Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Foster, Professor, Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne

The United Kingdom’s Illegal Migration Bill, introduced in the House of Commons this week, will look very familiar to Australians.

If passed, the bill would see asylum seekers who arrive in the UK without a visa deemed “illegal” and prohibited from applying for protection under the refugee system. Any claim for protection will be deemed “inadmissible”, and anyone arriving “illegally” will be removed to their home country or a so-called “safe” third country.

The bill also grants enhanced detention powers to the government while removal arrangements are under way. In other words, it lifts directly from the Australian handbook when it comes to punitive refugee policy, including the potentially devastating human impact and disregard for human rights.

The similarities extend to political spin as well as policy. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has firmly backed the bill, vowing this week to “fight” for the legislation. He made his address behind a lectern emblazoned with the slogan “stop the boats” – the same three-word slogan that helped former Australian Liberal Prime Minister Tony Abbott win the 2013 federal election, and launched a particularly dark chapter in refugee policy in Australia.

While the UK government notes that irregular migrant arrivals have “increased notably” since 2019, it is imperative to consider the origin of those seeking asylum.

Afghans consist of the largest nationality group to have crossed the English Chanel in recent months, consistently increasing since the resurgence of the Taliban.

Countries do not exist in a vacuum. When wars and conflict erupt, people are forced to flee elsewhere. This is the fundamental premise upon which the Refugee Convention was drafted in the aftermath of the second world war.

The dark history of Australia’s refugee policy

The reintroduction of regional processing of asylum seekers in Australia in 2012 followed a long history of turning back boats at sea. The turn-backs were drastically stepped up in the immediate aftermath of the 2013 election under the guise of Operation Sovereign Borders.

Both policies remain in place under the new Labor government at an estimated cost of $9.65 billion over the past decade for offshore processing alone. Australia’s policy of sending asylum seekers to third countries – Nauru and Papua New Guinea – has been found to contravene human rights by numerous international bodies.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet labelled the centres “an affront to the protection of human rights”. The International Criminal Court’s prosecutor called the offshore regime “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.

Australian law provides that an application for a protection visa is not valid if made by an “unauthorised maritime arrival”. It also stipulates that such arrivals “must” be removed to a regional processing country.

The UK bill similarly places a duty on the secretary of state to remove any person who arrives without authority, irrespective of their claim for protection under refugee law. This amounts to a dangerous repudiation of the UK’s obligations under international refugee law to respect the doctrine of non-refoulement. It’s a cornerstone principle that protects refugees from being returned to a place where they may suffer harm.

This is but one of the more drastic ways in which the UK bill contravenes human rights law. Home Secretary Suella Braverman has acknowledged she cannot guarantee the bill is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Concerningly, the UK bill further authorises the secretary to “make arrangements for the removal” of an unaccompanied child who arrives alone.

Removal of children is sadly commonplace in the Australian experience, with devastating impacts. More than 8,000 pages of leaked incident reports from Australia’s detention camps on Nauru in 2016 (known as the “Nauru files”) detailed numerous cases of child abuse and sexual assault suffered on the island. More than 1,000 of the leaked reports documented harm to children.

There’s no denying the issue of refugees arriving by sea is complex. But within the tangle of competing arguments, some things are simple. There’s no excuse for harming people.

With the UNHCR estimating the “vast majority” of those arriving in the UK via the English Channel would be accepted as refugees if their claims were fairly determined, this bill undermines the fundamental system of international protection. It represents a dangerous trend by governments eager to follow the lead of Australia’s punitive policy.

Read more:
Changes to temporary protection visas are a welcome development – and they won’t encourage people smugglers

The human toll is too high

Beneath the intellectual discussion of human rights violations lies the devastating human impact of the Australian policy Britain seeks to replicate. Over the past ten years, we’ve represented and heard from many who have suffered irreparable harm from Australia’s refugee policy.

Among them were children who have attempted self-harm and speak about no longer wanting to live. A tall, gentle man who lost his eye and suffered blunt facial trauma while witnessing his friend die during a riot in detention on Manus Island. A wife who watched on helplessly as her husband self-immolated on Nauru. He died in agonising pain two days later from burns the inquest into his death heard were “very survivable”. There were also pregnant women medically evacuated to Australia with life-threatening conditions, shaking on the hospital bed as they recall their ordeal and clutch their newborn.

We have witnessed families separated across oceans; fathers who missed the birth of their children. The ongoing physical and mental harm suffered by refugees in Australia cannot be overestimated – nor can the damage to the soul of the nation.

The Australian experience of deterring and punishing people seeking asylum by boat should serve as a warning rather than a blueprint for the UK. Australia represents an example of a dangerously inhumane and exorbitantly costly policy that has damaged its human rights standing globally. But, more fundamentally, it’s an example of the devastating human toll that will ensue if this bill is passed into law.

Michelle Foster receives funding from Australian Research Council.

Katie Robertson 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. UK moves to copy Australia’s cruel asylum-seeker policy – and it will have the same heavy human toll – https://theconversation.com/uk-moves-to-copy-australias-cruel-asylum-seeker-policy-and-it-will-have-the-same-heavy-human-toll-201390

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Cresswell, Adjunct professor, UNSW Sydney

Macquarie Island, around 1,500km southeast of Tasmania, is more than just a remote rocky outcrop. In fact, it’s the only piece of land on the planet formed completely from ocean floor, which rises above the waves to form peaks that teem with penguins and other bird species, some of them found nowhere else on Earth.

These are just some of the reasons why this unique island, and the seas that surround it, have globally significant conservation values. Our new independent assessment of these values forms the scientific evidence base of Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s announcement last month of plans to significantly increase protections for the waters surrounding Macquarie Island.

By comprehensively assessing the available data on the marine ecosystems and the many species that live on and around Macquarie Island, our report reveals a subantarctic environment that is crucial for breeding and feeding for millions of seabirds and thousands of marine mammals.

Macquarie Island and its surrounding seas (to a distance of 5.5km) are already protected as a Tasmanian reserve, and the area (this time including seas to a distance of 22km) is also a World Heritage Area. A Commonwealth marine park also covers most of the southeast quadrant of the island’s “economic exclusion zone”, including a sanctuary zone and two seafloor management zones.

The federal government’s proposed expansion of the marine park would cover the island’s entire economic exclusion zone, increasing the area of Australia’s marine sanctuaries by more than 388,000 square kilometres, an increase larger than the area of Germany.

An outstanding spectacle

Macquarie Island is the exposed crest of the 1,600km-long undersea Macquarie Ridge, which makes Macquarie Island the only piece of land in the world formed entirely of oceanic crust.

Macquarie Ridge is one of only three such ridges that impede the eastward flow of a current called the Antarctic Circumpolar Circulation, resulting in distinct differences between the west and east sides of the ridge, which are used in different ways by different species.

The oceanography is further divided north to south by two major ocean fronts, the Sub-Antarctic Front and the Polar Front, creating three distinct bodies of water. They are closer here than anywhere else in the Southern Ocean, and as they interact with the Macquarie Ridge create at least six different large-scale oceanographic habitats.

This creates an outstanding spectacle of wild, natural beauty and a diverse set of habitats supporting vast congregations of wildlife, including penguins and seals. Fifty-seven seabird species, including four species of penguins and four species of albatross, have been recorded on Macquarie Island, and 25 of these species have been observed breeding there. The royal penguin and the Macquarie Island imperial shag live nowhere else on Earth.

The ridge includes a series of undersea mountains that act as “stepping stones” linking subantarctic and polar animals on the sea floor, such as brittlestars.

Read more:
Enjoy them while you can? The ecotourism challenge facing Australia’s favourite islands

Needing more protection

Our report shows the area around Macquarie Island is not well represented by the current marine park. In particular, the entire area to the west, and most of the northern and southern parts of the Macquarie Ridge, are not protected by the current marine park, but will be included in the proposed expansion.

Our report also considers several options for protecting the area’s unique ecosystems and concludes that the most sensible approach, given the available data, would be to declare the whole area around the Macquarie Ridge as a marine park, increasing the protection outside the current sanctuary zone, while allowing the current fishery to continue in a habitat protection zone.

This provides the simplest, most expeditious reserve design that is relatively easy to implement, achieves environmental protection and sustainable fishing, recognises the importance of the entire Macquarie Island region, and provides the most resilience to climate change.

Direct human impacts in the area are predominantly due to fishing and marine debris, although climate change is an ever-present threat too. The fishery targets the deepwater Patagonian toothfish using bottom longlines, mostly in the central zone of the Macquarie Ridge. This fishery is generally well regarded for its best-practice fishing methods and commitment to positive environmental outcomes, and this fishing activity would continue under the new plans.

But if new fisheries were allowed to develop targeting midwater species, or new industries such as seabed mining were permitted, these could directly impact the seabirds, marine mammals and other species that live in these areas.

The proposal put forward by Minister Plibersek protects all of the Commonwealth waters in two different zones of a marine park, effectively tripling the size of the current marine park. It protects the marine domain and allows the current fishery to continue without significant changes to current practices or catches.

Restrictions on any potential future fisheries would be determined by the distribution of “sanctuary zones” which would preclude fishing, and “habitat/species zones”, which could accommodate sustainable fishing. Mining would be precluded under either category of protection.

Read more:
Disruption over Macquarie Island calls for some clever Antarctic thinking

What next?

The government’s proposal signals a clear priority for protection over development in this area. A period of public consultation on the proposal will commence in March. Any future development of the marine park would need to be orderly and careful, including prior consideration of environmental impacts. Any changes to the current fishery management arrangements should ensure that the changes maintain or enhance conditions for a long-term sustainable fishery.

More broadly, our report also demonstrates the potential for, and importance of, compiling the most up-to-date available data for any region prior to any formal review process to update Australia’s marine park network.

The authors thank Anthony D. M. Smith for his contribution to this article and the report on which it’s based.

Ian Cresswell received funding from the Australian Marine Conservation Society and the Pew Charitable Trusts.

Andrew John Constable has received Funding from the Australian Marine Conservation Society and Pew Charitable Trusts.

Nic Bax has received funding from the Australian Marine Conservation Society and the Pew Charitable Trusts

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

– ref. Penguin paradise and geological freak: why Macquarie Island deserves a bigger marine park – https://theconversation.com/penguin-paradise-and-geological-freak-why-macquarie-island-deserves-a-bigger-marine-park-201368

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Xanthe Mallett, Forensic Criminologist, University of Newcastle

Madeleine McCann, the British girl who vanished as a three-year-old from her family’s holiday apartment in Portugal in 2007, was back in the news recently as yet another person claimed to be her. It’s a phenomenon fuelled by social media – in 2020 a TikTok trend emerged in which women uploaded images to compare themselves to Madeleine.

The latest claim was quickly debunked by police, but it raises an interesting question: why do some cases stick in the public consciousness? What generates the ongoing engagement and interest?

Put this into the context that two people under the age of 18 go missing every hour in Australia. That’s 48 every single day.

In the United Kingdom, of the 353,000 missing person incidents reported annually, almost 215,000 relate to children. Of these, 98% will be found within 2 days, while the other 2% will remain missing for more than a week – and, as in Madeleine’s case, some will stay missing for years.

The case of Madeleine McCann

I was living in the UK when Madeleine was abducted, and remember vividly the photos of her, and the constant live news coverage from the scene.

And I remember the interviews with Madeleine’s parents. I was working in a forensic centre, and I can recall conversations with criminal psychologists and forensic practitioners about the parents – we were all of the same mind. They were behaving exactly as parents would if their child had been abducted. Their body language, verbal cues, everything said they were telling the truth.

But their innocence was not accepted by everybody, and some people were suspicious because of the parents’ apparent determination to stay in the spotlight. For me, the reason was clear – keeping Madeleine on page 1, at the beginning of every news bulletin, constantly in the public eye and on the public’s mind, was their best chance of getting her back. They were trying to use the world’s media to help find their daughter.

Sadly, it failed, and we still don’t know what happened to Madeleine, or why, and ultimately who is responsible.

But it was that media strategy, fuelled by the parents’ intelligence, perseverance and strength, that made Madeleine a worldwide story. Add to that the pictures of Madeleine constantly circulated in the media, an innocent, angelic, blonde-haired child, and she has become part of the world’s collective conscience.

Madeleine is what social scientists would call an “ideal victim”, a term coined by criminologist Nils Christie as “a person or category of individuals who, when hit by crime, most readily are given the complete and legitimate status of being a victim”.

Once her face was implanted on our public consciousness, the story played into every parent’s worst nightmare: their child being taken by a predator, without leaving a trace, and never seen again.

Madeleine McCann and the ideal victim

It wasn’t that the circumstances around Madeleine’s disappearance were different to others, but the family that changed the script by how they responded. That’s why the whole world knows her name.

The term “ideal victim” can be a little confronting, and criminologists are not saying they are a good choice – but rather that the victim wasn’t engaging in any risky behaviour, they weren’t involved in any criminal activity, they were in essence totally blameless for what happened to them.

This is complicated framing, as people’s unconscious and conscious bias plays into how we judge a victim’s culpability, and ultimately how much we care about them as a victim or survivor.

I’ve spoken about this “weighing of human worth” and our associated interest in some cases over others before. In an earlier piece for The Conversation , I discussed the notion of “White women’s syndrome” and why there is always more media and public interest when a young, attractive, Caucasian female vanishes, when compared to a woman of colour for example.

I used the media storm around Gabby Petito to illustrate this: Gabby was another “ideal victim” – young, innocent, vulnerable, and the target of an abusive, controlling man.

Read more:
The Gabby Petito case has been exploited by the media. We need to stop treating human tragedy as entertainment

But how has that level of public attention on the case, dissection almost, expressed itself? Well, if you type ‘Madeleine McCann’ into a Google search, you will return around 26,200,000 hits.

Channel 9 created a podcast, which releases new episodes every time there is a “breakthrough”. Dozens of other podcast series have produced episodes on the case.

A comparable Australian story

William Tyrrell is Australia’s Madeleine. William was also three years old when he vanished from his step-grandmother’s home in New South Wales in 2014. Like Madeleine, he vanished without a trace, and there were images of William available in the media, showing a gorgeous little boy, the very picture of innocence.

Who can forget the little boy in the Spider-Man suit? Another ideal victim, and one the media – and the public – took to their hearts.

But not all children get the same attention. Do you know the name of Bradford Pholi, a ten-year-old Indigenous boy who disappeared after leaving his family home in Sydney on Boxing Day in 1982?

It’s likely Bradford was murdered, and a $100,000 reward was offered in 2009. While his siblings remain hopeful one day they will find out what happened to their brother, I doubt his face is one you will recognise.

I have never seen it age-progressed to see what Bradford would look like now, as has been done for both Madeleine and William.

Stories about First Nations children do not generate the same attention as that seen for white children, a sad truth and one that must be recognised and faced. Why are we less engaged with stories like Bradford’s? This is a question I wrestle with as a criminologist and as a person.

Madeleine’s disappearance changed missing children’s cases forever

One positive that can be taken away from Madeleine’s case is that the media strategy used by her parents has changed the ways families of missing children interact with the media.

To gain interest and keep the search front and centre for the missing children, the family has to engage and face the media pack, as hard as that is under such an extremely stressful situation. They need to be the voice for their missing child.

Read more:
Cleo Smith has been gone almost a week. Why missing children cases grip the nation

It worked in the case of Cleo Smith, the four-year-old who was abducted while camping with her mother and de facto father in regional Western Australia in 2021. Again, the world watched and breathed a collective sigh of relief when 18 days later Cleo was found.

Sadly, the media strategy has not paid off, yet, in Madeleine’s case, but the world lives in hope that one day we will find out what happened to her.

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

– ref. The case of missing Madeleine McCann still grips the world – but why? – https://theconversation.com/the-case-of-missing-madeleine-mccann-still-grips-the-world-but-why-200727

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna DeMello, Research Fellow, University of Otago

New Zealand’s smokefree law, which came into effect in January, introduces several world-first endgame measures, including removing most nicotine from smoked products, disallowing product sales to anyone born on or after January 1 2009, and a major reduction in the number of tobacco retail outlets nationwide (from about 6000 to 600).

Several studies reporting associations between greater retailer density and higher tobacco use among both adults and adolescents support this measure.

As researchers working on these issues, we were keen to know how people who smoke perceived the retail reduction measure, and how they would respond and adapt once it was implemented.

Our open-access research unearthed new insights into the potential effects fewer outlets would have on people who smoke. We were particularly interested in speaking with Māori, who bear a disproportionate burden of harm from smoking.

We interviewed 24 adult participants from Dunedin (Otepoti) and Hamilton (Kirikiriroa). We used web-based, interactive maps to illustrate the potentially large drop in retailers in these locations, compared with the current number of outlets. For Dunedin, the number of outlets in our scenario dropped from around 80 to just 3.

Read more:
New Zealand is introducing law to create a smokefree generation. Here are 6 reasons to support this policy

Impacts on daily life, wellbeing and equity

Although many expected to be able to purchase tobacco during regular shopping trips, people who did not live near a designated retailer felt the changes would disrupt their lives. They raised concerns about fuel costs, travel difficulties and risk of increased judgement.

While some expected to budget more carefully in response to the changes, others anticipated purchasing tobacco in bulk (buying a week’s supply at once) in the short term, if they could afford it. Some worried that having extra tobacco on hand could increase smoking.

As discussions evolved, many participants thought they would reduce their smoking, or quit, as access became less convenient. They anticipated better health and felt becoming smokefree would foster their physical and mental wellbeing. As one explained:

It would be a really good way for me to cut down. I’m over it … Why do I put something into my body that’s harming me? Self-harm, isn’t it?

Nonetheless, others were adamant their smoking would not change, either because they thought addiction ruled this out or because they resisted change imposed by others.

Most thought the measure would help people planning to quit and those who had recently given up smoking, as it would make tobacco less ubiquitous. They also expected reduced availability to prevent youth uptake, an outcome they strongly supported.

Participants anticipated youth would experience a “healthier, better world” where tobacco no longer threatened their wellbeing, independence and resilience.

