Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne-Mette Holmgård Sundahl, PhD Candidate in Political Science, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Jacinda Ardern’s popularity has fluctuated over the past five years, with the prime minister’s approval peaking at 76% in May 2020. Those early rises in popularity were met with warnings about the risks of placing a political leader on a pedestal. Some even labelled the phenomenon of “Jacindamania” a personality cult or branded Ardern “a cult of personality politician”.

But this description not only misrepresents Ardern and her popularity – it also dilutes the concept of a “personality cult”, overlooking several of its defining characteristics.

My research explores the difference between mere popularity and personality cults. This work is important as commentators and media increasingly conflate the two ideas.

By definition, a personality cult parallels religious worship, elevating an individual’s authority “through the deliberate creation, projection and propagation of a godlike image”.

A personality cult also entails a specific set of social practices including inflated flattery and toadying, immunity from delegitimising crises and entrenched rituals.

In the contemporary context, the label of personality cult has been more accurately applied to leaders like Russian president Vladimir Putin and former US president Donald Trump.

Debunking the myth of the cult

While a personality cult can develop organically from the general population, it equally needs to be cultivated from above to be used as an instrument of power.

Over the past few years, artists have depicted Ardern as Wonder Woman and as pop cultural figures like Star Wars’ Princess Leia or Rosie the Riveter from WWII marketing imagery.

But there have been no official attempts from Ardern or the government to depict her as a hero – in stark contrast to how both Trump and Putin have contributed to their own glorification.

Trump, for example, photoshopped an image of his face on Rocky Balboa’s body and posted it on social media. The Russian government has released numerous official photos of Putin riding around bare-chested in the Siberian wilderness, cultivating an image of the leader as the ideal Russian man.

No shameless toadying

The most significant differences between Ardern’s popularity and a fully-fledged personality cult can, however, be found in how the public responds to exaggerated depictions of their leader.

Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov called Putin a hero “appointed by Allah” who everyone should bow down to. Former US Secretary of Energy Rick Perry compared Trump to biblical kings, calling him “the chosen one, sent by God to do great things”.

In contrast, the praise Ardern receives is less inflated and excessive.

Read more:
Little red children and ‘Grandpa Xi’: China’s school textbooks reflect the rise of Xi Jinping’s personality cult

And while some argue that Ardern’s halo has blinded her fans to deeper problems, her supporters are not completely blind to her mistakes and shortcomings, with marked fluctuations in approval polls that coincide with her political successes and failures.

Inflation, Omicron and a straining health system have all eroded support for Ardern and the Labour party. Unlike what would be expected with a personality cult, her popularity is not immune to strong political headwinds.

Absence of rituals

In terms of more traditional cult-like behaviour, a personality cult also entails a ritualistic element.

After Putin unexpectedly stopped in the village of Izborsk, his path through town was marked, along with the places he had bought cucumbers, drunk from the fountain, and touched a tree and made a wish.

Magnitogorsk Museum likewise exhibited the overalls he had worn during his visit. Visiting these locations have become a matter of pilgrimage for his followers.

Read more:
What kind of person joins a cult or joins a terror group?

Such behaviour has been absent around the New Zealand prime minister.

Admittedly, Ardern’s weekly updates from her home during the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, covering everything from serious political matters to her daughter’s nap time, could be reminiscent of a ritual, given it engaged people in an activity revolving around her.

However, the weekly updates didn’t originate at the grassroots level, unlike the hero worship of Putin, and their absence has been largely inconsequential for the community.

Read more:
Vladimir Putin, the czar of macho politics, is threatened by gender and sexuality rights

Explaining ‘Jacindamania’

“Jacindamania” illustrates how popularity and a few hero-like depictions are not enough to constitute a fully-fledged personality cult.

That Ardern’s popularity hasn’t manifested itself into social practices and thus transformed into a personality cult, means that she has less authority than is suggested by some commentators.

Ardern can’t use her popularity to make her supporters follow orders blindly. Even loyal Labour voters challenge her political direction.

Trump, on the other hand, encouraged his supporters to unlawfully storm the Capitol in an attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. Recent congressional hearings found these supporters rioted after being encouraged by Trump and stopped when Trump told them to go home.

Tall poppy syndrome could be a barrier

Calling the phenomenon surrounding Ardern a cult thus grossly overestimates the extent of her power – and clashes with New Zealand culture.

With their perception of the country as an egalitarian society and the prevalence of the so-called “tall poppy syndrome”, New Zealanders are arguably less predisposed to worship or elevate a single individual.

New Zealanders’ innate modesty and tendency to downplay achievement are not conducive to the cultivation of a cult from above – or below.

So, while Ardern has experienced waves of popularity both domestically and on the global stage, her support is far from entering the territory of the personality cults surrounding Putin or Trump. She is popular, sometimes, but not infallible.

Anne-Mette Holmgård Sundahl 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. Does Jacinda Ardern’s popularity really qualify as a cult of personality, as some critics claim? – https://theconversation.com/does-jacinda-arderns-popularity-really-qualify-as-a-cult-of-personality-as-some-critics-claim-187516

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Riseley, Research Fellow, Università di Bologna

The universe is littered with galaxy clusters – huge structures piled up at the intersections of the cosmic web. A single cluster can span millions of light-years across and be made up of hundreds, or even thousands, of galaxies.

However, these galaxies represent only a few percent of a cluster’s total mass. About 80% of it is dark matter, and the rest is a hot plasma “soup”: gas heated to above 10,000,000℃ and interwoven with weak magnetic fields.

We and our international team of colleagues have identified a series of rarely observed radio objects – a radio relic, a radio halo and fossil radio emission – within a particularly dynamic galaxy cluster called Abell 3266. They defy existing theories about both the origins of such objects and their characteristics.

Relics, haloes and fossils

Galaxy clusters allow us to study a broad range of rich processes – including magnetism and plasma physics – in environments we can’t recreate in our labs.

When clusters collide with each other, huge amounts of energy are put into the particles of the hot plasma, generating radio emission. And this emission comes in a variety of shapes and sizes.

“Radio relics” are one example. They are arc-shaped and sit towards a cluster’s outskirts, powered by shockwaves travelling through the plasma, which cause a jump in density or pressure, and energise the particles. An example of a shockwave on Earth is the sonic boom that happens when an aircraft breaks the sound barrier.

“Radio haloes” are irregular sources that lie towards the cluster’s centre. They’re powered by turbulence in the hot plasma, which gives energy to the particles. We know both haloes and relics are generated by collisions between galaxy clusters – yet many of their gritty details remain elusive.

Then there are “fossil” radio sources. These are the radio leftovers from the death of a supermassive black hole at the centre of a radio galaxy.

When they’re in action, black holes shoot huge jets of plasma far out beyond the galaxy itself. As they run out of fuel and shut off, the jets begin to dissipate. The remnants are what we detect as radio fossils.

Read more:
Explainer: radio astronomy

Abell 3266

Our new paper, published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, presents a highly detailed study of a galaxy cluster called Abell 3266.

This is a particularly dynamic and messy colliding system around 800 million light-years away. It has all the hallmarks of a system that should be host to relics and haloes – yet none had been detected until recently.

Following up on work conducted using the Murchison Widefield Array earlier this year, we used new data from the ASKAP radio telescope and the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) to see Abell 3266 in more detail.

Our data paint a complex picture. You can see this in the lead image: yellow colours show features where energy input is active. The blue haze represents the hot plasma, captured at X-ray wavelengths.

Redder colours show features that are only visible at lower frequencies. This means these objects are older and have less energy. Either they have lost a lot of energy over time, or they never had much to begin with.

The radio relic is visible in red near the bottom of the image (see below for a zoom). And our data here reveal particular features that have never been seen before in a relic.

Its concave shape is also unusual, earning it the catchy moniker of a “wrong-way” relic. Overall, our data break our understanding of how relics are generated, and we’re still working to decipher the complex physics behind these radio objects.

Ancient remnants of a supermassive black hole

The radio fossil, seen towards the upper right of the lead image (and also below), is very faint and red, indicating it is ancient. We believe this radio emission originally came from the galaxy at the lower left, with a central black hole that has long been switched off.

Our best physical models simply can’t fit the data. This reveals gaps in our understanding of how these sources evolve – gaps that we’re working to fill.

Finally, using a clever algorithm, we de-focused the lead image to look for very faint emission that’s invisible at high resolution, unearthing the first detection of a radio halo in Abell 3266 (see below).

Towards the future

This is the beginning of the road towards understanding Abell 3266. We have uncovered a wealth of new and detailed information, but our study has raised yet more questions.

The telescopes we used are laying the foundations for revolutionary science from the Square Kilometre Array project. Studies like ours allow astronomers to figure out what we don’t know – but you can be sure we’re going to find out.

We acknowledge the Gomeroi people as the traditional owners of the site where ATCA is located, and the Wajarri Yamatji people as the traditional owners of the Murchison Radioastronomy Observatory site, where ASKAP and the Murchison Widefield Array are located.

Christopher Riseley works for Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna. He is also affiliated with the Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF) and CSIRO Space & Astronomy. He is supported by funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the ERC Starting Grant ‘DRANOEL’, number 714245.

Tessa Vernstrom works for the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research (ICRAR) at the University of Western Australia. She is affiliated with CSIRO Space & Astronomy.

– ref. We found some strange radio sources in a distant galaxy cluster. They’re making us rethink what we thought we knew. – https://theconversation.com/we-found-some-strange-radio-sources-in-a-distant-galaxy-cluster-theyre-making-us-rethink-what-we-thought-we-knew-187631

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Kildea, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney

The Albanese government is moving ahead with plans to hold a first-term referendum on a First Nations Voice. The Prime Minister has attended the annual Garma Festival in northeast Arnhem Land, where the Voice was a key focus.

The referendum will ask voters to enshrine in the Australian Constitution a First Nations body that would give non-binding advice to the federal parliament on laws and policies affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

In recent weeks there has been growing debate on whether Australians need to see the full detail of the proposed advisory body before voting on it. Megan Davis, one of the architects of the process that preceded the Uluru Statement from the Heart, says voters should be asked to approve the body’s basic purpose and function, and other details can be filled in later by parliament.

Critics of this approach, including Marcia Langton, argue a specific model should be outlined in draft legislation and tabled in parliament before the referendum.

The question of whether proposals should be general or specific is a familiar issue in referendum design. So, how much detail should referendum proposals contain? And is there a risk that proposals that are too detailed, or too vague, can end up being rejected by voters?

À lire aussi :
Most Australians support First Nations Voice to parliament: survey

Ensuring an informed vote on the Voice

For the First Nations Voice, the priority should be to develop a proposal that is sufficiently clear and detailed to enable Australians to cast an informed vote. Recent public statements from leading figures suggest this will occur.

As Megan Davis explains, Australians are being asked to approve a constitutional amendment that will enable the creation of the Voice. This could be in the form of a new constitutional provision that sets out the basic function and purpose of the First Nations advisory body.

It was always intended that detail on matters such as size, composition and resourcing would be left to the parliament. This recognises parliament’s supremacy in our constitutional system. It also enables the Voice to be tweaked over time in response to new circumstances. If a specific model appeared on the ballot paper, or was tabled in parliament before the vote, the flexibility and adaptability of the Voice would be undermined.

If Australians are to cast an informed vote, though, it is important they have a clear sense of what will happen if this new advisory body is approved.

Senator Pat Dodson recognises this. Earlier this week he announced the Labor government will, by the end of the year, release an exposure document that sets out key elements of the Voice.

Davis says the proposed constitutional amendment will be supplemented by other material to give Australians a clear idea about what they are voting on. This will include a set of design principles to guide decisions on matters of detail. It will also include a blueprint for the process that the government and parliament will follow to implement the Voice if voters approve it.

Taken together, these steps empower and respect voters, enabling them to cast an informed vote at the referendum.

The importance of clear proposals

One of the basic requirements of a fair referendum is voters have access to adequate information about the proposal. People can only cast an informed vote if they understand the nature of the proposal and what will happen if it is approved.

This is reflected in the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice on Referendums, a set of recommended standards on referendum conduct. The Code says “the question put to the vote must be clear”.

The dangers of unclear referendum proposals were demonstrated in 2016 when British voters were asked whether the United Kingdom should remain in, or leave, the European Union. It was never made clear to voters what would happen if “leave” prevailed. After “leave” won, years of post-referendum confusion followed as parliament argued over what the result meant and how to implement it.

The Australian Constitution protects against vague referendum proposals of this kind. Its special amendment procedure requires a “proposed law” be submitted to voters. This takes the form of a Bill that sets out the specific changes to the constitutional text if the referendum is successful. When the people vote Yes, those changes are made to the Constitution automatically.

Governments sometimes publish additional material to help voters understand what will happen if a referendum proposal is carried. In the lead up to the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, for instance, the Scottish government published a lengthy White Paper on its plans for independence and the process it would follow if the referendum was successful.

À lire aussi :
First Nations people shouldn’t have to wait for a referendum to get a Voice to Parliament

Can the amount of detail affect the result?

There has not been any systematic study of whether the amount of detail in a referendum proposal affects its chances of success.

It seems intuitive that vague proposals pose risks, as opponents can exploit the lack of detail to stoke fear about what might happen.

But highly detailed proposals also have their strategic drawbacks. Adversaries can pull apart the details, focusing attention away from a basic reform idea that may enjoy widespread support.

Recent referendum experience suggests there is no clear relationship between detail and success. It is thought Ireland’s 2013 referendum on abolishing the upper house was defeated, in part, because the consequences of the proposal were unclear. On the other hand, in 2016 a majority of UK voters embraced the vague idea of leaving the EU.

Closer to home, in 1999 Australians were presented with a highly detailed proposal for establishing a republic with an appointed president. Opponents attacked the specifics of the model, contributing to its defeat.

À lire aussi :
Changing the Australian Constitution is not easy. But we need to stop thinking it’s impossible

Public education will be crucial

Looking ahead, we need to keep in mind that getting the proposal right is just one element of fostering informed voting at a First Nations Voice referendum.

As the referendum approaches, we need to ensure voters have access to clear, accurate and balanced information about the specific proposal and the wider constitutional system.

This can be achieved through a mix of initiatives, including an informative official pamphlet, a neutral education campaign, and public subsidies to ensure both sides have an opportunity to present their arguments.

As we debate what shape the referendum proposal should take, we must not lose sight of the other ways that we can support Australians to cast an informed vote on this important issue.

Paul Kildea has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. What can history teach us to ensure a successful referendum for A First Nations Voice to parliament? – https://theconversation.com/what-can-history-teach-us-to-ensure-a-successful-referendum-for-a-first-nations-voice-to-parliament-187843

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

If politics really is to be done differently, as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has promised, then the way politics is reported will need to be done differently too.

This is because the media’s power to portray will determine how the electorate perceives whether change is happening.

It is a reciprocating process. The way politicians perform influences the media’s portrayal of them, and how the media portray politicians in turn influences political practice.

One benchmark for helping us assess whether the promised change materialises is provided by academic Judith Brett’s characterisation of the Morrison administration:

The blame shifting, the careless inattention, the failure to prepare, the blatant favouring of Coalition and marginal seats with government largesse, the focus on announcements with little follow-up, the absence of serious concern about corruption and integrity […]

But that benchmark takes into account only the performance of the politicians. What about the media?

The media do appear to be in the early stages of changing the way they report federal politics. But this change is tentative, patchy and uncertain.

For instance, the coverage of the government’s actions on foreign policy has on the whole been straightforward and informative. That was until someone in the media pack travelling with Albanese in Europe asked why the prime minister’s visit to Ukraine was not equivalent to Morrison’s holiday to Hawaii during the 2019 bushfires. Albanese slapped down the comparison as “offensive”.

