peter Dutton made a captain’s call in declaring it would vote against the legislation. While most of his colleagues were so inclined, it was a poor precedent for the new leader to preempt this week’s party room discussion.

In fact, it would have been better for the opposition to refrain from a stand, and just wave through the legislation. The government had a clear mandate for this policy, which had been spelled out in detail well before the election.

The Coalition’s opposition has exposed the unhappy position of the much-diminished Liberal moderates.

Tasmanian Liberal Bridget Archer crossed the floor to vote with Labor. Opposition Senate leader Simon Birmingham said if the 43% target had required legislation, then “I would have wanted to vote for it in a heartbeat. However, it doesn’t require legislation.” This reasoning made no sense.

The opposition has been left looking like a stranded asset on the climate issue, adrift from a pragmatic business community that wants to promote confidence. Anthony Albanese relished quoting what he described as “an alphabet soup” of business groups supporting “a vote for certainty”. He hit where it hurt when he taunted the opposition about “what the business community are saying about them in private”.

The government, with a majority in the House of Representatives, did not need any crossbenchers to get its bill through. But, in a gesture, it accepted modest amendments from some of them. It was a sign of the government’s desire where possible to be inclusive towards the teals (“good manners” as well as “good government”, Climate Change Minister Bowen called it). The teals, incidentally, had met together to discuss their amendments.

The climate vote was the culmination of what was, in legislative terms, a flying start for the government in its first parliamentary fortnight.

Albanese, anxious to reinforce the perception of momentum (that he had first generated on his overseas trips), piled the maximum number of bills into the parliament.

Among them were his aged care reforms, that passed both houses. Also on the agenda, as a private member’s bill but facilitated by the government, was the removal of the ban on the ACT and Northern Territory legislating for voluntary assisted dying. This passed the lower house overwhelmingly, with both sides giving a conscience vote. It is set to go through the Senate in September.

While it’s been a happy fortnight for the government on the legislative front, it was punctuated by a darker moment, when treasurer Jim Chalmers delivered his sombre economic update to the house last week. Followed by Tuesday’s interest rate rise, the government can’t escape that the months ahead will become increasingly tough as cost of living increases bite deeply.

The Albanese government’s early days have sent some signals about who has influence on it. Its determination to stare down the Greens was firm. On the other hand, we’ve seen its willingness to give concessions to the unions.

Labor’s policy to scrap the construction industry “watchdog”, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, was a well-known policy plank. It was more surprising, however, that Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke acted so quickly to draw the ABCC’S teeth by regulation, well ahead of legislation being introduced later in the year.

Even more unexpected – and highly questionable – has been the government’s intention to wind back the more detailed disclosure requirements the Morrison government introduced for superannuation funds. This can only be seen as a sop to industry funds, with no good argument that it is in the interests of fund members.

While the victory on the climate bill was the fortnight’s parliamentary showstopper, Albanese’s most ambitious play was made outside parliament, when he attended the Garma festival in Arnhem Land last weekend. There he announced draft wording for his proposed constitutional amendment for an Indigenous “Voice” to parliament.

Albanese has a deep commitment to achieving the Voice, commencing his election night victory speech with a pledge to “the Uluru Statement from the Heart in full”, and talking about it often since. One influence is his chief of staff Tim Gartrell, who a decade ago went to work for the Recognise campaign, under the auspices of Reconciliation Australia. Recognise aimed to raise awareness about constitutional reform, without committing to a specific model.

Later this term, legislation will come before parliament for the referendum. It will easily pass both houses. But unlike the climate legislation, on which the Coalition’s stance ultimately didn’t matter, except to its own credibility, on the referendum bill its position will be crucial. Not to whether the bill gets through – but to the prospects for the referendum doing so.

If the referendum passed without bipartisan support, it would be defying history. This exercise needs a united stand across the political spectrum.

Yet it is already clear the opposition is divided on the Voice. Finding its way to a common position on the Voice referendum will be even more difficult for the Coalition than forging a new climate policy.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Government win on climate legislation leaves opposition looking like a stranded asset – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-government-win-on-climate-legislation-leaves-opposition-looking-like-a-stranded-asset-188231

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

Perhaps not since the marriage equality vote has the passage of a bill in the House of Representatives carried such a combination of substantive and symbolic import as the Albanese government’s climate legislation.