Yet many remained concerned about people who had smoked longer-term and felt they would struggle to quit and could perhaps sacrifice necessities (food and power) to continue smoking. One said:

The younger generation … target them, that’s great, but people who have been smoking their entire lives … I think it’s extremely unfair for them.

A large majority believed the changes would burden people experiencing material hardship and mental ill health. They thought these people would experience reduced physical, mental and whānau wellbeing. Participants strongly endorsed greater community-level support, which they thought could help people managing difficult life circumstances.

Read more:
Forget tobacco industry arguments about choice. Here’s what young people think about NZ’s smokefree generation policy

Taking a wider approach

Participants’ contributions illustrate the complex and contradictory responses smokefree policies elicit. While they supported quitting (many participants hoped to eventually become smokefree) and preventing youth uptake, their concerns illustrate another, less comfortable perspective which sees the new measures as a potential threat to those who are vulnerable and addicted.

Our findings highlight the importance of community mobilisation, enhanced cessation support and strong Māori leadership, as signalled in the Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan.

In particular, the responses highlight the need for approaches that go beyond biomedical, health-focused thinking. Addressing the concerns raised in our research could assuage our participants’ worries and minimise maladaptive responses – but only if the approaches used are comprehensive and culturally meaningful.

Anna DeMello 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. NZ’s smokefree law will reduce the number of tobacco retailers – here’s what people who smoke think of that – https://theconversation.com/nzs-smokefree-law-will-reduce-the-number-of-tobacco-retailers-heres-what-people-who-smoke-think-of-that-200436

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Greening, Professor, Microbiology, Monash University

It may sound surprising, but when times are tough and there is no other food available, some soil bacteria can consume traces of hydrogen in the air as an energy source.

In fact, bacteria remove a staggering 70 million tonnes of hydrogen yearly from the atmosphere, a process that literally shapes the composition of the air we breathe.

We have isolated an enzyme that enables some bacteria to consume hydrogen and extract energy from it, and found it can produce an electric current directly when exposed to even minute amounts of hydrogen.

As we report in a new paper in Nature, the enzyme may have considerable potential to power small, sustainable air-powered devices in future.

Bacterial genes contain the secret for turning air into electricity

Prompted by this discovery, we analysed the genetic code of a soil bacterium called Mycobacterium smegmatis, which consumes hydrogen from air.

Written into these genes is the blueprint for producing the molecular machine responsible for consuming hydrogen and converting it into energy for the bacterium. This machine is an enzyme called a “hydrogenase”, and we named it Huc for short.

Hydrogen is the simplest molecule, made of two positively charged protons held together by a bond formed by two negatively charged electrons. Huc breaks this bond, the protons part ways, and the electrons are released.

In the bacteria, these free electrons then flow into a complex circuit called the “electron transport chain”, and are harnessed to provide the cell with energy.

Flowing electrons are what electricity is made of, meaning Huc directly converts hydrogen into electrical current.

Hydrogen represents only 0.00005% of the atmosphere. Consuming this gas at these low concentrations is a formidable challenge, which no known catalyst can achieve. Furthermore, oxygen, which is abundant in the atmosphere, poisons the activity of most hydrogen-consuming catalysts.

Isolating the enzyme that allows bacteria to live on air

We wanted to know how Huc overcomes these challenges, so we set out to isolate it from M. smegmatis cells.

The process for doing this was complicated. We first modified the genes in M. smegmatis that allow the bacteria to make this enzyme. In doing this we added a specific chemical sequence to Huc, which allowed us to isolate it from M. smegmatis cells.

Read more:
Antarctic bacteria live on air and make their own water using hydrogen as fuel

Getting a good look at Huc wasn’t easy. It took several years and quite a few experimental dead ends before we finally isolated a high-quality sample of the ingenious enzyme.

However, the hard work was worth it, as the Huc we eventually produced is very stable. It withstands temperatures from 80℃ down to –80℃ without activity loss.

The molecular blueprint for extracting hydrogen from air

With Huc isolated, we set about studying it in earnest, to discover what exactly the enzyme is capable of. How can it turn the hydrogen in the air into a sustainable source of electricity?

Remarkably, we found that even when isolated from the bacteria, Huc can consume hydrogen at concentrations far lower even than the tiny traces in the air. In fact, Huc still consumed whiffs of hydrogen too faint to be detected by our gas chromatograph, a highly sensitive instrument we use to measure gas concentrations.

We also found Huc is entirely uninhibited by oxygen, a property not seen in other hydrogen-consuming catalysts.

To assess its ability to convert hydrogen to electricity, we used a technique called electrochemistry. This showed Huc can convert minute concentrations of hydrogen in air directly into electricity, which can power an electrical circuit. This is a remarkable and unprecedented achievement for a hydrogen-consuming catalyst.

We used several cutting-edge methods to study how Huc does this at the molecular level. These included advanced microscopy (cryogenic electron microscopy) and spectroscopy to determine its atomic structure and electrical pathways, pushing boundaries to produce the most highly resolved enzyme structure yet reported by this method.

Enzymes could use air to power the devices of tomorrow

It’s early days for this research, and several technical challenges need to be overcome to realise the potential of Huc.

For one thing, we will need to significantly increase the scale of Huc production. In the lab we produce Huc in milligram quantities, but we want to scale this up to grams and ultimately kilograms.

However, our work demonstrates that Huc functions like a “natural battery” producing a sustained electrical current from air or added hydrogen.

As a result, Huc has considerable potential in developing small, sustainable air-powered devices as an alternative to solar power.

The amount of energy provided by hydrogen in the air would be small, but likely sufficient to power a biometric monitor, clock, LED globe or simple computer. With more hydrogen, Huc produces more electricity and could potentially power larger devices.

Another application would be the development of Huc-based bioelectric sensors for detecting hydrogen, which could be incredibly sensitive. Huc could be invaluable for detecting leaks in the infrastructure of our burgeoning hydrogen economy or in a medical setting.

In short, this research shows how a fundamental discovery about how bacteria in soils feed themselves can lead to a reimagining of the chemistry of life. Ultimately it may also lead to the development of technologies for the future.

Chris Greening receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health & Medical Research Council, Human Frontiers Science Program, and Australian Antarctic Division.

Ashleigh Kropp receives funding from the Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship from the Australian Government.

Rhys Grinter receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), and the National Health the Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

– ref. Electricity from thin air: an enzyme from bacteria can extract energy from hydrogen in the atmosphere – https://theconversation.com/electricity-from-thin-air-an-enzyme-from-bacteria-can-extract-energy-from-hydrogen-in-the-atmosphere-200432

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Patrick F Walsh, Professor Intelligence and Security Studies, Charles Sturt University

A recent Wall Street Journal article reported on new, classified intelligence from the US Department of Energy about the origins of COVID. It concluded with “low confidence” that the pandemic may have been due to a lab leak in Wuhan, China, rather than a natural disease transmission from animal to human.

The report is the latest chapter in a long saga about the origins of the pandemic, involving conflicting assessments from intelligence, policy and scientific communities around the globe.

The debate over the origins of COVID began early in the pandemic, with a lot of pressure being placed on the intelligence community by then-US President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to lay blame on the Chinese government.

In May 2021, the Biden administration tried to resolve some of the conflicting intelligence and data points about the origins of COVID by tasking the US intelligence community to do a 90-day review on the available information.

An unclassified version of this review was then released in October 2021. It was published by the peak body within the US intelligence community – the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

The report shows a consensus among eight US intelligence agencies and the National Intelligence Council (which provides longer-term strategic analysis for the president) that COVID was not a bioterrorism incident.

However, there was disagreement among the agencies around the two most probable origins of COVID:

• it was the result of animal-to-human transmission

• it was the result of an accidental laboratory leak, likely from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

No agency was named in the unclassified report, though four agencies, as well as the National Intelligence Council, have reportedly concluded (also with low confidence) that the origins were from natural transmission. Two others (the FBI and Department of Energy) have now assessed it as a lab leak. Two agencies remain undecided, including, reportedly, the CIA.

Why is intelligence conflicting?

This lack of consensus among intelligence agencies and low levels of confidence on their assessments are due to many factors.

The variations in analytical judgements are mostly due to how each agency interprets what are, at best, fragmented intelligence sources. There’s also the question of how intelligence analysts comprehend complicated scientific research.

Several scientific studies that examined environmental testing for COVID at the live animal and seafood market in Wuhan and early patient cases living nearby have provided strong evidence of a natural transmission of the virus. That is, the scientific evidence leads to the market as the probable epicentre of the epidemic.

Read more:
The COVID lab leak theory is dead. Here’s how we know the virus came from a Wuhan market

Yet, the scientific and epidemiological data itself is also incomplete. In particular, analysts haven’t identified which animal the virus likely “jumped from” to infect humans. More genetic data and a better understanding of how coronaviruses are transmitted naturally are required to fill the information gaps, notably in the initial cases in Wuhan.

According to US officials, Beijing has not been willing to provide full access to data requests from Western governments – or to the World Health Organization.

What needs to change before the next pandemic

The Department of Energy report highlights an even greater issue that has received less attention. The US intelligence community and its other “Five Eyes” partners (Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand) must improve their intelligence collection methods and analysis of health security threats and dangers, including from potential pandemics.

Four things will help improve the capabilities of the intelligence community and hopefully bring greater confidence in their assessments of the causes of future health emergencies and pandemics.

1. Better health intelligence collection and analysis

As pandemics become more frequent, our intelligence agencies need better risk, threat and hazard assessment methodologies to drive more robust, evidence-based collection and analysis of intelligence.

This means improving ways to combine traditional intelligence sources (often qualitative in nature) with scientific evidence to better assess the potential intent, capability and impact of threats and health hazards.

2. Fostering stronger ties with the scientific community

The intricacy of future pandemic threats and possible weaponisation of biotechnology will require intelligence agencies to foster a more purposeful and consistent interaction with the scientific community.

The US intelligence community has a track record here, but it and other Five Eyes countries will require even more strategic, coordinated outreach from the relatively closed intelligence world to the scientific community.

Greater workforce expertise in microbiology, genetics, virology and public health is also required within the intelligence community.

3. Creating a robust national health security strategy

Each agency cannot feasibly develop the capabilities to improve its intelligence collection and analysis on its own. A whole-of-government approach is required to iron out each agency’s roles, functions and mandates for future health security risks.

We advocate for a national health security strategy, much like the national cybersecurity strategies in each Five Eyes country, to improve governance and coordination across intelligence agencies in the health security space.

4. Conducting a 9/11 commission-style review

Lastly, to develop stronger post-COVID national health security measures, we need full independent reviews of how the intelligence community and key public health agencies worked throughout the pandemic in the US and its allies.

Such reviews could include what was done well and lessons to be learned that can be fed into national health security strategies.

Ideally, a review would also examine any evidence of politicising intelligence. Politics have always influenced intelligence gathering and analysis, not just during COVID.

For example, the assessment of whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction before the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 shows how politics can negatively affect the ability of intelligence agencies to provide independent, non-biased advice to policy makers.

Recent calls for the equivalent of a 9/11 commission into COVID so far have not gone anywhere in Washington. It is not too late for such a review to take place. But realistically, given the fractured political climate in the US, the possibility of establishing an independent commission seems more difficult than in the other Five Eyes countries.

What this means is that we’re missing an opportunity to improve our intelligence agencies, which is acutely needed before the next global pandemic event.

Read more:
It’s getting harder for scientists to collaborate across borders – that’s bad when the world faces global problems like pandemics and climate change

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. Disputes over COVID’s origins reveal an intelligence community in disarray. Here are 4 fixes we need before the next pandemic – https://theconversation.com/disputes-over-covids-origins-reveal-an-intelligence-community-in-disarray-here-are-4-fixes-we-need-before-the-next-pandemic-201166

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sora Park, Professor of Communication, News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra

Australian media have been widely criticised for not representing the diversity of the community they speak to and write for – nor, importantly, the people they report on. Our latest research shows that while the news industry is beginning to address its lack of diversity, there is still much work to be done.

Findings are showcased in the Valuing Diversity in News and Newsrooms report, released today. The analysis is based on a national online survey of 2,266 Australians and 196 journalists, combined with in-depth interviews with 27 journalists about their views on diversity in the news and in newsrooms.

Australia is a multicultural country. Half (48%) the population has at least one parent born overseas. Almost one-third (28%) were themselves born overseas. One in four lives in a non-English-speaking household.

However, the report shows only 39% of Australians believe everyone is treated equally, regardless of their ethnic or cultural background.

A key reason respondents may feel this is a sense of not being seen or heard in the news. Feeling equally valued and heard is an essential ingredient of social cohesion.

However, when asked about fairness and amount of coverage, less than half (46%) say the news covers culturally diverse people fairly. Only 44% say there is enough coverage of issues relevant to them, while 41% say the news is impartial and unbiased when reporting on these groups. These figures drop significantly among audiences from non-European, non-Anglo or Indigenous backgrounds.

Most Australians consider the news media to be doing a good job of covering the most important stories of the day (76%) and reporting stories accurately (70%). However, only around half say that news organisations are doing a good job of giving voice to the underrepresented (54%), with 38% saying they are doing a bad job at this.

Journalists are generally critical of the state of diversity in the industry. Only 30% of journalists say there is enough ethnic or cultural diversity in their news organisation. Around one in ten say they have experienced discrimination based on their ethnic or cultural background, and 47% of women journalists say they have experienced discrimination because of their gender. Only around half say their news organisation is doing a good job of producing news content for ethnically diverse audiences.

Why are we not seeing diversity in the news? Some of the answers can be found in the structure, practices and cultures of news organisations.

First, there are simply too few people from different cultural backgrounds in newsrooms across Australia.

According to Census 2021, only about 9% of journalists are from a non-Anglo or non-European background. A study that analysed 103 news programs over two weeks in June 2022 found 78% of presenters, commentators and reporters had an Anglo-Celtic background.

Second, competing news values often push diversity down the priority list.

Most journalists we interviewed agreed inclusive reporting is good journalism. In the survey, we asked journalists which area of newsroom diversity they would like to prioritise: “ethnic and cultural diversity” was ranked the top.

However, when they are on the job and making reporting decisions, understandably they prioritise relevance to their audience (91%) first. Compared to other news values such as exclusivity (47%), capturing attention (42%) or surprise and novelty (38%), only 29% say it is very or extremely important that news includes voices from multicultural communities.

Third, the “glass ceiling and sticky floor” phenomenon is persistent. We found people from ethnically or culturally diverse backgrounds seeking a career in journalism continue to face discrimination.

Overall, 43% of journalists agree there are barriers to getting a job in their organisation because of ethnic or cultural background. And the majority (69%) of journalists from non-Anglo/non-European backgrounds say they have experienced barriers to career progression because of their ethnic or cultural background.

More than two-thirds “somewhat” or “strongly agree” their organisation’s junior level is doing a good job with employee diversity (67%). In stark contrast, only 23% “somewhat” or “strongly agree” that senior levels at their organisation are doing well with employee diversity.

Fourth, there is not enough training and support from the organisation.

Over half (52%) of journalists say their news organisation has policies relating to language use about ethnically diverse communities. About half (49%) also say their organisation collects or monitors staff diversity. However, only 39% received training on how to cover issues of diversity in the past year.

The journalists we interviewed cautioned against inclusion as a “box-ticking” exercise, and labelling people from diverse backgrounds. A journalist from an Asian background talked about an inclusivity workshop where participants were all non-white, emphasising the importance of making sure journalists from all cultural backgrounds receive adequate training.

News organisations have made significant efforts to improve newsroom diversity in recent years. Despite this, we still have a long way to go in shifting the culture, removing unconscious bias and making space for journalists from diverse cultural backgrounds.

Trust and engagement with the news media are directly related to audiences’ perceptions of adequate and fair representation. So for news organisations seeking to regain audience trust, it is vital to have journalists from diverse cultural backgrounds telling stories from their experience.

Sora Park receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Google News Initiative, Australian Community Media and Australia Council for the Arts.

Jee Young Lee receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Google News Initiative, Australian Community Media and Australia Council for the Arts.

Kieran McGuinness has received funding from Google News Initiative and the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

– ref. Australia’s media improve on diversity – but there’s still a long way to go – https://theconversation.com/australias-media-improve-on-diversity-but-theres-still-a-long-way-to-go-200452

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Malouff, Associate Professor, School of Behavioural, Cognitive and Social Sciences, University of New England

You have made a momentous decision: you will seek psychological treatment for your depression, anxiety, substance abuse, or other mental health issue.

Your mind then may turn to the question of what type of treatment would best suit you. To even ask this sophisticated question, you need to realise there are various types of psychological treatment. To make a wise choice, you must understand what each type of therapy provides.

Let’s look at several types of psychotherapy (also known as talking therapy) that have the potential to help with almost any mental health problem.

Read more:
Think therapy is navel-gazing? Think again

1. Cognitive behaviour therapy

Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is a common type of therapy where the therapist explores the thoughts and behaviours that relate to your therapy goal.

Let’s suppose you have been feeling depressed for months. Relevant thoughts might be that no one likes you and that you are worthless. Relevant behaviours might include staying in your home and avoiding contact with others.

The therapist would likely help you challenge the accuracy and usefulness of those thoughts and find replacement thoughts. The therapist might encourage you to do more for fun and to interact more with others.

Read more:
Explainer: what is cognitive behaviour therapy?

2. Acceptance and commitment therapy

In acceptance and commitment therapy, you would instead be asked to accept your negative thoughts as yours (regardless of whether they are accurate) and also accept your negative emotions.

The therapist would encourage you to look at your thoughts and emotions as separate from you so you can examine them more objectively. Acceptance might reduce your negative feelings about yourself.

The therapist would explore your values and encourage you to commit to acting according to them. If you value kindness, for instance, the therapist might encourage you to show kindness to others.

3. Psychodynamic therapy

A psychodynamic therapist would help you explore your childhood, searching for traumas and difficulties with your parents.

If you felt unloved by your parents as a child, you would consider whether your parents provide a fair representation of the entire world.

You might consider to what extent you deserve love now as an adult. You might also gain insight into how your early experiences colour your current expectations, and affect your emotions and behaviour.

You might find yourself transferring to the therapist your feelings toward your parents and then realise that others are not your parents and you are no longer an unloved child.

