Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matt Harvey, Senior Lecturer in Law, Victoria University

Earlier this month, the Federal Court found the Gillard’s governmnet’s controversial 2011 live export ban was unlawful.

But this is not a problem for the former government, who imposed the ban. It is one the current Morrison government has to grapple with.

Not only do they face millions of dollars in damages, but the Federal Court judgment raises serious questions about the limits of ministerial decision-making.

How did this start?

In June 2011, then agriculture minister Joe Ludwig issued a snap, blanket ban on Australia’s live cattle exports to Indonesia for six months.

Read more: Can meat exports be made humane? Here are three key strategies

This followed a Four Corners report featuring disturbing footage of the treatment of Australian cattle at Indonesian abattoirs.

At the time the footage aired, the minister was already in discussion with exporters about the conditions in abattoirs. Several “closed loops” had been created in which the entire journey of an animal from Australia to the abattoir in Indonesia had been subjected to quality control.

But the footage was so shocking, there was public pressure to do more.

Ludwig issued orders under the Export Control Act to suspend live cattle exports to Indonesia, without exceptions.

While the ban was celebrated by animal welfare groups, it angered the live cattle industry. It caused great difficulties for exporters in the process of shipping stock and they suffered significant losses and additional costs.

In 2014, the Northern Territory-based Brett Cattle Company launched a class action against the agriculture minister and the Commonwealth.

What did the Federal Court find?

The Federal Court handed down its landmark ruling on June 2.

Justice Stephen Rares found the ban was “capricious and unreasonable”, and Ludwig had committed the “tort of misfeasance” in public office by imposing the live export ban without regard to its possible illegality and the losses it would cause.

This means Ludwig either knew the ban was beyond his ministerial power, or was reckless as to whether it was. There was also recklessness regarding the possible harm that might result.

The key element here is the lack of an honest attempt to perform the functions of the ministerial office, with “honest” having the technical legal meaning of genuine belief that your action is lawful.

Rares wrote Ludwig “plunged ahead” with the ban, even though

he knew that he had no advice about whether it would be valid and that there was a real risk that it would not be.

What does this mean?

This means damages will be awarded to the plaintiffs in the class action, unless the former minister or the Commonwealth successfully appeal.

To date, 300 parties have joined the class action, calling for a reported $600m in compensation.

Apart from the price tag, the case is also potentially significant as a major restraint on ministerial discretion.

Read more: The ban on live sheep exports has just been lifted. Here’s what’s changed

While there have been other bans of particular forms of live exports since this one in 2011, ministers now know that they cannot simply impose a blanket ban, but must take legal advice and proceed with caution.

What happens now?

Having made his findings, Rares has now invited the parties to confer on how damages and costs will be calculated.

Ludwig seems unlikely to appeal. He did not give evidence in the case. While he may face personal liability, the Commonwealth is also liable.

The Morrison government is currently weighing up an appeal. The prime minister reportedly told a meeting of Coalition MPs earlier this month the judgement raised “real issues”.

Earlier this week, Attorney-General Christian Porter said he was still deciding about a possible appeal.

“I take a very cautious approach,” he told reporters in Canberra. “And what I want to understand is what are the potential implications of that decision for a range of industries, including the live animal export industry?”

Even though the current government is highly critical of the 2011 decision, no government would wish to have ministerial discretion restrained in this way.

Appealing is costly, but the Commonwealth has deep pockets.

Their preferred course at this stage, though, may be to reach agreement on damages and costs, rather than leaving these to the court. Porter says he won’t make a decision on an appeal until June 29, when final orders are delivered on the case.

What are the chances of a successful appeal?

An appeal would have to argue the judge made an error of law.

The judgment has been very carefully crafted and may well withstand appeal, but the principles at stake are worth testing.

As Porter reportedly told colleagues, the tort of misfeasance has been applied here in a way not seen before.

Read more: The ban on live sheep exports has just been lifted. Here’s what’s changed

Regardless of whether an appeal is pursued, ministers are more likely to take more advice before acting in future.

However, nine years after the event, it is hard to see this as an effective form of ministerial accountability. The affected exporters look likely to finally get some compensation. But the cattle are long dead.

– ref. How the Gillard government’s live cattle ban created a headache for Scott Morrison – https://theconversation.com/how-the-gillard-governments-live-cattle-ban-created-a-headache-for-scott-morrison-140551

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thalia Anthony, Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney

Readers are advised the following article contains descriptions of violence that may be traumatic.

In July 2018, Western Australia’s Police Commissioner Chris Dawson formally apologised for the mistreatment of Aboriginal people at the hands of police, acknowledging the “significant role” the police played in the dispossession of Australia’s First Nations people. Dawson made particular reference to the way:

forceful removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families and communities, the displacement of mothers and their children, sisters, fathers and brothers, the loss of family and resulting destruction of culture has had grave impacts

“Forced removal” references the unique role played by police in many settler colonies such as Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand, the United States and Canada in relation to First Nations peoples: executing assimilationist policies designed to dismantle First Nations families.

A closer look at the history of policing in Australia helps explain some of the dynamics at play in the Black Lives Matter and First Nations Deaths in Custody movement in Australia and a growing push for alternative models of policing.

Read more: Was there slavery in Australia? Yes. It shouldn’t even be up for debate

The ‘Irish Model’ of policing

Mainstream histories of policing have looked to 19th century British Prime Minister Robert Peel’s London Metropolitan Police “British Model” of policing, with its focus on policing through consensus and “walking the beat”.

There is another model of policing, however, which better reflects the Australian history.

Known as the “Irish Model” from its origins in suppressing dissent in the Irish colony in the 19th century, it set the police against the community, placed them in military style barracks, under a highly centralised and hierarchical chain of command. In general, they were not there to win hearts and minds.

Look to Chris Owen’s magnificent study of policing in the Kimberley region of Western Australia between 1882 and 1905 – titled Every Mother’s Son is Guilty. Policing was based around a highly mobile horse mounted model to cope with the extraordinary distances. As Owen shows, attitudes of the police towards First Nations people were deeply influenced by contemporary beliefs that they were inferior to whites, and a priori criminal.

Many police officers in the frontier colonial era were conscious of being part of a “civilizing mission” and held highly paternalistic attitudes.

One officer who policed the remote regions of Western Australian in the 1920s recalls being

conscientious in my desire for their welfare, for I looked upon them then, as I do now, as children.

Punitive attitudes

Elsewhere, officers exercised often unfettered brutality in punitive frontier expeditions. This was in pursuit of pastoral land grabs, settler occupation and the disintegration of Aboriginal families.

This was a feature of the Native Police Forces that operated in various parts of Australia from the 1830s until the early 20th century.

These forces, responsible for many atrocities against Aboriginal people, consisted of Aboriginal troopers under the command of white officers such as Constable William Willshire whose killings resulted in an unsuccessful murder trial in 1891 and Lieutenant Frederick Wheeler, whose massacres were reviewed by a Queensland parliamentary inquiry in 1861 (which decided to reprimand but not dismiss him).

The inquiry heard evidence of the Native Police Force’s murderous contact with Aboriginal people.

Historical accounts of the Northern Territory’s Native Police, modelled on the Queensland’s Force, documents its fatal force against Aboriginal lives to allegedly defend colonists’ lives and property.

In Western Australia, the 1927 Royal Commission into the killing and burning of Aboriginal bodies in the Forrest River massacre found police were brutal in effecting arrests.

The use of police brutality extended beyond Native Police expeditions, and was characteristic of police powers more widely. The Colonial Frontier Massacres Map documenting massacres of First Nations families across Australia include extensive records of police killings, such as 60 Warlpiri, Anmatyere and Kaytetye women, men and children in the Coniston Massacre in 1928.

Police practices of neck chaining Aboriginal prisoners continued officially into the mid-20th century in parts of Australia.

Read more: Defunding the police could bring positive change in Australia. These communities are showing the way

‘Protection’

Ideas of law and order formed only a fragment of the colonial police role where Aboriginal people were concerned. Much of it was taken up with implementing the “Aboriginal Protection Acts” or simply “Aboriginal Acts”, which continued well into the 20th century. Examples abound: the Aborigines Protection Act 1886 (Western Australia), the Aboriginal Protection Act and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897 (Queensland), the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (New South Wales), the Aborigines Act 1911 (South Australia); Aboriginals Ordinance 1911 (Northern Territory) and The Aborigines Protection Act 1886 (Victoria).

Aboriginal Acts were used in practice to forcibly relocate Aboriginal people to a place of prescribed confinement, which in practice could include on government settlements, reserves, church missions, hospital lock ups, penal islands, cattle stations and other institutions.

Often police officers assumed the role of Aboriginal Protector under these Acts and exercised broad powers over Aboriginal lives.

Police also gained specific powers under legislation that allowed them to remove Aboriginal children from their families under “child welfare” legislation. Testimony from Victoria in the Bringing them Home inquiry into the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families reported that:

From 1956 and 1957 more than one hundred and fifty children (more than 10% of the children in the Aboriginal population of Victoria at that time) were living in State children’s institutions. The great majority had been seized by police and charged in the Children’s Court with “being in need of care and protection”. Many policemen act from genuine concern for the “best interests” of Aboriginal children, but some are over-eager to enter Aboriginal homes and bully parents with threats to remove their children.

Police still play a role in removing First Nations children from their families today. The Family is Culture Report in 2019 noted significant concerns about the use of police during removals, saying:

when police are used for removal, especially riot police, this has historical continuity.

Police powers in the first half of the 20th century extended to the forced isolation and confinement of Aboriginal people on public health grounds, such as in various lock-up hospitals, on the basis of a diagnosis made by a police officer of syphilis or leprosy – or a decision that the person was at risk.

The police acted as the gatekeepers for enclosure in a ubiquity of institutions. At the same time as imposing the law, the police also acted as Protectors of Aboriginal people, distributed rations and blankets, provided pastoralists with Aboriginal workers in remote areas and ensured that they remained on pastoral stations.

Aboriginal people who defied Aboriginal Protection Acts and the rules of reserves and settlements – such as speaking in language, practising culture, marrying without the protector’s permission, or otherwise disobeying orders of the protector – would be sent for punishment to places such as Palm Island. These Acts were often enforced by police officers.

Hope for the future

Moving away from a colonial and assimilationist model of policing in Australia involves restructuring police and honouring First Nations self determination.

Community Patrol models, which are embedded in First Nations communities and work towards the safety and wellbeing of women, children and families, provide a First Nations alternative.

It’s time to consider setting police models on a new course that abolishes force and re-imagines community relationships.

– ref. Enforcing assimilation, dismantling Aboriginal families: a history of police violence in Australia – https://theconversation.com/enforcing-assimilation-dismantling-aboriginal-families-a-history-of-police-violence-in-australia-140637

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stuart Marshall, Senior Research Fellow, Anaesthesia Teaching & Research, Monash University

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, health workers globally have been concerned about inadequate supplies of personal protective equipment, ventilators and other essential items of medical care.

So many have created workarounds to fill the perceived gap between what they have and what they need.

Those of us who grew up in the 1980s remember the fictional crime-fighting hero Angus “Mac” MacGyver. He could seemingly create anything to get him out of a sticky situation using common household objects such as a magnifying glass and some duct tape.

Now, we use the verb “to MacGyver”, to make or repair something, using whatever items are at hand.

MacGyvering in health care was rife before the pandemic. But according to images of homemade gizmos on social media, COVID-19 has spurred health workers to make even more equipment using an array of small, common, interlocking devices at their disposal.

Read more: We love reliving the 1980s, but only as farce

Curbing the ‘MacGyver bias’

But there are risks as well as potential benefits of this approach.

Last year, my colleagues and I wrote about the “MacGyver bias”. This cognitive bias means that people who create and use homemade devices are likely to have an emotional connection to their inventions.

It’s related to the better-known “IKEA effect” related to the extra connection we have with flatpack furniture we’ve put together ourselves.

With the MacGyver bias, clinician-inventors might not see the pitfalls and dangers in using their creations. They may downplay the risks and overestimate the benefits. Many of these inventions have also been created and introduced with little or no proof they work or are safe.

Read more: The IKEA effect: how we value the fruits of our labour over instant gratification

Intubation boxes and gadgets for ventilators

One such example during the current pandemic is the intubation box, a clear perspex box that covers a patient’s head during an invasive procedure.

The aim is to better protect health workers from exhaled aerosols containing coronavirus emitted when placing tubes into patients’ lungs to help them breathe.

In the past few months, high-profile journals have published somewhat sketchy, preliminary reports of these devices.

Some of these reports are on actual patients, some under laboratory conditions, giving them an air of legitimacy.

However, more detailed studies, carried out by researchers not involved in making or designing the boxes, show significant potential harms from using them. Intubations may take longer, risking patient safety, and the boxes can damage health workers’ personal protective equipment, risking theirs.

Another example involves using 3D-printed components called splitters to modify ventilators, allowing patients to share machines.

On face value, connecting two critically ill patients to the same life-saving machine seems sensible if ventilators are in short supply.

But a strong consensus statement issued earlier this year by several professional organisations advised against using ventilator splitters because of concerns these patients would be receiving poorer care.

This didn’t stop some clinicians from going ahead, saying “the other option is death”.

Read more: Millions of products have been 3D printed for the coronavirus pandemic – but they bring risks

Stifling innovation?

Many great breakthroughs in medicine have been a result of happenstance and self-experimentation rather than a deliberate program of research.

For example, common surgical instruments and devices have been derived from thumbtacks, spoons and engine carburettors.

Today, it takes a long time to navigate the processes required by medical device regulators, such as the US Food and Drug Administration and Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration.

Regulators need to see evidence of rigorous testing to see these devices not only work but are safe.

So, while these novel, MacGyvered devices might indeed save lives, the evidence for their use is often non-existent and raises serious ethical questions about when and how they are introduced.

How could we find a balance?

If regulatory requirements stifle innovation, lives might be lost from a lack of potential new inventions.

Clearly a compromise is needed that doesn’t involve the full and lengthy regulatory process, yet still maintains a rigorous, independent assessment.

This could be a stopgap on the way to full approval, particularly in time-pressured situations such as a pandemic, when even imperfect solutions might be needed.

So what would this process look like?

We commonly use mock-ups of equipment or clinical spaces when educating health professionals. These simulation labs are now finding a new purpose, to test devices and processes before implementing them.

This means we can anticipate many problems before the new device comes close to a patient. By using a structured process, we can find solutions and test them objectively, away from the patient, without harm. This way, we can fail frequently, rapidly and safely to find the ideas (and devices) we might want to actually use.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses difficult questions about how we might deal with innovation in medicine. However, it also provides us with a catalyst to improve safety and implement change.

– ref. How 80s TV show MacGyver is inspiring doctors during the coronavirus pandemic – https://theconversation.com/how-80s-tv-show-macgyver-is-inspiring-doctors-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic-140081

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Romilio, PhD, Independent Researcher, The University of Queensland

Perhaps the most iconic dinosaur is Tyrannosaurus rex, a massive predator that lived in what is now North America. We have now discovered that carnivorous dinosaurs of a similar size existed in ancient Australia as well.

Following the footprints

We learned about these carnivores by studying fossils that were discovered up to 90 years ago. Coal miners came across them while digging in the Walloon Coal Measures at Rosewood, near Ipswich and Oakey, north of Toowoomba, Queensland.

The fossils are not bones. They are fossilised footprints, the only form of fossils that record the movements of animals and preserve details of their behaviour and environments they preferred.

While searching through records of fossil footprints in Australia, we came across an archival photograph from the 1930s showing a dinosaur footprint inside a coal mine. While these mines have long since closed, the picture led us to investigate fossil footprints collected at that time and stored in museums, and other footprints like them.

Older than T. rex

The specimens we found suggest the richly forested and swampy environment of southern Queensland in the Jurassic Period was home to several types of meat-eating dinosaurs. The smallest would have been the size of an emu, while the largest would have been just under 3 metres tall, almost as large and as imposing as a T. rex.

The footprint of this large dinosaur is almost 80cm long – roughly the distance from the centre of your body to the tip of your outstretched arm. The fossilised track is approximately 160 million years old, 90 million years older than the oldest known T. rex fossils.

This suggests the print belongs to a different predatory dinosaur. While similar to T. rex in size and dietary preference, these massive ancient Australian trackmakers may have been slimmer and more elongated in appearance than the North American dinosaur icon.

Fast runners, formidable predators

As well as individual footprints, we found evidence of trackways where multiple footprints made by the same animal are preserved. Based on what we know about how two-legged animals move, we can use the trackways to figure out how the dinosaurs travelled through their environment.

