Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicola Gaston, Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

A lack of strategy and research funding – by both the current and previous governments – has been well documented, most comprehensively in the first report by the Science System Advisory Group (SSAG), released late last year.

If there is one word that sums up the current state of New Zealan’s research sector, it is scarcity. As the report summarises:

We have an underfunded system by any international comparison. This parsimony has led to harmful inter-institutional competition in a manner that is both wastefully expensive in terms of process and scarce researcher time, and is known to inhibit the most intellectually innovative ideas coming forward, and of course it is these that can drive a productive innovation economy.

The government expects research to contribute to economic growth, but policy and action undermine the sector’s capacity to do so.

The latest example is last week’s cancellation of the 2026 grant application round of the NZ$55 million Endeavour Fund “as we transition to the science, innovation and technology system of the future”. Interrupting New Zealand’s largest contestable source of science funding limits opportunities for researchers looking for support for new and emerging ideas.

Changes to the Marsden Fund, set up 30 years ago to support fundamental research, removed all funding for social science and the humanities and shifted focus to applied research. This is despite fundamental research in all fields underpinning innovation and the international ranking of our universities.

New Zealand has an opportunity to change its economy based on the potential of emerging sectors such as artificial intelligence, cleantech and quantum technologies. Other countries, including Australia and the United Kingdom, already consider quantum technologies a priority and fund them accordingly.

But when it comes to strategy, the composition of the boards of new Public Research Organisations, set up as part of the government’s science sector reform, are skewed towards business experience. Where there is scientific expertise, it tends to be in established industries. The governance of the proposed new entity to focus on emerging and advanced technologies is yet to be announced.

Critical mass requires funding and strategy

Scientists have been calling for a science investment target of 2% of GDP for a long time. It was once – roughly a decade ago – the average expenditure within the OECD; this has since increased to 2.7% of GDP, while New Zealand’s investment remains at 1.5%.

The SSAG report repeatedly refers to the lack of funding, and it would be the obvious thing to see addressed in this year’s budget. But expectations have already been lowered by the government’s insistence there will be no new money.

The report’s second high-level theme is the engagement of government with scientific strategy. Government announcements to date seem focused on attracting international investment through changes to tax settings and regulation. I would argue this is a matter of focusing on the wrapping rather than the present: the system itself needs to be attractive to investors.

Creating a thriving research sector is also a matter of scale. International cooperation is one way for New Zealand to access efficiencies of scale. And work on building international partnerships is one area of positive intent. But we need to look at our connectivity nationally as well, and use investment to build this further.

Countries with greater GDPs than New Zealand’s invest much more in research as a proportion of GDP. It means the size of these other countries’ scientific ecosystems – if measured by total expenditure – is three to four times New Zealand’s on a per capita basis.

A matter of scale

Per-capita scale matters because it tells us how easy it is for researchers to find someone else with the right skillset or necessary equipment. It tells us how likely it is for a student to find an expert in New Zealand to teach them, rather than needing to go overseas.

And it tells us how quickly start-up companies in emerging technologies will be able to find the skilled employees they need. A thriving university system that attracts young people to develop the research skills needed by advanced technology companies is a key part of this challenge.

The government’s science sector reform aims to increase its contribution to economic growth. But research contributes to economic growth when scientists can really “lean in” with confidence to commercialising and translating their science.

That can’t happen if budgets don’t fund the critical mass, connectivity and resources to stimulate the transition to a thriving science system.

Nicola Gaston receives funding from the Tertiary Education Commission as the Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology. She also receives funding from the Marsden Fund. All research funding goes to the University of Auckland to pay the costs of the research she is employed to do.

– ref. NZ Budget 2025: science investment must increase as a proportion of GDP for NZ to innovate and compete – https://theconversation.com/nz-budget-2025-science-investment-must-increase-as-a-proportion-of-gdp-for-nz-to-innovate-and-compete-255591

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leonora Risse, Associate Professor in Economics, University of Canberra

After two years of publishing the gender pay gaps of Australia’s private-sector companies, the Workplace Gender Equality Agency has released public-sector employer data for the first time.

The report shows a stark contrast between the private and public sectors. The Commonwealth public sector has a gender pay gap of 6.4%, far less than the equivalent gap of 21.1% in the private sector.

The agency attributes a big part of the “substantially better” outcome in the public sector to the achievement of gender balance at managerial and board levels.

Women’s representation in senior and governance roles doesn’t just narrow the pay gap at the top. It can also change workplace cultures and embed more gender-equitable practices that ripple through to all occupational levels.

The agency says public-sector employers have achieved this outcome by “long-term and deliberate actions that address gender equality”. These include conducting a gender pay gap analysis and formulating a gender-equality strategy.

The public sector’s results also illustrate the power of setting targets. The Australian government has set – and now achieved – targets for women to hold 50% of all Australian government board positions.

Who’s performing well?

Of the 120 public-sector employers in the Workplace Gender Equality Agency’s dataset, 55 have a gender pay gap that falls into the target range of between –5% and +5%.

Several have a gender pay gap in total remuneration at or very close to zero. These include the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Department of Treasury, Department of Social Services and the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman.

A handful have a slight positive gender pay gap in favour of women, including the Productivity Commission.

Where is there room for improvement?

To support greater transparency, the Workplace Gender Equality Agency has published a searchable database of Commonwealth public sector employers. This is broken down by each department and agency.

The largest gender gaps in median total remuneration are reported by the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (50.4%) and Coal Mining Industry Corporation (31.7%).

Closer to the middle of the pack, the Australian Federal Police reports a gender pay gap of 12.2%. The Reserve Bank of Australia has a gap of 11.5%, and Australia Post 8.6%.

The data does not include elected officials such as members of parliament.

All up, half of Commonwealth public-sector employers have a gender pay gap larger than 5%, which the agency deems the acceptable maximum.

But this is still a better performance than in the private sector, where 60% of companies exceeded the 5% threshold.

Read more:
Women’s annual salaries are narrowing the gap. But men still out-earn women by an average $547 a week

How much less are women earning?

Women working in Australia’s public sector earn on average A$8,200 less per year than their male colleagues.

The data cover both the Australian Public Service (APS) (which is directly responsible for the delivery of government services) and non-APS organisations (which deliver services on behalf of the government).

Within the APS workforce, men’s average total remuneration of $128,503 compares to women’s $121,146. This equates to a 5.7% gap.

In public-sector agencies outside the APS, this gender pay gap widens to 8.8%. Men’s average salary of $127,354 compares to women’s $116,157.

Read more:
Women’s annual salaries are narrowing the gap. But men still out-earn women by an average $547 a week

In agencies outside the APS, more of this gender gap – 5.6 percentage points – is due to men being paid more in bonuses, overtime and superannuation. Within the APS, these above-base payments contribute only 1.1 percentage points to the overall gap.

The role of discretionary above-base payments in widening the gap in total remuneration is similar to the dynamics of the private sector, where there is also greater scope for individual negotiation.

Research shows negotiation practices are laced with gender biases.

More standardised recruitment, promotion and wage-setting practices in the public sector, compared with private companies, mean there’s less scope for personal subjectivity and implicit biases in hiring, promotion and salary decisions.

Turning data into action

This is the first year the Commonwealth public sector’s performance on gender equality has been published at employer level. It follows changes to legislation in 2022 requiring public sector employers to report their gender equality indicators to WGEA from 2023, similar to the obligations of large private companies.

The point of publishing gender pay gaps is to spark awareness and motivate employer action.

Three in four public sector employers report they have taken action after conducting a gender pay gap analysis. Of these actions, one in four employers have corrected instances of unequal pay.

With a heightened awareness of the benefits of flexible work, almost all public-sector employers (96%) reported “flexible working is promoted throughout the organisation”.

But there is scope to improve the practical implementation of flexible work policies.

Only 56% of public-sector employers offer an online option for all team meetings. Only 43% provide support to managers to ensure performance evaluations are not unfairly biased against staff who work remotely or hybrid. And only 5% report that management positions can be designed as part-time.

With this greater transparency, there will be opportunity to monitor changes in future to look for ongoing improvements in gender-equality practices and outcomes.

It’s in the interests of fostering a more equitable, productive and effective public sector for all.

Read more:
Working from home is producing economic benefits return-to-office rules would quash

Leonora Risse receives research funding from the Trawalla Foundation and the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia. She has previously undertaken commissioned research for the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. She is a member of the Economic Society of Australia and the Women in Economics Network. She serves as an Expert Panel Member on gender pay equity for the Fair Work Commission.

– ref. The public service has a much smaller gender pay gap than the private sector. It’s a big achievement – https://theconversation.com/the-public-service-has-a-much-smaller-gender-pay-gap-than-the-private-sector-its-a-big-achievement-256810

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Barbara Catinella, Professor and Senior Principal Research Fellow, International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research (ICRAR), The University of Western Australia

Galaxies are often described as vast star factories, churning out new suns from clouds of gas. For decades, astronomers have assumed that the more raw material a galaxy holds, the more stars it should be able to make.

But our latest study, published this month in the Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (PASA), challenges that assumption. We found that when it comes to forming stars, it’s not just the amount of gas in a galaxy that matters – it’s where that gas is located.

Getting the ingredients in the right place

Our research is part of one of the largest efforts to map atomic hydrogen gas in nearby galaxies. This huge project is called the WALLABY survey (or the Widefield ASKAP L-band Legacy All-sky Blind Survey).

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe and the basic building block of stars. But surprisingly, a large fraction of this gas in galaxies lies far from where stars actually form – out in the faint outer regions, well beyond the bright stellar disk.

Think of atomic hydrogen as the flour in a cake recipe. It’s the essential ingredient for making stars. But what really matters for the recipe is not how much flour there is in the bag, but how much ends up in the mixing bowl.

In the same way, to understand how stars form, we need to focus on the gas that’s in the right place. In a galaxy, that means within the stellar disk, where it can actually be used.

A closer look

Until now, most measurements of atomic hydrogen in galaxies have focused on their total gas content, without showing where that gas is located. That’s because earlier observations – especially those made with single-dish radio telescopes – couldn’t detect where in a galaxy hydrogen gas was located.

However, the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) telescope in Western Australia has a very wide field of view and moderate resolution. This means astronomers can use it to efficiently map the hydrogen gas across large areas of the sky and within individual galaxies.

Using the ASKAP telescope, the WALLABY survey should eventually detect more than 200,000 galaxies and provide detailed hydrogen maps for many thousands of them.

A puzzle resolved

Our study, led by PhD student Seona Lee, draws on hydrogen maps for around 1,000 galaxies. This is an unprecedented sample size for this kind of analysis.

The results reveal a clear trend. The amount of star formation is much more closely linked to the amount of hydrogen gas within the stellar disk than the gas farther out. That outer gas, even when it is plentiful, appears to play little immediate role in fuelling new stars.

This helps explain a long-standing puzzle – why some galaxies with large gas reservoirs form relatively few stars. It turns out much of their gas may be sitting idle in the galactic outskirts, too far from the regions where stars actually form.

In short, measuring the total gas content of a galaxy doesn’t give the full picture. To understand star formation, we need to zoom in – not just total up the ingredients, but see where they’re actually being used.

Parts of this research were supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All Sky Astrophysics in 3 Dimensions (ASTRO 3D), through project number CE170100013.

– ref. For making stars, it’s not just how much gas a galaxy has that matters – it’s where it’s hiding – https://theconversation.com/for-making-stars-its-not-just-how-much-gas-a-galaxy-has-that-matters-its-where-its-hiding-257011

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Jeffries, Senior Lecturer in Microbiology, Western Sydney University

The outbreak of the deadly “mud bug” melioidosis in north Queensland has not yet abated since it began at the start of this year.

So far there have been 221 cases and 31 deaths from the disease in 2025. This encompasses a 400% increase in cases in Cairns and a 600% increase in Townsville compared to the average over previous years.