While not actually necessary for the implementation of Labor’s policy, Thursday’s vote on the 2030 43% emissions reduction target sent multiple signals.

It marked a hinge-point in Australia’s climate policy, although it would be naïve to see it as the end of our “climate wars”, or to underestimate the challenges of turning the policy into reality.

It sent a crucial message to investors. Without the legislation – which will go through the Senate in September – the encouragement to shyer investors would be that bit weaker.

It showed, in the government’s prior negotiations with the Greens, that Labor would resist pressure from the minor party. The government rejected their demand for a ban on new coal and gas projects.

However on Thursday the Environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, did reject one new venture, announcing she proposed to block a Queensland coal mining project, backed by Clive Palmer, which would have “unacceptable impacts” on the Great Barrier Reef.

Given it was such a signature Labor policy, the climate vote put a stamp of action and delivery on the new government.

And it reinforced the point to the opposition that it has a massive task ahead in renovating its climate policy into something halfway saleable for the next election.

Indeed, the debate over the legislation has highlighted and exacerbated the bad place the Coalition is in.

Peter Dutton made a captain’s call in declaring it would vote against the legislation. While most of his colleagues were so inclined, it was a poor precedent for the new leader to preempt this week’s party room discussion.

In fact, it would have been better for the opposition to refrain from a stand, and just wave through the legislation. The government had a clear mandate for this policy, which had been spelled out in detail well before the election.

The Coalition’s opposition has exposed the unhappy position of the much-diminished Liberal moderates.

Tasmanian Liberal Bridget Archer crossed the floor to vote with Labor. Opposition Senate leader Simon Birmingham said if the 43% target had required legislation, then “I would have wanted to vote for it in a heartbeat. However, it doesn’t require legislation.” This reasoning made no sense.

The opposition has been left looking like a stranded asset on the climate issue, adrift from a pragmatic business community that wants to promote confidence. Anthony Albanese relished quoting what he described as “an alphabet soup” of business groups supporting “a vote for certainty”. He hit where it hurt when he taunted the opposition about “what the business community are saying about them in private”.

The government, with a majority in the House of Representatives, did not need any crossbenchers to get its bill through. But, in a gesture, it accepted modest amendments from some of them. It was a sign of the government’s desire where possible to be inclusive towards the teals (“good manners” as well as “good government”, Climate Change Minister Bowen called it). The teals, incidentally, had met together to discuss their amendments.

The climate vote was the culmination of what was, in legislative terms, a flying start for the government in its first parliamentary fortnight.

Albanese, anxious to reinforce the perception of momentum (that he had first generated on his overseas trips), piled the maximum number of bills into the parliament.

Among them were his aged care reforms, that passed both houses. Also on the agenda, as a private member’s bill but facilitated by the government, was the removal of the ban on the ACT and Northern Territory legislating for voluntary assisted dying. This passed the lower house overwhelmingly, with both sides giving a conscience vote. It is set to go through the Senate in September.

While it’s been a happy fortnight for the government on the legislative front, it was punctuated by a darker moment, when treasurer Jim Chalmers delivered his sombre economic update to the house last week. Followed by Tuesday’s interest rate rise, the government can’t escape that the months ahead will become increasingly tough as cost of living increases bite deeply.

The Albanese government’s early days have sent some signals about who has influence on it. Its determination to stare down the Greens was firm. On the other hand, we’ve seen its willingness to give concessions to the unions.

Labor’s policy to scrap the construction industry “watchdog”, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, was a well-known policy plank. It was more surprising, however, that Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke acted so quickly to draw the ABCC’S teeth by regulation, well ahead of legislation being introduced later in the year.

Even more unexpected – and highly questionable – has been the government’s intention to wind back the more detailed disclosure requirements the Morrison government introduced for superannuation funds. This can only be seen as a sop to industry funds, with no good argument that it is in the interests of fund members.

While the victory on the climate bill was the fortnight’s parliamentary showstopper, Albanese’s most ambitious play was made outside parliament, when he attended the Garma festival in Arnhem Land last weekend. There he announced draft wording for his proposed constitutional amendment for an Indigenous “Voice” to parliament.

