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

An investigation commissioned by the High Court has found former judge Dyson Heydon sexually harassed six young female associates who worked for him when he was on the court.

In a statement late Monday, Chief Justice Susan Kiefel said: “We’re ashamed that this could have happened at the High Court of Australia”.

Heydon served on the court between 2003 and 2013. He came to national political attention when then prime minister Tony Abbott appointed him as royal commissioner to investigate trade union governance and corruption.

Kiefel said the court had acted immediately to commission an independent inquiry after receiving last year the allegations of sexual harassment. The investigation was done by Vivienne Thom, a former Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.

Kiefel said the court had “made a sincere apology to the six women whose complaints were borne out. We know it would have been difficult to come forward.

“Their accounts of their experiences at the time have been believed. I have appreciated the opportunity to talk with a number of the women about their experiences and to apologise to them in person.” She said she had also valued their suggestions for change.

The Sydney Morning Herald, which published late Monday the result of its own investigation, said Heydon’s predatory behaviour had been an “open secret” in legal and judicial circles.

The Herald reported that Heydon in a statement through his lawyers Speed and Stracey had denied the allegations in the High Court inquiry.

“In respect of the confidential inquiry and its subsequent confidential report, any allegation of predatory behaviour or breaches of the law is categorically denied by our client,” the statement said.

“Our client says that if any conduct of his has caused offence, that result was inadvertent and unintended, and he apologises for any offence caused.”

The law firm Maurice Blackburn is representing three of the women, including Rachael Collins and Chelsea Tabart.

The investigation was instigated after Josh Bornstein, principal lawyer with Maurice Blackburn, then representing two of the women, wrote to the chief justice and the court’s chief executive in March last year with allegations of the harassment. Bornstein also raised concerns about inadequate procedures within the court for dealing with judicial misconduct.

Bornstein said in a statement on Monday the investigation had unveiled a pattern of predatory behaviour and sexual harassment over many years towards young female associates Heydon employed. When the harassment occurred Heydon was “in his 60s, a conservative judge, a prominent Catholic and a married man”.

“The women he employed were in their early 20s and often straight out of university. He was one of the most powerful men in the country, who could make or break their future careers in the law,” Bornstein said.

“There was an extreme power imbalance between Mr Heydon and the young women he preyed on. The fear of his power and influence meant that the women did not feel able to come forward until recently,” he said.

He said the investigation “also found that the associates employed by the High Court were largely on their own in trying to protect themselves and manage Mr Heydon’s behaviour.

“The Court did not have a clear procedure which permitted a complaint of mistreatment by a judge to be aired.

“As a result, outgoing female associates felt a duty to try and warn incoming female associates of Mr Heydon’s behaviour and to give advice about how to try and protect themselves,” Bornstein said. A number of the women had abandoned legal careers after these experiences, he said.

The Herald reported that a current judge had told it “Mr Heydon slid his hand between her thighs at a professional law dinner not long after he joined the High Court bench.”

It quoted the unnamed judge, who was a barrister at the time of the incident, as saying, “He indecently assaulted me. I have no doubt it was a crime and he knew I was not consenting.” She told the Herald Heydon was too powerful to complain about, saying he “was a giant of the profession”.

Kiefel said the investigation had made a number of recommendations that the court had acted on. These were to

• develop a supplementary HR policy to cover personal staff of justices

• review the induction of associates to ensure it covers material relevant to their role

• identify an appropriate person to form a closer working relationship with associates. The person would liaise with associates and provide support if required

• clarify that the requirements for associates to observe confidentiality related only to court work

• make clear to associates they were not obliged to attend social functions .

• consider canvassing current associates to find out more about their experiences while working at the court.

“We have moved to do all we can to make sure the experiences of these women will not be repeated,” Kiefel said. “We have made sure there is both support and confidential avenues for complaint if anything like this were to happen again.”

Law Council of Australia president Pauline Wright said: “The attrition rate of women lawyers is high, and experiences of sexual harassment are a key reason why women leave the law”.

– ref. High Court apologies for Dyson Heydon’s sexual harassment of six associates – https://theconversation.com/high-court-apologies-for-dyson-heydons-sexual-harassment-of-six-associates-141215

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Esterman, Professor of Biostatistics, University of South Australia

On Sunday, Victoria recorded 19 new COVID-19 cases for the preceding day. Only New South Wales (5) and Western Australia (1) also had new cases.

Reports indicate in the 24 hours since, Victoria can count another 16 infections.

This continues a spike that has now spanned several days. Victoria accounted for 83% of new cases across the country over the past week (up to June 21).

Of the 116 new cases recorded in Victoria over this period, 29 (25%) were returned overseas travellers whose infections were detected while in quarantine. The remaining 87 cases were primarily acquired in the community.

Read more: Coronavirus: what causes a ‘second wave’ of disease outbreak, and could we see this in Australia?

As a result of the increase in community-acquired infections, the Victorian government at the weekend announced a tightening of restrictions — including reducing the number of visitors allowed in homes to five.

While the easing of some restrictions planned for today, such as the reopening of gyms, have gone ahead, others, like increasing the number of people allowed to dine in restaurants, are on hold.

What’s behind this spike?

Cases among returned overseas travellers are expected, and with quarantines in place, they’re not a major threat. However, there’s still a 1% chance someone could be infectious beyond the mandated 14 days of quarantine.

But it’s the community-acquired cases that are of greatest concern to public health officials. They indicate there are sources of infection in the community that health authorities don’t know about, making it difficult to control the epidemic.

According to the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, most of these community-acquired infections have occurred during family gatherings. They suggest some people have not followed the advice to limit the number of people invited to a home, nor physical distancing or appropriate hygiene within this setting.

Even if this is correct, why aren’t we seeing a similar problem in other states? Could Victorians have more or larger family gatherings, or be less likely to maintain social distancing and hygiene than residents of other states? We don’t have answers to these questions, and probably never will.

Read more: Planning a snow holiday? How to reduce your coronavirus risk at Thredbo, Perisher or Mount Buller

Is this the start of a second wave in Victoria?

If we regard this level of cases as a wave, Victoria now appears to be on its fourth wave. The second and third occurred in early May and early June, respectively.

The current wave is about at the same level as the one in early May, but could well grow rapidly. It’s causing significant concern because the epidemic appears to be dying out in all other jurisdictions.

It’s unclear why Victoria is getting these repeated waves, unlike the other states, which, apart from a few minor blips, have only had one major peak.

Victoria’s situation is a threat to other states and territories

The Northern Territory, ACT, South Australia and Tasmania have just about eliminated COVID-19.

The remaining states are on the same path, although New South Wales is still recording a few community-acquired cases.

Any state that allows travel to and from Victoria, particularly without quarantine, runs the risk of restarting the epidemic.

Queensland chief health officer Jeannette Young has declared all 31 local government areas (LGAs) in Greater Melbourne, as well as five bordering LGAs, to be COVID-19 hotspots.

This means anyone who has spent time in one of these hotspots within the last 14 days must self-quarantine for 14 days upon entering Queensland (unless the travel to Queensland is for a limited number of essential purposes).

Read more: Heading back to the gym? Here’s how you can protect yourself and others from coronavirus infection

What can Victoria do?

Victoria is already doing the right things to try and flatten this new outbreak. The reimposing of restrictions on family gatherings should work, provided people stick to them.

Victoria currently has the highest rate of testing of all states and territories, with roughly 10% of the population tested so far. Testing, especially in hotspot communities, is one of the best ways to locate and control community-acquired infections.

Six Melbourne local government areas have been identified as coronavirus hotspots. These are Hume, Casey, Brimbank, Moreland, Cardinia and Darebin.

The Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) has advised against travel to and from these areas until community transmission is under control.

Even if the Victorian government elects to impose stay-at-home restrictions in these areas, it will be impossible to seal them off completely from the rest of the state.

But it’s clear the Victorian health department needs to focus testing in these areas, and conduct an information campaign explaining to residents why adhering to restrictions is so important.

How worried should we be?

Is it likely to get worse? Potentially, yes. If it does, the Victorian government will need to rapidly expand its contact tracing and testing. South Australia is already sending contact tracers to help.

There’s still a good chance the Victorian government can gain control of the situation before it gets out of hand — but it will have to move fast.

Other states and territories should insist all visitors from Victoria undertake mandatory quarantine.

Finally, we must all realise further outbreaks could occur anywhere in Australia, and it’s up to all of us to continue to follow social distancing rules.

Read more: 4 ways Australia’s coronavirus response was a triumph, and 4 ways it fell short

– ref. Victoria’s coronavirus hotspots: not quite a second wave, but still cause for concern – https://theconversation.com/victorias-coronavirus-hotspots-not-quite-a-second-wave-but-still-cause-for-concern-141193

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Centaine Snoswell, Research Fellow Health Economics, The University of Queensland

The expansion of telehealth services was a deliberate strategy to help reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission between practitioners and patients, so is it working?

According to our analysis, the answer is that telehealth is indeed reducing the risk. Since March 2020, more than 7 million MBS-funded telehealth consultations have been reported, with the vast majority (91%) being done by telephone.

Read more: What can you use a telehealth consult for and when should you physically visit your GP?

On March 13, the federal government added new telehealth items to the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to allow health-care providers to offer both telephone and video consultations.

Before then, only Australians living outside major cities were eligible for Medicare-funded telehealth consultations, via video only. This was limited largely to medical specialist services and a very small number of GP and allied health services.

In response to COVID-19, the federal government increased Medicare-funded telehealth services, including making telephone consultations available for the first time. They removed geographical constraints and increased the range of telehealth services available.

At first these expanded services were only open to vulnerable patients, such as older Australians and those with a chronic illness. But by early April, these restrictions were lifted, meaning all Australians could access Medicare-funded telehealth.

Tracking telehealth

We have been tracking the increased uptake of Medicare-funded telehealth during COVID-19. We have collected information on six different health-care discipline groups, and also compared the rates of telephone versus video consultations.

During the first six weeks after access to telehealth was expanded on March 13, 7 million consultations – or 22% of the services we examined – were delivered by telehealth.

This represents 7 million avoided face-to-face interactions between patients and health service providers, thus reducing the risk of transmission and infection.

We also found:

• GP appointments accounted for 80% of all consultations examined. During April, GP telehealth activity was largely done by telephone but accounted for 36% of all GP consultations. This was associated with a slight reduction in face-to-face consultations – from an average of 10.5 million consultations per month before the outbreak, to 8.3 million consults in April.

• The proportion of specialist consultations delivered via telehealth increased tenfold in March, from 0.7% in February to 7% in March. When all eligibility criteria were lifted in April, this proportion rose to 37%.

• Although psychiatrists have provided videoconference consultations to Australians since 2002, the coronavirus outbreak prompted a steep decline in face-to-face consultations and an increase in telehealth consultations. Prior to coronavirus, around 4.5% of all consultations each month were via telehealth, this rose to 26% in April this year.

• Mental health services provided by non-psychiatrists (including sessions provided by psychologists) showed an increase in telehealth (50% phone, 50% videoconference), and a 50% reduction in face-to-face consultations.

• Telehealth consultations for allied health services and nurse practitioners were very limited before the pandemic. But in the six weeks from March 13, roughly 29,000 allied health and nursing telehealth consultations were reported through Medicare. Most allied health services involved video consultations, whereas nursing consultations were mainly by telephone.

Are Australians using health care more?

Is the rise in telehealth the result of patients switching from face-to-face consultations to telehealth, or are people simply accessing health care in greater numbers amid the COVID-19 pandemic? The answer varies between different parts of the health system.

Our data suggest the total number of specialist, allied heath, psychiatric and mental health consultations has stayed roughly the same. This suggests face-to-face consultations were simply being replaced by telehealth.

But for GPs and nurse practitioners, the total number of consultations rose significantly, from 10.8 million in February to 12.9 million in April. Around 90% of these telehealth consultations were delivered by phone, so the increase in activity may partly be due to the ease and simplicity of using the telephone. Alternatively, the increase may have been due to more people having health concerns amid the pandemic.

It remains to be seen whether the increase in GP and nursing consultations will continue after the pandemic, or whether it is purely related to COVID-19.

Are phone consultations adequate?

According to Medicare guidelines, telephone consultations should be offered only when video conferencing is not available. There is little doubt telephone consultations are effective in some scenarios, but we don’t yet know if they are as effective as video consultations. For this reason it has been suggested phone consultations be limited to no more than half of a practice’s telehealth provisions. This issue is one we are keen to research further.

A small survey conducted by the Consumer Health Forum found 80% of patients offered a telehealth option accepted, and 68% of patients found it better or equivalent to an in-person consultation. Public awareness of telehealth has increased rapidly, and it is likely that this awareness will help drive the continuation of telehealth.

Read more: Coronavirus has boosted telehealth care in mental health, so let’s keep it up

Telehealth is not new, but its uptake had been slow and fragmented until COVID-19 came along. The sudden telehealth switch has prompted an overnight shift in the way health care is delivered in Australia, and shown (again) that telehealth is feasible and relevant to patients’ needs. The challenge now is to make it a sustainable and routine part of health care into the future.

This is a complex task. The health workforce will need telehealth training and education; the health system will need systems to promote, refer, document and remunerate telehealth appropriately; and everyone, including patients, will need to be encouraged to view telehealth not as a stopgap or emergency option, but as an integral part of health care.

– ref. Telehealth in lockdown meant 7 million fewer chances to transmit the coronavirus – https://theconversation.com/telehealth-in-lockdown-meant-7-million-fewer-chances-to-transmit-the-coronavirus-141041

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katrina Raynor, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Transforming Housing Project, University of Melbourne

In a Conversation article a year ago we applied negotiation theory to changes to the Victorian Planning and Environment Act. The changes were designed to support local councils in negotiations with developers to secure affordable housing. A council may now negotiate with a developer to deliver or fund affordable housing as part of a development approval or planning amendment process.