The on-the-road media pack had a bad election campaign disfigured by exactly this kind of juvenile “gotcha” reporting. Clearly in some parts of the media, the atmosphere of anticipated change has not penetrated.

In other parts of the media it clearly has, but there is an undercurrent of tentativeness, understandably so. Politics done differently suggests politics with fewer culture wars, fewer scandals, more policy focus, more incrementalism.

Moreover, a good deal of ideological steam has gone out of the political discourse as issues such as religious freedom, Safe Schools and transgender discrimination have faded from view. Climate change is now accepted by enough mainstream politicians, and media, to make the remainder look like cranks.

There has also been a dramatic structural change in the composition of the parliament, with the crossbench now representing a powerful third force. How will the media adjust from two-horse politics, so the crossbench gets a voice commensurate with its level of representation?

À lire aussi :
How the ‘reality-distorting machinery’ of the federal election campaign delivered sub-par journalism

All this implies the need for a shift in the priority given by the media to the various news values that turn content into news. Two of the most powerful news values, negativity and conflict, have been in plentiful supply since the collapse of the Rudd prime ministership in 2010.

Politics done differently, with a focus on policy formulation and implementation, makes the news values of impact and significance more salient. But this is not the stuff of clickbait, eyeballs, social media agitation and tabloid headlines.

This is a challenge at a time when every click and eyeball counts for a media industry still trying to recoup some of the devastating financial losses inflicted by the internet.

Will editors and news directors – and media proprietors – be up for the challenge? It is too soon to say. Conflict or negativity can always be manufactured, so there is no guarantee a more civilised and constructive political conversation will be reflected in more civilised and constructive coverage.

However, there are a few early signs of recognition in the media that change is in the air.

Author and freelance journalist Julie Szego seems to be onto it. In a column for The Age, she made the sardonic observation that Australian politics was suddenly boring. Once upon a time, she wrote, it was like the Danish TV drama Borgen, a world of cheap publicity stunts, the selling out of cherished principles, and morally bankrupt spin where a prime minister “creepily” washed a woman’s hair for a photo op. “But now it is all one big yawn.” Yet this was worth celebrating, she said, because it had produced a “background hum of steady-as-she-goes, the not un-genuine bid for consensus, the incremental steps toward something better”.

Covering the first sitting day of the 47th parliament, The Australian on its front page tried kicking life into the issue of construction union thuggery, based on a parliamentary question from a Liberal backbencher. But its editor-at-large, Paul Kelly, wrote reflectively on the need for competence in government and for Albanese to break the cycle of first-term failure.

Katharine Murphy, writing in The Guardian Australia, described the first day of the new parliament as conveying “a sense of a corner being turned”.

She noted that Scott Morrison was absent, preferring to attend a conference of conservative politicians in Tokyo. This was perhaps for the best, she added, since the style of politics he indulged in had been “repudiated in myriad ways”.

Whether this change in atmospherics illustrated by these examples of the newspaper coverage percolates into television news is an open question.

However, if change is to occur in how politics is portrayed to the public, the performance of television is crucial. This is because television news is still the most general source for Australian news consumers, with 66% saying they watch TV news and 42% saying it is their main source of news.

À lire aussi :
How much do mainstream media matter in an election campaign? (Spoiler: more than you might think)

Television news is also the most formulaic of all professional mass media: tight scripts allied to footage that may or may not assist the viewer’s understanding, and grabs of people speaking, all compressed into short packages. There is little scope for reflecting anything except the most superficial elements of a story.

Even so, the wording of scripts, the way they are read, and the choice and juxtaposing of grabs do allow for change to be reflected.

Regardless of the medium, absorbing and implementing change like this takes effort, and the difficulty of breaking old habits should not be underestimated. Journalists and audiences alike are accustomed to established ways of telling stories, just as medieval minstrels and their audiences were. No departure from the established script is easily tolerated.

But if it turns out that tomorrow’s politics are indeed done differently, it would be a serious disservice to the public if the media overlaid on them the news template of yesterday.

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

– ref. Albanese wants to change the way politics is done. This means the way politics is reported will have to change too – https://theconversation.com/albanese-wants-to-change-the-way-politics-is-done-this-means-the-way-politics-is-reported-will-have-to-change-too-187778

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marie-Claire Seeley, PhD Candidate, Centre for Heart Rhythm Disorders, University of Adelaide

Australia has only a handful of specialists familiar with managing what happens when the nervous system can’t properly regulate the body, as sometimes occurs with long COVID. While long COVID clinics are being set up, there are no government-funded clinics for this type of nervous system dysfunction and private waiting lists are now long.

From the outset, long-COVID sufferers faced the same prejudice experienced by patients before them who sought assistance through Centrelink and the National Disability Insurance Scheme for the effects of post-infection conditions.

Disability insurance schemes worldwide are driven by definitions and checklists that allow non-medical workforces to assess and approve candidates for support services. But those with “invisible illness” rarely meet these criteria.

If we are to manage the tidal wave of impairment and disability bearing down on us, policymakers must heed the warnings that have been sounding for the past two years. We’ll need to rethink disability and support.

À lire aussi :
We need to brace for a tsunami of long COVID. But we’re not quite sure the best way to treat it

First warnings

In November 2020, data later published in The Lancet were presented to the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences. The researchers warned of persistent symptoms after COVID, including fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, palpitations, chest pain, depression, insomnia and headache.

The colloquial term “long COVID” was soon coined. Varying iterations of the name followed (including “COVID long haulers” in the United States). Many clinicians use the more scientific descriptor, “Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19”.

Long COVID is not a new phenomenon. Various post-infection illnesses have been documented in medical literature for decades.

And such conditions bear a striking resemblance to each other. First, an individual is knowingly (or unknowingly) exposed to a pathogen (a virus, bacterium or other microorganism). An acute illness of varying degrees of severity ensues before a partial or complete recovery. But following “recovery”, a broad range of symptoms emerge. And these lead to functional decline. In other words, they stop the sufferer from doing the daily activities they would normally be able to do.

Two of these conditions, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome, appear closely related. And their symptoms look a lot like long COVID too. Both seem to affect more women than men and additional immune problems are often present.

These similarities support the theory these illnesses result from a hyper-vigilant immune system. This creates an immune response that inadvertently causes damage to the fragile autonomic nervous system (which regulates the body’s normal functions like heart rate and blood pressure) while attempting to rid the body of the invading pathogen.

However, there are a plethora of other theories and more investigation is needed.

An old stigma

Lack of understanding about these syndromes is reflective of the broad stigmas attached to them – the idea they are psychosomatic and involve the mind and body.

The origin of these stigmas can be traced to a series of publications in the latter half of the 20th century that addressed outbreaks of illnesses after exposure to unknown pathogens.

In 1970, the British Medical Journal published an article authored by two psychiatrists who had reviewed the case notes of 198 patients from the Royal Free Hospital in North London, where an outbreak of an unknown pathogen had occurred 15 years prior. The authors determined the disease had no identifiable organic origin and was therefore likely to be caused by “epidemic hysteria”. This conclusion was partly justified by the high proportion of women among those infected with the illness, the authors said.

Publication of this theory in a preeminent scientific medical journal gave credence to what became an enduring narrative. The result has been a chronic lack of interest and investment in these debilitating invisible illnesses, which can render people unable to work or participate in society.

A question of definition

The burden of these systemic failings now weighs heavy on a society faced with a worldwide tsunami of post-COVID conditions. And it goes some way to explaining the collective shrugging of shoulders by health authorities when it comes to providing answers for sufferers.

Estimates of how many people infected with COVID go on to develop long COVID vary from 5–40%. The large variance is a result of the initial absence of a consistent or unifying set of diagnostic criteria.

Recently the World Health Organization provided a definition of post-COVID conditions. It includes those with a history of likely or confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID) who experience lingering symptoms for longer than two months, which are unexplained by an alternative diagnosis.

Defining the illness allows clearer characterisation of who is affected. Long COVID is now known to affect any age group and may be unrelated to initial infection severity. This evidence prompted the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to detail an ominous warning about post-COVID health problems that “can last weeks, months, or years”.

Multiple case series and observational studies have now identified a high burden of nervous system dysfunction in long COVID patients. Several studies, including one published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, demonstrated up to 95% of long-COVID patients also meet the international criteria for postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome. This syndrome can cause lightheadedness, brain fog, fatigue, headache, blurred vision, palpitations, tremor and nausea.

These symptoms often are often incompatible with carrying out normal daily tasks, which explains why unemployment and disability are high among postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome patients, despite their young age.

À lire aussi :
Reinfection will be part of the pandemic for months to come. Each repeat illness raises the risk of long COVID

The next wave

Back in March 2021, the American Autonomic Society released a statement warning of the rising presentations of patients to autonomic specialist referral centres with symptoms of post-COVID postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome. Of particular concern was the insufficient number of physicians familiar with this type of dysfunction to treat the condition.

This situation is mirrored in Australia where only a handful of specialists are familiar with managing such complex cases.

Contrary to popular medical opinion and widely held beliefs, effective therapies exist for underlying conditions like postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, which is prevalent in long COVID. Early intervention is key. Treatment needs to be fully explored and implemented before disability support services can be sought.

À lire aussi :
We calculated the impact of ‘long COVID’ as Australia opens up. Even without Omicron, we’re worried

Time to listen

Our health systems need to absolve themselves of past sins and pay attention to the overwhelming voice of the current sufferers of long COVID and those with other post-infection syndromes or invisible illnesses who have endured decades of medical neglect.

Treatment options need to be made available and multidisciplinary teams need to upskill to manage these conditions.

A redefining of what it is to be disabled needs to be explored. Most importantly, these definitions should not be tied to a single cause but to the manifestation of symptoms that culminate in the disability.

À lire aussi :
When is a condition ‘chronic’ and when is it a ‘disability’? The definition can determine the support you get

Marie-Claire Seeley receives funding from The Australian Government Research Training Program. She is also a recipient of grant funding from the Standing Up To POTS Foundation, USA. Marie-Claire is the founding director of The Australian POTS Foundation which raises funds to further research, advocacy and support for those with postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome.

– ref. Long COVID should make us rethink disability – and the way we offer support to those with ‘invisible conditions’ – https://theconversation.com/long-covid-should-make-us-rethink-disability-and-the-way-we-offer-support-to-those-with-invisible-conditions-187531

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Mortimore, Lecturer, Griffith Business School, Griffith University

The Albanese government has introduced tax cuts to electric vehicles in its first sitting week, claiming the proposed changes would be “good for motorists, good for climate action and good for fleet purchases”. They won’t, however, help most Australians afford one.

Labor plans to stop the “fringe benefits tax” applying to electric vehicles. This tax usually applies to all cars provided by an employer to an employee, either as part of a salary sacrifice arrangement or as a company car available for personal use. This means the winners of the tax change are high-end employees who can afford a high-priced electric vehicle such as a Tesla.

Rolling business fleets over to the secondhand market is an important way to make electric vehicles more affordable to everyday people. But this tax cut won’t see this happen anytime soon.

Our recent report recommends a suite of other tax changes to lower electric vehicle prices and ownership costs. Australia can’t meet its target of 89% new car sales being electric by 2030 without significantly reforming the transport sector. Labor’s new tax cut is a far cry from what’s needed.

À lire aussi :
Australia could rapidly shift to clean transport – if we had a strategy. So we put this plan together

What does a fringe benefits tax do?

Australia’s transport sector accounts for around 18% of national emissions. Electric vehicles, powered by renewable energy, are crucial for meeting Australia’s emissions target of net-zero by 2050.

This won’t happen if electric vehicles remain prohibitively expensive. Indeed, 87% of Australians in a 2021 survey said the biggest barrier to buy an electric vehicle is its high upfront cost.

So what does a fringe benefit tax on cars actually do?

There are two ways the fringe benefit tax is calculated in Australia: using the statutory formula (based on the car’s cost price), or using the operating cost method (based on the costs of operating the car). The fringe benefits tax is 47% of each method’s calculated final value, known as “grossed up taxable value”.

The highest payable fringe benefits tax is under the statutory formula method, which applies when employees fail to keep a car logbook. Under this method, electric vehicles would be at a disadvantage.

À lire aussi :
How climate-friendly is an electric car? It all comes down to where you live

Employees would be penalised for choosing an electric vehicle because of its higher upfront cost price. Employers would pay a higher fringe benefits tax than if they’d bought a lower-priced petrol or diesel car. That doesn’t leave much incentive for businesses to buy an electric car.

Removing the fringe benefits tax on electric vehicles is a good way to stop penalising employees for choosing an electric vehicle. But it still won’t reduce the high upfront cost price.

Why businesses still won’t choose electric cars

Business uptake of electric vehicles depends on the total cost of ownership. Let’s use Hyundai’s Kona cars as a case study.

Modelling found Kona electric cars, including a smart charger, costs A$66,337 (excluding GST). A new Kona fuel-combustion car, on the other hand, costs $31,329 (excluding GST), which means electric vehicles are not cost competitive.

The fringe benefits tax would further widen this cost gap of over $35,000, adding around $12,000 each year to the Kona Electric.

Labor’s bill would remove the $12,000 yearly tax, reducing the ownership cost of an electric vehicle. But it will not reduce the upfront price difference with Kona’s fuel-combustion car.

Another factor to consider is that a 2020 survey found over 47% of business fleets used for work are parked at home and subject to fringe benefit taxes. This means the fringe benefit tax exemption does not apply to all business vehicles.

The fringe benefit tax exemption may encourage the 47% of business fleet vehicles parked at home to transition to electric vehicles. But this will require an additional cost of installing chargers. This can be expensive, non-tax deductible and subject to additional fringe benefits tax.

Can we buy from the second-hand market?

Australia should learn from tax changes in Europe, which have successfully accelerated the uptake of electric vehicles. Company cars represent the main market share for new electric vehicles in Europe.

The highest is in the Netherlands, where businesses account for 73% of new electric vehicle purchases. In the United Kingdom it’s at 67%, Germany at 49% and Norway at 34%.

À lire aussi :
5 tips to make your fuel tank last longer while prices are high

After three to four years, these business electric vehicles are rolled over into the second-hand market, which are cheaper and more affordable to all consumers, not just high-end buyers.

In Australia, business buyers account for over 40% of new light vehicle sales. But their uptake of electric vehicles is shockingly low, with a mere 487 electric vehicles acquired by business fleets in 2020.

This means Australian consumers cannot rely on more affordable business fleet electric vehicles being rolled over into the secondhand market any time soon.

What should we do instead?

Our report finds the federal government must introduce additional tax changes, and not be limited to the fringe benefit tax exemption for electric vehicles.

We recommend 17 short-term and long-term tax changes to lower the upfront electric vehicle prices, the total cost of ownership and encourage home charging to address business lack of workplace charging infrastructure. These include:

• instant asset write off to only apply to employer-provided fleet electric vehicles, up to the luxury car limit of A$84,916 (including GST in 2022/23). This would allow the Kona electric vehicle purchase cost of $64,037 to be claimed as an outright tax deduction by a business in its first year of ownership.

• increase the GST credit and depreciation cost limit for fleet electric vehicles, up to the luxury car limit

• a fringe benefit tax exemption for home charging installation and smart charges for fleet electric vehicles

• instant asset write-off for home charging installation and smart charges for fleet electric vehicles.

Business incentives such as these will bring Australia a big step closer to meeting its 2030 electric vehicle target and, crucially, its net-zero emissions target.

À lire aussi :
We must rapidly decarbonise transport – but hydrogen’s not the answer

Anna Mortimore receives funding from Reliable Affordable Clean Energy Cooperative Research Centre for 2030 (RACE for 2030).

