Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape says it is very disappointing that foreign-owned media in the country continue to run “fake news”.
He said this after an editorial in the Malaysian-owned National on Wednesday claimed that former Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop had “rubbished” Papua New Guinea at the PNG Mining and Petroleum Conference in Sydney this week.
“Nothing could be further from the truth,” said Marape, who attended the Sydney conference on Monday.
The National’s controversial “Stay home” editorial on Wednesday. Image: APR screenshot
“The people of Australia and PNG demand an apology from The National for what seems to be a deliberate attempt to damage good relations between our two countries,” he said.
“Even PNG Chamber of Mines and Petroleum president Anthony Smaré, who organised the conference, is bewildered at where The National got this information from.
“Such lies, propagated by foreign-owned media in PNG, will only damage the good relations between Australia and PNG that have existed long before they came in.
“The 1000-plus people who packed the Hilton Hotel in Sydney never heard a bad word from Julie Bishop, who even after leaving politics, continues to be a very good friend of PNG.
‘Selling point for PNG’ “Her speech at the conference on Monday was a selling point for PNG.”
Prime Minister Marape was also disappointed that people of PNG believed the National editorial.
“It is also very disappointing that Papua New Guineans, even the well-educated ones, believed The National editorial which spread like wildfire on social media,” he said.
“Those many good Papua New Guineans in Sydney on Monday for the conference will dispel this myth.”
Marape said he had never controlled media in PNG, which is mostly foreign-owned, since becoming Prime Minister in 2019.
“Never once did I budge into newsrooms at late hours or call editors, like my predecessor Peter O’Neill was known for, and demand that news stories be pulled down,” he said.
“These foreign-owned media should be grateful for this and tell the truth, rather than lies, about a country in which you are a guest.
“My government will be encouraging more PNG ownership of mainstream media in 2023 and beyond.”
The editorial in The National, owned by the Malaysian logging company Rimbunan Hijau, said on 7 December 2022:
Stay home and clean up Perhaps Papua New Guineans can learn a thing or two from the Sydney, Australia, conference last week.
Former Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, long used to Papua New Guinea and its talkative politicians, did not mince words.
She fairly told Papua New Guinea: “Stop begging for aid.
“Stop begging for investment.
“You have been independent 47 long years.
“You have sufficient resources.
“About time you did something of your own.”
That would have been sobering.
Lesson one – Stop begging for aid. At the last review of Australia’s aid to PNG, the aid bill from that direction had reached K28 billion [NZ$12.5 billion]. That amount will easily now be up to K50 billion. What lasting infrastructure has the aid money built? What import replacement industry has aid assisted in standing up? How has aid fared in lowering infant and maternal mortality or reduced poverty or improved living standards. These are quantifiable and verifiable factors on the human and economic indexes. If the present indexes are negligible or dropping, then the most important question of all is: Where has all the aid money gone? Lesson two: Stop begging for investment. You attract foreign direct investment by the incentives you offer, by the taxation regime you have, by the stable political climate you offer and security for investment and safety of employees that is in place. Do not go on foreign investment missions until these issues are sorted out at home. Do not go ask for investors if you have not started up Wafi Golpu, Papua LNG, Pnyang LNG and Porgera gold mine. Nobody is blind or a fool. Everybody is well aware what goes on in PNG. Lesson three: Think trade, not aid or loans. When you think in that direction you think about what you must grow or produce at home for trade. You must think markets, volumes, quality and sustainability. You must think about local manufacturing industries and growth of service industries. Lesson four: Enough talking, time for action. Do we need to even need an explanation for this last lesson? When you look at the lessons proffered here, you can easily see that much of the things that need doing must be done in the country. Even PNG’s neighbours are tiring of hearing PNG talking about this plan or that plan or whatever other plan without seeing any of the plans bearing fruit. Since Somare broached the 8-Point Plan in 1973 and the five National goals and Directive Principles have been written into the Preamble of the National Constitution, PNG has been planning forever but never getting up to work the plans. It has been forever asking others to do the things it itself seems loathe to do. These others, Australia being a principal partner in this, are now telling us: enough is enough. It is time the globe-trotting ceased and the trips to expos stopped. Putting Julie Bishop in the line-up of speakers also means the conference organisers thought the time was ripe for some straight talking. Stay home and clean up the backyard.
This media report is made up – it does not contain one actual quotation from my speech! The audience – mostly from PNG – can verify that I did not say this. 🤷♀️ https://t.co/eKZpBKbJvT
A new initiative has been launched in 15 Pacific Island countries to improve educational standards.
The Pacific Regional Inclusive Education Review was launched last week with each country having their own national surveys with the assistance of community groups, NGOs and stakeholders.
It has has been signed by Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
The Pacific Disability Forum comprises one of the many networks used to complete the survey, and it has roots in 21 countries.
Its main objective is to ensure children, including those living with disabilities, access quality learning.
The Forum’s CEO, Setareki Macanawai, said the review allowed for an understanding of the current issues within education across the region.
“[The purpose is] to have a shared understanding, and I think this is what this review has done. It has provided a lens-key, a good starting point. A good starting point condition for us in the Pacific to then develop a shared understanding of what inclusive education should look like for us in the Pacific.”
Making education accessible Macanawai also said it was hard to make education accessible in the region due to various pre-conditions.
“There is a lot of stigma, there is a lot of discrimination broadly and generally across the Pacific in the different cultures and societies which is a pre-condition that makes it hard to create an inclusive education for all, particularly those with impairments,” he said.
The biggest challenge to inclusive education in the Pacific is limited access or children living in poor housing. Image: UNICEF Pacific/2022/Temakei/RNZ Pacific
The review is conducted by UNICEF Pacific and the Pacific Regional Inclusive Education Taskforce.
UNICEF Pacific’s Chief of Education Programme Anna Smeby said the biggest challenge to inclusive education in the Pacific is limited access or children living in poor housing.
“We know that challenges can be in physical access, teaching approaches and availability of extra support, and it can be in the inclusiveness of the environment which means the infrastructure, but also social and emotionally whether it is a welcoming environment,” she said.
“Improving policy for inclusive education, building and strengthening to adapt and differentiate instruction, the resource in classroom so that they have the resources they need and improving school infrastructure, bringing inclusive education leaves us to learn from each other both the shared challenges and the promising practices.
Vulnerable groups “Vulnerable groups include learners with a disability or some sort of impairment, commonly students in remote places who do not have access to full-cycle schooling and students who have missed earlier learning but also gifted and talented students that need additional support in different ways,” Smeby said.
The collaboration between the 15 countries, regional partners, and the Pacific Inclusive Education Taskforce, supports Sustainable Development Goal 4 to achieve quality education for all and to build a pathway for all children to a productive and healthy adulthood.
UNICEF Pacific’s Deputy Representative Roshni Basu said countries needed to include the review’s recommendations into its policies urgently.
“UNICEF is committed to ensure that all children of our Pacific shores are able to enjoy their right to inclusive, and of course quality, education.
I urge all countries to maximise effort and commitment to translate the review findings into concrete investments for inclusive education.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Malake villagers in the Ra of western Fiji have flocked to their polling station eager to vote for a government who will have the interests of their community.
Nailati Rogolea, who ferried his entire family yesterday on a fiberglass boat to Malake Island from their settlement in Naria, said choosing the next government that could address issues they faced was important to his family.
“We want to choose someone that will not only listen to their people but also look after them,” he said.
A photograph taken by NASA’s Orion spacecraft has given us a new perspective on our home planet.
The snap was taken during the Artemis I mission, which sent an uncrewed vehicle on a journey around the Moon and back in preparation for astronauts’ planned lunar return in 2025.
We get pictures of Earth every day from satellites and the International Space Station. But there’s something different about seeing ourselves from the other side of the Moon.
How does this image compare to other iconic views of Earth from the outside?
Earthrise
In December 1968, three astronauts were orbiting the Moon to test systems in preparation for the Apollo 11 landing. When they saw Earth rise over the lunar horizon, they knew this was something special. The crew scrambled to find colour film in time to capture it.
Excerpt from the Apollo 8 flight transcript, at the moment the crew observed the Earth rise. NASA
Photographer Galen Rowell called the resulting image “the most influential environmental photograph ever taken”.
Six years earlier, biologist Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring drew public attention to how human industries were harming terrestrial ecosystems. The book ignited the environmental movement and laid the ground for the reception of Earthrise.
Above all, we are the generation to see through the eyes of the astronauts the astonishing ‘earthrise’ of our small and beautiful planet above the
barren horizons of the moon. Indeed, we in this generation would be some
kind of psychological monstrosity if this were not an age of intense, passionate, committed debate and search.
She saw Earthrise as part of the underpinning of a “moral community” that would enable a more equitable distribution of the planet’s wealth.
Blue marble
The last Apollo mission took place in 1972. On their way to the Moon, the astronauts snapped the whole Earth illuminated by the Sun, giving it the appearance of a glass marble. It is one of the most reproduced photographs in history.
The Blue Marble. NASA
Like Earthrise, this image became an emblem of the environmental movement. It showed a planet requiring stewardship at the global scale.
The Blue Marble is often used to illustrate the Gaia hypothesis, developed by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the 1960s and ’70s. The hypothesis proposes that Earth is a complex self-regulating system which acts to maintain a state of equilibrium. While the theory is not widely accepted today, it provided a catalyst for a holistic approach to Earth’s environment as a biosphere in delicate balance.
The impression of a single, whole Earth, however, conceals the fact that not all nations or communities are equally responsible for upsetting the balance and creating environmental disequilibrium.
Pale blue dot
Our farthest view of Earth comes from the Voyager 1 spacecraft in 1990. At the request of visionary astronomer Carl Sagan, it turned its camera back on Earth for one last time at a distance of 6 billion kilometres.
Pale Blue Dot, updated by Kevin M. Gill using modern image-processing techniques, 2020. NASA
If Blue Marble evoked a fragile Earth, Pale Blue Dot emphasised Earth’s insignificance in the cosmos.
Sagan added a human dimension to his interpretation of the image:
Consider again that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it, everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you’ve ever heard of, every human being that ever was, lived out their lives.
Rather than focusing on Earth’s environment, invisible from this distance, Sagan made a point about the futility of human hatred, violence and war when seen in the context of the cosmos.
Tin can, grey rock, blue marble
Now, on the cusp of a return to the Moon 50 years after Blue Marble was taken, the Orion image offers us something different.
Scholars have noted the absence of the photographer in Earthrise, Blue Marble and Pale Blue Dot. This gives the impression of an objective gaze, leaving out the social and political context that enables such a photograph to be taken.
Here, we know what is taking the picture – and who. The NASA logo is right in the centre. It’s a symbol as clear as the US flag planted on the lunar surface by the Apollo 11 mission.
The largest object in the image is a piece of human technology, symbolising mastery over the natural world. The spacecraft is framed as a celestial body with greater visual status than the Moon and Earth in the distance. The message: geopolitical power is no longer centred on Earth but on the ability to leave it.
Elon Musk sent an identical message in photographs of his red Tesla sportscar, launched into solar orbit in 2018, with Earth as the background.
But there’s a new vision of the environment in the Orion image too. It’s more than the whole Earth: it shows us the entire Earth–Moon system as a single entity, where both have similar weighting.
This expansion of the human sphere of influence represents another shift in cosmic consciousness, where we cease thinking of Earth as isolated and alone.
It also expands the sphere of environmental ethics. As traffic between Earth and the Moon increases, human activities will have impacts on the lunar and cislunar environment. We’re responsible for more than just Earth now.
Our place in the cosmos
Images from outside have been powerful commentaries on the state of Earth.
But if a picture were able to bring about a fundamental change in managing Earth’s environment and the life dependent on it, it would have happened by now.
The Orion image does show how a change of perspective can reframe thinking about human relationships with space.
It’s about acknowledging that Earth isn’t a sealed spaceship, but is in dynamic interchange with the cosmos.
Alice Gorman is a member of the Advisory Council of the Space Industry Association of Australia and Co-Chief Investigator of the International Space Station Archaeological Project.
However, O’Neil hinted that changes to criminal law could target specific ways that extreme right-wing groups organise themselves compared to groups such as al-Qaeda or Islamic State.
Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, Australia has enacted at least 96 counter-terrorism laws, amounting to more than 5,500 pages of legislation. So do we need any more laws, or changes to existing laws, to combat right-wing terrorism?
Australia’s counter-terrorism laws
Australia has the largest collection of counter-terrorism laws in the world. This reflects a strong belief in legality: that powers and offences should be written into the statute books and not be left to arbitrary executive power. But it also shows how readily Australian governments have responded to evolving threats with ever-increasing powers.
Our counter-terrorism laws contain countless criminal offences and powers of surveillance, interrogation and detention. As an example, a control order can require a child as young as 14 to obey a curfew and wear an electronic monitoring bracelet to protect the public from a terrorist act or prevent support for terrorism.
Most of the offences and powers rely on a broad statutory definition of terrorism. A “terrorist act” means harmful conduct or a threat that aims to: (1) advance a political, religious or ideological cause; and (2) intimidate a government or section of the public.
Importantly, this definition is ideologically neutral – as are all the laws. They do not mention Islamist or right-wing terrorism.
The laws apply equally to these and other terror threats, no matter the ideology. A white supremacist who prepares or commits a terrorist act faces life imprisonment in the same way as a religious fundamentalist.
What changes might be made?
We won’t know the details of Labor’s proposed changes until next year.
The government might ask parliament to tweak the definition of a “terrorist organisation” in Division 102 of the federal Criminal Code. A terrorist organisation is one that is directly or indirectly preparing a terrorist act (or that advocates a terrorist act).
Various offences stem from this definition. It is a crime, for example, to recruit for a terrorist organisation or be a member of one.
Some features of these groups can make banning them difficult. Their membership structures, ideological demands and support for violence can be less clear compared to groups like al-Qaeda and Islamic State, which have committed and encouraged terrorist acts all around the world.
Right-wing extremist groups hold divisive rallies, exploit protests, spread racist sentiment and encourage hatred against minorities – but most of these acts do not constitute terrorism.
Far-right groups hold rallies and inflame racism, but most of these acts do not constitute terrorism. David Crosling/AAP
Expanding the definition of a terrorist organisation could capture right-wing extremist groups that are dangerous to society but do not obviously engage in or support terrorist acts.
Another possibility is that Labor could seek to ban Nazi and other hate symbols that such groups commonly use. New legislation in Victoria, which comes into force at the end of this month, makes it an offence punishable by 12 months’ imprisonment to publicly display the Nazi swastika (Hakenkreuz).