We wrote that these arrangements were likely to be ineffectual. Our survey of almost 150 affordable housing stakeholders now suggests we were right about this system of voluntary negotiations.

Tellingly, a majority of each class of stakeholders – developers and financers, local government and non-profit providers – would prefer to have consistent mandatory affordable housing requirements applied to all developments.

Read more: If it’s voluntary for developers to make affordable housing deals with councils, what can you expect?

What’s the incentive to negotiate?

We argued in our 2019 article that negotiations are shaped by stakeholders’ interests, the potential for mutual gains, and access to information. Our survey has since found one of the key barriers to successful affordable housing negotiations is a lack of incentives to be involved.

Respondents also identified the lack of capacity to enforce affordable housing contributions as a key issue, as the table below shows.

Even when affordable housing is agreed upon, the development might not be completed for many years. Over that time, council staff may change many times. And things can slip through the cracks if no one is championing affordable housing delivery.

Researchers have identified a similar trend of non-compliance and under-compliance with sustainability requirements in building codes.

The other key barrier is a lack of effective mechanisms to give developers and councils incentives to engage in time-consuming and potentially costly negotiations.

Floor area uplift or density bonuses (allowing a developer to build more dwellings than would otherwise be permitted) are commonly offered as an incentive to build affordable housing. However, it is only effective in areas where being able to increase density is a valuable asset to a developer and doesn’t greatly add to construction costs.

Read more: Ten lessons from cities that have risen to the affordable housing challenge

How is information (ab)used?

We also found a lot of distrust in the industry. Developers referred to a “complete lack of understanding of […] commercial reality” in councils. Other respondents accused developers of looking for ways to “wriggle out of their obligations”.

Across sectors, respondents felt it was almost inevitable developers would manipulate information and operate unfairly in negotiations. Developers felt this way about local councils.

Large variations in the skills and knowledge held by individuals across sectors add to this lack of trust. These information and skill discrepancies affect power relations in negotiations.

Private developers reported substantial knowledge of development feasibility. But they typically don’t understand the affordable housing sector or relevant legislation well.

State and local government representatives report having lower levels of skill in development feasibility. And they also have lower confidence in leading negotiations. These patterns are also reflected in the amount of formal training different sectors have received in development feasibility.

Mandatory systems are preferred

One of the key problems with voluntary negotiations is a lack of consistency in affordable housing expectations. Each agreement is negotiated on a case-by-case basis.

In other parts of the world affordable housing contributions are mandatory. Developers buy land and make development decisions on the assumption that 10%, 20%, 40% or even 50% of the dwellings will be sold or rented at below-market rates. This mechanism is often called inclusionary zoning.

Read more: England expects 40% of new housing developments will be affordable, why can’t Australia?

It works because affordable housing expectations are established in the developer’s initial feasibility analysis. These expectations are applied consistently across all sites in the area from the outset. In other countries, these requirements are often tied to financial support from multiple levels of government.

The survey revealed an almost unanimous preference for an inclusionary zoning approach in Victoria. The current system of voluntary negotiations was ranked third of four policy approaches.

Progress falls well short of meeting needs

Despite these limitations, negotiations are happening to a modest degree in Victoria. These arrangements are producing some new affordable housing.

For example, Women’s Housing Limited bought seven units for low-income women at a discounted rate in Box Hill. And in Glen Eira the provision of land for affordable housing was a key factor in a planning scheme amendment for East Village.

These outcomes should be celebrated as an example of changing expectations in the development industry. They are a step forward in generating affordable housing using the planning system.

However, Victoria still has a huge gap between the need for and supply of affordable housing. The state falls well short of international best practice.

Read more: Public land is being sold exactly where thousands on the waiting list need housing

We continue to argue that the right mechanisms are not yet in place in Victoria to ensure affordable housing negotiations are efficient, equitable and transparent.

The research team are seeking people involved in the affordable housing and development sectors with experience in affordable housing negotiations to participate in interviews for ongoing research. To be involved or to find out more, please email affordable-housing@unimelb.edu.au

– ref. ‘Confusing and not delivering enough’: developers and councils want new affordable housing rules – https://theconversation.com/confusing-and-not-delivering-enough-developers-and-councils-want-new-affordable-housing-rules-139762

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giorgia Alù, Associate Professor, Department of Italian Studies, University of Sydney

Aridly undulating to the horizon in hillock after hillock, comfortless and irrational, with no lines that the mind could grasp, conceived apparently in a delirious moment of creation.

This is the description of a scorched, unruly Sicilian landscape – both protagonist and spectator of the story of its people – in Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa’s The Leopard.

The Leopard (Il Gattopardo) is one of the greatest Italian literary works of the 20th century. Since its publication in 1958, it has been regarded as a classic of European literature. Written by a Sicilian nobleman and set in the 19th-century during the Risorgimento – the movement for Italian Unification – it recounts the decline and fall of Sicily’s aristocracy.

Rosary, macaroni, faded grandeur

The action begins in 1860 when Italian general and patriot Giuseppe Garibaldi and his thousand volunteers land in Sicily to take the island from the Bourbons. They aim to unify the Kingdom of Naples – also known as the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies – with the Italian peninsula under the monarchy of Victor Emmanuel II. Events in the novel mark the passing of feudalism and the advent of modernity.

Yet everyday activities foreground the novel: daily recital of the Rosary, evening readings around the fire, faded grandeur of meals where “monumental dishes of macaroni” are served among massive silver and splendid glass, a walk and hunting expedition in the sunburnt Sicilian countryside, a magnificent ball.

The central character of the story is the irascible and reclusive Don Fabrizio Corbera, Prince of Salina, an aristocratic landowner and lover of astronomy, faithfully accompanied by his Great Dane Bendicò.

His family’s ancestral coat-of-arms shows an African serval or ocelot (mistakenly translated as leopard). The prince’s favourite nephew, the impoverished ambitious and frivolous Tancredi Falconeri, opportunistically supports the unification efforts of Garibaldi.

Tancredi falls in love with the beautiful Angelica, leaving a cousin who loves him devastated and his aunt distraught. Angelica is the daughter of Don Calogero Sedàra, a member of the merchant class ascending to power.

The novel’s main tension lies in class struggle: between the falling elites represented by the house of Corbera and the climbing middle class represented by the unscrupulous Sedàra. The national unification led by Piedmont in Northern Italy – and by statesman Camillo Benso, Count of Cavour – will mark the end of the aristocracy’s as well as of the church’s privileges in Italy.

Don Fabrizio reluctantly realises the only way to ensure the career of his nephew, who aims to become a diplomat, is to give his blessing to Tancredi’s marriage with Angelica. The union will provide Tancredi with the money he will need to succeed in the new regime. It will also bestow a title of nobility on Angelica and her parents. By the book’s end, set in 1910, the prince has died and his line has ended.

Read more: Guide to the classics: Tacitus’ Annals and its enduring portrait of monarchical power

Rejected at first

The manuscript was initially rejected in 1956 and 1957. Important Italian publishers such as Mondadori and Einaudi thought it ideologically deficient, reactionary for its representation of an immobile history, and structurally weak. It also failed to align with the mainstream Italian literature of the time.

The manuscript was subsequently reviewed by writer Giorgio Bassani and published for Feltrinelli in 1958, a year after its author’s death.

Generally classified as a historical novel, The Leopard became a bestseller both in Italy and abroad, with 52 editions printed in the first four months. It won the prestigious Strega literary prize in 1959.

But critical debate erupted. The book appeared during an economic boom and when Italian intellectual culture was strongly politicised. Leftist intellectuals saw it as a backward, conservative portrayal of Sicilian elites written by a little-known man with no sense of progress.

After a few years, initial objections waned and the novel came to be appreciated for its writing and modern narrative structure.

With supple and ornate language, the book has an introspective storyline and alludes to the works of Shakespeare, Sterne, Tolstoy, Baudelaire, Keats, Proust and Stendhal. The narration is characterised by stylistic shifts that reflect both Prince Salina’s varying points of view and the unnamed but all-knowing narrator’s perceptions of history.

In 1963 director Luchino Visconti recreated The Leopard’s opulence in an unforgettable screen adaptation starring Burt Lancaster.

Meditations on history and humanity

Although The Leopard is a representation of 19th century Sicilian aristocracy, it is also a contemplative and ironic distancing from this same world. It is, above all, a novel that provides a profound meditation on transition and historical causality.

Besides, The Leopard is an ambitious political book. Critical interpretations of the novel have divided on whether the author was bemoaning the decline of the traditional ruling class, mercilessly critiquing it, or reflecting on the limits of political reforms.

In the plot, we can find similarities between the Bourbons’ supremacy and fascism, between Garibaldi’s conquest and the allied occupation at the end of the second world war. The book foreshadows political life in the newly unified kingdom and economic transformations that paved the way for corruption and criminal organisations in post-1945 Italy.

Read more: Looking back at Italy 1992: the rise and fall of King Midas

As journalist and author, Luigi Barzini, once said, the book “made all us Italians understand our life and history to the depths.”

The most memorable – and misread – line in the book is

If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change.

Spoken by Tancredi, it references Sicilian society’s resistance to change. It is also the narrator’s rumination on modern Italy with its various paradoxes and divisions.

The Leopard is a family saga, a psychological novel, a meditation on death and on the loss of collective memory. It has been read as a lyrical and prophetic contemplation on the experience of modernity and on the risks that it involves, such as ambition, and loss of beauty and traditions.

A solitary, melancholic man, author Tomasi di Lampedusa was deeply aware of his own mortality. The Leopard was his only novel that, together with a collection of short stories and literary studies, was published posthumously. His book would sell more than 3.2 million copies, be translated into more than 37 languages, and rightly honoured as an “immortal” masterpiece.

– ref. Guide to the Classics: The Leopard – https://theconversation.com/guide-to-the-classics-the-leopard-133443

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Smit, Adjunct associate professor, University of Technology Sydney

The transport sector is Australia’s second-largest polluter, pumping out almost 20% of our total greenhouse gas emissions. But everyday drivers can make a difference.

In particular, the amount of time you let your car engine idle can have a significant impact on emissions and local air quality. Engine idling is when the car engine is running while the vehicle is stationary, such as at a red light.

A new Transport Energy/Emission Research report found in normal traffic conditions, Australians likely idle more than 20% of their drive time.

This contributes 1% to 8% of total carbon dioxide emissions over the journey, depending on the vehicle type. To put that into perspective, removing idling from the journey would be like removing up to 1.6 million cars from the road.

Read more: We thought Australian cars were using less fuel. New research shows we were wrong

Excessive idling (idling for longer than five minutes) could increase this contribution further, particularly for trucks and buses. When you also consider how extensive idling may create pollution hot spots around schools, this isn’t something to take lightly.

Pollution hot spots

Reducing idling doesn’t just lower your carbon footprint, it can also lower your fuel costs up to 10% or more.

Drivers simply have to turn their engines off while parked and wait in their vehicle. Perhaps crack open a window to maintain comfortable conditions, rather than switching on the air conditioner.

Some idling is unavoidable such as waiting for a traffic light or driving in congested conditions, but other idling is unnecessary, such as while parked.

Read more: Transport is letting Australia down in the race to cut emissions

When many cars are idling in the same location, it can create poor local air quality. For example, idling has been identified overseas as a significant factor in higher pollution levels in and around schools. That’s because parents or school buses don’t turn off their engines when they drop off their kids or wait for them outside.

Even small reductions in vehicle emissions can have health benefits, such as reducing asthma, allergies and systemic inflammation in Australian children. In 2019, Australian researchers identified that even small increases of exposure to vehicle pollution were associated with an increased risk of childhood asthma and reduced lung function.

Anti-idling campaigns make a difference

Overseas studies show anti-idling campaigns and driver education can help improve air quality around schools, with busses and passenger cars switching off their engines more frequently.

In the US and Canada, local and state governments have enacted voluntary or mandatory anti-idling legislation, to address complaints and reduce fuel use, emissions and noise.

The results have been promising. In California, a range of measures – including anti-idling policies – aimed at reducing school children’s exposure to vehicle emissions were linked to the development of larger, healthier lungs in children.

Read more: Australians could have saved over $1 billion in fuel if car emissions standards were introduced 3 years ago

But in Australia, we identified almost no anti-idling initiatives or idle reduction legislation, despite calls for them in 2017.

However, “eco-driving”, as well as a promising new campaign called “Idle Off” is poised to roll out to secondary school students in Australia.

What about commercial vehicles?

Commercial vehicles can idle for long periods of time. In the US, typical long-haul trucks idle an estimated 1,800 hours per year when parked at truck stops, although a significant range of between 1,000 and 2,500 hours per year has also been reported.

Read more: Electric car sales tripled last year. Here’s what we can do to keep them growing

Fleet operators and logistics companies are therefore in a good position to roll out idle reduction initiatives and save on operating (fuel) costs while reducing emissions.

In fact, fleet operators overseas have actively sought to reduce idling emissions. This is not surprising as fuel costs are the second-largest expense for fleets, behind driver wages, typically accounting for 20% of a trucking fleet’s total operating costs.

Various technologies are available overseas that reduce idling emissions, such as stop-start systems, anti-idling devices (trucks) and battery electric vehicles.

But unlike other developed countries, Australia doesn’t have fuel efficiency or carbon dioxide emission standards. This means vehicle manufacturers have no incentive to include idle reduction technologies (or other fuel-saving technologies) in vehicles sold in Australia.

For example, the use of stop-start systems is rapidly growing overseas, but it’s unclear how many stop-start systems are used in new Australian cars.

Emission reduction technologies also come with extra costs for the vehicle manufacturer, making them less appealing, although cost benefits of reduced fuel use would pass on to consumers. This situation probably won’t change unless mandatory emission standards are implemented.

In any case, it’s easy for drivers to simply turn the key and shut down the engine when suitable. Reducing idling doesn’t require technologies.