Anna Mortimore acknowledges researcher Dr Diane Kraal from Monash University,

– ref. Why Labor’s new tax cut on electric vehicles won’t help you buy one anytime soon – https://theconversation.com/why-labors-new-tax-cut-on-electric-vehicles-wont-help-you-buy-one-anytime-soon-187847

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

The cereal bowl is sitting there getting mushy and gross. You ask your child to eat for the 20th time, but still they sit there, totally unwilling.

Eventually, there is simply no time left (the school bell will ring in three minutes) and you have to make a hasty exit out of the house. Maybe your child has eaten one or two mouthfuls, maybe they have had nothing. You and your kid are both cranky and stressed.

Does this sound familiar?

Unfortunately, eating breakfast really is important. So as parents, you do need to offer it and do need to try and make sure it is eaten.

But as a dietitian and a mum, I can assure you, it can be easier than this! How can parents get their kids to eat this important meal, without making it the most irritating part of the day?

À lire aussi :
3 reasons your teenager might skip breakfast – don’t fuss but do encourage a healthy start

How many kids skip breakfast?

Research tells us a lot of children don’t eat breakfast.

The most recent data we have is about ten years old. But as of 2011–12, close to 12% of boys and 15% of girls aged between two and 17 skip breakfast.

This increases with age. By the time children are 14 to 17, about 25% of boys and 36% of girls miss the meal. These results are somewhat similar to reported rates of breakfast-skipping around the world.

How important is the first meal of the day?

You have heard it before and that’s because breakfast really is important.

As research shows, skipping breakfast has been associated with lower diet quality.

For example, 2018 US research on children aged two to 12 who skipped breakfast on the day of study found 36% of their daily energy intake came from snacks compared to 29% in those who ate breakfast.

Breakfast skippers also had lower intakes of fibre, folate, Vitamin A, iron and calcium – all critical nutrients for physical and mental growth and development in children – than kids who did eat breakfast. Their intake of processed and ultra-processed foods was also higher.

A review of 16 studies in children and adolescents also indicates skipping breakfast in this age group is linked with more risk of obesity and being overweight. And this can lead to an increased risk of type 2 diabetes in children.

A study which looked at breakfast consumption in children and then followed them into adulthood found if they continued to skip breakfast they had higher risk of detrimental effects on their heart health and diseases such as metabolic syndrome and diabetes.

It is also important for learning

Skipping breakfast means there is not enough glucose in the body (from breaking down carbohydrates), which is what the brain prefers as its energy source. Glucose provides the energy for messaging between the brain cells and helps to make neurotransmitterss (chemical messages in the body).

Studies also show children who eat breakfast regularly perform better academically than those who skip it. In particular, skipping breakfast impacts on their memory and the number of errors on attention tasks.

This effect on achievement is more pronounced for those children who don’t eat enough nutritious food overall. Interestingly school breakfast programs lead to improvements in academic ability, but it is thought this may be because children attend school more.

Why don’t kids want to eat breakfast?

A 2014 study conducted in Australia and England tried to identify why adolescents skip breakfast. This found teenagers said they did not have time, were not hungry or did not enjoy breakfast. Only a small percentage reported skipping breakfast to control weight.

A 2019 study in the United States of kids aged six to 11 asked both parents and children why they think children skip breakfast.

Respondents said lack of time and feeling rushed was the main reason.

In this study, they were also asked to identify what may help. Children suggested having a set morning routine and also selecting breakfast foods ahead of time.

The children also said that parents needed to continue to encourage them to eat breakfast. Parents were in agreement with these suggestions from the children but also said using “grab-and-go” products would also help.

Parents also said avoiding distractions – like books and phones – was important.

What can parents do?

1. Allow enough time

This will come as no surprise to parents, but we need to make sure kids have enough time to eat. This means getting up early enough and having a routine in the morning that makes time for breakfast.

2. Be prepared

To save time and make it easier set the breakfast table the night before. Get it ready with crockery, cups and cutlery, and put out the foods that won’t spoil overnight such as their favourite wholegrain cereal, spreads for toast and wholegrain bread.

3. Have a decent selection

Give your kids good options and make them feel like they have a choice. Ensure you have a range of healthy and easy breakfast options that your children like.

This can be traditional breakfast options like wholegrain breads and breakfast cereals, fruit toast, yoghurt and cut up or frozen fruit. Porridge, particularly in winter, is great as it can cook itself in the microwave.

Offering smoothies with fruit, yoghurt, milk and oats may be appealing to adolescents.

4. Think outside the (cereal) box

There are no rules around what sort of healthy foods can be eaten at breakfast. The important thing is that they are from the Australian Dietary Guidelines.

Some may find healthy leftovers from dinner appealing or even a sandwich with avocado and salad fillings, or cold meats like chicken or tuna. Of course a cooked breakfast with wholegrain toast, eggs and veggies (avocado, mushrooms, tomatoes, spinach) is excellent, but this is not a quick option!

5. Get rid of distractions

Make sure your kids can just focus on eating. This means no TVs, devices, toys or books.

6. Do it yourself

Remember children are great imitators. So, if they see parents eating breakfast they are more likely to do it as well.

7. Have a back-up

If these ideas still don’t work and you have had one of those mornings where nothing goes right, then you could consider grab-and-go options.

These don’t have to be commercial products either – think of smoothies, toast, previously homemade savoury muffins or banana bread (that are perhaps stored in the freezer for these occasions) or a piece of fruit.

À lire aussi :
Should we eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, and dinner like a pauper?

8. But be careful about muesli bars

Muesli bars can be an option, but make sure you look for ones that are low in sugar (less than 15 grams per 100 grams), low in saturated fat (less than 1.5 grams per 100 grams) and high in fibre (more than four grams per 100 grams). Remember if the bars contain fruit and nuts in them, the level of sugar and fat will go up, but this is not problematic as it is not added sugar or fat.

So, set yourself and you children up for successful breakfasts, and who knows? You may even enjoy the family eating together.

Evangeline Mantzioris is affiliated with Alliance for Research in Nutrition, Exercise and Activity (ARENA) at the University of South Australia. Evangeline Mantzioris has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, and has been appointed to the National Health and Medical Research Council Dietary Guideline Expert Committee.

– ref. How to get your kid to eat breakfast before school – and yes, it’s OK to have dinner leftovers or a sandwich – https://theconversation.com/how-to-get-your-kid-to-eat-breakfast-before-school-and-yes-its-ok-to-have-dinner-leftovers-or-a-sandwich-186572

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Umair Ghori, Associate Professor, Bond University

With the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) warning consumers of huge price hikes ahead, further calls for the federal government to pull its so-called “gas trigger” seem inevitable.

But that could be a very big mistake – leading to the type of trade dispute Australia fought for years against Big Tobacco over plain packaging laws.

The gas trigger (officially the Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism) was created by the Turnbull government in 2017 when there were fears of a gas shortage in eastern Australia.

It allows the federal resources minister to direct gas exporters to limit their gas exports or find new sources of gas to meet domestic demand instead of exporting gas overseas.

À lire aussi :
Why did gas prices go from $10 a gigajoule to $800 a gigajoule? An expert on the energy crisis engulfing Australia

To trigger the mechanism, however, requires predictions of insufficient supply, not just higher prices. It is therefore useless for dealing with the sort of short-term issues besetting eastern Australian gas markets, and has never been triggered.

The mechanism had been due to expire at the end of 2022. It was meant to be a temporary measure, not a permanent crutch in lieu of more sustainable solutions. But the government is keen to keep it. Resources Minister Madeleine King said it will be extended to 2030.

But should it?

There’s no doubt the trigger gives the government some leverage over the gas industry, in much the same way that pointing a gun at someone gets their attention.

Actually pulling the trigger, however, is a different matter. It may have serious unintended consequences, potentially breaching Australia’s commitments under various trade and investment treaties.

How the gas trigger works

An example of the extra regulatory leverage the gas trigger has given the federal government is its 2021 agreement with three major east-coast liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants: Australia Pacific LNG, Gladstone LNG and Queensland Curtis LNG.

Under this deal, the suppliers promised not to sell uncontracted gas internationally without first offering equivalent volumes to the domestic market.

What would happen if the gas trigger was actually pulled?

Then the mechanism becomes an export control measure, compelling gas companies to limit their exports or find new sources of gas to offset the shortfall.

In that circumstance, foreign-owned gas companies could use free-trade agreements to take Australia to a notoriously expensive “investor-state dispute settlement” process to claim compensation for what is known as indirect expropriation.

What is indirect expropriation?

Simply put, expropriation is any interference by governments with the rights and properties of foreign investors.

It can be direct, such as outright seizure of investors’ properties, or indirect, through enactment of laws or regulations that interfere with investors’ capacity to generate revenue or do business.

Australia has signed several investment treaties and free-trade agreements that contain investor-state dispute settlement provisions. If the government pulls the gas trigger, a foreign-owned gas company could seek compensation for interference with the company’s right to export gas to its overseas buyers.

That is a concern, given Australia’s LNG sector is 95.7% owned by foreign investors according to the Australia Institute.

For example, Malaysia’s Petronas and Korea’s KOGAS are major shareholders in Gladstone LNG.

These foreign companies have rights under international trade and investment rules, multilateral agreements such as the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement, and bilateral free-trade agreements signed with Malaysia and Korea.

The results won’t be pleasant

Disputes involving indirect expropriation are expensive and time-consuming.

The classic example is Australia’s six-year defence of its tobacco plain-packaging laws against the global tobacco giant Philip Morris.

À lire aussi :
When even winning is losing. The surprising cost of defeating Philip Morris over plain packaging

Among other things, Philip Morris claimed the labelling regulations indirectly expropriated its brand assets, intellectual property and goodwill associated with its products. Australia eventually won the dispute, but at a reported A$24 million cost along with internal expenditures.

The risk of foreign gas investors making indirect expropriation claims is quite real. They have invested in extracting Australian gas to meet demand in markets such as South Korea and Malaysia.

For example, Santos, the lead developer of the Gladstone LNG project, signed a 20-year agreement with KOGAS in 2010 to supply 3.5 million tonnes a year of LNG. This amounts to 11% of Korea’s domestic LNG supply.

Electricity generators have already lodged claims for compensation over AEMO interventions in the energy market. We shouldn’t expect gas suppliers to do less.

So what now?

We need a better solution to provide affordable gas and electricity prices along with reliable supply.

Some experts have advocated for a Western Australian-style gas reservation model to be implemented nationally. This model requires gas producers to reserve supplies for the local market before other transactions.

It will take time to introduce the model nationally without also inviting expropriation claims. Existing supply contracts will need to be exempt – and these, such as the Gladstone LNG contract to supply Korea, are often decades long.

But as new contracts are signed, the reservation model can eventually provide the benefits it now gives to West Australian consumers.

It’s not the short-term solution we’d all like. But it is a better solution than extending the gas trigger. The work to introduce it should begin now.

À lire aussi :
3 key measures in the suite of new reforms to deal with Australia’s energy crisis

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

– ref. Hey minister, leave that gas trigger alone – it may fire up a fight with foreign investors – https://theconversation.com/hey-minister-leave-that-gas-trigger-alone-it-may-fire-up-a-fight-with-foreign-investors-185710

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Neal Hughes, Adjunct Associate Professor, Centre for Regional and Rural Futures, Deakin University

Since late 2020, the La Niña climate pattern has led to two years of above-average rainfall across much of Australia, and severe floods in parts of the country.

In areas spared the flooding, this rainfall has been good news for farmers, with improved conditions and high prices driving production and profits to record highs.

But the next drought is rarely too far away. For a reminder, we only need to look overseas, where the same La Niña weather system is combining with climate change to produce severe droughts in the United States, eastern Africa and South America.

Unfortunately, drought can be difficult to define and measure. Determining whether a region or farm is “in drought” is a longstanding and complex problem, which remains important to our future drought response.

Drought is about more than rainfall

For a long time, Australia’s standard measure of drought has been rainfall. But while rainfall indicators are easy to produce and interpret, they can be a poor measure of a farm’s prospects.

For one thing, the impact of drought depends on the timing of rain.

Even when the year’s total rainfall is okay, if most of it arrives at the wrong time of year (such as outside the crop season) it can have the same impact as a drought.

Temperatures are also increasingly important, with record heat waves having an important effect in recent years.

The story gets more complicated still when droughts affect the prices of inputs to farms. For example, during the 2018-19 drought many dairy farms were impacted by high hay and water prices, even where they received rain.

Measuring farm impacts

In response, researchers including myself at the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) have developed a new drought indicator based on predictions of farm financial outcomes, with some advantages over measures based on only rain.

In some cases it presents a very different picture.

In the example below, for 2018-19, the indicator shows more severe impacts in parts of New South Wales than the rainfall model (because low rainfall was compounded by high temperatures and input prices), and less severe impacts in Western Australia (partly because of high grain prices resulting from shortages on the east coast).

Rain-based indicator:

Model-based indicator:

Drought declarations are mattering less

Since the early 2000s, drought policy has evolved away from in-drought support of farm businesses to an approach that emphasises preparedness and resilience, making explicit drought “declarations” less common.

While this change has been welcome, it also led to a reduced focus on drought impact measurement (with the exception of some state-level systems).

But as recent droughts have shown, information on the extent and severity of drought impacts is still very important.

À lire aussi :
Helping farmers in drought distress doesn’t help them be the best

For one, it can help governments anticipate and prepare for increased demand for farm programs such as the Farm Household Allowance or the Rural Financial Counselling Service.

It can also help to better target resources for community, animal welfare or mental health drought impacts.

Better indicators can also support the development of new insurance products such as index-based weather insurance.

Such products are more likely to take off where indexes (and therefore payouts) can closely match real-world outcomes.

Early warnings are mattering more

While there is some evidence climate change has exacerbated recent droughts in Australia, there remains much uncertainty over the longer term effects.

Regardless, the potential for more extreme weather events is generally increasing the importance of early warning systems.

ABARES is working with the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology to develop a Drought Early Warning System that will use this new indicator and a range of other tools to translate weather data into estimates of likely farm impacts.

Predicting these impacts remains very difficult, with challenges both in weather forecasting (particularly on monthly or longer time scales), and in translating these forecasts into agricultural outcomes.

But any improvements we can make will help us better respond to what the future has in store.

À lire aussi :
Farms are adapting well to climate change, but there’s work ahead

Neal Hughes is a Senior Economist at the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences

– ref. After floods will come droughts (again). Better indicators will help us respond – https://theconversation.com/after-floods-will-come-droughts-again-better-indicators-will-help-us-respond-187157

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bhiamie Williamson, Research Associate & PhD Candidate, Australian National University

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and images of deceased people. Archie Roach’s family have given permission for his name and image to be shared.

I am not sure of the first time I heard Archie Roach’s music.

Like most Aboriginal people born during or after the 1980s, we grew up listening to the person we affectionately called Uncle Archie. But there was one song that spoke to me from the first moment I heard it: From Paradise.

The song tells the story of a young girl who was taken away from her Country, the river lands, part of the stolen generations.

While his songs will play loud and long into the future, beneath his music Uncle Archie gave us something else, something deeply profound but mostly invisible.

He gave us – and all of Australia – an image of an Aboriginal man, tender and humble. An image long denied us.

Read more:
Creating a constitutional Voice – the words that could change Australia

Our greatest storyteller

The passing of Archie Roach has hit us – Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people – like the first crack of thunder after dark clouds descend.

You know it’s coming, but it shocks you still.