Albanese has a deep commitment to achieving the Voice, commencing his election night victory speech with a pledge to “the Uluru Statement from the Heart in full”, and talking about it often since. One influence is his chief of staff Tim Gartrell, who a decade ago went to work for the Recognise campaign, under the auspices of Reconciliation Australia. Recognise aimed to raise awareness about constitutional reform, without committing to a specific model.

Later this term, legislation will come before parliament for the referendum. It will easily pass both houses. But unlike the climate legislation, on which the Coalition’s stance ultimately didn’t matter, except to its own credibility, on the referendum bill its position will be crucial. Not to whether the bill gets through – but to the prospects for the referendum doing so.

If the referendum passed without bipartisan support, it would be defying history. This exercise needs a united stand across the political spectrum.

Yet it is already clear the opposition is divided on the Voice. Finding its way to a common position on the Voice referendum will be even more difficult for the Coalition than forging a new climate policy.

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

– ref. Government win on climate legislation leaves opposition looking like a stranded asset – https://theconversation.com/government-win-on-climate-legislation-leaves-opposition-looking-like-a-stranded-asset-188231

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC Principal Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney

Health Minister Mark Butler today announced Australia had secured 450,000 doses of a third-generation monkeypox vaccine, 22,000 of which will arrive later this week.

There are now 58 people with the virus in Australia.

The announcement comes after the Chief Medical Officer declared monkeypox a “communicable disease incident of national significance” last week. This means the federal government can assist states and territories — for example, making antivirals or vaccines available through the national medical stockpile. It also signals the seriousness of the epidemic and the need to bring it under control.

Most of Australia’s cases are in New South Wales and Victoria, with most through travel, but some through community spread.

Globally, we have gone from a few hundred to more than 23,000 cases in three months, with the United States overtaking European countries to have the largest number of cases.

The epidemic is still largely spreading in communities of men who have sex with men, with over 98% of cases in this group.

Overseas, the rate of a concurrent sexually transmitted infection is around 30%, and HIV around 40%. The rate of HIV coinfection is much lower in Australia, reflecting the success in controlling HIV.

Read more:
Monkeypox in Australia: should you be worried? And who can get the vaccine?

What’s the new vaccine?

The third-generation non-replicating vaccine is the preferred vaccine for monkeypox. It has fewer risks of serious side effects than second-generation vaccines and can be given safely to people with weakened immune systems.

Australia hadn’t stockpiled these ahead of the epidemic, but the new announcement is a welcome move.

The vaccine Australia has just purchased is made by Danish biotech Bavarian Nordic. The only other non-replicating vaccine is the LC16m8 from Japan, and scaling up production is difficult, so supplies are limited.

Monkeypox is closely related to smallpox, and the smallpox vaccines protect against it and other orthopoxviruses. Smallpox vaccines are made from the vaccinia virus. First- and second-generation vaccines replicate in the body, so if someone is immunosuppressed, the vaccinia virus can spread and cause serious illness. These vaccines can also cause myocarditis and pericarditis in one out of every 175 vaccinated people as well as rarer serious side effects.

The first-generation vaccines such as Dryvax were used for smallpox eradication until 1980 when smallpox was declared eradicated, but had impurities because it was manufactured on the skin of calves.

The second-generation vaccines, such as ACAM2000, are made using cell cultures and is purified. However, these also replicate in the body and have the same side effects.

First- and second-generation vaccines are given as a single dose with a two-pronged needle that scratches the skin, with a scar forming at the site, which indicates it has worked.

Third-generation vaccines need two doses and are given like other vaccines, and do not leave a scar.

Vaccine advisory body the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) recommends the following people are prioritised for the vaccine:

• high-risk monkeypox contacts in the past 14 days, including men who have sex with men who have recently had a high number of sexual partners or group sex, and those living with HIV
• sex workers, particularly those with clients who are high-risk
• anyone in the high-risk groups who is planning to travel to any country with a significant monkeypox outbreak.

Antivirals against smallpox (and monkeypox) were similarly not stockpiled ahead of the epidemic, but are expected to be available. There’s also a vaccinia immunoglobulin (antibody treatment) available to treat people with severe infection.