4. Narrative therapy

In narrative therapy, you would explore the stories of your life, particularly the stories that seem to persist.

If you were an outsider in school, reluctant to join in social activities, you may think of yourself as a loner. As an adult, even though you engage fully and successfully in social interactions at work, you may continue to think of yourself as a loner.

In other words, the story you tell yourself remains unchanged despite your social success at work, and you feel depressed about being alone.

In becoming aware of the story of your life, you create distance from the story and you may find ways to change the story (the narrative). In essence, you rewrite the story in a realistic way to develop toward being the person you want to be.

Read more:
Psychologists are starting to talk publicly about their own mental illnesses – and patients can benefit

5. Person-centred therapy

In person-centered therapy, sometimes called supportive counselling, the therapist would listen attentively, try hard to understand life as you experience it and try to understand and even feel your emotions.

The therapist would show caring and an interest in helping you, in the expectation that you can find your own way to overcome feeling depressed.

A mix of styles to suit you

You can ask potential therapists what type of therapy they provide. Many will say they are eclectic, meaning they try to choose methods to suit each client and specific problem. They may combine methods of different therapy types.

They may also use popular methods such as mindfulness training that do not fit any specific therapy type. Mindfulness training involves focusing on your breathing and being aware of the here and now.

You can request an eclectic therapist to provide a certain type of therapy or certain therapy methods. Once the therapist gets to know you, you can discuss your preferences and decide on the therapy methods to use.

Read more:
Meditation and mindfulness offer an abundance of health benefits and may be as effective as medication for treating certain conditions

How can you decide which one?

You might wonder which type of therapy usually works best. The answer is unclear. Much depends on the specific client, the problem and the therapist.

Most types of therapy work moderately well for treating people with depression. Psychotherapy also appears to be reasonably effective for other types of psychological problems.

CBT has the strongest evidence for treating a broad range of psychological problems (including post-traumatic stress disorder). However, CBT has the most evidence in part because it is heavily studied (for example to treat specific phobias).

Acceptance and commitment therapy is also backed by substantial evidence, as is psychodynamic therapy.

The effects of narrative therapy and person-centred therapy have not been studied so much.

Some people, including those with depression or psychosis, can benefit by receiving psychotherapy and taking medication prescribed by a GP or psychiatrist.

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

John Malouff 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. I think I need therapy. Here are 5 types of psychotherapy to help with almost any mental health problem – https://theconversation.com/i-think-i-need-therapy-here-are-5-types-of-psychotherapy-to-help-with-almost-any-mental-health-problem-199197

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Rae, Honorary Professorial Fellow, School of Chemistry, The University of Melbourne

Can bushfire smoke reduce the concentration of ozone in the stratosphere? A decade ago, we might have been sceptical. But there’s a growing body of research showing a clear link.

Last year, MIT expert Susan Solomon and colleagues published a groundbreaking study showing the 900,000 tonnes of bushfire smoke and particles emitted during Australia’s 2019–20 Black Summer did, in fact, thin out the ozone umbrella that protects us.

Ozone floats around 20–25 kilometres above our heads, acting like airborne sunscreen. Its concentration is tiny – up to 15 parts per million – but it is highly effective at blocking damaging ultraviolet-B rays from the sun. Without this layer, many plants would die, while humans and other animals would be afflicted with skin cancers.

The Black Summer fires burned so much forest and scrub across the country they produced massive pyrocumulus clouds. The fires were making their own weather, sending plumes of smoke into the higher reaches of our atmosphere, where smoke particles interacted with ozone. That single Australian summer of fire took out 1% of the atmosphere’s ozone – damage that will take a decade to fix.

Now, Solomon’s researchers have found out how smoke actually does it. In their new research, they detail the chemistry involved. This research is important, as we enter what’s been dubbed the Pyrocene – the age of fire – with bushfires already growing in size and intensity as the world heats up.

So how does smoke break ozone?

Australians became all too familiar with the sight and smell of bushfire smoke over the Black Summer. But what’s in it?

Particles in bushfire smoke are carbonaceous, consisting of burnt and partly burnt vegetable material alongside sulfates – compounds which can be pumped into the atmosphere by volcanoes, fossil fuel burning, or bushfires.

The problem is, these carbonaceous particles bind well to substances like hydrogen chloride which comes from the chemical compounds found in living plants. Other compounds with chlorine are also involved in the smoke, such as the reactive chlorine nitrate and hypochlorous acid.

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

The tiny smoke particles act as transport, carrying these substances containing chlorine up higher and higher to the stratosphere. Once there, chlorine sets about destroying ozone, molecule by molecule. Each chlorine atom can take apart hundreds of ozone molecules, meaning a small amount can have a disproportionate impact.

To find this out, Solomon and her colleagues relied heavily on models of the atmospheric chemistry. Their results agreed well with experimental observations made by satellite. So, although the chemical interactions have not been fully shown, the overall picture is probably correct.

You might remember it was chlorine atoms at the heart of our fears about the hole in the ozone layer. Almost 50 years ago, scientists discovered our protective ozone layer was thinning – and connected it to the chlorine-dense chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) used in spray cans and refrigerators.

The area of greatest loss was dubbed the “ozone hole”, which still appears over Antarctica each year in spring in smaller form.

The way we responded to the loss of stratospheric ozone is remarkable, in retrospect. In 1987, nations agreed to the Montreal Protocol, banning CFC manufacture and use. It worked, and concentrations of ozone are now recovering by around 1% a year. That figure is about what was lost during the Black Summer.

What does this mean for the future?

It means the ozone layer will be slowly degraded by wildfire smoke. Fires burn in both northern and southern hemispheres, and their smoke is swept around the globe by natural processes. That means we’re likely to see falling ozone concentrations in new places rather than just around the South Pole. Affected areas would include the mid-latitudes around the equator, where billions of people live.

Ozone does replenish itself. It’s continuously formed and destroyed in the stratosphere. The net balance of these competing processes has – until now – been a steady but small concentration of ozone. This layer makes life possible by absorbing the worst of the ultraviolet light pouring down from the sun and giving us a measure of protection from skin-damaging radiation.

A hotter world is one with more fire in it, affecting areas like Siberian tundra, Californian mountains and Kenyan grasslands.

This research is yet another warning about the perils of unmitigated climate change. Bushfire smoke could undo the good work of the Montreal Protocol.

In retrospect, achieving this protocol seems relatively straightforward: ban one class of chemicals. To stop bushfire smoke eating away at our ozone umbrella means reversing climate change. And that is something we are struggling to do.

Read more:
Repairing ozone layer is also reducing CO₂ in the atmosphere – new study

Ian Rae was for 15 years a member of technical advisory groups to the Montreal Protocol

– ref. Bushfire smoke eats up the ozone protecting us from dangerous radiation. The damage will increase as the world heats up – https://theconversation.com/bushfire-smoke-eats-up-the-ozone-protecting-us-from-dangerous-radiation-the-damage-will-increase-as-the-world-heats-up-201375

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gavin R. Slemp, Associate Professor, Centre for Wellbeing Science, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne

About three quarters of Australian teachers experience substantial stress in a typical work week, according to a 2021 survey. Another 2019 Australian study showed more than half suffer from anxiety, and about one in five meet the criteria for moderate to severe depression.

It’s not surprising, then, that increasing numbers of teachers are leaving the profession. Meanwhile, enrolments for education degrees have been declining.

Teachers in Australia and around the world are under-resourced and burning out, reinforcing the urgent need for policy initiatives to improve their working conditions. But can anything else be done?

Our research shows one way teachers may be able to take more control over their wellbeing at work is by “job crafting”.

Read more:
Australia has a plan to fix its school teacher shortage. Will it work?

What is job crafting?

Job crafting is about making noticeable changes to your job to make it more engaging and meaningful. These are changes you make yourself of your own initiative and they can be small or large. The idea is employees “craft” their jobs so it more closely aligns with what they value and how they perceive themselves.

Job crafting emerged in management research in 2001, and has since been studied in a range of occupations. There are at least three different ways employees can craft their work:

• Task crafting is about changing the number, scope, sequence, or types of tasks in a job

• Relational crafting is about making changes to how you relate to people at work

• Cognitive crafting refers to changing how you interpret or think about your work.

Studies show job crafting is associated with employee wellbeing, engagement and performance. Studies also show when employees are trained to use job crafting strategies, they show increased performance and work engagement.

Read more:
Australian teachers are dissatisfied with their jobs but their sense of professional belonging is strong

Our research

In 2022, we conducted 46 in-depth interviews with teachers across all levels in Australia about how they used job crafting. Teachers told us they used job crafting in multiple ways, including by modifying the tasks they did with students and by involving other teachers in their classes.

One primary school teacher spoke about how he combined his hobby of playing cards with his maths lessons.

I bring a lot of those card games into class with the kids and we find the maths in the games […] I think they can definitely sense my passion for the games and that makes them more excited. I’ve had quite a few parents say, ‘My child now loves maths because of the way you play the games,’ which is really nice.

Another primary school teacher spoke of how they emphasised their love of reading in their teaching – and sought out new ways to read with their students through collaborating with other teachers.

Just because I love reading books, after lunch we might read a book, or go to another [teacher’s] class and read a book with their kids, and [that teacher] will come to mine. It means I get to meet new kids and they’ve got someone different in front of them, and my kids also have someone different in front of them.

A secondary teacher gave us another example of how they work with colleagues during the day, to change classroom dynamics:

I love saying to the other teachers, ‘Hey, do you want to drop into my class because I think you’ll like it’ or ‘This kid misses you, he hasn’t seen you in ages, do you want to come swing by?’ It’s so nice to have other adults in the room […] And [for] teachers that you have really good relationships with, you can then model what a healthy relationship looks like to the kids.

‘Helping human beings’

Other teachers spoke of how they used cognitive crafting by expanding their ideas of what they consider to be the role of a teacher. As one primary teacher noted:

I see myself as helping human beings grow rather than teaching academic knowledge.

A secondary teacher also talked of the importance of thinking beyond the daily “grind” of their job:

I think teachers can, especially when they’ve been teaching for a while, kind of get into a bit of a grind. And it’s just they see teaching as delivering content. But I don’t see it that way. To me, teaching is all about building relationships with my students and using the content as a vehicle to build those relationships and to hopefully get them to where they need to be in later life.

Cognitive strategies such as this are key to connecting the job to a larger purpose. This gives work more meaning, which is essential for employee wellbeing.

What helps job crafting?

Our interviewees also spoke of the things that helped and hindered their job crafting.

They told us having too many time pressures and administrative burdens made it difficult to try new approaches. They also said a lack of time, rigid systems, and a lack of autonomy within their schools made it difficult to be creative. One secondary teacher noted:

If you’ve been teaching for a while, or even if you’re a grad teacher, you spend a lot of time, you know, just surviving. Then to have the energy to think about changing things, even if it is for the better, it’s difficult.

Teachers said they needed time to reflect on their work. They also said they needed school leaders to support their ideas, so they felt safe and free to take risks, which research shows is important for job crafting.

One primary teacher noted how many teachers are fearful of being judged at work.

We preach mistakes being okay and risk-taking with our kids, but we don’t really with our staff. We like our staff to be neat and ordered and to tick the right boxes […]. So I think that whole idea of taking risks and challenging educational philosophies would allow people to be more curious in that space.

Job crafting works, but we need to do more

Our research shows teachers are using job crafting to make their jobs more manageable, more enjoyable and more effective.

They also told us the overall school environment can either support these different approaches – or make it too difficult to try.

While job crafting has significant potential to help teachers in stressful jobs, it is important to note that improving teacher wellbeing is a shared responsibility. And it is up to schools, government and the broader community to better support the important work teachers do.

Kelsey J. Lewis contributed to the research in this piece.

Gavin R. Slemp has previously participated in a research project that was partially funded by the Victorian Department of Education and Training’s Strengthening Teachers Initiative.

Dianne Vella-Brodrick and Jacqui Francis 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. Our research shows how ‘job crafting’ can help teachers manage and enjoy their stressful work – https://theconversation.com/our-research-shows-how-job-crafting-can-help-teachers-manage-and-enjoy-their-stressful-work-200087

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

Treasurer Jim Chalmers sparked a political row when he announced a tax hike on superannuation concessions for accounts with balances over $3 million, from 15% to 30%, to begin in 2025. Polling indicates the move has broad support from the public, although any change to super is always controversial. Opposition leader Peter Dutton has promised the change would be reversed by a Coalition government.

Mike Callaghan, a former treasury official, chaired the Retirement Income Review that was handed to the Morrison government in 2020.

Callaghan sees the Chalmers’ change to super as “an important step”.

“I think one of the most encouraging things is the fact that this issue regarding equity and sustainability of superannuation, and the measure, has taken place now because it’s a very controversial topic […] The fact that we have seen movement is very encouraging.”

“There’s a lot more that needs to be done in terms of improving the equity and sustainability of the retirement income system and superannuation in particular.

“The unfortunate thing is, given the controversy around it, it might kerb enthusiasm […] towards some more significant changes for some time. That could be the downside of this.”

The superannuation tax concessions are skewed heavily towards higher income earners. Observers have noted that superannuation has become an inheritance vehicle in many cases. Ageing Australians are passing their assets to family rather than using the “nest egg” for their retirement. Callaghan sees this as a “significant issue”.

“It’s fine if people want to leave an inheritance to their children, but what we’re seeing now is that’s not generally a conscious decision of people. We’re seeing across the system now, people not drawing [superannuation savings] down to use them for the intended purpose, which was to support the standard of living in retirement.

“The problem is […] that people don’t know what to do to make the best use of the assets they have in retirement. A lot of it is ignorance, a lot of it is confusion, a lot of it is that having a savings mentality has been drummed into them. Build up your nest egg. Don’t spend your nest egg.”

People need advice to navigate the system “and they’re not getting the advice. The biggest deficiency we’ve seen that’s leading to this outcome, I think, is that people don’t get advice. I think it’s about only 10% of retirees actually get advice entering retirement.

“They need a positive push that they do need advice. When you see the surveys of why people don’t get advice, they say ‘it’s too costly’ and they say, ‘but I don’t have that big financial asset, so I’m not one that has that need for financial advice’. There’s the other one of lack of trust.”

Home ownership is a major factor in what life will be like for retirees. “If you own your own house, you don’t have to pay rent and you have a substantial asset […] that you can draw on to support your retirement.”

But Callaghan doesn’t think younger people should be able to access their super for a house deposit. “While [having a home is] important, solving the problem of helping first home owners get into housing is not going to be solved by tweaks to the superannuation system. It’s not going to achieve its objective at all, as many people say, it’s likely to just add extra pressure to house prices and there is a cost, this very significant cost to the individual of letting them access superannuation.”

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Chair of Retirement Income Review, Mike Callaghan, on reforming superannuation – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-chair-of-retirement-income-review-mike-callaghan-on-reforming-superannuation-201393

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giselle Newton, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

Last week, the Queensland government accepted in principle recommendations from a 2022 inquiry into the rights of donor-conceived people.

Donor conception is a technique to facilitate pregnancy using donated sperm and/or eggs.

Queensland is among the least progressive jurisdictions in Australia on donor conception. To date, it has no legislation governing donor conception, despite a senate inquiry recommending in 2011 that jurisdictions which didn’t yet have a statutory scheme in place should establish one “as a matter of priority”.

The government’s response to the inquiry indicated it supports allowing donor-conceived people to know the identity of their donor and siblings once they turn 18, regardless of when they were born.

In 2016, Victoria passed legislation enabling donor-conceived people to access identifying information about their donor. South Australia is also currently considering amendments to improve the operation of its donor conception register, and Western Australia is developing new legislation following a 2019 independent review.

Here’s why the Queensland government should move to implement the recommendations of the inquiry as soon as practicable.

Changing attitudes

Donor conception has been practised in Australia since at least the 1940s. Historically, doctors promised donors anonymity and encouraged parents to keep their treatment a secret.

But attitudes have changed. We now know anonymity isn’t in the best interests of donor-conceived people. Best practice is to allow donor-conceived people to have identifying information about their donors, regardless of when they were born.

Identifying information includes the donor’s full name, and is in addition to non-identifying information already provided such as cultural background, occupation and physical features. Many donors now also support this.

Read more:
Victoria’s world-first change to share sperm or egg donors’ names with children

Since 2004, ethical guidelines by Australia’s peak medical and health research body have prohibited the anonymous donation of sperm and eggs. However, these guidelines don’t have the legal force of legislation and don’t have an impact on those conceived before 2004.

Research with donor-conceived people, and evidence provided to parliamentary inquiries, has shown fertility clinics are often unable and/or unwilling to provide accurate information. This might include, for example, denying donor-conceived people access to donor conception records even when donors have consented, and giving incorrect information about siblings.

Over the years, many donor conception records have been modified or destroyed. This has often occurred to protect anonymity, but is also due to questionable past practices such as sperm mixing, donors’ identities not being verified, and recruitment of medical students in exchange for course credits.

5 reasons for urgent reform

Establishing a centralised, government-held register would bring Queensland in line with other jurisdictions that already recognise the rights of donor-conceived people. This includes Victoria, South Australia, NSW (for those born after 2010), and Western Australia (for those born after 2004).

This will also help pave the way for an equitable national standard and a national donor conception register, an approach supported by the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand.

There are five reasons legislating this as soon as possible in Queensland is essential.

1. Legislation needs to respond to technological advances. Donor-conceived people are already able to identify donors through informal channels following the rapid growth of direct-to-consumer DNA testing, coupled with social media. But DNA data is highly sensitive and donor-conceived people should have official pathways to information that don’t require them to exchange their personal data for information to large corporations.

2. Donor-conceived people who find out about their conception during early childhood have more positive attitudes towards their conception and better wellbeing compared to donor-conceived people who discover later in life. One of the inquiry’s recommendations was that birth certificates be annotated when a person is donor-conceived. This would discourage deception. The UK government is currently considering allowing donor-conceived people to contact their donor before 18.

3. Many donor-conceived people want to meet their donor and donor siblings. In everyday conversations, we often discuss our families, genetics, and resemblance. It’s unsurprising that donor-conceived people are interested in knowing about their genetic heritage to understand themselves and their cultural background. Knowing who one’s siblings are is also important to avoid sexual relationships.