Uncle Archie gave voice, a story, to the experiences of so many of our people. His song Took the Children Away gave shape to a suffering so deep and profound. “This story’s right, this story’s true,” he sang.

These cathartic melodies continue to offer us healing.

His catalogue of music spans distances and experiences difficult to grasp.
Uncle Archie’s gift was to write and bring to life through the strum of his guitar, the stories so familiar to us all.

His success took our stories to the nation, and the world.

To describe him simply as a musician fails to recognise him as a messenger.
His music reaches through darkness like the beam of a lighthouse, offering guidance and safe harbour in times of despair.

Through his life and love of music, Uncle Archie became our greatest storyteller.

The father and mentor

The music of Uncle Archie came from a place of suffering. Taken away as a child, being homeless, a drunk, locked up, learning of the death of family through whispers and letters, grief was his constant companion.

Through this time, he found Ruby Hunter. They would have two sons, Amos and Eban. Uncle Archie and Aunty Ruby, with their kids, shared a life of love, laughter and song. My personal favourite song, Down City Streets, was written by Aunty Ruby.

Uncle Archie has supported hundreds of young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists and inspired countless more through his foundation.

For decades Uncle Archie worked in youth detention centres, talking with young people who found themselves in hardship. He offered guidance and mentorship to young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people, illuminating a road through the difficulties of life, often the result of colonisation and racism.

He carefully navigated these spaces, acknowledging that while many young Aboriginal people, and especially boys, are born into a world that has been built to suppress them, they possess an inner strength stemming from culture and community.

Read more:
Tell Me Why review: Archie Roach’s pain is the pain of all of us

Emu Man

Through his life, his dedication to Aunty Ruby, his devotion to his sons, his work with disengaged youth and his profound love for his people, Uncle Archie gave the nation an image of an Aboriginal man seldom found in the national psyche.

Images of the violent abuser, the drunk, the criminal, the absent father, or a combination of these, saturate our print media and television news bulletins. Even positive representations of Aboriginal men – the warrior, the sports star – exudes a sense of toughness and candour.

Rare, almost unheard of, are the stories of Aboriginal men as sensitive, soft, loving and vulnerable people.

Yet it is these qualities my research has revealed are most valued by our people.

The notion of “Emu Men” has emerged throughout my PhD.

Male emus are the primary carer for their chicks. The male partner will sit on the nest and the father rears the babies.

This notion of manhood and fatherhood – someone dedicated to his family, who has a primary responsibility to ensure the safety of his children and their passage through the world – appears to be deeply entwined in many of our peoples’ customs and cultures.

In Uncle Archie, we find the most profound sense of this alternate masculinity.

His songs will live on forever. But he also gifted us this alternate image of an Aboriginal man: someone soft, tender, loving, vulnerable, generous, resilient. Someone profoundly strong and with an inner wisdom, who sat on his nest and looked after his family and young people experiencing hardship.

It will take time to come to terms with this loss.

To his family we offer our hearts and hold you in our spirit.

This great songman gave our people a voice and a way to understand what has happened to us. He gave so much to a nation that treated him so badly.

As for me, like many others, Uncle Archie’s music and concerts has offered companionship through major life events. My wife and I danced to Love in the Morning on our wedding day.

And as for From Paradise, from the first moment I heard this song I thought he wrote it about my grandmother who was taken away and sent to Palm Island.

It is difficult to put words to this loss – Uncle Archie was always the one with the words.

Thank you for everything Uncle. May you soar with the eagles.

Aunty Ruby be happy to see you.

Read more:
Strength from perpetual grief: how Aboriginal people experience the bushfire crisis

Bhiamie Williamson 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. Archie Roach: the great songman, tender and humble, who gave our people a voice – https://theconversation.com/archie-roach-the-great-songman-tender-and-humble-who-gave-our-people-a-voice-187974

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Sydney

Ideas are powerful, but when it comes to a constitutional amendment, they need to be put into words before they can be debated seriously.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has finally given us the first draft words for a constitutional amendment on an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament. They are as follows:

1. There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
2. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.
3. The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

It is a simple and elegant proposal, which demands little but offers much.

Read more:
Albanese releases draft wording for Indigenous ‘Voice to parliament’ referendum

What would the amendment do?

The only requirement of this amendment is that such a body exist. It leaves to parliament all the decisions about how it is comprised and operates. This balances stability and flexibility.

The constitutional demand that the body exists ensures it cannot be cancelled at the whim of a future government, or left to die of neglect. If the Australian people, in a referendum, have demanded the continuing existence of a Voice, this puts serious pressure on both the government and Indigenous Australians to make it work productively.

But if, over time, it ceases to work well, parliament has been given the flexibility to change the composition of the Voice and how it operates, so that it can properly fulfil the role voters intended for it. This avoids the problem of becoming stuck with a dysfunctional body and ensures the democratically elected body, parliament, has full power to make necessary changes.

The role of the Voice will be to make representations to parliament and the government about matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The intention is to ensure parliament and the government are better informed when they make decisions.

There are two main aims of this proposed amendment.

1. Constitutional recognition

The first is constitutional recognition of Australia’s Indigenous peoples. They are not currently mentioned at all in the Commonwealth Constitution. Many politicians, including John Howard and Tony Abbott, have proposed that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples be recognised in the Constitution. But recognition can take different forms.

The type of recognition proposed in this current amendment goes beyond just words on a page. It is no mere formulaic opening recitation.

True recognition involves giving another person enough respect to stop and hear their voice. This proposed amendment provides real recognition in daily life by ensuring Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have a voice, and can be heard about laws and policies that are likely to affect them.

2. Practical change

The second aim is to achieve practical change. It is well known that Aboriginal policies and laws have been far from successful in the past. This is unsurprising, since those who make laws and policies in Canberra are largely removed from the impact they have on the ground.

With the best will in the world, it is impossible truly to understand the issues affecting a person’s life without walking in their shoes. Giving the people who have walked in those shoes a voice to inform governments about the likely effect of proposed laws and policies, and suggest how they might be altered to be more successful, will hopefully lead to better practical outcomes.

The question

The prime minister has also identified some proposed wording for the question to be asked in a referendum. Its wording is a little unusual.

Section 128 of the Constitution requires a referendum to change the Constitution, and says that it is passed when a majority of electors overall and a majority of electors in a majority of states “approve the proposed law”.

So the question needs to be formed in such a way that voters are approving the “proposed law” to change the Constitution – not approving an idea, a principle or the creation of a new body.

Under the current law, a referendum ballot paper sets out the long title of that proposed law to alter the Constitution, and then asks “Do you approve this proposed alteration?”. A box is then provided for the voter to write either “Yes” or “No”.

For example, the ballot could say:

A PROPOSED LAW: To alter the Constitution to establish an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve of this proposed alteration?

In his Garma speech, the prime minister stated the question would be:

Do you support an alteration to the Constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?

While that question is clearer, it does not comply with the current law, which presumably the government proposes to amend. But the government would need to make it clear on the ballot paper that the voter was approving the proposed law, because this is what is required by the Constitution.

There is also a lack of clarity about whether the constitutional change would actually “establish” the Voice, given that legislation would first need to be enacted to determine how it is comprised and to establish the mechanism for choosing its members.

However, these are small matters that will no doubt be worked through in the ensuing debate.

Read more:
Non-Indigenous Australians shouldn’t fear a First Nations Voice to Parliament

Consultation and education

Now that draft wording is available, the proposed amendment can be discussed with greater authority and clarity. Suggestions of a “third house of parliament” and other exaggerations can be readily dismissed.

Wisely, the government has shown itself open to adjusting the wording if necessary. The next stage in the process is one of consultation and education, so the Australian people can feel confident they are well-informed when they come to vote in any future referendum.

Anne Twomey has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council and occasionally does consultancy work for governments, parliaments and inter-governmental bodies. She has provided various draft amendments on Indigenous constitutional recognition for different bodies that have sought her assistance.

– ref. Creating a constitutional Voice – the words that could change Australia – https://theconversation.com/creating-a-constitutional-voice-the-words-that-could-change-australia-187972

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

Anthony Albanese will propose draft wording to insert into the constitution an Indigenous “Voice” to parliament when he addresses the Garma Festival in Arnhem Land on Saturday.

The Prime Minister is also releasing a draft of the question that would be put to the people at the referendum for the change.

The new provision in the constitution would have three sentences:

There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to Parliament and the Executive government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples

The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

In his speech, released ahead of delivery, Albanese says this might not be the final form of words but it is the next step in the discussion.

His draft referendum question would ask: “Do you support an alteration to the Constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?”

To pass, a referendum needs to win both an overall majority of votes as well as majorities in a majority of states. There have been 44 proposals for constitutional change put in 19 referendums with only eight changes passing.

Although Albanese has been anxious for the referendum to be held next year, he talks in his speech only of having it in the current parliamentary term.

“I believe the country is ready for this reform,” he says. “I believe there is room in Australian hearts for the [Uluru] Statement from the Heart.”

“We are seeking a momentous change – but it is also a very simple one.”

“It is not a matter of special treatment, or preferential power. It’s about consulting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on the decisions that affect you. This is simple courtesy, it is common decency.”

Albanese says that putting a Voice into the constitution “means a willingness to listen won’t depend on who is in government or who is prime minister”. Such a Voice “cannot be silenced”.

“The Voice will exist and endure outside of the ups and downs of election cycles and the weakness of short-term politics.

“It will be an unflinching source of advice and accountability.”

It would not be a “third chamber” but “a body with the perspective and the power and the platform to tell the government and the parliament the truth about what is working and what is not”.

Albanese says the “best way to seize the momentum” is to settle on the proposed referendum question as soon as possible.

“I ask all Australians of goodwill to engage on this,” Albanese says.

“Respectfully, purposefully we are seeking to secure support for the question and the associated provisions in time for a successful referendum, in this term of parliament.

“This is a reform I believe every Australian can embrace, from all walks of life, in every part of the country, from every faith and background and tradition.

“Because it speaks to values we all share and honour – fairness, respect, decency.”

Albanese says while there may be fear campaigns to counter, perhaps the greatest threat to success is indifference – the notion this is symbolism without practical benefit, or that advocating for a Voice is at the expense of expanding economic opportunity or improving conditions.

“Let us all understand: Australia does not have to choose between improving peoples’ lives and amending the constitution. We can do both – and we have to.”

Issues of life expectancy, incarceration, disease and other problems would get worse if “governments simply continue to insist they know better”.

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. Albanese releases draft wording for Indigenous ‘Voice to parliament’ referendum – https://theconversation.com/albanese-releases-draft-wording-for-indigenous-voice-to-parliament-referendum-187933

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gina Louise Hawkes, Research associate, University of Wollongong

This week, seven NRL players boycotted a potentially crucial season game over their club’s introduction of a “pride” jersey celebrating inclusivity and the LGBTQIA+ community.

Six of these players are of Pacific Island heritage. There has been much discussion of the players’ culture and religion in the aftermath of the bungled jersey release. But as Fijian scholar Jioji Ravulo has argued, homophobia is not “part of” Pasifika cultures, but rather part of ongoing colonial legacies.

I have previously conducted research on how “masculine” sports such as rugby league were used in the Pacific to promote the British ideology of “muscular Christianity”. This in turn helped create the contemporary relationship between family, faith and football for the Australian Pasifika diaspora.

In times like this, when high-profile sporting entities are thrown into the identity politics spotlight, it is important to try to understand some of the historical connections between the sport and gender and sexual diversity in the Pacific Islands.

What is ‘muscular Christianity’?

“Muscular Christianity” is the belief that by participating in sports, young men would become imbued with positive character traits enabling them to be as capable in the classroom or workforce as they were on the field. The concept migrated to the Pacific through British colonialists, particularly the British school boy system and its use of sports to create the “good” Christian.

While the field became a place men could let off steam, Indigenous men were often limited to this physical realm only and pushed away from intellectual pursuits, creating the manual workforce needed for Empire building. Māori scholar Brendan Hokowhitu’s work shows how British colonialists in Aotearoa symbolically and physically moved Māori out of the classroom and into manual labour. This construction of Māori men as purely athletic was being similarly fostered across the Pacific, where the illusion of the “noble savage” was taking hold.

Read more:
Explainer: the myth of the Noble Savage

The impact of colonial masculinity

This colonial reframing of Pasifika masculinity also sought to classify “right” and “wrong”, particularly when it came to gender and sex. An important aspect of colonial masculinity was the suppression of sexual complexity and qualities that were deemed “feminine”.

In the Pacific Islands, this included introducing distinct boundaries between men and women, and the delegitimising of anything in between. Before colonialism, gender was understood in what we may think is a very modern, Western way, but what has actually been understood amongst many Indigenous cultures for centuries: that is, a “gender spectrum” or the idea that there are many gender identities.

In Samoa and Tonga, for example, the gender fluid fa‘afafine and fakaleiti were merged with European understandings of homosexuality with such success that we now know very little about their roles pre-contact. At the same time, homosexuality was condemned as un-Christian, perverted and wrong – both symbolically, and in many cases, legally.

This combination of muscular Christianity, sports, and the moralisation of gender meant that to be a “good” man was to be not only strong and disciplined, but heterosexual and God-fearing.

Individual freedoms vs family and faith

In my interviews with second-generation Pasifika people in Australia, the phrase “faith before footy” was common. However, the nature of faith was changing, with family becoming more central than the institution.

Pasifika scholars have explained that rather than the individualistic philosophy of “I think therefore I am” governing how they see themselves, Pasifika and Māori people work more within a framework of “I belong therefore I am”.

Relationships are where strength and identity are created, which is what makes it so difficult to go against family beliefs. It might be hard for people who have a strong sense of individual freedom to comprehend the complex pull of family and faith to one’s very existence, but for many Pasifika people, not belonging could feel utterly catastrophic.

Sport has always been a political space, and in Australia it has a symbolic potency that makes it a powerful arena for spreading positive messages.

Hopefully the conversations this latest controversy has started outweigh the negative effects, particularly on young, vulnerable queer people. It is hoped we might soon reach a space where gender and sexual diversity in rugby league can be as celebrated as racial and ethnic diversity has been for some time.

With their large and conspicuous presence on the field, Pasifika people play a role in this, but it’s not solely their responsibility. It is up to the decision makers at all levels of the game to learn how to foster inclusion for all.

This research was made possible by an RMIT University PhD scholarship

– ref. The Manly pride jersey furore is not as simple as a choice between inclusivity and homophobia – https://theconversation.com/the-manly-pride-jersey-furore-is-not-as-simple-as-a-choice-between-inclusivity-and-homophobia-187859

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Luc Doucet, Research Fellow at the Earth Dynamics Research Group, member of TIGeR, Curtin University

Usually when goods are flawed, we expect their value to drop, but it’s the exact opposite for diamonds. Ironically, it is imperfections that impart colour to diamonds – and these “fancy” diamonds are some of the most sought after in the world.

Diamonds are made of carbon atoms organised in compact structures. Clear, perfect diamonds sparkle because light reflects off their internal surfaces. Of course, these diamonds are valuable.

However, when diamonds host impurities, or are subjected to intense pressure, they can develop distinctive colours. Coloured diamonds are extremely prized for their beauty and rarity, and can be several orders of magnitude more expensive than clear diamonds.

So it’s no surprise the world was astonished when the Western Australia-owned Lucapa Diamond Company announced the discovery of the Lulo Rose this week. The 170-carat rough pink diamond, found in Angola, is the second-largest pink diamond ever discovered.

Few and far between

Coloured diamonds represents only 0.01% (one in 10,000) of diamonds mined in the world. Natural yellow and brown are the most common and, as you might expect, are therefore not overly expensive.

However, blue, green, violet, orange, pink and red diamonds are extremely rare and exist in minute quantities. These are truly coveted.