Fortunately, case numbers have begun to drop. Queensland Health reports new cases weekly, and in the most recent reporting period – up to May 6 – seven new cases were recorded, down from a peak of 29 cases in the week to February 16.

However, people are still contracting and dying from this disease. So what’s keeping it active in Queensland, and are there any promising vaccines on the horizon?

What is melioidosis?

Melioidosis is caused by the bacterium Burkholderia pseudomallei which lives in soil, mud and groundwater, usually not causing any harm. But B. pseudomallei can cause disease in humans and animals if it enters the skin via a cut. Or it can be inhaled in water droplets and enter the lungs.

The disease generally takes one to four weeks to establish itself, meaning people don’t develop symptoms immediately after they’ve been exposed.

Melioidosis most commonly presents as pneumonia. However chronic skin infections, called cutaneous infections, occur in 10–20% of cases. Melioidosis can also lead to blood infections.

Symptoms of the pneumonia form include fever, headache, difficulty breathing, muscle pain, chest pain and confusion.

We don’t understand cutaneous infections as well as we do lung infections with melioidosis. Cutaneous infections are also less responsive to standard antibiotic treatments due to the nature of the chronic wound. For example, the bacteria can form a slimy layer called a biofilm. This can help the bacteria produce proteins which can block the antibiotics from working.

Melioidosis occurs most commonly in tropical areas, such as Thailand. But it’s also regarded as endemic in northern Australia, occurring in Queensland and the Northern Territory. Nonetheless, the scale of the current outbreak in north Queensland is highly unusual.

Anyone can contract melioidosis, but certain medical conditions can increase a person’s risk. These include diabetes, liver, kidney or lung disease, cancer, or other conditions which might compromise the patient’s immune system.

During the current Queensland outbreak 95% of cases have been in people with risk factors such as diabetes or lung disease.

How is melioidosis spreading in Queensland?

Melioidosis increases during periods of high rainfall and flooding, and this has been the case in the current outbreak. However, patterns have begun to emerge suggesting the bacterium may now be spreading in other ways.

Experts have suggested that while the Townsville cases can be explained by flooding and correlate to high levels of rainfall, the Cairns cases do not match with this explanation.

One suggestion is that the construction of the Bruce Highway upgrade south of Cairns has caused an increase in cases due to clay soil particles becoming airborne during construction.

It’s not an entirely new idea. The movement of soil during highway construction and urban expansion has been investigated as a potential mode of transmission during previous spikes of melioidosis cases in far north Queensland.

The infrastructure body responsible for the upgrade has pledged to follow expert health advice as investigations continue.

Could B. pseudomallei be evolving and becoming more deadly?

This potential change in how the disease is spreading, and the increased number of cases and deaths, might indicate the organism is evolving to spread more easily and become more deadly. Genome analysis is ongoing to determine this.

Notably, bacteria found in the environment can acquire genes from other bacteria in soil and water. This may give them enhanced abilities to survive in unfavourable conditions and be more resilient to changes in their natural habitat, as well as potentially infect human hosts more effectively.

In a warming climate with increased rainfall, the bacterium behind melioidosis is likely to be a prime candidate for this kind of change.

How about treatments and protection?

There’s currently only one way to treat melioidosis, which involves receiving intravenous antibiotics in hospital for several weeks, followed by up to six months of oral antibiotics.

Against a backdrop of urgent calls for more research and increased public awareness around melioidosis, there may be hope on the horizon.

Researchers at the University of California have developed a vaccine which produces a protein that mimics the proteins in B. pseudomallei, leading to an immune response against this bacterium. The vaccine has been successful in mouse models and will continue to a further animal trial, which, if successful, will lead to human trials.

It seems melioidosis is a problem that’s not going away.

If you live in an affected region such as tropical Queensland or the NT, limit exposure to mud and water as much as possible. If you’re spending time in muddy areas, use appropriate personal protective equipment such as gloves and boots. You can also protect yourself by covering any open wounds and wearing a respirator if you’re working closely with water.

Monitor for symptoms and see a doctor if you feel unwell. More information is also available from Queensland Health.

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

– ref. The Queensland melioidosis outbreak is still growing. What’s keeping this deadly mud bug active? – https://theconversation.com/the-queensland-melioidosis-outbreak-is-still-growing-whats-keeping-this-deadly-mud-bug-active-256794

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jun Eric Fu, Senior Research Fellow, Youth Research Collective, The University of Melbourne

Australia’s school system – and whether it is doing its job – is often under the microscope from politicians, experts and parents.

The most recent NAPLAN results in 2024 triggered a wave of heated discussions after about one in three students were not meeting literacy and numeracy benchmarks.

Education Minister Jason Clare is among those who also have serious concerns about rates of students who complete Year 12. In 2024, the retention rate of students between Year 7 and Year 12 was 79.9%. For government school students, it was 74%.

But what do students themselves think about their schooling? Our new study asked recent school leavers about their experiences.

Our research

Our study draws on a 2023 survey as part of the Life Patterns research program, which follows different generations of young Australians after school.

We surveyed more than 4,000 young people recruited from a diverse sample of 100 government, Catholic and independent schools in urban and regional areas of Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania.

These young people completed high school in 2023 and were asked to comment on their school experiences.

Students are mostly satisfied, but …

The participants rated their overall impression of school on a five-point scale, from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. About 60% of them were “quite satisfied” or “very satisfied”.

Despite this broadly positive picture, many of them also expressed concerns about their education, feeling its current content did not prepare them for life after school.

As one female student from a capital city told us:

I feel like school doesn’t prepare us for the real world at all and it freaks me out.

This sentiment was echoed by another female student from a regional city:

School seems extremely disconnected from either knowledge or experience that will help with jobs, or life skills that will assist in becoming a good, productive, happy person.

For many, this disconnect between the education on offer and the education they wanted contributed to a disengagement from school. A male student from a regional city said:

I am committed to my education and a dedicated student, but find it hard to connect with some of the information we are learning as it seems outdated and irrelevant. I want to learn things that are going to improve my life.

This follows researchers’ longstanding concerns the education system is not adequately setting students up for life outside school – and the complex social, political and economic changes they will confront.

Don’t focus on uniforms

Students also spoke about schools focusing on issues that do not matter to young people, such as students wearing the “correct” uniform or whether or not they have their phone at school.

As one female student commented:

Focus on more real issues. The debates about phones allowed at school or uniforms at school seem almost irrelevant when you compare them to the everyday common hardships and problems young people face.

Too much stress

A strong theme in young people’s responses was the amount of stress they faced with their studies. These feelings were often linked to heavy workloads (particularly in Year 11 and 12) and the pressure they felt to achieve certain grades.

A male student from a country town said:

[…] the pressure and the expectations to do well in school is so high and caused a lot of stress and anxiety.

Another male student from a capital city also felt:

There is so much pressure on high school and how one exam can change the course of your future which isn’t true.

This echoes other studies that query the focus on a single score (the ATAR) and supports alternative approaches to measuring education outcomes at the end of Year 12.

More mental health support

Amid ongoing reports of young people struggling with their mental health, mental health also emerged as a major concern in students’ responses.

A male student from a capital city told us young people were “battling every day” and they needed more free, accessible resources and support from school staff.

They also saw a connection between the pressures of schooling and mental health concerns. As one female student told us:

There is too much expected from students at school, leading to burn out and mental illnesses.

What next?

Our study shows many young people care deeply about their education. But they also feel it isn’t working for them or preparing them for life beyond school.

This suggests government institutions and schools need to be doing more to include young people’s perspectives as they design and implement curricula.

By recognising young people as active stakeholders in schools,
education shifts from something happening to them to something happening with them. This approach can foster a stronger sense of belonging, ownership and engagement with learning.

Jun Eric Fu works on the Life Patterns research program, which is funded by the Australian Research Council.

Julia Cook receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. ‘Outdated and irrelevant’: what do young Australians think of their schooling? – https://theconversation.com/outdated-and-irrelevant-what-do-young-australians-think-of-their-schooling-256889

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, Visitor, School of History, Australian National University

I remember seeing footage, several years ago, of a jubilant Malcolm Turnbull, then prime minister and Liberal leader, speaking in Tamworth to loyal members of the National Party. These were the rank and file who had spent weeks stumping for their man in New England, Nationals leader and deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce, who had resubmitted himself to voters after discovering he was a dual citizen of Australia and New Zealand.

A lot was riding on the outcome. Turnbull’s government had the slimmest possible majority in the lower house, and the loss of the Nationals leader would have been bad for the government as well as morale. Consequently, Turnbull was overjoyed when he thanked voters in New England “for getting the band back together”. Joyce’s handsome victory was, he explained, a “great demonstration” of the “strength of our Coalition”.

While it may seem unfair to bands everywhere to lean too heavily on that metaphor, there is something to it. Like The Beatles, the Liberal and National parties have allowed their creative tension to become little more than just tension. Like Simon and Garfunkel, deep-seated resentments have been allowed to fester without resolution for too long. And now, like Fleetwood Mac, the two parties have chosen to go their own way, at least for a time.

An agreement and an idea

The Coalition is first and foremost an agreement – or rather, a series of agreements. It is predicated on the pragmatic reality that neither the Liberal Party (and beforehand, its predecessor parties) nor the agrarian National (formerly Country) Party was able to govern alone, or at least not for very long.

The first of these agreements was struck in February 1923, following an election the previous year that left the Nationalist Party, led by wartime prime minister Billy Hughes, well short of a lower house majority. The new Country Party won 14 seats in the lower house (roughly 18%) on its own, making it a force to be reckoned with.

Country MPs were willing to form a power-sharing agreement with the Nationalists, but not without cost. The larger party had to jettison its leader in favour of a new prime minister, Stanley Melbourne Bruce. The rural party won a hefty share of the ministries (five out of 11) and Earle Page, Country Party leader, became treasurer and de facto deputy prime minister.

Though they were not aware of it, Bruce and Page were creating something that has since become a tradition, an idea that can all too easily seem like an immutable part of Australia’s political life.

For more than 100 years now, some form of that “Coalition” has stood against Labor, and in doing so has helped to constitute a two-party system whose predominance is well and truly waning.

Discordant notes

The termination of the Coalition in 2025 is neither shocking nor unprecedented. Indeed, if the band analogy has any meaning here, it is because there have been so many discordant notes over those 102 years.

When the United Australia Party (UAP) came on to the federal scene in response to the Great Depression, the party of farmers chose to go it alone. The UAP won a majority and governed in its own right from 1931 to 1934, only joining the Country Party in coalition when the 1934 elections robbed it of outright majority.

The death of UAP founder and prime minister Joe Lyons in April 1939 tore that marriage apart. His successor, Robert Menzies, declared his desire to choose all ministers (even those from the Country Party) himself, thereby alienating that party. Apart from a few dissidents, the Country Party quit the coalition, until the outbreak of war and declining electoral fortunes made a remarriage necessary.

The Liberals and Country Party/Nationals managed their affairs well enough during their long stints in office from 1949 to 1972, and again under Malcolm Fraser (1975–83) and John Howard (1996–2007). But even in good times, these were not always the happiest of bandmates.

Country Party leader John McEwen dominated the government in the late 1960s, to the point of brazenly vetoing the leadership candidacy of Harold Holt’s deputy (the unpopular Billy McMahon) when the former went swimming and failed to return.

Fraser was often criticised by Liberal colleagues for his instinctive closeness to the National Party. Paul Davey explains that in Howard’s day, the Nationals felt “overshadowed” and “undersold”. In fact, the very word “Coalition” bordered on synonymous with “Liberal”.

Different states of mind

To be fair, Howard had learned a lot about managing the Coalition relationship by the time he arrived at The Lodge. The agreement had been brutally severed during his first stint as leader, thanks to Queensland premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen’s quest to become prime minister.