This outbreak is different

We don’t know much more about the genetic changes in the virus, except that there are more than 50 mutations. The virus appears to have been continuously mutating — and rapidly.

It’s possible some of these changes may be responsible for the rapid spread of the virus, and some new symptoms. Developing the rash around the genitals and anus is much more common in this outbreak than in the classic monkeypox presentation where the rash usually appears on the face, hands and feet.

A study from Cameroon found a 6% rate of asymptomatic infection. That’s not a high proportion, but shows that asymptomatic infection is possible. A pre-print study (not yet reviewed by other scientists) found that of 224 men screened, three had asymptomatic monkeypox.

Asymptomatic infection can also occur in vaccinated people, but none of the three men were vaccinated against smallpox. Still, this doesn’t adequately explain the spread of monkeypox globally.

Read more:
Monkeypox: an expert explains what gay and bisexual men need to know

So far the epidemic hasn’t spread widely outside of gay and bisexual men, and the death rate has been very low. Most deaths have been in children in countries in Africa where monkeypox is endemic. This means it is in the animal populations in those countries and causes outbreaks when infection spreads from animals to humans, and sometimes between humans.

To date there have been a handful of deaths in non-endemic countries such as Brazil, India and Spain.

Cases in children have occurred in the US and Europe. The risk of severe outcomes and death is much higher for children, so good outbreak control is important.

Australia should be able to control it

It’s important to ensure the virus doesn’t get established in animal hosts, which is a risk if the epidemic becomes very large. Rodents are the main host of this virus, but a range of other animals including monkeys can be a reservoir.

If the virus becomes established in animals in Australia, we will have to live with it forever – like we now have to live with Japanese encephalitis, which had never been found on the mainland until 2022.

It’s not yet known whether Australian native animals are susceptible to monkeypox. The virus is excreted in faeces, so environmental contamination poses a risk that the virus may get into waterways and thereby infect animals.

Read more:
Why declaring monkeypox a global health emergency is a preventative step — not a reason for panic

Australia should be able to control monkeypox, drawing on our successful HIV response.

This requires community engagement, good diagnosis, contact tracing and use of vaccines as both pre-exposure vaccine prophylaxis for people attending high-risk events or otherwise at high risk; and “post-exposure vaccine prophylaxis”, which you can take after you’ve been exposed to an infected person.

C Raina MacIntyre currently receives funding from NHMRC. MRFF and Sanofi. She has been on advisory board for Bavarian Nordic and had funding and in-kind support for a smallpox tabletop exercise in 2019 from Bavarian Nordic, Emergent Biosolutions, Siga and Meridien Medical. Bavarian Nordic and Emergent make smallpox vaccines, and Siga makes the anti-viral TPOXX. She is on the WHO SAGE Smallpox and Monkeypox ad-hoc Working group.

– ref. Australia secures 450,000 new monkeypox vaccines. What are they and who can have them? – https://theconversation.com/australia-secures-450-000-new-monkeypox-vaccines-what-are-they-and-who-can-have-them-187691

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tony Wood, Program Director, Energy, Grattan Institute

The Albanese government has accepted the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s recommendation to “initiate the first step” to trigger the controversial Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism to avert a supply crisis in eastern Australia.

What the competition watchdog hasn’t recommended is what to do about the gas price, which has little to do with supply.

In its latest half-yearly report on gas supply, the ACCC predicts that, without action, eastern Australia will suffer a domestic gas shortage in 2023, and is concerned that already-high prices will go even higher.

The report identifies several causes. One is Russia’s war against Ukraine, which has European buyers seeking alternatives to Russian gas.

Australian liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporters have been keen to meet this demand and reap the high prices they are willing to pay.

But the report also makes clear there are significant problems with the Australian gas market itself, with ineffective competition between gas producers, poor compliance, and an apparent lack of real commitment by gas exporters to the agreement they made with the federal government to ensure affordable and sufficient gas for domestic users.

Frustratingly though, the report has little to say (beyond expressing concern) about the more immediate issue of escalating domestic prices.

Looming shortage

The report identifies an east coast gas supply of 1.98 billion gigajoules in 2023 – well in excess of domestic demand of 571 million gigajoules.