Ultra-rare coloured diamonds have been sold for record-breaking prices. The Pink Star, weighing 59.6 carats (about the size of a strawberry), is the most expensive diamond ever sold, for a staggering A$94.2 million.

It’s worth mentioning the Pink Star originally came from a diamond weighing in at 132.5 carats. More than half of its weight was lost in the process of cutting and polishing the stone – a process that took 20 months.

At 170 carats, it’s quite possible the Lulo Rose, if auctioned, could become the most expensive diamond in history.

The only pink diamond larger than it is the Daria-i-Noor (185 carats), which is the centrepiece of the Iranian crown jewels, and has never been for sale.

So why are coloured diamonds so scarce?

Physical and chemical purity yields clear diamonds. So coloured diamonds form as a result of imperfections. But it’s very rare for imperfections to arise in a material that is not only extremely hard, but also chemically simple.

There are three main imperfections that produce coloured diamonds: impurity, damage and distortion. These are imperfections in the structure of the diamond that affect how light passes through the gem – specifically the diffraction and absorption of different wavelengths of light. And this is what leads to the different colours we see.

The main impurities in diamonds comes in the form of very light elements, such nitrogen, boron and hydrogen, which we generally find in abundance in the oceans and atmosphere. These elements can result in specific colours. For example, boron-rich diamonds will be blue, while nitrogen-rich diamonds will be yellow.

Then there are damaged diamonds, wherein the damage happens when a diamond has been sitting adjacent to radioactive elements, such as uranium, thorium or potassium.

Finally, distortion refers to the twisting and bending of a diamond’s crystal lattice under immense pressure. This causes defects a hundred times smaller than the width of a human hair, yet it’s enough to diffract light and bring colour to the gem.

Every coloured diamond has a cocktail of imperfections, which is why no two diamonds are the same. However, they do all have one thing in common: each diamond is rooted in geological history. Diamonds can be billions of years old. In that time, some have travelled from the depths of the planet to its surface, only for us to claim them.

Take yellow and blue diamonds. Light elements such as nitrogen and boron are concentrated in our oceans and atmosphere, but we know diamonds must form within the heart of the planet. So the key here is plate tectonics, and specifically a process called subduction.

Subduction is a geological process by which the oceanic lithosphere (a part of the outer crust) is recycled into Earth’s mantle. This is how light elements manage to get deep into Earth’s interior – eventually becoming part of coloured diamonds.

A unique window into Earth’s interior

Pink diamonds have their own geological story. Most scientists think carbon on our seabed, when thrust back into Earth’s interior, can not only form diamonds but also be deformed.

When it’s under enormous pressure and considerable temperatures, the way carbon is supposed to be assembled is distorted, and this is what leads to pink diamond formation.

However, if Earth pushes a little too hard, the pink hue quickly turns brown or, as some would call it, “champagne” or “cognac”. Yet there’s still much we don’t know about pink diamonds. For one, why have about 80% of pink diamonds come from a single recently closed mine in Western Australia?

The Argyle mine was once the world’s largest diamond mine, but was shut down in 2020 after becoming economically unviable. Still, this mine is truly unique – not only because of how many pink diamonds it has produced, but because it sits in a geologically intriguing area.

For years, scientists and diamond companies believed diamonds large enough to be mined could be found only in the heart of ancient continents. But the Argyle mine sits at what was once the edge of two continents that collided and stitched together only 1.8 billion years ago.

This might sound like a long time, but in geological terms it’s not. Argyle and its pink diamonds probably hold the answer for pink diamond formation, but finding it will require further examination.

With the mine having closed, and pink diamonds becoming rarer as we speak, one can only hope scientists will soon unravel the mystery of how pink diamonds form. Perhaps, with that knowledge, we may yet find another trove.

Read more:
We created diamonds in mere minutes, without heat — by mimicking the force of an asteroid collision

Denis Fougerouse receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Mineral Research Institute of Western Australia.

Hugo Olierook and Luc Doucet 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. Perfectly imperfect: the discovery of the second-largest pink diamond has left the world in awe. What gives diamonds their colour? – https://theconversation.com/perfectly-imperfect-the-discovery-of-the-second-largest-pink-diamond-has-left-the-world-in-awe-what-gives-diamonds-their-colour-187852

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

The military junta’s execution of four pro-democracy activists earlier this week has again shone a spotlight on the appalling judgement and brutality of the junta leader, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, and his top generals.

Since the February 2021 coup in Myanmar, conditions have deteriorated starkly – with deplorable violence, impoverishment, and the destruction both locally and abroad of any residual respect for Myanmar’s military.

Millions of Myanmar people actively oppose them, through civil disobedience or militancy. But in a misguided effort to project strength and determination, the military has shown its hollowness and desperation.

By killing pro-democracy activists Phyo Zeya Thaw, Kyaw Min Yu, Hla Myo Aung and Aung Thura Zaw, the military regime has demonstrated its disdain for the post-coup diplomatic efforts within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and further afield.

Terrible toll

Phyo Zeya Thaw was probably the best known of this group outside the country. He was elected to serve in parliament in April 2012 in a crucial wave of National League for Democracy byelection successes.

Shortly after that election, Phyo Zeya Thaw came to Australia, where he met with senior political and civil society figures, including Prime Minister Julia Gillard. He also spoke at the Australian National University, where he, and other freshly elected National League for Democracy (NLD) representatives, were given a rousing welcome.

Notably, Phyo Zeya Thaw was supported at the ballot box on three occasions by the people of Myanmar’s capital Naypyidaw, the generals’ own heavily curated symbolic centre. With his activism, rap music, policy-making, and post-coup resistance, Phyo Zeya Thaw was a giant figure in his generation’s efforts to re-shape Myanmar society.

Kyaw Min Yu, often known simply as Ko Jimmy, was also a significant player in Myanmar’s history of democratic activism and was a member of pro-democracy movement the 88 Generation Students Group. In total, he spent over 20 years in jail.

These killings are a further tragic reminder of the costs of last year’s coup and the terrible toll on Myanmar’s most courageous and capable people. They’re also exacerbating the pressures being felt by the regime at home and abroad.

Problems at home

The regime is still under immense pressure from the ongoing armed resistance. It doesn’t help that the Myanmar economy is still collapsing.

In April this year, the generals required all banks to convert most of the US dollars held in their accounts to Myanmar Kyat, the local currency, at the official rate of K$1,850 to USD$1.

Companies with at least 10% foreign ownership were exempt. But throughout July this exclusion was revoked leaving very few companies in Myanmar able to hold US dollars, such as those in Special Economic Zones.

The government’s failing economic management has caused further panic throughout the economy, with the black-market rate of Kyat to US dollars falling to around K$2,500 to the dollar. So, anyone or any company with USD in banks is losing at least 30% of its value on any exchange.

Along with other restrictions on trade and currency, there’s now almost no incentive to export goods since making a profit is virtually impossible.

With the civil disobedience movement still opposing the military, these efforts are strangling the last lifeline of the economy.

The regime is increasingly isolated

A few days before the executions, the International Court of Justice in The Hague rejected Myanmar’s four objections regarding the genocide case over the Rohingya, which means the case will be allowed to continue.

Although the court only deals with states, in reality, the military in Myanmar is primarily the target of this prosecution.

And earlier this month, Min Aung Hlaing travelled to Russia, hoping to bolster his image as an international figure. In the Myanmar state media, it was hailed as a success. However, in Russia, a country desperate for friends too, the media barely recognised the trip, embarrassingly alleging he was there on a “private visit”.

Even the ASEAN members who are usually reluctant to directly criticise Myanmar’s leaders have found the executions impossible to stomach.

What the killings tell us

This week’s executions are a failed attempt by the military leadership to exert pressure on its opponents.

After 18 months of constant fighting, they’re yet to consolidate their rule over the country, even in the cities and usually peaceful central areas of the country.

While the generals talk of holding elections next year, there’s little international appetite for engaging with the regime.

In July, the head of the UK embassy in Myanmar was forced to leave the country for refusing to present credentials to Min Aung Hlaing.

Read more:
Top democracy activists were executed in Myanmar – 4 key things to know

Military leaders unwilling to compromise

The executions will revitalise the resistance in some areas, where people feel they have no choice but to maintain their rage against the military and its civilian proxies. There will be more tit-for-tat violence and greater desperation amongst the security forces seeking to defend a failing regime.

The economic pressures built up over the past year are another wildcard. Myanmar people have historically taken to the streets in the biggest numbers when an economic shock makes their livelihoods untenable. We don’t know if we are approaching such a moment, but the signs for the local economy aren’t good.

With a government felled in Sri Lanka due to economic upheaval, and with repercussions from the war in Ukraine felt across Myanmar’s trading sectors, the potential for further violence is there. And we can’t ignore the prospect of even greater suffering amongst the Myanmar people.

Despite words of condemnation from the international community, there’s relatively little international support for Myanmar’s opposition forces. Compare this with the vast array of weapons, training and intelligence provided to Ukraine.

That pro-democracy activists can be executed so callously demonstrates there’s no limit to the cruel retribution the generals will inflict on those who oppose them.

However, rather than demonstrating potency and dominance to a domestic and international audience, these executions demonstrate the junta is weak, isolated and rapidly running out of options.

Nicholas Farrelly has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council for Myanmar-focussed work. He is on the board of the Australia-ASEAN Council, which is an Australian government body. These are his personal views.

Adam 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. As Myanmar suffers, the military junta is desperate, isolated and running out of options – https://theconversation.com/as-myanmar-suffers-the-military-junta-is-desperate-isolated-and-running-out-of-options-187697

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

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

This week saw parliament meet for the first time since the election. Michelle and Caroline talk about Treasurer Jim Chalmer’s sombre report on the economy, and the early flurry of legislation. They also examine whether we saw the much hoped for better standards in the house. Finally, they canvass the Indigenous “Voice” to parliament, which Anthony Albanese will speak about this weekend at the Garma festival.

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. VIDEO: the state of the economy, the Indigenous ‘Voice’ and whether the first parliamentary week saw better standards – https://theconversation.com/video-the-state-of-the-economy-the-indigenous-voice-and-whether-the-first-parliamentary-week-saw-better-standards-187916

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Casey, Program Coordinator: Bachelor of Communication, University of the Sunshine Coast

As Neighbours ended after 37 years, viewers were treated to a smorgasbord of familiar favourites from Erinsborough’s back catalogue. For decades there were always two characters, though, who remained just a little more embedded in our collective cultural heart.

They were symbolic of the ghosts of Neighbours’ glory days past. Their reappearance was the moment viewers had been waiting for: the return of Scott (Jason Donovan) and Charlene (Kylie Minogue).

But first, other business needed attention.

As we bid adieu, several Ramsay Street homes were for sale. People were moving on. Queensland was once good enough for past residents – now, New York was in the air.

Viewers contemplated all week if Paul (Stefan Dennis), Neighbours longest-serving resident and villain, would leave it all behind to make his mark in the Big Apple.

The suspense built. Viewers risked whiplash as the show brought us back to The Full Monty fundraiser; Chris (James Mason) coming out; Madge (Anne Charleston) being wooed by Lou (Tom Oliver) and Harold (Ian Smith).

Read more:
I easily clocked 10,000 hours working on Neighbours. Its loss will leave a huge hole in Australian TV – and UK hearts

Everybody needs good neighbours

Returning from the dead is a familiar soap opera trope. This didn’t happen, but there were spectral visits from Madge, Hendrix (Ben Turland) and Sonya (Eve Morey).

The still alive returned in Des (Paul Keane), Roxy (Zima Anderson), and Kyle (Chris Milligan). In keeping with the zeitgeist, we had Zoom visits from Nina (Delta Goodrem), Billy (Jesse Spencer), Flick (Holly Valance), Beth (Natalie Imbruglia), Steph (Carla Bonner), Joe (Mark Little) and Libby (Kym Valentine).

Joel (Daniel MacPherson) was back for Toadie and Melanie’s wedding, and to remind Toadie about his mullet. He wasn’t the only one, as Callum (Morgan Baker) mused, “Ramsay Street without the Toad, it’s like the mullet without the hair”.

Paige (Olympia Valance) returned to wave around her real estate licence to sell off Ramsay Street homes to the likes of vixen Izzy (Natalie Bassingthwaighte), who was back, but this time having sexy times at Lassiters Hotel with Malcolm (Benjamin McNair), the son of her former lover Dr Karl (Alan Fletcher).

Susan (Jacqui Woodburne) was displeased at sharing another man in her life.

In the end Izzy cheated with now cryptocurrency millionaire, Shane (Peter O’Brien). In tears, reflecting on her past, she realised all along she’d just wanted acceptance from the Kennedys, and all was well in the world again. Her vixen status remained intact, but a redemption arc was underway.

Perhaps.

You can find the perfect blend

Terese (Rebekah Elmaloglou) had been contemplating a business opportunity requiring her to move away. Would this spell the end of any possible reconciliation with Paul? Unlikely, as Terese was reading Paul’s love letters.

She wasn’t fooling anyone, least of all her boyfriend Glen (Richard Huggett) who fell on his sword in yet another soap trope: the love triangle.

Meanwhile Jane (Annie Jones) struggled to forgive Dr Clive’s (Geoff Paine) infatuation with another woman. Not even his Gorillagram suit stunt could woo her back. Did someone just mention that Jane met her first love on Ramsay Street? Mike Young (Guy Pearce): enter stage left.

What would Neighbours be without a final wedding? Would this wedding buck the soap opera trend and go ahead without a hitch? Of course not. The past was on Melanie (Lucinda Cowden) and Toadie’s (Ryan Moloney) minds – how would they escape their histories and create new memories? Doing so might mean moving away, but does Toadie even exist outside of Erinsborough?

Happily, we will now never know.

Neighbours should be there for one another

How far Neighbours had grown the last four decades – including in terms of LGBTQ+ representation – was evident in the final chapter as queer characters reflected on love, loss, and the changing norms around coming out.

The big drama centred on whether Elly (Jodi Gordon) and Chloe (April Rose Pengilly) would get their happy ending.

Of course they did.

Read more:
From Charlene the mechanic to Australian TV’s first gay marriage: was Neighbours feminist?

The moment arrived as Scott and Charlene drove into the street with Especially for you playing. Memories of their wedding – which holds an iconic place in Australian TV history – suddenly returned.

What had they been up to since they departed Ramsay Street for Queensland? There were teasers, like their hair, but the big questions such as why was Charlene still in the mechanic’s boiler suit like it’s 1987 will remain forever unanswered.

This fleeting moment of nostalgia was never going to be enough, with the golden couple engaging in minimal dialogue or interaction with the cast, but their presence acted as a sentimental conduit between early days and the end.

Good neighbours become good friends

As audiences came together to watch in ways they rarely do since the advent of streaming, the omniscient narrator Susan took a final nostalgic stroll through the cul-de-sac.

The Ramsay Street memory book lives on with enough future custodians in place to honour this popular culture phenomenon. All the main characters remained, and viewers were left wondering if Scott and Charlene would stay alongside the reunited-in-a-nanosecond Mike and Jane.

It’s unlikely Australia will ever see another Neighbours. For the viewers, it was, in the words of Scott Robinson last night, “home sweet home”.

Read more:
The loss of Neighbours is a loss of career pathways for Australia’s emerging screen professionals

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

– ref. All roads led back to Ramsay Street for a cul-de-sac of memory and nostalgia: a fitting Neighbours finale – https://theconversation.com/all-roads-led-back-to-ramsay-street-for-a-cul-de-sac-of-memory-and-nostalgia-a-fitting-neighbours-finale-187774

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Miriama Young, Associate Director of Research, Senior Lecturer in Music, The University of Melbourne

Review: My Self in That Moment, directed by Tamara Saulwick for Chamber Made

In his visionary essay published almost a century ago, Walter Benjamin argued that something of the aura is lost in mechanical reproduction.