A figure head of New Right populism, Bjelke-Petersen felt that neither the federal Liberal Party (then led by Howard) nor his National Party colleagues were made of tough enough stuff to beat modern Labor.

The Nationals’ federal leader, Ian Sinclair, later said the vision of Howard, Sinclair and Bjelke-Petersen presenting separate election programs was an “absolute farce”.

It mattered that the death of the Coalition was spearheaded by a state premier. Such agreements had always been less popular and more controversial within the state branches of both parties.

South of the Murray, it was quite unspectacular for Country Party MPs in the mid-20th century to change their allegiances and even stand alone in office with the tentative support of the Labor Party.

In Queensland, the Liberal and National Parties governed together, often with the latter as the senior partner. But Bjelke-Petersen scrapped the Coalition in that state in 1983 and consolidated its parliamentary majority at an election in 1986. By the time of his departure in 1987, both parties had badly fractured.

In time, the two parties merged in that state to prevent such outbreaks in future. Federal members of the Queensland LNP face some awkward conversations now.

Principled stances and survival

In announcing the latest split, Nationals leader David Littleproud said his party was taking a “principled stance”, though what exact principles were involved we have not learned. His deputy, Kevin Hogan, said he hoped the parties would “get back together” later on.

We know the sticking points were these: a guaranteed $20 billion Regional Australia Fund, divestiture powers to break up businesses with unhealthy market power, obligations for better regional mobile coverage, and an ongoing commitment to the nuclear energy project.

The latter commitment flies in the face of electoral reason, but the other three policies are clearly informed by the history of telecommunications deregulation and privatisation (which caused many sleepless nights in the National Party during the Howard years) and the ever-present threat of other, more populist parties chasing Nationals MPs’ heels in regional Australia.

The National Party made a big effort to resist that pressure in the 1990s, when One Nation looked like it might decimate its grip on the regions. A few days ago, Pauline Hanson said the Nationals and One Nation could in fact form their own coalition, so close were their policy offerings. That this was even uttered is a testament to how much the Nationals have changed over the past 30 years in their quest for survival.

Time apart could provide the parties with the political space they need for self-reflection and strategic reorientation. But they will not have one another to blame for their performance in coming months and years. Breaking up the band is easy to do. Touring alone is hard.

Joshua Black is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at The Australia Institute.

– ref. The band is breaking up: has the Coalition stopped making sense? – https://theconversation.com/the-band-is-breaking-up-has-the-coalition-stopped-making-sense-257118

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Hayward, Emeritus Professor of Public Policy, RMIT University

There was not a lot of cheer in the media reporting ahead of the 2025/6 Victorian budget released on Wednesday. Debt and deficits dominated the coverage.

All eyes turned to new treasurer, Jaclyn Symes, to see if in her first budget the Labor government was finally delivering some financial discipline.

That theme flowed into the press conference during the budget lockup, when journalists got to grill the treasurer about the budget papers. Symes copped a pasting. Journalists were clearly unhappy with what they had read and more unhappy about what they heard.

Yes, the operating side of the budget is projected to be back to a wafer thin A$600 million surplus. But that is almost $1 billion less than was promised when Symes delivered a budget update last December.

And all that infrastructure is to paid for by more borrowings, taking net debt to $167 billion, $10 billion more than it was last year.

And that was despite the government benefiting from a whopping $3.5 billion in GST grants from the Commonwealth, over $1 billion more than the previous year.

And it was despite a new fire and emergency services levy that is set to deliver an extra $600 million.

And it was also despite a 22% increase in fees and fines, and a $1.3 billion rise in unspecified government charges. And it is also based on banking $500 million of savings from an efficiency review led by former head of Premier and Cabinet Helen Silver, which won’t be finished until July at the earliest.

So where did that extra money go? Well, it paid for more than $6 billion of new services ($3 billion net of savings), and an extra $1.6 billion for new infrastructure, across all portfolios. This includes free public transport for seniors on weekends and free public transport for kids.

The big ticket item was health, which got an extra $2.5 billion. That came as a surprise given health copped a $1.5 billion cut in last year’s budget, after the government claimed the hospitals were still spending at pandemic levels and needed to rediscover efficiency.

That cut did not last long. Health services workers staged a short but effective campaign that forced the then new premier, Jacinta Allan, to buckle. The money was returned in December’s budget update.

The budget papers show the Victorian economy has been performing strongly post pandemic, with Victoria leading the nation in employment growth. The budget papers tip that strong performance will continue, despite the continued warnings that all that government debt will eventually force the economy to buckle.

The government argues rather than be criticised it should be applauded for a job well done.

It spent up big on infrastructure during the pandemic, which has delivered to the state remarkably strong economic performance. It also spent up big to protect Victorians from COVID.

It has a budget recovery plan and everything is on schedule. First employment had to grow, then we needed a cash surplus and now we have an operating surplus to add to it. Net debt in real terms will start to fall next year as the last step in a long-term plan.

It also points to the state’s balance sheet to highlight it has something to show for all that debt in the form of $437 billion in assets.

Victoria is not alone in running budget operating deficits during the pandemic. NSW and Queensland make happy bedfellows, but they are not as eye-catching because their levels of debt are much lower.

Victoria is also not alone as a state or provincial government that has a lot of debt. The Canadian provinces are also in that situation, with Quebec and Ontario leading the pack.

Then there are the German state governments. Their problem is not too much debt, but far too little, leaving them to grapple with not enough as well as crumbling infrastructure caused by a constitutional debt brake that is responsible for the mess, and which has recently been lifted.

Treasurer Symes delivered a budget that has disappointed those who wanted to see debt fall and for the government to at long last show some fiscal discipline. With the economy still doing quite nicely, and so many new announcements to glow in, Treasurer Symes will be quite happy to disappoint.

The political calculation here is simple: Victorians want services and aren’t worried if it is paid for by debt.

Whether that remains the case at next year’s state election due in November is another question. For this will have been Syme’s last real chance to have been more prudent, and just at that moment when the economy could have afforded it.

David Hayward chairs the Strategic Advisory Committee for Fire Rescue Victoria.

– ref. Victorian budget has cash to splash on health, transport but new levies, job cuts, rising debt signal pain ahead – https://theconversation.com/victorian-budget-has-cash-to-splash-on-health-transport-but-new-levies-job-cuts-rising-debt-signal-pain-ahead-257013

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

The Reserve Bank of Australia cut the official interest rate for the second time this year, as it lowered forecasts for Australian economic growth and pointed to increasing uncertainty in the world economy.

The bank lowered the cash rate target by 0.25%, from 4.1% to 3.85%, saying inflation is expected to remain in the target band.

All the big four banks swiftly passed the cut on to households with mortgages. This will save a household with a $500,000 loan about $80 a month.

Announcing the cut, the Reserve Bank stressed in its accompanying statement it stands ready to reduce rates again if the economic outlook deteriorates sharply.

The Board considered a severe downside scenario and noted that monetary policy is well placed to respond decisively to international developments if they were to have material implications for activity and inflation in Australia.

Inflation is back under control

The latest Consumer Price Index showed that inflation remained around the middle of the Reserve Bank’s medium-term target band of 2-3% in the March quarter.

The Reserve Bank was also comforted by the underlying inflation measure called the “trimmed mean”. This measure excludes items with the largest price movements up or down.

The bank noted that it has returned to the 2–3% target band for the first time since 2021. This suggests inflation is not just temporarily low due to temporary factors such as the electricity price rebates.

Read more:
Inflation is easing, boosting the case for another interest rate cut in May

In February, Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock conceded the bank had arguably been “late raising interest rates on the way up”. It did not want to be late on the way down.

Perhaps Bullock is being unduly modest. The central bank looks to have judged well the extent of monetary tightening. It did not raise interest rates as much as its peers, but still got inflation back to the target.

Unemployment remains low

Last week, we got an update on the strength of the labour market. Unemployment stayed at 4.1%. It has now been around 4% since late 2023, a remarkable achievement.

This is below the 4.5% the Reserve Bank had regarded as the level consistent with steady inflation (in economic jargon, the NAIRU). But neither prices nor wages have accelerated.

Households and businesses may turn cautious

In its updated forecasts, the bank sees headline inflation dropping to 2.1% by mid-year but going back to 3.0% by the end of the year, as the electricity subsidies are removed. By mid-2027, it will be back near the middle of the 2-3% target.

Underlying inflation is forecast to stay around the middle of the target band throughout.

The Reserve Bank cut its forecast for gross domestic product (GDP) to 2.1% by December, down from its previous forecast of 2.4% made in February. It said:

Economic policy uncertainty has increased sharply alongside recent global developments, and this is expected to prompt some households to increase their precautionary savings and some businesses to postpone some investment decisions.

The unemployment rate is expected to increase to 4.3% by the end of the year and remain there through 2026.

Cost of living pressures look set to ease, as real household disposable income grows faster than population.

As the Reserve Bank governor told a media conference on Tuesday:

There’s now a new set of challenges facing the economy, but with inflation declining and the unemployment rate relatively low, we’re well positioned to deal with them. The board remains prepared to take further action if that is required.

Economic and policy ‘unpredictability’

The main uncertainty in the global economy is how the trade war instigated by US President Donald Trump will play out. According to one count, he has announced new or revised tariff policies about 50 times.

“The outlook for the global economy has deteriorated since the February statement. This is due to the adverse impact on global growth from higher tariffs and widespread economic and policy unpredictability,” the bank noted.

The US tariff pauses on the highest rates on China and most other nations are due to be in place for 90 days. But more measures may be announced before then.

This uncertainty is likely to be stifling trade, and even more so investment decisions by companies in the face of rapidly changing policies. And it will weaken the global economy.

In her press conference, Bullock said the board’s judgement was that “global trade developments will overall be disinflationary for Australia”. Not only is the global outlook weaker, but some goods no longer being sold to the US could be diverted to Australia.

Where will interest rates go from here?

The Reserve Bank’s updated forecasts assume interest rates will fall further, to 3.4% by the end of the year.

But this is just a reflection of what financial markets are implying. It is not necessarily what the bank itself expects to do. It is certainty not a promise of what they will do.

But the Reserve Bank still regards its stance as “restrictive”, or weighing on growth. So if it continues to believe inflation will stay within the target band, or the global outlook deteriorates, it will cut rates further.

John Hawkins was formerly a senior economist with the Reserve Bank.

– ref. RBA cuts interest rates, ready to respond again if the economy weakens further – https://theconversation.com/rba-cuts-interest-rates-ready-to-respond-again-if-the-economy-weakens-further-256798

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Helen Dickinson, Professor, Public Service Research, UNSW Sydney

Ensuring the provision of high quality disability services will pose a significant challenge for the Albanese government’s second term.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) cost A$43.9 billion in 2023–24 and is one of the fastest growing pressures on the federal budget.

As the government seeks to moderate growth of the scheme budget, some NDIS participants are finding they are no longer eligible for the scheme.

The problem is, the supports they’re supposed to be able to access instead aren’t yet in place – or don’t exist.

Containing growth

Concerns have been mounting for some years about the NDIS’s growing budget. In 2024, National Cabinet set a target of moderating annual growth to 8%. If met, the scheme will still grow to $58 billion by 2028.

The previous government attempted to limit its annual growth through legislative changes and a focus on weeding out fraud.

Read more:
The NDIS reform bill has been passed – will it get things ‘back on track’ for people with disability?

But there have been a number of reports in recent months of the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) reassessing eligibility of NDIS participants to determine whether their supports are most appropriately paid for by the scheme.

If individuals are unable to provide evidence within 28 days they may lose their funding. This can be a challenge to get if participants need to see a clinical professional to gather evidence.

One group particularly impacted by eligibility reassessments are children. Some participants report being told they are no longer eligible for NDIS funding and should instead seek supports from other mainstream services such as health or education.