Reducing your carbon footprint

If reducing emissions or saving money at the fuel bowser is not enough incentive, then perhaps, in time, exposing children to unnecessary idling emissions will be regarded in the same socially unacceptable light as smoking around children.

Read more: Cities must act to secure the future of urban cycling: our research shows how

And of course, there are other measures to reduce your transport carbon footprint. Drive a smaller car, and avoid diesel cars. Despite their reputation, Australian diesel cars emit, on average, about 10% more carbon dioxide per kilometre than petrol cars.

Or better yet, where possible, dust off that push bike, or walk.

– ref. Switch off your engine, it’s not hard: how to cut your fuel bill, clear the air and reduce emissions – https://theconversation.com/switch-off-your-engine-its-not-hard-how-to-cut-your-fuel-bill-clear-the-air-and-reduce-emissions-135316

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Wallace, Program director of Interior Architecture, University of South Australia

“What will it take to encourage much more widespread reliance on working at home for at least part of each week?” asked Frank Schiff, the chief economist of the US Committee for Economic Development, in The Washington Post in 1979.

Four decades on, we have the answer.

But COVID-19 doesn’t spell the end of the centralised office predicted by futurists since at least the 1970s.

The organisational benefits of the “propinquity effect” – the tendency to develop deeper relationships with those we see most regularly – are well-established.

The open-plan office will have to evolve, though, finding its true purpose as a collaborative work space augmented by remote work.

If we’re smart about it, necessity might turn out to be the mother of reinvention, giving us the best of both centralised and decentralised, collaborative and private working worlds.

Cultural resistance

Organisational culture, not technology, has long been the key force keeping us in central offices.

“That was the case in 1974 and is still the case today,” observed the “father of telecommuting” Jack Nilles in 2015, three decades after he and his University of Southern California colleagues published their landmark report Telecommunications-Transportation Tradeoff: Options for Tomorrow. “The adoption of telework is still well behind its potential.”

Read more: 50 years of bold predictions about remote work: it isn’t all about technology

Until now.

But it has taken a pandemic to change the status quo – evidence enough of culture resistance.

In his 1979 article, Schiff outlined three key objections to working from home:

• how to tell how well workers are doing, or if they are working at all

• employees’ need for contact with coworkers and others

• too many distractions.

To the first objection, Schiff responded that experts agreed performance is best judged by output and the organisation’s objectives. To the third, he noted: “In many cases, the opposite is likely to be true.”

The COVID-19 experiment so far supports him. Most workers and managers are happy with remote working, believe they are performing just as well, and want to continue with it.

Personal contact

But the second argument – the need for personal contact to foster close teamwork – is harder to dismiss.

There is evidence remote workers crave more feedback.

Read more: Informal feedback: we crave it more than ever, and don’t care who it’s from

As researchers Ethan Bernstein and Ben Waber note in their Harvard Business Review article The Truth About Open Offices, published in November 2019, “one of the most robust findings in sociology – proposed long before we had the technology to prove it through data – is that propinquity, or proximity, predicts social interaction”.

Waber’s research at the MIT Media Lab demonstrated the probability that any two workers will interact – either in person or electronically – is directly proportional to the distance between their desks. In his 2013 book People Analytics he includes the following results from a bank and information technology company.

Experiments in collaboration

Interest in fostering collaboration has sometimes led to disastrous workplace experiments. One was the building Frank Gehry designed for the Chiat/Day advertising agency in the late 1980s.

Agency boss Jay Chiat envisioned his headquarters as a futuristic step into “flexible work” – but workers hated the lack of personal spaces.

Less dystopian was the Pixar Animation Studios headquarters opened in 2000. Steve Jobs, majority shareholder and chief executive, oversaw the project. He took a keen interest in things like the placement of bathrooms, accessed through the building’s central atrium. “We wanted to find a way to force people to come together,” he said, “to create a lot of arbitrary collisions of people”.

Yet Bernstein and Waber’s research shows propinquity is also strong in “campus” buildings designed to promote “serendipitous interaction”. For increased interactions, they say, workers should be “ideally on the same floor”.

Being apart

How to balance the organisational forces pulling us together with the health forces pushing social distancing?

We know COVID-19 spreads most easily between people in enclosed spaces for extended periods. In Britain, research by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine shows workplaces are the most common transmission path for adults aged 20 to 50.

Read more: As coronavirus restrictions ease, here’s how you can navigate public transport as safely as possible

We may have to get used to wearing masks along with plenty of hand sanitising and disinfecting of high-traffic areas and shared facilities, from keyboards to kitchens. Every door knob and lift button is an issue.

But space is the final frontier.

It’s going to take more than vacating every second desk or imposing barriers like cubicle walls, which largely defeat the point of open-plan offices.

An alternative vision comes from real-estate services company Cushman & Wakefield. Its “6 feet office” concept includes more space between desks and lots of visual cues to remind coworkers to maintain physical distances.

Read more: Vital Signs: rules are also signals, which is why easing social distancing is such a problem

Of course, to do anything like this in most offices will require a proportion of staff working at home on any given day. It will also mean then end of the individual desk for most.

This part may the hardest to handle. We like our personal spaces.

We’ll need to balance the sacrifice of sharing spaces against the advantages of working away from the office while still getting to see colleagues in person. We’ll need new arrangements for storing personal items beyond the old locker, and “handover” protocols for equipment and furniture.

Offices will also need to need more private spaces for greater use of video conferencing and the like. These sorts of collaborative tools don’t work well if you can’t insulate yourself from distractions.

But there’s a huge potential upside with the new open office. A well-managed rotation of office days and seating arrangements could help us get to know more of those colleagues who, because they used to sit a few too many desks away, we rarely talked to.

Read more: Goodbye to the crowded office: how coronavirus will change the way we work together

It might just mean the open-plan office finally finds its mojo.

– ref. The death of the open-plan office? Not quite, but a revolution is in the air – https://theconversation.com/the-death-of-the-open-plan-office-not-quite-but-a-revolution-is-in-the-air-140724

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kurt Sengul, Doctoral Researcher, University of Newcastle

The Conversation is running a series of explainers on key figures in Australian political history, looking at the way they changed the nature of debate, its impact then, and it relevance to politics today. You can also read the rest of our pieces here.

Pauline Hanson and her party have only achieved modest electoral successes. Yet, she is undoubtedly Australia’s most successful populist politician and has had a profound impact on the way the country talks about issues like multiculturalism and immigration.

Hanson’s entire political career can be seen as a denial and rejection of the realities of whiteness in Australia – that is, the unearned benefits and privileges afforded to white people in settler-colonial countries.

Hanson has benefited from – and helped to shape – the normalisation of racism and xenophobia in Australia. She has pushed the boundaries of what can be “acceptably said” in public discourse and has had a disproportionate influence on the national debate.

In doing so, she has also created the political space for other far-right figures like Fraser Anning to emerge and become more a part of the political mainstream.

The birth of One Nation

Hanson first emerged on the political landscape in 1996 when she was disendorsed as the Liberal Party candidate for Oxley following racist comments she made about Indigenous people in a letter to the Queensland Times.

She contested the election anyway, running as an independent on a self-described nationalist, populist and protectionist platform, and won the seat with a large swing against the Labor incumbent.

In her maiden speech to the House of Representatives, Hanson claimed to speak on behalf of “mainstream Australians” and promised a “common sense” approach to politics.

Most controversially, Hanson warned Australia was “in danger of being swamped by Asians”, called for the abolition of multiculturalism and railed against Indigenous rights, so-called “political correctness” and “reverse-racism”.

The times suited Hanson. After 13 years of Labor government, John Howard and the Liberal Party looked to exploit a sense of resentment and grievance on the issues of multiculturalism and immigration, which arguably opened up the space for Hanson and helped to legitimise her views.

Indeed, in a 1996 speech delivered to the Queensland Liberal Party, Howard celebrated the idea people felt able to speak a little more freely and could do so

without living in fear of being branded as a bigot or racist.

Hanson’s One Nation party was formed the following year and performed well at the 1998 Queensland state election, winning 11 seats.

Hanson’s downfall and political resurrection

One Nation’s initial success, however, was short-lived. Hanson failed to win the newly redistributed seat of Blair at the 1998 federal election. Her party then began to suffer from internal divisions, poor leadership and Hanson’s personal and financial scandals.

She was subsequently convicted of electoral fraud in 2003. (It was later overturned on appeal.)

After a number of failed federal and state campaigns (including under the rebranded Pauline’s United Australia Party), Hanson finally succeeded in being elected to the Senate in 2016, along with three other One Nation candidates.

This represented a high point for the party at the federal level and gave it considerable influence over government policy.

Read more: Henry Parkes had a vision of a new Australian nation. In 1901, it became a reality

Hanson’s populist, nativist beliefs

Hanson can best be described as a populist radical right politician, alongside such figures as Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, Marine Le Pen and Viktor Orbán.

For populist figures, politics are seen as a struggle between everyday, ordinary people and a corrupt, illegitimate and out-of-touch elite.

But more importantly, the populist radical right also uses the language of “us-versus-them” and portrays immigrants and refugees as existential threats to the safety, security and “culture” of a particular society.

In Hanson’s view, non-natives must either assimilate and embrace “Australian culture and values” or “go back to where they came from”.

Hanson has consistently drawn on a sense of grievance and victimhood – in particular, white victimhood. She has espoused a belief in the existence of so-called “reverse-racism” or “anti-white” racism since the outset of her political career.

Hanson has even gone so far as to claim the

most downtrodden person in this country is the white Anglo-Saxon male.

The mainstreaming of the far-right

Hanson’s resurgence in 2016 occurred in a very different political climate than her first stint in parliament in the late 1990s.

Political scientist Cas Mudde refers to the 21st century as the “fourth wave of the far-right”. It is a time when far-right ideas are becoming increasingly tolerated, debated and normalised in the mainstream and the boundaries of what can be said are shifting.

Emboldened by years of normalised Islamophobia in Australia and the electoral successes of far-right parties globally, Hanson’s maiden Senate speech warned Australia was now

in danger of being swamped by Muslims, who bear a culture and ideology that is incompatible with our own.

She called for a “Trump style” immigration ban, a Royal Commission into Islam and the “banning of the burqa”.

Hanson’s resurgence has clearly cemented Muslims as the new “dangerous other”, though her racist attitudes towards First Nations people and Asian immigrants have also remained a constant.

Her claims of “anti-white racism” have also gained traction in the mainstream. For example, when Hanson put forth a Senate motion declaring “it’s OK to be white” in 2018, a surprising number of Coalition members voted for it and later defended it on Twitter.

It was only later, after a vocal outcry, that the Coalition backed down and claimed the votes were made in error.

The media have played a key role in the mainstreaming of Hanson and One Nation by consistently giving them a platform to voice far-right ideas.

Hanson’s legacy and impact on society

There are a couple of ways to think about Hanson’s legacy and impact on society.

The first is to gauge her direct influence on government policy through her role as a parliamentarian. There’s no doubt she has wielded considerable influence as one of a number of senators to hold the balance of power in recent years.

Yet, despite some success in influencing legislation and her recent appointment as deputy chair of the family law inquiry, Hanson has been largely unsuccessful in seeing her signature policies realised.

Read more: How Julia Gillard forever changed Australian politics – especially for women

And while acknowledging Hanson’s role in mainstreaming far-right ideas, it’s important to note these ideas have existed before her maiden speeches and will exist well beyond her time in politics.

Exclusively focusing on Hanson’s individual acts ignores the systemic nature of racism and the role of the mainstream political class in reproducing and upholding these racist structures.

When assessing Hanson’s legacy, it may be comforting to view her as an aberration and reflection of a bygone era, but she remains very much a product of the Australian settler-colonial story.

It’s perhaps more accurate to think of Hanson as a symptom of racism and xenophobia in Australia, rather than its cause.

– ref. Pauline Hanson built a political career on white victimhood and brought far-right rhetoric to the mainstream – https://theconversation.com/pauline-hanson-built-a-political-career-on-white-victimhood-and-brought-far-right-rhetoric-to-the-mainstream-134661

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Duckett, Director, Health Program, Grattan Institute

The COVID-19 pandemic forced us all to change the way we live. The lockdown altered fundamental aspects of our lives, not only to protect our own health but also the health and lives of others.

Just as Australians have shown a remarkable ability to adapt to a world with COVID-19, so too has Australia’s health system. In a report released today, the Grattan Institute outlines seven key lessons that can help make the health system more effective, efficient and equitable, and better able to deal with future crises.

Lesson 1: telehealth works

Since mid-March, Australians have been able to consult their GP or a specialist from the comfort of their own homes, via phone or video (known as telehealth). Although face-to-face consultations are sometimes still necessary, the pandemic has shown the enormous potential for telehealth to provide more efficient care in many instances, such as for routine appointments or mental health check-ups.

During the pandemic, telehealth was a no-brainer to protect patients and health professionals from getting sick or making others sick. But given its widespread adoption and success, it is also a no-brainer for telehealth to become a permanent fixture of health care in Australia.

The federal government should revise the temporary telehealth Medicare items to ensure they promote continuity of care and make them more appropriate for the longer term, couple them with e-referrals (to replace the museum-era fax machines), and introduce rules to prevent rorting.

Read more: Coronavirus has boosted telehealth care in mental health, so let’s keep it up

Lesson 2: out-of-hospital care also works

Alongside telehealth, the pandemic prompted a rapid expansion of hospital-in-the-home care, including new “virtual hospitals”. Many people with chronic health conditions, or who are in rehabilitation or residential aged care, can be monitored by health professionals and given health advice without face-to-face contact, using technologies such as telemonitoring.

Commonwealth and state governments should fund further expansion of these services.

Read more: The ‘hospital in the home’ revolution has been stalled by COVID-19. But it’s still a good idea

Lesson 3: Australia needs new funding arrangements for general practices

Australia’s rigid primary care funding model, in which doctors are paid on a fee-for-service basis, made it hard for GPs to set up new practice models during the pandemic – such as quickly establishing COVID-19 testing clinics or making outreach calls to vulnerable patients.