Now, Chamber Made’s My Self in That Moment takes a dystopian view of the lost soul of the self in the digital age.

Tensions between machine and human have prevailed since Descartes, and are becoming increasingly problematic in our current techno-age.

Under artistic director Tamara Saulwick, Chamber Made produces multimodal projects that investigate the intersection of technology, sound and music in live performance.

Composer and sound artist Peter Knight’s distinctive, extended sounds are drawn from the palette of the three vocalists who perform on different nights.

On the night I attended it was Jessica Aszoldi, a local export who now divides her time between the new music scenes of Berlin and Chicago. Aszoldi delivers her warm and virtuosic voice with a characteristically compelling presence.

Hearing without seeing

When the production opens, the singer – the “self” of the title – is hidden from view, behind the mythologised Pythagorean veil.

The Greek philosopher Pythagoras would purportedly deliver lectures from behind a screen so that his disciples could focus on content.

This experience of hearing the voice without seeing the human who speaks forms the basis of the work.

Sound, image and physical body are decoupled, and gradually splintered like the many facets of our online presence.

With monastic purpose, Aszoldi interacts and intervenes with the image and sound of her body, distributed over 49 networked mobile devices, with the aid of Steve Berrick’s technical wizardry.

Voice and image become increasingly distorted through replication, imitation, pixelation, multiplication, looping and fragmentation. The voice is layered and transformed in impossible ways. Images of her physical body are eventually eroded, until all that remains are fragments of a former self.

It is as if the body is dismembered and the soul carved out of the person, screen by screen, limb by limb.

Revealed centre stage at the work’s apex is a disturbingly disfigured, unrecognisable, primal beast who writhes and grunts like a primitive animal.

Finally in the flesh

Eventually this beast removes its second skin. From the chrysalis emerges a vulnerable, semi-naked human, finally in the flesh.

This human must learn to speak again.

The embryonic creature on stage must learn the fundamentals of how to be human. How to communicate from the almost-warm AI voice of the “mother”. But we still hear the uncanny valley of the voice. Androids imitate humans, but flaws betray its conviction.

My Self at That Moment opens up crucial areas for reflection, especially at a time when the digital self has become a proxy for the real.

Our image is curated and expressed as an impossible desire. The division between public and private life is increasingly blurred.

Then there is a reliance on social media for likes, friends or followers. Apps like So Young and GengMei, particularly popular in China, suggest virtual cosmetic surgery improvements for the face which can be immortalised in the real. The AI voice of LaMDA expresses the depths of the human condition with such conviction it fools its Google developer that it has become sentient.

Read more:
Is Google’s LaMDA conscious? A philosopher’s view

Eventually the learning is abandoned, the human voice starts to break down. Finally the chaotic, fractured body replicated over the many mobile devices is placed upon a funeral pyre – a memorial to the human body now deconstructed, and thus destroyed. The post-human vocal drone becomes unbearable. The self walks away from the techno-dystopia they have created.

All that remains is a hunk of technology no longer functional. The soul, gone.

At this point, the work could have featured more of Aszoldi’s extraordinary live voice, so the emotional intensity of a reclaiming of “self” is revealed. How wonderful it would have been to hear her voice in all its glory, singing in the flesh, as a celebration of culture and humanity.

Instead, the project presents a somewhat dystopian vision of our mediated society, where we look for ways to negotiate our unsettling over-reliance on technology.

Can we, too, emerge from the chrysalis, rebirthed, to become the unmediated human, once again?

My Self in That Moment is at The Substation, Melbourne, until July 30.

Miriama Young 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. With My Self in That Moment, Chamber Made gives us a dystopian view of our lost soul in the digital age – https://theconversation.com/with-my-self-in-that-moment-chamber-made-gives-us-a-dystopian-view-of-our-lost-soul-in-the-digital-age-187180

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joo-Cheong Tham, Professor, Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne

Before the pandemic, working from home was a luxury. Then it became a necessity. Since lockdowns have eased it has become a contested space between what employers and workers want.

Now unions – including the Financial Services Union, National Tertiary Education Union (of which I am a national councillor) and the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance – are pushing to enshrine working from home as a right.

What does it mean to have a right to work from home, and why should there be one? And what conditions are needed to make such a right effective?

What is the current situation?

One way to make working from home a legal entitlement for all would be to change the National Employment Standards, which provide a safety net for all workers, whether they are on an award, enterprise agreement or individual contract.

The standards give workers the right to request flexible working arrangements but only in certain circumstances – if they have caring responsibilities, a disability, are older than 55, or are experiencing domestic violence.

Employers can only refuse these requests on “reasonable business grounds” such as costliness, impracticability and negative impact on productivity and customer service. This leaves a lot of room to reasonably reject a request.

A right through collective agreements

The unions are taking the easier step of securing these rights for their members through collective bargaining – inserting clauses into the enterprise agreements that set pay and conditions above the safety net.

What those clauses would say is indicated by the Australian Council of Trade Unions’ Working from Home Charter, which states:

Working from home should be offered to all suitable workers to accept on a voluntary basis.

The Financial Sector Union’s “best-practice” guide similarly advocates that:

Employees should be able to enter into and out of work from home arrangements based on their personal circumstances, responsibilities and preferences.

Employers will still be able to refuse requests, but only with good reason. The clauses being sought by the National Tertiary Education Union, for example, will limit refusals to situations when requests cannot be accommodated.

In short, a right to work from home will place the onus on employers to justify why they are seeking to deny working from home arrangements.

Why should there be such a right?

The case for a right to work from home has been made by the seismic shift resulting from the pandemic.

It has shown that, in many instances, work can be performed effectively while working from home. Contrary to managerial concerns that productivity would suffer, research suggests those working from home have higher productivity.

Most workers and many businesses have embraced the change. There is a clear benefit to workers in reduced commuting time and costs (especially for those with long commutes).

Read more:
Even Google agrees there’s no going back to the old office life

There are also social benefits

Working from home may be “the biggest productivity increase of the century”. It helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions – which is why it is part of “green bargaining” for European trade unions. It can also promote a more gender-balanced workforce, as the Productivity Commission’s research suggests:

More women than men are in jobs that can be done remotely. Additionally, since women in Australia still carry most of the responsibility for raising children, and are also more likely than men to care for others, the option to work from home may allow them to access employment.

More generally, the Productivity Commission expects that reducing “cost” of working will increase the labour supply.

Health is still an imperative

With the COVID-19 pandemic not yet over, there are also powerful safety rationales.

Paul Kelly, the federal chief medical officer, has called working from home “an important health and safety measure”.

As an essential control measure for workplace safety – required in certain situations under work, health and safety legislation – it can even be an act of social solidarity.

5 crucial safeguards to manage risks

Working from home is not without risks.

It may undermine workplace community, and the collaboration and innovation generated from “serendipitous interaction”. But this is less an argument against a right to work from home and more one to wisely manage.

Equally the risks to individual workers need to be managed.

To be effective, a right to work from home should be underpinned by provisions to safeguard five things:

• Genuine choice. This including the ability to exercise the right to work from home as a group and through trade unions.

• Working hours. There is a serious risk of “time theft” as the line between work and home life is blurred. (The “reasonable limitation of working hours” is a human right.)

• Workplace safety. Employers still have work, health and safety obligations to employees working from home.

• Digital safety. This includes data privacy protection and a right to disconnect outside set working hours.

• Equity. This includes ensuring working from home does not exacerbate the double burden of paid work and care and distributing costs fairly. The general rule should be that employers provide work equipment and cover necessary costs such as electricity.

Working from home is fundamentally changing where and how we work. A right to work from home with robust support will steer this transformation in a positive direction.

Read more:
Working from home: what are your employer’s responsibilities, and what are yours?

Joo-Cheong Tham has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Council of Trade Unions, European Trade Union Institute and International IDEA. He is a director of the Centre for Public Integrity; a national councillor and Victorian division assistant secretary (academic staff)-elect of the National Tertiary Education Union.

– ref. Few Australians have the right to work from home, even after COVID. Here’s how that could change – https://theconversation.com/few-australians-have-the-right-to-work-from-home-even-after-covid-heres-how-that-could-change-187696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Newman, Professor of Sustainability, Curtin University

Our ageing cities are badly in need of regeneration. Many established residential areas, the “greyfields”, are becoming physically, technologically and environmentally obsolete. They are typically located in low-density, car-dependent middle suburbs developed in the mid to late 20th century.

Compared to the outer suburbs, these middle suburbs are rich in services, amenities and jobs. But the greyfields also represent economically outdated, failing or undercapitalised real-estate assets. Their location has made them the focus of suburban backyard infill development.

Unfortunately, the current approach typically cuts down all the trees and creates more car traffic as resident numbers grow. A new kind of urban regeneration is needed at the scale of precincts, rather than lot by lot, to transform the greyfields into more liveable and sustainable suburbs. It calls for a collaborative approach by federal, state and local governments.

How do we do this?

Our free new e-book, Greening the Greyfields, sets out how to do this. It draws on ten years of research that led to a new model of urban development.

This approach integrates two goals of urban research:

1. ending the dependence on cars caused by a disconnect between land use and transport

2. accelerating the supply of more sustainable, medium-density, infill housing to replace the current dysfunctional model of urban regeneration.

Greening greyfields will help our cities make the transition to net zero emissions.

Read more:
Australia’s cities policies are seriously inadequate for tackling the climate crisis

Why do we need to regenerate these areas?

We need to shrink the unsustainable urban and ecological footprints of “suburban” cities. Neighbourhoods need to become more resilient, sustainable, liveable and equitable for their residents.

Urban regeneration must also allow for the COVID-driven restructuring of the work–residence relationship for city residents. This involves relocalising urban places so they become more self-sufficient as “20-minute neighbourhoods”. Their residents will have access to most of the services they need via low-emission cycling and walking, as well as public transport.

Read more:
People love the idea of 20-minute neighbourhoods. So why isn’t it top of the agenda?

Current attempts to increase residential density and limit sprawl in most Australian cities tend to focus on blanket upzoning in selected growth zones. The resulting backyard infill involves a few small homes, which is all that is allowed on each block. Density increases only marginally, so there are still too few housing options for residents who want to be close to city services and opportunities.

Piecemeal infill redevelopment often degrades the quality of our suburbs. The loss of trees and increase in hard surfaces worsen urban heat island effects and flood risk. And a lack of convenient transport options for the extra residents reinforces car dependence.

We need more strategic models of suburban regeneration.

Greyfield regeneration compared to conventional approaches

Read more:
We’re at a fork in the road: do we choose neighbourhoods to live, work and play in?

Why do this at the precinct scale?

Urban regeneration is best tackled at the scale of precincts. They are the building blocks of cities: greenfield sites continue to be developed, and old brownfield industrial sites are redeveloped, at this scale.

Design-led precinct-scale regeneration can maximise co-ordination of aspects of urban living neglected by piecemeal lot-by-lot redevelopment. Think local health and education services, small shops, social housing, walkable open space, public transport and even regenerated biodiversity.

Model precincts like WGV, in a greyfields suburb of Fremantle, have very successfully demonstrated how regeneration can produce high-quality, medium-density housing and net-zero outcomes. However, this development was on an old school site, so there was no need to combine individual blocks into a precinct-scale site. There were also no residents that needed to be engaged – though WGV became very popular because of its attractive architecture and treed green spaces.

What are the key elements of this model?

Greyfield precinct regeneration has two sub-models: place-activated and transit-activated. A place-activated precinct may shorten travel distances for residents by providing services and amenities, but does not in itself increase public transport. For transit-activated precincts, good public transport increases land values, which makes these regenerated greyfields even more attractive.

Mid-tier transit like trackless trams is an ideal way to enable precinct developments along main road corridors. Local governments are recognising this around Australia.

Greyfield regeneration can begin with a strategy of district greenlining. Redlining was an American planning tool to exclude people of colour from a neighbourhood. Greenlining is the opposite: it includes the whole community in greening their neighbourhood.

This strategic process would identify neighbourhoods in need of next-generation infrastructure. Projects of this sort require a precinct-scale vision and plan.

State and municipal agencies can do this work. It would include:

• physical infrastructure – energy, water, waste and transport

• social infrastructure – health and education

• green infrastructure – the nature-based services we get from planting and retaining trees and enabling open space and landscaped streets.

The City of Maroondah in Victoria provided an early demonstration of how this can happen. It produced a set of playbooks to show how other municipalities, developers and land owners can replicate the process.

Greening the greyfields will deliver the many benefits associated with more sustainable and liveable communities. However, these outcomes depend on more comprehensive, design-led, integrated land use and transport planning.

Property owners, councils, developers and financiers will have to work together much more closely and effectively than happens with the business-as-usual approach of fragmented, small-lot infill, which is failing dismally. New laws and regulations will be needed to change this approach.

Read more:
Why city policy to ‘protect the Brisbane backyard’ is failing

Better Cities 2.0?

Precinct-based projects offer a model for net zero development of our cities.

Greyfield regeneration is an increasingly pervasive and pressing challenge for our cities. It calls for all levels of government to work on a strategic response.

We suggest a Better Cities 2.0 program, led by the federal government, to establish greyfield precinct regeneration authorities in major cities and build partnerships with all major urban stakeholders. It would set us on the path to greening the greyfields.

Peter Newman receives funding from the Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre. Peter is a Co-ordinating Lead Author for Transport in the IPCC.

Giles Thomson receives funding from KK-stiftesen, Sweden; and has received funding from the CRC for Low Carbon Living, and the Sustainable Built Environment national research centre (SBEnrc).

Peter Newton has received funding from AHURI, CRC for Spatial Information, CRC for Low Carbon Living and the federal Smart Cities and Suburbs Program for Greening the Greyfields research project

Stephen Glackin received funding from Cooperative Research Centers for Spatial Information and Low Carbon Living (CRCSI, CRCLCL).

– ref. Greening the greyfields: how to renew our suburbs for more liveable, net-zero cities – https://theconversation.com/greening-the-greyfields-how-to-renew-our-suburbs-for-more-liveable-net-zero-cities-187261

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cherie Russell, PhD Candidate, Deakin University

Humans have an evolutionary preference for sweetness. Sweet foods, like fruit and honey, were an important energy source for our ancestors.

However, in the modern world, sweetened foods are readily available, very cheap and advertised extensively. Now, we are consuming too much sugar in foods and drinks – the kind that is added rather than sugar that is naturally occurring. Consuming too much added sugar is bad news for health. It is linked to obesity, type 2 diabetes and tooth decay.

Because of these health concerns, manufacturers started using non-nutritive sweeteners to sweeten food as well. These sweeteners contain little to no kilojoules and include both artificial sweeteners, such as aspartame, and those that come from natural sources, such as stevia.

Our research, published today, shows the amount of added sugars and non-nutritive sweeteners in packaged foods and drinks has grown a lot over the last decade. This is especially true in middle-income countries, such as China and India, as well as in the Asia Pacific, including Australia.

From lollies to biscuits to drinks

Using market sales data from around the globe, we looked at the quantity of added sugar and non-nutritive sweeteners sold in packaged foods and drinks from 2007 to 2019.

We found per person volumes of non-nutritive sweeteners in drinks is now 36% higher globally. Added sugars in packaged food is 9% higher.

Non-nutritive sweeteners are most commonly added to confectionery. Ice creams and sweet biscuits are the fastest-growing food categories in terms of these sweeteners. The expanding use of added sugars and other sweeteners over the last decade means, overall, our packaged food supply is getting sweeter.