But all too often, parents find these services don’t fund the necessary supports, leaving them to either fund this themselves or have their child go without.

If opportunities for early intervention are missed, they may require more intensive and expensive supports in future.

What are foundational supports?

The NDIS was never intended to provide services to all people with disability. About 86% of disabled Australians do not have NDIS plans.

But this doesn’t mean that people with disability who are not on the NDIS don’t also have support needs.

New research found people with disability who were not NDIS participants had high levels of need for assistance for tasks of daily living including transport, cognitive and emotional tasks, mobility and household chores.

These supports aren’t usually provided in the health system, but similar supports are provided through aged care.

The NDIS review argued a lack of accessible and inclusive mainstream services for people with disability meant people were being pushed into the NDIS as their only potential source of support.

A key recommendation of the NDIS review was states and territories should provide “foundational supports”.

Foundational supports are split into two categories. General foundational supports includes things such as peer support, improving self-advocacy skills, and information and advice.

Targeted supports include shopping and cleaning for those not eligible for the NDIS. Supports are aimed at particular groups such as those with psychosocial disability (from a mental disorder), families of children with developmental delay, and transition supports for young people preparing for employment and independent living.

Foundational supports are supposed to be available from July of this year so people with disability who aren’t eligible for the NDIS can access support without having to join the scheme.

But people who are reassessed as ineligible for the scheme are having their funding cut before these foundational supports have been established, leaving a worrying gap.

Read more:
States agreed to share foundational support costs. So why the backlash against NDIS reforms now?

There is currently significant confusion in the disability community about what foundational supports will look like and who will be able to access these.

What is clear is there is significant unmet need for people with disability outside of the scheme and this might lead to a deterioration of functioning among those in this group and potentially burnout of informal carers.

Getting foundational supports right will be a key point of negotiation between federal and state and territory governments if people with disability are to be supported appropriately and the NDIS is to be sustainable.

New ministers and ministries

The new government has moved responsibility for the NDIS from the Department of Social Services into the new Department of Health, Disability and Ageing led by Mark Butler.

While Butler will sit in Cabinet, Jenny McAllister has been appointed to the outer ministry as Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

The shift of the NDIS to this portfolio has raised concerns among the disability community that it might not be a priority in an government department that also deals with health and aged care.

There are further concerns this move might medicalise how disability is seen. This would go against the human rights basis of the NDIS, where issues of choice and control are crucial.

The ministerial and departmental restructures do present new opportunities to harmonise services for people with disability.

Currently health, disability and aged care are competing to attract similar workforces across allied health, aged care and disability support. A cross-sector approach to workforce planning could be streamlined if it is the responsibility of one department.

Without this, we risk putting more pressure on the NDIS and leaving people with disability not on the NDIS without the supports they need.

The government’s ministerial and departmental restructure will likely further delay the implementation of foundational supports. Given the breadth of responsibilities of the health, disability and aged care portfolio, other policies – and election promises – might take precedence over work on foundational supports.

Helen Dickinson receives funding from ARC, NHMRC and Department of Social Services

Anne Kavanagh receives funding from the ARC, NHMRC, MRFF, MS Australia and the Australian government.

– ref. The government wants to contain NDIS growth. But ineligible people with disability also need support – https://theconversation.com/the-government-wants-to-contain-ndis-growth-but-ineligible-people-with-disability-also-need-support-256236

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Riboldi, Lecturer in Social Impact and Social Change, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

Social media advertising is an increasingly important frontier in election campaigns.

Political parties, candidates and third-party groups – such as trade unions, industry bodies and interest groups – all spend big to push their message high into the algorithms of potential voters.

Read more:
What did the parties say on TikTok in the election, and how? Here’s the campaign broken down in 5 charts

In the 2025 Australian federal election, this spend has been estimated at around A$40 million across the Meta- and Google-owned digital media platforms.

Based on our analysis of data from the Meta Ad Library – part of a broader research project on third sector groups (not political parties or candidates) during the election – third party groups spent more than $7.5 million advertising on Meta platforms Facebook and Instagram from March 28 to May 3 – the date the election was called to polling day.

Understanding which of these groups spent what, and on what, offers insights into the election results and modern political campaigning generally.

Some surprises in the stats

During the election campaign, much media commentary focused on right wing organisation Advance Australia’s digital campaigning.

However, our analysis shows pro-Liberal/National Party groups were outspent on Meta (which owns Facebook) almost 3:1 by anti-Liberal groups.

Much of this was focused on workers’ rights, or in opposition to the Coalition’s nuclear energy policy.

The top 25 spending groups on Meta spent just more than $6 million between them, at a rate of around $6,500 a day. The rate of spending increased steadily during the campaign, with the bulk of the spend (more than $4 million) occurring in the final two weeks.

On May 2, the day before the election, these 25 big spenders paid on average $16,622 to push their message on Meta social media platforms.

Conservative campaign group Advance Australia spent just less than $50,000 on Meta on the final day of the campaign (social media advertising is exempt from the two-day ad-blackout laws affecting traditional media operators).

Advance was the biggest third-party campaigning group on Meta during the election, spending more than $1 million during the campaign’s 37 days.

Advance’s left-wing competitor during the campaign was the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), which spent around $475,000 on Meta advertising across the campaign, including more than $52,000 on May 2.

While the ACTU spent less than half of Advance’s spend across Meta during the campaign, it spent three times as much on YouTube/Google advertising. Data from the Google Ad Transparency Center reveals the ACTU spent $928,000 on the platform between March 28 and May 3, whereas Advance spent $296,000 during the same period.

Key battlegrounds: climate and energy

The other two big Meta spenders the day before polling day highlight the key policy contest among third party organisations – the Coalition’s proposal to introduce nuclear powered energy to Australia.

Nuclear for Australia was the biggest spender on Meta on May 2, spending more than $65,000 in one day. Its direct counterpoint, Liberals Against Nuclear, spent a touch more than $32,000 on the same day.

However, during the whole campaign, Liberals Against Nuclear spent more ($246,000 compared to Nuclear for Australia’s $236,000).

An anti-nuclear message was particularly prominent across the top 25 spending groups on Meta. Of the 15 organisations we identified as being explicitly anti-Liberal, nine were climate organisations with an anti-nuclear message.

These nine organisations spent a total of $2.5 million across Meta during the course of the campaign.

The most significant of these was Climate 200, which spent almost $900,000 on Meta during the election campaign.

Another key anti-nuclear nuclear campaigner on Meta was Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), which spent almost $400,000 between March 28 and May 3 across two different Facebook pages, and Hothouse Magazine, which spent almost $300,000 on pro-renewables advertising.

Together, the 15 explicitly anti-Liberal groups spent more than $3.6 million during the election, far eclipsing the two clear pro-Liberal groups, Advance Australia and Nuclear for Australia, which spent around $1.3 million between them.

So, what insights might these findings offer into the election results?

What may the future hold?

There certainly appears to be a correlation between the historic low Coalition vote and the outspending of pro-Liberal entities on Meta.

Read more:
Political parties can recover after a devastating election loss. But the Liberals will need to think differently

Outside of Advance and Nuclear for Australia’s Meta campaigning, big-spending right-wing groups such as Australians for Prosperity, Better Australia and Australian Taxpayer’s Alliance seemed more singularly focused on tearing down the Greens and Climate 200-backed independents than on helping the Coalition win government.

In contrast, the anti-Dutton and anti-nuclear focus of the anti-Liberal third party spending has a degree of collective discipline about it, which is probably indicative of the strength of the workers’ rights and climate movements in Australia.

Additionally, the climate movement’s strong anti-nuclear campaign may have presented a message which glossed over Labor’s climate failures during the previous term.

This may have sent some pro-climate voters to Labor rather than to the Greens or Climate 200 independents. For their part, these organisations appeared to campaign more around the opportunities of a possible minority government than on environmental issues.

Civil society actors such as trade unions and industry groups have a long history of involvement in Australian politics.

The increasing non-major party vote, now around a third of all voters, means there are now more voices in our democratic processes.

This in turn creates more opportunities for third party organisations to influence policy debate and election outcomes.

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

– ref. Follow the money: the organisations that spent the most on social media during the election – https://theconversation.com/follow-the-money-the-organisations-that-spent-the-most-on-social-media-during-the-election-256784

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Lindsey, Malcolm Smith Professor of Asian Law and Director of the Centre for Indonesian Law, Islam and Society, The University of Melbourne

Making Jakarta their first overseas visit has become a set piece for newly elected Australian prime ministers dating back to John Howard in 1996.

So, we should not be surprised that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese flew to Jakarta soon after his landslide re-election, just as he did in 2022. In fact, it would be very surprising if he did not.

These visits are now an obligation for a newly elected PM. Failing to jump on the plane would be seen in Indonesia as an intentional snub.

The visits follow a familiar pattern. The prime minister offers some sort of paraphrase of Paul Keating’s famous tag, “There is no country more important to Australia than Indonesia”. (Albanese actually quoted Keating word for word.)

There is a carefully planned photo op, such as riding bamboo bikes, visiting a crowded marketplace or, this time around, a golf cart ride at the presidential palace.

The brief visit ends with a joint press conference, where both leaders pledge to “strengthen the relationship”. With occasional exceptions, their announcements are vague and aspirational. Sometimes they just restate what they’ve said before.

In other words, these performative post-election prime ministerial visits have become an essential, symbolic part of Australia’s bilateral relationship with Indonesia, but they too often lack substance.

This is a pity, because Australia needs to work much harder to achieve its key aims with Indonesia, which Albanese defined in Jakarta as closer economic and defence engagement.

To put it bluntly, Australia struggles to get Indonesia’s attention. It is an uncomfortable truth that, from an Indonesian perspective, Australia’s leverage and importance is limited. Jakarta sees Canberra as the junior partner in the relationship.

An Indonesian president is hardly likely to say, “There is no country more important to Indonesia than Australia”, let alone make a post-election visit to Canberra a fixture.

Prabowo’s gesture to Australia

This is not to say Indonesia’s current president, Prabowo Subianto, is hostile to Australia. He is not.

In fact, he made a significant friendly gesture to Australia soon after he was sworn in last year by releasing the remaining five members of the Bali Nine from prison in Indonesia and sending them home for Christmas.

This move was beneficial to Prabowo on multiple fronts.

First, generous acts of clemency of this kind distinguish him from his predecessor, Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, and his hardline “war on drugs” policy. Jokowi endorsed Prabowo in last year’s election, but Prabowo is keen to emerge from his long shadow.

Second, Prabowo is far more cosmopolitan and interested in international affairs than his predecessor. He has ambitions to be a player on the global stage, as witnessed by his (failed) efforts to broker a peace between Russia and Ukraine last year. Freeing foreign prisoners makes him more welcome overseas.

Third, granting clemency helps counter Prabowo’s dark past, and the long-standing and credible allegations of human rights abuses that date back to his time as Soeharto’s son-in-law and a special forces commander.

These allegations are more of a problem internationally than at home, but they are still a nuisance for Prabowo. He likely expected his Bali Five gesture would win him a warm and image-enhancing response from Albanese – and indeed, that proved to be the case.

But while all this suited Prabowo nicely, it did not result in any major developments in the two areas most important to Australia: trade and security.

Lingering mistrust on security matters

There are understandable reasons for this.

Take security, for example. Indonesia is critically important to Australia as its northern defensive shield. It is vital to our interests that we have a strong security partnership with Indonesia. But Australia is less important to Indonesia’s own defences.

We are also not fully trusted. In addition to lingering concerns about the AUKUS deal with the US and UK, Australia’s role in the independence of Timor–Leste in 1999 resulted in Indonesia famously tearing up the sweeping security treaty Keating negotiated with Soeharto in 1995.