The state offence will not apply to the hundreds of hate symbols used by right-wing extremists, but it sends an important message that neo-Nazi ideology holds no place in Australian society. It provides a legal mechanism to counter threats of right-wing extremism in a way that the federal counter-terrorism laws currently do not.
Are changes needed?
Australia’s counter-terrorism laws are already extensive and apply to all types of terrorism, so no obvious strategic gaps need to be filled. If a criminal offence or power is needed to combat terrorism, Australia already has it and more.
Minor changes to Division 102 could target specific features of right-wing extremism compared to Islamist terrorism. Federal laws could supplement emerging state laws by outlawing hateful symbols used by right-wing extremists and other terrorist groups.
However, more right-wing groups could be proscribed under the laws as they currently stand. Decisive action to ban internationally recognised right-wing extremist groups, combined with a national inquiry into hate crime law and its reporting, would send a strong message. Australia’s extensive counter-terrorism laws need not be further expanded.
Keiran Hardy 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Thompson, Associate Professor of Media Studies, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington
Getty Images
Broadcasting Minister Willie Jackson’s announcement of planned legislation requiring big online platforms such as Google and Meta/Facebook to “pay a fair price” to New Zealand news media for their content was welcomed by many as much-needed support for local journalism.
But there are good reasons to be cautious. Such deals can lack transparency, provide few guarantees of where revenues go, and may offer little protection of the public interest.
The government’s move follows Australia’s 2021 News Media Mandatory Bargaining Code and Canada’s proposed Online News Act. Both require the online giants to reach compensation agreements with news providers or be subject to mediation or arbitration by state regulators.
There’s no question traditional media business models – particularly newspapers – have been eroded by advertising shifting online. According to New Zealand industry figures, newspapers enjoyed a 40.7% share of the total domestic advertising spend (NZ$606 million) in 2001. By 2011 this had declined to 26.7% ($582 million), and by 2021 it was just 10.4% ($331 million, including newspaper websites).
Digital advertising wasn’t even measured in 2001. By 2011, it represented 15.1% of New Zealand’s advertising turnover ($328 million) and by 2021 “digital only” accounted for 50.2% ($1.62 billion).
Where does the money go?
As governments have shown increasing resolve to intervene and ensure some of the digital platforms’ huge revenues are reinvested in content, the platforms have acted to limit the scale and scope of regulatory measures.
Google News Showcase, for example, now pays monthly fees to seven New Zealand news providers. Meta/Facebook, on the other hand, appears to be reducing its commitments to such deals.
But these bilateral arrangements would seem to have superseded the Commerce Commission’s recent decision to authorise the News Publishers’ Association application to permit collective bargaining between local news media and the platforms.
In the US, similar bargaining provisions in the Journalism Competition and Preservation legislation appear to have been withdrawn following opposition from Facebook.
Given New Zealand’s proposed legislation is intended to incentivise such agreements, do these developments mean it’s too little, too late?
There are several limitations to “voluntary” payment arrangements, even with the prospect of a statutory shotgun wedding in the background. Although the Australian mandatory bargaining code appears to have driven payment agreements without resort to mediation, no minimum level of subsidy is specified. It only requires the platforms to negotiate in “good faith”.
There is also little transparency in bilateral commercial agreements, and the outcomes depend largely on what the platforms themselves deem acceptable. Although larger news organisations might carry some weight in negotiations, smaller operators (if they’re covered at all) will likely be forced to accept whatever crumbs fall from the rich platforms’ table.
Perhaps most importantly, there is no guarantee any platform payments to news media will actually be invested back into public interest news content. There is nothing to prevent corporate shareholders pocketing the proceeds. Even if it is directed into news, it could merely subsidise partisan or populist reporting.
Where’s the public interest?
The policy principles underpinning mandatory bargaining need examining. Yes, the notion that the news sector deserves to be compensated is superficially appealing – commercial sustainability of the fourth estate is the policy rationale.
But determining the right level of compensation is complicated because the costs and benefits on both sides are so ambiguous.
News media provide content that generates audience traffic, but the platforms make that content discoverable and direct users to the source websites. Moreover, the decline in news revenues began before the ascendency of the platforms, and different platforms benefit differently from hosting and sharing news content.
The dominance of the platforms in monetising online traffic isn’t really based on their “poaching” of news; it’s their ability to harvest user data and their control of the algorithms governing online content discovery. Crucially, such considerations fall outside mandatory bargaining frameworks.
In this respect, commercial remedies focused solely on the news sector risk overlooking the wider issue. The public as a whole might merit compensation for the market failures and social harms inflicted by the way social media and content discovery portals operate.
But there’s another key reason to be cautious about mandatory bargaining legislation. Even if it did offer a modest benefit to local news producers, it would come with a significant political opportunity cost. In short, it would inhibit any move toward a more substantial regulatory framework – such as a digital services tax.
Such a model would arguably have a greater public benefit. That’s because an independent agency like NZ On Air could collect and disburse the revenue – ensuring the money supported public interest content.
If a digital levy was introduced on top of mandatory bargaining legislation, however, the platforms would claim – with some justification – they are being taxed twice.
At the same time, news media may well prefer a guaranteed direct subsidy from a platform funding agreement when the alternative is taking their chances with a larger but contestable revenue source like the Public Interest Journalism Fund.
The wrong legislation will make it more difficult to introduce wider regulatory measures to support the news media and protect the public interest. We should be careful we don’t get less than we bargain for.
Peter Thompson has previously received funding from:
The Ministry for Culture and Heritage,
NZ On Air,
The Department of Internal Affairs,
The Department of Canadian Heritage.
His is a board member of the Better Public Media Trust
“Kneading” is when cats massage an object with the front paws, which extend and retract, one paw at a time.
This massaging action, named for its resemblance to kneading dough, is repeated rhythmically. You may have spotted your cat kneading and wondered how on Earth they developed such a behaviour.
So, why do cat’s knead? Does it tell us anything about how they’re feeling and is there anything you can do if they’re painfully kneading you while sitting on your lap?
Cats first begin to knead when just tiny kittens, still nursing from their mother. Kneading is associated with suckling, which helps stimulate a mother cat’s milk supply through the release of oxytocin and likely evolved for this reason.
Kneading also has another evolutionary advantage. It can be used as a form of tactile and pheromone communication between kitten and mother.
Cats have scent glands in their soft paw pads, and when they knead, these glands release pheromones (chemical messages used to communicate).
Kneading on their mother releases pheromones associated with bonding, identification, health status or many other messages.
One of these, known as “cat appeasing pheromone”, is released by the sebaceous glands round the mammary glands.
Pheromones are not only important for bonding between the mother and young. Cat appeasing pheromone also has the potential to treat aggression in mature cats.
Kneading can be used as a form of tactile and pheromone communication between kitten and mother. Shutterstock
If kneading is a kitten behaviour, why is my adult cat still doing it?
While kneading evolved to stimulate milk supply and express chemical and tactile messages between kitten and mother, it’s also a common behaviour in adult cats, because of something called neoteny.
Neoteny is when an animal retains their juvenile physical or behaviour traits into adulthood. It’s likely these traits are advantageous for cats when needing to socialise with humans and other cats or animals in the household.
Kneading, in particular, may be retained into adulthood because it can help communicate messages.
Kneading on your lap is a cat’s way of saying “we’re affiliated” or “you’re in my social group”. Or, to be very human about it, “you’re my person”.
We may also reinforce kneading by rewarding our cat with attention when they do it.
Some cats like to knead on soft or woollen blankets while also sucking on the material, as if from a teat. This may be relaxing or soothing for the cat because of this association.
We may also reinforce kneading by rewarding our cat with attention when they do it. Shutterstock
What does kneading say about how our cats are feeling?
In most cases, kneading likely indicates your cat is comfortable.
However, if the kneading (and especially sucking) occur very frequently, for a long time, appear compulsive or are beginning to damage your cat’s paws, legs or mouth, it may be a sign your cat is stressed or in pain and needs to see a vet.
Some cats don’t knead at all. Just like people, cats are individuals and like to show that they are comfortable or affiliated with you in their own ways.
Kneading likely indicates your cat is comfortable. Giphy.
Help! My cat kneading is hurting my legs
Kneading is a normal behaviour that may be an important part of your cat feeling bonded with you. If your cat’s claws are getting a little too involved for your liking then invest in a thick blanket that you can cover your legs with. Avoid telling them off or kicking them off your lap.
Instead, reward kneading where the claws are kept to a minimum by showing more attention via patting or handing out a food treat when your cat is kneading the way you would like them to.
You can even add in a cue to request the claws go away. Something short like “pads!” would be a good option. Simply associate the word and a food reward with the behaviour you want.
And if you need your cat more than they knead you, that’s OK too.
Susan Hazel is affiliated with the Dog & Cat Management Board of SA, RSPCA SA and Animal Therapies Ltd.
Julia Henning does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
Essay by Keith Rankin.
“Antlers grow through a mechanism that is very similar to cancer. But, because deer can keep that growth in check, they are extremely resilient to cancers. …
“Sardinia’s own dwarf deer, a relative of Ireland’s giant elk, was eradicated within a hundred years of human colonization, some 9,000 years ago.”
Thomas Halliday, Otherlands, p.46
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
Cancer is one of those c-words which we resile from. The essence of cancer, as a disease in the body, is that a part of the body becomes a tumour which has a ‘malign’ growth imperative; a cellular reproduction program which eventually colonises the body and – if insufficiently checked – kills that whole of which it is a growing part.
A ‘sufficient check’ may sometimes be instigated by the body’s immune system, or may be the result of a ‘rescue mission’ in the form of medical treatment. A third possibility is that the cancer is ‘self-aware’, and at some point contains itself; aware that by killing the whole body it also kills itself.
Deer antlers would appear to be a cancer which the body itself is able to check before that tumour’s growth becomes unsustainable. The ‘intelligence’ of the whole is able to stem the growth of the part, but without destroying that part.
Humankind
The problematic relationship of the human species to Earth – the body-planet – is unmistakable. Humans are a species which threaten the survival of the whole; the whole of which humans are a part. And that is a cancerous threat; a malign growth imperative, from the point of view of Nature; from the perspective of the Earth-ecosystem.
Humankind, homo sapiens, has arguably been a cancer from its very beginnings. Some fauna – such as Sardinia’s dwarf deer – became extinct very soon after human intrusion. Human beings have always had a disproportionate impact on their host ecosystems.
It has now become a mainstream view that the Earth is entering a human-created mass-extinction event. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said yesterday (at the Montreal COP15 Biodiversity Summit): “Humanity has become a weapon of mass extinction”. (UN chief urges strong global nature deal to end ‘orgy of destruction’; Reuters, 7 December2022.)
How can the threat posed by humanity to Nature be sufficiently checked? Rescue is out of the question; that would mean an intervention from outside of Earth!
The statistically most likely outcome is that the Earth will reach a tipping point – as in the ‘mass extinction’ events in the distant past – and flip to an altered state which does not have a place for our species, and most other species we know today. When pressed, most of us do accept that this is indeed the most likely outcome. Many of us find this possibility acceptable, however, because we believe – in hope – that the ‘when’ will be beyond the natural lifetimes of everyone on the planet today.
There is another possibility. It requires that the cancer itself be intelligent; noting that intelligence springs from self-awareness. If we (as individual humans) have cancer, we do not expect our tumour – or tumour cells – to be self-aware. But, if we are a cancer, we can be self-aware; we can be aware that the destruction of our whole means the destruction of all the parts of the whole; including the cancer, ourselves. That awareness gives us the capacity to check ourselves; to become a good cancer.
For humanity to be a good cancer – an intelligent self-aware cancer – means humanity has a long-term future; accepting our history as a cancer, while also ensuring that we do not continue to be malignant. We could be like the antlers of a stag, a beautiful accomplishment that stabilises once it has grown sufficiently; we could be intelligent ‘antlers’, a good cancer.
Shall we continue to play the role of a malign tumour? Or shall we be a benign, self-aware, non-suicidal, self-limiting cancer? Can we choose? Or do the myopias and rivalrous divisions within humanity prevent us from protecting the Earth, of which we are a part?
The answers I gave on Tuesday, Predicting the Coming Quarter Century, are both ‘no’ and ‘yes’. The cancer is clearly at an advanced stage. And it’s not curable; indeed, we do not and should not want the Earth to be cured of us. My optimism is that we may navigate the coming critical years. And that – say from 2050 – the Earth’s cancer may enter remission. If so, we, the cancer, may thrive by becoming a good cancer, a survivable cancer, a cancer which the Earth can live with.
To be a good cancer means possessing the individual and collective behavioural awareness that the survival of the Earth ecosystem in its current state is at stake. The tumour of humanity can thrive, as a part of the Nature we cherish in our better moments, once it becomes benign. We need a win-win outcome: Humanity thriving, and Earth surviving in its familiar hospitable state.
Postscript
A cancer is a disease from within which undermines and kills its host; if unchecked. This understanding applies to all our human systems in which individual – or tribal – behaviour may undermine the host system.
Thus, scientists should not undermine science, economists should not undermine economics, communicators should not undermine communication, governments should not undermine government, businesses should not undermine business.
*******
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
An encounter with a mysterious and extinct human relative – the Denisovans – has left a mark on the immune traits of modern Papuans, in particular those living on New Guinea Island.
This is a new discovery we describe in a study published in PLoS Genetics today. It further suggests that our modern human diversity didn’t just evolve – some parts of it we got from other, extinct human groups.
DNA from our evolutionary cousins
Humans are the only living species of the Homo genus. But until 50,000 years ago, our ancestors coexisted – and sometimes interacted – with multiple other Homo groups across the globe. Most of them we know only by sparse archaeological remains, which offer tantalising glimpses of our evolutionary cousins.
But for two groups there is something else: DNA. Thanks to technological advances, scientists have retrieved DNA from fossils and sequenced it. As a result, we now have complete genome sequences of the best-known archaic hominins, the Neanderthals, and a far more elusive group, Denisovans.
Although many Neanderthal fossils have been unearthed all over Europe since they were first identified in the 1860s, the number of known Denisovan fossils fits in the palm of a hand – literally!
The genome sequence we have comes from the smallest bone of a pinky finger. It belonged to the 60,000-year-old remains of a teenage girl from a cave in Siberia, the largest known Denisovan fossil until recently.
These genome sequences have transformed the way we think about our extinct relatives. For one, they quickly demonstrated that as humans expanded outside Africa, we had sex – and children – with these other populations.
Traces of their genomes linger in individuals alive today, transmitted across hundreds of generations.