Governments should remove barriers in the Medicare system to allow for different models of care.

Read more: 4 ways Australia’s coronavirus response was a triumph, and 4 ways it fell short

Lesson 4: public and private systems should be more integrated

The pandemic showed the potential for public and private health-care systems to work better together. Private hospitals were set up to deal with the overflow from potentially overwhelmed public hospitals. At the same time, private hospitals effectively came to a halt when governments suspended non-urgent elective surgeries, to free up resources to tackle the pandemic.

Now there is a huge backlog of patients who need elective surgeries. Clearing this backlog should not be a business-as-usual matter. The pandemic provides an opportunity for Australia to move away from the current inconsistent wait-list process, to a standardised, efficient, equitable process with a single wait-list priority system to properly manage elective surgeries.

State governments should also consider negotiating long-term contracts with private hospitals for extra help.

Read more: Elective surgery’s due to restart next week so now’s the time to fix waiting lists once and for all

Lesson 5: there are gaps in Australia’s pandemic preparedness

Despite Australia’s largely successful response to the pandemic, our preparedness regime was not totally up to scratch. Australia had not contemplated a crisis of this scale, and as a consequence the early response was characterised by reactive policy-making and mixed messages to the public.

Future pandemic planning should include a workforce strategy to support the rapid expansion of health-care capacity; provide a national surveillance approach to quick and accurate reporting of disease data; and ensure that secondary health effects such as mental health problems and domestic violence are built into the plan and managed in the longer term.

Read more: What are the characteristics of strong mental health?

Lesson 6: the health system needs a stronger supply chain

During the pandemic, health workers had to cope with inadequate supplies of testing kits and personal protective equipment (PPE) such as face masks. Problems with Australia’s supply chains hampered ready access to supplies, and the global surge in demand forced Australian health departments to join the global bidding for fast-tracked supplies from overseas.

Australian governments need to strengthen local supply chains, by drawing on a diverse set of suppliers and increasing product standardisation to enable easier substitution of products. The National Medical Stockpile also needs to be reviewed, because it did not have sufficient supplies.

Read more: Supplies needed for coronavirus healthcare workers: 89 million masks, 30 million gowns, 2.9 million litres of hand sanitiser. A month.

Lesson 7: Commonwealth and state governments can better coordinate primary care

The creation of the National Cabinet improved national coordination in response to the pandemic, as the old fractured federal relationships were temporarily set aside.

Renewed cooperation through primary care agreements, and strengthened Primary Health Networks, could reduce – or, better still, end – the overlap in services provided by the Commonwealth and states, and improve primary care delivery.

Read more: The national cabinet’s in and COAG’s out. It’s a fresh chance to put health issues on the agenda, but there are risks

The new normal can be better than the old

Australia’s health care must not “snap back” to the old order. The pandemic has shown us a better way. Now reform is needed to transform these temporary improvements into long-term successes.

But reform and a “new normal” won’t just happen automatically. Consumers and clinicians should be engaged now to build on what went well during the pandemic, to ensure our health system is better than it ever was before the pandemic.

– ref. 7 lessons for Australia’s health system from the coronavirus upheaval – https://theconversation.com/7-lessons-for-australias-health-system-from-the-coronavirus-upheaval-141122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Judith Brett, Emeritus Professor of Politics, La Trobe University

Because we are rich in coal and gas, Australia has been plagued with two decades of wars over climate policy. The wars have claimed three prime ministers: Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Malcolm Turnbull. They have also, in the words of journalist Alan Kohler,

ruined Australia’s ability to conduct any kind of sensible discussion about economic policy and to achieve consensus on anything.

The response to the pandemic shows that consensus and effective, evidence-based policy are not impossible for Australia’s politicians. Faced with a crisis of life and death, they can put aside ideology and stare down vested interests.

The optimists among us hope they can do this with the life and death crises humanity is facing as the planet heats, and that the terrible fires last summer will have convinced our leaders climate change is real, and effective action urgent. So far, the calls for urgent action are louder from business than from political leaders. Innes Willox, the chief executive of the Australian Industry Group, has linked restoring growth after the pandemic to the achievement of net-zero emissions by 2050.

The federal government, by contrast, is championing gas as a “transition fuel” between coal and renewables. Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s handpicked chair of the National COVID-19 Co-ordination Commission, Nev Power, has strong links to the gas industry.

Calling gas a “transition fuel” at least admits the need for a transition. But gas also contributes to the planet’s heating, and the federal government has no plausible plan to meet Australia’s Paris target, nor to ramp it up, which must be done for a safe future.

Read more: A single mega-project exposes the Morrison government’s gas plan as staggering folly

The grip that coal and gas has on our political elites goes back to the 1960s, when minerals replaced wool as the mainstay of our commodity exports. Iron ore and coal led the way.

About the same time, mining’s social licence was being challenged by Indigenous Australians, who objected to mining on their traditional lands, and by environmentalists concerned about mining’s destructive impact on natural habitats. The miners’ response was a concerted public relations campaign to align their interests with the national interest by convincing Australians their prosperity depended on mining and should not be curtailed.

In this, the miners have been spectacularly successful. First, in the 1980s, they stymied the implementation of the Hawke Labor government’s plan for uniform land rights legislation, which would include protection of sacred sites, the right to royalties and a veto over mining on Indigenous land.

In Australia, unlike other common law countries, the Crown owns the minerals, so the veto would have given Indigenous owners more rights than freehold owners. Miners launched a furious public campaign centred on the argument that Indigenous Australians should not have special rights.

A decade later, after the High Court determined in the Mabo and Wik judgements that forms of native title had survived European settlement, the miners fought again to make sure the resulting legislation did not include any veto over mining; and it didn’t.

Second, they have delayed effective government action on climate change. At the end of the century, as pressure mounted for a reduction in the burning of fossil fuels, Australia’s coal producers organised to prevent the federal government from signing international agreements to reduce carbon emissions. Their core argument was that mining underpinned Australia’s wealth, but they also spread scepticism about climate change amongst conservative elites, turning it into an identity marker for the Australian right.

Under John Howard, fossil fuel advocates gained extraordinary access to government decision-making on climate and energy policy. This access was not given to environmental non-government organisations (NGOs) or climate scientists. So much for balance.

The power of the fossil fuel lobby was weaker after Howard lost the 2007 election. Later, it was unable to prevent the Gillard government from implementing a price on carbon and establishing a series of agencies to advance action on climate change.

But with Tony Abbott as prime minister, the industry’s power was back. Scepticism about climate science spread to science and expertise generally, undermining the federal government’s commitment to innovation and research. The fossil fuel lobby is not solely to blame for the Coalition’s philistinism under Abbott, but it bears some responsibility for its self-interested spreading of climate scepticism.

Read more: Morrison government dangles new carrots for industry but fails to fix bigger climate policy problem

The mining lobby’s third success has been to capture the National Party and turn it into the party of coal and coal seam gas, even when extracting these destroys the good agricultural land on which our food security depends. This is an astonishing achievement.

In March 2019, on Network 10’s The Project, Waleed Aly asked Nationals leader Michael McCormack

Could you name a single, big policy area where the Nats have sided with the interests of farmers over the interests of miners when they come into conflict?

Off the top of his head, McCormack could not name one. Mining has so successfully aligned itself with perceptions of the national interest that the National Party now champions the jobs of miners more energetically than the livelihoods of the farmers it once regarded as the heart of the nation.

The biggest lesson from the pandemic is that governments are our risk managers of last resort. Ours, both state and federal, have been prepared to inflict massive economic pain on businesses and individuals to protect our health, and we are grateful.

As we face the much larger but more slow-moving crisis of the heating planet, governments must stare down the fossil fuel industry and its supporters, for all our sakes, even if this inflicts on them some economic pain.

If they can do it for the pandemic, they can do it for climate change.

Judith Brett’s Quarterly Essay, The Coal Curse, is out today.

– ref. Australia’s devotion to coal has come at a huge cost. We need the government to change course, urgently – https://theconversation.com/australias-devotion-to-coal-has-come-at-a-huge-cost-we-need-the-government-to-change-course-urgently-140841

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Larissa Schneider, DECRA fellow, Australian National University

This month, federal authorities finally announced an upcoming ban on mercury-containing pesticide in Australia. We are one of the last countries in the world to do so, despite overwhelming evidence over more than 60 years that mercury use as fungicide in agriculture is dangerous.

Mercury is a toxic element that damages human health and the environment, even in low concentrations. In humans, mercury exposure is associated with problems such as kidney damage, neurological impairment and delayed cognitive development in children.

Read more: Australia emits mercury at double the global average

The ban will prevent about 5,280 kilograms of mercury entering the Australian environment each year.

But Australia is yet to ratify an international treaty to reduce mercury emissions from other sources, such as the dental industry and coal-fired power stations. This is our next challenge.

A mercury disaster

Mercury became a popular pesticide ingredient for agriculture in the early 1900s, and a number of poisoning events ensued throughout the world.

They include the Iraq grain disaster in 1971-72, when grain seed treated with mercury was imported from Mexico and the United States. The seed was not meant for human consumption, but rural communities used it to make bread, and 459 people died.

In the decades since, most countries have banned the production and/or use of mercury-based pesticides on crops. In 1995 Australia discontinued their use in most applications, such as turf farming.

Despite this, authorities exempted a fungicide containing mercury known as Shirtan. They restricted its use to sugar cane farming in Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia and the Northern Territory.

According to the sugar cane industry, about 80% of growers use Shirtan to treat pineapple sett rot disease.

But this month, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority cancelled the approval of the mercury-containing active ingredient in Shirtan, methoxyethylmercuric chloride. The decision was made at the request of the ingredient’s manufacturer, Alpha Chemicals.

Shirtan’s registration was cancelled last week. It will no longer be produced in Australia, but existing supplies can be sold to, and used by, sugar cane farmers for the next year until it is fully banned.

Workers and nature at risk

Over the past 25 years, Australia’s continued use of Shirtan allowed about 50,000 kilograms of mercury into the environment. The effect on river and reef ecosystems is largely unknown.

What is known is that mercury can be toxic even at very low concentrations, and research is needed to understand its ecological impacts.

The use of mercury-based pesticide has also created a high risk of exposure for sugar cane workers. At most risk are those not familiar with safety procedures for handling toxic materials, and who may have been poorly supervised. This risk has been exacerbated by the use itinerant workers, particularly those from a non-English speaking background.

Further, in the hot and humid conditions of Northern Australia, it has been reported that workers may have removed protective gloves to avoid sweating. Again, research is needed to determine the implication of these practices for human health.

To this end, Mercury Australia, a multi-disciplinary network of researchers, has formed to address the environmental, health and other issues surrounding mercury use, both contemporary and historical.

Australia is yet to ratify

The Minamata Convention on Mercury is a global treaty to control mercury use and release into the environment. Australia signed onto the convention in 2013 but is yet to ratify it.

Until the treaty is ratified, Australia is not legally bound to its obligations. It also places us at odds with more than 100 countries that have ratified it, including many of Australia’s developed-nation counterparts.

Australia’s outlier status in this area is shown in the below table:

Mercury-based pesticide use was one of Australia’s largest sources of mercury emissions. But if Australia ratifies the convention, it would be required to control other sources of mercury emissions, such as dental amalgam and the burning of coal in power stations.

The three active power stations in the Latrobe Valley, for example, together emit about 1,200 kilograms of mercury each year.

Time to look at coal

If Australia ratified the Minamata Convention, it would provide impetus for a timely review and, if necessary, update of mercury regulations across Australia.

Emissions from coal-fired power stations in Australia are regulated by the states through pollution control licences. Some states would likely have to amend these licences if Australia ratified the convention. For example, Victorian licences for coal-fired power stations currently do not include limits on mercury emissions.

Pollution control technologies were introduced at Australian coal plants in the early 1990s. But they do not match state-of-the-art technologies applied to coal plants in North America and Europe.

Read more: Why won’t Australia ratify an international deal to cut mercury pollution?

Australian environment authorities have been examining the implications of ratifying the convention. But progress is slow.

The issue of mercury emissions does not attract significant public or political attention. But there is a global scientific consensus that coordinated international action is needed.

The pesticide phase-out and ban is an important step. But Australia still has a way to go.

– ref. Ban on toxic mercury looms in sugar cane farming, but Australia still has a way to go – https://theconversation.com/ban-on-toxic-mercury-looms-in-sugar-cane-farming-but-australia-still-has-a-way-to-go-140596

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Forde, Director, Griffith Centre for Social and Cultural Research, Griffith University

The federal government’s announcement they will more than double the cost of humanities and communications degrees for university students has taken the sector by surprise – not least because it goes against increasing evidence that these programs are the key to our nation’s future success.

Read more: Fee cuts for nursing and teaching but big hikes for law and humanities in package expanding university places

If the government wants to support university courses that lead to jobs, they’d do well to listen to their business leaders who have been quite clear, in recent years, about the sorts of graduates they’re looking for.

Business leaders call for humanities

Chief Executive of the Business Council of Australia, Jennifer Westacott, said in a 2016 speech all 21st century successful leaders would need “some form of humanities perspective and education”.

I argue this because I believe our economic and technological success has not been matched with a constant orientation towards a better human condition.

She said the humanities produce people who can “ask the right questions, think for themselves, explain what they think, and turn those ideas into actions”.

She went further to say the key skills required by industry and business were nested in the humanities: “critical thinking, synthesis, judgement and an understanding of ethical constructs”.

Another valued industry body, Deloitte Access Economics, reported in 2018 that humanities and communications graduates delivered 30 technical skills hugely sought-after by employers.

Their analysis was based on graduate outcomes and employer satisfaction surveys, coupled with wide-ranging consultations with global business, public sector agencies and researchers.