Several of the larger dinosaurs seem to have been moving at a walking pace, as the lengths of their steps are shorter than the estimated lengths of their legs. However, two trackways had the very large step sizes that are typical of animals on the run.

The step distance suggests these large dinosaurs were moving at speeds of up to 35 kilometres per hour. For comparison, the average human can sprint at around 24 kilometres per hour.

These speeds mean the ancient track-makers would have been formidable predators. Unfortunately, no trackway was preserved for the largest track-maker.

Lucky conditions

Not all kinds of ground are equally suited to preserving tracks for fossilisation. What appears to have happened in southern Queensland is the dinosaurs stepped onto mats of swamp plant material that was then overlaid with sand, which results in sandstone filled footprints in a bed of coal. The miners were able to easily remove the softer coal from beneath the sandstone, and to their surprise found these ancient footprints.

If not for the mining of coal and the keen eyes of the 20th century miners who spotted unusual features in the rock, we might never have known about these tracks. It is likely that more hidden treasures are still buried beneath our feet.

Read more: Mysteries of prehistoric Australia: a tough place to hunt dinosaurs and megafauna

Filling in the gaps in ancient Australia

Our discovery fills a gap in the slowly growing record of Australian dinosaurs. While large dinosaur tracks have been documented in various Australian states, so far most belong to plant-eaters. They include tracks of long-necked sauropods similar to Brontosaurus, and ornithopods similar as Muttaburrasaurus, the skeleton of which can be seen on display at the Queensland Museum.

Evidence for meat-eating dinosaurs also exists, but so far the fossil record indicated much smaller animals, ranging from the size of chickens to a little bit smaller than Allosaurus.

Our discovery of the footprints of a huge carnivore adds an important top-level predator to the Australian dinosaur-scape.

– ref. Dinosaur footprints show predators as big as _T. rex_ stomped across Australia 160 million years ago – https://theconversation.com/dinosaur-footprints-show-predators-as-big-as-t-rex-stomped-across-australia-160-million-years-ago-140931

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Ball, Associate Professor/ Principal Research Fellow, Griffith University

Last week, my two-year-old niece was sent home from daycare for having a runny nose – a sin that would otherwise be commonplace on a windy winter’s day.

The daycare centre instructed my sister she would need to produce a medical certificate “clearing” my niece of COVID-19 before she would be allowed to return to daycare.

My sister stopped her work to collect my niece before going to the local medical centre and waiting for an appointment with a general practitioner. The GP did not recommend a COVID-19 test and wrote a letter encouraging the daycare centre to allow my niece to return.

This is not an isolated case. Reports in the media, as well as accounts on parenting forums and social media, suggest Australians are being asked to present “clearance certificates” before returning to childcare, school or work after illness.

But there are several problems with this. Chiefly, it places an unnecessary strain on resources when it’s not technically possible for a doctor to “clear” a patient of COVID-19.

Read more: Why do some people with coronavirus get symptoms while others don’t?

Everyone is trying to do the right thing

Schools, workplaces and businesses have appropriately declared ensuring people’s safety is the number-one priority as Australia works to recover from the pandemic.

Businesses have enacted social distancing policies that are now a non-negotiable part of their workplaces.

Similarly, health authorities have advised schools and early childhood centres to be proactive in sending home children who become unwell during the day.

These measures are logical and understandable. After all, no business wants to be at the centre of an outbreak of COVID-19.

An unnecessary strain on resources

The added volume of patients coming in for so-called clearance certificates places additional strain on GPs and their clinic staff.

Each time an otherwise healthy worker or child visits a GP for a medical clearance certificate, they may delay other patients in genuine need of medical attention.

It also fills waiting rooms, which are now more limited in their capacity so as to allow for social distancing.

Read more: How can I treat myself if I’ve got – or think I’ve got – coronavirus?

Further, this trend increases costs to the government, which funds Medicare – and to patients themselves if there’s an out-of-pocket fee.

Strictly speaking, it’s not appropriate to be using Medicare funds for these consultations as they’re not medically warranted.

You can’t ‘clear’ a person of COVID-19

GPs cannot give a conclusive, written guarantee that the patient sitting in their office is free from COVID-19. That’s simply not how the science of COVID-19 detection works.

Rather, GPs can report on the results of a COVID-19 test. However, a negative test result doesn’t rule out the possibility of a person having COVID-19. An infection may still be developing at an as yet undetectable level.

The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) has voiced its frustration that employers, schools and daycare centres are continuing to request these certificates.

The RACGP says the notion of clearing someone of COVID-19 is nonsensical and could give false assurance to both the individual and workplace or school that the person is free of COVID-19.

It also notes this practice may mean COVID-19 testing kits are being used unnecessarily. Tests should be reserved for people with symptoms specifically associated with COVID-19, health-care workers, or people who have had close contact with a case.

Read more: How long are you infectious when you have coronavirus?

It’s not a legal requirement

Your employer cannot force you to provide a COVID-19 clearance, chiefly because there is no law mandating it.

As an alternative, the RACGP has developed a letter template that GPs can sign and give to their patients to provide to their employer, school principal or daycare manager.

It suggests employers and schools can help support safe workplaces by allowing flexible workplace arrangements, providing access to sick leave without requiring medical review, ensuring adequate hand washing facilities and upholding social distancing recommendations.

Read more: Immunity passports could help end lockdown, but risk class divides and intentional infections

Of course, if you’re sick and have COVID-19 symptoms such as cough or fever, it’s important you seek a test straight away, and self-isolate if you return a positive test.

But in the absence of COVID-19 symptoms, parents and employees should be trusted to determine when they are well and can safely return to childcare, school or work.

– ref. Employers, schools, take note. Coronavirus ‘clearance certificates’ are a waste of everybody’s time – https://theconversation.com/employers-schools-take-note-coronavirus-clearance-certificates-are-a-waste-of-everybodys-time-140929

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tom Morton, Associate Professor, Journalism, Stream Leader, Climate Justice Research Centre, University of Technology Sydney

The Australian government’s investment roadmap for low-emissions technologies promises more taxpayers’ money to the gas industry but fails to deliver the policy needed for people to support a transition to renewable energy.

It ignores what academic experts, the CSIRO, the Australian Energy Market Operator, the Australian Industry Group and several premiers and energy ministers are all saying: renewable sources of energy are already cheaper than gas or coal generation, and wind and solar could provide up to 75% of Australia’s electricity by 2025. The technologies could also drive employment in a post-COVID renewables-led recovery, enabling Australia to “rebuild stronger and cleaner”.

Read more: Energy giants want to thwart reforms that would help renewables and lower power bills

But policymakers need to make sure the communities bearing the costs of the energy transition also share in its benefits.

Get local people involved

Our research on the social impacts of renewable energy shows a strong emphasis on sharing the benefits with the community and encouraging participation is essential for successful energy transitions.

The bulk of well-paid, plentiful jobs in renewables come during manufacture and construction, but who benefits from those jobs can be an issue.

Mortlake, in south-west Victoria, is home to two wind farms that won tenders under the state’s Renewable Energy Auction Scheme.

The scheme is successful in making local content commitments, with regional supply chains and training in Geelong, Ballarat and Portland. Local content in this context refers to the Victorian Major Projects Skills Guarantee and the Local Jobs First policy. These government schemes are principally designed to encourage employment in Victoria.

While some construction workers have come from nearby areas, employment is mainly local to the state, not to people living in Mortlake. One of the locals described the experience to us as a “circus coming to town” – not jobs.

Commitments to Australian employment are a step in the right direction, but the term “local” should be used with caution.

The suppliers and tradespeople in a community earmarked for any renewable energy project may lack the specialist training and hence are less likely to get hired. Industry tendering processes still tend to favour large national or international contractors with established supply chains.

The wind industry in Mortlake has become a better listener to community concerns, partly due to lessons learnt from previous local opposition to proposed wind farms. The emphasis now is on local benefits and engagement.

For example, one of the wind farm developers agreed to put the transmission line underground following council lobbying.

Don’t divide communities

Renewable energy projects are often in direct competition with gas for the hearts and minds of communities.

Yet one study found there are many more potential jobs in renewables than in gas in north-west New South Wales.

Narrabri is close to the NSW government’s New England Renewable Energy Zone. According to the AltEnergy database, there have been proposals dating from 2018 for at least six solar farms in the region (three each in Narrabri and Gunnedah).

Together these would produce about 600 megawatts of electricity. Most of the projects have undertaken community consultation and secured planning approvals. Only Gunnedah South, which has secured a power supply contract with Amazon, appears to be imminent, with 150 locally sourced jobs in the construction phase.

Locals we interviewed in Narrabri and Gunnedah in 2018 were sceptical that renewables could deliver lasting jobs. Clearly, there still needs to be evidence on the ground that the renewables industry can create local employment, whether directly or via related ventures and supply chains.

While few people knew of the numerous solar projects or could name the companies involved, everybody we spoke to knew of Santos and its proposal to drill the region for gas.

Santos says it will create “up to” 200 ongoing jobs from its operations. But this is contested and there are concerns about impacts of gas drilling on water and on agriculture.

Opposition to the gas project has been strong. In 2018 the CSIRO found no more than 43% of locals would “be OK with” the proposed gas operation.

Yet Santos has created a sophisticated operation to press its case. The gas giant has its own store in town and donates money to local organisations. As we found, its name is everywhere: on rugby jerseys, at the golf course, in the local newspaper.

Locals miss out on the benefits

The real problem with getting acceptance of renewables lies in ownership and participation. If local communities miss out on economic benefits from corporate-owned renewables, their willingness to accept infrastructure, such as an ever-greater density of wind farms, declines.

Read more: Really Australia, it’s not that hard: 10 reasons why renewable energy is the future

The clear lesson is that social legitimacy comes from local benefits. If people see little local benefit and have weak relationships with the energy companies, they are likely to focus on negatives such as disruption to views, ecology and land use.

Improving the quality and stability of jobs would be a good start. Supporting local ownership, making regulation more renewables-friendly and diversifying and democratising energy production would help build a lasting social base for the energy transition we have to have.

– ref. People need to see the benefits from local renewable energy projects, and that means jobs – https://theconversation.com/people-need-to-see-the-benefits-from-local-renewable-energy-projects-and-that-means-jobs-138433

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

The federal government will fund an extra 39,000 university places by 2023 in a package that will restructure the amounts students have to pay for courses to encourage them to “make more job-relevant choices”.

Under the plan to produce “job-ready graduates”, to be outlined on Friday by Education Minister Dan Tehan, those opting for teaching, nursing, clinical psychology, English and languages would pay 46% less for their degree.

But the student contribution for the humanities would soar by 113%, and the costs for law and commerce would jump by 28%. These are the “more popular” courses, Tehan says in his speech, released in part ahead of delivery.

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

There would be no change for medicine, dental, and veterinary science students.

“In total, we expect that 60% of students will see a reduction or no change in their student contribution,” Tehan says.

The universities package, which will require legislation, strongly reflects Scott Morrison’s jobs-oriented approach to all main policy areas in the wake of COVID.

Graduates from more vocationally-oriented degrees have higher employment rates. For example those from engineering, education, health, management and commerce and information technology have rates above 75%.

Under the plan, no current student would pay an increased contribution.

Tehan stresses the reform is not deregulating fees.

The government plan provides for an additional 100,000 places by 2030.

Tehan says projections prepared before COVID indicated over the five years to 2024 the overwhelming majority of new jobs were expected to require tertiary qualifications, with almost half of all new jobs going to someone with a bachelor or higher qualification.

The projections have health care making the largest contributions to employment growth, followed by science and technology, education, and construction. As part of a long-term structural shift, these four industries are projected to provide 62% of total employment growth over the next five years, Tehan says.

“Universities must teach Australians the skills needed to succeed in the jobs of the future,” he says.

The government’s measures aim to

• boost numbers of graduates in areas of expected employment growth, including teaching, nursing, agriculture, STEM and IT

• lift the education attainment for students in regional areas

• strengthen relationships with business to drive workforce participation and productivity.

The plan would rectify the “misalignment between the cost of teaching a degree and the revenue that universities receive to teach,” Tehan says. Under the changes the student and Commonwealth contribution would equal the cost of teaching the degree.

It would provide an incentive for students “to make more job-relevant choices, that lead to more job-ready graduates, by reducing the student contribution in areas of expected employment growth and demand.”

Proposed new clusters and bands design

Tehan says the changes are based at a unit level not a degree level, so an arts student could reduce their total cost by including electives in subjects like mathematics, English, science and IT.

“We are encouraging students to embrace diversity and not think about their education as a siloed degree.

“So if you want to study history, also think about studying English.

“If you want to study philosophy, also think about studying a language.

“If you want to study law, also think about studying IT,” Tehan says.

“Existing students set to gain from this policy will be able to do so from next year.

“Students will have a choice. Their degree will be cheaper if they choose to study in areas where there is expected growth in job opportunities,” Tehan says. “A cheaper degree in an area where there’s a job is a win-win for students.”

– ref. Fee cuts for nursing and teaching but big hikes for law and humanities in package expanding university places – https://theconversation.com/fee-cuts-for-nursing-and-teaching-but-big-hikes-for-law-and-humanities-in-package-expanding-university-places-141064

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW

Australia has done well on the public health front during the COVID-19 pandemic, thanks to decisive action by the National Cabinet in March. Australia has done better than most countries on the economic front, too, thanks to the federal government’s large fiscal measures.

But we are at a crossroads.

By September, we may well have largely dealt with the public health aspects of the pandemic. But the economic recovery will only just be starting. The danger is that misunderstanding the nature of this economic crisis will lead the government to bungle that recovery.

Read more: Eradicating the COVID-19 coronavirus is also the best economic strategy

This recession is not like any recession in living memory.

Those of the 1980s and 1990s were “business cycle” recessions. The economy outpaced its inbuilt speed limit and inflation rose. To curb inflation, central banks pushed up interest rates. Those higher rates ended up choking off investment and spending too much.

The global financial crisis of 2008 was different again. That basically involved a massive dislocation in credit markets due to defaults (or the prospect of defaults) on mortgage debts packaged up and sold as investment products – known as mortgage-backed securities and collateralised debt obligations. When it finally became clear how bad these investments were, global credit markets effectively froze, bringing a range of otherwise healthy companies close to bankruptcy.

COVID-19 Recession

The economic crisis now was caused by a massive supply shock which, in turn, was caused by the virus.

For instance, Sweden’s “self-lockdown” saw economic activity drop 25%. Denmark’s coordinated lockdown resulted in economic activity falling 29%. According to Asger Lau Andersen and colleagues at the University of Copenhagen’s Center for Economic Behaviour and Inequality:

This implies that most of the economic contraction is caused by the virus itself and occurs regardless of whether governments mandate social distancing or not.

This is COVID-19 Recession phase one – a big supply shock while the virus ravages both the community and the economy.

Once the public health crisis has been brought under control, countries will emerge from the supply shock with fractured economies.

Australia will likely be in this position in the next couple of months. Household and company balance sheets will be badly damaged. Consumer and business confidence will be low. Unemployment high. Underemployment higher still. Renters or mortgage holders at greater risk of defaulting on payments.

Read more: The economy in 7 graphs. How a tightening of wallets pushed Australia into recession

This will mark the beginning of COVID-19 Recession phase two.

Supply shocks create demand shocks

In a remarkable paper published in April, economists Veronica Guerrieri, Guido Lorenzoni, Ludwig Straub and Iván Werning develop a theory of what they call “Keynesian supply shocks”.

Their theory demonstrates how supply shocks can create demand shortages when markets are “incomplete” – which is pretty much all markets, all the time.

The COVID-19 supply shock is the shutting down, directly or indirectly, of industries such as hospitality and tourism. Workers in affected businesses lose their jobs and income. If they were on low incomes – as many workers in food and accommodation services are – their “marginal propensity to consume” (rather than than save their income) would have been high. If you don’t earn much, you don’t save much – you just spend. So their drop in consumption will be large unless they borrow to spend.

This is going to lead to an overall demand shortfall unless the workers who still have jobs and steady incomes start spending a lot more. But people typically won’t want to do that for multiple reasons – including the fact the goods consumers ordinarily spend big on – such as exotic holidays – are still not available.

The policy response

This all suggests policy responses to this economic crisis must be different to past responses.

Phase one has required ameliorating the supply shocks as much as possible.

Arguably the Australian government’s JobSeeker and JobKeeper programs have done that reasonably well – although JobKeeper in particular should have been better designed.