In the case of Neanderthals, these traces are in all individuals of non-African ancestry today. In the case of Denisovans, we find small traces of their genome in people from all over Asia – especially in Papua New Guinea, and in the island nations of Southeast Asia, where individuals may owe up to 4–5% of their genome to these ancestors.
But identifying these fragments of DNA in our genomes is only the beginning.
The DNA makes a difference
The real challenge is to find the biological consequences of this DNA for the people who carry it – which, it bears remembering, is the vast majority of humans. Our specific research question was to pinpoint the molecular processes that might be affected by its presence.
Studies of Neanderthal DNA have shown that genetic variants inherited from them can alter the levels at which some human genes are expressed, for example. We also know Neanderthals have contributed to our immune systems (including differences in how people respond to infection with COVID-19), and to variation in skin and hair colour.
But it has never been clear whether Denisovan DNA has left similar trends in modern humans.
In 2019, a study revealed the genomic coordinates where Denisovan DNA might be found within the genome of Papuan individuals – that is, the indigenous people of New Guinea Island – alive today.
This led us to begin looking into these regions, to understand the cellular and biological processes that might be affected by Denisovan DNA. We took a hybrid approach to this question, making computational predictions first, and following up with laboratory-based experiments to validate our findings.
In addition, we took advantage of the known Neanderthal DNA within these people to highlight any Denisovan-specific contribution. This gave us a more integrated understanding of how encounters with these relatives left potential biological and evolutionary consequences in modern humans.
A unique Denisovan contribution
We noticed that in Papuans, Denisovan and Neanderthal genetic variants both occasionally occur within parts of the genome responsible for modulating the expression levels of nearby genes.
However, only Denisovan variants are consistently predicted to occur and affect elements controlling the expression levels of immune-related genes.
So, these different sources of DNA might contribute to the genetic and phenotypic diversity within Papuans in different ways.
To validate our predictions, we designed an experiment comparing five Denisovan sequences against their modern human counterpart, and tested their ability to actually affect gene expression levels inside a particular kind of immune cell known as a lymphocyte.
In two of the five cases, the Denisovan variants did have a measurably different impact on the gene expression levels than their modern human counterpart. And they impact genes known to be important players in the response to infectious microbes, including viruses.
The fact that Denisovans, but not Neanderthals, seem to have contributed to the immune systems of present-day Papuans, tells us something about these ancient people, too.
Although little is known about how widely through Asia Denisovans lived, it suggests their immune system changed to adapt to the infectious diseases of their environment.
When humans moved in 60,000 years ago, these bits of DNA likely contributed to our success in settling this part of the world.
While our study is the first to elucidate the contribution of Denisovan DNA within modern human genetic diversity, there are still exciting questions to address. In particular, it is not clear whether the overall contributions of Denisovan and Neanderthal genetic variants consistently differ from each other.
It is also important to note we tested genetic variants in immune cells under resting conditions. This means the same or other genetic variants might have different effects out in the environment – this will be an important question for studies in the future.
Irene Gallego Romero receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Leakey Foundation, the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative, the Royal Society of New Zealand and the French National Research Agency
Davide Vespasiani 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.
When the first five images from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) were unveiled, one of them stared at me with two eyes. It was an image of the Southern Ring Nebula, NGC3132, and smack in the middle were two bright stars.
Now, the fact that NGC3132 houses a binary star system (two stars orbiting one another) has been known since the days of the Hubble Space Telescope.
But in those early images, the central star that ejected the nebula – a tiny, hot white dwarf – was so dim it was almost invisible next to its bright Sun-like companion. In effect, the nebula had one eye almost closed.
But the JWST reveals more than Hubble did. It can collect “cooler” photons (light particles) in the infrared range of the electromagnetic spectrum. In this cooler light, we saw both stars in the binary system shining as bright as one another: two glaring eyes!
This was surprising to any astronomer who understands this type of nebula; super-hot white dwarfs typically don’t shine brightly in infrared light. It made sense for the cooler star to be shining this way, but observing the same brilliance from its partner was unexpected.
Emails started to bolt coast to coast and across oceans as astronomers pieced the puzzle together. The central white dwarf star of NGC3132, they realised, is enshrouded in dust. The dust is warmed up by the star’s heat and therefore shines in the infrared, producing the light we observed.
It was this that led us on the trail to find out what was really happening in the Southern Ring Nebula. Our findings from a team of nearly 70 astronomers are published today in Nature Astronomy.
At the heart, a hot white dwarf
The Southern Ring Nebula is a planetary nebula. That means it’s a gaseous nebula formed by a Sun-like star shedding most of its gas in the last act before its demise.
Once it shed much of its mass, the star became a hot white dwarf. This central star now sits in the middle of the nebula, cooling like a stellar ember, effectively dying.
You can see the two central stars quite clearly in this image, the dust-enshrouded white dwarf in the red and its companion to its left. NASA, Author provided
The beauty of planetary nebulae is they can be looked at forensically: parts of the nebula farther from the middle were ejected earlier in time. In this way, the entire nebula functions a bit like a geological record.
With its dying white dwarf in the centre, our group approached NGC3132 like a crime scene.
First, we quickly realised the dust making the central star shine so brightly was actually a disk wrapped closely around the central star that must have been forged by a companion. This orbiting companion star would have stripped gas away from the central star, hastening its demise.
We didn’t spot the companion, though. We think it’s either too faint to detect, or has potentially perished in the interaction and merged with the central star.
Then we noticed something else: broken concentric arches engraved in the extended halo of the nebula. These also betrayed the presence of an orbiting companion. Could this culprit be the same one that forged the disk of dust?
Note the concentric arches on the edges of the nebula. NASA, Author provided
We don’t think so. Although the arches have suffered some “weathering”, our measurements of them betray the presence of yet another companion star. This one is placed a little too far from the central star to have created the dust disk.
And just like that, we had gathered evidence the Southern Ring Nebula contains not just two stars in a binary system, but four.
And we would gather more yet.
Tied up in a bumpy, gassy bubble
The “ring” that gives the nebula its name is actually the wall of an egg-shaped bubble containing hot gas, heated by the central star. This wall is marked with noticeable protuberances.
Combining the JWST image with data from the European Southern Observatory, our team created a 3D model that revealed these protuberances come in pairs, moving in opposite directions away from the central star.
One possible explanation is the interaction that created the dust disk didn’t involve just one close companion, but two. In other words, we’re looking at a potential fifth star in the mix – interacting chaotically with the central star to blow out jets that push out those protuberances.
This fifth star’s presence is still tentative. But we can say with a good degree of certainty the stellar system that created the Southern Ring Nebula comprises not just the binary star system (the two eyes of the nebula), but also a third star that ripped away the gas to form the disk, and another that inscribed a track of concentric arches in the gas bubble.
The panels above are a time-lapse cartoon of the formation of NGC3132. Star 1 is the central star (shown in the first panel before it becomes a white dwarf). Star 2 is the distant bystander companion. Star 3 and 4 are responsible for emitting jets that created protuberances in the shape of the gas bubble, and form the dusty disk around the white dwarf (shown in panel 4). Star 5 gave rise to the formation of the concentric arches. NASA, ESA, CSA, E. Wheatley (STScI), Author provided
As for the second eye of the nebula – the one we’d always known about – it was definitely an innocent bystander. It’s too far from the central star to have participated in its demise.
One case closed, more to come
The case of the Southern Ring Nebula isn’t the only one demonstrating how stars work in packs. Much of stellar astrophysics is being revisited today in light of the realisation of just how gregarious stars can be. And we’re all the more excited for it.
A wealth of phenomena arise from stellar interactions, from supernova explosions, to the merging of black holes and neutron stars giving rise to gravitational wave events.
As the JWST delivers more detailed images of the universe, astronomers will be keenly dusting off their gloves to tackle more mysteries.
Orsola De Marco is affiliated with Astronomy Australia Limited (non-executive board director and chair of the board). This is a non-for-profit company that applies for and administers NCRIS grants to Australian Astronomy.
We often hear about “dementia breakthroughs” in the news – new genes being discovered, new blood tests being developed, new drugs being tested.
However, there remains no effective or accessible cure for dementia. This is of great frustration to people living with dementia, and their carers and loved ones.
Two new “breakthrough” drugs have been in the news. While they may not bring much relief to those living with the disease today, we are learning more about dementia, and getting closer to a treatment.
A bit about dementia
Dementia is an umbrella term to describe a group of conditions characterised by a loss of brain function. This includes the ability to remember, plan and make decisions.
In Australia, dementia is the second leading cause of death. For women it’s the leading cause of death. Older age is the greatest risk factor for dementia. But dementia is not an inevitable or normal consequence of ageing.
Up to 70% of all dementia is attributed to Alzheimer’s disease. Other types of dementia include vascular dementia, frontotemporal dementia, and Lewy body disease. Because Alzheimer’s is the most common form of dementia, most “dementia breakthroughs” often refer to “breakthroughs” in Alzheimer’s.
Searching for treatments
Alzheimer’s disease takes a long time to develop, up to 30 years or more. For a long time, scientists had only a limited understanding of the disease. To develop the right drugs, it’s crucial to have the right tools to be able to understand how the disease progresses.
Over the past 20 years, breakthroughs in brain imaging, brain fluid analysis and, more recently, blood tests, have enabled us to measure key Alzheimer’s proteins – amyloid and tau – in living people. This has allowed scientists to understand how these proteins develop over time.
We have also been able to clarify which risk factors – age, sex, genetics, environment, lifestyle – contribute to the development of cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s. This provides important insights into who and what to target.
Studies now suggest Alzheimer’s begins with the buildup of amyloid in the brain. As amyloid builds up, tau then begins to develop. Researchers think it’s this tau buildup that leads to brain cell death and cognitive decline. Some scientists refer to amyloid as the “trigger”, as once the trigger has been pulled, the “bullet” (tau) is on its way.
Build-up in the brain of a protein called amyloid is the likely trigger for Alzheimer’s. Shutterstock
Stopping the buildup of amyloid, or removing it, became a key strategy in attempts to develop drugs for Alzheimer’s.
Two new drugs
Two drugs that have received a lot of attention in recent weeks are aducanumab (marketed as Aduhelm) and lecanemab. Both drugs showed substantial reduction in amyloid in the brain. But whether this reduction in amyloid resulted in a meaningful benefit in memory and thinking is less clear.
In two aducanumab trials, patients did not show any meaningful benefit. But six months later, the drug maker Biogen released and subsequently published new data reporting participants on the highest dose had 22% slower cognitive decline compared to participants on a placebo.
The Food and Drug Administration in the United States granted accelerated approval for aducanumab as it thought the drug would improve or slow Alzheimer’s symptoms.
Recently, drug companies Eisai and Biogen announced the results of a lecanemab trial. Around 1,800 participants with early Alzhemier’s were given the drug or a placebo over 18 months. They found a reduction in brain amyloid and tau levels in those taking the drug when compared to participants taking a placebo.
This translates to roughly a six-month benefit in memory and thinking ability. This is not much. In addition, questions have been raised about whether the drug may be less effective for people with higher risk of developing Alzhemier’s, including those with certain genes, women, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations.
Women and culturally diverse people are more at-risk of dementia. Shutterstock
There are also substantial side effects that accompany both drugs. Of most concern are brain swelling and small brain bleeds as detected on brain scans. These were observed in 21-40% of participants. The risk of these side effects will need to be an important discussion between patients, their families and their doctors.
Another consideration is the cost. The price of lecanemab has not yet been announced, but aducanumab costs US$28,200 (A$42,000) per patient per year. Additional costs for brain scanning will also be required to monitor side effects. This makes it inaccessible to most people to purchase privately.
It also has consequences for the availability of the drug to be considered under Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). Around 150,000 people with mild Alzhemier’s would currently be eligible for aducanumab if it were available. If all of these people received the drug, PBS expenditure would increase by 50%.
Companies that develop drugs must provide evidence of their effectiveness to the government health authorities in each country in which they intend to make it available. The governing body in Australia is the Therapeutic Goods Administration. This process has not yet been completed for either drug in Australia.
But we still have a long way to go. Because Alzheimer’s symptoms take decades to develop, studying and tracking brain and cognitive changes from early in the disease has been difficult. Beyond amyloid and tau, a range of other biological, genetic, lifestyle, and environmental factors can also contribute to Alzheimer’s disease.
It’s unlikely any single one of these factors alone can fully explain why someone develops the disease. It’s likely the disease manifests when several of these risk factors coalesce. For example, someone with a genetic predisposition may be more likely to develop the disease in the face of poor cardiovascular health.
Disentangling the contribution of these risk factors can be challenging. This is why large numbers of people are often required to participate in research.
Given the prevalence of the disease in the community, every advance is seen as newsworthy. And from a scientific point of view, they are.
However these findings, or “breakthroughs,” have not been enough to offer relief to people living with Alzheimer’s or their families, for whom life gets harder every day. Their hopes are dashed when reported “breakthroughs” still haven’t translated into a cure or an effective treatment.
We now have multiple drugs that show some effect in slowing memory deterioration, but the effects are small. Outcomes of more drug trials will be announced in the coming years.
While these advances may not come fast enough to help people living with the disease now, they’re an important incursion in the war against this devastating disease. They show we’re getting closer.
If you are interested in learning how to reduce your dementia risk by changing health behaviours, please join us at the BetterBrains Trial. We are actively recruiting Australians aged 40-70 with a family history of dementia.
Yen Ying Lim receives funding from the National Health & Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Australian Research Council (ARC), and the Alzheimer’s Association (USA).
Emily Rosenich 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.
Picture this. You’re in government for the first time in more than a decade. And within six months, you’re facing a diabolical problem: skyrocketing energy prices. To your constituents, it doesn’t matter that the root cause is a war in Europe. What they’ll see is pain – electricity and gas bills climbing and climbing.
So what can you do? Federal and state energy ministers met yesterday to hash out the problem ahead of today’s meeting of the prime minister, state premiers and territory leaders.
One thing’s for sure – it’s politically impossible for governments to do nothing, with power prices expected to jump by 56% over this year and next and gas to rise by a lesser extent. That’s against a backdrop of rising inflation and rising interest rates, which are set to cause yet more hip-pocket pain.
So what options does the government actually have? Which one is the best? And – importantly – which is the most politically feasible? Here they are from best to worst.
1. Gas and coal producers choose to lower domestic prices
Your looming energy bill pain starts in gas-rich places such as Queensland, where major gas companies extract coal seam gas, liquefy it and sell almost all of it overseas. Similarly, coal companies mine coal and sell most of it overseas.
In the wake of the war on Ukraine and sanctions slapped on fossil fuel giant Russia, fossil energy prices have skyrocketed. That means coal and gas companies can sell their commodities at profit margins much higher than normal. And it means many of our own fossil power plants, both coal and gas, must now pay huge prices to secure part of their own supplies, culminating in the horribly high bills for you.