They found 72% of employers “demanded” communication skills when hiring, but only 27% of potential hires actually had those skills.

They also found transferable skills, such as as teamwork, communication, problem-solving, innovation and emotional judgement, “have become widely acknowledged as important in driving business success”.

The report concluded

[…] humanities education and research has a fundamental role to play in understanding how our society and economy can adapt to these changes, in creating future value, and in helping individuals gain rewarding employment.

If our purpose is to incentivise programs that lead to jobs, which will equip the nation for the future, and will elicit innovative and creative responses to complex problems, then we must encourage broad study in the humanities and social sciences.

Our society calls for humanities

Most of us working in these fields can explain with great conviction the richness our disciplines bring to students, and ultimately to the societies they live in.

They bring an understanding of the world, of past mistakes and future threats, of current failings we can try to solve, and of medical, social and environmental challenges that confront us.

Our ability to understand the impact of the current global pandemic or migration, the environmental crisis, social cohesion, poverty and its many side-effects, domestic violence, the effects of social media and politics are daily concerns in the humanities.

And increasingly, we are aware the scale of these problems and the failure of our current institutions to deal with them – the often-discussed “crisis of trust” – cannot be solved by science, mathematics, engineering and technology alone.

It is the contribution of the humanities and social sciences to the STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) disciplines that may ultimately lead us to some real and applied solutions to the crises we face.

It’s therefore curious the education minister Dan Tehan is encouraging humanities students to add a “job-ready” edge to their studies by doing (soon-to-be much cheaper) courses in technology, science and maths.

And at the same time, he is actively discouraging students of technology, science and maths from being able to take some humanities courses as part of their degree because of the prohibitive higher cost.

Read more: Humanities graduates earn more than those who study science and maths

“So if you want to study history, also think about studying teaching. If you want to study philosophy, also think about studying a language. If you want to study law, also think about studying IT”, Tehan said in his National Press Club address.

Interdisciplinary knowledge, and combining humanities and social science with the STEM disciplines, is a strong concept. We already do it in many of our communications and arts degrees.

But to suggest this should only be one-way traffic is highly problematic.

Microsoft president Brad Smith and head of Microsoft’s AI division Harry Shum recently wrote that lessons from liberal arts would be “critical to unleashing the full potential of AI”.

They wrote

[…] skilling-up for an AI-powered world involves more than science, technology, engineering, and math. As computers behave more like humans, the social sciences and humanities will become even more important. Languages, art, history, economics, ethics, philosophy, psychology and human development courses can teach critical, philosophical and ethics-based skills that will be instrumental in the development and management of AI solutions.

Leading universities around the world are increasingly combining core study in engineering and IT with humanities study. They acknowledge the communication, interpersonal and adaptable skills gives a much longer “shelf life” to the technical skills learned while at university.

And let’s not forget world leaders with Arts degrees

The Academy of Social Sciences reports two out of three CEOs of Australia’s ASX200 listed companies have a degree in the social sciences. There are similar proportions of government senior executives, and federal parliamentarians holding social science degrees.

And of course, the roll call of important world leaders of the 20th and 21st century with a humanities or social science degree – Barack Obama, Martin Luther King, Youtube CEO Susan Wojcicki, and Indira Gandhi among them – tells us our messages now must be around the importance of the humanities, not the reverse.

Read more: University students aren’t cogs in a market. They need more than a narrow focus on ‘skills’

So I return to the start. There is increasing confirmation, in Australia and across the world, that humanities, social sciences and communication are key to a viable future.

On what evidence, then, has the federal government proposed these changes? We have to trust this is not an attempt to muzzle critical thought and new ideas in our universities – but rather, a misguided attempt that needs a little more work.

– ref. If the government listened to business leaders, they would encourage humanities education, not pull funds from it – https://theconversation.com/if-the-government-listened-to-business-leaders-they-would-encourage-humanities-education-not-pull-funds-from-it-141121

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Iain Lawrie, PhD Candidate, University of Melbourne

As we re-open our economy and workers gradually return to workplaces, overall travel will increase. However, the need to maintain social distancing means public transport can’t operate at usual capacity. And fears of crowded public transport will lead to commuters making a much higher proportion of trips in private vehicles – unless they are offered viable alternatives such as the ones we discuss here.

Our initial analysis (as yet unpublished) of Australia’s major cities suggests a shift to cars will produce severe traffic congestion if even a modest proportion of the workforce returns to their usual workplaces during the COVID-19 recovery. In this article, we suggest some public transport solutions to avoid congestion caused by a shift to car travel.

Read more: Coronavirus recovery: public transport is key to avoid repeating old and unsustainable mistakes

Globally, this trajectory is already becoming apparent. As lockdowns are eased, car use is rising much more quickly than public transport use. The latest figures from cities as diverse as Berlin, Los Angeles, Chicago, Auckland and Sydney all show this.

What are the implications of this trend?

First, the shift to private vehicles will be a bigger problem in cities with centres traditionally served by public transport than dispersed, car-dominated regions. Modelling by Vanderbilt University in the US showed an 85% shift of mass transit riders to cars would increase daily commute times by over sixty minutes in New York, but merely four minutes in Los Angeles. This is because public transport serves a mere 5% of journeys to work in Los Angeles but 56% in New York.

In cities that rely heavily on public transport, or even those with car-dominated suburbs but transit-dominated centres such as Sydney and Melbourne, a shift to cars for CBD trips will very quickly overwhelm the capacity of the road network. Pre-pandemic, 71% of trips to the Sydney CBD and 63% to Melbourne’s CBD were on public transport. So, while travel volumes may remain well below pre-pandemic levels for some time, road traffic is recovering faster than other travel modes.

Sydney’s and Brisbane’s road traffic volumes have already returned largely to pre-pandemic levels even while most CBD offices remain empty. Melbourne isn’t far behind. Returning commuters are in for a shock.

Read more: Cars: transition from lockdown is a fork in the road – here are two possible outcomes for future travel

What can we do about it?

Several commentators suggest now may be the time to apply congestion pricing – charging a fee to use roads in peak periods. However, when many people are making travel decisions based on the health risks, such policy may not produce the desired behaviour change.

Read more: How ‘gamification’ can make transport systems and choices work better for us

The alternative is to improve commuters’ public transport options, rather than trying to price congestion away. The aim should be to allow it to operate more effectively while still providing room for on-board social distancing.

This is no easy task, yet it may be politically and technically easier than rapidly bringing in a comprehensive road-pricing regime. Even with social distancing restrictions, public transport will use roads more efficiently than private cars.

The return to work must be gradual and supported by considerable flexibility in working hours. This will help manage peak demands. But on its own it’s not enough if frequent public transport services continue to be offered only during a limited commuter peak.

More services, more often

So, public transport services need to run at high frequencies for many more hours in the day. Some analysts suggest services be run at peak frequencies for most of the day.

Many suburban bus services, particularly direct services along arterial roads, should run much more often than their existing peak offerings. Routes can be tweaked to remove unnecessary detours that lead to slow travel times.

Read more: 1 million rides and counting: on-demand services bring public transport to the suburbs

These frequent, direct services should be supported by rigorous cleaning, visual guidance to maintain separation on platforms and within vehicles, and tools to help identify crowded vehicles.

Most importantly, we need to rapidly create “pop-up” dedicated bus lanes right across metropolitan areas. These lanes allow buses to avoid being held up by increasing traffic volumes. Although bus lanes may reduce capacity for private vehicles, when buses run frequently they are a much more efficient use of scarce road space.

Faster travel times for public transport would, in turn, mean operators could deliver more frequent services with existing fleets and drivers. This would reduce the operational cost of allowing for social distancing.

Read more: To limit coronavirus risks on public transport, here’s what we can learn from efforts overseas

Frequent services on these pop-up corridors will provide a critical, time-competitive alternative to driving. Although not without its challenges, implementing a fast and frequent bus network is conceptually straightforward and the cost is modest compared to the congestion impacts it could offset.

This solution will require a nimble and co-operative approach from state and local transport authorities and private operators. Success will mean our transit-centred CBDs and district centres continue to function efficiently.

In the longer term, a fast and frequent metropolitan transit network will leave a lasting positive legacy, supporting carbon reduction and city-shaping investments such as Sydney’s Metro and Brisbane’s Cross River Rail. Failure will lead to crippling congestion that erodes the economic and social strength of our previously vibrant cities.

– ref. How to avoid cars clogging our cities during coronavirus recovery – https://theconversation.com/how-to-avoid-cars-clogging-our-cities-during-coronavirus-recovery-140744

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rahul Sen, Senior Lecturer, School of Economics, Auckland University of Technology

The impact of COVID-19 on New Zealand’s international education sector can hardly be overstated. Almost overnight, the global travel ban thwarted the plans of thousands of international students. Lecture theatres, halls of residence and private accommodations stood empty.

By the end of April 2020, overseas enrolments stood at 17,570 students – about half the total number during the same period in 2018.

However, given the closed borders and early lockdown, it’s heartening that universities have continued to receive overseas inquiries and enrolments for next year.

The fact students still want to study in New Zealand can be attributed to two things.

First, despite the recent border control failure, New Zealand is in a singular position as the first OECD country in the world to eliminate COVID-19. Praise from the media has been global and glowing, which prospective students will have noticed.

Second, New Zealand universities have acted swiftly to ensure current international students here and abroad can continue their studies with minimal disruption.

Read more: Interactive: international students make up more than 30% of population in some Australian suburbs

Both these aspects will play a crucial role in re-establishing New Zealand as a preferred destination as the economy recovers. Targeting potential student groups and marketing New Zealand as a quality education centre will be key to this.

It will need to be a priority. Already two Australian universities, in partnership with state and federal governments, are trialling direct charter flights for international students in anticipation of re-opened borders.

We already have a competitive edge

New Zealand has positioned itself well as a leading international education destination over the past two decades.

Our global reputation as a clean, green and welcoming place to study translates into an international education sector estimated to be worth NZ$5.1 billion. That makes it the fourth-largest export earner and the second-largest services export sector. It contributes around 1.5% of New Zealand’s GDP.

International students make direct and indirect contributions to the economy. They are obviously a vital source of revenue for the New Zealand education sector, but they also help to redress critical skill shortages in the labour market.

Read more: How universities came to rely on international students

In 2019, for example, international students filled about 47,000 jobs. They add value by gaining qualifications in critical areas like health care and science and technology. And they contribute to the broader economy by spending on tourism and hospitality.

On average, each international student has an economic value of close to $40,000 per year.

If New Zealand’s elimination strategy succeeds, it will remain an attractive destination for international students – particularly if other leading destinations (namely the US, UK and EU) struggle to contain the pandemic.

Out of crisis comes opportunity

New Zealand’s victory over the virus will mean a win for New Zealand universities. The primary aim of marketing strategies should now be to further emphasise New Zealand as a safe, internationally competitive and quality destination to pursue tertiary study.

As the UK and US continue to struggle with the COVID-19 crisis, Australia and New Zealand are poised to become preferred destinations for international education. This presents New Zealand universities with a unique opportunity to target students who might previously have preferred to study in those bigger markets.

Universities can also capitalise on support from local councils. They are backing calls to let international students return, such as the recent proposal from Auckland Council and the wider education sector.

Read more: Student teachers must pass a literacy and numeracy test before graduating – it’s unfair and costly

New Zealand universities should also aim to develop new partnerships with leading international institutions within our key export markets. The recently established New Zealand Centre at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi, and the University of Auckland China learning centres are examples of such alliances.

The latter model – on-campus learning for international students in China while they wait for borders to open – should be explored by other players in this sector. Given that most New Zealand universities have limited enrolments from Southeast Asia, a similar approach with leading academic institutions in the region could tap new markets.

The government’s role could be vital

As the world grapples with containing COVID-19, the move to open our borders for international students presents two main challenges: safety and cost.

New arrivals will have to quarantine in regulated facilities and be tested regularly for an agreed period. This will inevitably mean extra costs for students. Many of them will not be able to afford it.

One possible solution is that New Zealand universities, together with the government, offer financial packages for deserving international students. This would be justified as critical for maintaining our competitiveness in an increasingly knowledge-based global economy.

Business as usual is no longer an option. Only by creatively adapting to the new realities of a post-COVID world will the New Zealand brand grow again and our universities become a preferred destination for international education.

– ref. Learning from experience: how our universities can turn the international student crisis into an opportunity – https://theconversation.com/learning-from-experience-how-our-universities-can-turn-the-international-student-crisis-into-an-opportunity-139202

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Weihuan Zhou, Senior Lecturer and member of Herbert Smith Freehills CIBEL Centre, Faculty of Law, UNSW Sydney, UNSW

China’s landmark investigations into Australian barley led to the imposition of “anti-dumping” and “anti-subsidy” tariffs of 80.5% in May, threatening an Australian export market worth $A600 million a year.

China says it made its own calculations on the extent to which Australia subsidised barley after Australian authorities failed to give it all the information it needed in the form it requested.

It set out its findings on subsidies in a report at present only available in Chinese.

One was that Australian officials “did not comply” with its requirements in relation to the Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program.

Australia disputes that conclusion.

At first glance the possibility that Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program could have had anything to do with subsidising barely exports seems baseless.

The Murray Darling Basin Plan, of which the Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program is a part, is a long-running program aiming to remedy a century of over-exploitation of water.

It includes no discussion of production targets, export volumes or anything else that might be expected to set off trade alarm bells.

Plan more than environmental

But the plan and its A$13 billion budget is about more than the environment.

It originally prioritised the environment, but in 2010 its goal was explicitly changed to address a triple bottom line of economic, social and environmental concerns.

From there, its management became a major economic and political issue.

Read more: While towns run dry, cotton extracts 5 Sydney Harbours’ worth of Murray Darling water a year. It’s time to reset the balance

Scandals surround huge payments for dubious water rights, infrastructure spending that doesn’t actually save water, and massive subsidisation of irrigation expansion into areas that were not previously irrigated.