Phase two needs to deal with the demand shortfall that will become more apparent as the supply shocks fade.

That will require more stimulus, not less. Any focus on getting back to a balanced budget – encapsulated by Prime Minister Scott Morrison warning the government can’t save every job and needs to be “extremely cautious about expenditure” – is precisely not what is needed.

Read more: The costs of the shutdown are overestimated — they’re outweighed by its $1 trillion benefit

In times of widespread falls in demand, with monetary policy that can no longer respond, fiscal contraction simply makes the crisis worse.

It’s a lesson learnt long ago by economists of all stripes, and immortalised by former US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke on the occasion of Keynesian critic Milton Friedman’s 90th birthday in 2002:

Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.

Mr Morrison needs to remember that lesson.

– ref. Vital Signs: COVID-19 recession is different – and we need more stimulus to deal with it. – https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-covid-19-recession-is-different-and-we-need-more-stimulus-to-deal-with-it-141037

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Shirley, Edith Cowan University

In his surprisingly dark and often shocking account of life at a New York performing arts school, Alan Parker’s Fame (1980) exposes the way youthful exuberance and vulnerability are easy prey for those who manipulate and abuse their position.

The fim depicts public humiliation, shaming, racism, attempted suicide, drug abuse and homophobia. But perhaps the most horrific sequence is when aspiring actress Coco (played by Irene Cara) is preyed on by a sleazy filmmaker. She turns up for a sham screen test and is coerced into removing her blouse.

“You’re acting like a dumb school kid … I thought you were a professional,” the older man cajoles as he manipulates her inexperience to achieve his own ends. The film’s narrative treats such behaviours as the inevitable reality of a highly competitive and hierarchical working environment.

“Performers aren’t safe,” declares one of Coco’s fellow students shortly after her trauma. “We’re the pie in the face people remember.”

Forty years since Fame hit screens, in the wake of the #MeToo movement and as we emerge from COVID-19 physical distancing measures, there is still more that can be done to protect those seeking to pursue careers in the performing arts.

Read more: Don’t stand so close to me – understanding consent can help with those tricky social distancing moments

Harrassment and power

High-profile cases in the industry as well as more recent incidents in the training sector locate sexual harassment and exploitation within hierarchical power structures that provide a fertile breeding ground for abuse.

Within the context of performer training, the blurred boundaries between personal and professional modes of communication – together with a tendency to confuse the need for “professional discipline” with “passive obedience” – produces an atmosphere of uncertainty and self-doubt. Students can feel completely disempowered.

While abusive behaviours are by no means exclusive to the entertainment industry or performing arts education, traditional power structures and outmoded values provide a natural home for offenders.

According to a British Dignity in Study survey conducted of 600 students at specialist drama schools, music colleges, conservatoires, dance colleges and universities in 2018, a staggering 57% had experienced inappropriate behaviour. And 57% of those students did not report the behaviour.

Some perceived it as “culturally acceptable”; others feared the perpetrator or reputational damage. Of the students who did report concerns, 48% remained dissatisfied with the outcome and 79% of this group indicated no corrective action was taken.

If the situation in the UK feels alarming, then that in Australia offers little evidence to the contrary.

Performer Candy Bowers has written about sexually abusive behaviour as a student. When she reported the incident – unwanted comments about her body by an older man who then forcibly tongue-kissed her onstage without consent – her tutors urged to “get used to it, stop being so sensitive, toughen up”, and even to “take it as a compliment”.

Inside the actors’ studio

A number of professional organisations and training institutions have developed detailed codes to confront the issues faced, notably Screen Producers Australia, the Royal Court Theatre in the UK and the University of Sydney. But little work has been done to develop practice-based, experiential approaches to enable and empower the most vulnerable.

Training institutions have tried to communicate standards via lectures, handouts, and pre-rehearsal briefing sessions.

Reams of detailed legal documentation or standardised presentations may reassure institutions they’ve met their duty of care obligations – but how many 18-21-year-old dancers, singers, actors or technicians will actually take the time to fully engage with or read through a litany of complex clauses or phrases, let alone understand them?

If we are genuinely to change the pervading culture, alternative strategies are needed. These strategies should not be solely dependent on intellectual processes, but also engage physicality and the use of gesture, the senses, and emotional intelligence. Sexual harassment, objectification, bullying, humiliation, homophobia and racism are all forms of oppression to be addressed in real, not academic, terms.

Read more: Acting unpleasantly: why harassment is so common in the theatre

Empowering change

Acclaimed Brazilian theatre practitioner Augusto Boal developed forms of theatre practice to bring about social and political change.

Known as the Theatre of the Oppressed, the technique utilises live facilitation, imagery, dialogue and role play to empower communities and find solutions to social problems, such as homophobia.

Using this kind of approach to illustrate, unpick and interrogate the hierarchical structures in our training institutions – between those who have status and power (including professional practitioners, producers, teachers) and those who do not (students, technicians, supporting staff) – could prove vital in moving us forward.

And we can do it with what we do best. Performance has momentum. Using the medium to speak with those who are training in the performing arts could provide the platform from which to initiate change.

At Edith Cowan University’s Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts (WAAPA), we are currently in discussion with the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) to look at developing experiential, practice-based approaches to #MeToo training for performing arts students.

Those who deliver training at WAAPA will complete #MeToo and intimacy training. Interactive role-play and assertiveness coaching will build emotional intelligence and develop confidence in transactional communication. By “acting out” scenarios of harassment, coercion, or sexism we can experience their impact, test practical responses and make explicit what is not acceptable.

These steps will impart agency to young performers, but also help ensure their safety and welfare. Training that is genuinely creative and empowering liberates self-belief and the confidence to speak.

Instead of assuming that performing arts students are innately possessed of such qualities, we need to think about imparting them from the moment they arrive.

Action on set

The training sector must embrace the important role of the intimacy director. Like fight directors, choreographers or stunt co-ordinators, this role focuses on the need to remove risk and ensure the highest possible standards of safety on film and theatre sets as well as in the TV studio.

Excellent work is being done in this area by organisations such as Intimacy on Set which offers a range of training packages as well as advice on ensuring safe working practices and protocols.

Ita O’Brien, the organisation’s founder, stresses the importance of establishing a safe working environment:

An injury can go from purely physical, to emotional and psychological – when someone’s body has been handled and touched in a way that is not suitable for that person … intimacy coordination work is about everybody being in agreement and consent … and about absolutely every detail serving character, serving story telling.

Referring to her work as Intimacy Coordinator on the BBC/Hulu adaptation of Sally Rooney’s award winning novel, Normal People, O’Brien points to the vulnerability of the drama’s young leading actors (Daisy Edgar-Jones and Paul Mescal) and offers an insight into how she approached early rehearsals.

Actors want to give their best. They want to say yes, but we had to create an atmosphere where they didn’t just say yes because they felt like they needed to …Everyone had the novel, so they knew what was required, but were they happy with it?

In my first rehearsal with director Lenny Abrahamson, and leading actors Daisy and Paul, I gave a presentation and showed all of them our intimacy guidelines. Then we worked on a scene that felt like a body dance. When we were done, everybody left knowing that everything would be handled in a professional way.

Locally, actor Michala Banas is working behind the scenes at Melbourne Theatre Company as an intimacy coordinator and cites O’Brien as a mentor.

If we are to guarantee the physical, emotional and psychological safety of our students during rehearsals and performances, then the guidance of an Intimacy Director is no longer an optional extra, but an absolute necessity.

Safe space

Fear for our safety or for those around us can only ever be negative and destructive.

In the performing arts, we require those whom we train to be imaginative, courageous and sensitive. We ask them on a daily basis to take risks, to be experimental, to make new discoveries and to trust in the collective power of the ensemble.

Ensuring the establishment of clear and unambiguous boundaries between the personal and professional, together with a working environment that respects the rights of the individual can only ever liberate the work. The right to liberty and security of person is a universally declared human right. The right to resist, openly challenge and report inappropriate or abusive behaviour in the workplace is not a favour that is bestowed upon us by tutors or institutions.

A safe space does not exclude the ardours of rigour and tenacity or even the quest for virtuosity and eminence. Moreover, it does not stifle creativity or artistic freedom. How could it? On the contrary, the freedom, security and trust that a genuinely safe space engenders makes the pursuit of performance excellence tangible and achievable.

– ref. Friday essay: training a new generation of performers about intimacy, safety and creativity – https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-training-a-new-generation-of-performers-about-intimacy-safety-and-creativity-132516

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

The notion that Nine’s 60 Minutes revelations about the appalling shenanigans of Victorian Labor power broker Adem Somyurek were a total surprise to ALP insiders deserves a horse laugh.

As one federal source says, anyone with any knowledge of the party’s factions knew this character ran the right in Victoria, based on branch stacks. It was one of those things treated as – well – normal.

But it apparently took journalist Nick McKenzie’s excellent public expose – with pictures, audio, and obvious political cost to Labor – to bring home to the insiders just how bad this was by any normal standards.

Daniel Andrews and Anthony Albanese were quick to react, and over two days state ministerial heads had rolled and the Victorian branch had been taken over by the Labor national executive and delivered into the safe hands of former premier Steve Bracks and former federal minister Jenny Macklin.

Problem smothered, Labor hoped.

Not exactly. This story was not just a drama but a thriller.

Somyurek was brought down by a sting carried out by surveillance, filmed and recorded in the office of Labor federal backbencher Anthony Byrne, who is more important than his status sounds because he’s deputy chair of the parliamentary committee on intelligence and security.

How the “hit” was organised remains unclear. What we do know is Somyurek and Byrne used to be “like brothers” (according to Somyurek), and then fell out, and now the former state minister is not just disgraced but under investigation by the authorities.

But the political death throes of a power broker can be ugly. Somyurek provided the media with a heap of fruity texts in which Byrne talked about wanting one Labor’s figure’s “head cut off” so he could “piss on his corpse”, as well as denigrating Andrews and Bill Shorten, and describing female figure as “dribbling shit”.

Then Somyurek looked into a camera and said “everything I know now about branch work, Anthony Byrne taught me”.

Byrne’s as yet unexplained role in the use of his office has brought into question whether he should retain the committee deputy chairmanship.

So far Albanese is backing him. Byrne has also been given a glowing personal reference by the committee’s Liberal chair, Andrew Hastie. Observers note Hastie and Byrne are joined at the hip on security issues, and, it seems, have drawn close at a personal level.

Asked about Byrne’s suitability, Morrison said, “it really is a test for Mr Albanese as to whether he believes that Mr Byrne should continue to serve on that committee”. Awkward.

The crisis has hit Albanese at the worst time – smack in the middle of the byelection in Eden-Monaro, a highly marginal Labor seat which he desperately needs to hold.

While the federal intervention was absolutely the right way to go, Albanese faltered somewhat in his responses during the week.

On Monday night – a full day after Sunday’s 60 Minutes – when he was asked in whose office the filming was done, Albanese told the ABC, “I’m not aware of all the details of that. That’s a matter for Channel Nine and 60 Minutes”.

Subsequently, he said he hadn’t talked to Byrne because the whole matter was being investigated by the Victorian anti-corruption body. By Thursday, after the Byrne texts has come out, Albanese said he’d “counselled” his federal MP about his language.

Albanese has over the years had a good record on the need for the party to be clean. But this week, while acting strongly for intervention, he also looked as though he was just trying to stay – publicly – as unengaged with the detail as possible.

The federal intervention, though the correct course, makes for a messy situation. The voting rights of party members have been suspended until 2023. All Victorian federal and state preselections in the hands of the national executive, cutting out the say of (legitimate) party members. And it’s unclear how the Victorian branch will be represented at Labor’s national conference, if the coronavirus allows it to go ahead at the scheduled time late this year.

Some point out Albanese might be encouraged by comparisons with Gough Whitlam’s moves against the Victorian ALP that culminated in its restructuring in 1970 (and helped Whitlam to power in 1972). The parallel is limited, however.

For one thing, Whitlam made party reform a long term cause; Albanese has reacted to specific crises, in both NSW (after the affair of the Chinese donor with his cash in the Aldi bag) and in Victoria.

For another Whitlam, in an era when the party organisation had much more control over policy, was pursuing a left wing union-dominated ideological clique in Victoria which was a handbrake on winning government. In this case, it’s the right involved, and no ideology.

For the moment, Albanese may be taking a small degree of comfort from the fact Labor’s latest scandal being in Victoria somewhat lessens the publicity impact in Eden-Monaro.

Against the background of COVID, the Eden-Monaro contest is being conducted in the strangest of circumstances, making it particularly difficult to get a readout on this marginal seat.

Scott Morrison still carries the baggage of his poor performance during the bushfires, which hit this NSW electorate hard, and the problems with the recovery. But he’s been boosted by his management of COVID, and the huge government spending is still cushioning to a degree the devastating economic impact.

On Thursday the jobs figures saw Australia’s unemployment jumping to 7.1%, with 838,000 the total jobs lost in two months. Morrison warned there would be “more in the months ahead”. Millions of people are being shielded through JobKeeper.

Polling in single seats is notoriously unreliable, and this contest is complicated by 14 candidates. But for what it’s worth an Australia Institute poll of 643 on Monday night found Labor ahead on the two-party vote, 53%-47%. Asked which of a list “is the single most important issue for the federal government”, a third of voters selected the economy and a quarter chose climate change.

The byelection stakes have become very high for Albanese. A defeat would lead to muttering within Labor; that in turn would exacerbate the problems he’s having cutting through.

Even now, eyes are watching shadow treasurer Jim Chalmers. A recent flattering profile of Chalmers drew internal attention, and the government is seeking to needle.

Although no one suggests losing Eden-Monaro would mean any immediate challenge to Albanese, some in Labor do believe it would significantly reduce his chance of taking the opposition to the election.

In preparing for that election, Labor could be running against the clock. While not due until early 2022, it could be late next year – which wouldn’t leave the opposition much time to find the stride it is missing at the moment.

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Labor party’s dirty linen on display at bad time for Anthony Albanese – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-labor-partys-dirty-linen-on-display-at-bad-time-for-anthony-albanese-141075

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Johnston, Senior Fellow, University of Melbourne

Interest in Aboriginal fire knowledge has been high since last summer’s terrible bushfires. One initiative shows the huge potential benefits of this ancient practice – not just in Australia, but globally.

The International Savanna Fire Management Initiative (ISFMI) is taking the fire management techniques of indigenous northern Australians to the world. Recently, it’s reinvigorated traditional fire management in Botswana, in southern Africa.

Results so far show the Botswana project is likely to prevent significant amounts of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere, reduce destructive fires, promote a productive landscape, increase biodiversity and revive traditional culture.

Australia’s bushfire royal commission is currently looking at how Aboriginal knowledge can be incorporated into mainstream fire management. So let’s take a closer look at how it’s already working in Australia and abroad.

Reviving an ancient practice

Intense bushfires devastate ecosystems, biodiversity, human health, livelihoods and economies. Climate change will increase the severity, incidence and intensity of bushfires in many regions.

Over thousands of years, Aboriginal people in Australia have used fire to manage natural resources, and as an integral expression of culture.

Burning was often undertaken in the early dry season, when fires can develop gently and be easily controlled. Such burning removed fuels such as grass and leaf litter that might otherwise cause bigger fires. It also retains the canopy and other plant matter, and so preserves habitat for animals.

Read more: Our land is burning, and western science does not have all the answers

Over time, following the colonisation of Australia, indigenous land managers were forced off or left their traditional lands. Their absence has allowed large and intense bushfires in the late dry season to increase.

Traditional fire management techniques were first reintroduced at scale in Western Arnhem, in the Northern Territory, in 2007. Now there are 76 such projects – more than half either owned by, or significantly involving, an Aboriginal community.

Since the projects began, the total area affected by destructive wildfires has fallen. This reduces emissions because fires caused by cultural burning are less intense and extensive than large wildfires. This reduction is recognised by the federal government as carbon credits, generating more than A$90 million for communities so far.

Exporting Indigenous know-how

The initiative focuses on fire-prone savanna landscapes which globally account for more than 60% of carbon emissions from fire each year. Principally funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, it comprises an active network of indigenous organisations, traditional owners and experts.

Botswana was the first site to prove that transferring this knowledge is possible. Among the reasons it was chosen were its savanna landscapes and a tradition of fire management by its own indigenous people.

The first ranger exchange took place in May 2019, when Indigenous rangers from Northern Australia travelled to Botswana at the invitation of the Botswanan government.