Indeed, the loss of Timor–Leste still rankles with some senior Indonesian military figures. Australia and Indonesia have signed new security arrangements since then – the Lombok Treaty, in particular, and the agreement signed last year enabling more complex training exercises between the two militaries. However, none match the scale of the 1995 agreement.

Moreover, our engagement on security is complicated by Indonesia’s long-standing commitment to a non-aligned diplomatic policy – what it calls “free and active”.

Jakarta did stop short of allowing Russia to base long-range aircraft in Papua province, but under its non-aligned stance, it has purchased weapons and fuel from Russia and become the first Southeast Asian country join the BRICS grouping of countries (founded by Brazil, Russia, India and China).

Undercooked on trade and investment

As for the economic relationship, our low profile in Indonesian markets – despite our proximity – severely limits our leverage and influence in Indonesia.

Indonesia has a population approaching 300 million and a huge retail market. But as a trading partner, Australia ranks far behind many other countries, including China, the US, Japan, India, Singapore, and even Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam.

This is despite signing a free trade agreement with Indonesia in 2019. Although it was many years in the making, the deal did not deliver dramatic changes at the time, and has had limited impact ever since.

Indonesia is open about its hunger for more foreign investment. But, again, we are not a major investor in our near neighbour. In fact, Australia invests more in far-flung tax havens such as Luxembourg and Ireland, as well as in Papua New Guinea, Taiwan and India, than we do in Indonesia. It’s not even in our top 20 investment destinations.

As Albanese said in Jakarta, strengthening investment ties requires government, business and civil society demonstrating greater engagement and ambition when it comes to Indonesia.

This is not easy. Australian businesses remain wary of Indonesia because of bureaucratic red tape and the complexity created by decentralised and sometimes chaotic local governments, as well as serious, widespread corruption.

However, this is true of many other business destinations in Asia and the developing world. It is hard to avoid the impression that Australian businesses have a blind spot regarding Indonesia.

A move that would get Jakarta’s attention

The ambition that Albanese called for is well overdue.

Both China and India have large diasporas in Australia that can offer rich human resources for investors in those countries and help them navigate complex markets. By comparison, the local Indonesian population is tiny, and our education system has failed to fill the gap.

In fact, Indonesian studies is barely hanging on by its fingernails in our schools and universities. The numbers of students studying Indonesian in Year 12 has plunged to minuscule numbers in recent years. And universities drop courses every year, with enrolments falling 63% between 1992 and 2019.

A second-term leader with a gigantic majority, Albanese is ideally positioned to do something about this.

He should take a page from the playbooks of ALP heroes Keating and Kevin Rudd, who funded programs to boost Asian languages in schools. Albanese should allocate serious funding – A$100 million would be good start – over the next decade to revive Indonesian language instruction in Australian schools.

That would help rebuild what was once a level of Indonesia literacy unmatched anywhere else in the world. It would be a big step towards helping Australian businesses summon up the courage to enter complex Indonesian markets where only around 5% of the population have functional English.

And it would be an ambitious announcement that would be guaranteed to get serious attention in Jakarta.

Tim Lindsey receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. There’s no country more important to Australia than Indonesia. Trouble is, the feeling isn’t mutual – https://theconversation.com/theres-no-country-more-important-to-australia-than-indonesia-trouble-is-the-feeling-isnt-mutual-256900

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julia Henning, PhD Candidate in Feline Behaviour, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

Cats have a long history with humans, going back more than 9,000 years. Attracted to human settlements by the rodents that plagued (sometimes literally) our ancestors, cats ingratiated themselves as useful mousers and slowly domesticated themselves.

Farmers began to employ them as pest controllers. It was through this arrangement that cats and milk first became acquainted.

Before the commercialisation of pet food, cats were mostly fed scraps from the family table. Not much was known about their nutritional needs. In his 1877 book on cats, Scottish doctor Gordon Stables insisted cats need two bowls – “one for water and the other for milk” – and suggested porridge and milk as an excellent feline breakfast.

From these origins, cats and milk became further embedded in the collective zeitgeist through depictions of milk-loving cats in art, books, movies and cartoons. There’s even the classic trope of the scruffy street cat being rescued from the rain to enjoy a saucer of milk from a kindly stranger.

While it’s not surprising that cats and milk have persisted as an unquestioned combination, research now tells us cats shouldn’t be drinking milk at all.

The vast majority of cats are lactose intolerant

Like all mammals, cats begin life drinking milk from their mother. But past kittenhood, milk is a completely unnecessary part of a cat’s diet.

After weaning (around 6–12 weeks of age), kittens stop producing the enzyme lactase, required to digest lactose in milk. For the vast majority of cats, this means they are lactose intolerant.

However, just like in humans, the level of intolerance varies for each individual based on how much of the enzyme their body naturally produces.

Don’t rush to give your kitten milk, though. Just because kittens can digest lactose doesn’t mean they should be drinking cow’s milk. Cats are much smaller animals than cows and, fittingly, the amount of lactose in the milk of mother cats is much lower than in cow’s milk. It’s best to let them drink from their mother or to get them a kitten-appropriate cat formula.

Lactose intolerance isn’t the only reason not to give your cats milk. Though rare, cats can also develop an allergy to milk or dairy.

What happens to cats who drink milk?

Lactose is a type of sugar. When it can’t be broken down to be absorbed into the bloodstream, lactose travels through the intestines to the colon where the bacteria inside the body ferment it.

This fermentation breaks lactose down into acids and gases which cause unpleasant symptoms, including the passing of excessive gas, bloating, constipation, abdominal pain and occasionally nausea and vomiting. In cats, the most common symptom observed is diarrhoea.

Chronic or persistent diarrhoea can cause further complications such as dehydration, electrolyte imbalance and malnutrition. In some cases, it can even be life threatening.

Cats who consume milk or dairy regularly as part of their diet are at increased risk of these health complications.

If milk is so bad for cats, why do they love it?

We often like things that are bad for us. But to answer this question, we first have to remember cow’s milk is intended for feeding and growing a baby cow.

To achieve this feat, it contains an assortment of proteins and fats that are highly palatable, especially to cats. Cats need high levels of protein and fat for optimal health and daily functioning.

Cow’s milk, in particular, is also high in casein, a protein that is broken down by the body into alpha-casozepine. In some studies, it’s been associated with a calming effect in cats. While this wouldn’t initially make a cat want to drink milk, it may create a comforting association with milk over time.

Can I give milk sometimes as a treat? What about milk alternatives?

The short answer is: no.

Dairy is not a natural part of cats’ diet. While they may like the taste, milk is likely to cause your furry friend discomfort and health issues, so it’s best to avoid entirely.

And if you’re thinking your cat is one of the lucky few that isn’t lactose intolerant, think again. Cats are very good at hiding discomfort because, in the wild, showing weakness would make them a target for predators.

If you absolutely must, opt for lactose-free milk or milk formulated specifically for cats, and keep it as a very occasional treat.

While it won’t upset their stomachs in the same way as regular cow’s milk, it still won’t offer your cat any nutritional benefit.

As for milk alternatives like oat, soy or almond milk? Any unusual additions to your cat’s diet are likely to cause digestive upset, so it’s best to avoid these as well.

The bottom line? Don’t give your cat milk. They don’t need it, they probably can’t digest it and it’s likely to cause more pain than it’s worth.

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

– ref. Can cats drink milk? Despite the stereotypes, it’s actually a bad idea – https://theconversation.com/can-cats-drink-milk-despite-the-stereotypes-its-actually-a-bad-idea-255227

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Kennedy, Youth Mental Health Researcher, University of the Sunshine Coast

We have all experienced boredom – that feeling of waning interest or decreased mental stimulation. Eventually we lose focus, we disengage. Time seems to pass slowly, and we may even start to feel restless. Whether it be watching a movie that disappoints, a child complaining that “there’s nothing to do”, or an adult zoning out during a meeting – boredom is a universal experience.

Generally defined as difficulty maintaining attention or interest in a current activity, boredom is commonly viewed as a negative state that we should try to avoid or prevent ourselves from experiencing.

But what if there’s another way to view boredom, as a positive state? Could learning to embrace boredom be of benefit?

The brain on boredom

The brain network is a system of interconnected regions that work together to support different functions. We can liken it to a city where suburbs (brain regions) are connected by roads (neural pathways), all working together to allow information to travel efficiently.

When we experience boredom – say, while watching a movie – our brain engages specific networks. The attention network prioritises relevant stimuli while filtering out distractions and is active when we commence the movie.

However, as our attention wanes, activity in the attention network decreases, reflecting our diminished ability to maintain focus on the unengaging content. Likewise, decreased activity occurs in the frontoparietal or executive control network due to the struggle to maintain engagement with the unengaging movie.

Simultaneously, the default mode network activates, shifting our attention toward internal thoughts and self-reflection. This is a core function of the default mode network, referred to as introspection, and suggestive of a strategy for coping with boredom.

This complex interplay of networks involves several key brain regions “working together” during the state of boredom. The insula is a key hub for sensory and emotional processing. This region shows increased activity when detecting internal body signals – such as thoughts of boredom – indicating the movie is no longer engaging. This is often referred to as “interoception”.

The amygdala can be likened to an internal alarm system. It processes emotional information and plays a role in forming emotional memories. During boredom, this region processes associated negative emotions, and the ventral medial prefrontal cortex motivates us to seek alternative stimulating activities.

Boredom versus overstimulation

We live in a society that subjects us to information overload and high stress. Relatedly, many of us have adopted a fast-paced lifestyle, constantly scheduling ourselves to keep busy. As adults we juggle work and family. If we have kids, the habit of filling the day with schooling and after-school activities allows us to work longer hours.

In between these activities, if we have time to pause, we may be on our screens constantly organising, updating, or scrolling to simply stay occupied. As a result, adults inadvertently model the need to be constantly “on” to younger generations.

This constant stimulation can be costly – particularly for our nervous system. Our overscheduling can feed into overstimulation of the nervous system. The sympathetic nervous system which manages our fight-or-flight response is designed to deal with times of stress.

However, when we are constantly stressed by taking in new information and juggling different activities, the sympathetic nervous system can stay activated for too long, due to the cumulative effects of repeated exposure to different stressors. This is sometimes referred to as “allostatic overload”. It is when our nervous system becomes overwhelmed, keeping us in a heightened state of arousal, which can increase our risk of anxiety.

Eliminating the state of boredom deprives us of a simple and natural way to reset our sympathetic nervous system.

Could boredom be good for us?

In small doses, boredom is the necessary counterbalance to the overstimulated world in which we live. It can offer unique benefits for our nervous system and our mental health. This is opposed to long periods of boredom where increased default mode network activity may be associated with depression.

There are several benefits of giving ourselves permission to be occasionally bored:

• improvements in creativity, allowing us to build “flow” in our thoughts
• develops independence in thinking and encourages finding other interests rather than relying on constant external input
• supports self-esteem and emotional regulation, because unstructured times can help us sit with our feelings which are important for managing anxiety
• encourages periods without device use and breaks the loop of instant gratification that contributes to compulsive device use
• rebalances the nervous system and reduces sensory input to help calm anxiety.

Embrace the pause

Anxiety levels are on the rise worldwide, especially among our youth. Many factors contribute to this trend. We are constantly “on”, striving to ensure we are scheduling for every moment. But in doing so, we are potentially depriving our brains and bodies of the downtime they need to reset and recharge.

We need to embrace the pause. It is a space where creativity can prosper, emotions can be regulated, and the nervous system can reset.

Daniel Hermens receives funding from the Commonwealth government’s Prioritising Mental Health Initiative and the Queensland Mental Health Commission.

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

– ref. Boredom gets a bad rap. But science says it can actually be good for us – https://theconversation.com/boredom-gets-a-bad-rap-but-science-says-it-can-actually-be-good-for-us-255767

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pat McGorry, Professor of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne

The death of former AFL footballer Adam Selwood, less than four months after the death by suicide of his twin Troy, is an unfathomable tragedy for the Selwood family.