Stories abound of favoured companies or regions reaping large windfalls at the expense of taxpayers, other farmers, the environment, or all three.

Administered with ‘habitual’ secrecy

Australia’s Department of Agriculture says the government fully engaged with China’s investigation, “including providing extensive information on production and commercial information on the Australian barley industry”.

But the department hasn’t always been forthcoming about its operations.

A South Australian Royal Commission concluded that its claim to be committed to engaging in public debate and open dialogue should be regarded with “deep suspicion”.

The separate Murray Darling Basin Authority operated with “an unfathomable predilection for secrecy”.

The behaviour was “habitual”, in the assessment of the Royal Commission.

We might have given China a case

Even if Australian officials did participate in the Chinese investigation in good faith, the potential for confusion is considerable given the jargon that engulfs both water management and trade law.

Few water managers speak trade law and equally few trade lawyers understand the jargon of the Murray Darling Basin Plan.

From a trade law perspective, although the Sustainable Rural Water Use and Infrastructure Program and the Basin Plan do not explicitly subsidise exports, the fact that much of the Basin’s produce is exported means it could be argued that they distort trade.

Read more: The Murray-Darling Basin scandal: economists have seen it coming for decades

It is open to a country such as China to take action if the program has conferred benefits to an Australian industry and the subsidised exports have caused a material injury to a competing domestic industry.

China alleges this is the case for barley, but a stronger case could perhaps be argued for the Basin’s bigger export crops: cotton, almonds and walnuts.

Part of the reason is that the program involves government spending, but it is possible to argue that the implementation of the Basin Plan has also subsidised exporters in another way, by environmental mismanagement.

Read more: Australia’s ‘watergate’: here’s what taxpayers need to know about water buybacks

The Barwon-Darling has been described by environmental regulators as “an ecosystem in crisis”. Contributing to the crisis has been a system that allocates scarce water to irrigators and diverts huge volumes of floodwater into private dams.

This arguably illegal practice of “floodplain harvesting” provides huge benefits to cotton exporters.

It is uncertain whether China’s barley decision will bring about changes to Australian water management that downstream communities, irrigators, Indigenous nations and environment groups have long called for.

It would help if water regulators explained what they were doing in terms that can be understood by ordinary Australians and Chinese trade experts alike.

Contributing to this article were Maryanne Slattery, a former director at the Murray Darling Basin Authority and a director of water consultancy Slattery Johnson, Rod Campbell, Research Director at the Australia Institute and Allan Behm, director of the Australia Institute’s International and Security Affairs program.

– ref. Why China believed it had a case to hit Australian barley with tariffs – https://theconversation.com/why-china-believed-it-had-a-case-to-hit-australian-barley-with-tariffs-140633

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justine Humphry, Lecturer in Digital Cultures, University of Sydney

Last year, nearly one third of Australian adults owned a smart speaker device allowing them to call on “Alexa” or “Siri”. Now, with more time spent indoors due to COVID-19, smart voice assistants may be playing even bigger roles in people’s lives.

But not everyone embraces them. In our paper published in New Media Society, we trace anxiety about smart assistants to a long history of threatening robot voices and narratives in Hollywood.

The warm and solicitous female voices of smart assistants contrast with cinematic robot archetypes of the “menacing male” or “monstrous mother”, with their highly synthesised voices and dangerous surveillant personalities.

Instead, smart assistants voices have been strategically adapted by companies like Google, Apple and Amazon to sound helpful and sympathetic.

‘Menacing males’ and ‘monstrous mothers’

In the early 20th century, robots were marvels of futuristic technology. The first voice given to a robot was Bell Labs’ “the Voder” in 1938. This was a complex device (typically played by Bell’s female telephone operators) that could generate slow and deliberate speech, composed of various manipulations of generated waveforms.

While they appeared in earlier movies, in the 1950s robots truly came into their own on screen.

With distinctive sounds that gave the robots a sense of otherness, they became associated with narratives of science gone out of control, such as in Forbidden Planet (1956) and The Collossus of New York (1958). HAL 9000, the infamous computer in Stanley Kubrick’s 2001 A Space Odyssey (1968), becomes murderous as the computer shows its allegiance to the mission at the cost of the crew.

Later, film makers started exploring robots as maternal figures with misplaced instincts.

In the Disney movie Smart House (1999), the home turns into a controlling mother who flies into a rage when the family refuses to cede to her demands. In I, Robot (2004), the computer VIKI and her robot hordes turn against people to protect humanity from itself.

But perhaps the most enduring vision of robots is neither a menacing male nor a monstrous mother. It is something more human, as in Bladerunner (1982), where the replicants are hard to distinguish from humans. These humanoid robots continue to predominate on the small and big screen, showing increasingly more psychologically complex characteristics.

As the robots Maeve and Dolores achieve more sentience in the Westworld TV series (2016), their behaviour becomes more natural, and their voices become more inflected, cynical and self-aware. In Humans (2015), two groups of anthropomorphic robots, called “synths”, are distinguished by one group’s ability to more closely resemble humans through features of natural conversation, with more animation and meaningful pauses.

From fiction to reality

In these films the voice is a crucial vehicle with which robots express a persona. Smart assistant developers adopted this concept of developing persona through voice after recognising the value in getting consumers to identify with their products

Apple’s Siri (2010), Microsoft’s Cortana (2014), Amazon’s Echo (2015) and Google Assistant (2016) were all introduced with female voice actors. Big tech companies strategically selected these female voices to create positive associations. They were the antithesis of the menacing male or monstrous mother cinematic robot archetypes.

But while these friendly voices could steer consumers away from thinking of smart assistants as dangerous surveillant machines, the use of female-by-default voices has been criticised.

Smart assistants have been described as “wife replacements” and “domestic servants. Even UNESCO has warned smart assistants risk entrenching gender bias.

Read more: There’s a reason Siri, Alexa and AI are imagined as female – sexism

Perhaps it is for this reason the newest smart-voice is the BBC’s Beeb, with a male northern English accent. Its designers say this accent makes their robot more human-like. It also echoes traditional media practices using the masculine voice of authority.

Of course, it’s not all in the voice. Smart assistants are programmed to be culturally competent in their relevant market: the Australian version of Google Assistant knows about pavlova and galahs, and uses Australian slang expressions.

Gentle humour, too, plays a significant role in humanising the artificial intelligence behind these devices. When asked, “Alexa, are you dangerous?”, she replies calmly, “No, I am not dangerous.”

Smart assistants resemble the humanoid robots in latter-day pop culture – sometimes nearly indistinguishable from humans themselves.

Dangerous intimacy

With voices that are apparently natural, transparent and depoliticised, the assistants give only one brief answer to each question and draw these responses from a small range of sources. This gives the tech companies significant “soft power” in their potential to influence consumers’ feelings, thoughts and behaviour.

Smart assistants may soon play an even more intrusive role in our everyday affairs. Google’s experimental technology Duplex, for instance, allows users to ask the assistant to make phone calls on their behalf to perform tasks such as booking a hair appointment.

Read more: AI can book a restaurant or a hair appointment, but don’t expect a full conversation

If it/she can pass as “human”, this might further risk manipulating consumers and obscuring the implications of surveillance, soft power and global monopoly.

By positioning smart assistants as innocuous through their voice characteristics – far from the menacing males and monstrous mothers of the cinema screen – consumers can be lulled into a false sense of security.

– ref. From HAL 9000 to Westworld’s Dolores: the pop culture robots that influenced smart voice assistants – https://theconversation.com/from-hal-9000-to-westworlds-dolores-the-pop-culture-robots-that-influenced-smart-voice-assistants-140341

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

The government’s higher education changes, announced last week, appear driven by three factors. How you judge the result will depend on where you sit.

In sum, the shake up will reduce student fees for courses in areas the government identifies as potentially job-rich and increase them for the humanities and certain other courses to produce a result that’s funding-neutral for the government.

The first driver of the policy is the surge in demand for places. This is coming both from what’s dubbed “the Costello baby boom” (“have one for mum, one for dad and one for the country,” Peter Costello said when treasurer) and from the COVID-flattened economy, which will stop many young people taking a gap year.

The government wants to manage this pressure without having to fork out more money.

Secondly, the changes reflect Scott Morrison’s overwhelming preoccupation with jobs. This is the main element in both his rhetoric and his policy across government. When he announced recently the national cabinet would be made permanent, he said its singular focus would be jobs.

Read more: Fee cuts for nursing and teaching but big hikes for law and humanities in package expanding university places

While it is understandable that at the moment most issues are being seen through the employment prism, in the longer term a government’s lens should be wider. Work (with the opportunity to obtain it) is critical to the well-being of the individual and the community. At the same time it is not everything, certainly not if people are to have rounded and fulfilling lives.

Finally, there does seem to be an ideological tinge to the policy, notably in the treatment of the humanities. The cost for these courses will rise by a massive 113%. This compares with hikes of 28% for law and commerce.

There is an anti-intellectual streak in this government, with ministers unsympathetic towards universities, which many of them see as breeding grounds for left-leaning activists. Education Minister Dan Tehan, for one, has been very critical of what he has identified as curbs on free speech in the universities.

This government and its prime minister are a very long way from Liberal Party founder Robert Menzies’s views. Menzies saw as one of his major achievements the expansion of Australia’s universities, and he had a broad view of higher education.

David Furse-Roberts wrote in a Quadrant article titled, “A Rugged Honesty of Mind: Menzies and Education”: “Far from functioning merely as utilitarian “degree factories” to churn out the greatest volume of graduates, Menzies esteemed universities as the great nurseries of civilisation. In addition to equipping undergraduates with essential training and vocational skills, the university would serve to cultivate the character of students and encourage them to seek truth and beauty in their chosen discipline.“

Menzies strongly defended the humanities (although it has been noted the “humanities” as taught in universities of his day looked rather different from much of today’s content). And, it should be added, universities then did not teach the wide range of vocational courses they do today.

The Morrison government takes a basically “utilitarian” view of universities. Indeed, universities have made themselves very utilitarian, as they have transformed into giant businesses – substantially in response to governments of both persuasions pushing them on the revenue front.

This strengthened the Australian economy, as higher education ballooned into a massive export sector.

But COVID has brought home the over-dependence of our universities on foreign students, for many thousands of whom they are now desperately trying to find a passage back.

It is not just the financial position of institutions that has been compromised by excessive reliance on overseas students, who pay so much more than the domestic cohort.

So have some academic standards, although this is not often publicly admitted. One hears frequent complaints, for example, from domestic students who find themselves working (and assessed) in groups with overseas students who have limited English language skills. And some staff feel under the pump to pass foreign students.

The COVID crisis should mark a point where universities take stock of how they are managing the trade offs between foreign income on the one hand and educational standards and the needs of domestic students on the other.

Coming back to the Tehan package for domestic students, the reaction has been predictably diverse, according to how various stakeholders see it affecting them. The winners are applauding; the losers cross.

Read more: Humanities graduates earn more than those who study science and maths

In terms of its broad effects Andrew Norton, professor in the Practice of Higher Education Policy at the Australian National University, believes it will not alter students’ choices substantially.

He tells The Conversation that student course choices are primarily driven by their interests. For most of them, that includes the career they hope for after finishing their degree. Student with firm goals would not change a fundamental life choice due to a change in fees, he says. Students who are less clear about exactly what kind of job they want after finishing their career will only choose within their range of interests.

Norton argues that if some students are not aware of courses that might interest them, then improved careers advice and course marketing would be a better solution than shuffling hundreds of millions of dollars in student payments between courses.

He says the changes raise questions of fairness. While those benefitting from lower fees, such as students undertaking teaching and nursing, will pay off their student debts more quickly than under the current system, those graduating from the humanities could be saddled with debt for decades. “This mix of windfall gains and heavy new debt burdens seems unnecessary to achieve the policy goal of improving graduate employment outcomes.”

The government will need to get its changes through the Senate. When it launched a sweeping plan to deregulate fees some years ago, it could not obtain parliamentary approval. It stresses this is not deregulation, but whether it will be more successful with this proposal remains to be seen.

– ref. View from The Hill: Tehan’s student fees are not just about jobs, but about funding and a dash of ideology too – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-tehans-student-fees-are-not-just-about-jobs-but-about-funding-and-a-dash-of-ideology-too-141185

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Max Finlayson, Adjunct Professor, Charles Sturt University

Water use in the Murray-Darling Basin has long been a source of conflict. Damage to rivers and wetlands, including fish kills and algal blooms, has featured prominently in the news.

But the Winton Wetlands, in the south-east basin, represents a bright spot. Its restoration provides a sense of hope that reaches beyond the complexities of history.

The wetlands site is about 2.5 hours drive north-east of Melbourne. It’s now a thriving place for plants and wildlife that attracts plenty of visitors – but it wasn’t always like this.

From dispossession to decommissioning

The Yorta Yorta people were the original Aboriginal inhabitants of the area. They lost access to the land and water when European settlers took it for farming in the 1860s.

The farmers and the wetlands were displaced in 1970 when a 7.5 kilometre rock wall was built to form Lake Mokoan. The dam project allowed for local irrigation and created a drought reserve for the River Murray. This was broadly welcomed for the economic and recreational values it promised.

It worked for a while, but the resulting flooding killed around 150,000 iconic river red gums, including many Aboriginal scar trees.

The dam was dried out for downstream supplies in the 1982 drought. Then the 1990s brought massive blue-green algal blooms.

The frequent blooms made it hard to use the water. The Victorian government needed to find water savings for water projects elsewhere and in 2004 decided to remove the dam.

It was a controversial move, opposed by many in the community, including those who lived around the lake, or used the water for recreation or irrigation. But in 2009 a gap was cut through the wall and the water drained.

Restoration of the wetlands

After the dam was decommissioned, it was clear the site had undergone significant ecological and social change. So the government was keen to establish a world-class wetland with close links to nearby communities.