Seeing Australia’s predicament – and knowing the government has vowed to do something about energy prices – you might wonder why these companies haven’t agreed to do a deal and provide these relatively small volumes for domestic use at a much lower price, given they mine or extract on Australian soil.
This is the simplest, best and least likely option. Hence the government feels forced to intervene.
Coal seam gas is extracted from wells like these in south-east Queensland and largely sold overseas. Shutterstock
2. Governments impose price caps on gas and coal
This is the option talked about most at present. It’s one of the best options available to government, in the absence of corporate action.
How would it work? Because prices are often opaque, hidden behind confidential long-term contracts between gas and coal producers and their buyers, the government would likely have to impose a price cap on the short-term spot market where these commodities are sold.
About five years ago, the Turnbull government signed an agreement with our three major LNG producers to ensure we would have enough domestic supply. This agreement made no mention of price, as it was mainly concerned with supply.
The government could build on this agreement by introducing a gas price cap, and introduce similar agreements for coal companies.
It will be hard for gas and coal producers to cry foul, given the lion’s share of their profits come from exports. Domestic supply is a small fraction of their business.
One wrinkle here is the new debate between federal and state governments over how these caps should be imposed. Reports suggest the federal government is preparing to cap gas prices – but that it wants the states to cap coal prices.
Gas prices have soared this year. Shutterstock
3. Impose a temporary tax on windfall fossil fuel profits and give Australian consumers the money
This is a good option, involving two steps. First: impose a windfall tax. That’s not too hard. You can get the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to determine what the acceptable price was for oil and gas 18 months ago, and say anything above that is taxed at a windfall rate – up to 100%. The tricky part would be to collect this revenue and redistribute it to energy consumers.
Politically, it could be challenging, given Labor went to the election saying no new taxes. But the government would be so popular they could probably get away with breaking a promise by arguing that when things change, you have to change with them.
4. Impose a gas reservation policy for the east coast market
Many experts have suggested introducing a gas reservation policy for the national market (in reality, that means most of Australia’s east coast plus South Australia). After all, Western Australia introduced a gas reservation policy after a previous energy crisis and it worked.
Yes, this would work to drive down energy prices. It’s just not the best idea. When you introduce policies like this, you force gas producers to set aside a percentage of their output for domestic use. This output floods the market and drives down prices. That’s overly complicated. If you want to bring the price down, you can bring the price down other ways.
Is the market failing – or working exactly as intended?
All of these options have one thing in common: governments intervening in markets in ways almost unthinkable a year ago.
Let’s play devil’s advocate for a minute. The market is doing precisely what it’s intended. There’s huge demand for the commodities of gas and coal, which are still used widely to produce electricity. That means whoever is prepared to pay most gets the commodity.
Even before this year’s energy crisis, gas-fired power was the most expensive option in Australia. In our auction-based energy system, the highest accepted bid for a specific time period sets the price for the next time period.
When gas power successfully bids into the grid, it sets new high prices for every other electricity provider, from coal to hydro to renewables. These all get windfall profits – and we cop the pain.
Gas power stations were already the most expensive source of electricity even before the price spikes. Shutterstock
Market logic dictates that those who can’t afford to pay just have to deal with it. Businesses may go broke, consumers may have to radically cut back on energy use – but that’s just how the market works.
The problem, of course, is if it happens on a large scale, as we may well see next year. Lots of people will get extremely angry at the government. That’s why we’re seeing the government mulling the best way to intervene. They cannot allow it to happen.
I don’t envy the government. If they come up with a clean way to solve the problem, I will applaud enthusiastically. But the way it’s looking at the moment, it may be messy. Especially if companies or consumers begin clamouring for compensation.
Flexi schools cater to young people who have been pushed out of mainstream schools. Some students may have been expelled or struggled to fit in. Some may have been bullied or have learning needs the mainstream system could not meet.
Flexi schools give students a second (and sometimes a third, fourth or fifth) chance to stay or become engaged with schooling.
Demand for flexi schools has been increasing, but we still have little information about the quality of schooling young people receive at these schools, or their long-term trajectories after attending one.
Our new research shows students value the support they get from their flexi school but want the curriculum to challenge them more, and better support their aspirations.
What are flexi schools?
Flexi schools come in multiple forms. Some sit alongside mainstream government high schools. Some are run by community groups, church organisations or are backed by philanthropy.
There is limited recent data on how many flexi schools there are in Australia. A 2014 report estimated 70,000 young Australians were engaged in flexi schools. This number is expected to be higher in 2022. This report was published almost a decade ago now and the sector was predicted to grow because of the demand.
Flexi schools tend to be smaller than mainstream schools, often with fewer than 200 students. They are centred on the young person, their needs, strengths and interests. There is an emphasis on community, relationships and wellbeing. Schools usually don’t require students to wear a uniform and it is common for a student to call their teacher by their first name.
We surveyed almost 500 flexi school students around the country in May to June this year. This is the most comprehensive picture of young people’s experiences in flexi schools in Australia to date.
Flexi school students are diverse
Our research showed Australian flexi schools educate a diverse group of young people. The average age of a student is 15 years old, with ages ranging from ten to 20 years. Our respondents came from 43 different cultural backgrounds. One in three identified as Aboriginal and or Torres Strait Islander.
Author provided.
In such a diverse school setting, 77% of young people said they felt their identity was valued. More than 80% felt their flexi school was a welcoming place. As one respondent said:
If I am experiencing issues, teachers support me, don’t judge and are extremely kind and considerate.
Flexi school students have high aspirations
Many flexi school students have already been labelled as “disengaged” by the sheer fact mainstream schooling hasn’t worked for or accommodated them. But this does not mean they are disengaged from their education or their lives going forward.
In our survey we asked young people to tell us about their career and life goals. Young people told us they had a huge range of career goals from owning a small business to doing a trade or becoming a park ranger, youth worker, primary teacher, author or worker in the mining industry.
Our respondents told us they have have strong aspirations for their futures. As one student told us:
[I want] to grow my [business] into a popular […] local gardening landscaping service supporting houses and gardens that need repairing.
Others told us they want to become “totally independent” and talked about pursuing happiness and community connections:
[I want to] find some work I purely enjoy and just live a normal life. Preferably doing some trade work or contributing to the community.
Young people also specifically spoke about doing further study and going to TAFE or university, to do a wide range of courses from computer science to education and medicine:
I aspire to be a paramedic or doctor when the time comes, I would like to go to university to study medicine.
Flexi students want to be challenged
It is often assumed young people in flexi schools are not interested in doing intellectually challenging work. Data from our survey shows this is not the case.
Author supplied.
Less than half (47.5%) of the young people we surveyed said they experienced learning that was challenging. They told us they wanted “harder work, more future guidance” and “more learning at my age level”:
I learn best when I am given a challenge and have help to understand the challenge when I don’t understand what to do.
When we asked young people what they would like to learn at their flexi school they said more STEM-related subjects (including maths, science, coding and engineering), history and geography, social studies and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures. As one student wrote:
Access to learn more about Indigenous culture and access to learn another language !!! (like Auslan for example)
Our respondents were also keen to learn more about life skills, wellbeing, and vocational education.
There is a lot policy makers, educational leaders and practitioners in flexi schools can learn from this finding. Flexi schools are not just about keeping young people “in school”. They also need to provide a high-quality curriculum and challenging, diverse learning experiences.
Author supplied.
The bigger picture
In an ideal world, there would be no need for flexi schools because mainstream schools would cater for every young person in society. This is not the current reality and in the meantime, flexi schools play a critical role supporting young people who would otherwise be disengaged from mainstream schools.
Flexi schools need to respond to young people who have diverse needs. The focus tends to be on their relationships and wellbeing. But young people have told us they want a challenging curriculum as well.
As a matter of social justice, young people need a curriculum that adequately equips them for life and further study or training. This is an issue flexi school providers and policy makers must consider as a priority.
Marnee Shay receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Edmund Rice Education Australia.
Jodie Miller receives funding from Edmund Rice Education Australia.
Martin Mills receives funding from the Australian Research Council and from Edmund Rice Education Australia.
Australia is about to play host to negotiators from 14 countries involved in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) over six days in Brisbane from Saturday.
They include the United States, Australia, Brunei, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, but not China.
Although as unfamiliar as many of the acronyms in the alphabet soup of trade deals to which Australia is a party, the IPEF has a very specific focus.
The US wants to use it to diversify its supply chains away from China towards its allies and create US-style rules in a region encompassing the Indian and Pacific Oceans and extending from the east of Africa to the west of the United States.
At the launch of negotiations in May the US said the agreement would
enable the United States and our allies to decide on rules of the road that ensure American workers, small businesses, and ranchers can compete in the Indo-Pacific.
And the US is not involved in the two other big regional trade agreements involving IPEF members including Australia:
the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) of the ten ASEAN nations plus five others including China
the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) of 11 nations excluding China, from which the Trump administration withdrew in 2016.
There is still strong bipartisan US Congressional opposition to legally binding agreements like the CPTPP. This means in negotiating IPEF the US will not offer increased market access to Australia or other member countries.
The “four pillars” of the framework are
trade, in which there will be a general commitment to boost trade among members while recognising labour rights, environmental and other concerns
supply chains, aimed at diversifying away from China and facilitating cooperation among members in the event of major disruptions
clean economy, in which there will be recognition of the role of incentives in encouraging energy transitions
fair economy, in which the members commit to preventing and combating corruption and tax evasion.
India has opted out of the trade pillar but says it will sign up to the other pillars.
This means the IPEF will offer no immediate trade benefits for Australia or other countries, but for developing countries it will offer the prospect of US energy and other projects as an alternative to China’s One Belt One Road initiative.
More open process but negotiating documents secret
The Albanese government’s policy promises more transparent and accountable trade negotiations, including access to negotiating texts and independent evaluation of their costs and benefits.
It has promised this for the IPEF, and both civil society and business organisations have been invited to present their views to IPEF negotiators in Brisbane.
But this will be a one-way street because Australia and other IPEF countries have signed agreements with the US pledging to keep all negotiating documents secret until five years after the negotiations.
Without access to the details of the proposals, consultation will be extremely limited.
Standards on human rights, labour and the environment
Civil society groups have made submissions supporting the IPEF goals of higher standards for labour rights and environmental protection, and are asking for them to be made fully enforceable.
It remains to be seen whether all IPEF countries will commit to these goals without the carrot of access to the US market, and how commitments would be enforced unless they were legally binding.
A strategic balancing act for Australia
Australia is a US ally, but China is Australia’s largest export market.
Foreign Minister Senator Penny Wong recently said the government’s policy was to deepen regional relationships, building a regional order in which all states can contribute to a strategic equilibrium “rather than be forced to choose sides”.
The Albanese government is also hoping its recent success in re-establishing diplomatic contact with China will help ease China’s trade restrictions on Australian barley, wine and lobsters and contribute to regional stability.
But the US recently announced new trade restrictions against China, including a ban on US exports associated with the manufacturing of computer chips, and secondary restrictions on countries that export these products to China, including IPEF members South Korea and Singapore.
Singapore’s prime minister Lee Hsien Loong responded saying a further decoupling between the US and China could “result in less economic cooperation, less interdependency, less trust, and possibly, ultimately, a less stable world.”
The negotiations will present a challenge for the Albanese government’s policies on trade transparency, labour and environmental standards and regional stability.
Patricia Ranald is an Honorary Research Associate at the University of Sydney and the Convener of the Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network (AFTINET)
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cherine Fahd, Associate Professor of Visual Communication in the School of Design, University of Technology Sydney
The author and her family with Santa in 1980. Author provided
In April 1995, my uncle secured a lucrative job in Saudi Arabia. He and my aunt left their home in suburban Sydney and relocated to a western compound (a residential gated community for expats) in Jeddah. My aunt shares stories of life under Saudi’s strict laws and how she craved her western freedoms. One such freedom was the celebration of Christmas.
Hailing mostly from Australia, the UK and America, the compound residents organised their Christmases by smuggling in decorations and creating homemade Santa suits. They even staged the photographic rituals with mums and dads disguised as the shopping centre Santa Claus.
At home in Saudi Arabia. My uncle catches his daughter as she leaps off Santa’s lap, 1996. Image courtesy of the Sharbine and Pryor families, Author provided
My aunt’s eagerness to recreate this photographic ritual with her children stems from her own childhood posing with Santa. My siblings and I were also photographed every year on Santa’s lap and we continue the ritual with our own kids.
My aunt is looking at Santa instead of the camera. 1966. Image courtesy of H. Pryor, Author provided
As a photographer, I have spent years studying my curious desire to participate in this photographic custom. While I do not celebrate Christmas on religious grounds and bemoan the increasing consumerism of the season, I participate with overzealous enthusiasm in the Santa Claus photo.
This is evident in the careful way I have cultivated the collection of my children’s Santa photographs between 2009-2018, and kept guard of my family’s collection from the 70s and 80s that portrays me alongside my siblings and, on one rare occasion, with my parents.
I use myself and my family as a case study. Analysing details like my mother’s obsession with dressing my sister and I in identical outfits, and then the ways I consciously made my children dress themselves.
Year after year my mother dressed my sister and I in matching outfits – an indicator of togetherness and the ideal family. Author provided
The Santa photo feeds my photographic penchant for overly staged family portraits that signal to the camera “we are posing together for a photograph”.
In Photography A Middle–Brow Art, the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu famously observed in his 1965 study of amateur photography, that the family represents itself in “ideal moments of celebration” in order to secure its honourable social standing.
The Santa photos certainly fit this schema, tied to the so-called “Kodak moments” where everyone says “cheese”.
Instagram, which today operates as a public family album, reveals a searchable hashtag archive. Across #santaphoto, #santaphotos, #santapictures and #vintagesantaphoto you’ll find thousands of images of children sitting nicely on Santa’s lap.
Like most family photographs they serve a nostalgic function to take us into our pasts (with rose coloured glasses) and make us laugh at ourselves, at how we used to look, our hair styles, fashions, poses and reactions.
Today there are even photo sessions for pets, and “sensitive Santa photo sessions” for children with special needs.
COVID-era sees young Leo posing 1.5 metres apart from Santa. Image courtesy of the Morosin family., Author provided
With the rise of COVID-19, we see action packed beach Santa photos proving popular. In the shopping centre, the 1.5 metre social distancing rule is captured for posterity.
But Santa photos capture more than just the idealised moments of family life.
If the perfect family photograph is where the children are well dressed and everyone is posing and smiling happily, the “Santa fails” resist the ideal.