The devastating news has sent shockwaves through the AFL and wider Australian communities.

The shock and grief have prompted many people, from current and former AFL players to fans and media commentators, to seek actions and solutions.

The immediate priority is to ensure the Selwood family and anyone who is currently struggling with mental ill-health and may be adversely impacted by this latest tragedy, is supported and offered hope for the future.

In addition, the AFL community and mental health advocates have implored the AFL to introduce a mental health round, similar to its other themed rounds such as its ANZAC commemorations or the current Sir Doug Nicholls round, which celebrates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander players, cultures and communities.

Better late than never?

I first raised the idea of a mental health round for the AFL in 2010 with then-CEO Andrew Demetriou after I was fortunate enough to be named Australian of the Year.

This allowed me gain access to prominent leaders to champion the fight against the alarming rise of mental ill-health in Australia – especially young people.

The idea never materialised, but I strongly believe a mental health round can play a significant role in reimagining the national conversation on mental health.

However, there are pros and cons to this, and it is critical it is approached in a strategic fashion that goes beyond just awareness and anti-stigma campaigns.

It must instead deliver real and meaningful reform to reduce the impact of mental ill-health and preventable deaths from suicide.

The problem we face

Mental ill-health affects all Australians directly or indirectly – suicide is the number one cause of death for people under 40.

More than 3,000 families every year lose a loved one to suicide and these are largely preventable deaths.

This growing public health crisis creates a huge burden that is social, emotional and economic.

In 2021, the Productivity Commission estimated the cost to Australia of our neglect of mental ill-health and suicide: around A$200 billion per year.

Up to 75% of all mental disorders begin before the age of 25.

Suicide is the biggest killer of young people, and two in five young people now experience mental ill-health every year, a 50% increase since 2007.

Athletes sit within the peak age of risk for mental ill-health, and elite sport can come with unique pressures that heightens risk.

While the AFL and most clubs have engaged strongly around this issue and have sought to provide support for current and former players, the wider mental health crisis extends far beyond the boundaries of the sporting arena.

Now the AFL has a unique opportunity to drive significant change.

Benefits and risks of a mental health round

A mental health round would build on key recommendations from The Lancet Psychiatry’s 2024 commission on youth mental health.

Produced by a global consortium of world-leading psychiatrists, psychologists, academics and young people, it identified the need for “high-profile societal champions” to help sustain “high-quality media attention, which is crucial to any political campaign”.

It highlights societal champions (such as sporting bodies and figures), alongside the unified voice of health and research experts “play a key role in ensuring a message is received by a wider audience and appeals to the public in order to gain support from policy makers”.

This approach must be underpinned by powerful storytelling, which emphasises:

Positive stories of effective care and innovation, combined with credible first-person accounts from service users and their families and carers.

The AFL is uniquely positioned to deliver this by uniting athletes, fans, media platforms and grassroots programs.

It has taken on this role before with positive results, improving awareness and raising money for our ANZACs, as well as the fight against motor neurone disease (MND) – a relatively rare condition compared to mental illness and suicide.

However, it is imperative any such approach moves beyond the well-meaning but tired awareness campaigns that merely encourage people to “check on your mates”, “speak up if you’re struggling” or suggest the solution is simply a matter of improving “resilience”.

That can be code for “just pull yourself together” or “toughen up” – language that is all too familiar in footy circles.

Some elements of the sporting media may need to look in the mirror here.

Anti-stigma campaigns are similarly ineffective in isolation.

A key objective of a mental health round should also be to engage and empower grassroots Australian communities to demand investment the mental health crisis urgently requires.

There is not much use urging people to seek help if expert mental health care is inaccessible or of poor quality. We can rely on world-class cancer care when we need it, but not so mental health care.

In addition to rapid and free access to high quality care, we also need a major boost to scientific research to create new treatments and fuel prevention.

The AFL is already a case study in how to galvanise medical research in another neglected area via its partnership with the FightMND campaign, an incredible initiative that has raised both public engagement and precious funds for scientific discovery.

A step forward?

To honour the tragic deaths of Adam and Troy Selwood and the tens of thousands of families who have been are devastated by suicide in recent years, Australia needs to do something about it.

The AFL is uniquely positioned to take a decisive leadership role on this issue.

But a mental health round must ensure public mental health experts are central to its design and delivery, so it drives not just conversation but real, lasting change.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Patrick McGorry receives funding from the NHRMC, NIH, Wellcome Trust and other research funders fro scientific research in mental health and suicide prevention. I am a member of the AFL’s mental health advisory committee.

– ref. 15 years ago, I urged the AFL to launch a mental health round. Now it’s time for action – https://theconversation.com/15-years-ago-i-urged-the-afl-to-launch-a-mental-health-round-now-its-time-for-action-256995

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne Macaskill, Senior Lecturer in Experimental Psychology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Conventional wisdom suggests memories of past experiences can help us navigate problems in the present.

For example, if a friend told you they were having a disagreement with their partner, you might ask what they did last time they argued. If your child was anxious about a presentation, you might boost their confidence by saying “remember that great speech you did last year”.

Indeed, memory researchers have found people report a key reason they remember the past is to solve problems in the present. But does this prove that drawing on experience is a good problem-solving strategy?

How much insight do we have about whether these memories support us to solve current problems? And, objectively, does this strategy help people identify more and better solutions?

To get more conclusive evidence, we ran two experimental studies (one with 170 students, one with 340 students). In each, we instructed some people to recall previous times they were successful (we call this the “memory group”). We instructed others to recall neutral personal memories such as what they had for breakfast that morning (we call this the “control group”).

We then asked both groups to come up with as many solutions as they could to everyday problems, such as resolving a disagreement, or working in a team to complete a project.

We expected the memory group to generate more solutions to these problems than the control group. But surprisingly, they did not. Both groups generated the same number of solutions.

Does this mean drawing on the past is an ineffective problem-solving strategy, or perhaps only effective for some people?

Unpacking the link between memory and problem solving

To dig further, we asked all participants what was going on in their heads while they were coming up with solutions. Across both groups, some participants said they drew on past experiences we did not specifically instruct them to recall.

This result hinted that recalling memories might be something some people are in the habit of doing anyway, and a possible reason why our memory instructions didn’t seem to make a difference.

We therefore wondered if our instructions were only helpful for participants who do not typically use their memory to solve problems. Indeed, in a followup study with 237 student participants, we found our instruction to recall past successful experiences was useful, but only for a subset of people.

Specifically, this applied to participants who reported they don’t typically use their memory of personal experiences for problem solving. These participants came up with more solutions than anyone else.

We reasoned this was because they already had other good problem-solving strategies (for example, thinking about facts relevant to the problem or thinking laterally and creatively) and we had merely given them an additional strategy (recalling their past).

However, we found no relationship between how often participants typically used their memory to solve problems, and how many solutions they came up with.

Memories can help with difficult tasks

What do our findings tell us? Recalling a memory may be helpful for generating solutions to problems, but it is not the only or best way to solve problems.

However, recalling a memory might help more or be more important in other problem-solving steps, such as defining a problem or implementing a solution once you’ve thought of it.

For instance, some experimental evidence suggests intentionally remembering past experiences could be helpful for doing hard things, such as public speaking, exercising or overcoming a fear of heights.

One study found people who remembered a positive public speaking experience before giving a speech were less anxious, and actually did a better job. Another study found people who recalled a positive experience with exercise increased their exercise over a week, even when the researchers took into account their prior attitudes, motivation and exercise activity.

A specific positive and related memory may therefore be helpful to following through on your intention to perform a specific behaviour. Conversely, as we have found, recalling a memory might not be the best or only approach for coming up with multiple solutions to a problem.

People also report that they recall their experiences to shape their identity and to develop and maintain relationships through reminiscing. Memory of personal experiences therefore has the potential to influence many facets of our life.

Overall, our research highlights the importance of context – when, how and who is drawing on memories of past experiences to solve problems – when we consider conventional wisdom about memory.

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

– ref. Does drawing on memory help us solve problems? Our experiment gave some surprising answers – https://theconversation.com/does-drawing-on-memory-help-us-solve-problems-our-experiment-gave-some-surprising-answers-255105

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deanna D’Alessandro, Professor & Director, Net Zero Institute, University of Sydney

In the wake of Labor’s resounding victory in Australia’s federal election earlier this month, there has been much talk about flailing productivity in Australia.

In fact, last week, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers made clear that the priority for the government’s second term will be to boost productivity. This crucial measure of how much we produce for every hour we work rises a little every year. But growth has slowed over the past decade.

As part of this, the federal government has tasked the Productivity Commission with a new strategy to enhance productivity. A draft report is expected in July or August, with implementable ideas across five key pillars.

So far, however, one part of the solution to the productivity slump has received little public attention: boosting support for scientific research.

Productivity relies on science

Science can help boost national economic productivity in many ways.

For one, scientific innovation and creativity can create high value goods and services for both Australian and international markets. And translating this research into real-world economic benefits builds a workforce that combines science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) skills with business skills.

This is important because it fosters technological innovation and supports evidence-based decision making. It also empowers individuals to solve complex problems in the face of technological change. This ultimately drives productivity growth.

Australian scientific solutions will also need to be at the fore if the Future Made in Australia agenda is to realise its goal of stronger public-private sector relationships and a more resilient economy.

The so-called fourth industrial revolution, or Industry 4.0, refers to the rapid digitisation and automation of manufacturing industry technologies and processes. It not only relies on science to realise the enormous opportunities of digital technologies, but also to ensure they are harnessed sustainably.

For example, science can help address the serious concerns relating to the huge energy and resource cost of artificial intelligence.

Recognising the role of science

The government seems to recognise the role scientific research and innovation can play in boosting productivity.

For example, in 2024 it fully launched the Australian Economic Accelerator, which was announced by the former Coalition government two years earlier. This scheme is designed to foster and build productivity by supporting university research in Australia that has the potential for commercialisation.

Australia’s new national science and research priorities also highlight the crucial role of science in addressing Australia’s complex energy and environmental challenges.

But there are still some fundamental problems in the world of science that are limiting productivity growth in Australia.

A widening gap

One of these problems relates to research and development – or R&D – funding.

Australia’s investment in R&D as a percentage of gross domestic product has been declining for many years. It has dropped from 2.25% in 2008–9 to 1.68% in 2021–22. At the same time, other advanced economies have increased their R&D spending, leading to a widening gap. The OECD average is 2.7%.

Multiple leading bodies have called out this decline as a threat to Australia’s long-term productivity. That’s because R&D spending in science fosters innovation and creativity – two major factors in productivity growth.

Another problem is the declining support for fundamental science which isn’t done with any application in mind, but can be equally important in the long term to enhancing productivity.

Consider the discovery of penicillin. Or of the double helix structure of DNA. These are just some scientific breakthroughs that were not initially focused on practical applications, but ultimately proved transformative.

This kind of scientific research requires sustained support, allowing knowledge to grow. We have seen the results of this in action and its impact even more recently. Scientists had worked on mRNA vaccines for decades before the vaccine breakthrough achieved during the COVID pandemic.

A nation at a crossroads

Australia is at a crossroads. Simply increasing funding in the short term through measures such as Australia’s Economic Accelerator is, at best, a band-aid solution. What’s needed to properly tackle the problem is thoughtful reform and long-term, strategic planning to secure the nation’s prosperity for decades to come.

There is some hope for this, thanks to the government’s comprehensive review of the R&D sector. This review aims to align R&D with national priorities, maximise the value of existing investments, harness public-private partnerships, and strengthen collaboration between research and industry.

The review is engaging a wide range of stakeholders and is designed to deliver long-term transformation.

Addressing productivity in these areas could yield substantial benefits. It could build Australia’s industrial and economic self-sufficiency. And it could broaden our field of view around productivity and how it can be boosted through long-term investment in science and R&D reforms.