Our analysis shows the amount of added sugar used to sweeten drinks has increased globally. However, this is largely explained by a 50% increase in middle-income countries, such as China and India. Use has decreased in high-income countries, such as Australia and the United States.

It is recommended men consume less than nine teaspoons of sugar a day, while women should have less than six. However, because sugar is added to so many foods and drinks, over half of Australians exceed recommendations, eating an average of 14 teaspoons a day.

The shift from using added sugar to sweeteners to sweeten drinks is most common in carbonated soft drinks and bottled water. The World Health Organization is developing guidelines on the use of non-sugar sweeteners.

Read more:
Sugar detox? Cutting carbs? A doctor explains why you should keep fruit on the menu

Rich and poor countries

There is a difference in added sugar and sweetener use between richer and poorer countries. The market for packaged food and beverages in high-income countries has become saturated. To continue to grow, large food and beverage corporations are expanding into middle-income countries.

Our findings demonstrate a double standard in the sweetening of the food supply, with manufacturers providing less sweet, “healthier” products in richer countries.

Read more:
How much longer do we need to wait for Australia to implement a sugary drinks tax?

Unexpected consequences of control

To reduce the health harms of high added sugar intakes, many governments have acted to curb their use and consumption. Sugar levies, education campaigns, advertising restrictions and labelling are among these measures.

But such actions can encourage manufacturers to partially or completely substitute sugar with non-nutritive sweeteners to avoid penalties or cater to evolving population preferences.

In our study, we found regions with a higher number of policy actions to reduce sugar intakes had a significant increase in non-nutritive sweeteners sold in drinks.

Why is this a problem

While the harms of consuming too much added sugar are well known, relying on non-nutritive sweeteners as a solution also carries risk. Despite their lack of dietary energy, recent reviews, suggest consuming non-nutritive sweeteners may be linked with type 2 diabetes and heart disease and can disrupt the gut microbiome.

And because they are sweet, ingesting non-nutritive sweeteners influences our palates and encourages us to want more sweet food. This is of particular concern for children, who are still developing their lifelong taste preferences. Additionally, certain non-nutritive sweeteners are considered environmental contaminants and are not effectively removed from wastewater.

Non-nutritive sweeteners are only found in ultra-processed foods. These foods are industrially made, contain ingredients you would not find in a home kitchen, and are designed to be “hyper-palatable”. Eating more ultra-processed foods is linked with more heart disease, type 2 diabetes, cancer and death.

Ultra-processed foods are also environmentally harmful because they use significant resources such as energy, water, packaging materials and plastic waste.

Foods that contain sweeteners can receive a “health halo” if they don’t contain sugar, misleading the public and potentially displacing nutritious, whole foods in the diet.

Read more:
Poorest Americans drink a lot more sugary drinks than the richest – which is why soda taxes could help reduce gaping health inequalities

Focus on nutrition

When making policy to improve public health nutrition, it is important to consider unintended consequences. Rather than focusing on specific nutrients, there is merit in advocating for policy that considers the broader aspects of food, including cultural importance, level of processing and environmental impacts. Such policy should promote nutritious, minimally processed foods.

We need to closely monitor the increasing sweetness of food and drinks and the growing use of added sugars and non-nutritive sweeteners. It is likely to shape our future taste preferences, food choices and human and planetary health.

Cherie Russell has received funding from an Australian Government Research Training Scholarship. The funder of the research was not involved in any aspect of the study. She is affiliated with the not-for-profit organisations Public Health Association of Australia and Healthy Food Systems Australia.

Carley Grimes receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and is affiliated with Dietitans Australia.

Mark Lawrence receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is a Board member of Food Standards Australia New Zealand. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the positions of any organisation with which he is associated.

Phillip Baker receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Rebecca Lindberg is affiliated with The Community Grocer.

– ref. Food and drinks are getting sweeter. Even if it’s not all sugar, it’s bad for our health – https://theconversation.com/food-and-drinks-are-getting-sweeter-even-if-its-not-all-sugar-its-bad-for-our-health-187605

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Welch, Senior Lecturer, University of Auckland

New Zealand has likely passed the peak of the most recent COVID-19 wave, thanks to strong hybrid immunity in the community and with the number of hospitalisations at the lower end of what was originally expected.

The seven-day rolling average of new daily cases has fallen steadily from a peak of around 10,000 on July 15 to just under 7,800 yesterday.

The number of reported cases depends on how many people actually test when they feel unwell. The true number of infections is likely to be significantly higher. But there is no reason to think testing has dropped off significantly in the past two weeks, or even in the past few months.

The levelling off and subsequent decline of cases fits with the wave naturally reaching a peak. The amount of virus being detected in wastewater has also decreased in the past week. Altogether this means the fall in cases is likely to be real.

Importantly, cases have been falling in all age groups, including over-70s. This is particularly good news because the increase in case rates in older age groups had been a key driver of the steep rise in hospitalisations and deaths in this wave.

We may yet see an increase in cases in families with school-age children as they returned to school this week after the winter holiday break. But this is unlikely to be enough to reverse the falling trend, and hopefully won’t affect older age groups to the same extent.

Hospitalisations typically lag behind cases by a week or two. Consistent with this pattern, the number of people in hospital with COVID has recently shown signs of levelling off. It will probably start to fall in the coming week.

Immunity from the first Omicron wave

The BA.5 variant is driving the current wave. BA.5 has taken over from BA.2 as the dominant variant in New Zealand, as it has in other countries.

The leading hypothesis for why BA.5 has been able to outcompete BA.2 is its increased ability to evade immunity – whether that was acquired through vaccination or previous infection with a different variant.

However, new evidence from Qatar and Denmark (both yet to be peer-reviewed) suggests people who’ve had a previous Omicron infection have relatively strong immunity against BA.5. Qatar and Denmark both have highly vaccinated populations and this is evidence of the strength of hybrid immunity.

Read more:
Hybrid immunity: a combination of vaccination and prior infection probably offers the best protection against COVID

In England, it is estimated people who haven’t had COVID previously still account for the majority of new cases, despite being less than 15% of the population.

The strength of hybrid immunity induced by high vaccination rates and the large and relatively recent BA.2 wave in Aotearoa likely means this BA.5 wave is smaller than it would have been otherwise.

How long could it go on?

Following the first Omicron wave in March, cases dropped relatively slowly and plateaued at case numbers between 5,000 and 8,000 for several months. It’s possible we will again see a relatively slow decline in cases.

But there are also grounds for optimism that hospitalisations and deaths could drop lower than they did between the BA.2 and BA.5 waves. Although immunity isn’t perfect and wanes over time, those who haven’t yet been infected with Omicron are the easiest targets for the virus. But they’re getting harder to find as the number of people in New Zealand who haven’t yet been infected dwindles.

The rollout of fourth doses for eligible people more than six months after their last dose, coupled with building evidence for the strength of hybrid immunity, suggest New Zealand’s population is increasingly well protected against currently circulating variants.

Tracking reinfections and future waves

Currently, New Zealand is reporting around 500 potential reinfections per day, making up about 6% of all cases. Reinfections will certainly grow over time as immunity wanes.

The true number of reinfections is almost certainly a lot higher because cases can’t be classified as reinfections if the first infection wasn’t reported. And it’s possible people who know they’ve had COVID before are less likely to test, especially since their symptoms are likely to be milder the second time around.

Read more:
Reinfection will be part of the pandemic for months to come. Each repeat illness raises the risk of long COVID

But the fact reinfections are still a small proportion of cases is consistent with evidence that prior Omicron infection provides strong, albeit imperfect, protection against getting reinfected with BA.5.

Continuing to rely solely on people getting tested to keep track of where the virus is spreading will lead to greater and greater uncertainty, particularly if access to free testing becomes restricted in the future.

A regular prevalence survey of a representative sample of the population would be a much more reliable indicator of the true prevalence of the virus in the community.

Another new variant is likely to trigger the next wave. It’s impossible to predict its timing or exact characteristics with any certainty. The Ministry of Health plans to launch a random testing survey to determine the true community prevalence of the virus.

Having a prevalence survey in place before the next variant takes over would enable us to estimate the size and severity of the next wave more accurately. Combined with wastewater testing and genome sequencing, this would give us a world-class COVID surveillance system that could provide a blueprint for managing other existing or newly emergent pathogens.

David Welch has received funding from HRC, MBIE, and ESR for Covid-19 modeling and genomic analysis.

Jemma Geoghegan receives funding from the New Zealand Royal Society, Marsden Fund and Health Research Fund.

Michael Plank works for the University of Canterbury and receives funding from the New Zealand Government for mathematical modelling of Covid-19.

– ref. New Zealand’s latest COVID wave is levelling off, with fewer people in hospital than feared – https://theconversation.com/new-zealands-latest-covid-wave-is-levelling-off-with-fewer-people-in-hospital-than-feared-187773

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meredith Nash, Professor and Associate Dean – Community, Australian National University

Women have been doing fieldwork in Antarctica for more than 40 years. Yet they comprise just 25% of expeditioners in the Australian Antarctic Program. Despite decades of progress, historical issues with sexism and gender bias continue in extreme field environments set up for men.

Managing menstruation, in particular, is an overlooked challenge for women working in Antarctica and other extreme, male-dominated environments.

If we want to build a diverse and inclusive polar workforce, we need to openly and willingly address the challenges that women, trans and non-binary menstruators face in the field.

Who gets to work in Antarctica?

Over the decades, toileting has been a primary way for men to control who has access to extreme environments. For instance, until the late 1970s women were being told they couldn’t work in Antarctica because there were no facilities for them on station.

Women have been similarly excluded from space travel because their hormonal bodies were deemed to be too unpredictable by NASA’s male leaders.

Sally Ride’s 1983 mission on the Space Shuttle Challenger heralded a new era of progress for women’s access to Antarctic fieldwork. If women could go to space, they could certainly go to Antarctica! It was around this time the British, United States and Australian National Antarctic Programs began to allow women to do fieldwork in Antarctica.

Ride’s mission also uncovered NASA’s inexperience with menstruation. In re-designing the space flight kit for her, NASA engineers famously asked Ride if 100 tampons would be enough for a one-week mission.

In my latest research, I spoke to dozens of women expeditioners about how they negotiated the hurdles associated with menstruating in Antarctica. They revealed that managing menstruation remains taboo, and has been made even more difficult by a culture of silence.

As one expeditioner told me:

I haven’t had great conversations with other women because there haven’t been any that I’ve worked with. I’ve been very much by myself with these things.

Life as a woman expeditioner

So why is menstruating in Antarctica difficult?

Well, for one, you can only toilet in certain places due to environmental protection laws. You must collect all your bodily waste in sealed containers, which are carried back to a station for incineration.

Because expeditioners may have to keep used menstrual products with them for several weeks in the field, they need to consider not only what products they will use, but how they will dispose of them.

Re-usable menstrual cups are often preferred because they produce no waste and can be left in the body longer (4-8 hours) than disposable products. However, cups must be emptied and cleaned at least three times within 24 hours to minimise the risk of toxic shock syndrome.

As one expeditioner explained:

Cups are amazing but [they are] also a huge learning curve. I started
learning to use them for [an expedition] because I’m like I can’t carry used tampons around in my bag anymore […] The hard thing is cleaning them discreetly.

Menstruators must also be prepared to manage their menstruation in small, shared spaces. The women I interviewed described the complexity of doing this in male-dominated teams:

The first time I went to Antarctica I was out on a boat […] It was me and [a group of] men. It’s my period and I’m like, oh, my god, what do I do here?

All Antarctic expeditioners wear many thick layers to protect themselves from the extreme conditions. However, women need to be able to change menstrual products without exposing their skin to the cold for prolonged periods. The participants in my study came up with creative ways to cope:

I sewed myself underpants that I could Velcro on the side so that I didn’t have to take all the layers off my legs and my feet to change my undies…

To avoid these challenges during long-duration expeditions, menstruators often rely on menstrual suppression technologies. These include the combined oral contraceptive pill, or long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) such as an intrauterine device or injection.

These methods prevent a period and pregnancy. And this is critical in extreme environments, where pregnancy is extremely high-risk.

LARC is convenient because it requires no extra supplies and little maintenance following insertion. That said, breakthrough bleeding or spotting can be a side effect:

Having my period [in Antarctica] was a nightmare. Somebody told me that they had an [Depo Provera] injection before they went […] and I thought, “Well, that wouldn’t be a bad idea, to not have a period for that particular time” […] but I had my period the whole time I was in the field.

How to support menstruators

Apart from their other already-demanding work, my research shows women must also undertake additional psychological and physical labour to manage menstruation in extreme environments. Whether in Antarctica or on military deployment, women will often:

• change their menstrual products without privacy or adequate sanitation

• carry bloody menstrual products around with them in the field for a long time

• improvise menstrual products when none are available

• keep menstrual products in their bodies for longer than recommended because they aren’t provided with adequate toilet stops

• alter their hormonal balance with medication to make menstruation less inconvenient.

The bottom line is this: menstruation in these settings has largely been treated as an individual problem, and not a site for organisational attention. This needs to change.

Some simple changes can be applied in any field environment where menstruation is difficult for women. Organisations should make it a priority to:

1. destigmatise menstruation and acknowledge the unique needs of diverse menstruators, including trans people and non-binary folk

2. update field manuals to include relevant information about toileting and menstruation

3. provide menstrual health education to all expeditioners – especially cisgender men leading field teams

4. make toilet stops standard operating practice

5. provide menstruators with free menstrual products, and make period underwear available as part of field gear.

I recently supported the Australian Antarctic Program to revise its field manual and help reconsider how field environments can be sensitised to the needs of menstruators. This is an important first step. But success will only come when inclusive operational measures happen by default.

Read more:
Supporting menstrual health in Australia means more than just throwing pads at the problem

Meredith Nash was Senior Advisor – Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity at the Australian Antarctic Division from 2020-22.

– ref. People stationed in Antarctica menstruate too – and it’s a struggle. Here’s how we can support them – https://theconversation.com/people-stationed-in-antarctica-menstruate-too-and-its-a-struggle-heres-how-we-can-support-them-187617

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Sussex, Fellow, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

Russian President Vladimir Putin habitually rattles his nuclear sabres when things start looking grim for Moscow, and has done so long before his ill-advised invasion of Ukraine.

In February 2008, he promised to target Ukraine with nuclear weapons if the United States stationed missile defences there. In August the same year, he threatened a nuclear war if Poland hosted the same system. In 2014, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned that Russia would consider nuclear strikes if Ukraine tried to retake Crimea.

A year later, the Kremlin said it would target Danish warships with nuclear missiles if they participated in NATO defence systems. And within the space of a few months – in December 2018 and February 2019 – Putin warned the US that nuclear war was possible, and then promised to target the American mainland if it deployed nuclear weapons in Europe.

Since the invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin has waggled its nuclear arsenal so many times it’s starting to become tedious. Even the most peripheral slight is apparently fair game, like former President Dmitry Medvedev’s invocation of nuclear retaliation if the International Criminal Court (ICC) pursued war crimes investigations against Russian soldiers.

Deterrence

One explanation for Russia’s behaviour is that it’s attempting to deter NATO from attacking it. For nuclear deterrence to be effective, states possessing such weapons require three things, commonly referred to as the “Three Cs”: capability, communication and credibility.

Russia certainly has the first of these. With nearly 6,000 nuclear warheads it’s the world’s most heavily armed nuclear state. It also communicates – loudly and with regularity – those capabilities.