Santa fails show children reeling from Santa, throwing tantrums, back arching, crying and demanding to leave. Search #santafail on Instagram to see the truth of the matter: we happily and freely deposit our children onto the lap of a total stranger.
Scared of Santa. My sister in 1977 and my brother in 1989 both in tears. Author provided
The artist Julie Rrap recently shared a story with me about her father who was once employed as a shopping centre Santa. He often reported coming home with a saturated lap from children having wet themselves while seated.
The comic relief that comes with such stories and the Santa fails are over time another ritual enjoyed among family members. But my attraction to the Santa photo goes deeper than comic relief of fearing Santa.
A work of art
As a migrant family in 70s and 80s Australia, we interpreted the Santa photo as a fun and unpretentious custom that assimilated us into the middle-class values of suburban Australia.
Participating in this ritual made us feel and appear more Australian, if only to ourselves.
I’m also interested in the Santa photos as a photographic typology. As a photographer, I have done what Bourdieu describes and “elevated the ordinary photo into a work of art”.
Through my training I have linked the seriality of Santa photographs to Rineke Dijkstra’s photographic portraits of Olivier and Almerisa. Photographing the same people over many years, Dijkstra captures the subtle changes in their appearance, mood and fashion style, as well as their social and political status.
Marking time. Frame by frame I witness what I can’t see before my very eyes, my children growing and changing. Author provided
I am also reminded of the playful fictional photographs of Christian Boltanski where the title of the work – 10 photographic portraits of Christian Boltanski 1946-1964, 1972 – leads the viewer to think they are looking at portraits of a boy growing up, when in fact they are reconstructions.
Like these artworks, Santa photos mark time, revealing what is imperceptible in everyday life. Through the repetition of a performance, a scene and an image we confront ourselves and the people we love changing.
Children and animals are notoriously the hardest subjects to photograph. The training a photographer receives with Santa photography is a baptism of fire. Moving subjects, crying babies, a toddler’s inability to sit still, scared children that won’t smile and toddlers engaged in escape attempts all combine with the parent’s consumer expectations that the photographer should get the right shot.
Remember, the next time you take your children, pets or yourself to have a Santa photo, keep in mind that the “right shot” and the best Santa photos are often not the ones where they’re smiling.
Cherine Fahd 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.
Anthony Albanese heads towards Christmas with inflation, interest rates and power prices all high. But, comfortingly for Labor, his own popularity is up there too.
The objective circumstances in which the government finds itself sit somewhere between challenging and confronting. Politically, however, it could hardly be in a better place, as this week’s Newspoll and Resolve poll testified.
The electorate, though starting to feel some pain, remains very content with the government and its leader. For now, its angst is focused on others.
God bless Scott Morrison, Labor must say to itself daily, as the former prime minister remains a recurring reminder of the bad old days of a disorderly government.
Morrison was censured by parliament last week over his multi-ministries and next week will give evidence at the royal commission into Robodebt, a scandal that spanned the period during which he was social services minister, treasurer and prime minister. In impact on people’s lives, Robodebt puts the “power grab” into the shade.
If Morrison’s name “triggers” many of the public, so does – for very different reasons – that of Reserve Bank Governor Phil Lowe. In the past, those facing mortgage squeezes bared their teeth at governments, whether justifiably or not. Few had a clue who the bank’s governor was. But Lowe has been visible and loose-lipped, and he’s now a prime target.
Lowe is under fire from some economists for not moving fast enough to raise rates, meaning more then had to be done. However, it was his unwise prediction that rates wouldn’t increase before 2024 that has brought him the public backlash, especially from those who borrowed on that basis and now regret it.
Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers know the government’s teflon coating can’t stick indefinitely. Interest rates will bite deeper as people come off fixed mortgages and run down their savings accumulated from government funding during the pandemic. Lowe will be gone some time next year. The finger pointing will likely shift.
Labor is delivering with gusto on its election promises. 2023 will see, with fanfare, the child care reforms start and the integrity commission begin operating.
But come December 2023, will energy prices for households and businesses be manageable? Will the inflation dragon be at least half-slain? Will people still be patient even though their real wages will likely not have started to rise?
Much will hang on the May budget, for which work has begun, with the expenditure review committee meeting this week. It will be harder to frame than its modest October forerunner.
The fat left by Coalition programs has already been sliced away. So the cuts, needing to go to areas such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme, will be more controversial.
There’ll be pressures to spend too, notably on health, where there are major problems throughout the system and agitation from the states. And the Fair Work Commission’s wage increases for aged care workers will have to be funded.
The budget’s run-up will see a renewed tricky debate about the Stage 3 tax cuts.
On the upside, commodity prices, still likely to be high, will give another bonus for the bottom line.
During 2023, much political attention will be on the Voice referendum. If the Voice is passed, the government will get a lot of praise, but the story will quickly fade. The average voter will be a lot more focused on their personal situation.
By this time next year, the government will be halfway through its term. It will be turning its eyes towards the 2025 election.
Albanese has made it clear he’s set on a long game, regarding the first term as only a pipe-opener for the second. His recipe is orderly government, a clear agenda that increasingly picks up its ambition while not frightening the horses, and strong, controlled messaging.
On the latter, the government is relentless, believing it’s dangerous to leave any media vacuum. A bevy of ministers blankets the media daily, regardless of whether there’s much fresh to say.
This week saw the release of Labor’s election post-mortem, which not only picks over what happened but highlights the weaknesses to be addressed before the next contest.
The background is an increasingly fluid electorate, where major parties have been losing their grip on voters, and the under-40s are supplanting the political pre-eminence of the baby boomers.
Despite Labor’s success, this heartland vote has eroded in parts of outer suburban Melbourne and, to a lesser extent, parts of western Sydney.
Warning these communities “must not be taken for granted”, the report says: “The unusually disparate results in individual seats, regions and states reflect the political turbulence of recent years and the frustrations of many voters.
“While the results do not represent a permanent realignment of Australian politics, the loss of support for Labor in heartland areas, as evidenced once again in the recent Victorian state election, is cause for significant concern.”
Labor has had big buffers in heartland seats. But with the notion of “safe” seats now becoming outdated, once these buffers are reduced, seats can quickly morph into marginal. Add to this voters’ close scrutiny these days of individual candidates, plus the growth of the “community candidates” movement, and all sorts of seats are actually or potentially vulnerable.
The Liberals were the victims of this vulnerability at the May election. But Labor isn’t immune.
The defeat of Labor’s high-profile Kristina Keneally by local Vietnamese-Australian Dai Le in the Sydney seat of Fowler can be seen as a one-off, or as delivering a wider message.
RedBridge’s Kos Samaras (a former Labor official) noted this week in a tweet that the “tactical voting” that was a feature in the teal seats wasn’t just confined to them.
“It’s far more prevalent among Millennials and Gen Z, right across the country. Hence the willingness of voters to tactically vote to turn safe seats into marginals. Therefore getting more attention as a result.”
Apart from shoring up the heartland, the Labor report also says the party needs strategies for improving its performance in Queensland and Tasmania, and to retain the clutch of extra seats it secured in Western Australia.
WA could be particularly difficult next time. Albanese was greatly helped by the strong anti-Morrison, pro-McGowan sentiment arising from the COVID border wars. He won’t have that advantage in 2025.
To give itself some insurance, Labor needs to win seats at the election, not just hold what it has.
This far out, the risk for Albanese doesn’t seem that of being toppled by Peter Dutton. Rather – given Labor is in majority by a whisker and governments often lose seats at their first election – the more likely danger is that if things went badly in just a few places, the government would fall into minority. A development that would complicate Albanese’s pursuit of his ambitions.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Wintle, Professor in Conservation Science, School of Ecosystem and Forest Science, The University of Melbourne
Shutterstock
The Albanese government has just released its long-awaited response to a scathing independent review of Australia’s environment protection law. The 2020 review ultimately found the laws were flawed, outdated and, without fundamental reform, would continue to see plants and animals go extinct.
The extent to which the government implements the review’s 38 recommendations to strengthen the laws will determine the fate of many species and ecosystems – so, how did it go?
As biodiversity conservation experts, we find the plan to be promising. For example, federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek pledged to establish an independent environmental protection agency to be “a tough cop on the beat”.
But some uncertainty remains, and there is also a lot of important detail still to be worked through.
Australia has the world’s worst track record for mammal extinctions. The national threatened species list comprises more than 1,700 species and over 100 threatened ecological communities, and more are added every year.
Extraordinary species such as mountain pygmy possums, northern hairy-nosed wombats and regent honeyeaters are hanging on by a thread. Others, such as the white-footed rabbit-rat and the central hare-wallaby, are already lost forever. Previously abundant animals such as bogong moths, which the mountain pygmy possum relies on for food, have become rare.
Australia’s environment law – the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act – is ostensibly wildlife’s best defence against a range of threats to their habitat, such as urban development, mining and land clearing.
But this defence has failed, time and again. In just one example, the extinction threat facing the iconic koala has become worse, not better, since it was “protected” under the EPBC Act.
What the plan got right
There is strong merit in this. We encourage a similar emphasis on developing plans to abate threats such as such as feral cats, foxes, deer, and rabbits, that should also have strong regulatory standing.
We’re also pleased to see confirmation of the formation of the environmental protection agency (EPA). This addresses one of the review’s top criticisms on the lack of resourcing and independent enforcement of the EPBC Act.
The model could be a game-changer: undertaking assessments and making decisions about development proposals at arm’s length from government. The EPA will have its own budget and mandatory tabling of an annual report in parliament.
Bramble Cay melomys was declared extinct in 2019. Ian Bell, EHP, State of Queensland, CC BY-SA
Another big plus is the government’s pledge to deliver on national environmental standards, overseen by the newly formed EPA. These standards describe the environmental outcomes that must be achieved. For example, the standards could require that decisions result in no further population decline of threatened species.
Crucially, these standards will apply to “regional forest agreements”. These agreements are controversial because they effectively exempt forest logging from scrutiny under the EPBC Act. However, the timeline for imposing the standards on regional forest agreements is uncertain, and currently “subject to further consultation with stakeholders”.
Finally, a regional planning approach will be used to identify environmentally valuable and sensitive areas in which new developments pose too great a risk, as well as places that are more-or-less available for new development. The critical detail of how those zones are determined is yet to be negotiated.
A major uncertainty: offsets
Perhaps the biggest concern we have about the federal government’s approach relates to environmental offsets. Offsets can be imposed by the government as a way to compensate for environmental destruction by improving nature in other places.
Evidence shows offsets have so far been largely ineffective, in part because existing policy is not properly implemented and rules not enforced. They may even facilitate more biodiversity loss by removing ethical roadblocks to destroying ecosystems and habitat for threatened species.
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek on Thursday emphasised a move away from simply protecting habitat that already exists in exchange for habitat loss elsewhere (so-called “avoided loss offsets”), and instead focusing on restoration. This is a welcome improvement to how offsets are delivered.
The basics of what biodiversity offsetting involves.
However, the government will accept payments into a fund when offsetting is too difficult: for example, when there’s no like-for-like habitat available. This is worrying. If offsets for a threatened species are hard to find, it’s an important signal that we’re reaching the limit of habitat we can lose.
Imagine if a developer cleared cassowary habitat in a Queensland rainforest, and compensated for that by paying for koala tree planting in another part of Australia. Nice for the koala, but we have guaranteed a further decline for the cassowary.
The government’s plan points to the New South Wales Biodiversity Conservation Trust as an example of how these offset payments could be managed. Yet the auditor-general of NSW recently discredited the way this scheme handles offsets, saying it doesn’t lead to enough biodiversity gains compared to the losses and impacts from development in the state.
The government plans to change environmental offsets. Shutterstock
The national system would need to be very different to the NSW one if it’s to support the federal government’s goal of zero extinctions by 2030. In practice, this would mean avoiding the use of offsets to compensate for the destruction of habitats that aren’t replaceable or cannot be readily recreated elsewhere.
National environmental standards for environmental offsets haven’t yet been finalised. The detail included in these will be crucial to the success of the scheme.
Show us the money
Much of the federal government’s overhaul is to be welcomed. But we won’t prevent new extinctions unless it’s supported by serious investment to develop and implement plans, and enforce laws. Increased funding to recover endangered species is also urgently needed, to the tune of A$2 billion per year.
But it’s an order of magnitude more than our current spend on targeted threatened species recovery actions.
By and large, the proposed plan looks set to make a positive difference to Australia’s threatened plants and animals. But a lot of detail remains to be worked through. Getting that detail right could mean the difference between a species surviving, or disappearing forever.
Brendan Wintle has received funding from The Australian Research Council, the Victorian State Government, the NSW State Government, the Queensland State Government, the Commonwealth National Environmental Science Program, the Ian Potter Foundation, the Hermon Slade Foundation, and the Australian Conservation Foundation. Wintle is a Board Director of Zoos Victoria. Brendan Wintle is a member of the Biodiversity Council
Martine Maron has received funding from various sources including the Australian Research Council, the Queensland Department of Environment and Science, and the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program. She is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, President of BirdLife Australia, a Councillor with the Biodiversity Council, a member of the board of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy and a Governor of WWF-Australia.
Sarah Bekessy receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ian Potter Foundation and the European Commission. She is a Councillor of the Biodiversity Council, a Board Member of Bush Heritage Australia, a member of WWF’s Eminent Scientists Group and a member of the Advisory Group for Wood for Good.
Paul G Buchanan and Selwyn Manning deliver S03 Episode 24 of A View from Afar.
A View from Afar
PODCAST: Is an Independent Foreign Policy an Unachievable Myth? – Buchanan and Manning
/
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed
PODCAST – In this, the 24th episode of A View from Afar for 2022 political scientist Dr Paul Buchanan and host Selwyn Manning examine whether there is, in reality, such a thing as foreign policy independence in today’s world.
Specifically, Paul and Selwyn examine the following questions:
What does it mean to be foreign policy independent, and what would independence look like?
How is foreign policy independence different from foreign policy autonomy and flexibility?
What factors inhibit or constrain foreign policy independence (domestic and international)?
In an interdependent world can FP independence be a realistic objective?
And finally: is FP independence possible for a small state in this era, if it ever was, and conversely, do great powers really exercise independence in their foreign affairs?
You can also keep the conversation going on this debate by clicking on one of the social media channels below:
Threat.Technology placed A View from Afar at 9th in its 20 Best Defence Security Podcasts of 2021 category. You can follow A View from Afar via our affiliate syndicators.
Political Roundup: Labour needs Mahutu to go, but she’s too powerful
The pressure on Jacinda Ardern to sack Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta is building. But Mahuta is too powerful within the Labour Party to get rid of easily.