In 2009 an independent, community-based committee of management was formed to renew the site.

The scale of the renewal is significant, covering 8,750 hectares. It’s the first site outside the US to be classed as a Wetland of Distinction by the Society of Wetland Scientists, a leading global voice for wetland science and management.

Importantly, local Indigenous people are actively involved in the project, which recognises Indigenous cultural heritage sites throughout the wetlands.

This runs alongside efforts to document and share the history of the European settlers. The committee recognises that people in the wetlands have more than once moved from occupation to dispossession.

The ecological renewal is built around specific management actions to establish self-sustaining populations of native fish, waterbirds and other fauna, and aquatic plants. It’s also improving the water quality and reducing the populations of feral animals and weeds.

Native plants returned to the site include the river red gum and cane grass.

Native fish are breeding, as is the majestic white-bellied sea eagle. A rakali (Australia’s answer to otters) and sugar gliders have been sighted.

Read more: A major scorecard gives the health of Australia’s environment less than 1 out of 10

An advisory panel is guiding the science behind the project. It’s supported by research partnerships with universities and an annual science forum, designed as an information exchange between the committee and the wider community.

A cafe and visitors hub are now regularly used for events. People visit the wetlands for walks, bike rides, canoeing, stargazing and birdwatching.

There are 60km of roads, nine bush walks, 30km of cycling trails and artworks celebrating the landscape and its history.

The decommissioning of the dam was not well received by some in the community at first. The restoration project is working hard to repair the connection of people to the site through ecological renewal, art and recreational events.

If you restore it, they will come

The success of the Winton Wetlands project in involving the community is reflected in increasing visitor numbers to the site. These have grown from 36,264 in 2016-17 to 65,287 in 2018-19.

In addition, the numbers of schoolchildren who visit the site for guided nature excursions has increased from 274 in 2016-17 to 2,013 in 2018-19.

Volunteers are also playing a role with some 4,114 hours of effort in 2018-19 operating the information desk, taking guided walks, organising planting days and other restoration activities. Volunteers support the science work in various ways including long-term monitoring of frog calls.

Read more: Don’t count your fish before they hatch: experts react to plans to release 2 million fish into the Murray Darling

The management committee is determined to rebuild the ecological integrity of the wetlands. But there is a lot still to do, and there are differences of opinion over the priorities and the speed at which things are being done.

The initial funding of A$17 million from the Victorian government will soon be exhausted. Other financial avenues are being pursued. This is necessary to secure a future for this bright spot – a gem of inestimable value – in the Murray-Darling Basin.

– ref. Restoring a gem in the Murray-Darling Basin: the success story of the Winton Wetlands – https://theconversation.com/restoring-a-gem-in-the-murray-darling-basin-the-success-story-of-the-winton-wetlands-140337

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Dwyer, Associate Professor, Department of Media and Communications, University of Sydney

The Australian government is setting out to develop a “bargaining code” to address power imbalances between news media publishers and digital platforms such as Facebook and Google. The creation of this code was recommended last year in the final report of the Digital Platforms Inquiry held by the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission (ACCC).

The ACCC is planning to publish a draft version of the code at the end of July, but in the meantime it has asked interested parties to contribute their views. Most submissions won’t be made public until the draft code is released, but some stakeholders – including Facebook – have published their submissions themselves.

In Facebook’s submission, it sets out to rebut the ACCC’s understanding of the digital media landscape.

Facebook argues it doesn’t really need news publishers because news content is substitutable, and anyway the platform prioritises content from family and friends in people’s news feeds.

In effect, Facebook is saying it does more good than harm to journalism and news media businesses. The bargaining process hinges on a dispute over the value of news content and exactly what it contributes to the platform’s business – which is currently unclear, particularly to those outside the tent.

Read more: No more negotiating: new rules could finally force Google and Facebook to pay for news

Valuing news

Facebook’s approach plays into a narrative about how consumers and advertisers migrated to the web in the early 21st century, collapsing the 150-year-old advertising model of newspapers.

Historically, news was the “poor cousin” in direct commercial arrangements between advertisers and newspapers (and later broadcasters). News evolved as byproduct of this exchange and so it remains, secondary to the main game, a kind of subsidy and a “filler” to be used by these giant digital machines of platform capitalism.

But news is also acknowledged as a public good with broader societal benefits. Platforms are slowly realising they cannot avoid regulation to reduce the harms that result from their own market dominance.

Facebook’s chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has identified the platform’s key problematic areas as “harmful content” (such as hate speech and inappropriate imagery) and “election content” (such as targeted political advertising).

Facebook itself has moved from strongly opposing external regulatory interventions to guardedly accepting the idea, as long as the particular regulation suits them.

Read more: Media Files: ACCC seeks to clip wings of tech giants like Facebook and Google but international effort is required

A strategic rebuttal

In its ACCC submission, Facebook argues it hasn’t contributed to the demise of news businesses by hoovering up advertising revenue. Instead, it points out the rise of the internet had already sent news media into structural decline.

If anyone is to blame, according to Facebook, it is the news businesses themselves who didn’t see the digital tsunami on the horizon.

Unsurprisingly, Facebook does not mention its own substantial market power: with Google, the social media giant carries the bulk of online advertising. As US media scholar Victor Pickard has noted, Facebook and Google between them collect 85% of all growth in digital advertising revenue, leaving very little for news publishers.

Facebook’s take on the news market

Facebook argues the ACCC, the news industry and the rest of us are all suffering from “misconceptions”. In broad terms these are: that Facebook is responsible for the market failure of news; that it “steals” news content and news publishers have no control over its surfacing; and that there’s a value imbalance between the platforms and news media businesses which favours Facebook, and therefore Facebook should compensate the businesses at commercial rates.

However, Australians are increasingly getting their news via social media newsfeeds. Research from the University of Canberra shows the COVID-19 pandemic has boosted this trend, and Reuters has found older Australians too are increasingly using social media as a pathway to news.

Clearly, digital platforms and news media businesses have a symbiotic relationship. But it is far from an equitable one: with a market capitalisation of US$671 billion, annual revenue of more than US$70 billion, and around 1.73 billion users every day, Facebook dwarfs any news media business.

As social media platforms are growing more important when it comes to accessing news, and news is a social good, the ACCC is calling for a more sustainable, if not an aspirationally equitable relationship.

Facebook likes the idea of a new Australian Digital Media Council modelled on the Australia Press Council. It would arbitrate disputes between news media publishers and digital platforms.

But is this a reasonable comparison? Can news publishers be equated with individual complainants who seek remedies?

Trying to dodge responsibility?

The central theme of Facebook’s submission is a refusal to acknowledge there is a power imbalance between news media businesses and Facebook and Google that needs to be addressed.

Facebook questions the idea of even casting their relationship to the news media sector in that way. Indeed, the company appears to in denial about the simple fact noted by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s comment on the handing down of the Digital Platforms Inquiry report:

Make no mistake, these companies are among the most powerful and valuable in the world.

If nothing else, Facebook has demonstrated its well-oiled PR machine and the phalanx of people ready to defend its surging revenue base. Its counter-arguments to the ACCC are evidence of this, and also a determination to maintain absolute algorithmic control over the news feed.

From Facebook’s perspective, a key impact of COVID-19 has been that people are now spending increasing amounts of time on their platform.

– ref. Facebook vs news: Australia wants to level the playing field, Facebook politely disagrees – https://theconversation.com/facebook-vs-news-australia-wants-to-level-the-playing-field-facebook-politely-disagrees-141043

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mahmoud Elkhodr, Lecturer in Information and Communication Technologies, CQUniversity Australia

Prime Minister Scott Morrison had some alarming news for Australians this morning: we are under cyber attack. He informed the nation the attacks “hadn’t just started”, and that Australian businesses and governments are being widely targeted.

It is unclear why the government chose today to make the announcement, or indeed what exactly is going on.

The attack is described as “state-sponsored”, which means a foreign government is believed to be behind it. When asked who that might be, Morrison said there is a high threshold for drawing that kind of conclusion, but added:

…there are not a large number of state-based actors that can engage in this type of activity.

This has been interpreted as a coded reference to China, which the Australian government reportedly suspects of being behind the attacks.

Read more: Why international law is failing to keep pace with technology in preventing cyber attacks

What do we know about the attack so far?

An advisory note posted on the government’s Australian Cyber Security Centre website describes the attack as a “cyber campaign targeting Australian networks”.

The advisory says the attackers are primarily using “remote code execution vulnerability” to target Australian networks and systems. Remote code execution is a common type of cyber attack in which an attacker attempts to insert their own software codes into a vulnerable system such as a server or database.

The attackers would not only try to steal information but also attempt to run malicious codes that could damage or disable the systems under attack.

Detecting this is hard, and would require advanced defensive measures such as penetration testing, in which trained security professionals known as “ethical hackers” try to hack into a system in an attempt to find potential vulnerabilities.

What systems have been affected?

The advisory linked the attack to three specific vulnerabilities in particular systems, detailed in the table below. Any business that uses any of these systems is vulnerable to attack. It is too early to tell whether other systems are also vulnerable; other vulnerabilities may emerge as investigations continue.

How can businesses protect themselves?

Even though the specific threats are not fully known to the public, there is a range of measures businesses can take in the meantime. These include:

Use available government resources

The federal government has provided extensive cyber safety guidelines for Australian businesses, featuring advice on cyber security and data protection, and information on the various types of cyber threat.

More comprehensive cyber security guidelines can be found at the ACSC website, including detailed advice on secure management of databases, email systems and physical computer assets, among others.

Watch out for spam

Phishing is not just limited to email. These scams can be executed via text messages, social media such as Facebook, and VOIP messaging services such as WhatsApp.

As a general guide:

• do not open messages or attachments from unknown senders

• remember that genuine organisations such as banks, government departments and online retailers never ask for personal information via email, and you should always check with them directly (such as by calling them) if in doubt.

Read more: Everyone falls for fake emails: lessons from cybersecurity summer school

Beware DDoS attacks

A “distributed denial of service” (DDoS) attack is the most common type of cyber attack. It works by flooding your website with traffic, preventing genuine customers from reaching your website. Think of it like a traffic jam clogging up a highway and preventing cars from reaching their destinations.

Luckily, there are ways to reduce the impact of DDoS attacks, such as by using intrusion detection and prevention systems. If you are concerned about DoS attacks speak with your internet provider about developing a DDoS response plan.

Have a backup plan

A “continuity plan” ensures important assets such as personnel records, customer databases and network configurations are protected and can be restored quickly in the event of a cyberattack.

Suggested plans are available via the federal and Queensland governments.

Businesses should also follow sensible IT security procedures, which include the following:

Regardless of the details, the latest announcement is a reminder that we should not lower our guard against cyber attacks. The latest round of cyber attacks are likely the result of previous “reconnaissance attacks”, which revealed existing vulnerabilities in Australian networks.

Taking the steps outlined above could help prevent hackers mounting similar attacks in the future.

– ref. Australia is under sustained cyber attack, warns the government. What’s going on, and what should businesses do? – https://theconversation.com/australia-is-under-sustained-cyber-attack-warns-the-government-whats-going-on-and-what-should-businesses-do-141119

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Eva, Senior Lecturer, Monash University

The COVID-19 crisis has changed the way many of us work. With the switch to working from home, in particular, a fundamental workplace behaviour has gone by the wayside.

Informal feedback.

At the office it is easy to get, and give. But working from home makes it hard. Every interaction requires dialling a number, typing out a message or scheduling a video meeting. That little bit of extra effort means many of us may not bother, given other demands. Indeed a survey of 1,001 US employees in April found lack of communication was a common reason 45% said they felt burnt out.

Read more: It’s not just the isolation. Working from home has surprising downsides

So feedback is especially essential now.

But how to achieve it?

Traditional management thinking would assume the key source of feedback employees need is from supervisors, and put resources into that.

But this might be the time to change that. Our research shows the same organisational benefits can be achieved through a broader culture of feedback between colleagues, making managerial feedback non-essential.

Managers not that important

Our study investigated the degree to which two different sources of feedback – manager feedback and colleague feedback – influenced worker’s willingness to take on more office tasks.

To do so, we surveyed 300 employees and their 64 managers three times over three months in late 2018.

In the first month, employees rated the level of performance and developmental feedback they got from their managers and colleagues, using a “Likert scale” of one to five, one being strong disagreement and five strong agreement. For example, they were asked: “My co-workers provide me with valuable information about how to improve my job performance.”

Read more: Six effective ways to have that difficult conversation at work

In the second month, employees rated their work engagement and whether their feedback expectations were being met. These expectations are part of what researchers call the “psychological contract” between an individual and an organisation – personal beliefs about the reciprocal obligations between the worker and the workplace.

In the third month, we asked the employees’ direct managers to report on any extra tasks those employees had taken on over the past quarter. We asked them to assess if the employee was innovative, such as “creating new ideas” and “transforming the ideas into innovative applications”. We also asked how they helped others, such as “giving their time to help others who have work-related problems”.

Our hypothesis was that receiving high levels of manager feedback would be associated with high scores on these measures.

The results of our analyses did show feedback from managers was important. It increased employee engagement by about 13%.

Unexpectedly, however, our results also showed managerial feedback wasn’t any more important than feedback from colleagues.

That is, employees who rated feedback from managers low but feedback from colleagues high scored just as well on the engagement scores from their managers.

So the source of feedback did not matter, so long as it was there.

Decentralising feedback

Our results are in line with research showing the best feedback for fostering innovation comes from a source that understands the work, is immediate and frequent.

They show the potential of decentralised work cultures to pick up the slack when conditions, such as working from home, mean workers aren’t having their psychological contract fulfilled by managers.

Read more: Say yes to mess – why companies should embrace disorder

Promoting an organisation-wide culture of constructive and supportive feedback is even more important to overcome the hurdles in remote working to getting enough informal feedback.