4. Dealing with health issues often requires knowledge of one’s genetic heritage. If a donor-conceived person learns of a genetic condition, they may want to notify their donor and siblings.

5. Many donors want to find out about, and meet, their donor-conceived (adult) children. Many donors make themselves identifiable to their donor-conceived children. Reasons may include believing the donor-conceived person is entitled to information about their identity, wanting to provide avenues to seek information, or curiosity about how many people were conceived following their donation and their identities.

Some people have concerns about removing anonymity. But the conditions of anonymity promised by doctors were never legally binding. This legislation is retrospectively being applied to a period when there was no legislation.

Another concern is that it could jeopardise the number of people willing to donate sperm or eggs. But research suggests shifts from anonymous to identifiable donation aren’t detrimental to donor numbers. Rather, the type of people who donate changes. For example, this may encourage more donors in their 30s rather than late teens or early 20s.

Read more:
DNA test kits are changing donor-conceived families

Donor-conceived advocacy

Donor-conceived people have long been speaking out to agitate for reform in donor conception.

This reform is the result of decades of advocacy, and represents a key moment to enshrine donor-conceived people’s rights in legislation.

If this article raises issues for you and you need support, please contact Donor Conceived Australia.

Giselle Newton received funding under the Australian government’s Research Training Program. Giselle holds an appointment as Adjunct Associate Lecturer at the Centre for Social Research in Health at UNSW Sydney. Giselle is a donor-conceived woman and is a member of Donor Conceived Australia. Giselle contributed to the Inquiry into Matters Relating to Donor Conception Information 2022 (QLD).

Caitlin Macmillan has received Australian Government’s Research Training Program funding. Caitlin contributed to the Inquiry into Matters Relating to Donor Conception Information 2022 (Qld) and the Inquiry into Assisted Reproductive Treatment Practices in Victoria 2020 (Vic.)

Katharine Gelber has received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia. She contributed to the Inquiry into Matters Relating to Donor Conception Information 2022 (Qld).

– ref. Qld agrees to allow donor-conceived people the right to know the identity of their donor. Here’s why it’s important – https://theconversation.com/qld-agrees-to-allow-donor-conceived-people-the-right-to-know-the-identity-of-their-donor-heres-why-its-important-201081

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giuseppe Carabetta, Associate Professor, University of Technology Sydney

The court case against federal independent parliamentarian Monique Ryan by her former chief of staff Sally Rugg will, according to Rugg’s lawyers, open the door to legal action “by every Australian worker experiencing exploitation because of a contractual obligation to perform undefined ‘reasonable additional’ hours”.

Given the pecularities of the case, that’s unlikely. But the case will put the spotlight on an important, but rarely tested, question of what “reasonable” overtime means.

Rugg is seeking compensation in the Federal Court for “adverse action” by Ryan against her for refusing to work more than 70 hours a week. Ryan denies Rugg’s allegations. So far, it’s a classic battle of claim and counter-claim.

The outcome will turn on what “reasonable” means (as well as matters of evidence and credibility). There is no simple definition of this in Australian workplace law, even though it is pivotal to what the Fair Work Act says about working overtime.

Nor are there many tribunal or court decisions setting precedents to guide the Federal Court’s ruling.

What the Fair Work Act says

Under Section 62 of the Fair Work Act, an employer must not request or require a full-time employee to work longer than 38 hours a week, “unless the additional hours are reasonable”.

An employee may refuse to work additional hours “if the request is unreasonable”. This is essentially what Rugg says she sought to do.

What determines whether a request is reasonable or unreasonable? Section 62 sets out ten (non-exhaustive) factors that must be taken into account:

• any risk to employee health and safety from working the additional hours
• the employee’s personal circumstances, including family responsibilities
• the needs of the workplace or enterprise in which the employee is employed
• whether the employee is entitled to receive overtime payments, penalty rates or other compensation for, or a level of remuneration that reflects an expectation of, working additional hours
• any notice given by the employer of any request or requirement to work the additional hours
• any notice given by the employee of his or her intention to refuse to work the additional hours
• the usual patterns of work in the industry, or the part of an industry, in which the employee works
• the nature of the employee’s role, and the employee’s level of responsibility
• whether the additional hours accord with averaging terms that are applicable under an award or enterprise agreement or agreed with the individual employee
• any other relevant matter.

These considerations apply to all workers, regardless of their salary level or whether they are covered by awards or other industrial instruments.

Read more:
Our culture of overtime is costing us dearly

Past court decisions

While case law is slim, one judgement almost certain to be mentioned is the Federal Court’s 2022 ruling in Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Dick Stone Pty Ltd.

This claim for compensation was brought by the meatworkers’ union on behalf of Samuel Boateng, a migrant from Ghana who was employed as a knife-hand and labourer by Dick Stone Meats in Sydney.

Boateng’s contract required him to work 50 “ordinary hours” a week (2am to 11.30am on weekdays, and 2am to 7am on Saturdays) plus “reasonable additional hours” as requested.

The union argued the contract contravened both the Meat Industry Award 2010 and the Fair Work Act. Justice Anna Katzmann agreed. She ruled it was possible for an employee to agree to ordinary work hours above 38 hours, but the onus was still on the employer to ensure those additional hours were reasonable.

She affirmed that:

What is reasonable in any given case depends on an evaluation of the particular circumstances of both the employee and the employer having regard to all relevant matters including those matters mandated for consideration in section 62.

In Boateng’s case, Katzmann concluded the requirement to work 12 hours more than the 38-hour standard was, in the overall circumstances, unreasonable. Three factors were given particular weight:

• the health and safety risks associated with lengthy shifts in a role requiring the use of knives
• the fact the employee did not hold a managerial or supervisory role that might warrant additional hours
• the fact the employee was not being paid overtime rates in accordance with the award.

Further, while the 50-hour week aligned with the employer’s operational needs, this did not necessarily make the additional hours reasonable from the employee’s perspective.

Rugg’s case is different

The outcome in the Boateng case has limited application to a dispute involving a white-collar worker working long hours on high wages.

As Ryan’s chief of staff, Rugg was in a managerial role. Her base salary was $136,000, with a “top-up” allowance of about $30,000 for “reasonable additional hours” (but no overtime payments).

That said, the case does confirm general principles. What is “reasonable” involves a balancing of various factors, including the needs or circumstances of each party. The “weighting” given to different indicators might also vary depending on the individual job. There is no magic touchstone.

Read more:
Most of us who work long hours like the jobs we are in. Those who don’t, change jobs quickly

Much will turn on matters of degree. Factors that will weigh in Rugg’s favour are the amount of work hours required relative to her income, and her personal circumstances including her family responsibilities. Health and safety risks are likely to feature also.

Factors Ryan’s lawyers will seek to highlight are the nature of her employment, level of responsibility, and established patterns and standards of work within the industry – provided these can be verified.

The distinctive nature of Rugg’s position and demands means any judgement will have limited application to “regular” employees.

Nonetheless, the case will be significant in offering some rare (and much-needed) guidance both for employers and employees on what “reasonable additional work hours” means.

Giuseppe Carabetta 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. What are ‘reasonable’ hours? The Ryan-Rugg legal stoush may help the rest of us know – https://theconversation.com/what-are-reasonable-hours-the-ryan-rugg-legal-stoush-may-help-the-rest-of-us-know-201093

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giuseppe Carabetta, Associate Professor, University of Technology Sydney

The court case against federal independent parliamentarian Monique Ryan by her former chief of staff Sally Rugg will, according to Rugg’s lawyers, open the door to legal action “by every Australian worker experiencing exploitation because of a contractual obligation to perform undefined ‘reasonable additional’ hours”.

Given the pecularities of the case, that’s unlikely. But the case will put the spotlight on an important, but rarely tested, question of what “reasonable” overtime means.

Rugg is seeking compensation in the Federal Court for “adverse action” by Ryan against her for refusing to work more than 70 hours a week. Ryan denies Rugg’s allegations. So far, it’s a classic battle of claim and counter-claim.

The outcome will turn on what “reasonable” means (as well as matters of evidence and credibility). There is no simple definition of this in Australian workplace law, even though it is pivotal to what the Fair Work Act says about working overtime.

Nor are there many tribunal or court decisions setting precedents to guide the Federal Court’s ruling.

What the Fair Work Act says

Under Section 62 of the Fair Work Act, an employer must not request or require a full-time employee to work longer than 38 hours a week, “unless the additional hours are reasonable”.

An employee may refuse to work additional hours “if the request is unreasonable”. This is essentially what Rugg says she sought to do.

What determines whether a request is reasonable or unreasonable? Section 62 sets out ten (non-exhaustive) factors that must be taken into account:

• any risk to employee health and safety from working the additional hours
• the employee’s personal circumstances, including family responsibilities
• the needs of the workplace or enterprise in which the employee is employed
• whether the employee is entitled to receive overtime payments, penalty rates or other compensation for, or a level of remuneration that reflects an expectation of, working additional hours
• any notice given by the employer of any request or requirement to work the additional hours
• any notice given by the employee of his or her intention to refuse to work the additional hours
• the usual patterns of work in the industry, or the part of an industry, in which the employee works
• the nature of the employee’s role, and the employee’s level of responsibility
• whether the additional hours accord with averaging terms that are applicable under an award or enterprise agreement or agreed with the individual employee
• any other relevant matter.

These considerations apply to all workers, regardless of their salary level or whether they are covered by awards or other industrial instruments.

Read more:
Our culture of overtime is costing us dearly

Past court decisions

While case law is slim, one judgement almost certain to be mentioned is the Federal Court’s 2022 ruling in Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Dick Stone Pty Ltd.

This claim for compensation was brought by the meatworkers’ union on behalf of Samuel Boateng, a migrant from Ghana who was employed as a knife-hand and labourer by Dick Stone Meats in Sydney.

Boateng’s contract required him to work 50 “ordinary hours” a week (2am to 11.30am on weekdays, and 2am to 7am on Saturdays) plus “reasonable additional hours” as requested.

The union argued the contract contravened both the Meat Industry Award 2010 and the Fair Work Act. Justice Anna Katzmann agreed. She ruled it was possible for an employee to agree to ordinary work hours above 38 hours, but the onus was still on the employer to ensure those additional hours were reasonable.

She affirmed that:

What is reasonable in any given case depends on an evaluation of the particular circumstances of both the employee and the employer having regard to all relevant matters including those matters mandated for consideration in section 62.

In Boateng’s case, Katzmann concluded the requirement to work 12 hours more than the 38-hour standard was, in the overall circumstances, unreasonable. Three factors were given particular weight:

• the health and safety risks associated with lengthy shifts in a role requiring the use of knives
• the fact the employee did not hold a managerial or supervisory role that might warrant additional hours
• the fact the employee was not being paid overtime rates in accordance with the award.

Further, while the 50-hour week aligned with the employer’s operational needs, this did not necessarily make the additional hours reasonable from the employee’s perspective.

Rugg’s case is different

The outcome in the Boateng case has limited application to a dispute involving a white-collar worker working long hours on high wages.

As Ryan’s chief of staff, Rugg was in a managerial role. Her base salary was $136,000, with a “top-up” allowance of about $30,000 for “reasonable additional hours” (but no overtime payments).

That said, the case does confirm general principles. What is “reasonable” involves a balancing of various factors, including the needs or circumstances of each party. The “weighting” given to different indicators might also vary depending on the individual job. There is no magic touchstone.

Read more:
Most of us who work long hours like the jobs we are in. Those who don’t, change jobs quickly

Much will turn on matters of degree. Factors that will weigh in Rugg’s favour are the amount of work hours required relative to her income, and her personal circumstances including her family responsibilities. Health and safety risks are likely to feature also.

Factors Ryan’s lawyers will seek to highlight are the nature of her employment, level of responsibility, and established patterns and standards of work within the industry – provided these can be verified.

The distinctive nature of Rugg’s position and demands means any judgement will have limited application to “regular” employees.

Nonetheless, the case will be significant in offering some rare (and much-needed) guidance both for employers and employees on what “reasonable additional work hours” means.

Giuseppe Carabetta 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. What are ‘reasonable’ hours? The Ryan-Rudd legal stoush may help the rest of us know – https://theconversation.com/what-are-reasonable-hours-the-ryan-rudd-legal-stoush-may-help-the-rest-of-us-know-201093

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott Williams, PhD Candidate in Biochemistry, La Trobe University

Over the millions of years crocodiles and their relatives have roamed our planet, they have evolved robust immune systems to help combat the potentially harmful microbes in the swamps and waterways they call home.

Our study, recently published in Nature Communications, takes a closer look at antimicrobial proteins called defensins, found in saltwater crocodiles. These proteins play a key role in the reptiles’ first line of defence against infectious disease.

As the threat of antibiotic-resistant microbes grows, so does our need for new and effective treatments. Could the defensins of these beasts hold the answers to help create a new wave of life-saving therapeutics?

What are defensins?

Defensins are small proteins produced by all plants and animals. In plants, defensins are usually made in the flowers and leaves, whereas animal defensins are made by white blood cells and in mucous membranes (for example in the lungs and intestines). Their role is to protect the host by killing infectious organisms.

Research into the defensins of different plant and animal species has found they can target a broad range of disease-causing pathogens. These include bacteria, fungi, viruses and even cancer cells.

The most common way defensins kill these pathogens is by attaching themselves to the outer membrane – the layer that holds the cell together. Once there, defensins create holes in the membrane, causing the cell contents to leak out, killing the cell in the process.

What’s special about crocodile defensins?

Despite living in dirty water, crocodiles rarely develop infections even though they often get wounded while hunting and fighting for territory. This suggests crocodiles have a potent immune system. We wanted to better understand how their defensins have adapted over time to protect them in these harsh environments.

By searching through the genome of the saltwater crocodile, we found that one particular defensin, named CpoBD13, was effective at killing the fungus Candida albicans – the leading cause of human fungal infections worldwide. Although some plant and animal defensins have previously been shown to target Candida albicans, the mechanism behind CpoBD13’s antifungal activity is what makes it unique.

That’s because CpoBD13 can self-regulate its activity based on the pH of the surrounding environment. At neutral pH (for example, in the blood) the defensin is inactive. However, when it reaches a site of infection which has a lower, acidic pH, the defensin is activated and can help clear the infection. This is the first time this mechanism has been observed in a defensin.

Our team discovered this mechanism by revealing the structure of CpoBD13 using a process called X-ray crystallography. This involves “shooting” lab-grown protein crystals with high-powered X-rays, which we were able to do at the Australian Synchrotron.

Are fungi really a threat to human health?

In comparison to bacterial and viral infections, fungal infections are often not seen as serious. After all, pandemics throughout human history have only ever been caused by the former. Indeed, fungi are most commonly known in the general public for causing athlete’s foot and toenail infections – hardly life-threating conditions.

But fungi can pose severe problems to human health, particularly in people with impaired immune systems. Globally, approximately 1.5 million deaths per year are attributed to fungal infections.

Our current arsenal of antifungals is limited to only a handful of drugs. Furthermore, we haven’t had a new class of antifungal treatments since the early 2000s. To make matters even worse, overuse of the antifungal medicines we do have has led to some drug-resistant fungal strains.

Rising global temperatures have also made once cooler regions more hospitable to pathogenic fungi. Climate change has even been linked with the emergence of new drug-resistant species, such as Candida auris.

Read more:
Explainer: what is Candida auris and who is at risk?

A long way from crocs to the clinic

In the hunt for new medicines, our study and those like it are important for finding potential future antibiotics. By characterising the defensins of crocodiles, we have provided the groundwork needed to develop CpoBD13 into an effective antifungal. However, undertaking clinic trials is a long and costly process. From the initial discovery, it can take between five and 20 years to get a new drug approved.

Currently, protein-based treatments can sometimes unintentionally harm a person’s healthy cells. By using our knowledge of the crocodile’s defensins, we could potentially engineer other proteins to take on CpoBD13’s pH-sensing mechanism. Thus, they would only “turn on” upon reaching the infection.

Although there is much work to do before we see crocodile defensins in the clinic, we hope to one day harness the unique primal power of the crocodile’s immune system to aid in the global fight against infectious disease.

Mark Hulett receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, Medical Research Future Fund.

Scott Williams 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. Crocodiles are uniquely protected against fungal infections. This might one day help human medicine too – https://theconversation.com/crocodiles-are-uniquely-protected-against-fungal-infections-this-might-one-day-help-human-medicine-too-201290

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Pearse, Lecturer, Australian National University

This fortnight, Australia’s parliament is considering an amendment to the safeguard mechanism, which is the main way we’ve tried to cut emissions over the last nine years. As you may already know, it hasn’t done what it was meant to do.

The mechanism was meant to force our largest greenhouse gas polluters to buy carbon credits if they emitted over a baseline. But almost no one ever paid, as the baselines were set very high. That’s why Labor wants to tighten up Australia’s overly flexible carbon trading scheme as part of this bill.

But to pass it, the government needs support from most of the crossbench, which is unlikely, or from the Greens, given the Coalition has refused to support it. Australia’s third largest party has offered to “support the bill tomorrow” – if the Albanese government agrees to stop all new coal and gas projects.

Labor won’t agree to this. But it will need to negotiate to have any chance of success.

Are the Greens grandstanding, as some commentators have suggested? Hardly: they’re negotiating hard to try to get the best outcome for the climate.

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Adam Bandt is wedged by Greens’ overreach on emissions legislation

The trouble with negotiating strong carbon market rules

If the Greens were in power, they might choose a different approach. But they are limited by what Labor is offering: the ability to improve the rules of Australia’s carbon market.

In 2023, our methods of driving down emissions are still limited. Labor has decided to focus on improving the safeguard mechanism, which is a baseline-and-credit carbon offset scheme first legislated by the Abbott Coalition government in 2014.

Because of very loose baselines given to the 215 major emitters covered by the scheme, emissions actually grew. The previous government also bought carbon credits through the flawed Emissions Reduction Fund.

What Labor proposes is to make the mechanism function more like the carbon market set up by the Rudd/Gillard Labor governments over a decade ago.