Read more: A surprising answer to a hot question: controlled burns often fail to slow a bushfire

In savannas outside the town of Maun, Botswanan firefighters pitted their controlled burning skills against Australia’s indigenous rangers.

The Botswanans applied European-style fire suppression techniques they’ve adopted over the years. This involved fire trucks and 30 people. They ignited the windward side of their area, let the fire race through and then extinguished the flames.

It was 38℃, the wind was strong and the bush was dry. It was no surprise the fire was intense and all that remained was a charred landscape.

In contrast, two Australian indigenous rangers used hand-held devices called drip torches to weave a path of fire through their area. Their block was gently burnt using the wind, the bush and their skill – clearing out undergrowth and leaving green-topped trees.

The demonstration emphatically convinced the 300 spectators, who comprised most of Botswana’s firefighting community, that the skills of Australia’s indigenous rangers were effective in Botswana’s savannas.

Indeed, the techniques used by the visitors are not dissimilar to traditional Botswanan fire methods. The common ground was reflected when the two groups exchanged almost identical fire sticks when the rangers visited a nearby community.

Last year, Botswana sent a delegation to Northern Australia to learn more about the techniques.

At pilot sites in Botswana, the communities, indigenous rangers and local fire managers are now experimenting with reinvigorating traditional fire techniques.

Lessons learnt

The degradation of savanna landscapes in Australia following colonisation is replicated around the world.

Globally, bushfire management is dominated by the concept of fire suppression rather than prevention. Fighting fire with fire seems counter-intuitive to many people. But the Botswana experience shows these attitudes can be changed quickly.

Another key lesson is that convincing people and communities to use traditional fire techniques requires real-life demonstrations. Trying to make the point through lectures, simulations and written material has limited impact.

And creating networks is essential to connect the few experts and limited resources. Knowledge of traditional fire management around the world is scarce, and experience even more so. In Botswana for example, only a few community elders still have this knowledge.

The experiences also show scale is key. A couple of small sites, with a few local people involved, is not enough to manage wildfires effectively.

Beyond Botswana

The initiative has demonstrated how Northern Australia-style traditional fire management will be useful in other savanna environments around the world

We are now working on expanding this Australian technology to other promising sites in Angola, Namibia, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Brazil and Timor Leste.

Many other countries are interested in adopting these techniques. New funding, including from the private sector, is needed to scale up traditional fire management internationally.

Read more: Australia, you have unfinished business. It’s time to let our ‘fire people’ care for this land

The following people made important contributions to this article:

– Nolan Hunter, CEO, Kimberley Land Council

– Dean Munuggullumurr Yibarbuk, Warddeken Land Management

– Rowan Foley, CEO, the Aboriginal Carbon Foundation

– Cissy Gore-Birch, Executive Manager Aboriginal Engagement, Bush Heritage Australia

– Professor Jeremy Russell-Smith, Charles Darwin University

– Professor José M.C. Pereira, University of Lisbon

– Professor Guido van der Werf, Vrije Universiteit

– ref. Fighting fire with fire: Botswana adopts Indigenous Australians’ ancient burning tradition – https://theconversation.com/fighting-fire-with-fire-botswana-adopts-indigenous-australians-ancient-burning-tradition-135363

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Daley, Chief Executive Officer, Grattan Institute

It’s wrong to expect a “snap-back” at shopping centres, food courts, cinemas and other places where people used to gather to spend money.

We’ve identified three reasons why spending in physical stores on goods like clothes is likely to remain much lower than it was for a long time.

1. Fear, much of it age-based

First, even when governments relax restrictions, lots of people will still be worried and will go out less. Unless there are zero cases for several weeks in a state or city, many people will remain reluctant to go out.

This is why we have previously argued that there is a big dividend in eliminating COVID-19 in the style of New Zealand, the Northern Territory, and South Australia, rather than bumping along with “suppression” – and several new locally-acquired cases a day – as Victoria is still doing.

This reluctance to go out and spend, irrespective of government restrictions, could be seen in Australia before government restrictions were imposed, as shown on the “Consumers and mobility” tab of the Grattan Econ Tracker.

Read more: New Zealand hits zero active coronavirus cases. Here are 5 measures to keep it that way

The effects of fear shouldn’t be underestimated.

Spending in Sweden has fallen almost as much as in Denmark, even when Denmark was in lockdown and Sweden had minimal restrictions. Swedes are afraid to go out, particularly if they are old.

Spending by people aged 70+ has fallen further in Sweden than in Denmark, and 60-69 year-olds have cut their spending by about the same amount in both countries.

This isn’t surprising. COVID-19 is much more deadly for older people.

Age-based fear is a challenge for retailers because older households now spend significantly more than younger households. 25 years ago it was the other way around.

2. Time to form new habits

Second, we are likely to keep spending on different things, and using different channels, even after restrictions are lifted.

Habits tend to form when behaviour changes consistently. They strengthen over time, and are particularly sticky once behaviour has been consistent for a period of months – and we’ve been living with lockdown for that long in Australia.

Once formed, the new habits can persist unless there is another shock.

Read more: Australia’s drive-ins: where you can wear slippers, crack peanuts, and knit ‘to your heart’s content’

Australians have become used to doing more of their purchasing online. They have become used to spending more on living comfortably at home, and less on clothes for the office and to go out.

After the shutdown, people are likely to continue to work from home more often.

The habits of shopping remotely, and spending more on home furnishings and less on clothes, are likely to continue, and they would be likely to continue even if COVID-19 vanished tomorrow.

3. Global recession

Third, irrespective of COVID-19 regulations and behaviours, we are heading into an “old-fashioned”, globally synchronised, deep recession.

For the moment, JobKeeper, the temporarily-boosted JobSeeker payment, and a recent bounceback, have resulted in spending on credit and debit cards a bit more than this time last year.

But unemployment jumped to 7.1% on Thursday. That official rate understates how bad things are.

In May an extra 227,700 Australians lost their jobs (on top of 607,400 in April).

But only 85,000 of them were counted as unemployed. When and if the bulk of those people look for work, the unemployment rate will climb further.

Employed Australians, total

After JobKeeper ends in September (or is phased out as a result of the government’s review) many of the three million people on it will also become counted as unemployed.

Australians who have lost their jobs are likely to spend less than they did before.

After each of the previous two recessions it took years for employment to recover.

Spending need not recover after COVID

These three factors – fear, new habits, and recession – are present in countries and regions that seem to be well clear of coronavirus.

Much of China has been free of most government restrictions for months. Manufacturing and infrastructure spending has largely returned to pre-COVID levels.

But consumer activity is still below pre-COVID levels, and it is inching up only slowly.

Read more: The economy in 7 graphs. How a tightening of wallets pushed Australia into recession

Australia might well see an “opening party” on the day each particular COVID-19 restriction is lifted.

But after that, the best guess is that consumer spending will remain very subdued and refocused for a long time.

For those in the hardest-hit sectors and regions – particularly arts and recreation, hospitality, and clothing – the pain will continue long after the restrictions are lifted.

– ref. Retail won’t snap back. 3 reasons why COVID has changed the way we shop, perhaps forever – https://theconversation.com/retail-wont-snap-back-3-reasons-why-covid-has-changed-the-way-we-shop-perhaps-forever-140628

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Silvia Griselda, PhD student, University of Melbourne

Last month, the Australian Academy of Science published a report showing the COVID-19 pandemic would disproportionately affect women in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) disciplines.

The report noted before COVID-19, around 7,500 women were employed in STEM research fields in Australia in 2017, compared to around 18,400 men. The authors wrote:

The pandemic appears to be compounding pre-existing gender disparity; women are under-represented across the STEM workforce, and weighted in roles that are typically less senior and less secure. Job loss at a greater rate than for men is now an immediate threat for many women in Australia’s STEM workforce, potentially reversing equity gains of recent years.

Women are less likely to enrol in science and maths degrees than men. In Australia, only 35% of STEM university degrees are awarded to women. This figure has been stable over the past five years.

Some research in the 1990s suggested girls don’t study maths and science because they might not do as well as boys. But recent research shows girls score similarly or slightly higher than boys in maths and science.

So why don’t they choose these careers as often as men?

Our recently published study found while women perform at the same or higher level in maths and science as men, their performance in the humanities is markedly better. This may be the reason they’re choosing not to pursue STEM careers.

Girls just as good at maths and science

We wanted to see if there were gender differences in school performance when it came to science and maths and whether these affected students’ university applications.

Our study used data of more than 70,000 secondary school students in Greece over ten years.

We found girls’ scores in maths and science were around 4% higher than boys. But their scores in humanities subjects were around 13% higher.

We also found girls were 34% less likely to chose a STEM-related specialisation in their last years of high school.

These findings can be translated to Australia. According to the latest results from the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), girls in Australia perform on a similar level to boys in maths and science, but at a much higher level in reading.

The difference between girls’ and boys’ performance in reading is 6% in Australia and 9% in Greece.

But when it comes to maths and science, there is not much of a difference between girls’ and boys’ performance in either country.

Female comparative advantage in STEM

Our study showed students decided which fields they want to specialise in by comparing their academic strengths and weaknesses between subjects and with their classmates.

Using our data, we compared the students’ grades in STEM and humanities subjects. If a student had a higher grade in STEM than reading and writing subjects, we defined this student as having a STEM advantage. If this STEM advantage was greater than one of the students’ classmates, this student had STEM as an academic strength.

Because boys were generally better in science and maths than humanities, they had a higher STEM advantage. As girls were only slightly better in science and maths than humanities, their STEM advantage was lower than that of boys.

In our data, we considered pairs of girls with identical grades in STEM and humanities subjects at the beginning of secondary schools, who were randomly assigned to different classrooms. We then observed their enrolment decisions one to three years later.

For instance, two girls with a similar performance in STEM and humanities (with same STEM advantage) were assigned to different classrooms.

One girl was assigned to a classroom where her classmates had a high STEM advantage (higher scores in STEM than humanities). The other girl was assigned to a classroom where her classmates had a similar performance in STEM and humanities subject (no STEM advantage).

Our findings showed these two girls, on average, even if they had identical grades in STEM and humanities, chose different fields of study at the end of secondary school. The former (whose peers had a STEM advantage) was less likely to choose a STEM-related field.

Our study showed these two girls with identical performance ended up choosing a different educational career, based on which classmates they sat with.

This explained up to 12% of the gender gap in STEM enrolment in tertiary education.

We did the same for boys. Analysing pairs of boys with identical grades but different classmates, we did not observe any difference in their enrolment decisions.

What can be done?

Our research indicates girls are more influenced by their success relative to their peers, whereas this does not hold for boys.

Our findings are in line with previous research that suggests girls are more influenced by negative grades than boys, especially in STEM, when making decisions about their future.

Our research suggests the teacher has an important role to play in recognising and encouraging individual academic strengths, independently of classmates or gender.

Previous research has shown teacher gender stereotypes regarding girls’ ability in STEM negatively affects the way girls see themselves.

Teachers can and must foster confidence in girls when it comes to science and maths subjects, even if they may be better at reading and writing.

Maths and science studies lead to occupations such as engineering, physics, data science and computer programming, which are in great demand and generally pay a high salary. So turning away from STEM may have a long lasting impact on girls’ life earnings.

– ref. Girls score the same in maths and science as boys, but higher in arts – this may be why they are less likely to pick STEM careers – https://theconversation.com/girls-score-the-same-in-maths-and-science-as-boys-but-higher-in-arts-this-may-be-why-they-are-less-likely-to-pick-stem-careers-131563

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Flynn, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Monash University

Earlier this month, horrific reports emerged of a baby girl dying in Katherine, while her mother was in police custody.

Without commenting on this specific case, it raises important issues that should be of concern to all of us, about what happens to children when a parent or carer is arrested.

People may be surprised to learn of the scope this issue and the potential for harm.

When we arrest adults, we are often arresting parents

Many children in our community confront the experience of parents being arrested on a daily basis. When we arrest adults, more often than not, we are arresting parents.

There are no publicly available arrest data. But recent Australian Bureau of Statistics figures support a cautious estimate that at least 100,000 Australian children each year have a parent who is arrested.

Read more: FactCheck Q&A: are Indigenous Australians the most incarcerated people on Earth?

Some of these parents will end up in prison. It is generally accepted by those working in this area that around 50% of imprisoned adults have dependent children. Conservative estimates note that more than 40,000 children experience parental incarceration each year in Australia.

Figures from our research with imprisoned parents also suggest most of these children will be under the age of ten.

Indigenous children are over-represented in this group, given the high rates of Indigenous incarceration in Australia.

But what happens to the kids?

Despite the frequency of parents being arrested, we know very little about what happens to their children.

Existing research has focused on children who witness arrest, consistently noting the long-term risk of trauma.

Much less is known about the arrest process, how this occurs and the immediate consequences for children, although recent Monash University research highlighted poor attention to children at this time.

Read more: As we imprison more adults, what’s happening to the children?

Researchers are most concerned about those children whose parents are arrested and remanded into custody. There are many anecdotal cases of children being left alone, with no adult supervision and no basic provisions.

Haphazard responses

When police arrest a parent, there is no formal Australia-wide information gathering about the children. And specific guidelines to ensure children are “seen” and cared for are largely absent.

Some Australian states have agreements with child protective services. But often officers are unaware of the detail of these agreements, or their subsequent responsibilities.

These agreements are also typically framed in general terms. This means children’s safety is largely left to the interpretation and discretion of police officers, who have many competing responsibilities, and are often under-resourced to deal with children.

The result is that responses to children are individualised and haphazard. With no clear roles and responsibilities, children can fall through the cracks.

While some local, small scale research, including my 2015 study with colleagues – has shown evidence of good policing practices, these are not guaranteed, and nor are good outcomes for children.

Some parents more at risk

Some parents and children are more at risk. Our research shows mothers fall into this category, more often being primary carers of children. Indigenous women – the fastest growing group in prisons – and their children are even more at risk.

Our small, unpublished study by Monash University researchers in 2015 draws on data from 14 Indigenous women in Victoria and NSW, who were interviewed for a larger investigation. Their experiences show additional challenges for them and their children, with police reported to have more extreme responses than for non-Indigenous families.

These children were more likely to be either taken immediately into out-of-home care, or it was simply assumed that extended family would care for the children. Minimal attention was paid to ensuring suitable care. While it is clear police stations are not childcare centres, we need to ensure much better processes to protect vulnerable children.

There are solutions

Solutions to this problem are both very easy and very complex.

In recent years, we have seen policing become more responsive to issues that intersect.

For example, in some jurisdictions, police are required to actively ask arrestees about their Indigenous status, then follow specific guidelines in their interactions. The same goes for mental health. In Victoria, a protocol requires police attention to determining a person’s fitness for interview.

Three things we can do now

Three immediate actions are needed.

First, police officers need to ask about dependent children during any standard arrest. This is successfully done in other countries, such as Sweden, alongside a clear relationship with child protective services and relevant community services.

Second, police need to develop and implement child-sensitive arrest procedures.

And third, police services, in collaboration with child protection and relevant non-government specialist organisations, need to develop guidelines to care for children where parental arrest will likely see the immediate removal of the parent.

Collaboration across different sectors and a “child-aware” approach is already happening in other “adult-focussed” systems, such as mental health, alcohol and drug abuse and family violence. It is also possible here.

Change is possible. But unless it happens – and happens quickly – children will continue to fall through the cracks.

Read more: To fix the family law system, we need to ask parents what really works

– ref. At least 100,000 children have a parent who is arrested each year. There are no proper systems to protect them. – https://theconversation.com/at-least-100-000-children-have-a-parent-who-is-arrested-each-year-there-are-no-proper-systems-to-protect-them-140872

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Irga, Chancellor’s Postdoctoral Research Fellow and Lecturer in Air and Noise Pollution, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney

Australians are accustomed to having fresh air, and our clean atmosphere is a source of pride for many.

Last summer’s bushfires, however, brought air quality to the public’s attention, as millions of Australians breathed some of the world’s worst quality air.

But there’s a lesser-known source of pollution causing billions of dollars worth of health costs every year: indoor wood-fired heaters.

This week, the Victorian branch of the Australian Medical Association endorsed calls to remove these heaters via a buyback or subsidy scheme. But will it work?

Read more: How does poor air quality from bushfire smoke affect our health?

Wood heater smoke is a huge pollution source

In winter, wood heater smoke is the single biggest air pollutant in New South Wales and the ACT. Similarly, in Victoria, wood smoke on cool winter days is responsible for most breaches of air quality standards.