It will take leadership from the top, and bottom.

But you can do it. And we think someone should, informally, tell you that.

– ref. Informal feedback: we crave it more than ever, and don’t care who it’s from – https://theconversation.com/informal-feedback-we-crave-it-more-than-ever-and-dont-care-who-its-from-138932

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Hurley, Policy Fellow, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University

Education minister Dan Tehan has announced changes to funding rates for university courses as part of a plan to create “job ready graduates”.

He said:

Projections prepared before the COVID-19 pandemic showed that over the five years to 2024 it is expected that the overwhelming majority of new jobs will require tertiary qualifications – and almost half of all new jobs will go to someone with a bachelor or higher qualification.

Under the new plan, students doing teaching, nursing, clinical psychology, English and languages will pay 46% less for their degree from next year.

Students in agriculture and maths will pay 62% less, while those studying science, health, architecture, environmental science, IT, and engineering will be 20% better off.

But the student contribution for the humanities will go up by 113%, and the costs for law and commerce will jump by 28%.

The rationale is to encourage students to select courses with the best employment outcomes.

Read more: Fee cuts for nursing and teaching but big hikes for law and humanities in package expanding university places

Tehan said health care is projected to make the largest contributions to employment growth, followed by science and technology, education and construction.

He said these industries are projected to provide 62% of total employment growth over the next five years.

Although there will be no change in course fees for medicine, dental, and veterinary science students.

With a forecasted rise in unemployment due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Tehan is expecting more young people to go to university, and others to return to re-skill.

National figures show about 93% of graduates who are available for work are employed three years after completing their bachelor degree.

While science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) graduates are a focus of Tehan’s reforms, not all STEM graduates have above-average employment outcomes. After three years, the overall employment rate of engineering graduates is 95%, while science and maths graduates have a 90.1% rate of overall employment.

And science and maths graduates actually earn less than those with a degree in the humanities.

Which university students get jobs?

Undergraduates who study physiotherapy and occupational therapy have the highest level of employment (98.8%) three years after finishing their bachelor degree, while creative arts graduates the lowest (89.3%).

Of the study areas where the government is proposing students contribute more, law graduates (95.8%) and business graduates (95.5%) are employed at rates above the average. Humanities graduates are employed at a rate of 91.1% (above science and maths).

The median salary for university graduates differs as well. After three years, medicine graduates earn the most (A$100,000) along with dentistry graduates (A$97,400).

As the graph above shows, humanities and social science graduates (A$70,300) earn more than maths and science graduates (A$68,900).

Will reforms help the coronavirus class of 2020?

It is unclear whether these reforms will help school leavers facing an uncertain future.

During a recession many people look to study while the employment market remains weak. In his speech, Tehan said:

We know that people turn to education during economic downturns and we also know the Costello Baby Boom generation will begin to finish school from 2023.

In 2017 the Australian government effectively put a cap on university places, after five years of “demand driven” funding (where government essentially funded the amount of places students were enrolled in).

Read more: Demand-driven funding for universities is frozen. What does this mean and should the policy be restored?

In practice, this means there are now limits on the number of government subsidised places at universities.

Because of demographics and previous growth in enrolments, the cap was not expected to restrict the number of people going to university until 2023.

But the COVID-19 pandemic means these assumptions may no longer apply.

Normally school leavers follow a number of pathways into the workforce (including going straight to work, or studying a university of vocational education and training course first). Most young people take the university pathway.

However, these school leavers don’t start their courses at the same time.

Read more: Most young people who do VET after school are in full-time work by the age of 25

Around 20-25% of school leavers who go to university before working take a gap year. Travel restrictions and a weaker employment market may mean this year’s school leavers will bring forward their study plans.

There may also be more school leavers who choose to study at university instead of entering the workforce directly after school. For instance, 44% of 18 and 19 year olds who are not studying work in retail, accommodation and food services, and trade.

These industries have suffered large job losses because of the coronavirus pandemic.

A reduction in new apprenticeships and traineeships, fewer jobs and higher youth unemployment mean school leavers may look to enrol in education and training.

Before COVID-19 hit, domestic enrolments were only projected to go up by around 1-2% in the next few years. However, due to COVID-19, there already has been a reported doubling of year 12 students in NSW applying for a university course compared to the same time last year.

The government believes 39,000 extra university places will be created by 2023 because of these changes. But this number is not specifically designed to meet a projected increase in demand because of the coronavirus. Therefore, it is unclear (without the government lifting the cap) whether there will be enough funded university places for school leavers whose plans have been displaced by the pandemic.

– ref. Humanities graduates earn more than those who study science and maths – https://theconversation.com/humanities-graduates-earn-more-than-those-who-study-science-and-maths-141112

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

University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and Assistant Professor Caroline Fisher discuss the week in politics including: The Prime Minister’s announcement that Australia was under a Cyber attack, Foreign Minister Marise Payne’s speech regarding Australia actively engaged in pushing reform of international institutions, Scott Morrison’s broad agenda of reducing red tape, the unemployment figures, and alleged branch stacking in the Victorian Labor party.

– ref. VIDEO: Michelle Grattan on cyber attacks, unemployment and branch stacking – https://theconversation.com/video-michelle-grattan-on-cyber-attacks-unemployment-and-branch-stacking-141124

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Rix, Lecturer/Academic, School of Health & Human Sciences & Gnibi College of Indigenous Australians, Southern Cross University, Southern Cross University

The global Black Lives Matter movement is forcing us all to confront past and current injustices Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people face.

It’s also a chance for Australia’s future health workers to acknowledge how colonisation and subsequent injustices shape interactions today between Indigenous Australians and mainstream health services.

By addressing these injustices early in their studies, health students might one day provide culturally appropriate or culturally safe health care. That’s rather than perpetuate well-documented institutional racism that sees many Indigenous people avoid mainstream health care or receive substandard care when they do.

However, our new book chapter brings together a growing body of evidence that convincing largely white, undergraduate students of this is an uphill struggle.

Here’s what we face. And here’s what we can do better if our future doctors, nurses and health workers are ever to help Close the Gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people’s health and well-being.

Read more: ‘I can’t breathe!’ Australia must look in the mirror to see our own deaths in custody

Yes, it’s confronting

A new group of health students start their undergraduate degree. Enter the compulsory Indigenous health unit. This may be students’ first exposure to the brutality under which Australia was colonised.

The first weeks expose the British colonisers’ attempts to commit the physical and cultural genocide of Indigenous people.

In the first lecture, some white faces turn paler at the reality of what they are learning. The brutality of “hidden” facts behind colonisation emerges.

Read more: Friday essay: can looking at art make for better doctors?

Most students become immediately engrossed, yet challenged. For the first time many realise they belong to a dominant cultural group that perpetrated the early massacres and continuing attempts to eradicate Indigenous peoples’ language and culture.

Students are shocked to learn Australia was colonised under the lie of terra nullius (land without people), unofficially relegating Aboriginal people to the status of flora and fauna.

Discovering the historical and continuing barriers to Indigenous people seeking health care can also be shocking.

For instance, Indigenous patients are ten times less likely than non-Indigenous patients to go on the waiting list for a kidney transplant, despite being at much higher risk of end-stage kidney disease.

What’s all this to do with Black Lives Matter and health?

To genuinely claim Black Lives Matter, white health students must reflect critically on their own history, culture and worldview.

For instance, when it comes to health care, they need to acknowledge the dominance of Western and biomedical knowledge over traditional knowledge in mainstream health care. Unless forced to think about it, many white health students assume biomedical knowledge is all there is.

Health students also need to examine their unconscious bias towards Indigenous people.

This refers to the instant judgements we make about other people and situations based on our own values, experiences and cultural beliefs. It’s the type of bias that leads people to unwittingly judge Indigenous people more harshly than white people for the same actions, particularly when it comes to criminality, lifestyles or conflict.

Read more: Ms Dhu coronial findings show importance of teaching doctors and nurses about unconscious bias

Students need to unpack their white privilege. Unless students are forced to think about it, it’s easy to deny this privilege exists, despite decades of evidence showing otherwise.

In health care, for example, white clinicians hold the power of their white privilege but also their expert knowledge of the health conditions Indigenous Australians seek support for.

Being aware of all of this is therefore essential if white health professionals are to build positive therapeutic relationships with Indigenous people, based on two-way respect and understanding.

Read more: Australia needs to confront its history of white privilege to provide a level playing field for all

We can’t keep on repeating past mistakes

When confronted with these issues during their studies, some students become angry, fearful, guilty, argumentative or defensive. This common reaction is known as “white fragility”, when white privilege and unconscious bias collide.

Some stay silent, ticking the right boxes to get a “good grade” as a culturally safe health professional.

The percentage of overtly racist students is low. However their impact on other students and lecturers is damaging.

These students often argue they will treat everyone the same, regardless of their culture. Others make inflammatory statements, along the lines of “just get over it”.

Yet, it is crucial these students examine their unconscious biases, and have these conversations in the “safe space” of a classroom before alienating Indigenous Australians from mainstream health services once they graduate.

Once these students join the workforce, and their attitudes go unchecked, they become complicit in the continuation of institutional racism against Indigenous people.

The lethal impact of institutional racism in health services is ever present. The avoidable death of a young pregnant Aboriginal woman from sepsis tragically illustrates this. This young woman died after being turned away from a NSW hospital on some 20 occasions with increasing pain. Emergency department nurses judged she was seeking drugs.

Read more: Why racism is so hard to define and even harder to understand

We can’t accept racism in the media

When the issue of “cultural safety” was added to nurses’ and midwives’ codes of conduct in 2018, we had a stark reminder of white Australia’s attitude and unconscious biases, as played out in the media. This comment from 2GB’s Michael McLaren was typical:

This all sounds ridiculous to me. What the hell is cultural safety? No one’s ever heard of it.

Cultural safety emerged in the 1990s from the work of Maori nurses in New Zealand. It’s about providing an environment, that’s:

[…] safe for people; where there is no assault, challenge or denial of their identity, of who they are and what they need. It is about shared respect, shared meaning, shared knowledge and experience, of learning together with dignity, and truly listening.

Here’s what we could be doing better

White and Indigenous expert lecturers, working together, need to deliver this material to health students.

If students witness positive cross-cultural relationships and teaching teamwork, this clearly demonstrates two-way understanding and respectful relationships. It also steers clear of an “us and them” divisive culture.

If Australia wants to convince the rest of the world Black Lives Matter, future health workers can acknowledge and reflect on the enduring legacy of colonisation and its expression as institutional racism today. Only then may Closing the Gap become a reality.

We acknowledge and pay our respects to the Bundjalung people on whose lands we live learn, write and teach. We thank the Elders past and present for the learning and knowledge in this article.

The authors use the term Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as the respectful and inclusive term for Australia’s First Nations Peoples. However, the term Indigenous Australians is also used to enable the complexity of this topic to be adequately discussed in this short article.

– ref. Black Lives Matter in health care too. But convincing tomorrow’s health workers is tough – https://theconversation.com/black-lives-matter-in-health-care-too-but-convincing-tomorrows-health-workers-is-tough-140631

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Jackson, PhD Candidate, Monash University

We are entering our first pink-tinged recession.

The official unemployment figures released on Thursday confirmed that female work has has been more heavily impacted than male work.

Since February 457,517 women have lost their jobs and 380,737 men.

The disparity is likely to be worse when JobKeeper ends. The jobs at risk are concentrated in female-dominated industries.

Employed Australians, total

This might be thought to be reason enough for the government to focus its recovery efforts on supporting female jobs rather than “shovel ready” male-dominated jobs such as those in the construction industry.

But there’s another reason.

Women report poorer mental health than men. When responding to Australia’s Household Income and Labour Dynamics (HILDA) survey 20% of women report having diagnosed depression or anxiety, compared with 13% of men.

Young women suffer doubly

Using almost twenty years of HILDA data (2001-2018) we have compared changes in people’s mental health in locations that are experiencing increased unemployment with changes in other times and locations, controlling for other things that might effect mental health.

Women in their early-20’s and mid-40’s are more affected by local economic downturns than men.

Read more: There’s a reason you’re feeling no better off than 10 years ago. Here’s what HILDA says about well-being

These ages are the ones in which women’s involvement in the labour market is the highest – just before and after having children.

The graph below shows that for women in their early-20’s every one percentage point increase in the unemployment rate is estimated to increase the number of women with poor mental health by about 7%.

This suggests that an increase in the unemployment rate from about 5% in February to the peak of 10% forecast by the Reserve Bank could increase the number of young women with poor mental health by about 33%.

It would increase the number of young men with poor mental health by about 20%.

Searching for explanations

It might be that because women typically spend fewer active years in the labour market, the effect of unemployment in those years is more devastating.

A spell out of the workforce with children after a spell out of the workforce with unemployment means a woman who lost her job during a recession might never obtain the lifetime earnings she would have expected.

Read more: Women are drinking more during the pandemic, and it’s probably got a lot to do with their mental health

Further analysis of the HILDA data supports this contention. Among young women the association between unemployment and poor mental health is much stronger for those that would like to have children.

Women in their mid 40’s (who are often trying to re-enter the work force after focusing on children) are also much more prone to poor mental health than men during downturns, perhaps because it’s their last chance to build up lifetime earnings.

We need a two-pronged approach

Australia’s last recession, in the early 1990s, hit the jobs of men much harder than those of women. This recession looks different. Women are being hurt more than men, and the effects on the mental health of women aged in their early 20s and early 40s will amplify the difference.

The right approach is to ensure recovery programs are directed towards industries that employ women, and to boost funding for mental health care, especially programs designed for women.

The Royal Commission into Victoria’s mental health care system found it “failed to aid those who are most in need of high-quality treatment, care and support”.

It isn’t a good start.

– ref. Young women are hit doubly hard by recessions, especially this one – https://theconversation.com/young-women-are-hit-doubly-hard-by-recessions-especially-this-one-140943