By implementing robust R&D reforms and driving productivity across all sectors, Australia can set itself up for sustained growth and international influence.

Deanna D’Alessandro receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Kate Harrison Brennan was an Advisor to former Prime Minister Julia Gillard and is a member of the Australian Labor Party.

– ref. The federal government wants to boost productivity. Science can help – https://theconversation.com/the-federal-government-wants-to-boost-productivity-science-can-help-256567

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scarlett Howard, Research Fellow, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University

Did you know goldfish can learn to drive cars? Have you heard bumblebees can learn to pull on a string? Would you believe some primates can perform calculations with Arabic numerals?

These tasks seem completely irrelevant to these animals in their natural environment, so why are researchers interested in them?

As someone who studies the intelligence of insects, much of my own research has been labelled as “ecologically irrelevant”.

However, as I have argued in Trends in Cognitive Sciences, there are plenty of reasons to study this kind of animal intelligence.

Finding relevance in irrelevance

The study of animal intelligence often seeks to form a better understanding of the animal’s ecology. However, there are also many studies that aim to push the limits of animal cognition beyond what we would expect in their everyday life.

Ecologically irrelevant research can help us understand the limits of animal intelligence and develop bio-inspired technology. It can also help us explore behavioural responses to environmental change, and advance our understanding of the evolution of intelligence.

Understanding how animals respond to ecologically irrelevant tasks sheds light on how our own intelligence has evolved. We frequently use comparisons between humans and non-human primates to understand whether a cognitive capacity has evolved in modern humans, or if we observe similar abilities in other primates and animals.

For example, children as young as 24 months old can find a hidden object in a room when its location is pointed out to them in a photograph. This ability is known as representational insight.

Some chimpanzees can also pass this test. Do these results mean a chimpanzee has the same level of intelligence as a two-year-old child?

Furthermore, this test may allow us to estimate when representational insight evolved. It may have been before humans and chimpanzees split into different lineages.

Imitating nature, comparing species

Biologically inspired (bio-inspired) solutions to modern computing problems use technology based on biology. Some bio-inspired technologies can cope well with uncertainty by using brain-like computations to process and solve real-world problems. Many animals are considered models for bio-inspired technologies based on their vision, behaviour and movement.

For example, the flight mechanics of dragonflies have been studied to build micro aerial vehicles. Since bio-inspired technology will undoubtedly be used in unnatural situations, it is useful to know how animals would respond in these same scenarios to build more accurate technology.

Comparing the behaviour and intelligence of different species can pose a huge challenge to scientists. To enable accurate comparisons we need to have a task of equal difficulty for both species.

If we use a task that animals perform regularly in their natural environments, we run the risk that one species may have an advantage from performing the task more frequently. However, if we use a task that neither animal is likely to ever need to perform, we can “level the playing field” for an accurate comparison.

Animals must often adapt to new and unfamiliar situations. Environmental changes such as urbanisation, climate change, habitat loss and invasive species introductions cause animals to encounter new challenges that may have previously been ecologically irrelevant.

A puzzle box may be seem irrelevant to many animals. However, cockatoos in Australia have learned how to open rubbish bins to forage. The cockatoos have then adapted to solve new puzzles as humans attempt to make bins harder to open.

This “innovation arms race” between humans and cockatoos shows how an initially ecologically irrelevant task may become relevant to an animal.

Does a true test of ecologically irrelevant intelligence exist?

One major question is whether we have been able to create a truly ecologically irrelevant task for animals to complete.

For example, bees have been trained to recognise images of human faces. This task may appear ecologically irrelevant to a bee.

However, to the bee, an image of a human face may actually represent an unfamiliar but rewarding flower, particularly when the correct option is paired with a reward of sugar water, which imitates a flower’s nectar. Is this task relevant or irrelevant to a bee? The answer is: it depends.

Many experiments provide food rewards. Therefore, animals may interpret these experiments as a foraging task, thus making even the most complex and arbitrary tasks during tests of intelligence still somewhat ecologically relevant to the animal. Other rewards for animals participating in experiments include shelter, social interactions, and play.

While the task itself may appear ecologically irrelevant, the reward may be highly relevant to animals looking for food, mating opportunities, safety, or fun. This leads us to question if any task we give animals is completely bereft of ecological relevance.

Scarlett Howard currently has funding from the Australian Research Council and the Hermon Slade Foundation.

– ref. Fish driving cars and chimps doing maths: what teaching animals ‘irrelevant’ skills reveals about our own minds – https://theconversation.com/fish-driving-cars-and-chimps-doing-maths-what-teaching-animals-irrelevant-skills-reveals-about-our-own-minds-253938

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Auricht, Visiting Research Fellow in Natural Resources Management, University of Adelaide

South Australia is famously the driest state on the driest inhabited continent.

But even for South Australia, the current drought is extreme. Rainfall has been the lowest on record across large areas.

When drought strikes and water sources dry up, life becomes hard for wildlife. In these conditions, perennial water sources become enormously valuable.

Dotted across the drought-stricken Fleurieu Peninsula south of Adelaide are more than 850 swampy wetlands. When the landscape dries out, these swamps act as refuges. Animals, birds, insects and reptiles come from far and wide, drawn by permanent spring-fed water, good habitat, diverse plant species and cooler, more humid micro-climates. These swamps are vital habitat for the critically endangered Mount Lofty Ranges southern emu-wren.

Drainage channels were cut through many of these swamps in the early days of settlement, in an effort to turn them into pasture. The Fleurieu swamps are now considered an endangered ecological community. More than 90% of the remaining swamps are located on private property.

Keeping these swamps intact and restoring dried out wetlands comes with real benefits for farmers. Birds and insects seek refuge in the swamps, but feed on pest species on nearby farmland.

As drought tightens its grip on South Australia, these swamps will only become more important to wildlife. Restoring these swamps by bringing back the water and restoring plants and pollinators could go some way to help.

Important for nature – and humans

The swamps of the Fleurieu are some of the most diverse and productive habitats on Earth. Many species of plants, birds, frogs, fish, insects, mammals and reptiles rely on them to survive.

Before colonisation, swamps and wetlands covered large areas of the Fleurieu Peninsula. Three First Nations language groups lived in these areas on the central and eastern peninsula. The importance of these wetlands is recorded in the shared story of Tjilbruki, a Kaurna ancestor whose tears at the death of his nephew gave rise to six freshwater springs.

Over the last 200 years, most of this region has been cleared for pasture, crops and vineyards. Only 4% of the swamps are conserved. They are now listed as a critically endangered ecological community. These swamps are still declining due to threats such as more human settlement, land clearance, water extraction and invasive species such as blackberries.

Many were drained to make way for agriculture. We don’t fully know how many remain, as many are not well captured in current maps.

But we know these wetlands are vital, not just for nature but for farmers too. Farmers would miss them if they were gone.

We can see this most clearly during droughts. As the land gets drier and ephemeral water sources evaporate, ibises, eastern great egrets, white-faced herons and masked lapwings move into these swamps, seeking water. During the days, though, they spread out and feed on pasture pests such as grasshoppers and cockchafer beetle grubs.

Similarly, these wetlands act as a haven for important insect pollinators and predators. Hoverflies and native bees help farmers by pollinating pasture legumes such as clover, while predators keep down the numbers of pest species.

As adults, parasitic wasps rely on the nectar from swamp plants such as woolly teatree. But they lay their eggs on common pasture pests such as caterpillars and grubs. When their larvae hatch, they eat these pests. Carnivorous insects such as ladybirds and assassin bugs eat other insects which can trouble farmers.

Restoration is possible

Swamps don’t have a great reputation. Throughout human history, they have been seen as sources of foul air and a haven for insects and disease. A common response was to dig channels to drain them.

We now know much more about how important swamps and other wetlands for the natural world – and for humans. Wetlands naturally store water and carbon, tame floods and offer refuges during drought. Correcting these historic mistakes will take time.

Peatlands like these store huge volumes of carbon in their waterlogged soils. Our research estimated the carbon storage of a peat swamp at Yundi at more than 2,500 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per hectare. The depth of carbon-rich organic peat was up to three metres in places. By contrast, a healthy woodland stores around 650 tonnes per hectare.

This natural carbon sink will remain as long as the peat remains moist and annual increments from plant growth and decay add to the stock.

When an agricultural drain is cut through a swamp, water gradually leaches out of the peat profile. Over time, enough water leaves to dry out the peat, beginning with the surface layer. This means long-stored carbon and methane can be released back to the atmosphere.

Conserving remaining peatlands and restoring those already drained is essential if the climate goals of the Paris Agreement are to be achieved, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization.

On the Fleurieu Peninsula, there’s huge potential to return water to the soils and expand these once-thriving wetlands.

The good news? Community groups and farmers have already embarked on several restoration projects. Around 50 farmers in the region have formed the Fleurieu Swamp Restoration Network. To date, in cooperation with Yundi Nature Conservancy, 25 swamp restoration plans have been developed and 15 are under way. If successful, these will restore more than 100 hectares of swamp.

Christopher Auricht is a director of environmental consultancy Auricht Projects Pty Ltd. He receives funding from both state and federal governments for wetland related consulting and research.

– ref. Surviving swamps on South Australia’s parched Fleurieu Peninsula are a lifeline to wildlife – and farmers – https://theconversation.com/surviving-swamps-on-south-australias-parched-fleurieu-peninsula-are-a-lifeline-to-wildlife-and-farmers-256238

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Ho, Associate professor in Social and Political Sciences, University of Technology Sydney

Every year, thousands of New South Wales students sit a test to determine places for highly sought-after selective high schools. These are academically selective public schools often associated with high Year 12 scores.

While there has long been a level of expectation around selective school entrance, the most recent round of testing has shone a fresh light on the pressures some young people are experiencing.

Media reports have described some students studying for 18 months to prepare for the selective school test, with multiple sessions of tutoring each week.

Earlier this month, police were called to control crowds at two testing centres as parents and students from one session overlapped with another. This is also the first year the tests have been done online and there were technical difficulties as students tried to complete exams.

One exam invigilator told The Sydney Morning Herald about the stress they witnessed among students.

We were dealing with kids who were freaking out and totally traumatised by what was going on. You could not make up a worse nightmare than what we went through that day.

It’s not surprising children were upset. The pressure to perform well on test day is enormous. As my previous research has found, some families believe entry into a selective school will secure their child’s future.

As my new research with colleagues suggests, this sees some families place huge pressure on students to study and prepare for academic tests in primary school.

Not just a NSW thing

Most (albeit not all) of Australia’s selective schools are in NSW.

But there is pressure around other tests in the primary years. There are similar levels of competition for lucrative private school scholarships around Australia, which children sit as early as Year 3. Many of these are determined by centralised tests.

Tutoring companies also offer programs for primary students preparing for NAPLAN tests in Year 3 and Year 5, as well as the “opportunity class” test in NSW (for an academically selective stream for Year 5 and 6).

Our research

In ongoing, as yet unpublished research on education cultures among migrant communities in Sydney, colleagues and I are focusing on 38 families with children in upper primary school.

In 2022 and 2023, we interviewed students, parents and teachers at six schools in high and low income areas of Sydney. All schools included large numbers of Asian migrants, allowing us to compare different groups’ approaches to education.

While not necessarily representative of all Asian migrant families, or all families with school-aged children in general, we found intensive preparation for the selective test was common in this group, especially among those students already enrolled in an opportunity class.

The tutoring routine

Many students preparing for the selective test told us they attended private tutoring three or more days per week, in addition to completing home based study. Some had begun this routine up to 12 months before to the test.

One mother, whose son attended tutoring every day, at three different centres, on top of two hours of daily homework, told us,

That’s how we prepare for selective […] You need to be methodical […] no pain, no gain.