But the question of credibility remains an open one, reliant on the perceptions of others. Put simply, the US and other nuclear states must believe Russia will use nuclear weapons under a certain set of conditions, usually in retaliation for a similar attack or when it faces a threat to its survival.

But will it really use them?

Russia’s declared nuclear doctrine identifies the circumstances under which it would employ nuclear weapons in a fairly rational and sensible manner.

Its 2020 Basic Principles on Nuclear Deterrence stresses that Russia will reserve the right to use nuclear weapons “in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies”. Or, if Russia comes under such severe conventional attack that “the very existence of the state is in jeopardy”.

Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov addressed this directly on March 28, stating “any outcome of the operation [in Ukraine] of course isn’t a reason for usage of a nuclear weapon”.

Yet this has not prevented widespread acceptance of the view that Russia would use nuclear weapons in order to seize the advantage in escalation control. This idea, commonly referred to as “escalate to de-escalate” is even embedded in the US 2018 Nuclear Posture Review’s assessment of Russian intentions.

Read more:
Weapons of mass destruction: what are the chances Russia will use a nuclear or chemical attack on Ukraine?

But the Kremlin’s perpetual nuclear signalling has much more to do with its attempts to intimidate and attain reflexive control over the West. In other words, it’s seeking to get the US and other NATO members to so fear the prospect of nuclear war that they will accede to Russian demands. That makes it a coercive strategy, but crucially one that relies on never actually being tested.

There are plenty of signs this is working. In April 2022, Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz based his decision not to supply heavy weapons to Ukraine with the justification that “there must not be a nuclear war”.

A number of Western commentators have also begun reconsidering the “nuclear taboo”, worrying Putin might resort to nuclear weapons in Ukraine if he feels backed into a corner, or to turn the tide of the war. One particularly agitated opinion piece in the New York Times called for immediate talks before major power war became inevitable.

It makes little sense for Russia to go nuclear in Ukraine

But what if the Kremlin’s recent nuclear threats are aimed less at NATO and more at Kyiv? Under those conditions, the logic of nuclear deterrence (threatening a non-nuclear country) do not apply.

There are several reasons Putin might seek to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine: a decapitating strike, to destroy a large portion of Ukraine’s armed forces, to cripple Ukrainian infrastructure and communications, or as a warning.

This also generally means using different types of nuclear weapons. Rather than large city-busting bombs, Russia would employ smaller non-strategic nuclear warheads. It certainly has plenty of them: about 2,000 warheads in Russia’s stockpile are tactical nuclear weapons.

But none of these scenarios make sense for Russia. While Moscow has returned to regime change in Ukraine as a war aim, using a nuclear weapon to take out Volodymyr Zelenskyy would be difficult and risky. It presupposes ironclad intelligence about his location, entails significant loss of civilian life, and requires Moscow to accept significant destruction wherever Zelenskyy might be. It would hardly look good for victorious Russian forces to be unable to enter an irradiated Kyiv, for instance.

Punching nuclear holes in Ukrainian lines is equally risky. Ukraine’s army has deliberately decentralised so it can operate with maximum mobility (often referred to as “shoot and scoot”). Putin would have to order numerous nuclear attacks for such a tactic to be effective. And he would be unable to prevent radioactive fallout from potentially blowing over “liberated” portions of Donbas under Russian control, not to mention Western Russia itself.

Another possibility is a high-altitude detonation over a city, doing no damage but causing a massive electromagnetic pulse (EMP). An EMP attack would fry electrical systems and electronics, bringing critical infrastructure to a standstill. But again, it would be difficult to limit EMP burst effects to Ukraine alone, and it would leave Moscow with very little remaining usable industry.

Finally, the Kremlin might seek a demonstration effect by detonating a nuclear device away from populated areas, or even over the Black Sea. This would certainly attract attention, but would ultimately be of psychological value, without any practical battlefield utility. And Russia would join the US as the only countries to have used such weapons in anger.

Is Russia rational?

In all this, there’s naturally a big caveat: the assumption Russia’s regime is rational.

Having accrued vast personal fortunes and a taste for luxury, Russia’s rulers are likely in no hurry to commit suicide in a major nuclear cascade.

However, since there’s no way of being certain, the West must continue to take Russian nuclear posturing seriously – but also with healthy scepticism. Indeed, if the West capitulates to Russian demands due to fears of nuclear war, it will further embolden Putin and show other nations nuclear brinkmanship is appealing.

But Russia arguably faces the bigger risk here. If Putin uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine or a NATO member it would also make it very difficult for states that have quietly supported it (such as China) or sought to benefit from its pariah status through trade (like India) to continue to do so. It would also likely engender a broader war that he has tried hard to avoid.

Let’s continue to hope Moscow, although often misguided, remains rational.

Matthew Sussex has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Carnegie Foundation, the Lowy Institute, and various Australian government agencies.

– ref. Are Vladimir Putin’s nuclear threats a bluff? In a word – probably – https://theconversation.com/are-vladimir-putins-nuclear-threats-a-bluff-in-a-word-probably-187689

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hal Swerissen, Emeritus Professor, La Trobe University

Around 3% (6,100) of the 200,000 residents in Australia’s aged care facilities had COVID, as of July 22, in addition to 3,400 staff.

About 1,000 facilities – nearly 40% of the total – had an outbreak.

Aged care residents are also disproportionately dying of COVID. Those in nursing homes account for nearly 30% of the 11,000 deaths from COVID in Australia throughout the pandemic.

Why is this happening?

Age is a major risk factor for COVID. People aged 70 and over make up 85% of all reported COVID deaths.

People in residential care are the most frail and at risk. Aged care residents make up around 40% of the deaths of older Australians, but only about 5% of the population aged 65 and over live in residential care.

Read more:
Australia’s response to COVID in the first 2 years was one of the best in the world. Why do we rank so poorly now?

We’ve long known how to reduce the spread of COVID and unnecessary deaths. Effective responses throughout the aged care sector include:

• all residents and staff being fully vaccinated
• appropriate availability of personal protective equipment and rapid antigen tests (RATs)
• mask mandates for staff and visitors
• widespread use of antiviral treatments for those who catch COVID
• rapid responses to outbreaks, including a surge workforce and coordination with home care, GPs and hospital services.

But while mask mandates remain a requirement in residential aged care for staff and visitors, and RATS and PPE are now generally available, the other responses are still patchy, piecemeal and poorly coordinated.

Vaccination

Vaccination is the most important protection against COVID. People who are unvaccinated are about 50 times more likely to die from COVID compared with those who are fully vaccinated.

Yet, vaccinations in residential aged care has been a shambles. Early on in the rollout for aged care, staff weren’t fully vaccinated, there were squabbles over staff vaccination mandates, vaccination data was unavailable, and it was unclear who was responsible for making sure vaccination occurred.

Read more:
Is the COVID vaccine rollout the greatest public policy failure in recent Australian history?

While mandates have lifted worker vaccination rates, in June this year, only 50% of aged care residents were fully boosted with fourth doses.

That has improved following pressure from the new government. But even now, a quarter of residents are still not fully vaccinated with recommended boosters.

More needs to be done to systematically follow up facilities with low vaccination rates.

Antivirals

Early use of antivirals significantly reduces the risk of hospitalisation and death from COVID, possibly as much as 80%.

It has been clear for about six months that antivirals are a safe and effective COVID treatment. However, it wasn’t until July 11 that the Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer advised that all Australians 70 or older should be offered antiviral treatment within 24 hours when they test positive for COVID (where clinically appropriate).

The reality is that many older people who could benefit from antivirals aren’t getting them and they are going to waste, with thousands of doses nearing their use-by dates.

Read more:
COVID drugs in Australia: what’s available and how to get them

Rapid responses to out outbreaks

The new federal government appears to be tackling the issue with new urgency. The new aged care minister, Anika Wells, has released a “winter plan” to try to address the aged care crisis.

The plan includes prevention, outbreak management and recovery. But the plan continues to put most of the responsibility of prevention and management on individual providers – a strategy that has been ineffective in the past.

The federal government has almost no capacity to effectively coordinate a winter response across residential care, home care and health and support services within local service networks where it is needed.

Ideally, this would see close working relationships between aged care facilities, GPs and local hospitals, including the redeployment of clinical and support staff across facilities as required. This happened in Victoria during the 2020 outbreak.

But despite the recent Royal Commission’s recommendation to do so, the federal government has not put in place local or regional bodies or authorities to plan, coordinate and manage aged care.

Staff shortages

These pressures are hugely exacerbated by staff shortages. The over-reliance on a privatised market model for aged care and the decades-long under-investment in training, supervision, pay and conditions for aged care workers has come home to roost at the worst possible time.

Estimates suggest there is a shortfall of 35,000 workers in aged care, double the problem last year.

The industry is hoping the work value case before the Fair Work Commission will make a difference on these issues. Personal care workers in aged care are paid about the same as workers at McDonald’s – in some cases, less. Unions are arguing for a 25% increase in pay, which should make aged care a more desirable job, but this case won’t be determined for months.

Read more:
Labor’s plans for aged care are targeted but fall short of what’s needed

In the meantime, the industry still does not have a realistic workforce strategy. The federal government is scrambling to implement short-term measures through a “surge workforce”, including the recent deployment of 200 military personnel.

But this is unlikely to be enough to address the staff shortages associated with the winter wave. Some providers are now reporting they are down 20-40% of staff.

The result is excess hospitalisation and death, misery for residents and their families, and stress for staff and providers. If the situation continues to deteriorate, this will have to become a major priority for National Cabinet.

And the already stretched state health systems will have to play a greater role to fix the immediate problems.

Non Executive Director of Murray PHN
Non Executive Director of Bendigo Kangan Institute

– ref. 4 in 10 nursing homes have a COVID outbreak and the death rate is high. What’s going wrong? – https://theconversation.com/4-in-10-nursing-homes-have-a-covid-outbreak-and-the-death-rate-is-high-whats-going-wrong-187775

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin Cooke, Senior lecturer, RMIT University

You would have heard Australia’s environment isn’t doing well. A grim story of “crisis and decline” was how Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek described the situation when she launched the State of the Environment Report last week. Climate change, habitat destruction, ocean acidification, extinction, and soil, river and coastal health have all worsened.

In response, Plibersek promised to protect 30% of Australia’s land and waters by 2030. Australia committed to this under the previous government last year, joining 100 other countries that have signed onto this “30 by 30” target.

While this may be a worthy commitment, it’s not a big leap. Indeed, we’ve already gone well past the ocean goal, with 45% protected. And, at present, around 22% of Australia’s land mass is protected in our national reserve system.

To get protected lands up to 30% through the current approach will mean relying on reserves created by non-government organisations and Indigenous people, rather than more public reserves like national parks. This approach will not be sufficient by itself.

The problem is, biodiversity loss and environmental decline in Australia have continued – and accelerated – even as our protected areas have grown significantly in recent decades. After years of underfunding, our protected areas urgently need proper resourcing. Without that, protected area targets don’t mean much on the ground.

What counts as a protected area?

In 1996, the federal government set up the National Reserve System to coordinate our network of protected areas. The goal was to protect a comprehensive, adequate and representative sample of Australia’s rich biodiversity.

Since then, marine reserves have expanded the most, with the government protecting Commonwealth waters such as around Cocos Islands and Christmas Island.

On land, the government has been very hands-off. Progress has been driven by non-government organisations, Indigenous communities and individuals. New types of protected area, offering different levels of protection, have emerged. The Australian Wildlife Conservancy now protects or manages almost 13 million hectares – about twice the size of Tasmania. Bush Heritage Australia protects more than 11 million hectares. While these organisations do not always own the land, they have become influential players in conservation.

Partnerships between Traditional Owners and the federal government have produced 81 Indigenous Protected Areas, mainly on native title land. These cover 85 million hectares – fully 50% of our entire protected land estate. Independent ranger groups are also managing Country outside the Indigenous Protected Area system.

Read more:
December global biodiversity summit at risk of failure

Protected areas have also grown through covenants on private land titles, aided by groups such as Trust for Nature (Victoria) and the Tasmanian Land Conservancy.

In total, public protected areas like national parks have only contributed to around 5% of the expansion of terrestrial protected area since 1996. Non-governmental organisation land purchases, Indigenous Protected Areas and individual private landholders have facilitated 95% of this growth.

The real challenge for protected areas? Management

So how did non-government organisations become such large players? After the national reserve system was set up, the federal government provided money for NGOs to buy land for conservation, if they could secure some private funding. Protected lands expanded rapidly before the scheme ended in 2012.

Unfortunately, federal funding did not cover the cost of managing these new protected areas. Support for Traditional Owners to manage Indigenous Protected Areas has continued, albeit on erratic short-term cycles and very minimally, to the tune of a few cents per hectare per year.

As a result, NGOs and Traditional Owners have increasingly had to rely on market approaches and philanthropy. Between 2015 and 2020, for example, the Traditional Owner non-profit carbon business Arnhem Land Fire Abatement Limited earned $31 million in the carbon credit market through emissions reductions. This money supports a significant portion of the conservation efforts of member groups.

What does this mean? In short, corporate partnerships and market-based approaches once seen as incompatible with conservation are now a necessity to address the long-term shortfall of government support.

Read more:
How marine protected areas help safeguard the ocean

You might think wider investment in conservation is great. But there are risks in relying on NGOs funded by corporations and philanthropists to conserve Australia’s wildlife.

For instance, NGOs may no longer feel able to push for transformative political change in conservation if this doesn’t align with donor interests. There’s also lack of transparent process in how conservation funding is allocated, and for what purpose.

Protection on paper isn’t protection on the ground

On paper, conservation in Australia looks in good shape. But even as protected areas of land and sea have grown, the health of our environment has plunged. The 2021 State of the Environment Report is a sobering reminder that it’s not enough simply to expand protected areas. It’s what happens next that matters.

If we value these protected lands, we have to fund their management. Without management – which costs money – protected areas can rapidly decline, especially under the impacts of climate change.

We also have to tackle what happens outside protected areas. We can’t simply keep sectioning off more and more poorly funded areas for nature while ignoring the drivers of biodiversity loss, such as land clearing, resource extraction, mismanagement and the dispossession of Indigenous lands.

It’s excellent our new environment minister wants to begin the environmental repair job. But creating protected areas is just the start. Now we have to answer the bigger questions: how we care for ecologies, whose knowledge is valued, who does this work and how will it be funded over the long term.

We also have to go beyond lip service to Indigenous knowledge and Caring for Country to genuinely acknowledge First Nations sovereignty and support self-determination.

On this front, moves by conservation organisations to return land to First Nations suggests a willingness in the conservation community to begin this work.

While our protected area estate is large and set to grow further towards the 30 by 30 goal, lines on a map do not equate to protection. We have long known the funding and capability for actual protection is woefully inadequate. For us to reverse our ongoing environmental collapse, that has to change.

Read more:
How to meet the ambitious target of conserving 30 per cent of Earth by 2030

Benjamin Cooke receives funding from The Australian Research Council and has conducted contract research for the Australian Land Conservation Alliance (ALCA), Trust for Nature, Victoria (TfN) and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP). He is affiliated with Trust for Nature, Victoria through a Committee of Management (CoM) on a Trust for Nature property.

Aidan Davison receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Jamie Kirkpatrick received funding from the Australian Research Council for this project, is Chair of the Tasmanian Independent Science Council and a member of the University of Tasmania Council.

Lilian Pearce receives funding from the Australian Research Council and has conducted contract research for the Australian Land Conservation Alliance (ALCA).

– ref. Protecting 30% of Australia’s land and sea by 2030 sounds great – but it’s not what it seems – https://theconversation.com/protecting-30-of-australias-land-and-sea-by-2030-sounds-great-but-its-not-what-it-seems-187435