The Three Waters reforms have become one of the Labour Government’s greatest liabilities. While there is widespread consensus on the need for significant reform of water infrastructure, including from opposition political parties and local government, the specific reforms the Government have dogmatically pursued remain unconvincing to most, if not downright offensive to many.
Poll after poll has shown that the public are opposed to the reforms. While everyone wants to see water fixed, the Minister has presented a reform programme that has been botched from the start. Mahuta has failed to convince the public of all the contentious elements of the reforms – from co-governance element through to legal entrenchment of the anti-privatisation provisions.
Mahuta’s entrenchment debacle
The entrenchment drama has really made clear that Mahuta is a power unto herself in the Labour Government, and beyond reproach by Ardern. Although murkiness remains over exactly how and why Labour ended up pushing through the constitutionally objectionable and anti-democratic entrenchment provisions for Three Waters, there is now little doubt that Mahuta was driving the change.
Mahuta’s demeanor in the aftermath of the entrenchment scandal will be infuriating her colleagues. After all, she has been publicly blaming everyone else in the party but herself for the botch up.
The chain of events over the entrenchment is now becoming a bit clearer, with the obvious conclusion that Mahuta caused this problem for Labour, and seemingly defied the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and breached the Cabinet Manual – normally all sackable offences.
Cabinet made a clear decision not to entrench any of the Three Waters legislation, especially after they were made aware of the official advice that this would be unconstitutional and dangerous. Mahuta appears to have conspired with the Green Party to bring in a last-minute amendment during parliamentary urgency to do just this.
It appears that Mahuta, as the Minister responsible for getting the legislation passed, and working with Green MP Eugenie Sage, then choose not to inform any of her colleagues of what was planned and what this would mean. By design or otherwise, it appears that she neglected to inform the Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins who is the Leader of the House, and Attorney General David Parker that she was arranging for the Government to vote in the anti-democratic entrenchment provision that Cabinet had decided against.
Since then, Ardern has given cover to Mahuta by explaining to the public that it was a “mistake” made collectively by “the team” rather than Mahuta. But Mahuta herself has spurned that spin and thrown both the PM and other colleagues under the bus by speaking out publicly with a different story.
Mahuta has made it very clear that the vote wasn’t a misunderstanding, as the Prime Minister has tried to suggest, but a conscious attempt to bolster the reforms. She also pointed out that the entrenchment issue had actually been discussed at a caucus meeting. What’s more, she pointed out that Labour MPs had plenty of forewarning of the Green Party’s entrenchment amendment, suggesting that her colleagues, and especially those on the related select committee, should have read the material produced about the bill outlining the details of the entrenchment issue. As the Herald’s deputy political editor Thomas Coughlan writes today, “Mahuta turned on her caucus, even as they closed ranks to defend her”.
Coughlan argues that Ardern has bent over backwards to prevent Mahuta being blamed for the debacle, but Mahuta has spurned such help, publicly contradicting the PM on the issue, which has only inflamed divisions within Labour. Coughlan says: “Mahuta openly diverged from the Prime Minister, treating the press gallery to a spectacle more reminiscent of the National Party circa 2020-21 than the modern Labour Party.”
The Local Government Minister has also made clear that she knew of the constitutional objections to what they were doing. And as Coughlan argues today, it was Mahuta’s responsibility to proactively inform her colleagues what they were voting for in entrenching the Three Waters provisions.
Increasing calls for Mahuta to go
Thomas Coughlan writes today that “Mahuta is likely to leave Cabinet soon and possibly by involuntary means.” There are certainly a lot of calls for her to be sacked.
Some of these calls are being made by the opposition National Party. Reading which way the political winds are blowing, leader Christopher Luxon is seeking to be associated with any demotion of Mahuta – in the same way that earlier in the year, when Poto Williams’ position as Police Minister was becoming untenable, Luxon was able to call for her sacking and claim a political scalp.
National argues Mahuta has breached Cabinet collective responsibility rules – normally a sackable offence. It is certainly true that the Cabinet Manual states clearly: “Once Cabinet makes a decision, Ministers must support it, regardless of their personal views”. And in this case Cabinet made a decision not to entrench any of the Three Waters legislation, and then Mahuta appears to have organised and participated in getting Labour to vote for an amendment to do precisely that.
As Newstalk’s Heather du Plessis-Allan argues today, “it’s frankly embarrassing for the PM to be ignored”. She argues Mahuta should be sacked, not just for her role in Three Waters, but also because of “the lingering perception that something isn’t quite right about her husband attracting all those Government contracts.”
Why Mahuta can’t be sacked
There is a reluctance by some commentators and journalists to discuss a major factor in stopping Mahuta from being sacked – Labour’s very large and powerful Māori caucus. The fifteen-strong Māori caucus – and six out of the 20 Cabinet Ministers – is the biggest ever in Labour. Insiders say that they have incredibly strong leverage over Ardern and her fellow ministers.
Mahuta is one of the leaders of the Māori caucus, alongside Willie Jackson. Some commentators paint a picture of Ardern as being held hostage to the agendas of the senior Māori leaders. For example, journalist Graham Adams, has written about how Ardern doesn’t show any great enthusiasm for, or belief in, the Three Waters reform programme, and as a very cautious and poll-driven leader, “would normally back away from any policy as widely disliked as Three Waters soon after the poll results arrived on her desk”. But in this case that would cause a rebellion from the Māori caucus.
Labour’s Māori MPs are particularly worried about the potential for Te Pati Māori to win back more of the Māori seats and the Māori vote in general. They are therefore note prepared to hand Te Pati Māori a huge stick to beat Labour with.
The Herald’s Thomas Coughlan points to this in his column today, trying to explain why Ardern seems so reluctant to stand up to Mahuta: “No one really knows why Ardern has burned through so much political capital defending her. It could be that Mahuta’s standing within the Māori caucus makes her too powerful to sack, or it could be an example of Ardern’s mercy and kindness, giving Mahuta a chance to get her yearned-for reforms through Parliament before retiring gracefully from Cabinet next year, and from Parliament at the next election.”
Heather du Plessis-Allan is more forthright about Mahuta’s powerful position: “she will not be sacked. She is one of the leaders of the Māori Caucus and they are powerful. I doubt very much that they’ll let the PM sack her. Nanaia is untouchable. You can see that from the way the PM has gone out of her way to defend Nanaia in this and say it was a team mistake. So even though Nanaia is causing all kinds of problems for Jacinda, and even though the Nats are right in that she’s probably done enough to be sacked, I bet you now she’s going nowhere.”
Similarly, today Peter Dunne suggests that a likely Cabinet reshuffle in late January might not allow the Prime Minister to sack Mahuta or Jackson: “both are senior members of Labour’s highly influential Māori Caucus – the so-called First Fifteen – which makes it almost impossible for the Prime Minister to act against them.”
According to Dunne, “Mahuta’s credibility has been severely damaged by the Three Waters saga, but her value arises from being Labour’s bridge to Tainui and the Kingitanga.”
Will Mahuta and Three Waters be blamed for a Labour Govt loss?
There should be no doubt that Mahuta’s reputation is at an all-time low. She was supposed to be one of the stars of Labour’s historically-powerful government this term, but has instead become one of the villains. She started the term with accolades for her new role as Minister of Foreign Affairs, but has performed relatively poorly in that role, as well as in her Local Government portfolio.
Interestingly, the Herald’s Audrey Young, recently gave Mahuta only 5 out of 10 in her evaluation of Government ministers. Young forecast that Mahuta was due to lose her portfolio in the next reshuffle due largely to her mismanagement of Three Waters. Earlier in the year, Young pronounced that Mahuta was “distracted by Three Waters reforms and a series of stories about public sector contracts awarded to her consultant husband.”
Mahuta has been accused of pushing the Three Waters reforms through to benefit iwi leaders, who are being given 50 per cent of the control over the new water companies.
Coughlan says today: “The problem that has dogged these reforms – a problem that followed her all the way into caucus this week – has been a lack of transparency and trustworthiness.” He details how the reform process has involved spin and deception from the Government since very early on.
A bigger problem is that the Three Waters reforms continue to impact Labour’s reputation and popularity very negatively, threatening to help sink the government at the next election. Two polls out this week, showed that the party had sunk to historic lows in support. First the 1News-Kantar poll on Monday put Labour on only 33 per cent support, which was the lowest the poll had recorded for the party since coming to power in 2017. And then on Wednesday the Roy Morgan poll gave a more shocking figure of 25 per cent support.
It’s worth pointing out that Roy Morgan had the most accurate poll results in the lead up to the last election. And the 25 per cent result is probably the lowest that any government has polled since the early 1990s when Ruth Richardson’s radical neoliberal economic reforms dragged down Jim Bolger’s National Government. Notably, Bolger’s eventual response was to sack Richardson. However, Ardern is in a bind, and due to the power of Labour’s Māori caucus, both Three Waters and Nanaia Mahuta look set to continue as an albatross around Labour’s neck.
After a wet and unusually cool spring for much of Australia, the start of meteorological summer is bringing a heatwave to the north of the continent. Even in our La Niña summer we can expect spells of heat, and it’s important to heed health warnings and take the hot weather seriously.
Heat is building across northern Australia and the area may see temperatures over 40℃ for the next few days. Some parts will experience temperatures more than 5℃ above average. These are quite big departures for tropical regions, which normally experience less variable temperatures than places such as Melbourne or Adelaide.
The Bureau of Meteorology is forecasting extreme heatwave conditions to persist through the weekend across parts of Western Australia, Northern Territory and Queensland. Bureau of Meteorology
Relief from the heat is expected early next week as more moisture allows wetter conditions, which will cool things back down.
As a La Niña event continues, people may be surprised to see a major heatwave in northern Australia. La Niña brings generally wetter and cooler conditions. However, there are other climate influences on Australia that can counteract its effects, and weather systems can still bring heat to the continent.
The negative Indian Ocean Dipole, which was combining with La Niña to provide the ingredients for a wetter-than-normal spring, has dissipated. The Madden-Julian Oscillation, which is a pulse of enhanced cloud followed by clearer skies that moves from west to east near the equator, is not very strong at the moment. This allows drier conditions conducive to heat to build over the north of the continent.
Extreme heat is dangerous, especially after cool periods
It is important for people to heed warnings about staying cool and hydrated during heatwaves. Each state and territory has handy advice to follow, including the Northern Territory, Queensland and Western Australia, which are affected by the current heatwave.
Bushfire-style emergency warnings will now be issued for heatwaves across Australia.
Extreme heat is especially dangerous when it follows a period of cooler weather. For those of us in the south of the country, you may have noticed the first really hot day of summer feels more extreme than a day with the same temperatures in February or March. This is because the human body takes time to acclimatise to the heat.
We see worse health impacts from extreme heat early in the warm season. This is why the Bureau of Meteorology incorporates recent temperatures into its heatwave forecasts and alerts.
What will the rest of summer bring?
The La Niña that helped set up the cool and wet spring conditions over most of Australia is predicted to ease very soon. There is high uncertainty, though, and some forecast models predict the La Niña will last a bit longer. Predicting the end of these events is tricky, so forecasts aren’t always correct.
With a weakening La Niña, the summer outlook is for warmer daytime conditions away from the east of Australia and the rainfall signal is no longer very strong.
The summer outlook points to cooler daytime temperatures across parts of eastern Australia but warm to hot elsewhere. Bureau of Meteorology
Rainfall outlooks, though, are generally less reliable in summer than at other times of year. This is because more of our summer rain is from storms, and it’s hard to predict ahead of time where these will occur. Less of our rain is from fronts and large-scale weather systems compared with cooler times of year.
This summer, more tropical cyclones are forecast in the Australian region. Depending on where exactly they form and track, we might see some places experiencing huge amounts of rain while others miss out.
There is not much confidence in whether it will be a wet or dry summer over most of Australia. Bureau of Meteorology
Expect more heatwaves
In any summer, parts of Australia will experience extreme heat. There are some places that, perhaps counter-intuitively, experience more heatwaves in a La Niña summer, including Victoria.
Human-caused climate change is also bringing more frequent and intense heatwaves to the continent and pretty much the whole world. We have increased the odds of having extreme heat events in Australia through humanity’s ever-increasing greenhouse gas emissions. This means we must be prepared for more heat regardless of what’s going on with the El Niño-Southern Oscillation or other climate influences.
We need to be prepared for different types of extreme weather over the summer. Wherever you are in Australia, it is important to keep up-to-date with the weather forecasts over the next few months.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne
Lukas Coch/AAP
A federal Resolve poll for Nine newspapers, conducted November 30 to December 4 from a sample of 1,611, gave Labor 42% of the primary vote (up three since the post-budget Resolve poll in late October), the Coalition 30% (down two), the Greens 11% (down two), One Nation 4% (steady), the UAP 2% (up one), independents 8% (steady) and others 3% (steady).
Resolve does not provide a two-party estimate until shortly before elections, but applying 2022 election preference flows to these primary votes gives Labor about a 60-40 lead, a two-point gain for Labor.
On Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, 60% thought he was doing a good job and 24% a poor job, for a net approval of +36, up seven points. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s net approval was down two points to -14. Albanese led as preferred PM by 54-19 (53-19 previously).
On voting intentions, this is Labor’s best result in any poll since the August Resolve poll (an estimated 61-39 to Labor). Albanese’s net approval is back to where it was in August, while Dutton’s is the worst of any Resolve poll since he became opposition leader.
In polls conducted since the May election, Resolve has been skewing left, with Newspoll, Essential and especially Morgan giving Labor far more modest leads.
Labor led the Liberals by 38-31 as party best for economic management (38-32 previously). On keeping the cost of living low, Labor led by 37-24 (31-24 previously).
By 79-4, voters supported setting price caps that utility companies cannot go over to tackle power prices. This was easily the most popular option, with 70-3 support for reserving a portion of gas for export to the local market and 63-6 support for bringing back or retaining ownership of power assets in public hands.
Morgan poll: 54.5-45.5 to Labor
After slipping to a lead of just 52.5-47.5 last week, this week Labor’s lead in Morgan’s weekly federal poll has rebounded to 54.5-45.5. Polling was conducted November 28 to December 4.
Victorian election update: Labor wins Northcote and Preston
After distribution of preferences, Labor has officially won Northcote by a 50.2-49.8 margin over the Greens. In Preston, there was speculation that an independent could win from fourth by overtaking the Greens then beating Labor, but preferences from minor candidates did not assist the independent, with Labor defeating the Greens.