Other parents explained they resorted to private tutoring because schools did not teach what was needed to succeed in the selective tests.

Not only do children spend afternoons, evenings and weekends in tutoring centres, they are also often giving up most if not all recreational, sporting and other extracurricular activities, narrowing their focus to acing the test.

Families also postpone holidays, outings and other potential distractions. Many of our student participants aiming for a selective school told us they never socialised with their friends outside of school time.

Sometimes they even neglected their school work so as to focus on the selective test. One teacher told us many of her students were absent from school in the week prior to the test, to ramp up their preparation.

How does this impact students?

This culture of extreme study and competitive schooling raises profound questions about the implications for student wellbeing. Some students spoke about their fatigue. As one student said:

I work up to late at night. So sometimes I feel drowsy and I yawn a bit and have water in my eyes.

Their teachers also expressed concern about insufficient sleep and heightened stress caused by the pressure to get into a selective school. They described students’ tears if they were not successful when the results came out.

One teacher said he had a “blanket rule” of not talking about the tests in the classroom, because his students were so preoccupied with ensuring they were doing enough preparation.

Other teachers reflected on students’ fear of taking risks because of the culture of perfectionism associated with scoring and ranking through tests.

What does the research say?

International research shows an association between high-stakes testing in primary years and issues with children’s mental health and academic confidence. There is also a negative association with students’ achievement in maths and literacy. That is, students who experience pressured exams were more likely to experience anxiety and depression, and not do as well in core subjects as those who did not experience this pressure.

Some parents in our study expressed concern for their child’s wellbeing. But others saw stress a positive sign of engagement and commitment, and necessary for securing the all important place in a selective school.

Given many are recent migrants, without established networks in Australia, and fearful of racial discrimination against their children, they believe education to be the most crucial foundation for future success.

However, we need more research on the impacts of these parental aspirations and anxieties on the next generation. And a broader discussion about the benefits of selecting some students – who may have benefited from extensive and expensive private tutoring – to go to separate, high-performing government schools.

Megan Watkins, Greg Noble and Alexandra Wong all contributed to the research on migrant families mentioned in this article, as part of a larger Australian Research Council-funded project.

Christina Ho received funding from the Australian Research Council to conduct this research.

– ref. ‘No pain, no gain’: why some primary students are following intense study routines – https://theconversation.com/no-pain-no-gain-why-some-primary-students-are-following-intense-study-routines-256815

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Tenbensel, Professor of Health Policy, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Minister of Health Simeon Brown claimed earlier this year that health funding in New Zealand has never been higher and that suggestions of underfunding are “fake news”.

On the bare statistics, Brown isn’t wrong. The allocation to Vote Health has indeed increased from NZ$18.2 billion in 2018-19 to $29.6 billion in the 2024-25 budget.

Yet for many working in the publicly-funded health system things have never seemed so bad, with daily stories of under-staffing and increasing levels of stress.

So, how much should the government be spending on health? Any answer needs to factor in the broader context of the health system, and where we sit historically and comparatively.

The health system is subject to significant cost pressures, few of which are unique to New Zealand. People are generally living longer, but more of that longer life span is spent in ill health.

At the same time, New Zealand’s population profile has changed significantly over the past 40 years. There is a lower proportion of working-age people paying income tax to support those who are older.

Technological advances, on balance, drive up health expenditure – more is possible, so more is expected. And compared with other parts of the economy, health services are labour-intensive.

Around two thirds of health expenditure is on staff, and health workforce shortages are a global problem (again, driven by demographic change). All these factors mean health costs rise faster than inflation.

Taking all of this into account, a recent health economics analysis calculated that to continue to deliver the same level of service in the United Kingdom (which has very similar health system characteristics to New Zealand), public spending on health would need to increase by 2.8% in real terms (above inflation) each year.

Then we need to factor in population growth, which has recently been between 1.5% and 2% per year in New Zealand. In this context, a 4-5% increase in Vote Health amounts to merely standing still.

Long-term deterioration

We also need to put our current situation in historical and international context.

The most appropriate indicator for international comparison is “publicly mandated health expenditure” (PMHE) as a percentage of GDP, as this excludes private expenditure (private health insurance and “out of pocket” payments).

Total health spending typically constitutes 10-12% of GDP in high-income countries, and PMHE is typically around 8%. In the 2010s, however, New Zealand’s PMHE dropped from 7.8% (2012) to 7% of GDP (2017). Meanwhile, Australia, Canada and the UK all remained at or above 8% during that time.

This represents a significant long-term deterioration which heightened the stress on our health system before and after the COVID pandemic.

Even when our PMHE as a percentage of GDP is comparable to Australia and other countries, our per-capita health expenditure is significantly less because our GDP per-capita is lower.

The most significant budget boost in recent years was in 2022. But this was largely soaked up by pay rises for health professionals that resulted from underfunding during the 2010s.

The current government finds itself in a very tight spot. This is partly because of international economic conditions and demographic trends, but also due to self-imposed constraints.

Even in such a large budget, there’ll be little room for major initiatives in health unless savings are found from existing areas. That is rarely feasible in health. As is true in most years, there could be up to three big-ticket items. If so, what should they be?

What Budget 2025 should include

First, the government needs to boost capital expenditure in health. A recent analysis by the UK Institute for Government shows that public service productivity, including in the health sector, fell sharply during and after the COVID pandemic. The New Zealand treasury reported similar productivity declines.

The UK report concluded these declines were primarily due to physical capacity constraints – clinical staff can’t be more productive when there is not enough physical space and diagnostic equipment.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced a $400 million increase in the annual capital allowance across all of government. Let’s see how much of the total $4 billion capital allowance is channelled into health.

A second priority should be primary healthcare. Here, the health minister has already announced a range of initiatives, headlined by $285 million of additional performance-based funding over three years. This is a welcome commitment, and the most significant boost in primary care funding since the mid-2000s.

However, it’s unlikely this will redress erosion over the past 20 years of primary care “capitation” funding (the amount a GP practice receives per enrolled patient).

This funding formula also needs to be modernised to better reflect where needs are highest and account for rising acuity and complexity of conditions in primary healthcare. This would relieve some pressures on hospital emergency departments and medical wards.

Third, investment to retain and attract health workers across the whole sector is vital. Given the demographic and epidemiological changes, proactively preparing for a mid-21st-century health workforce will require funding to support emerging models of health services, particularly in primary and community settings, including programmes such as Access and Choice and comprehensive primary and community care teams.

These priorities, and any government commitment to them in Budget 2025, must be understood against the backdrop of sustained historical underfunding.

The government is likely to claim health is a big winner in Budget 2025. Unless increases are significantly greater than 5%, such a claim will bring little respite to the health sector.

In any case, the race that counts is a marathon, not a sprint. New Zealand is well back in the field, struggling not to lose further ground.

Tim Tenbensel receives funding from the New Zealand Health Research Council.

– ref. NZ Budget 2025: anything less than a 5% increase in health funding amounts to merely standing still – https://theconversation.com/nz-budget-2025-anything-less-than-a-5-increase-in-health-funding-amounts-to-merely-standing-still-255593

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

A new Netflix documentary about a shirtless supplement salesman who claimed to be “natural” and was exposed as a fraud might seem like a punchline.

But Untold: The Liver King is more than just a character study of a well-known fitness influencer; it’s a case study of performative masculinity in the world of social media.

Brian Johnson, better known as the Liver King, built a brand on extreme workouts, eating raw organ meat, and evangelising about masculinity. He preached “ancestral living” and radical self-control, all while secretly using steroids.

And his rapid rise to popularity reveals how social media rewards the spectacle of hypermasculinity – especially when it leans into extreme behaviours.

Extreme self-discipline, extreme exercise, extreme eating and extreme “wellness” have all become forms of public performance on social media.

From influencers pushing steroids or “wellness” lifestyles, to the growing popularity of ultramarathons, a new model of masculinity is going viral: control your body, grit through pain, workout hard, and make sure everyone hears about it.

The rise of ‘discipline content’

Social media apps and websites such as TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, are flooded with content that frames pain and extreme physical effort as markers of masculine worth.

One analysis of male fitness YouTubers found they established authority and discipline through a mix of visible physical strength and affiliations with commercial fitness brands. In some cases, the influencers explicitly listed their personal records or showcased their physique post-training as proof of their “masculinity” and discipline.

Read more:
Why banning gym selfies could do us all a lot of good

Influencers also often frame extreme leanness and muscularity as indicators of moral virtue and discipline, even when achieving it has taken a negative physical or mental toll on them. The look of discipline has become more valuable than the outcome of it.

Posts are often wrapped in the language of “resilience”, “discipline” and militaristic rhetoric. Men are told to “go to war” in the gym, to “stay hard”, and to generally treat life like a battlefield.

What’s being sold isn’t stoicism: it’s pseudo-stoicism – a term researchers have coined to describe emotional suppression masquerading as strength and discipline.

Pain is the point

Strava’s 2023 Year in Sport report found Gen Z athletes are 31% less likely to exercise for health reasons compared to older generations. Instead, they are more likely to train with a focus on athletic performance – that is, to push their physical limits, improve metrics such as speed or distance, and outperform others.

The same report shows a surge in extreme endurance activity. Compared to 2023 data, uploads (activities shared with others) of gravel bike rides grew 55%, trail runs grew 16%, and ultramarathon-style workouts grew by 9%.

Take Nedd Brockmann, who ran across Australia in 2022, and last year ran 1,600 kilometres in ten days to raise money for charity – all while sharing his self-imposed physical torture.

Or take the countless fitness content creators pushing themselves through punishing routines for the camera.

These cases reflect a deeper shift of fitness being turned into spectacle, wherein suffering becomes a sign of legitimacy, and pain is “proof” that you’re serious.

Such extreme content, which is often visually striking, can also be pushed by social media algorithms. Research shows how social media platforms systematically boost content that is intense, emotionally charged, and morally loaded.

Read more:
Get big or die trying: social media is driving men’s use of steroids. Here’s how to mitigate the risks

In other words, posts that provoke a reaction are more likely to get promoted. And
content relating to “wellness” extremism is designed to provoke, as it is visceral, performative, and packed with motivational and self-help anecdotes.

Why this matters

This is a potential public health issue.

Social media platforms amplify and monetise these performances, often pushing the most extreme content to the top. And influencers make money, above the money made from directly these platforms, from selling supplements, gear and coaching plans. At the same time, they act in more and more extreme ways to get further amplified by algorithms.

The risks of this dynamic, for both the viewers and creators, are very real. They range from hormone damage, to mental and physical decline, to injury, and even death.

But there is also a deeper ideological harm, as young men are fed a narrow and punishing idea of what it means to be a man. They are taught pain equals purpose, and that if you’re not suffering, you’re not trying.

Where to from here?

Public health agencies need to reckon with this form of digital hypermasculinity.

Extreme fitness influencers aren’t just poor role models; they’re the product of a system that profits from insecurity and spectacle. The goal shouldn’t be to ban or censor this content. But we do need to challenge its dominance, and offer alternatives.

That means engaging young men in offline spaces, such as the Tomorrow Man project, where they have an outlet for community and relationship building.

It means creating counter-narratives that don’t mock, but model, healthier versions of ambition and masculinity. For instance, the Movember campaign’s podcast Dad in Progress explores the various challenges and experiences faced by new dads.

It also means holding platforms accountable for the way they amplify extreme content.

In the absence of healthier narratives, self-flagellation is the only thing young men will have to aspire to.

Samuel Cornell has received funding from Meta Platforms, Inc. His research is supported by a University of New South Wales Sydney, University Postgraduate Award.

– ref. From the Liver King to ultramarathons, fitness influencers are glorifying extreme masculinity where ‘pain is the point’ – https://theconversation.com/from-the-liver-king-to-ultramarathons-fitness-influencers-are-glorifying-extreme-masculinity-where-pain-is-the-point-256817