1.3 billion gigajoules of that supply is needed to meet long-term LNG export contracts. The ACCC has identified there will be a shortfall of 56 million gigajoules if the LNG producers export all of the 167 million gigajoules they will have in excess their contract obligations.

To avoid this shortfall, the ACCC has recommended the government take the first step in initiating the Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism. This involves determining if 2023 will be a “shortfall year”. Federal resources minister has said the government will take this step.

Read more:
The ‘gas trigger’ won’t be enough to stop our energy crisis escalating. We need a domestic reservation policy

If the government finds it will be a shortfall year, it can require exporters to offer their uncontracted gas to the domestic market first.

Whether the government will need to do that will depend on negotiations with the exporters – in particular the three joint venture exporters and their associates the ACCC says have influence over close to 90% of proven and probable eastern Australian reserves.

The ACCC report expresses concern that some LNG exporters “not engaging with the
domestic market in the spirit” of an agreement they signed:

Even if the behaviour could be proven to be technically compliant, we consider that some suppliers are not engaging with the domestic market in ways that are likely to result in supply agreements being reached and market conditions noticeably improving

It is also concerned the joint venture operators might be breaching the Competition and Consumer Act by effectively engaging in joint marketing without ACCC approval.

Another concern is the cost of transmission, with pipeline owners enjoying local monopolies. The ACCC has stopped short of recommending regulating the prices they can charge.

Few clues on prices

Where the recommendations fall short is on what to do about rising prices. Even before the looming shortfall, wholesale and retail prices to businesses have been climbing steadily for a year. The report says some prices have been doubled.

The ACCC has been operating on the superficially reasonable basis that domestic gas prices should be no higher than international ones.

It has been using “export parity prices” to indicate what the price would be if the federal government’s agreement with LNG exporters was functioning well.

On that metric, the agreement is functioning well. Domestic prices have largely followed international prices. But those prices have soared from A$3-10 per gigajoule to well above A$40.

Read more:
Why did gas prices go from $10 a gigajoule to $800 a gigajoule? An expert on the energy crisis engulfing Australia

The result is windfall profits to producers and unaffordable prices for domestic users of the kind that cannot be accepted as a well-functioning market.

The report makes no recommendation to address this problem.

While there have been arguments for a domestic reservation policy, a better way to address the price problem is a “windfall profit” tax on gas producers.

Even the threat of such a tax should be a brake on unfair domestic prices. The ACCC could set a price threshold to trigger the tax. It could be tailored to the specific circumstances and made defensible against claims of sovereign risk.

A windfall profits tax would be a start

Most of the findings of the latest gas inquiry report are neither new nor surprising. Yet their impact on gas users is heavy, and will get worse if further action is not taken.

The government has most of the tools it needs. It should act on the ACCC’s recommendations to meet the possible 2023 shortfall and on joint marketing.

It should go further on pipeline regulation, and it should implement a windfall profit tax to avoid catastrophic consequences for Australian gas users.

Tony Wood owns shares in several energy and resource companies via his superannuation fund

– ref. Avoiding a gas shortage is one thing, but what’s needed is action on prices – https://theconversation.com/avoiding-a-gas-shortage-is-one-thing-but-whats-needed-is-action-on-prices-187980

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Schmidt, Professor of Chemistry, UNSW Sydney

Is there a “fourth phase of water”? From time to time you might see people talking up the health benefits of so-called hexagonal water, or structured water, or exclusion-zone (EZ) water.

A few weeks ago Kourtney Kardashian’s Poosh website was spruiking a US$2,500 “structured water filter”. Last weekend even Australia’s Sydney Morning Herald got in on the act, running a now-deleted story on the virtues of “structured water”.

So what’s going on?

As a professor of chemistry, I can tell you “EZ water” is nonsense. But let’s talk about what it’s supposed to be, and how it’s supposed to work.

What is EZ water?

EZ water has its origins in observations by Gerald Pollack, a professor of bioengineering at the University of Washington. He was studying the behaviour of water near “hydrophilic” surfaces, which are made of materials with a very strong attraction to water.

Pollack found that water pushes away objects such as plastic microspheres, salt and even dye molecules from the region close to a very hydrophilic surface.