Wood heater smoke is generated from both open fireplaces and wood-fired heaters. Wood-fired heaters are controlled-combustion, domestic heating appliances. In order to discharge emissions, they use a metal pipe called a flue, while open fireplaces use chimneys.

Around 10% of Australian households – roughly 900,000 homes – use wood as their main source of heating, according to the ABS.

Read more: Bushfire smoke is everywhere in our cities. Here’s exactly what you are inhaling

Based on NSW guidelines, burning 10 kilograms of wood (an average day) in a modern, low-emitting wood heater can produce around 15 grams of “particulate matter”.

This is composed of tiny particles which can penetrate into the respiratory system, potentially causing lung and heart diseases. It is one of the most dangerous components of smoke, and a carrier for many of its cancer-causing chemicals.

By contrast, a truck travelling on congested urban roads can produce just 0.03 grams of particulate matter per kilometre travelled. A truck would therefore have to travel 500km in heavy traffic – roughly the distance from Melbourne to Mildura – to produce the same particulate matter emissions as one average day of using a wood heater.

So a wood-fired heater is like having a truck idling in your living room all day (albeit with the bulk of the emissions escaping via the chimney).

Smoke is toxic

The smoke from wood fires is very similar to that generated by bushfires, and is also detrimental to our health.

Australia’s wood-fired heaters are estimated to cause health costs of around A$3,800 per wood heater each year.

Given the roughly 900,000 wood heaters used as primary household heating sources in Australia, this could be as high as A$3.4 billion annually across the country.

One study published in May estimated 69 deaths, 86 hospital admissions, and 15 asthma emergency department visits in Tasmania were attributable to biomass smoke each year – the smoke which comes from burning wood, crops and manure. More than 74% of these impacts were attributed to wood heater smoke, with average associated yearly costs of A$293 million.

Another study modelled the effects of air pollution on over-45-year-olds in Sydney over seven years. It found chronic exposure to low levels of particulate matter was linked with an increased risk of death. Depending on the model used, it found between a 3-16% increased risk of dying occurred with each extra microgram (one millionth of a gram) of particulate matter per cubic metre of air.

Read more: From face masks to air purifiers: what actually works to protect us from bushfire smoke?

All of this assumes wood heater users follow the law and use clean, dry hardwood as fuel. Problems become far worse when treated wood is used as the fuel source.

Treated timber offcuts from construction or demolition activities are freely available and therefore continue to be used as fuel for wood heaters, against recommendations.

Much of this timber is treated with an antifungal chemical called copper chrome arsenate. Breathing the emissions when this wood is burned can increase incidents of liver, bladder, and lung cancers, and reduce the production of red and white blood cells, leading to fatigue, abnormal heart rhythm, and blood-vessel damage.

There is no safe level of indoor or outdoor air pollution. This is an ideal time to consider the hidden dangers associated with our “clean” air.

Change is difficult

Standard testing for new stoves is one way authorities try to reduce wood smoke emissions. Australian heaters must be designed to pass strict standards, however this system may not reflect the way heaters are actually operated in the home environment, because this varies so much between households.

For example, in New Zealand, testing on five heaters installed in people’s homes recorded particulate matter levels more than 15 times higher than their predicted average calculated during testing.

Banning wood stoves altogether is inequitable, as some people cannot afford any other source of heating, and many people employed in the wood-fire heater industry could lose their jobs. But changing economic incentives could work. An intervention method currently being proposed in Victoria is a wood stove buyback or subsidy scheme, which is now supported by the Victorian branch of the Australian Medical Association.

However, a similar rebate scheme did not have much impact in Canberra. Since November 2015, residents have been able to claim a subsidy of up to A$1,250 if they replace their wood heater with a ducted electric reverse cycle system. Just five households took up this rebate in the first six months. Meanwhile, 40,000-50,000 wood heaters are sold in Australia each year.

Another option is fines. Tasmanians can be fined A$1,680 if their chimney emits smoke which is visible for more than ten minutes. However, when these regulations were announced the laws were considered by many Tasmanians to be heavy-handed and the government was met with community resistance.

A way forward?

In 2001, Launceston established several strategies to encourage use of electric heaters instead of wood heaters, including a grant of A$500 to those switching over.

Following this, wood heater prevalence fell from 66% to 30% of all households, corresponding to a 40% reduction in particulate air pollution during winter.

Education could also help. If people knew the concentrations of air pollutants in their homes, they might be motivated to change their wood burning behaviour. Often residents are unaware of the concentrations of smoke generated by their activity, with many considering opening a window reduces the level of wood smoke in their home. Controlling indoor pollution is difficult, especially if the major source of the pollution is outdoors – opening the window would actually let more pollution in.

We suggest that together with the proposed rebate schemes, one way forward could be to provide affordable access (through subsidies or otherwise) to air-quality sensors. At the lower end of the scale, prices range from A$100-500, with more accurate devices in the range of A$1,000-5,000.

Despite the expense, they can improve awareness of levels of air pollution among those with wood-fired heaters, and may provide the impetus for people to work together and change community perceptions around wood-burning appliances.

Read more: How does bushfire smoke affect our health? 6 things you need to know

This article is supported by the Judith Neilson Institute for Journalism and Ideas.

– ref. ‘Like having a truck idling in your living room’: the toxic cost of wood-fired heaters – https://theconversation.com/like-having-a-truck-idling-in-your-living-room-the-toxic-cost-of-wood-fired-heaters-140737

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

The anger and frustration at New Zealand’s border quarantine failure have been palpable.

Two women, recently arrived in New Zealand, were granted compassionate leave from quarantine to be with grieving family after a parent’s death. But they were not tested for COVID-19 before being allowed to travel the length of the North Island by car. Both later tested positive.

Since news of the failure broke, other examples of mismanagement and claims of an overly relaxed quarantine regime have emerged.

Having endured lockdown and now nursing an ailing economy back to life, the “team of 5 million” has not been forgiving. Nor has Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who directed her director-general of health to immediately suspend compassionate exemptions for anyone in quarantine.

Read more: 2 new COVID-19 cases in New Zealand, but elimination of community transmission still stands

The fact she has also called in the military to oversee quarantine facilities and strengthen border control speaks volumes. The deployment of our armed forces was always an option during the emergency. The government wisely chose not to do so in any highly visible way.

Now it’s different. But rather than being a move against non-compliant New Zealand citizens or visitors to the country, it’s a last resort in response to the failed bureaucracy that allowed the mistakes to happen.

Legal uncertainty is not to blame

While the specific point of breakdown in the chain of command governing quarantine management has yet to be pinpointed, one thing is beyond doubt: this is not a matter of legal uncertainties.

The powers of the government in times of infectious and notifiable disease are vast under the Health Act. With the paramount goal of protecting public health, the obligation to direct people for medical examination and contact tracing is clear.

If there was any doubt about those existing powers during the COVID-19 crisis, two other pieces of legislation cleared it up.

First, specific laws were introduced with the Immigration (COVID-19 Response) Amendment Act. This gave the government additional powers to add conditions to all forms of visas as is “reasonably necessary to manage the effects, or deal with the consequences, of […] COVID-19”.

Second, the much-disputed COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020 established orders that could be made to “require persons to refrain from taking any specified actions that contribute or are likely to contribute to the risk of the outbreak or spread of COVID-19”.

Read more: The next once-a-century pandemic is coming sooner than you think – but COVID-19 can help us get ready

Those orders extend to requiring people to be isolated or quarantined, report for medical examination or testing, and provide any information needed for contact tracing.

At the core of this debate is a question of compulsion. The challenge lies in finding a path between the continuing global emergency and a domestic situation that is largely controlled but vulnerable. Enforced quarantine, mandatory testing and contact tracing are the logical solutions in protecting our borders, and the current legislation provides for them.

Longer term – especially if and when a vaccine is developed – this will be a difficult debate. Kiwis (rightly) do not like the idea of compulsion, unless there is a clear and declared emergency.

Furthermore, the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment became part of our Bill of Rights. This has been interpreted as the right to object to a range of medical practices, vaccinations being most notable. The question will be whether this interpretation is correct and, if so, whether it can be overridden for the public good.

Regardless, the existing pieces of legislation should have been ample to protect the population from exposure to the two women in question.

Read more: The coronavirus crisis shows why New Zealand urgently needs a commissioner for older people

We need a royal commission of inquiry

There is now an immediate need to assign accountability to the individuals or groups responsible for putting the community at risk. And this leads to the greater need for a royal commission to critically examine this current problem and many others, in the overall way that COVID-19 had been dealt with.

From the first national diagnosis of the COVID-19 crisis all the way to the recovery processes, a royal commission should be tasked with reviewing it all: the health, scientific, economic, constitutional, legal and cultural elements of the event.

This would provide a public record of what worked, what didn’t, what gaps were apparent and what could be improved next time. And it is the next time we have to be particularly worried about. Pandemics are an intergenerational problem, and what we are enduring will not be the last such experience.

– ref. The law is clear – border testing is enforceable. So why did New Zealand’s quarantine system break down? – https://theconversation.com/the-law-is-clear-border-testing-is-enforceable-so-why-did-new-zealands-quarantine-system-break-down-141036

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Dobson, Professor and Dean of Education, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

The recent release of global university rankings and the way these are reported raises important questions about the role and reputation of our tertiary institutions.

Are universities measured and ranked according to what we really value? Or are they ranked and valued only by what is measured? And are those measures authentic and trusted indicators of quality?

There was a time when no one feared that a university might slip a quality ranking or two in the eyes of the world, the taxpayer, benefactors or students considering domestic or international study. Nowadays, however, universities see no limit to the black hole of global rankings. Its gravitational pull consumes their attention.

While a modern phenomenon, rankings have historical origins. The birth of the modern research-intensive university can be traced to Western Europe in 1665 when the first academic journals appeared. In Germany, more than 3,000 journals were published between 1665 and 1790, marking an institutional move from the teaching university to the research university.

Academics were able to share and legitimise their research by publishing in these journals. Students who were called on to write and defend their essays orally could draw on the journals to support their learning.

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

There is no one ranking standard

Today’s journals and the number of citations academics can claim in them are key indicators of a university’s rank and quality. However, when a university has to research and teach in a language other than English, the effect on its ranking can be drastic.

Databases used by the larger university ranking systems, such as Scopus and CSI/SSCI, don’t automatically pick up non-English journals. Opportunities for researchers to gain “ranking points” through peer citations are therefore reduced.

In the global rankings of university quality, various factors are weighted slightly differently. The QS World University Rankings pay particular attention to reputation among colleagues in the discipline. The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) considers citations in journals as a proxy for research quality. And the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE) allocate equally across peer reputation, citation and institutional self-report surveys.

The systems are far from simple and universities increasingly invest in experts to advise on how to improve and maintain ranking scores, especially as more universities crowd the global ranking field.

If we are to accept this imperative to measure and rank universities by academic reputation, publishing record, teaching and research intensity, then we need to ask another question: what other indicators of quality and value might be included?

While online programs have often been considered inferior to “live” learning, for instance, the impact of COVID-19 has forced us to reconsider. There is now broader awareness of the opportunities online teaching opens up – including its positive impact on universities’ carbon footprints.

In fact, the THE rankings tracked progress towards the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals for the first time in 2019. One example of such sustainable activity is Goldsmiths College at the University of London, which banned the sale of beef on campus.

How do you measure intangible value?

Taking an even broader view, might we consider the spiritual dimension of higher education? The university has long been valued for its divine contribution: Oxford University’s motto has been “Dominus illuminatio mea” (the Lord is my light) for at least 200 years. “O my Lord. Advance me in Knowledge” is the motto of the University of Karachi.

This marriage of the sacred and the scientific has been a theme since the founding of the University of al-Qarawiyyin in 859 AD in Morocco. It’s said to be the oldest continually operating higher educational institution in the world.

In the rush to measure quantifiable indicators of output have we obscured these less tangible forms of value?

Read more: COVID-19: what Australian universities can do to recover from the loss of international student fees

If COVID-19 taught us anything, it was the value of communication and connection (sometimes called connectivism). In fact, experts from universities came to the fore as rarely before. Rather than handing more influence to PR and social media experts, might this be an opportunity to re-create the university as the place for exchanging ideas, teaching and research?

Maybe we should look back to the House of Wisdom (بيت الحكمة‎), founded in Baghdad in 786 CE, where scholars met daily to translate, discuss and write in many languages: Arabic, Farsi, Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Greek and Latin. Aristotle’s work was famously translated from Greek. So too the work of the physician Hippocrates.

What hadn’t been accessible was made accessible and shared. The “West” benefited from this knowledge from the East, laying the foundations for the Renaissance.

This was a true academy of the arts and sciences, valued not for its citations, number of Nobel Prize winners or the ratio of doctorates to bachelor degrees, but for the exchange of knowledge and ideas. One wonders how this global multilingual forerunner of a quality modern university might fare under our ranking regime.

By reaching back in history we might recover those other measures of quality and value that formed the foundations upon which modern universities are built. The adage that “if everything is to be as before, then all must change” rings true. How we value and rank the exchange of knowledge and ideas will once again become something worth striving for.

– ref. Beyond the black hole of global university rankings: rediscovering the true value of knowledge and ideas – https://theconversation.com/beyond-the-black-hole-of-global-university-rankings-rediscovering-the-true-value-of-knowledge-and-ideas-140236

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Johnston, Senior Fellow, University of Melbourne

Interest in Aboriginal fire knowledge has been high since last summer’s terrible bushfires. One initiative shows the huge potential benefits of this ancient practice – not just in Australia, but globally.

The International Savanna Fire Management Initiative (ISFMI) is taking the fire management techniques of indigenous northern Australians to the world. Recently, it’s reinvigorated traditional fire management in Botswana, in southern Africa.

Results so far show the Botswana project is likely to prevent significant amounts of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere, reduce destructive fires, promote a productive landscape, increase biodiversity and revive traditional culture.

Australia’s bushfire royal commission is currently looking at how Aboriginal knowledge can be incorporated into mainstream fire management. So let’s take a closer look at how it’s already working in Australia and abroad.

Reviving an ancient practice

Intense bushfires devastate ecosystems, biodiversity, human health, livelihoods and economies. Climate change will increase the severity, incidence and intensity of bushfires in many regions.

Over thousands of years, Aboriginal people in Australia have used fire to manage natural resources, and as an integral expression of culture.

Burning was often undertaken in the early dry season, when fires can develop gently and be easily controlled. Such burning removed fuels such as grass and leaf litter that might otherwise cause bigger fires. It also retains the canopy and other plant matter, and so preserves habitat for animals.

Read more: Our land is burning, and western science does not have all the answers

Over time, following the colonisation of Australia, indigenous land managers were forced off or left their traditional lands. Their absence has allowed large and intense bushfires in the late dry season to increase.

Traditional fire management techniques were first reintroduced at scale in Western Arnhem, in the Northern Territory, in 2007. Now there are 76 such projects – more than half either owned by, or significantly involving, an Aboriginal community.

Since the projects began, the total area affected by destructive wildfires has fallen. This reduces emissions because fires caused by cultural burning are less intense and extensive than large wildfires. This reduction is recognised by the federal government as carbon credits, generating more than A$90 million for communities so far.

Exporting Indigenous know-how

The initiative focuses on fire-prone savanna landscapes which globally account for more than 60% of carbon emissions from fire each year. Principally funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, it comprises an active network of indigenous organisations, traditional owners and experts.

Botswana was the first site to prove that transferring this knowledge is possible. Among the reasons it was chosen were its savanna landscapes and a tradition of fire management by its own indigenous people.

The first ranger exchange took place in May 2019, when Indigenous rangers from Northern Australia travelled to Botswana at the invitation of the Botswanan government.

Read more: A surprising answer to a hot question: controlled burns often fail to slow a bushfire

In savannas outside the town of Maun, Botswanan firefighters pitted their controlled burning skills against Australia’s indigenous rangers.

The Botswanans applied European-style fire suppression techniques they’ve adopted over the years. This involved fire trucks and 30 people. They ignited the windward side of their area, let the fire race through and then extinguished the flames.

It was 38℃, the wind was strong and the bush was dry. It was no surprise the fire was intense and all that remained was a charred landscape.

In contrast, two Australian indigenous rangers used hand-held devices called drip torches to weave a path of fire through their area. Their block was gently burnt using the wind, the bush and their skill – clearing out undergrowth and leaving green-topped trees.

The demonstration emphatically convinced the 300 spectators, who comprised most of Botswana’s firefighting community, that the skills of Australia’s indigenous rangers were effective in Botswana’s savannas.