How? By adding rules to allow new flexibility options for crediting and trading of carbon rights. The current safeguard bill also adds a “reserve” carbon budget for new fossil fuel projects, which would allow them to be built.

At the same time, the Chubb review into our carbon offset laws is recommending more oversight into the scheme following integrity questions.

In sum, though, climate change minister Chris Bowen’s proposed amendments are still too flexible.

If Labor gets its amendments through unchanged, big industrial emitters will likely be able to avoid actually having to reduce how much carbon dioxide and methane they can pump into the skies through loose baselines and unlimited offsets.

Is ‘no new coal and gas’ viable?

Since the early 2000s, the environment movement have campaigned for “no new coal”. As the gas industry surged in the 2010s, environmentalists called for limits on fracking and exports.

It’s entirely reasonable for the Greens to push the government to come clean about plans for emissions-intensive industries. Mining workers want to know what the future will hold. Labor voters are also wondering.

The Greens want a managed transition plan out of thermal coal by 2030 and coking coal (used for steelmaking) by 2040, with packages to help workers change jobs. They want Australia to be the first major fossil fuel exporter to limit production.

That’s what they want. But what can they get, given carbon-pricing mechanisms like the safeguard mechanism leave these decisions to the market?

This week, the Greens and the Coalition are forcing the government to release its modelling of the future of emissions-intensive industries.

How big does the government expect fossil fuel production facilities to be in the future? How much will big emitters rely on offsetting rather than reductions at the source?

Trading offset reform for no new coal and gas?

Crossbencher David Pocock is pushing for reforms on carbon offsets. But the Greens have offered to “put aside” their concerns about offsets if Labor moves to ban new fossil fuel projects.

If the Greens were successful in strengthening safeguard rules to introduce a zero-carbon limit on all new coal and gas mines, new fossil fuel projects would have to find carbon offsets for 100% of their emissions each year. But if Labor keeps refusing this approach, compromise may have to come elsewhere.

Greens leader Adam Bandt says they are making “an offer, not an ultimatum”. They want to bargain.

What could this look like?

Labor might seek to group Pocock and the 12 Green senators together to negotiate limits on permissible carbon offsets. If so, the Greens would end up where they were in 2009–11, trying to ensure carbon market rules minimise use of offsets.

What are the most likely deals we could see?

We could see four other compromises. In order of likelihood, they are:

Pausing new coal and gas mine approvals until environmental laws are stronger

Our biodiversity and environment laws are not up to the task. Labor has pledged to fix them.

Making federal environmental laws stronger is arguably a clearer way to reducing fossil fuel expansion. Why? These laws overlay state planning laws which keep churning out new mining licences. The Greens will want influence here.

The ‘climate trigger’

The Greens want to create a climate trigger modelled on the “water trigger” negotiated by former independent MP Tony Windsor.

A climate trigger, if it got up, would mean future projects would be assessed on greenhouse impact. But it wouldn’t be the same as a direct ban on new coal and gas. The Greens have a climate trigger bill before parliament, which would permit the climate change minister to reject large mines.

Replacing offsets

Offsets are often rubbery. But there are other ways to finance carbon cuts. A decarbonisation fund could permit democratic decision-making about carbon and biodiversity improvements.

Given carbon offset credits have political risks for the government and corporations, there’s merit to returning to fixed carbon pricing.

Negotiate with the states about fossil fuel industry transition

Labor could offer to negotiate with the states about managing the path away from coal and gas. Talking about what we have to do to stay in our carbon budget could foster parliamentary good faith and end finger pointing.

Climate wars – or real progress?

The Greens have a long history of pushing back against weak climate policy. Labor, in turn, has a history of criticising what they see as doctrinaire refusal. But when the cameras are off, these two parties have managed to achieve compromise and progress. It’s happened before, and it will most likely happen again.

Rebecca Pearse receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Recovery and Resilience Agency.

– ref. The Greens aren’t grandstanding on a new coal and gas ban – they’re negotiating well – https://theconversation.com/the-greens-arent-grandstanding-on-a-new-coal-and-gas-ban-theyre-negotiating-well-201287

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grant Duncan, Associate Professor, School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University

It’s been a difficult time for senior public servants recently – at least it has been for those willing to express their political views publicly. One has been sacked, another offered his resignation, and yet another has been questioned by a parliamentary select committee.

In an election year perhaps we can expect heightened sensitivities around the principle of public sector neutrality. Especially so, given those in the spotlight are all ministerial appointees to crown entity boards, not career officials.

These appointments blur the supposedly clear boundary between elected office-holders and professional public servants.

The case of Rob Campbell, former chair of Te Whatu Ora/Health NZ and the Environmental Protection Authority, seems the most clear-cut. His LinkedIn post likening the National Party’s Three Waters policy to a “thin disguise for the dog whistle on co-governance” was one thing. But his refusal to accept he’d done anything wrong was a bridge too far for the powers that be.

Things have gone better for former Labour MP Steve Maharey, who offered his resignation as chair of Pharmac, ACC and Education New Zealand for publishing what could be read as politically partial views. The government has said he will not lose his jobs.

And another former Labour MP, Ruth Dyson, now deputy chair of the Earthquake Commission and Fire and Emergency New Zealand, is also under scrutiny for apparently partisan Twitter comments. It’s safe to say the the nation’s newsrooms are now trawling the social media accounts of all senior civil servants and appointees.

Faceless bureaucrats?

On the face of it, the standards of conduct for people employed in the state sector – especially at senior levels – are clear. They’re expected to act with neutrality and impartiality, and not to take sides with political parties – even (or especially) if they have a past association with one.

They should be able to continue to serve after a change of government. New Zealand doesn’t follow the American model where an incoming president appoints about 4,000 civil servants. Instead, we rely on non-partisan professionals whose tenure isn’t tied to elections.

But these tensions and sensitivities about what people can and can’t say also exist in private enterprise. Any director or chief executive would be unwise to publish private opinions about political or economic affairs that might harm the reputation of the company.

Read more:
The balancing act: how much free speech should our public servants have?

Even a bottom-rung employee can face the sack for commenting online about their employer. Free speech comes with conditions attached, especially so for the public service.

One counter argument is that public servants’ impartiality is only a pretence anyway. And, as one commentator put it recently, “we should expect them to speak the truth to us, as they see it”. Indeed, we should criticise those who fail to do so, and not care if it upsets politicians.

That would be a major culture change for our Westminster-style system. But New Zealand has had prominent public servants who were admired as outspoken public intellectuals. The question is, where is the line and how do we define the terms?

Public intellectuals

One historical figure who rose high within the public service but expressed political views was
Edward Tregear (1846–1931). He was already a prominent intellectual when appointed the first secretary of the Labour Department by the Liberal government in 1891.

He drove pioneering labour and social reforms, but was often outspoken and found himself at odds with the government following the death of the prime minister, Richard Seddon, in 1906. He retired in 1910.

Clarence Beeby (1902–98) was a prominent psychologist and researcher with a strong commitment to public education and human rights when he was appointed director of education by Peter Fraser in 1940.

Labour’s educational reforms came to be identified with Beeby as much as with Fraser, which would have annoyed the prime minister. Beeby continued under the subsequent National government, however. Overall, his scholarship had wide influence and was recognised internationally.

The economist Bill Sutch (1907–75) worked under ministers of finance in the 1930s while also actively engaging in public life. He published two important books on New Zealand in the early 1940s (Poverty and Progress, and The Search for Security).

This independence caused some friction with Fraser, but Sutch worked for New Zealand at the United Nations. In 1958, he became permanent secretary for the Department of Industries and Commerce.

Read more:
To restore trust in government, we need to reinvent how the public service works

The new rules

Campbell’s online comments and Maharey’s op-ed columns probably aren’t at the same level of sustained achievement as those three exemplary civil servants’ publications. But they do raise important questions. Are today’s ministers and the public services commissioner too precious about political opinions? And are opposition MPs going to be hoist with their own petard once they’re in office?

Since the State Sector Act 1988, our system has tried to draw a clear line between ministers, who set high-level policy and have to justify it publicly, and public servants, who advise ministers and implement their decisions. Public servants should provide ministers with free and frank advice, but publishing personal opinions isn’t on.

Read more:
Will the High Court ruling on public servant’s tweets have a ‘powerful chill’ on free speech?

There’s always a grey area, however. Campbell breached the code of conduct, but was sacking him in proportion with the offence? Those in a position to decide thought that it was.

Given the public controversy, Maharey did the right thing to pre-emptively offer his resignation. What distinguishes him from Campbell is that he recognised the awkward political problem.

But is it so big a problem that heads should roll? Is the country better or worse off for its intolerance of intellectual and political independence of thought in the state sector?

Whatever the answer, under present arrangements we won’t see public servants like Tregear, Beeby or Sutch again. But Campbell and Maharey can write what they like in retirement.

Grant Duncan 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. NZ has a history of prominent public servants who were also outspoken public intellectuals – what’s changed? – https://theconversation.com/nz-has-a-history-of-prominent-public-servants-who-were-also-outspoken-public-intellectuals-whats-changed-201370

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emilie Vallee, Senior Lecturer in Veterinary Epidemiology, Massey University

When Cyclone Gabrielle hit New Zealand in February, it left a trail of destruction across the North Island. At least 11 people died, and more than 10,000 were displaced. Bridges were washed out (35 in the Hastings district alone), roads closed and communications cut.

With potable water and wastewater systems damaged and land covered in silt, there is another consequence that may yet appear – diseases, or more specifically, zoonoses that spread between animals and people.

Floods and their aftermath are a time of higher risk for disease spread. While we do not have much data specific to New Zealand, due partly to the difficulty of diagnosing and reporting diseases during times of crisis, we can use information from overseas to predict which diseases may flare up after floods.

First, the tummy bugs

The first group of diseases for which we expect to see a rise in case numbers soon after floods is gastroenteritis caused by water-borne pathogens. GPs in Auckland are reporting an increase in cases since the Auckland anniversary weekend floods.

Many pathogens survive in the gastrointestinal tract of animals and are released in their feces. Rain and floods facilitate their transmission by providing an environment through which they sometimes enter the food chain or water supply.

In 2016, Hawke’s Bay experienced a campylobacteriosis outbreak transmitted through the urban water supply that affected more than 6,000 people. The outbreak occurred just after heavy rain, which likely caused water contaminated with sheep feces to enter a bore.

Read more:
Floods create health risks: what to look out for and how to avoid them

Salmonellosis cases are also likely to rise during summer floods, aided by higher temperatures. The risk is particularly high as cases in dairy cattle have been steadily increasing during the past eight years.

Local branches of Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand in affected areas have been proactive in communicating these risks and prevention measures, including the importance of wearing protective gear during the cleanup.

Then, leptospirosis

About a week to a month after floods, rodent-born disease outbreaks can start to appear.

Floods disturb the habitat of rodents, including rats, and they can be attracted to food waste around people’s homes. This was regularly observed after floods in Queensland last year and in Auckland earlier this year.

In New Zealand, our main concern is the bacterial disease leptospirosis. Brown rats carry one of the variants, livestock several others, and, once the bacteria are shed in the animals’ urine, they can survive in water and soil for several days. This ability to survive in flood water means the risk of infection is increased for all variants, including those traditionally associated with ruminants and pigs.

Auckland has reported an increase in leptospirosis cases in February, likely linked with the floods at the end of January. Hawke’s Bay was already a known leptospirosis hotspot that could worsen.

The clinical signs of leptospirosis can vary a lot and it is important people seek medical attention when they feel unwell as it can be treated with antibiotics. People can get infected through contact with urine or a contaminated environment, via the mouth or nose or uncovered skin cuts.

Leptospirosis outbreaks in dogs can also happen. While they are rarely a source of infection for people in New Zealand, dogs can act as sentinels. The New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA) provides advice to owners of companion animals.

Finally, the mosquitoes

New Zealand is likely (at least for now) safe from the final group of diseases emerging after floods: vector-borne diseases.

We don’t have the disease-carrying insects or viruses known to cause outbreaks, but our Fijian neighbours and many other countries often report dengue outbreaks after floods.

Climate change is making it easier for both the insect carriers and viruses to establish in New Zealand, so we should not ignore this as a potential future threat.

Read more:
How to mozzie-proof your property after a flood and cut your risk of mosquito-borne disease

How to protect ourselves

Vaccination, early detection and treatment of livestock, which act as a reservoir for many of the pathogens above, are effective ways of protecting humans.

Cattle can be vaccinated against three variants of bacteria causing leptospirosis and four types of Salmonella. But vaccination does not cover all the strains and is more difficult in the current situation when fencing has been destroyed and some communities can only access veterinary medicine by helicopter.

The use of personal protective equipment and good hand hygiene for any outdoor activity that involves contact with animals or flood water and soil is the best way to prevent diseases. Rodent control, including rapid disposal of food waste, is also more important than ever.

Read more:
58% of human infectious diseases can be worsened by climate change – we scoured 77,000 studies to map the pathways

It is important people seek medical care rapidly, both for themselves and their animals when they are unwell. This is how they can access appropriate treatment, but also how surveillance can happen, so New Zealand starts learning its own lessons on health risks associated with floods.

Our cities, population structures, farming systems and wildlife species are different from overseas, so having local data is crucial. This will help during the next heavy rain and floods – and there is no doubt there will be many more.

We would like to acknowledge the contribution by Masood Sujau.

Emilie Vallee receives funding from The Wellcome Trust for the project CliZod – Digital Technology Development Award in Climate Sensitive Infectious Disease Modelling number 226044/Z/22/Z. She works at the Tāwharau Ora School of Veterinary Science at Massey University.

Barry Borman, Deborah Read, and Masako Wada 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. First the floods, then the diseases — why NZ should brace for outbreaks of spillover infections from animals – https://theconversation.com/first-the-floods-then-the-diseases-why-nz-should-brace-for-outbreaks-of-spillover-infections-from-animals-201162

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Burnett, Honorary Associate Professor, ANU College of Law, Australian National University

Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers has attracted controversy by proposing to update 30-year-old superannuation laws with a definition of the purpose of superannuation as being to fund a dignified retirement. There is a clear lesson here for other reforms to make policy objectives clear, even when they seem obvious. One important example is Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s Nature Positive Plan.

Plibersek’s department began consulting last week on new National Environmental Standards. She will table these later in the year, along with a bill to replace Australia’s most significant environmental law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

The standards will be the “beating heart” of the reforms. They will set out in some detail just what has to be protected and the circumstances in which development can be approved. It is essential these standards rest on solid foundations, including a clear statement of purpose.

You may be surprised to hear mandatory standards are new territory for environmental laws regulating development. Existing federal and state laws are mostly built around regulatory process and ministerial discretion. Typically, they tell ministers to consider ill-defined principles like “ecologically sustainable development”, but lack any real “bottom line”.

This leads to “black box” decision-making, in which decisions are unpredictable beforehand and opaque afterwards. This lack of transparency does little for the environment, which continues to deteriorate due to increasing pressures from climate change, habitat loss, invasive species, pollution and resource extraction.

Read more:
Our laws fail nature. The government’s plan to overhaul them looks good, but crucial detail is yet to come

Tough calls ahead

Plibersek faces some tough calls in developing the standards. If strong and clear, they will protect nature and make it harder to get developments approved. But if the standards lack a clear statement of purpose and carry over rubbery phrases and weak offset requirements, then it will be business as usual, freshly wrapped.

For these new standards, we must get the basics right. One basic is to gather enough environmental information to make properly informed decisions.

The government is acting on this need with its plan to set up an independent environment protection agency (EPA), including a dedicated data division. However, it has yet to put serious money on the table. Making up for lost decades of patchy data gathering will be expensive and time-consuming.

Read more:
‘Complete elation’ greeted Plibersek’s big plans to protect nature – but hurdles litter the path

Lack of clarity makes for ineffective law

Another one of the basics is to properly define ecologically sustainable development (ESD) as the foundation of environmental policy. The existing words on ESD in the EPBC Act are hard to divine. They trace their roots to the early 1990s and reflect the state of knowledge, and the compromises, of that era.

In fact, the EPBC Act does not even attempt to define “ecologically sustainable development”. Instead, it requires the environment minister to take into account five “principles of ecologically sustainable development”.

This disaggregation is part of the problem. Among other things, it forces the minister, in deciding whether to approve the clearing of koala habitat, for example, to consider an obscure principle that “improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms should be promoted”.

This is a high-level policy principle advocating “market-based instruments”, such as a carbon price. It does not belong in a decision about clearing native vegetation.

I am now a researcher but in a former life (2007-12) was responsible for the administration of the EPBC Act. I have gone back over several hundred statutory EPBC Act “recommendation reports”. In these reports, environment officials provide formal advice to the minister about whether to approve a development.

I found very few instances where ESD principles made a substantive difference to the advice. It’s not surprising, given the obtuse approach of the legislation to ecologically sustainable development.

Read more:
Environment laws have failed to tackle the extinction emergency. Here’s the proof

How to breathe new life into ESD

That is not to say we should abandon ecologically sustainable development. Properly defined, it can provide an overarching statement as to what environmental laws are designed to achieve and what development can be approved.

In the broad, ecologically sustainable development should mean keeping the environment healthy, so future generations can enjoy the same quality of life as we do. It would follow that development should not harm anything essential to a healthy environment.

It is important that we not simply roll the current principles into the National Environmental Standards without reflection.

One of the principles, the precautionary principle, can stand alone. It’s about risk management, to be applied when environmental knowledge is limited, which is often. It means, in context, that if a development risks serious or irreversible environmental damage, don’t approve it.

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

With that done, the central intent of ecologically sustainable development can be met by having the standards require that each decision maintain the diversity of life and the integrity of ecosystems affected by development. Ecological advice would be needed on how to do this in each case.

The gist of such a rule is to keep nature in good working order. That means maintaining viable populations of species and the essentials of ecosystems – their composition, structure and function.

The other three ESD principles deal with policy integration, intergenerational equity and market-based instruments. These principles are important but do not belong in the standards. They should be rehoused in a major policy statement, such as an environmental white paper.

It is often said with regulatory reforms such as the Nature Positive Plan that the devil is in the detail. That can be true, but in this case the devil is more in the basics. Get the basics right, and the rest is just detail.