Pollack’s explanation for this behaviour is that the structure of water changes in the “exclusion zone”.

Read more:
How snake oil got a bad name

While water molecules are made of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom (with the familiar formula H₂O), Pollack believes EZ water has an extra hydrogen atom and an extra oxygen atom (formula H₃O₂). This change supposedly results in a negative electric charge and a layered hexagonal network arrangement of atoms in the water.

Hydrophilic surfaces exists in the cells of the human bodies, so some have argued EZ water is “more natural” than ordinary water, and therefore must have manifold health benefits.

Tenuous health claims

The now-deleted Sydney Morning Herald article interviewed a supposed expert in water structure science called Rob Gourlay.

He makes many common claims for structured water: it is more natural, it has negative electric charge, it flows into our cells more quickly than ordinary water, and has many other supposed health benefits.

Though the article failed to mention it, a quick search reveals Robert Gourlay’s job title as “chief scientist” of a company called Phi’on, which sells water structuring devices.

From the plausible to the preposterous

Let’s have a look at these claims. Some of them are plausible, while some are preposterous.

We know that water behaves differently near an interface with another substance, because it is no longer only interacting with other water molecules. Surface tension is a familiar example of this phenomenon.

We also know that water behaves differently if it is confined in a very small space, on a scale of billionths of a metre.

Read more:
An untapped resource: how water became the ultimate consumer product

As such, there is no special reason to be immediately sceptical of Pollack’s experimental findings about the behaviour of water in the “exclusion zone”. They are indeed interesting, and many aspects have been reproduced.

But Pollack’s explanations for the behaviour have no basis.

Follow the atoms

If water somehow changed into a H₃O₂ form, simple arithmetic shows that turning two molecules of H₂O into one of H₃O₂ would leave an extra hydrogen atom floating around.

We would expect to see this hydrogen released as H₂ gas. Alternatively, the reaction would need to bring in extra oxygen from the air. A simple experiment would show that neither of these happen.

EZ water, for all its interesting properties, cannot be anything but H₂O. Pollack does not propose the H₃O₂ structure in a peer-reviewed publication, and other explanations have been put forth to explain his published experimental findings.

And the hexagonal structure for H₃O₂ which Pollack proposes, if stable and rigid, would not flow like a liquid.

Water has no memory

But suppose water in the exclusion zone did have some special structure. Could it be bottled and keep its properties?

All signs point to no.

In water with a neutral pH (neither acidic nor alkaline), about one molecule in every billion has an extra hydrogen atom that has jumped across from another molecule. This creates one positively charged H₃O⁺ ion and one negatively charged OH^– ion.

The extra protons (H⁺) that make H₃O⁺ ions are highly mobile – they rapidly leap from one molecule to another. This happens so fast that each of the hydrogen atoms in a given water molecule is replaced 1,000 times each second.

There are also short-lived attractions between the oxygen atoms in one molecule and the hydrogen atoms in a neighbouring molecule called “hydrogen bonds”. In liquid water at room temperature these bonds only last millionths of a millionth of a second.

The rapid movement of hydrogen atoms, and the flickering on and off of hydrogen bonds, mean that any structure in EZ water would dissipate very quickly. In bulk, water has forgotten its neighbours within picoseconds and has switched its hydrogen atoms in milliseconds. This is why it is liquid.

Experiments using intense laser pulses to disrupt the structure of water also show that it recovers within picoseconds. So any bulk water structure that is different from the usual kind that flows from our taps does not last much longer than a few millionths of a millionth of a second.

Water is water

So what does it all add up to? Put simply, it is not possible to buy any other type of water than regular water. You can change the pH, you can change the dissolved ions and gases, but not the water itself.

The snake-oil merchants selling structured water products use scientific-sounding words that are generally meaningless and are at best based on misinterpretations and abuses of Pollack’s experiments.

Pollack distances himself from most companies selling structured water products. He has his own structured water company, which among other products sells a “filterless water filter”.

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

– ref. Don’t fall for the snake oil claims of ‘structured water’. A chemist explains why it’s nonsense – https://theconversation.com/dont-fall-for-the-snake-oil-claims-of-structured-water-a-chemist-explains-why-its-nonsense-188159