Indeed, the techniques used by the visitors are not dissimilar to traditional Botswanan fire methods. The common ground was reflected when the two groups exchanged almost identical fire sticks when the rangers visited a nearby community.

Last year, Botswana sent a delegation to Northern Australia to learn more about the techniques.

At pilot sites in Botswana, the communities, indigenous rangers and local fire managers are now experimenting with reinvigorating traditional fire techniques.

Lessons learnt

The degradation of savanna landscapes in Australia following colonisation is replicated around the world.

Globally, bushfire management is dominated by the concept of fire suppression rather than prevention. Fighting fire with fire seems counter-intuitive to many people. But the Botswana experience shows these attitudes can be changed quickly.

Another key lesson is that convincing people and communities to use traditional fire techniques requires real-life demonstrations. Trying to make the point through lectures, simulations and written material has limited impact.

And creating networks is essential to connect the few experts and limited resources. Knowledge of traditional fire management around the world is scarce, and experience even more so. In Botswana for example, only a few community elders still have this knowledge.

The experiences also show scale is key. A couple of small sites, with a few local people involved, is not enough to manage wildfires effectively.

Beyond Botswana

The initiative has demonstrated how Northern Australia-style traditional fire management will be useful in other savanna environments around the world

We are now working on expanding this Australian technology to other promising sites in Angola, Namibia, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Brazil and Timor Leste.

Many other countries are interested in adopting these techniques. New funding, including from the private sector, is needed to scale up traditional fire management internationally.

Read more: Australia, you have unfinished business. It’s time to let our ‘fire people’ care for this land

The following people made important contributions to this article:

– Nolan Hunter, CEO, Kimberley Land Council

– Dean Munuggullumurr Yibarbuk, Warddeken Land Management

– Rowan Foley, CEO, the Aboriginal Carbon Foundation

– Cissy Gore-Birch, Executive Manager Aboriginal Engagement, Bush Heritage Australia

– Professor Jeremy Russell-Smith, Charles Darwin University

– Professor José M.C. Pereira, University of Lisbon

– Professor Guido van der Werf, Vrije Universiteit

– ref. Fighting fire with fire: how Botswana is adopting the ancient burning of Indigenous Australians – https://theconversation.com/fighting-fire-with-fire-how-botswana-is-adopting-the-ancient-burning-of-indigenous-australians-135363

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James C. Murphy, PhD, Lecturer and Tutor, Politics and History, Swinburne University of Technology

The Conversation is running a series of explainers on key figures in Australian political history, examining how they changed the country and political debate. You can read the rest of the series here.

As Australia’s longest serving prime minister, the career of Robert Menzies remains a model of political success in this country.

Despite this, much of Menzies’s legacy has failed to live long past his time in office, let alone into the 21st century. He was, for instance, firmly in favour of White Australia, obsessed with Australia’s British roots and idolised the monarchy. He also believed the Communist Party ought to be outlawed, and oversaw a highly protected, regulated economy. In many ways, Menzies was the last bastion of an old Australia we would hardly recognise today.

However, there are two notable exceptions – ways in which Menzies did manage to transform Australian political debate in a lasting way: firstly, through his construction of a middle-class political constituency he called “the forgotten people”; secondly, as the founder of the Liberal Party and Coalition.

Rising through the ranks

Born in Jeparit, Victoria, in 1894, Menzies rapidly made his way into the elite of Melbourne society. After working as a barrister and later a youthful minister in two Victorian state governments, he was elected to the federal parliament with the United Australia Party in 1934.

Attorney-General Menzies then became prime minister after Joseph Lyons died in office in 1939, just as the second world war broke out.

His factional enemies in the UAP were not impressed by his wartime leadership and, after his closest allies were killed in a plane crash, Menzies was forced out of the leadership in 1941.

Within a year, Labor was in government, and the UAP was collapsing.

This was not the end of Menzies, though. In 1944, he led efforts to reunite various right-of-centre groups to form a new anti-Labor party — the Liberal Party of Australia. He then headed the party’s campaigns against the Labor government’s alleged “socialist” excesses, such as bank nationalisation and petrol rationing.

In 1949, he led the Liberals to a sweeping election victory. Though he had some electoral near misses, and part of his longevity was owed to a fortuitous split in the Labor party, Menzies remained Liberal leader and prime minister until his retirement in 1966.

‘The forgotten people’

In 1942, as he sought to resurrect his political career, Menzies gave one of Australia’s most famous political speeches, which envisaged a constituency he called “the forgotten people”:

But if we are to talk of classes, then the time has come to say something of the forgotten class – the middle class – those people who are constantly in danger of being ground between the upper and the nether millstones of the false class war; the middle class who, properly regarded, represent the backbone of this country.

These were middle-class, god-fearing citizens, neither rich enough to fend for themselves, nor poor enough to seek trade union representation, and thus lacking power. They would become Menzies’ core constituency, with the party tailoring its policies to helping them meet their modest aspirations for themselves and their families.

Where the UAP had been seen as tied to the upper class and big business, Menzies would seek to attach his party to this ignored middle class, a group more Australians could imagine themselves to be part of, even if they had never thought of themselves in those terms before.

This construct has remained at the centre of Liberal Party rhetoric, reincarnated as John Howard’s “battlers” and Scott Morrison’s “quiet Australians”.

Even Labor has, at times, sought to defer to this supposed “backbone of the nation”. In his first speech to the Press Club as Labor Leader, Anthony Albanese suggested the ALP had lost the 2019 federal election because, to many voters, it failed to be the party of aspiration; essentially, that they neglected Menzies’s forgotten people.

Of course, this is not to say there really is a quiet, unassuming, aspirational majority lurking out in the suburbs. Rather, Menzies’s forgotten people are a rhetorical construct that has grown a life of its own. Politicians believe in this constituency and defer to it, even if it is not, actually, a meaningful voting bloc.

A Liberal-National Coalition

Menzies was also the driving force in creating and holding together the Liberal Party — and indeed the long-term Liberal-National Coalition, an alliance that has historically shifted the focus of political debate.

Read more: Australian politics explainer: Robert Menzies and the birth of the Liberal-National coalition

Keeping liberals, conservatives and rural interests in one bloc has meant the battle for leadership in Australia became a contest between the Coalition and Labor. This was no easy feat. Indeed, until 1944, there had been numerous minor parties campaigning on the right of the political spectrum. Some were reluctant to join Menzies’s new party, given that it would be a “liberal”, rather than “conservative” party.

Free-traders and economic moderates frequently fell out over welfare and tarrifs; hard-line conservatives and social liberals had serious disagreements over censorship, multiculturalism and other social issues. However, Menzies managed to unite them under what Howard would later call the Liberal Party’s “broad church” by focusing on Labor’s “socialism” and the international threat of communism. This appeal similarly kept the Nationals as Coalition partners. Menzies said:

In 1949 we were swept into power at what was then an almost record level of majority. Now all that happened because we had something to believe in, not just something to oppose, something to believe in.

Consequently, the issues, problems and demands that divided the Coalition have not been fully discussed in the public arena, but rather suppressed within party room debates and compromises. This has, to an extent, enabled non-Labor alliances to dominate politics. More recently, the two-party system has begun to break down, with more and more voters availing themselves of minor parties and independents in order to place previously ignored issues on the political agenda.

Read more: Can the Liberal Party hold its ‘broad church’ of liberals and conservatives together?

Menzies’s legacy

Menzies’s legacy, then, is not so much his particular beliefs or policies, nor in the model of leadership he provides as Australia’s longest serving prime minister. Rather, his lasting contributions were the rhetorical and organisational structures he built. While the former have faded into obscurity, the notion of “the forgotten people” and the Liberal-National Coalition remain as important now as they were when Menzies retired from office in 1966.

Had he retired from public life at his low ebb in 1942, Australian politics might look very different today.

– ref. ‘The time has come to say something of the forgotten class’: how Menzies transformed Australian political debate – https://theconversation.com/the-time-has-come-to-say-something-of-the-forgotten-class-how-menzies-transformed-australian-political-debate-131383

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sherene Idriss, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Deakin University

Do you make the 7/11 worker Indian? Or is that offensive? If you make them white …well … you’re lying really.

But also, you’re taking a job away from an Indian actor if you don’t.

This exchange, the first comment from actor-comedian Josh Thomas and the second by Celia Pacquola, during a panel discussion at the Sydney Opera House in 2016 was shared on social media this week. It has re-energised discussions about the lack of cultural diversity in the Australian arts scene.

Compare Thomas’s comments with an interview I did with a young Iraqi man, also in 2016, after a workshop on diversity in the arts in Western Sydney. Ziad said

I do so many of these talks and the white person in the crowd will be like, ‘Thanks for sharing, it’s a great start’. Like, great start really? … We have been having these conversations for 15 years already, you should know by now … It’s so frustrating because that ignorance is such an easy cop out and it doesn’t change anything. In five years’ time I could give the same talk and someone in the audience will say the same thing. They just want to give themselves a pat on the back, like, ‘good job me’, and go back to their normal lives.

Conversations about cultural diversity in the arts have been running on a parallel track. Against the backdrop of the Black Lives Matter movement they seem to have finally come to a head.

Many Australians are interrogating how whiteness has been fundamental to shaping our settler-colonial society – and how race has been depicted in performance. Comments like Thomas’s have taken centre stage in public debate about the kind of society we want to live in.

Calling out

The panel discussion clip was shared a week after actor Meyne Wyatt passionately closed the ABC’s Q&A program with his monologue about injustice towards Indigenous Australians.

The immediate online backlash to Thomas cast him as racist. But people of colour working in the arts offered more nuanced responses.

Rather than focus on Thomas, it is the nature of the panel discussion and how it centres the white experience that needs deeper analysis.

Additionally, it shows how difficult it is to challenge race-thinking and stereotyping – especially as a person of colour just starting out. Thomas’ comments are a symptom of systemic racism – not the whole problem.

Read more: Explainer: what is systemic racism and institutional racism?

Creative work is different to a lot of other jobs

In Australia it is illegal to engage in hiring practices based on race, gender, sex and age. But these are usually the attributes that can make or break your chances as an artist.

This harsh reality often confronts people of colour, who get into the arts hoping to freely express themselves.

My research includes over 30 interviews with young people of colour about how race, gender and socio-economic status shapes their experiences.

Because the arts scene is often based on unspoken rules, networking and gatekeeping, there are generally no channels for complaint if you are typecast or overlooked as “inexperienced” based on race.

Networks have to be maintained and that can mean accepting work perpetuates racist stereotypes because those are the easiest stories to tell.

The personal is political

Recognising systemic racism requires an understanding that being from a migrant background is often tied to socio-economic disadvantage. For Indigenous young people, heavy police surveillance intensifies structural disadvantage.

Young people trying to get work in the creative industries face many structural challenges early on in life that, over time, become compounded.

One of the participants in my research, who worked in publishing, illuminated this:

When I have been on hiring panels, I’ll say we need to try and recruit people of colour and they’ll be like, ‘Well, no Indigenous or Black person applied’. Or in the writing scene, ‘Oh there aren’t enough writers of colour or their stories aren’t good enough’.

The problem doesn’t start at the point of job ads. Like for me, it starts when I was born. I grew up in housing commission, I went to shit schools, we got moved around because we were displaced when they [the government] took over our building, and the fact that I have enough experience is a fucking miracle.

In the 2016 panel discussion, American TV writer Dan Harmon comments that diversity in the arts goes beyond what happens on screen. It’s the lack of support and resources available for young Black children, for example.

My research echoed this disadvantage in the Australian context. Ibrahim told me:

I told the art teacher that I wanted to do an animation [for year 12 art assessment] but I was waiting for my father to buy me the camera that would allow me to do it. Because the school didn’t have the technology … at one point the teacher said to me “are you gonna work on something you can do?” He just didn’t believe I could do it.

Read more: By rejecting stereotypes, Slam and Ramy show us authentic Arab Muslim men on screen

‘A great start’

In my research, being blocked from securing a gig based on racial stereotypes – like the hip hop artist who has to pretend to be Latin American instead of Arab Muslim – resulted in some young people suffering from poor mental health.

Some moved abroad to try their hand in the US or UK arts scene, as Asian Australian actors including Alexander Hodge have done. Others have become part of the “multicultural arts scene”. Some gave up on their dream altogether.

Rather than focus on Thomas’s apology, now is the time to ask whether arts gatekeepers really understand what cultural diversity means and to think beyond “adding colour” to the mix. It’s time for a deeper conversation about achieving transformative racial justice across our society, including the arts.

– ref. The sorry part is easy – why true racial diversity in the arts will take more than words – https://theconversation.com/the-sorry-part-is-easy-why-true-racial-diversity-in-the-arts-will-take-more-than-words-140933

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leisa Armstrong, Senior Lecturer in Computer Science, Edith Cowan University

In recent months, food security concerns have emerged for nations across Africa, Asia and the Middle East, as swarms of desert locusts wreak havoc on crops.

While the same level of damage isn’t currently being felt in Australia, the threat of infestations extends to us too. But drone technology is offering up solutions.

Not just a Biblical threat

In January, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) warned rising locust numbers in the Horn of Africa presented an “extremely alarming and unprecedented threat” to food security and livelihoods.

According to the FAO, a swarm of about 40 million desert locusts can eat the same amount of food in one day as about 35,000 people. Swarms can be as large as several hundred square kilometres, with as many as 80 million adults per square kilometre.

Countries impacted by infestations this year include Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Somalia, India, Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, Oman and Saudi Arabia.

A review of records by the Australian Plague Locust Commission has reported eight large outbreaks in Australia since 1930. The FAO has encouraged the use of drones to provide early warning systems that may help prevent locust outbreaks.

Control with technology

In nature, locusts are controlled by birds, spiders, parasitic flies and wasps – but these aren’t effective when numbers explode.

In Australia, locusts are generally controlled by aerial spraying of pesticides from light aircraft. One solution may be to destroy eggs by ploughing in crops or pastures, but there’s no conclusive data on how effective this is.

Drones are now providing an innovative alternative to the more expensive use of light aircrafts. These aerial vehicles can be used to remotely sense areas, carry out pest surveillance and monitor crop growth.

They also allow for targeted pesticide application through atomiser sprayers that deliver a fine, even spray from liquid.

Read more: How many locusts does it take to start a biblical plague? Just three

Each state and territory of Australia has been affected by plague locusts at some point in the past, with outbreaks having occurred in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. The latest April bulletin shows limited outbreaks in New South Wales.

There is a growing body of research on the use of drones for pest monitoring and management, with several Australian agricultural consultancy companies offering drone services for crop and soil monitoring. State and federal agricultural agencies also use drones for crop, disease and pest monitoring.

Understanding the movement of locusts helps determine the best way to control crop damage.

Last month marked the first time drones were used to clear swarms in Rajasthan, India. Spraying insecticides dispersed the insects into different areas.

Drones can also be used in the aftermath of infestations. For instance, recent outbreaks in Kenya have seen the use of drones for post-disaster mapping. These maps, along with satellite information, can provide more accurate assessments of the extent of crop loss.

On-ground internet-connected sensors with thermal and image processing capabilities could also potentially be used to monitor the spread of infestations. These could provide additional real-time monitoring to support satellite imagery.

Some bugs remain

There are limitations when it comes to using drones to tackle locust problems.

Drones don’t perform well in areas that are densely packed with locusts, due to damage to propellers. And while the technical specifications of drones have made rapid improvements over the past few years, they still only provide a limited load of insecticide for spraying.

The duration of flying time for drones is also usually less than an hour. Flying drones requires a degree of expertise, and any commercial drone flying requires certification from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Small creature, big bite

Locusts belong to the same order of insects as grasshoppers, katydids and crickets. Locusts are grasshoppers that develop “gregarious” behaviours and become more voracious as a result.

Grasshoppers can become gregarious and start to swarm due to an increase in chemical serotonin in their nervous system. This results in them going from individual walking grasshoppers to flying locusts. There are no clear differences between locusts and grasshoppers other than behaviour.

In Australia there are three main pest locust species: the Australian plague locust (Chortoicetes terminifera), the spur-throated locust (Austracris guttulosa) and the migratory locust (Locusta migratoria). Controlling these pests is difficult when they travel in swarms.

Locust swarms can decimate swathes of crop in their way, consuming everything from leaves and grains, to pastures and even trees.

With ongoing locust infestations, a rise in extreme weather events, and now COVID-19, the struggles faced by farmers the world over are compounded. Improving current technologies and finding new ways to innovate may help ease this burden in the coming years.