The ABC now gives Labor 54 of the 88 lower house seats, the Coalition 27, the Greens four and three still to be decided. The distribution of preferences will likely settle Bass (Labor leads 50.3-49.7 over Liberals) and Pakenham (Liberals lead 50.1-49.9 over Labor). Narracan will likely be won by the Coalition when the deferred election is held.
In the upper house, the ABC’s calculator applied to all eight regions currently gives Labor 15 of the 40 seats, the Coalition 14, Legalise Cannabis three, the Greens two, and one each for Animal Justice, Transport Matters, the Liberal Democrats, the Shooters, Labour DLP and One Nation.
On Monday I wrote that Transport Matters is very unlikely to win once below the line votes are factored in, with that seat going to the Greens instead. So the overall upper house is still likely to be 22 left to 18 right, with Labor needing the Greens and Legalise Cannabis to pass legislation opposed by the right.
All eight upper house regions are now at at least 70% of enrolled voters counted. The final turnout for the lower house was 87.1%. I expect final results for the upper house next week.
US Democrats to have 51-49 Senate majority after winning Georgia runoff
On Tuesday (Wednesday AEDT), Democrat Raphael Warnock defeated Republican Herschel Walker by a 51.4-48.6 margin in the Georgia Senate runoff. The runoff occurred after neither Warnock nor Walker won a majority on November 8. I covered the runoff for The Poll Bludger.
This result gives Democrats (including two independents who caucus with them) a 51-49 United States Senate majority, a gain of one seat for Democrats for the 2022 midterm elections. The one state that changed party control at these elections was Pennsylvania, a Democratic gain.
While holding the Senate with an increased majority is good for Democrats, only one-third of Senate seats are up for election every two years. In 2024, the seats that are up will be far more difficult for Democrats, as they will be defending 23 seats to just ten Republican defences. Three Democrats will be defending states Donald Trump won easily in both 2016 and 2020 – West Virginia, Montana and Ohio.
Republicans won the House of Representatives by a 222-213 majority at the midterms, a reversal of Democrats’ 222-213 majority after the 2020 elections. Unlike the Senate, all 435 House seats are up every two years.
Legislation needs to be approved by both chambers of Congress, so Democrats won’t be able to pass partisan legislation once the new Congress is sworn in on January 3. But the Senate alone can confirm presidential nominations for judges and cabinet-level appointments. So President Joe Biden’s judicial nominations will be confirmed for the next two years.
Adrian Beaumont 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Brooks, Principal Research Fellow – Fluvial Geomorphologist – specialising in catchment erosion research, Griffith University
James Daley , Author provided
Back-to-back bleaching events have highlighted the critical threat that climate change poses to the Great Barrier Reef. But few people are aware of the network of gullies pumping out about half the sediment that is polluting reef water quality and threatening its World Heritage status.
These gully networks are like miniature Grand Canyons, some with walls up to 20 metres high. They make a spectacular sight but are a disaster for the land, the reef and the rivers that connect them.
In the UNESCO delegation’s latest report on the reef, dramatically scaling up gully repair efforts is the top recommendation.
Along with global warming, degraded water quality is a key threat to the reef. But as the world continues to debate how to combat climate change, the report recognises that fixing gullies will give the reef a fighting chance to survive warming oceans. This is something Australia can do right now.
Over more than a century, land use changes have disturbed fragile soils in grazing country. The unearthed fine sediment from below the surface dissolves like a Berocca tablet when it rains, creating a gully. Left alone, this process will continue for hundreds of years and keep eating into the landscape.
Gullies can expose hectares of soil to severe erosion which feeds sediment directly into waterways. James Daley
Our team at Griffith university have been researching gullies since 2005. Over the last decade we’ve developed the tools to identify and target the highest priority gullies, and helped design ways to fix them.
Through detailed mapping we’ve found we can identify and target just a few percent of the tens of thousands of gullies to achieve a massive, cost-effective water quality improvement.
As the planet warms, Australia is already experiencing record heat. For our team working in Queensland’s gullies, temperatures can reach over 50℃ in the midday sun.
Field work in these conditions usually feels about as comfortable as working on the surface of Mars. Nonetheless, our team of scientists keep returning because of the staggering implications of the data we’ve been collecting.
Each wet season, the exposed soils in these gullies turn to a yoghurt-like consistency. Their chemistry primes them to readily erode, which they do with every raindrop that falls on them.
The eureka moment that could help save the reef.
In fact, an individual gully can produce thousands of tonnes of fine sediment each year from just a few hectares of land. If you look at the total flow of sediment from all gullies, on average over 400,000 truckloads are dumped across the reef every year, mostly within the inner lagoon.
As sediment and nutrients travel freely down the rivers, they pollute fragile ecosystems, filling water holes, clouding the water and reducing biodiversity. Once they reach the reef lagoon, they smother corals and seagrasses, which struggle to survive.
As the UNESCO report identifies, degraded water quality severely affects the resilience of the reef, limiting its ability to recover from bleaching and cyclones, and to withstand the changes caused by global warming.
The most effective solution for improving water quality
Stabilising gullied landscapes requires an approach akin to mine site rehabilitation. In 2016, we demonstrated that if you reshape (with major earthworks), recap (with rock, soil and mulch) and revegetate the gullies, you can rapidly repair them. Our research has shown that erosion from priority gullies can be reduced by 98% within a space of one to two years.
Most gullies have eroded over the last 160 years due to land use changes and fragile soils. Justin Stout
We’ve now mapped more than 25,000 individual gullies in three hot spot areas in the Normanby, Burdekin and Fitzroy River catchments.
Remarkably, we discovered that only a small proportion of the mapped gullies in each area are contributing a large proportion of the sediment pollution.
For example, in the Burdekin hot spot, we found only about 2% of the gullies contribute 30% of the sediment load to the reef. Targeting these gullies provides the best and quickest way to improve the reef’s water quality.
But the number of gullies repaired to date is a drop in the ocean compared to what still needs to be done.
So far, our method of identifying priority gullies for repair has been implemented across only 1% of the 44-million-hectare reef catchment. The urgent task, as the UNESCO report notes, is to identify other hot spot areas and rapidly roll out the prioritisation mapping to enable targeted remediation to get under way.
Gullies can be remediated back to healthy landscapes in less than two years. James Daley
What needs to happen now
UNESCO highlights the critical need to speed up effective action, recommending:
there is a need to secure a greater reduction of [sediment and nutrient] pollutants in the next three years than has been achieved since 2009.
The good news is the research has already been done. The data demonstrates it is possible to achieve this ambitious goal. The implementation of on-ground gully repair works with economies of scale is the quickest and most cost-effective way to do it.
Since 2008, Australian governments have set sediment reduction targets and invested considerable funds to improve reef water quality. The federal government intends to spend an additional A$580 million over nine years, and a further $270 million has been committed by the Queensland government.
Importantly, rapid progress can be made given the current funds earmarked for reef water quality. There are also proven working relationships already in place between our Griffith team, Traditional Owners , government and other stakeholders.
The challenge ahead is delivery. The next step requires a coordinated program to develop a pipeline of targeted gully projects.
The pieces of the puzzle are now all in place and there is no reason for delay.
Andrew Brooks has received funding from the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program (NESP) program and the Great Barrier Reef Foundation’s Innovation Program. He also consults to The Palladium Group providing technical advice related to the establishment and implementation of Reef Credits .
James Daley receives funding from the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program (NESP) program and the Great Barrier Reef Foundation’s Innovation Program.
A ping from the pizza company. A couple of pings from your socials. Ping, ping, ping from your family WhatsApp group trying to organise a weekend barbecue.
With all those smartphone notifications, it’s no wonder you lose focus on what you’re trying to do do.
Your phone doesn’t even need to ping to distract you. There’s pretty goodevidence the mere presence of your phone, silent or not, is enough to divert your attention.
So what’s going on? More importantly, how can you reclaim your focus, without missing the important stuff?
When you look at the big picture, those pings can really add up.
Although estimates vary, the average person checks their phone around 85 timesa day, roughly once every 15 minutes.
In other words, every 15 minutes or so, your attention is likely to wander from what you’re doing. The trouble is, it can take several minutes to regain your concentration fully after being interrupted by your phone.
If you’re just watching TV, distractions (and refocusing) are no big deal. But if you’re driving a car, trying to study, at work, or spending time with your loved ones, it could lead to some fairly substantial problems.
The pings from your phone are “exogenous interruptions”. In other words, something external, around you, has caused the interruption.
We can become conditioned to feeling excited when we hear our phones ping. This is the same pleasurable feeling people who gamble can quickly become conditioned to at the sight or sound of a poker machine.
What if your phone is on silent? Doesn’t that solve the ping problem? Well, no.
That’s another type of interruption, an internal (or endogenous) interruption.
Think of every time you were working on a task but your attention drifted to your phone. You may have fought the urge to pick it up and see what was happening online, but you probably checked anyway.
In this situation, we can become so strongly conditioned to expect a reward each time we look at our phone we don’t need to wait for a ping to trigger the effect.
These impulses are powerful. Just reading this article about checking your phone may make you feel like … checking your phone.
But is there any evidence our brain is working harder to manage the frequent switches in attention?
One study of people’s brain waves found those who describe themselves as heavy smartphone users were more sensitive to push notifications than ones who said they were light users.
After hearing a push notification, heavy users were significantly worse at recovering their concentration on a task than lighter users. Although push notification interrupted concentration for both groups, the heavy users took much longer to regain focus.
Frequent interruptions from your phone can also leave you feeling stressed by a need to respond. Frequent smartphone interruptions are also associated with increased FOMO (fear of missing out).
If you get distracted by your phone after responding to a notification, any subsequent procrastination in returning to a task can also leave you feeling guilty or frustrated.
There’s certainly evidence suggesting the longer you spend using your phone in unproductive ways, the lower you tend to rate your wellbeing.
We know switching your phone to silent isn’t going to magically fix the problem, especially if you’re already a frequent checker.
What’s needed is behaviour change, and that’s hard. It can take several attempts to see lasting change. If you have ever tried to quit smoking, lose weight, or start an exercise program you’ll know what I mean.
Start by turning off all non-essential notifications. Then here are some things to try if you want to reduce the number of times you check your phone:
charge your phone overnight in a different room to your bedroom. Notifications can prevent you falling asleep and can repeatedly rouse you from essential sleep throughout the night
interrupt the urge to check and actively decide if it’s going to benefit you, in that moment. For example, as you turn to reach for your phone, stop and ask yourself if this action serves a purpose other than distraction
try the Pomodoro method to stay focused on a task. This involves breaking your concentration time up into manageable chunks (for example, 25 minutes) then rewarding yourself with a short break (for instance, to check your phone) between chunks. Gradually increase the length of time between rewards. Gradually re-learning to sustain your attention on any task can take a while if you’re a high-volume checker.
Sharon Horwood 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.
On the 4th of December, TikTok user @jongraz announced his beloved pet, a pug named Noodle, had died aged 14. The announcement video received over 19 million views and 4 million likes, a testament to how widely loved Noodle was online.
Noodle and his owner Jonathan Graziano went viral on TikTok for their “Bones Day” routine. In the morning, Jonathan would film his attempts to lift Noodle out of bed. If Noodle stood up, it would be a Bones Day.
If he slouched back into bed, appearing to have no bones, it would be a No Bones Day. Jonathan would then give advice as to what kind of day viewers should expect to have, using Noodle’s Bones status as predictor of things to come.
For example, on a video with the caption “the prophet returns”, Jonathan tests Noodle and discovers it is a No Bones Day. He tells the viewers this “reading” means the audience has to be kind to themselves, they don’t have to do the dishes and are allowed to wear sweatpants for the rest of the day. Because Noodle said so.
The Bones Day phenomenon quickly became part of the Internet’s vernacular. The language spread into many online communities, and multiple TikTok musical artists made songs about Noodle. Noodle’s dad, along with illustrator Dan Travis, published a New York Times Bestseller book titled, Noodle and the No Bones Day
Noodle and Jonathan reached viral fame on TikTok one year into the pandemic, at time when many people were burnt out and experiencing deep loss. Fans online would use the Bones Day predictions as a sign of self care, coming together in the video comments to encourage Noodle and each other to rest and try again tomorrow.
Parasocial relationships and lost pets
Noodle’s death highlights the complex nature of online parasocial relationships. Introduced by Psychologists Donald Horton and R. Richard Wohl in 1956, this idea of a parasocial relationship describes when viewers of media have “an apparently intimate, face-to-face associations with a performer”.
Media scholar Janice Peck believes parasocial relationships are created when repeat contact with an online personality makes the viewer feel like they are talking to a friend. The intimate nature of how influencers share their lives online can make audiences feel closer to them. We are excited at their successes and can feel sadness when they are grieving.
If you have ever said that a celebrity’s behaviour was out of character, or felt like you understood a decision someone online was making, you might be experiencing a parasocial relationship. For example, the infamous trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard highlights how people eagerly take the side of one celebrity and condemn another. Shows like Love Island have incredibly strong fan attachments.
Parasociality, also called communicative intimacies by anthropologist and ethnographer Crystal Abidin, is negotiated through audience feedback, where audiences crave personal interactions – and influencers respond in kind. These kinds of relationships are common online and can also extend to pets.
There are currently millions of social media accounts dedicated to pets, many of these amassing large followings. Ester the Wonder Pig,Tuna the chiweenie, and Tikathe Italian Greyhound are some notable examples.
Pets and grief
Animal behaviourist Melissa Starling says that the loss of a pet can be deep and complex. While this grief is often invalidated by society by being seen as “lesser” than grief for a person, Starling argues it is important to recognise how the loss of a pet can be as painful as the loss of a human. Through the parasocial relationships that we form with pets like Noodle, it is not uncommon to grieve his death as we would our own pet or loved one.
Noodle is not the first beloved internet pet to pass away publicly. Earlier in the year Pot Roast, a famous cat on TikTok also died. The complex nature of the relationship between viewer and pet came to light as many fans of Pot Roast lashed out against her owner for the way she displayed her own grief.
One of the first famous pet’s death that reached headlines was the well-known Grumpy Cat, real name Tardar Sauce. Grumpy Cat amassed a massive online audience, and her owner created an entire brand around the cat’s signature grumpy face. This branding has continued long after the cat’s death.
Celebrating life after death
Users experiencing parasocial relationships, like the millions responding to Noodle’s death, use this relationship to show support and maintain relationships within online communities.
Since Noodle’s passing, thousands have posted videos memorialising his life, including other popular pet TikTok accounts like @mistermainer. @mistermainer’s video, which has over 750,000 views, is titled “Remembering an internet legend”. The video begins with close shot of the dog Maine before fading into clips of Noodle and his owner Jonathan, in a style reminiscent of funeral memorial videos.