Peter Burnett held a number of senior leadership positions in the federal Department of Environment from 2000 to 2013. From 2007-12, his responsibilities included administration of the EPBC Act.

– ref. Get the basics right for National Environmental Standards to ensure truly sustainable development – https://theconversation.com/get-the-basics-right-for-national-environmental-standards-to-ensure-truly-sustainable-development-201092

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Radha O’Meara, Lecturer in Screenwriting, The University of Melbourne

The stories of people with disability rarely make it onto Australian screens. This isn’t surprising when we look at the ways disabled people are treated in the Australian screen industry.

Workers with disability in the screen industry commonly face stigma, stereotyping, exclusion, bullying and harassment.

As one producer with disability told us:

For me the number one barrier has probably been stigma – people assuming that it’s going to be more difficult to have you working on the production.

However, experience of disability can have positive impacts on work. Disabled filmmakers make valuable contributors to Australian screen production and culture.

As another producer told us:

We solve problems better than anyone; we do it every minute every day, living in a world not made for us. Can you imagine the asset this is on your creative team?

For our new report, Disability and Screen Work in Australia, we surveyed more than 500 screen workers with and without disability.

Our report is the first in-depth research into the experiences of and attitudes towards people with disability in the Australian screen industry.

Read more:
Disability and dignity – 4 things to think about if you want to ‘help’

An inaccessible and prejudiced industry

Nearly one in five Australians lives with disability and the Australian screen industry employs more than 200,000 people.

Workers with disability contribute to all parts of the industry, in production, distribution and exhibition. Disabled people work as writers, producers, directors, performers and crew.

Despite the diversity of their experiences, roles and talents, screen workers with disability commonly encounter similar discrimination in the workplace.

Disabled people working in the Australian screen industry are paid much less. Among our survey respondents, most screen workers with disability (58%) are paid less than $800 per week, while most workers without disability (57%) are paid more than $1,250 per week.

Compared to screen workers without disability, workers with disability are more likely to be on short-term and casual contracts, to be working without pay, and to be unemployed.

Many screen workers with disability report a widespread lack of understanding about accessibility in the industry.

We spoke to one producer who uses a wheelchair. He found the physical barriers he faced were not noticed by his employer and he was expected to “overcome” these barriers. “It hampers your ability to work effectively,” he said.

Many respondents reported difficulties talking about access requirements at work. Employers are frequently inflexible when presented with options such as working from home or using different technologies.

Read more:
Australia is lagging when it comes to employing people with disability – quotas for disability services could be a start

Positive impacts of disability

Despite these barriers, many respondents said the screen industry benefits from the skills they have because of their experience of disability.

Nearly half of respondents with disability (47%) say their disability status impacts their screen work positively.

One screenwriter without disability said:

employers often see just the costs/difficulties, and not the benefits of having disabled writers in rooms or involved in projects.

Screen workers with disability told us they bring unique skills and perspectives that stem from navigating inaccessible environments. They demonstrate creative thinking, problem-solving, teamwork and empathy.

Ade Djajamihardja is a disability activist and founder of A2K Media, a production company that prioritises disability pride in their purpose, identity and activity. He works as a producer with “unapologetic acceptance” of his own disability status and that of his collaborators.

This means respecting the skills and talents workers with disability bring, and providing access requirements without resistance and judgement. This allows employers to fulfil their legal responsibilities and allows workers with disability to do their jobs effectively.

Screen workers with disability are crucial to telling authentic stories about disability, helping represent the diversity of our community. The disabled respondents to our survey noted they often see characters with disability on screen created and performed by people without disability, which stand out because they are inaccurate and stereotyped.

One screenwriter told us:

I think the more #ownstories that we can have in screen media the better. Things like insisting on [disability] representation in writing teams is a really good step in the right direction.

The screen industry’s future

Far from building an industry full of the most skilled people, the Australian screen industry excludes and marginalises people with disability.

One producer sees potential in the screen industry becoming more welcoming to disabled people:

I work in the creative industries. We need to be better at creatively working through these sorts of issues.

The people we surveyed suggested many ways to improve inclusion in Australia’s screen industry. They highlight easier access to reasonable adjustments, clear lines of communication and responsibility in workplaces, and targeted funding for creatives with disability.

Most importantly, survey respondents repeatedly call for greater understanding of disability issues. People with disability would like it to be normal to talk about accessibility in the workplace.

With employment discrimination a key focus of the current disability royal commission, the proposed Centre for Arts and Entertainment Workplaces should provide leadership in prioritising accessibility and inclusion.

Disability inclusion also requires the urgent attention of everyone working in the screen industry. As one actor said:

We deserve empowerment and to sit at the table too. Even if we need a ramp to get to the table or subtitles to understand.

Read more:
Pay, safety and welfare: how the new Centre for Arts and Entertainment Workplaces can strengthen the arts sector

This research was funded by Melbourne Disability Institute at the University of Melbourne and A2K Media.

– ref. ‘The number one barrier has probably been stigma’: the challenges facing disabled workers in the Australian screen industry – https://theconversation.com/the-number-one-barrier-has-probably-been-stigma-the-challenges-facing-disabled-workers-in-the-australian-screen-industry-200345

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Seale, Associate professor, UNSW Sydney

The vast majority of Australian children are up-to-date with their vaccines. But vaccination rates have dipped slightly over the past few years.

Fewer health checks, reduced access to routine health care during lockdowns, and fear of COVID have been the main reasons.

If that’s been the situation for your family, you can still catch up. Here’s how to check which vaccines are due for your children and how to organise appointments.

Read more:
Needles are nothing to fear: 5 steps to make vaccinations easier on your kids

Which shots are due?

If you are unsure which vaccines are given at different ages:

• look up the vaccine schedule, officially called the National Immunisation Program Schedule. This lists the recommended free vaccines at various ages

• download a vaccine scheduling app. Some states have an app you can download to create a personal vaccine schedule for your children, with reminders of what’s due and when

• chat to your GP. The next time you see a GP (for any reason), you can ask about vaccines and which ones are due.

Read more:
Health Check: are you up to date with your vaccinations?

I think we’re behind. How do I check?

If you think your child has missed a shot but want to check, obtain your child’s immunisation history statement using:

• your Medicare online account through myGov or

• the Medicare app.

You can also call the Australian Immunisation Register (1800 653 809) and ask for your child’s immunisation history statement to be sent to you. This can take up to 14 days to arrive in the post.

If your child is over the age of 14, they can get their immunisation history statements themselves.

If you’re not eligible for Medicare, you can still get your immunisation history statement online through myGov.

In very rare cases, a vaccine may have been given but not recorded on the Australian Immunisation Register.

If you think this may be the case, check your child’s baby health book, as information may have been recorded there. You may also need to check with the GP who gave the vaccine.

Read more:
Getting vaccinated at the pharmacy? Make sure it’s recorded properly

OK, we are behind. What now?

If there are no written records available of past vaccination, your child will be offered catch-up vaccines appropriate for their age.

But children who missed their recommended vaccines in childhood can also still receive them free before they turn 20.

Depending on the child’s age, you can go to your local doctor, pharmacy, hospital immunisation clinic, local council or see a community health nurse.

Find your local health service using this search engine.

Read more:
No, combination vaccines don’t overwhelm kids’ immune systems

I may need an interpreter

Catch-up vaccinations are free. But we understand that families who speak a language other than English can face challenges navigating the health system, including accessing vaccines.

If this applies to your family, or someone you know, you or they can use an interpreter to talk to the GP about catch-up vaccinations.

This is a free phone service, covering more than 150 different languages. Call 131 450.

Read more:
Nearly 1 in 4 of us aren’t native English speakers. In a health-care setting, interpreters are essential

I have a large family. Any tips?

If you have multiple children, the GP or practice nurse will tell you how many appointments you will need to ensure your children are up-to-date with their vaccines.

Here are some tips to help things run smoothly:

• bring an extra adult (if possible) to sit outside the clinic with children not being immunised. This reduces the risk of distractions in the clinic

• try to ring ahead to let the GP surgery know they need catch-up vaccines. This allows the team time to work out a catch-up schedule

• if you have records of vaccines given overseas speak to the surgery about dropping records in before the appointment. Again, this will allow the nurse to work out the catch-up schedule before you arrive

• in some situations, you may be able to have slightly longer gaps between vaccines to reduce the number of visits needed. This will depend on the situation. The GP or practice nurse will be able to determine if this is possible based on what vaccines are needed.

How about flu or COVID shots?

Beyond the vaccines on the National Immunisation Program, some children are also recommended a flu and COVID shot, depending on their age.

Children aged 6 months and older are also recommended to receive a yearly influenza vaccine (free for kids 6 months to under 5 years). If they are older than 10 years, they can get this flu vaccine at either a GP clinic or pharmacy.

COVID vaccination is currently recommended for children aged 6 months up to 5 years only if children have special medical or other needs, including a very weak immune system, disability, or complex or multiple health conditions.

Most children aged 5-17 years are recommended to have two doses of a COVID vaccine.

If your child has not received a COVID vaccine and you want some help deciding, there’s online help depending on the age of your child.

For more information about vaccines and catch-up vaccination, call the National Immunisation Information Line on 1800 671 811. For specific medical advice, see your health-care provider.

Holly Seale is an investigator on research studies funded by NHMRC and has previously received funding for investigator driven research from NHMRC and NSW Ministry of Health, as well as from Sanofi Pasteur, Moderna and Seqirus.

Abela Mahimbo has previously received funding from GSK for investigator driven research.

Jane E Frawley 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. My kids are behind with their vaccines. How do they catch up? – https://theconversation.com/my-kids-are-behind-with-their-vaccines-how-do-they-catch-up-199595

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caio Seguin, Postdoctoral research fellow, Indiana University

Through a vast network of nerve fibres, electrical signals are constantly travelling across the brain. This complicated activity is what ultimately gives rise to our thoughts, emotions and behaviours – but also possibly to mental health and neurological problems when things go wrong.

Brain stimulation is an emerging treatment for such disorders. Stimulating a region of your brain with electrical or magnetic pulses will trigger a cascade of signals through your network of nerve connections.

Read more:
What is repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and how does it actually work?

However, at the moment, scientists are not quite sure how these cascades travel to impact the activity of your brain as a whole – an important missing piece that limits the benefits of brain stimulation therapies.

In our latest research, published in Neuron today, we discovered the spread of brain stimulation can be predicted using the mathematics of networks.

Tracking electrical signals in the brain

Studying communication in the human brain is hard. This is because electrical signals move very fast, at the scale of thousandths of a second, between one part of the brain and another.

To make matters more complicated, signals are communicated via an incredibly complex network of nerve fibres that interlinks all brain regions. These issues make it difficult for scientists to even observe signals travelling through the brain.

Read more:
Like sightseeing in Paris – a new model for brain communication

However, under very special and controlled circumstances, we can use invasive electrodes to precisely track the propagation of brain signals. Invasive electrodes are instruments that are surgically inserted into the brains of consenting patients.

It is important to stress this type of invasive procedure can only be done in very special circumstances, when the primary goal is to help patients. In our case, patients were people with severe epilepsy. When epilepsy patients do not respond to medication, they can opt to use electrodes to help doctors find out more about what might be happening in their brains.

Our study was based on a large group of 550 epilepsy patient volunteers in more than 20 hospitals across North America, Asia and Europe.

The electrodes provide a way to gently stimulate a brain area with an electrical pulse, and, at the same time, record the patient’s brain activity. We used data from electrodes placed in different positions of the brain to track the communication of electrical pulses from one region to another.

As a last ingredient for our study, we used MRI scans to reconstruct the network of nerve fibres of the human brain, known as the connectome. This gave us a model of the physical wiring through which electrical signals are communicated in the brain.

The mathematics of network communication

So, how are signals communicated via the complex wiring of the connectome?

A simple possibility is signals travel via the most direct paths in the connectome. In network terms, this would mean that an electrical pulse goes from one region to another via the shortest path of intermediate regions between them.

Another idea is that signals spread via network diffusion. To understand this, think about how water would flow down a network of pipes.

Each time the water reaches a junction in the network, the flow is split along diverging paths. More junctions along the water’s journey means more splits, and the flow along any given path becomes weaker. However, if some of the diverging paths meet again downstream, the strength of the flow increases again. In this analogy, all connections (pipes) in the network contribute to shaping signal (water) flow, not only the ones along the most direct path.

What we found

These two types of network communication – shortest paths versus diffusive flow – are two competing hypotheses to explain how electrical signals cascade through the wiring of the connectome after brain stimulation. Today, scientists are not sure which hypothesis best matches what happens in the brain.

Our study is one of the first to try to settle this debate. To do this, we asked whether shortest paths or diffusion best predict electrical signal propagation, as measured by the electrodes in the brains of the patients.

After analysing the data, we found evidence supporting the diffusive flow hypothesis. This means that many more nerve connections – compared to just the ones travelling along shortest paths – shape how brain stimulation cascades down the connectome.

This is important information for scientists, as it helps us understand how the physical wiring of nerve connections contributes to brain activity and function.

Read more:
Your brain has ‘landmarks’ that drive neural traffic and help you make hard decisions

What’s next?

Our study is one of the first of its kind and more work is necessary to confirm what we found. We hope that progress in our understanding of brain communication will also help clinical scientists to design better brain stimulation treatments for mental health problems.

Brain stimulation can help to “restore” the malfunctioning communication between brain regions. For example, non-invasive stimulation (done outside the skull and without the need for surgery) is a treatment for major depressive disorder available in Australia.

In our future research, we will investigate if the discoveries reported here can be used to improve the therapeutic benefit of such brain stimulation treatments.

Caio Seguin has received funding from the University of Melbourne.

Andrew Zalesky receives funding from the Rebecca L. Cooper Foundation, the NHMRC and the ARC.

– ref. Electricity flow in the human brain can be predicted using the simple maths of networks, new study reveals – https://theconversation.com/electricity-flow-in-the-human-brain-can-be-predicted-using-the-simple-maths-of-networks-new-study-reveals-200831

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole Gurran, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Sydney

The current housing crisis has renewed debates about how to regulate short-term rental platforms such as Airbnb. The international research on the impact of these rentals is clear: when landlords “host” tourists rather than residents, housing supply is depleted, rents rise and neighbourhoods change.

Given Australia’s dire shortage of rental housing, restricting short-term rentals seems like a no-brainer. New research published this week showed the share of rental properties under $400 per week has fallen to 15% in most capital cities – half of what it was a year ago.

We’ve long studied these issues, watching as major cities around the world – from New York to Berlin to Barcelona – have enacted strong laws designed to protect local housing supply and neighbourhoods.

But do they even work? And would controlling short-term rentals solve Australia’s long-term rental crisis?

What some cities are trying

Amsterdam, San Francisco and London set limits of 30-90 nights per year that an entire home can be booked on a platform like Airbnb. Beyond this time, planning permission is needed to change the use of the property.

New Orleans has zoning laws that restrict holiday rentals to certain locations. Scotland has recently introduced similar laws requiring permission for short-term lets in certain “planning control areas”.

Numerous cities, including Boston, Amsterdam and Toronto, impose tourist taxes as a disincentive to short-term rental operators and to even the playing field with hotels. Revenue is then used to offset the impacts of lost permanent rental accommodation.

Paris has gone a step further, requiring short-term rental operators to “compensate” for lost rental supply in the city by purchasing and converting commercial floor space for residential use. The goal is to return housing to the market.

Enforcing regulations has been an ongoing battle, with data on short-term rental activity closely guarded by rental platforms.

Some platforms, such as Airbnb, now ensure hosts comply with local rules through their booking systems, although these cooperative actions typically occur after protracted legal battles.

Many local authorities have established dedicated compliance units to enforce regulations, often acting on neighbour complaints. New Orleans, for instance, uses highly visible code enforcement teams and even threats to cut off the electricity.

Ironically, some cities are contracting specialist platform firms to ensure compliance, such as “Sublet Spy”, which uses military-style technology to detect illegal lettings.

In Australia, change is piecemeal and slow

Planning laws are overseen by state governments in Australia. They have been much slower to act on short-term rentals than localities overseas.

New South Wales, for example, has moved to standardise regulations for short-term rentals following lengthy consultation processes and inquiries. These rules generally permit short-term rentals of whole homes without special approval, but limit bookings to 180 nights per year in metropolitan Sydney. Other areas can apply to impose the same conditions.

This is intended to preserve rental housing, but it is unlikely to do so given owners could book their properties for every weekend, as well as the Christmas holidays, before approaching the 180-night cap.

This is why Byron Bay, where housing is scarce for local residents and workers, has sought to impose a tighter cap of 90 nights, aside from designated areas with a concentration of second homes.

Byron Bay has one of the highest concentrations of short-term rental properties in the country. Rents in the area fell in 2020 as short-term properties pivoted to the long-term rental market when the borders were shut due to COVID.

However, this didn’t last long. With more people moving to Byron during the pandemic and the return of the short-term rental market, weekly rents rose from $555 in June 2020 to $800 by September 2022. The shortage of long-term rentals is one of the reasons Byron’s businesses have struggled to find staff.

Western Australia has proposed capping short-term rentals at 60 days annually without local planning approval. Beyond that, local planning rules apply.

In Margaret River, for instance, holiday home owners need to renew their planning permission annually to provide short-stay accommodation. This might be withheld if there have been complaints about the property.

Again, the primary focus is to protect established long-term rental housing supply. Ironically, the lack of permanent rental supply is putting pressure on the region’s tourism operators, whose employees are unable to find housing in the area. Meanwhile, caravan parks – meant for holidaymakers – are accommodating the homeless.

Tasmania has sought to enable local councils to develop and enforce their own regulations, although this might require new legislation.

In short, regulating short-term rentals to prevent further loss of rental supply is critical, but governments are moving slowly and enforcement is difficult.

link text

Creative uses for short-term rentals

Given holiday homes will remain an important part of tourism infrastructure in regional areas, could we make use of them in more strategic ways? For instance, during natural disasters or housing crises?

An estimated 65,000 people were temporarily displaced during the 2019-20 bushfires that ravaged the east coast. Some 3,100 houses were also destroyed, leaving around 8,000 people in urgent need of accommodation.