Read more: Swarming locusts: people used to eat them, but shouldn’t anymore

– ref. Huge locust swarms are threatening food security, but drones could help stop them – https://theconversation.com/huge-locust-swarms-are-threatening-food-security-but-drones-could-help-stop-them-140625

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brigid Clancy, PhD Candidate (Psychiatry) & Research Assistant, University of Newcastle

If you’re feeling excited about being out of lockdown, you’re not alone. Social media is buzzing with plans of big nights out to celebrate the relaxation of coronavirus restrictions in Australia and New Zealand.

But before you go on that big bender, here are some things to keep in mind so you don’t overdo it.

How has lockdown changed our drinking habits?

Several surveys have highlighted the disruption coronavirus has made to our drinking habits. First, there was a run on alcohol, with people stockpiling their favourite drinks. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia reported spending on alcohol was up more than 20% in the initial few weeks of lockdown.

Many experts were worried drinking would drastically increase, along with many of its harmful consequences. These include greater risk of mental health problems, family violence, and alcohol dependence.

Data from several sources confirmed drinking habits changed during lockdown. A survey by alcohol advocacy group Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE) found people who had been stockpiling alcohol weren’t just keeping it for a rainy day – 70% reported drinking more and 30% were worried about their own or someone else’s drinking.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) found, overall, 14% of Australians reported increasing their alcohol consumption, while 10% reported a reduction.

The Australian National University found, in particular, women have been drinking significantly more than pre-lockdown levels. Having child-caring responsibilities was a big predictor of increased alcohol consumption.

The ABS data also found the major increase in drinking was among women. This exacerbates a worrying trend over the past few years of women increasing their drinking.

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

Hello Sunday Morning, an organisation that helps people change their relationship with alcohol, also reported a significant increase in people accessing their online services.

Your alcohol tolerance may have changed

Changes in the amount you drink can affect your alcohol tolerance. How intoxicated you feel is related to your tolerance, whereas your blood alcohol concentration is more related to how much you have drunk over a certain time period.

This means if you’ve been drinking more during lockdown, your tolerance has probably increased. You would need to consume more alcohol to feel the effects you used to get from fewer drinks. If you feel less of the effects of alcohol, you might drink more without realising it.

Read more: Thinking about taking a break from alcohol? Here’s how to cut back or quit

While you might not feel as drunk, your brain function is still affected and you can still be over the legal limit for driving. Take care to monitor the number of drinks you are consuming and plan how you’ll get home without driving.

Higher tolerance to alcohol means you are also at increased risk of alcohol-related harm. Higher tolerance is associated with alcohol-use disorders and is one of the first signs of dependence.

On the other hand, if you have been drinking less, your tolerance may have decreased so a smaller amount of alcohol will affect you more than normal. This means if you drink the same amount as usual you might get drunk more quickly.

Take it slowly or you might end up a lot drunker than you planned. Monitor how you feel, and if your tolerance has decreased enjoy the extra cash you’re saving on drinks!

How to avoid drinking too much

To help avoid unintentionally drinking more than you planned, keep in mind these simple tips:

• set limits and count your drinks. Before you start drinking, decide how much you want to drink and stick to it. The draft Australian alcohol guidelines recommend no more than ten standard drinks a week, and no more than four in a day for healthy adults. If you have an existing health problem, alcohol affects you more so you should drink even less. If you are under 18 or pregnant, you shouldn’t drink at all

• alternate your drinks with water and sip slowly. Have at least one glass of water or a no sugar, non-alcoholic drink for every alcoholic drink. It will help slow you down and can also reduce the likelihood of a nasty hangover the next day. Avoid shots or buying rounds, so you can comfortably sit on your drinks and sip them slowly

• eat before and during drinking. This will help slow your drinking down and also slows the absorption of alcohol. You’ll be better able to monitor how much you are drinking, so you are less likely to overindulge.

Read more: What causes hangovers, blackouts and ‘hangxiety’? Everything you need to know about alcohol these holidays

How to have a good time while distancing

While you might be itching for things to get back to normal, we are still distancing while out in public. Make sure you are aware of your state or territory’s restrictions.

Remember your favourite pubs and restaurants have to follow strict rules, so respect the staff and the new practices they have put in place to keep everyone safe. Ask before merging tables, respect capacity limits, sign in with your name and phone number when requested, and use hand sanitiser if offered on arrival.

When out drinking, don’t share drinks and continue to follow COVID-related rules and guidelines such as:

• keep 1.5 metres away from each other

• don’t touch your eyes, nose or mouth

• maintain good hygiene practices such as hand-washing

• download the COVIDSafe app and have it open and running while out.

Read more: COVIDSafe tracking app reviewed: the government delivers on data security, but other issues remain

Where to get help

If you want to lower your tolerance, you can take a break from alcohol and “reset” your system.

To check your consumption, try the AUDIT screening tool online.

If you’d like to talk to someone about your drinking, call the National Alcohol and Other Drug Hotline on 1800 250 015. It’s a free call from anywhere in Australia. You can chat online with a counsellor at CounsellingOnline.

You can also talk to your GP. Many clinics are now conducting appointments via telehealth.

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

This article is supported by the Judith Neilson Institute for Journalism and Ideas.

– ref. Getting back on the beers after lockdown? Here’s what you should know – https://theconversation.com/getting-back-on-the-beers-after-lockdown-heres-what-you-should-know-140454

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gavin Mudd, Associate Professor of Environmental Engineering, RMIT University

Of all the elements on Earth, none is more strictly controlled under law than uranium. A plethora of international agreements govern its sale and use in energy, research and nuclear weapons.

Australian environmental law considers nuclear actions, such as uranium mining, as a “matter of national environmental significance” under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. This means uranium involves matters of national and international concern for which the Australian government is solely responsible.

The states, which own minerals, cannot exercise such oversight on uranium exports and use. So any new uranium mine needs both state and federal environmental approvals.

The Minerals Council of Australia wants to change this. In a submission to a ten-year review of the EPBC Act, the council argues that uranium’s special treatment is redundant, as environmental risks are already addressed in state approval processes.

On Monday, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced that BHP’s proposed expansion of the Olympic Dam copper-uranium-gold-silver mine in South Australia was one of 15 major projects set to be fast-tracked for environmental approval. This would include a single, joint state and federal assessment.

But responsibility and past performance make a compelling case to maintain our federal environmental laws more than ever. Here’s why uranium mining must remain a federal issue.

Our international obligations

Australia is a signatory to several international treaties, conventions and agreements concerning nuclear activities and uranium mining and export.

These include safeguards to ensure Australian uranium is used only for peaceful nuclear power or research, and not military uses.

As of the end of 2018, the nuclear material safeguarded under international agreements derived from our uranium exports totalled 212,052 tonnes – including 201.6 tonnes of separated plutonium.

Making sure our uranium trading partners don’t redirect that material for the wrong purpose has been the raison d’être of our nuclear foreign policy since 1977. It’s clearly a national legal and moral obligation, and something the states simply cannot do.

In response, a spokesperson for the Minerals Council of Australia said a national mechanism to manage safeguards already exists through the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office, adding:

Uranium is further regulated through the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) […] under the provisions of the ARPANS Regulations 1999. The object of the ARPANS Act is “to protect the health and safety of people, and to protect the environment, from the harmful effects of radiation”.

But ARPANSA regulates radiation safety and not uranium exports. If uranium mining was removed as a nuclear action, then there would be no public process involving our uranium exports – creating more secrecy and reducing scrutiny.

Successful rehabilitation has yet to be seen

Uranium mines are difficult to rehabilitate at the end of their lives. In my 24 years of research, including visiting most sites, I’ve yet to see a successful case study of Australia’s 11 major uranium mines or numerous small sites.

For example, the Rum Jungle mine near Darwin, which operated from 1954 to 1971, left a toxic legacy of acidic and radioactive drainage and a biologically dead Finniss River.

As a military project for the Cold War, it was Australian government-owned, but operated under contract by a company owned by Rio Tinto. The site was rehabilitated with taxpayer money from 1983-86, but by the mid-1990s the works were failing, and pollution levels were again rising.

The Northern Territory government is proposing a new round of rehabilitation. After accounting for inflation to 2019 dollars, Rum Jungle has cost taxpayers A$875 million for a return of A$139 million. The next round of rehabilitation is expected to cost many millions more.

The former Mary Kathleen mine, also part of Rio Tinto’s corporate history, operated from 1958-63 and 1976-82.

Rehabilitation works were completed by 1986 and won national engineering awards for excellence. But by the late 1990s, acid seepage problems emerged from the tailings dam (where mining by-products are stored) and overlying grasses were absorbing toxic heavy metals, creating a risk for grazing cattle.

Rare earth metals are also present in these tailings, leading to the possibility the tailings will be reprocessed to fund the next round of rehabilitation. The site remains in limbo, despite its Instagram fame.

Both Rum Jungle and Mary Kathleen were rehabilitated to the standards of their day, but they have not withstood the test of time.

Australia’s biggest uranium mine, Ranger, is fast approaching the end of its operating life.

Rio Tinto is also the majority owner of Ranger. Despite Ranger’s recent losses, Rio has retained control and given Ranger hundreds of millions of dollars towards ensuring site operations and rehabilitation.

In recent years the cost of rehabilitation has soared from A$565 million in 2011 to A$897 million in 2019, over which time A$603 million has been spent on rehabilitation works.

Site rehabilitation is required to be complete by January 2026, with Rio Tinto and Ranger assuming 25 years of monitoring – although plans and funding for this are still being finalised.

The legal requirement is that no contaminants should cause environmental impacts for 10,000 years, and no other mine has ever faced such a hurdle.

Recently, it emerged that Ranger had not agreed to continue its share of funding the scientific research required for the rehabilitation – an issue still unresolved. So despite promises of world’s best ever rehabilitation, concerns remain.

The Conversation contacted Rio Tinto to respond, and it referred us to Energy Resources Australia (ERA), which operates Ranger. An ERA spokesperson stated:

Since 1994, ERA has made an annual contribution to research into the environmental effects of uranium mining in the Alligator Rivers Region under an agreement with the Commonwealth. The agreement provides for a review of funding contributions at fixed periods or at either party’s request to acknowledge changes in Ranger operations.

ERA is required to cease processing in January 2021 in accordance with the expiration of its Authority to Operate under the Commonwealth Atomic Energy Act. Given the impending cessation in processing, ERA believes it is appropriate and reasonable to review the current research funding arrangements.

ERA has followed due process in this matter and welcomes the Commonwealth’s decision to support a process of mediation to resolve the issue.

No other former uranium mine in Australia can claim long-term rehabilitation success. Nabarlek, Radium Hill-Port Pirie, South Alligator Valley and other small mines all have issues such as erosion, weeds, remaining infrastructure, radiation hot-spots and/or water contamination. They all require ongoing surveillance.

Uranium mining is set to be outcompeted

Australia’s uranium export revenue from 1977 to December A$2019 was A$29.4 billion. Lithium has now overtaken uranium in export revenue – from 2017 to 2019, lithium earned Australia two to three times our uranium exports.

Even if Olympic Dam expands (and especially if it stops extracting uranium in favour of tellurium, cobalt and rare earths also present), this trend is expected to increase in the coming years as Ranger closes and the world transitions to renewable energy and electric vehicles to help address climate change.

In response, the Minerals Council of Australia stated that lithium’s contribution to large-scale electricity storage is just beginning, arguing:

With the development of new nuclear technologies such as small modular and micro reactors, the prospects for the future of both uranium and lithium are positive and no one should be picking winners apart from the market.

Ultimately, uranium remains an element with immense potential for misuse – as seen with North Korea and other rogue nuclear states. Federal oversight of uranium mining must remain. After all, the price of peace is eternal vigilance.

– ref. Expensive, dirty and dangerous: why we must fight miners’ push to fast-track uranium mines – https://theconversation.com/expensive-dirty-and-dangerous-why-we-must-fight-miners-push-to-fast-track-uranium-mines-139966

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Verity Firth, Executive Director Social Justice, University of Technology Sydney, University of Technology Sydney

This essay is based on an episode of the University of Technology Sydney podcast series “The New Social Contract”. This series examines how the relationship between universities, the state and the public might be reshaped as we live through this global pandemic.

COVID-19 comes with a set of pressing social challenges. These include environmental catastrophes such as the Australian droughts and bushfires, and the impending crisis of global warming. Social and health issues – include debilitating poverty, racial and income inequality, and chronic diseases – also loom large.

In this turbulent environment, universities have an important role to play as anchor institutions that support communities in transition.

Rather than undertaking knowledge work on behalf of society, they must do so in collaboration with society. This means building relationships with business, industry, government and not-for-profit organisations, to name but a few.

Out of the ivory tower

Recent decisions by the federal government to change the JobKeeper legislation three times, in a way that makes university staff ineligible, has left many in the sector feeling undervalued.

Criticisms of universities stem from both sides of politics. For many people, universities remain institutions embodying past imperial practices.

Read more: Why is the Australian government letting universities suffer?

The rise of the #RhodesMustFall movement in South Africa and the United Kingdom, and the growing movement in Australia to decolonise the curriculum, demonstrates black and First Nations’ students’ frustration at an institution they still see as predominantly elitist and white.

On the other side of the political spectrum, universities are seen as aloof and disconnected from the real-world concerns of businesses and ordinary people.

In 2017, then Vice-Chancellor of The University of Melbourne, Professor Glyn Davis, warned of a “rising tide of hostility” towards universities.

And the former president of the University of Pennsylvania argued that to ensure ongoing relevance, universities must engage with the real world, and move “out of the ivory tower and into the streets”.

Universities have fared reasonably well compared to declining levels of trust in other institutions. But it’s fair to say universities are built on an expert model that prizes academic knowledge and often de-legitimises other forms of knowledge and learning.

This often gets in the way of constructive collaborations between universities and communities.

Co-designed and collaborative knowledge

COVID-19 has allowed for a brief re-emergence of public and government trust in expertise. University and medical institute researchers, public health officials and politicians have been working alongside each other on the same problem.

Each have been able to contribute their expertise (and interests) at critical points in the decision-making process.

No consideration (such as opening the economy) has been given primacy over another (protecting Australian’s health). Instead there has been a weighing of the evidence and difficult calls made along the way.

Read more: Australians’ trust in politicians and democracy hits an all-time low: new research

This engaged decision-making process has been a key component of creating public trust. For this trust to continue, universities need to learn from this period and create new processes.

This point was best made by French philosopher, anthropologist and sociologist, Bruno Latour, when he argued the COVID-19 pandemic has given the public an opportunity to engage with scientific complexity, and debate with each other about statistics, experimentation and how diseases are spread.

He said

if you want people to have some grasp of science, you must show how it is produced.

But it goes further than just transparency. It’s about respecting all types of knowledge in the search for answers. In relation to the science of climate change, Latour argued that far from being an elite endeavour, everyone can contribute to a conversation about the weather and its impact on their community.

Respect for, and engagement with, knowledge from outside the “academy” is critical both for driving trust in expertise and finding better solutions to the problems faced by the globe.

Subscribe to the New Social Contract podcast on your favourite podcast app: Apple Podcast, Spotify, Stitcher

A new way forward for universities

Research partnerships between Indigenous elders and university academics are an excellent example of engaged research .

At the University of New England, researchers are working with the Banbai nation to better understand how to use Indigenous land management practices and science to apply fire strategically.

Extending this approach into the world of public policy, the Bushfire Royal Commission is looking to understand ways

the traditional land and fire management practices of Indigenous Australians could improve Australia’s resilience to natural disasters.

Griffith University is involved in “Logan Together”. This collective impact project, to support early childhood intervention in the Logan community, is a radical way for a university to embrace its role as an anchor institution.

The project deliberately empowers citizens and puts community members in leadership roles across the project. The goals and outcomes of this project are co-designed with community members, industry and government.

At the University of Technology Sydney, the Shopfront program helps deliver student community coursework projects for academic credit. Community organisations are paired with skilled student teams to deliver on a wide variety of community-led projects.

The students learn on the job, and not-forprofit partners benefit from the students’ expertise.

But how do universities change?

University groups like the Talloires Network and Engagement Australia champion the unique role universities have to address today’s global challenges through teaching, learning and research partnerships.

The Carnegie Community Engagement Classification (now being piloted in Australia by ten universities) has established a gold standard for engagement. This is based on the principle of reciprocity between universities and their partners in the community, government and industry.

It outlines a new era for universities, abandoning the expert model and embracing the concept of engaged research and teaching.

Outwardly focused, Carnegie promotes the

partnership of […] university knowledge and resources with those of the public and private sectors to […] address critical social issues and contribute to the public good.