Similarly, over 14,000 homes were damaged in NSW by last year’s floods, and more than 5,000 were left uninhabitable.

A year later, many people in NSW continue to live in inadequate accommodation. Government-issued temporary homes, such as campervans and “pods”, are in woefully short supply.

Housing generally takes a long time to build, making it difficult to respond to such short-term increases in demand.

More strategic and creative use of the short-term rental stock might be the answer. We have seen some gestures by Airbnb and other platforms to support people displaced by disasters, but these responses have largely been ad hoc and uncoordinated.

When disaster zones are declared, Commonwealth and state governments could mandate and coordinate access to short-term rental accommodations for displaced residents and relief workers.

We could even extend such declarations during housing crises like the one we’re experiencing now, as the mayor of Eurobodalla on the NSW south coast has suggested. This would give governments time to deliver longer-term housing solutions in areas of heavy demand.

Read more:
Ever wondered how many Airbnbs Australia has and where they all are? We have the answers

From short-term thinking to long-term reform

In comparison to much of the international regulation of the short-term rental market, Australia is very “light touch”. The overarching aim is to encourage the tourism economy.

While this might have been appropriate five years ago when the rental market was in better shape, and long-term housing demand focused on inner city areas, the current crisis demands a new approach. Regulations must be tailored to the conditions of local housing markets, rather than the one-size-fits-all approach that exists today.

More broadly, large-scale protections for renters, increased rental subsidies for low-income households and more construction of social housing is what’s really needed to solve Australia’s housing crisis. Preserving existing housing supply – and making better use of short-term accommodation during times of need – would also make an immediate difference for renters around the nation.

However, going on the history of housing regulation in Australia, renters should not hold out too many hopes for politicians to provide any real assistance.

Nicole Gurran receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

Peter Phibbs receives funding from Shelter Tasmania to undertake research on short term rentals in Tasmania.

– ref. Australia has taken a ‘light touch’ with Airbnb. Could stronger regulations ease the housing crisis? – https://theconversation.com/australia-has-taken-a-light-touch-with-airbnb-could-stronger-regulations-ease-the-housing-crisis-200347

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andreea Lachsz, PhD Candidate, University of Technology Sydney

On this International Women’s Day, let’s not forget women in prison.

There are 3,088 women imprisoned in Australia on any given day, representing 7.5% of the prison population. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are over-represented in these numbers.

Australia spends $4.44 billion on prisons. Despite this, reproductive health care equivalent to that in the community is often not available where women are being detained.

This includes care related to menstruation, menopause, contraception, preventive health care such as cervical screening tests, and access to abortions.

Adequate health care during pregnancy, birth and after birth is often unavailable in these prisons.

Read more:
The UN committee against torture has found Australia still has work to do

Protecting women’s dignity and health

Reproductive health care must be delivered in appropriate ways to those who require it. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people require culturally safe health care, free from racism. There must also be inclusive care for non-binary and transgender people.

Failing to provide access to sanitary pads and tampons is a form of degrading treatment, according to the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It can leave women and people who menstruate vulnerable to exploitation. For example, limited access to sanitary pads can lead to them being traded for favours.

In addition to menstrual items, underwear also needs to be available for people in prison. A 2019 consultation by the Queensland Human Rights Commission reported one woman’s experience of being detained in a Brisbane watch-house. The woman had to stick a menstrual pad to her tracksuit, because she was not given underwear. “There was blood everywhere,” the woman’s cellmate recalled. “They eventually gave her an incontinence nappy, and a clean pair of pants.”

The ACT Inspector of Correctional Services conducted a review into the Alexander Maconochie Centre, a prison in Canberra. The review investigated the use of force during a strip search on an Aboriginal woman. The woman had become distressed after being advised she was not allowed to attend her grandmother’s funeral and participate in Sorry Business. She was menstruating at the time, and was a victim-survivor of sexual assault.

The woman described her experience:

At this time I was menstruating heavily due to all the blood thinning medication I take on a daily basis. Here I ask you to remember that I am a rape victim. So you can only imagine the horror, the screams, the degrading feeling, the absolute fear and shame I was experiencing [during the strip search].

On another issue at the same prison, the ACT office recommended “condoms, water-based lubricants and dental dams be made freely available in the units so detainees can access them without having to make a request to staff”.

In its prison review, the inspector had been told detained people in the Alexander Maconochie Centre wanting to practice safe sex were “making do” by “cutting open latex gloves”.

Read more:
Here’s some context missing from the Mparntwe Alice Springs ‘crime wave’ reporting

Access to terminations and care following miscarriages

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture has stated “denial of legally available health services such as abortion and post-abortion care” amounts to “mistreatment of women seeking reproductive health services”. Forcing people to continue their pregnancy is a form of sexual and gender-based violence.

The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture has affirmed that respect for a detained “woman’s right to bodily integrity” requires they have the same access to the “morning after pill and/or other forms of abortion at later stages of a pregnancy” as “women who are free.”

It is also crucial for people who miscarry to be provided with the appropriate mental health and physical care.

Increased transparency and oversight is needed to ascertain whether minimum standards for reproductive health care are being met in Australian prisons. However, accounts from women in prison have indicated access to even basic healthcare is often a challenge.

Birth and separation

In Australia, there have been instances of an Aboriginal woman giving birth alone in a locked prison cell while staff observed through the hatch. Another example featured attempts to remove a baby from their Aboriginal mother against medical advice due to insufficient capacity at the prison. And an Aboriginal woman was denied the right to bond with her newborn and breastfeed them.

Yet the UN Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders state women “shall not be discouraged from breastfeeding their children, unless there are specific health reasons to do so”.

We need more transparency in prisons, so we can fix these issues

Implementation of the UN Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment could bring attention to what is happening in Australian prisons.

This protocol calls for regular visits to places of detention by independent bodies to prevent ill-treatment of detained people, including denial of reproductive health care.

But in January Australia missed its implementation deadline. Australia is currently at risk of being added to the UN list of non-compliant countries. Australian commonwealth, state and territory governments have some work to do before this tool can be effectively used to prevent mistreatment of incarcerated women.

And while shining a light in the dark corners of prisons is essential, there are concrete steps governments can take now to improve reproductive health care and provide community-equivalent care.

These include ending the privatisation of prison health care, having accessible health services provided by Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations, and reducing the number of women who are incarcerated in the first place.

Andreea Lachsz is currently contracted to the ACT government as the ACT National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) Coordination Director. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of ACT government, ACT NPM or any extant policy.

– ref. Health care offered to women in prison should match community standards – and their rights – https://theconversation.com/health-care-offered-to-women-in-prison-should-match-community-standards-and-their-rights-200656

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Nikitopoulos, Associate professor, Finance Discipline Group, University of Technology Sydney

You might not realise this when you flick your switch at home, but Australian electricity generators are forever locked in a bidding war. They compete for the right to supply electricity on the spot market. The cheapest bids win and electricity from those generators is supplied, or “dispatched”, to the grid in five-minute intervals.

This means that every five minutes, the electricity grid is rebalanced to ensure supply meets demand. Too little supply causes blackouts; too much causes tripping (and more blackouts).

But until recently, the price paid for wholesale electricity (the settlement price) on the Australian National Electricity Market (NEM) was averaged over six five-minute intervals (30 minutes). (Australia is unusual in this regard. Many grids elsewhere such as in Europe operate forward or day-ahead markets, where supply is planned in advance.)

That worked fine in the early days, but when supply started to fluctuate more wildly with the advent of intermittent renewable energy, so did the bidding war. Some generators starting gaming the system, pushing prices sky-high. Retailers complained.

So when the NEM finally introduced five-minute settlement in October 2021, it was a big deal. There was a great deal of excitement. Most commentators expected wholesale electricity prices to settle down, coal to lose market share, and batteries to boom. That’s mainly because the new system would be more efficient, rewarding cheap, nimble and flexible generators including batteries.

But what actually happened? Our analysis reveals the average spot price went up, not down, in Tasmania, Queensland, and New South Wales. Black coal-fired generators made more money on the spot market, not less. Flexible generators, especially batteries, did well too. (In the other NEM states, South Australia and Victoria, there was no significant change).

We argue further changes are needed to achieve the desired effects. These include increasing competition in the market (reducing the power of the three biggest electricity generators), building the infrastructure needed to support a green grid, and investing in more flexible and fuel-efficient technologies.

Read more:
Australia’s energy market operator is worried about the grid’s reliability. But should it be?

Greening the grid

The NEM opened in 1998. The market adopted a 30-minute settlement rule at the time, because five-minute settlement would have pushed the limits of metering and data-processing capabilities.

But as the share of renewable energy grew, it became increasingly apparent that more flexible technology would be needed to cope with intermittent solar and wind power.

Problems included frequent price spikes, blackouts, power tripping, and “gaming” behaviours by major generators.

Energy retailers became frustrated by this gaming behaviour in particular, and complained to the authorities, prompting the rule change. Previously, coal and gas generators could send dispatch prices through the roof in one interval, so that when prices were averaged over the 30 minutes, it made the final trading price high. One way of doing this was to create artificial scarcity of supply, by withdrawing generation to raise spot prices.

When a price spike occurred, generators would then pile in by offering a lower price for the remainder of the 30-minute settlement period.

Five-minute settlement aimed to resolve these issues and better support the integration of wind and solar power into the electricity grid, ultimately making electricity more affordable for customers.

The new rule would also encourage investment in faster response technologies such as batteries.

Our study adds to the understanding of early effects of this regulatory change in the NEM. This will support the transition to clean energy generation, and inform policy for future electricity markets that offer stability, security and lower prices. We also propose courses of action to facilitate more effective adaptation to the rule change.

Did the new rule work?

The market had four years to prepare for the rule change, allowing generators to adjust their operations.

When five-minute settlement came in on October 1 2021, there was no substantial immediate effect.

However, within the first eight months of the change, the market started to adjust. We found that five-minute settlement led to an average spot price increase (not decrease) in Tasmania, Queensland and New South Wales.

That’s because generators no longer had a financial incentive to rebid at a very low price after a price spike, as they had done in a 30-minute trading interval. That was a strategy that caused significant fluctuation in the spot price.

Promisingly, the implementation of five-minute settlement had no measurable impact on the intensity of electricity price fluctuations. That suggests the new rule may have been effective in maintaining price stability.

So, in these early stages of the rule change, wholesale electricity customers are actually paying more, but the price has been more stable.

The impact on retail prices remains uncertain. The retailers’ costs of buying electricity and managing price risks are one component of what costumers pay in their energy bills. In 2020–21, it accounted for about a third of their bill. So if these effects persist, there is a possibility these higher prices will be passed on to consumers as well.

We also found that variable and flexible generators, especially batteries, took advantage of their flexibility to capture more revenue from the spot market. Gas generators’ revenue barely changed, but that could be because less flexible gas generators are lumped in together with highly flexible gas generators.

Surprisingly, the revenue earned by black coal-fired generators also increased. We suspect generators changed their operations and bidding strategies to align with the five-minute settlement rule. However, revenue for coal-fired generators is still likely to fall over the medium to long term.

Three ways to improve five-minute settlement

It will take time to see the full effect of the rule change on the wholesale and retail electricity markets. However, we think the following changes are needed to fully realise the benefits of five-minute settlement:

1. Market concentration. The NEM is a concentrated market. The three largest generators, AGL Energy, Origin Energy and Energy Australia, hold a substantial market share. Together, they supply about 80% of the generated energy. Policies that promote competition are key to realising the benefits of five-minute settlement.

2. Supporting infrastructure. Five-minute settlement is expected to increase the operational cost of generating coal-fired power. That’s because ageing power plants would need to be upgraded to be able to compete during periods of fluctuating demand. Renewable generators, on the other hand, have extremely low operating costs, largely due to having no fuel costs. Coal-fired generators are likely to lose revenue and leave the market much earlier than expected. Firming and flexible demand technologies such as energy storage systems (pumped hydro, batteries or solar thermal) can effectively respond to the new market conditions and fill the gap.

3. Fuel-efficient and flexible technologies. Technologies such as batteries, pumped hydro and aero-derivative gas turbines operate more effectively in a five-minute settlement design. The recent rise in gas prices also necessitates investment in flexible and fuel-efficient technologies, such as reciprocating gas engines.

Without policies to address these three areas, we believe five-minute settlement is unlikely to offer substantial benefits to the market.

Read more:
5 policy decisions from recent history that led to today’s energy crisis

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

– ref. First look at the new settlement rule of Australia’s electricity market, has it worked? – https://theconversation.com/first-look-at-the-new-settlement-rule-of-australias-electricity-market-has-it-worked-200647

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martina Linnenluecke, Professor of Environmental Finance at UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

As the cost of living soars, many Australian households are turning to rooftop solar to cut their energy costs. A Pulse of the Nation survey last month showed about 29% of Australians have installed or are considering installing solar panels on their homes.

The same survey shows one in five Australians can’t afford to adequately heat or cool their homes. Many are also unable to install energy-saving options such as solar panels or insulation because of the upfront costs or because they are renters who cannot make changes to the dwelling. Among those who are financially stressed, earn less than A$50,000 or are between the ages of 18 and 34, a large majority do not intend to install energy-saving options, largely because they cannot afford them.

Renewable energy is not just critical for saving on energy bills, but also for mitigating climate change and fostering sustainable development. However, the reality is access to solar power is not equitable for all Australians. Our new research shows without better government support, many people will miss out on its benefits.

Read more:
How to maximise savings from your home solar system and slash your power bills

What does equity in rooftop solar uptake look like?

Our research focuses on how to make access to rooftop solar more equitable.

It is important to distinguish between equity and equality. Equality means every household will be given the same resources or opportunities. For example, every household would receive the same subsidy to install solar panels.

Equity refers to fairness. The idea of equity recognises not all households start from the same place. Instead, adjustments to imbalances might be required.

In the context of solar adoption, equity would mean every Australian can benefit from solar power. Any subsidies or other support would be adjusted based on individual circumstances.

To better understand how it affects the adoption of solar panels, we looked at several aspects of inequity. These include financial situation, renting status, gender, education and ethnicity.

For our study, we collected 167 studies worldwide on household solar panel adoption to determine what we know about how it’s affected by these aspects of inequity.

Read more:
We all need energy to survive. Here are 3 ways to ensure Australia’s crazy power prices leave no-one behind

Solar power equity has been neglected

Our findings show there is very limited in-depth data and research on this issue in Australia. Australian studies on residential solar uptake account for 20 (12%) of the 167 studies.

Research in Australia tends to focus on equity related to income. Of the 20 Australian studies, six find a positive link between income and solar panel adoption, four find a negative link, five show inconclusive results and five omit income altogether.

These mixed results can be explained, in part, by the fact that a range of factors impact whether a household can afford solar power. For example, a somewhat higher household income does not automatically mean that a household has less bill stress and enough accumulated wealth to afford the upfront cost of installing solar power.

Few studies offer a deeper analysis of variables such as education or ethnicity. For Australia, only five studies looked at education and only one at ethnicity. There is a lack of data on solar uptake among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

This limited research does not allow for definite conclusions about how these variables impact rooftop solar uptake.

Energy-saving installations in investment properties have also received limited attention. Many Australian renters report their dwellings have extremely poor insulation. This leads to hot indoor temperatures in summer and cold conditions in winter.

Renters typically have limited ways to fix these problems. The only available options for many renters are air conditioning and portable heaters powered by traditional energy sources, which increases electricity bills.

Read more:
Heat pumps can cut your energy costs by up to 90%. It’s not magic, just a smart use of the laws of physics

What policies can improve solar equity?

Policies that could improve equity in rooftop solar access include:

• direct financial support for low-income households that otherwise could not afford solar power

• a variety of other financial incentives such as solar rebates

• community solar programs that allow households to share the benefits.

Some programs are in place to help home owners on low incomes to install solar systems. For example, New South Wales has a “Solar for low-income households” program. Eligible individuals can get a free 3-kilowatt solar system in return for giving up the Low-Income Household Rebate for ten years. South Australia had a “Switch for Solar” trial, for which applications closed on August 31 2022.

However, to access these schemes Australians must first overcome one difficult hurdle: home ownership.

In addition, a focus on income alone can be problematic. Directing subsidies to low-income households alone misses households with low wealth that are above an income threshold.

The Australian government has promised new policy approaches. Its Powering Australia Plan pledged $102.2 million for community solar banks. These are community-owned projects to improve access for those currently locked out of solar power. Households can lease or buy a plot in these solar banks, instead of using their own rooftops.

Read more:
3 ways the Albanese government can turn Australia into a renewable energy superpower – without leaving anyone behind

The success of such projects will depend on whether they are accessible to and affordable for everyone.

More data collection is needed to identify priorities for policy action on energy equity. This can include a new Household Energy Consumption Survey (the Australian Bureau of Statistics conducted such a survey until a decade ago), broader analysis by researchers to consider equity dimensions, and collaboration between researchers and policymakers to trial new policies.

Martina Linnenluecke receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Rohan Best has received past funding from the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia.

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

– ref. Solar power can cut living costs, but it’s not an option for many people – they need better support – https://theconversation.com/solar-power-can-cut-living-costs-but-its-not-an-option-for-many-people-they-need-better-support-201090

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nina Van Dyke, Principal Research Fellow at the Mitchell Institute, Victoria University

When we talk about “school transitions”, we generally refer to three specific points: starting primary school, starting secondary school, and moving from secondary school to further education or work.

However, school transitions occur every year, and the lack of a smooth transition, particularly if it occurs outside the expected “big years”, sometimes takes both students and their parents by surprise.

The transitions from the first year of school to Year 1, and from Year 7 to Year 8, may be particularly fraught.

Year 1: when school ‘gets real’

In many Australian states, the first year of school (called kindergarten, prep, transition, reception, or pre-primary, depending on your state) is regarded as a transition year from preschool or kinder to primary school.

For example, in Queensland and Victoria, play-based learning is an important feature. This means there is an emphasis on activities including manipulative tasks such as jigsaw puzzles, games with rules, sharing and cooperation, and physical activities.

But Year 1 is regarded as a year when school “gets real” – regardless of what state you’re in.

Year 1 has an increased emphasis on academic learning as well as higher expectations around independence and self-regulation. For example, students are expected to cope independently with less adult supervision when going to the toilet and eating lunch, as well as a structured classroom routine. They are also expected to follow school rules, focus and listen in class, complete work to a schedule, and arrive to class on time.

Even for children who seem ready, the jump from the first year of school to Year 1 is a big one.

The ‘Year 8 dip’

The “Year 8 dip” refers to a drop in motivation and performance that often occurs between the first and second years of secondary school.

In Australia, there is also evidence of a “Year 9 dip”, in which “girls often withdraw or get anxious and boys muck up”.

A 2015 New South Wales study, for example, found drops in student engagement during the middle years of high school, with big drops from Year 7 to Year 8, and further drops from Year 8 to Year 9.

A 2014 Gallup poll found 75% of Year 5 students surveyed reported being engaged in school but only 58% were engaged in Year 8.

Read more:
Whether it’s a new teacher or class – here’s what to do when your child is not loving it

Why the Year 8 dip?

Year 8 and Year 9 are often seen as the least important years of secondary school. Year 7 is new and Years 10 and up are focused on exams and what students will do after they finish school. Year 8, in contrast, has no obvious purpose.

One study found students perceived they had lower levels of teacher support in Year 8 (and even lower in Year 9). Teachers confirmed this perception, agreeing they provided less support to students in Years 8 and 9.

But there is also an element of school becoming more challenging and more work. For example, Year 7 maths is largely repetition of primary school to catch everyone up and consolidate knowledge. This may lead some students to believe they don’t need to put in as much effort. When they get to Year 8, they are in for a rude shock.

Finally, Year 8 students are no longer the youngest in the school, and are conscious of “growing up”. At 13 and 14, peer groups become more important, perhaps shifting the importance of school downwards. And hormones are at their peak, affecting students’ mood and impulse control.

What can parents do to help?

There are many things you can do to help a child if they are finding the transition to Year 1 or Year 8 bumpier than expected.

Moving into Year 1

Speak positively with your child about the changes they might be experiencing in Year 1, while acknowledging and discussing any concerns they may have. For example, you might say something like:

It seems that you are a bit nervous about Year 1 because there are many new things to learn and some are a bit difficult. When I started a new job where I had to learn to do many new things, I also had the same feeling.

Another example could be:

It seems that you find reading a bit difficult. You are not as good at reading yet as you want to be. But if we read more together, this will help.

Strengthen your child’s independence and planning skills as they move into Year 1. For example, have them pack their own school bag. Discuss setting up a daily routine, such as when to get up, play and snack times, and when to go to bed.

Read regularly with your child to strengthen their language skills, to prepare them for the increased focus on academic learning in Year 1.

If you have concerns about your child’s progress or how they are settling in, talk to their teacher.

Going from Year 7 to Year 8

Be enthusiastic about Year 8 (and Year 9) when you talk with your child. Combat the narrative that these years “don’t really matter”. Even though peer opinion is increasingly important, we know parents’ opinions still matter to young people.

Be prepared for a possible drop in enthusiasm or work habits as your child moves into and through Year 8. Spot and address any concerning behaviours early; for example, wagging school or withdrawing from friends. Seek academic or mental health support if needed.

Recognise the increasing maturity of your Year 8 student – provide them with opportunities to have a greater voice in decisions about school or other issues. For example, let them lead a discussion around what electives they take in Year 9, or rules around electronic device use or bed times.

Read more:
How to avoid annoying your kids and getting ‘stressed by proxy’ during exam season

Nina Van Dyke is an Associate Professor and Principal Research Fellow at the Mitchell Institute at Victoria University. She recently received funding from the Alannah & Madeline Foundation to conduct research on cyberbullying in schools. Prior to that, she has conducted education and health-related research for a variety of organisations, and has received funding from government departments and not-for-profit organisations to conduct education and health-related research.

Cynthia Leung is an adjunct professor at the Mitchell Institute at Victoria University who receive funding from Minderoo’s Thrive by Five initiative to undertake research into early childhood education and care.

– ref. Year 1 and Year 8 can be surprisingly tough transitions (if your child is struggling, they are not alone) – https://theconversation.com/year-1-and-year-8-can-be-surprisingly-tough-transitions-if-your-child-is-struggling-they-are-not-alone-200356

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa French, Professor & Dean, School of Media and Communication, RMIT University

Protest was dangerous in feminism’s formative years.

The suffragettes in the United Kingdom initially began by trying to persuade and educate to win women the right to vote.

When that didn’t work they became frustrated – and, by 1903, radical.

By the 1910s, they adopted militant tactics, with women on hunger strikes being force-fed in prison.

It climaxed in 1913 when Emily Wilding Davidson, holding the suffragette flag, stepped in front of the horse of King George V at the Epsom Derby.

Her funeral, reportedly watched by 50,000 people, gave a global profile to the women’s right-to-vote campaign.

But while protest was very dangerous for first-wave feminists, subsequent Western activists often adopted pranks.

There is an adage that feminists and women aren’t funny. However, the history of activism reveals humour as a successful strategy for change.

Here are four great contemporary feminist pranks that demonstrate the power of humour for advocacy.

1. A chain reaction

On March 31 1965, feminist activists Rosalie Bogner and Merle Thornton walked into Brisbane’s Regatta hotel, chaining themselves to the foot rail of the front bar.

They were protesting the exclusion of women from Queensland public bars.

The police were called, smashed the padlock, and told them to leave. They refused.

After some bemused and sympathetic men gave them glasses of beer, the officer gave up, telling the women to have “a good time” and “don’t drink too much”.

They inspired women nationally to do the same. Laws had changed across Australia by the early 1970s.

According to historian Kay Saunders, it was the “beginning of second-wave feminism” in Australia.

Read more:
Brazen Hussies: a new film captures the heady, turbulent power of Australia’s women’s liberation movement

2. Guerrilla Girls

In 1985, the New York activist group Guerrilla Girls began their quest to counter the art world’s sexism, racism and inequality. They used gorilla masks to remain anonymous and emphasise that the message was paramount, not the activist.

Guerrilla Girls famously erected posters and placed stickers protesting the lack of women in art galleries, asking “Do women have to be naked to get into the Met Museum?”

Humour and statistics enhanced awareness, got people involved, and illuminated issues such as how few women of colour have their work exhibited.

Since the Guerrilla Girls began four decades ago, their messages have continued to spread and hold institutions accountable. They have expanded their mission to important causes such as poverty and war, while continuing to change the art world’s attitudes and to merging art and politics.

But the gender imbalance in art galleries is still a global issue. This is currently being countered with initiatives such as the National Gallery of Australia’s Know My Name campaign and efforts to write women back into art history.

Read more:
Why weren’t there any great women artists? In gratitude to Linda Nochlin

3. Switcheroo

In 1993 the Barbie Liberation Organization undertook a Christmas prank, swapping the voice boxes of 50 Barbie and G.I. Joe dolls.

G.I. Joe now said “I love to shop with you” or “Let’s plan our dream wedding”. Barbie hollered “Dead men tell no lies” or “Attack!”.

With an aim to teach children about stereotypes, the spectacle made a huge media splash for the cause.

The tactic is known as “shop-dropping”. The activist bought, altered and then dropped the dolls back on the shelves.

The organisation arranged for children to comment to the media on gender stereotyping, and the press reported there were hundreds of dolls instead of just 50.

Although impact is hard to measure, the prank created unprecedented media attention leading to the visibility of the organisation’s issues based video. It questioned the status quo regarding what girls can do and should think, promoting social change in exposing how toys shape ideology.

It revealed the impact of gender stereotypes and their insidious sexism; the way war toys are role models; and the need for playthings to be more inclusive and diverse.

Mattel, the company that makes Barbie, did not react, but later released toys indicating it had received the message. These include the Inspiring Women series featuring the likes of Eleanor Roosevelt, Ella Fitzgerald and Jane Goodall.

Read more:
My talk with Jane Goodall: vegetarianism, animal welfare and the power of children’s advocacy

4. Sausage fest!

At the 2016 Australian Film Institute’s premier event, the AACTA Awards, protesters from Women in Film and Television NSW blocked the red carpet dressed as sausages and chanting “end the sausage party”.

The event was livestreamed on Facebook after security gave them access, thinking they were part of the event.

The women were protesting for a quota system to improve the number of women working in the film and television industries.

They wanted to highlight a lack of feature film judging transparency, the low proportion of nominations for women, and how few films were directed and driven by female creatives.

Only 20% of Australian-funded feature films have a female director. AACTA does not fund films and it is therefore the broader industry that urgently needs to lift female participation.

Since the sausage prank, AACTA entry forms also ask about the diversity of the filmmakers, triggering producers to reflect on inclusion in their films.

AACTA has also changed its eligibility rules, engaging with Women in Film and Television to expand eligibility beyond just films that received a theatrical release.

This reduced barriers to entry; opportunities for women and diverse filmmakers are more frequently in independent or low-budget sectors, which don’t always attain release in commercial cinemas. This change in eligibility was reported as allowing greater inclusion and diversity.

Recognition across society has come from a long line of feminist pranksters. But slow progress means there is still a long way to go to achieve equality and equity.

Read more:
Women aren’t the problem in the film industry, men are

Lisa French 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. Protest is dangerous, but feminists have a long history of using humour, pranks and stunts to promote their message – https://theconversation.com/protest-is-dangerous-but-feminists-have-a-long-history-of-using-humour-pranks-and-stunts-to-promote-their-message-199298

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ayesha Scott, Senior Lecturer – Finance, Auckland University of Technology

Gender equity continues to be a significant problem in business globally. We all know the story: the gender pay gap is a persistent issue and female-dominated industries tend to be lower paid.

Female representation in senior leadership and board positions remains low in many countries, particularly in Aotearoa New Zealand. Women comprise only 28.5% of director positions across all NZX-listed companies and just 23.7% at companies outside of the NZX’s top 50.

Change is slow despite the well-established evidence showing the merits of improving gender equity for businesses – including better firm performance – and excellent initiatives such as Mind The Gap.

But there is a way to support companies that have made the change towards greater gender equity – and encourage others to do the same: we can invest with a “gender lens”.

The aim of investing with a gender lens is not only to make a financial return but also to improve the lives of women by providing capital to those companies doing well on gender issues.

Gender lens investing goes beyond counting female representation at board level. It encompasses the number of female managers, leaders and employees as well as the existence of policies or products provided by a company to address the gender pay gap and other inequities faced by their female employees. It also encourages investing in women-owned enterprises.

In essence, investing with a gender lens means identifying and investing in those companies that are empowering their female employees and embracing diversity. This might seem simple. But there are no investment portfolios or funds investing in companies that do right by women.

One explanation for this gap is that identifying gender-friendly companies is not easy. And this is where rating agencies have a role to play.

The role and power of rating agencies

Over the past three decades there has been a fundamental shift towards investing for not only financial returns but also for social outcomes – so called Responsible Investing (RI).

The growth in RI has spawned an industry dedicated to defining and measuring a company’s non-financial contributions across a range of areas, specifically across the environmental, social and governance (ESG) pillars.

The rating agencies build scores by collecting data on issues within each of the ESG pillars – for instance, the environmental pillar comprises data on carbon emissions, land use and water, among other measures – and then converts this into an overall score.

Read more:
Do women-focused capital funds actually help women, or are they just ‘pinkwashing?’

Fund managers, especially those managing RI funds, use these scores to inform investment decisions. What, then, are the comparable measures for gender lens investing?

While some rating agencies have created measures to identify companies suitable for a gender lens portfolio – for example, Sustainalytics has a gender equality index – others have very little on gender at all. Some rating agencies seem to base gender equity performance on the number of women on a company’s board or its in-house policies on diversity and discrimination.

In short, there is little-to-no substantive information available to allow investing with a gender lens. And why is that?

Well, rating agency MSCI states it collects information on “financially relevant ESG risks and opportunities”. Sustainalytics requires an issue to have a “substantial impact on the economic value of a company”. These agencies require an issue to affect financial performance.

Under its “social” pillar, for example, MSCI considers water usage, arguing companies in high-water-use industries face operation disruptions, higher regulation and higher costs for water, which can reduce returns and increase risk.

The absence of data related to gender implies women-friendly policies are not viewed as affecting the performance or risk of companies.

A gender lens to the rescue?

But with a bit of a push, rating agencies can help make gender equity transparent. They have the research capability and access to company data that everyday investors do not. This can help investors make informed decisions about what to invest in.

Read more:
Auditing, matching pay and accountability will close the gender pay gap: study

Pressure from investors can also force companies to address equity issues. When that happens, the public metrics of company performance on gender issues become a lever around which companies can be encouraged to change.

Investors themselves may also find great personal satisfaction in being able to make gender-aware decisions if they could easily apply a gender lens when deciding where to invest.

It is time for potential investors to start demanding data be collected. Once that happens, rating agencies will send a message to companies that gender equity matters. As long as investors stay silent, progress will remain slow.

Ayesha Scott receives funding from Te Ara Ahunga Ora (Retirement Commission).

Aaron Gilbert receives funding from Te Ara Ahunga Ora (The Retirement Commission).

Candice Harris 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. Want to support companies that support women? Look at your investments through a ‘gender lens’ – here’s how – https://theconversation.com/want-to-support-companies-that-support-women-look-at-your-investments-through-a-gender-lens-heres-how-201292

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shireen Daft, Lecturer, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University

Recent media attention has drawn global focus on an escalating number of Iranian schoolgirls falling ill over the past few months because of suspected chemical attacks. Accounts differ, but many reports cite more than 1,000 cases of poisoning at schools across Iran. At least 58 schools in ten provinces across the country have been affected.

The first known cases were reported in the city of Qom in November. There has been an escalation of reported cases, with 26 schools affected in a wave of attacks last week. The students have reported respiratory problems, nausea, dizziness and fatigue, with several girls hospitalised. Parents have been keeping their daughters home from school to protect them from these attacks.

Escalating public unrest and international attention has led Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to publicly denounce the attacks as a “major and unforgivable crime”, promising an investigation and swift punishment for those responsible.

This follows months of contradictory statements from government officials, the arrest of a journalist investigating the issue earlier this week, and the reported use of tear gas to disperse an organised demonstration about the poisonings in Tehran on Sunday.

Many consider the attacks a direct response to the ongoing protests in Iran since the death of Mahsa Amini in September. Students, mostly university students but also schoolgirls, have been at the forefront of those protests.

To date, there has been no direct evidence about who is responsible for the poisonings, and continued uncertainty about how they are carried out. Part of the difficulty in collecting information is the extreme limits imposed on press freedom in Iran. There have been calls from the international community for the United Nations to conduct an independent investigation.

Read more:
Women-led protests in Iran gather momentum – but will they be enough to bring about change?

There are some claims that question whether there has in fact been any chemical attacks at all. Instead, they speculate that this is in fact evidence of a mass psychogenic illness.

This would not be unprecedented – in an investigation of alleged poisonings of schoolgirls in Afghanistan between 2012-16, the UN concluded it was most likely a result of mass psychogenic illness, after finding no trace of chemical gas or poison.

However, the reality is that poisonous substances can degrade rapidly, especially nitrogen dioxide, which one government probe in Iran has indicated may be the cause. There have also been unconfirmed witness reports of suspicious objects being thrown into schoolyards.

Global threats to girls’ education

Another reason that the deliberate poisonings of the Iranian schoolgirls is so credible is that it is far from unusual. While education, including girls’ education, is highly respected in Iran, schoolgirls globally are all too often the object of attacks.

A report conducted by the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack looked at attacks on girls’ education between 2014 and 2018 in regions of conflict and instability. It found that schoolgirls and female teachers have been directly targeted in at least 18 countries, including Afghanistan, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, India, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, South Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen.

The nature of attacks is wide and varied, including the bombing of girls’ schools and abduction of girls. Teachers and students have been attacked either en route to school or while there. There have also been reports of sexual violence and sometimes forced marriage of both girls and their female teachers.

One of the most infamous cases of violence directed at girls for “daring” to attend school remains Malala Yousafzai being shot in the head in 2012 in Pakistan. There are also less direct forms of attacks, including the repurposing and shutting down of girls’ schools as a lower priority than boys’ education, threats to keep girls away from school, and the imposition and violent enforcement of restrictive dress codes.

Attacks on schools have escalated sharply in recent decades, but this escalation has been particularly acute in relation to schools dedicated to girls. All too often, these attacks occur with impunity.

The impact of attacks on education for girls

Even if the effects of the poisonings on the Iranian schoolgirls have so far not shown any evidence of serious impacts on their health, there are still long-term psychological effects of being the target of a systematic and gendered attack, and unknown long-term physical consequences.

Aside from the direct impact on the right of everyone to an education for the “full development of the human personality and […] dignity”, attacks on education have a profound and lasting effect on girls.

Girls deprived of an education are more likely to be vulnerable to child or forced marriages, usually also resulting in reduced reproductive and sexual autonomy. There is also increased risk of domestic violence and a life of poverty. Attacks on schools have also been linked to an increased likelihood of girls being forced into recruitment to armed groups and becoming victims of human and sexual trafficking.

More generally, the violation of the right to education, and systemic gender discrimination results in girls and women having fewer opportunities to participate meaningfully in political, cultural, and social life. This loss affects not just individual girls and women, but society generally.

Read more:
Not ‘powerless victims’: how young Iranian women have long led a quiet revolution

There is no quick fix

Unfortunately, there is no simple fix to such attacks on girls’ education. While the investigation and prosecution of those responsible in Iran is an important step for accountability, it does not address the underlying problems.

Girls’ education under attack is always going to be part of broader contexts of systemic and widespread discrimination against women, and systems of oppression that reinforce stereotypical attitudes towards girls and women.

But protecting the right of girls to an education should be the cornerstone of any efforts towards gender equality. Such blatant and horrific attacks on girls in schools, as in Iran, should act as a clarion call for urgent change.

Shireen Daft 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. Is the poisoning of schoolgirls in Iran a new front in the war against girls’ education? – https://theconversation.com/is-the-poisoning-of-schoolgirls-in-iran-a-new-front-in-the-war-against-girls-education-201291