Universities complete an accreditation process to receive the Carnegie classification. The classification acknowledges the old adage that an organisation values what it measures.

Traditional university ranking systems mainly rely on indicators around research – mainly reputation, citations and funding. Although these are important metrics, they do not speak to the broader public benefit of the university and the role it plays through teaching, learning and research engagement.

Read more: Climate change is the most important mission for universities of the 21st century

The Carnegie classification rectifies this imbalance. It asks universities to provide evidence about their engagement activities, and demonstrate these are part of the university’s core mission. It encourages universities to reflect on their relationships with industry, community and government and gain insights into how the university can improve its engagement practices.

Participating in the process provides universities with a roadmap to becoming a different type of university. It allows them to examine the culture of traditional academia and examine whether institutional practices stymie collaboration and relationships of trust with those outside the academy.

COVID-19 has shown how addressing the present crisis (and other big issues) as a multi-part player in the creation of new knowledge for a social purpose, has the capacity to renew the social license of universities.

‘Universities and Communities- who should they serve?’ was made by Impact Studios at the University of Technology, Sydney – an audio production house combining academic research and audio storytelling.

– ref. After coronavirus, universities must collaborate with communities to support social transition – https://theconversation.com/after-coronavirus-universities-must-collaborate-with-communities-to-support-social-transition-140541

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shanthi Robertson, Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University

Successful settlement and integration are shared goals of refugees and the communities where they settle. The findings of our research released today highlight the importance of simple everyday encounters and experiences for newly arrived refugees to feel welcome in Australia. We also found refugees’ strong social bonds with family and community do not prevent them developing connections with the broader Australian community.

Here we explore two aspects to refugees’ social connections:

• “social bonds” that connect refugees to others within their ethnic or religious community

• “social bridges” that connect them to others in the wider community.

Most research on refugee integration focuses on areas like employment, education, English proficiency and health. Our research shines a light on aspects of settlement that are often overlooked: refugees’ social connections. The social dimensions of integration help them to build resilience in the face of the challenges of navigating a new chapter of their lives in Australia.

These social connections help lay the foundations for belonging. Ultimately, this promotes their long-term integration.

We surveyed 334 refugees in their preferred language. All were past participants in an on-arrival settlement program in New South Wales. We conducted 15 follow-up interviews.

Importantly, all the survey participants had permanent residency in Australia. This gave them full and equal access to rights and services. We believe this was a critical factor in the high levels of belonging they reported.

The security of permanent protection provides a bedrock for high levels of trust in both the Australian community and institutions. The majority of respondents reported strong trust in:

• the government (a lot of trust, 85%)

• the people they work and study with (78%, a lot/some)

• the people in their neighbourhood (75%, a lot/some)

• the wider Australian community, to a slightly lesser extent (67% a lot/some).

Building bonds with Australia starts locally

As refugees engage with their ethnic and religious communities, our research found they also develop a strong sense of belonging to their local neighbourhood and mixed friendship networks.

Over three-quarters of respondents regularly meet and get to know people from ethnic and religious backgrounds other than their own. This indicates a high level of interactions and social bridges in everyday situations.

However, age, gender and particularly place of residence all play a role. Refugees living in regional areas were more likely than people in metropolitan areas to regularly meet people from ethnic/religious communities other than their own (90% strongly agree/agree in rural areas compared to 81% in urban areas). Men were more likely to regularly meet people from different backgrounds (81% strongly agree/agree compared to 70% among women), as were those between the ages of 18 and 24 (79%).

Good neighbours create social bridges

We found it’s mainly everyday encounters and experiences that foster refugees’ social bridges to the wider community. Their rates of participation in formal community activities – such as school, parent support groups and youth groups – were relatively low.

Despite reporting language difficulties in talking with their neighbours, refugees had high levels of trust in their neighbours and neighbourhoods. This was a result of positive and regular interactions and experiences.

The findings suggest that local, everyday and neighbourhood-level social bridges are a critical part of refugee belonging.

It is at this local scale that policy and service interventions are most likely to succeed. The findings also highlight why it’s important to safeguard and enhance positive attitudes towards refugees in the wider community.

For example, 25-year-old Maher from Afghanistan, who arrived in 2017, spoke about the importance of neighbours being friendly. He remembers them saying hello to him when he first arrived:

The neighbours were always very welcoming and warm, and usually when they see me they were greeting me well and it was making me feel very comfortable.

Aram, a 39-year-old Armenian man from Syria, also arrived in 2017. He, too, valued the general friendliness in his multicultural neighbourhood:

The community where I’m at, or the neighbourhood, there are people from all different races, from Asian to Middle-Eastern, Africans, they are all different nations. So we get along really well. We all say ‘hello’ to each other, very courteous to each other. So, in both ways, it feels that I’m welcome from this end and welcome from the other end.

These are the simple things anyone can do

Overall, our findings suggest people in the community can do a number of simple, everyday things to help refugees feel welcome. And, in doing so, they support their integration. Suggested actions include:

• say hello, smile and wave to neighbours – even if there is a language barrier, small positive actions make people feel like they are living in a safe and supportive community

• help with everyday activities if you can – offer to carry in shopping, give lifts to work or school, keep an eye on the house or collect mail when neighbours are away, which are all small actions that newly arrived families remember as very welcoming

• support grassroots ethnic and religious community groups if they are fundraising, holding activities or looking for volunteers – these are great local spaces to build social “bridges”

• contribute to an overall positive social climate and public discourse by sharing positive attitudes towards refugees and supporting organisations that do the same.

– ref. ‘The neighbours were always very welcoming and warm’: little things count to help refugees belong – https://theconversation.com/the-neighbours-were-always-very-welcoming-and-warm-little-things-count-to-help-refugees-belong-140449

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexandra Baxter, PhD Candidate in Law/Criminology, researching human trafficking and modern slavery in Australia, Flinders University

Yes, there was slavery in Australia. Yes, there is slavery in Australia now.

It occurs as forced labour, sexual exploitation and forced marriage.

These situations rarely involve the actual chains and bars we commonly associate with historical slavery. They are nonetheless conditions of enslavement: a person is forced to work under threat; is controlled by another; is dehumanised or treated as a commodity; and is not free to leave.

Relatively speaking, modern slavery is rare in Australia. Perhaps a few thousand people fit the strict definition, compared with about 40 million globally.

But every number is the story of a human being. Their stories are, however, rarely heard as modern slavery in Australia remains largely invisible.

Australian statistics

The best official data on modern slavery in Australia come from the Australian Federal Police, the agency to which all alleged human trafficking and slavery offences must be referred. Between 2013 and 2017, as reported to the federal parliament’s Inquiry into establishing a Modern Slavery Act, there were 496 referrals.

Read more: At last, Australia has a Modern Slavery Act. Here’s what you’ll need to know

The cases represent just a fifth of the iceberg, according to Anti-Slavery Australia, a research and policy centre that provides free legal services to victims of modern slavery. It estimates more than 80% of victims go undetected. This means about 2,000 more people in modern slavery than the AFP numbers indicate.

Forced labour

The most common form of slavery globally is (non-sexual) forced labour. An estimated 25 million people are forced to work through the use or threat of violence, or physical, emotional or financial restraints. Particularly prevalent is bonded labour or debt bondage – having to work to pay off a debt.

These practices thrive in the regulatory gaps of global supply chains. They are common, for example, in Indian textile making, in Thai fishing and in Chinese manufacturing.

In Australia such cases are relatively uncommon.

The first conviction under forced labour laws enacted by the federal parliament in 2013 was in April 2019. The case involved a Brisbane couple, Isikeli and Malavine Pulini, who were sentenced to five and six years’ jail respectively for forcing a Fijian woman to work as their domestic servant for eight years.

The woman had previously worked for the Pulinis in Tonga from 2001 to 2006. In 2008 they enticed her to Brisbane on a tourist visa, then took her passport from her. They manipulated her desire to stay in Australia and made her work long hours as nanny, cook, maid and cleaner. They paid her $150 to $250 a fortnight. She fled in 2016.

As the crown prosecutor Ben Power observed, this was “a secret hiding in plain sight” for eight years.

The majority of victims remain hidden for a long time. Commonly contributing to their invisibility are language barriers, a fear of immigration authorities, and an ignorance of Australian laws. Thus, while we can make estimates of the numbers of people caught in these situations, there might be more cases than we think.

Sexual exploitation

More common in Australia than labour exploitation, according to the AFP numbers, is sexual exploitation, which represents about 30% of slavery cases.

Sexual exploitation involves a person having to perform sex work due to coercion, threats or deception. To the extent this is done for the exploiter’s commercial gain, the International Labour Office considers sexual exploitation a form of forced labour.

One such case to end in a successful sexual slavery conviction is the November 2019 sentencing of Rungnapha Kanbut to eight years in jail for keeping two Thai women as slaves.

The two women came to Australia to do sex work. The man who made their travel arrangements took naked photos of them. The threat of these being posted on the internet was later used to deter the women from fleeing.

When they arrived in Australia, Kanbut took their passports and told them they needed to pay off a $45,000 debt. They worked up to 12 hours a day at multiple Sydney brothels. Most of their earnings went to Kanbut.

They were, as the judge put it, effectively kept “in a prison without bars”.

Read more: Human trafficking and slavery still happen in Australia. This comic explains how

Forced marriage

Forced marriage appears the most prevalent form of modern slavery in Australia. It involves being tricked, forced or coerced into a marriage without full consent. Of the estimated 15.4 million people in such arrangements globally, 13 million are female.

Research suggests victims of forced marriage in Australia are mostly the children of first-generation migrants from places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Somalia and Fiji (though it should be noted the practice is in no way limited to specific nations or cultures).

An example is the case of an Australian-born teenager whose strict Indian-born parents tricked her into travelling to India on the premise of marrying the man she loved but then extorted her into marrying someone else.

The teenager had angered her parents by conducting a long-distance relationship then moving from Sydney to Melbourne to live with her chosen boyfriend.

They finally cajoled her into agreeing to a wedding in India as part of a reconciliation. But once the wedding party was in India, they took her passport and threatened to have her boyfriend’s mother and sister kidnapped and raped if she didn’t do what they said. So she did.

This case has a comparatively happy ending. The Family Court of Australia declared the marriage void.

But for many women there are many barriers to getting to court. These are complex situations compounded by social stigma, family pressure, fear of violence and cultural and gender expectations.

Read more: Dowry abuse does exist, but let’s focus on the wider issues of economic abuse and coercive control

Complex problems, complex responses

Each form of modern slavery is complex. Each requires a different policy response.

Forced marriage needs more of a “soft approach”, including consultation and education strategies, and prevention and empowerment opportunities that engage whole communities.

Sexual exploitation requires addressing the reasons that lead women into sex work and then to become part of the cycle of exploitation.

With forced labour, Australia’s Modern Slavery Act provides a focal point to promote accountability in business supply chains.

That wouldn’t have helped the victim of the Pulinis, though. In her case, as is uncounted others, the ability to hide in plain sight is slavery’s first defence.

So, along with policy measures, there’s also a need to heighten community awareness. We all have to be able to better spot the signs of slavery even without chains and bars.

– ref. Forced labour, sexual exploitation and forced marriage: modern slavery in Australia hides in plain sight – https://theconversation.com/forced-labour-sexual-exploitation-and-forced-marriage-modern-slavery-in-australia-hides-in-plain-sight-140838

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brydie-Leigh Bartleet, Professor and Director, Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre, Griffith University, Griffith University

Over the past three years, our Making Music Work project has mapped the creative, social, cultural, and economic realities of a music career in Australia.

We surveyed nearly 600 musicians to understand their working lives, creative goals, career paths and economic circumstances. We also conducted interviews with 11 diverse musicians to explore their careers in more depth.

Our study shows the vast majority of Australian musicians undertake a portfolio career which encompasses concurrent and often impermanent roles. This is not a new phenomenon but in recent decades there have been major shifts in how music is made, paid for and consumed.

Now, the impact of COVID-19 on the funding and policy landscape has dramatically affected how musicians develop and sustain their careers – or not.

Balancing acts

Musicians told us they stay in the music industry because of their love and passion for music, which is central to their identity. Far from the “starving artist” myth, they combine music and non-music work in highly entrepreneurial ways. Surveyed before the current crisis, almost half (49%) the musicians in our study held two or more concurrent paid roles.

We found 560 different job titles, the most common being instrumental musician (25%) and private music teacher (10%). Musicians worked in music-related jobs as disparate as composers, sound technicians and community arts workers, and non-music jobs including sales assistants, journalists and librarians.

We spoke to musicians from 18 years old to 65 and above. Almost 70% had worked in music for more than 10 years, with nearly one in three of them practising as professional musicians for more than 20 years. This gives an indication of how committed Australian musicians are to the industry and sustaining their music careers and creative practice over time.

While most musicians we studied are committed to the profession, 12% said that they were thinking about leaving.

The most common reasons for leaving the music industry were financial stress, lack of income and caring responsibilities – all of which have since been exacerbated by the pandemic.

A live industry

Performance is the most common paid activity for musicians, with two-thirds of musicians deriving at least some of their income from performance fees.

Live performances are also crucial for peer networking and career development. Peer networks are mostly built and maintained through events, and are key to musicians’ building and renewing skills, developing new creative collaborations and securing jobs.

Given live music was immediately impacted by the COVID-19 restrictions and will be slow to return, the capacity of musicians to maintain their careers has been severely limited.

Federal, state and local governments have initiated a range of targeted grants and subsidies to help support the sector and its workforce. However, lobby groups and representative bodies have called for significantly more funding.

Read more: Friday essay: the politics of dancing and thinking about cultural values beyond dollars

On 10 June, music rights organisation APRA AMCOS published an open letter with more than 1,000 industry signatories imploring the Australian government to consider a suite of proposals.

In making their case, the signatories assert:

[w]e contribute $16 billion to the economy and we are an asset that is a lynchpin for the tourism and hospitality sectors and a powerful driver of metropolitan and regional economies and export to the world.

The employment puzzle

Musicians are predominantly self-employed or are employed on temporary contracts, leaving them ineligible for the current JobKeeper scheme.

Only half of musicians receive all of their income from music-related work, and the most common sources of music-related income are performance fees, music teaching and grants. The average income from all work was $41,257, with a median income of $30,576.

While the Australian government has permitted early release of superannuation in response to COVID-19, our study has shown that musicians have limited access to this and other employment-related benefits.

Less than one-third of our survey participants reported employer-based superannuation contributions, and only 7% had access to a health plan or private health insurance scheme.

Read more: The government says artists should be able to access JobKeeper payments. It’s not that simple

Cause for hope

In spite of the challenges, Australian musicians have shown tremendous creativity and resilience in adapting their work to online environments during the pandemic.

Musicians’ resilience is unsurprising given how creatively and financially nimble they have to be when negotiating music and non-music roles. To successfully engage across a variety of markets, genres and performance sites, musicians deploy diverse and agile skill sets. If they were to receive similar support as other sectors of the economy in this current crisis, they would be well placed to survive and thrive into the future.

Throughout our research, Australian musicians generously shared their expertise. They recognise the crucial role of peer networks to develop creative practices, sustain livelihoods and nurture the sector. This creative generosity will be central to the industry’s recovery from COVID-19.

Scott Harrison, Vanessa Tomlinson and Paul Draper also contributed to this research.

– ref. A long way to the top: Australian musicians balance multiple roles to make their careers work – https://theconversation.com/a-long-way-to-the-top-australian-musicians-balance-multiple-roles-to-make-their-careers-work-140840

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

After its calls for an inquiry into the origins of the coronavirus, Australia has found itself targeted by China with trade retaliation as well as sharp rhetoric.

In this podcast, we talk with two prominent China experts about the superpower’s wider ambitions and tactics and the bilateral relationship.

Clive Hamilton, from Charles Sturt University, has just coauthored, with Mareike Ohlberg, Hidden Hand. The book probes China’s ever-expanding activities on the international stage. “From Beijing’s perspective, they see themselves not in a new Cold War, but still in the old Cold War,” Hamilton says.

Richard McGregor, who as a journalist reported from China for many years, last year published Xi Jinping: The Backlash. McGregor argues for a rather different “tone” in Australia’s diplomacy. “We always seem to want to bring on a fight with China, and that ignores the economic equities we have in the relationship. We don’t want to give them any excuse to unfairly punish us.”

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Clive Hamilton and Richard McGregor on Australia-China relations – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-clive-hamilton-and-richard-mcgregor-on-australia-china-relations-140959