Popular user @thechalkingdad posted a video tribute to Noodle by drawing his portrait in chalk. This video, with 1.7 million views, has soft background music, and a sombre voice over that says, “Goodbye Noodle, may every day be a bones day in heaven”.
Parasocial relationships with pets online are not only common, but can lead to very real feelings of grief. While grieving a pet may transgress the expected boundaries, these feelings are valid.
Noodle’s death reminds us of the deep, complex, and often very fulfilling relationships that users can form online. Relative strangers are able to connect over social media in a solidarity of mourning. Rather than grieving alone, they can use social media platforms to grief collectively.
Edith Jennifer Hill 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.
The release this week of Sport NZ’s new Guiding Principles for the Inclusion of Transgender People in Community Sport caused a minor and predictable controversy. One former parliamentarian called the guidelines “woke ideology”. Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson responded that such opposition was “petty and small-minded”.
In reality, the guidelines are the result of extensive consultation over two years. They’re a response to national sports organisations calling for help in navigating the uncharted waters of imagining sport beyond the gender binary.
They recommend supporting athletes to participate in community sport in the gender they identify as. Sports organisations are now tasked with developing new or revised policies that prioritise inclusion.
While some, such as NZ Rugby and Boxing New Zealand, are already working on transgender policies, the guidelines offer a clear road map for the consultative process, with the support of Sport NZ.
Recognising this will be different for each sport, Sport NZ CEO Raelene Castle says the guidelines are simply a good “start point for conversation”. At their core is the principle of inclusion, based on wellbeing and safety, privacy and dignity, and removing discrimination, bullying and harassment.
By gaining confidence through this process, it’s hoped sports organisations will recognise that making sport safer and more inclusive is ultimately beneficial for all. The question now, however, is whether change at the grassroots level can filter up to elite sports, which are most often governed and directed by policies set by international bodies.
Sport NZ CEO Raelene Castle speaking at the World Conference on Women & Sport in Auckland in November 2022. Getty Images
A blurry line
Sport NZ and High Performance Sport New Zealand have committed to supporting national sporting bodies navigate the rules and regulations applied by international sporting organisations. In practice, however, the boundaries between community and national and international elite sports are blurry.
Access to sport is a human right. It has many social, psychological and physical benefits that should be available to all. The principles and practices of inclusion don’t observe boundaries between community and elite sport, and many sports organisations are struggling to balance competitive fairness with inclusiveness, and governance with human rights law.
Some international organisations continue to reinforce gender binary norms in elite sport with policies based on increasingly outdated views of biological sex. Others are working towards policies that recognise changing understandings of gender in wider society.
A year ago, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) released updated guidelines for inclusion of transgender and intersex athletes. No athlete should be excluded from competing based on an “unverified, alleged or perceived unfair competitive advantage due to their sex variations, physical appearance and/or transgender status”.
The guidelines recognised decades of significant harm caused to athletes who have experienced unethical and “medically unnecessary” procedures and treatments to meet previous selection criteria. Indeed, the widespread use of so-called “sex testing” justified by sporting criteria has been a gross violation of human rights.
Lia Thomas competing at the NCAA Swimming and Diving Championships in the US in March 2022. Getty Images
Resistance and reaction
The media attention and polarising debates surrounding high-profile transgender athletes like New Zealand Olympic weightlifter Laurel Hubbard and US swimmer Lia Thomas have prompted some sports organisations to revise their policies, often under duress.
Rowing USA, for instance, has just announced a new Gender Identity Policy. Domestic athletes can now participate based on their “expressed gender identity”.
Some are concerned that opening competition in this way essentially eliminates the “women’s category”. Others see such initiatives as a move towards reimagining sport as safe, supportive and inclusive of people across the gender spectrum.
Other sports have taken a different stance. World Rugby banned transgender women from women’s rugby in 2020. And earlier this year the aquatic sports federation FINA banned transgender swimmers, reintroducing measuresdescribed by one critic as “an unacceptable erosion of bodily autonomy for women and girls”.
Bans on trans athletes are often justified on the ground of biology and science. The counter-argument is that the research on transgender sports performance is too new to make definitive calls this early. But one analysis of the literature concluded “the future of women’s sport includes transgender women and girls”.
As the new book Justice for Trans Athletes shows, transgender athletes experience many challenges, including stigma, discrimination and gender-based violence. Sport NZ is to be commended for recognising its responsibility to take such trauma into account, given the harm that can be done during “debates” about the participation of an already marginalised and often vulnerable group.
Local sporting bodies will not lose funding if they don’t adopt the principles within their inclusion and diversity policies, but the Sport NZ guidelines clearly identify expectations for best practice.
It remains to be seen how national and international sports organisations implement and regulate such guidelines if and when some sporting bodies refuse to voluntarily adopt them. Given the onus is on organisations to carve their own paths, there is a lot of room for alternative interpretations of what are essentially still only recommendations.
As sports medicine and social science scholars acknowledge, developing overarching policy on transgender participation in sport remains complex and messy. Introducing guidelines and frameworks rather than enforceable policy may be a lighter touch, but it sends a clear message of an organisational commitment to change.
Starting from a place of inclusion is an important sign of progress. But it will be a shame if this important human rights issue becomes tangled and lost in the all-too-familiar power plays and politics of global sport.
Holly Thorpe 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.
People’s Alliance candidate Lynda Tabuya claims her 16-year-old daughter was “harassed” by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) officers last week.
Tabuya made this allegation in a video posted on social media.
“This is my daughter coming back from school and they asked her where I was,” she said.
“And she said she didn’t know and then they said to her, ‘tell your mother that FICAC is looking for her’.”
She said this step taken by FICAC was unacceptable.
“You come to my home and harass my child, my 16-year-old who was just coming back from school, just did her exam.
“It’s just very shameful.”
Made daughter panic Tabuya said this made her daughter panic and worry about what would happen to her mother.
“You know, they could have asked her, is there an adult in the home, can we see someone?
“But no, they came and my family was at home and they rang the doorbell like 10 times, 15 times in a row with my children inside.
“What are you doing FICAC. If you wanted to find me, you know where to find me, you have means to find me, but don’t harass my children.”
Questions sent to FICAC by The Fiji Times on the claims made by Tabuya remained unanswered.
Rakesh Kumaris a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.
The launch of a New Zealand project to produce more Pacific news and provide a “voice for the voiceless” on the islands has highlighted the neglect of that field by Australia and New Zealand — and also problems in universities.
The new development is the non-government, non-university Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN), a research base and publishing platform.
Its opening followed the cleaning-out of a centre within the Auckland University of Technology (AUT) — in an exercise exemplifying the kind of micro infighting that goes on hardly glimpsed from outside the academic world.
Cleaning out media centre The story features an unannounced move by university staff to vacate the offices of an active journalism teaching and publishing base, the Pacific Media Centre, in early February 2021.
Seven weeks after the retirement of that centre’s foundation director, Professor David Robie, staff of AUT’s School of Communication Studies turned up and stripped it, taking out the archives and Pacific taonga — valued artifacts from across the region.
Staff still based there did not know of this move until later.
The centre had been in operation for 13 years — it was popular with Pasifika students, especially postgrads who would go on reporting ventures for practice-led research around the Pacific; it was a base for online news, for example prolific outlets including a regular Pacific Media Watch; it had international standing especially through the well-rated (“SCOPUS-listed”) academic journal Pacific Journalism Review; and it was a cultural hub, where guests might receive a sung greeting from the staff, Pacific-style, or see fascinating art works and craft.
Its uptake across the “Blue Continent” showed up gaps in mainstream media services and in Australia’s case famously the backlog in promoting economic and cultural ties.
The PMC Project — a short documentary about the centre by Alistar Kata in 2016. Video: Pacific Media Centre
Human rights and media freedom The centre was founded in 2007, in a troubled era following a rogue military coup d’etat in Fiji, civil disturbances in Papua New Guinea, violent attacks on journalists in several parts, and endemic gender violence listed as a priority problem for the Pacific Islands Forum.
Through its publishing and conference activity it would take a stand on human rights and media freedom issues, social justice, economic and media domination from outside.
The actual physical evacuation was on the orders of the communications head of school at AUT, Dr Rosser Johnson, a recently appointed associate professor with a history of management service in several acting roles since 2005. He told the Australia Asia Pacific Media Initiative (AAPMI) that the university planned to keep a centre called the PMC and co-locate its offices with other centres — but that never happened.
His intervention caused predictable critical responses, as with this comment by a former New Zealand Heraldeditor-in-chief Dr Gavin Ellis, on dealing with corporatised universities, in “neo-liberal” times:
“For many years I thought universities were the ideal place to establish centres of investigative journalism excellence … My views have been shaken to the core by the Auckland University of Technology gutting the Pacific Media Centre.”
Conflicts over truth-telling The “PMC affair” has stirred conflicts that should worry observers who place value on truth-finding and truth-telling in university research, preparation for the professions, and academic freedom.
The Independent Australia report on the fate of the PMC this week. Image: Asia Pacific Report
The centre along with its counterpart at the University of Technology Sydney, called the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism (ACIJ), worked in the area of journalism as research, applying journalistic skills and methods, especially exercises in investigative journalism.
The ACIJ produced among many investigations, work on the reporting of climate policy and climate science, and the News of the World phone hacking scandal. It also was peremptorily shut-down, three years ahead of the PMC.
Both centres were placed in the journalism academic discipline, a “professional” and “teaching” discipline that traditionally draws in high achieving students interested in its practice-led approach.
All of which is decried by line academics in disciplines without professional linkages but a professional interest in the hierarchical arrangements and power relations within the confined space of their universities.
There the interest is in theoretical teaching and research outputs, often-enough called “Marxist”, “postmodern”, “communications” or “cultural studies”, angled at a de-legitimisation of “Western-liberal” mass media. Not that journalism education itself shies away from media criticism, as Dr Robie told Independent Australia:
“The Pacific Media Centre frequently challenged ‘ethnocentric journalistic practice’ and placed Māori, Pacific and indigenous and cultural diversity at the heart of the centre’s experiential knowledge and critical-thinking news narratives.”
Yet it can be seen how conflict may arise, especially where smaller journalism departments come under “takeover” pressure. It is a handy option for academic managers to subsume “journalism”, and get the staff positions that can be filled with non-journalists; the contribution the journalists may make to research earnings (through the Australian Excellence in Research process, or NZ Performance Based Research Fund), and especially government funding for student places.
There, better students likely to excel and complete their programmes can be induced to do more generalised courses with a specialist “journalism” label.
Any such conflict in the AUT case cannot be measured but must be at least lurking in the background.
The head of school, Dr Johnson, works in communication studies and cultural studies, with publications especially about info-advertising. He indicates just a lay interest in journalism listing three articles published in mass media since 2002.
What is ‘ideology’? Another problem exists, where a centre like the former PMC will commit to defined values, even officially sanctioned ones like inclusivity and rejection of discrimination.
Undertakings like the PMC’s “Bearing Witness” projects, where students would deploy classic journalism techniques for investigations on a nuclear-free Pacific or climate change, can irritate conservative interests.
The derogatory expression for any connection with social movements is “ideological”. This time it is an unknown, but a School moving against an “ideological” unit, might get at least tacit support from higher-ups supposing that eviscerating it might help the institution’s “good name”.
What implications for future journalism, freedom and quality of media? Hostility towards specific professional education for journalism exists fairly widely. The rough-housing of the journalism centre at AUT is indicative, where efforts by the out-going director to organise succession after his retirement, five years in advance, received no response.
The position statement was changed to take away a requirement for actual Pacific media identity or expertise, and the job left vacant, in part a covid effect. The centre performed well on its key performance indicators, if small in size, which brought in limited research grants but good returns for academic publications:
“On 18 December 2020 – the day I officially retired – I wrote to the [then] Vice-Chancellor, Derek McCormack … expressing my concern about the future of the centre, saying the situation was “unconscionable and inexplicable”. I never received an acknowledgement or reply.”
Pacific futures Journalism education has persisted through an adverse climate, where the number of journalists in mainstream media has declined, in New Zealand almost halved to 2061, (2006 – 2018). Also, AUT is currently in turmoil over the future of Māori and Pacific academics and the status of the university with an unpopular move to retrench 170 academic staff.
The latest Pacific Journalism Review . . . published for 28 years. Image: PJR
However new media are expanding, new demands exist for media competency across the exploding world “mediascape”, schools cultivating conscionable practices are providing an antidote to floods of bigotry and lies in social media.
The new NGO in Auckland, the APMN, has found a good base of support across the Pacific communities, limbering up for a future free of interference, outside of the former university base.
It will be bidding for a share of NZ government grants intended to assist public journalism, ethnic broadcasting and outreach to the region. While several products of the former centre have closed, the successful 28-year-old research journal Pacific Journalism Review has continued, producing two editions under its new management.
The operation is also keeping its production-side media strengths, such as with the online title Asia Pacific Report.
Independent Australia media editor Lee Duffield is a former ABC correspondent and academic. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Pacific Journalism Review. This article is republished with the author’s permission.
Australians desperately need more affordable homes, particularly homes for rent. The prospect of home ownership is rapidly receding for many people, especially younger generations (as the chart below shows). More people than ever are being forced into a tight rental market.
Adding to the demand for housing, households are getting smaller. The estimated shortfall of homes needed to house new households will be nearly 165,000 by 2032. An extra 20,000 dwellings a year need to be built to avoid that housing deficit.
So what can be done to provide more housing that households can afford? One emerging idea is build-to-rent developments.
Build-to-rent generally involves developing residential accommodation with a view to it being a long-term investment offering long-term homes for renters rather than home buyers. These developments are usually units and townhouses, owned by an institutional investor.
Our research project is investigating the opportunities to improve housing affordability in Australia. We have found broad agreement among leading players in the build-to-rent sector that these developments are affordable when the rent generated is right for both the households and developers. But there’s a catch: our interviewees considered the rents affordable only because they are set at a reasonable cost for their target group, middle-to-upper-income households.
So this “reasonable cost” is a market perspective. And most current build-to-rent developments are a premium product in city-centre locations. As one person in state government explained:
“It’s a market process and they do their due diligence and they work out that there’s sufficient people who can pay what they need to pay and people who are perhaps willing to pay a premium for a better product and some greater security of tenure, because they know that it’s going to be continued to be offered as a rental. The landlord’s not going to go, ‘I want to move in’, or sell it.”
Build-to-rent is well established overseas but relatively new to Australia. Unsurprisingly, there is still no single definition of exactly what it means, especially as an affordable housing option.
For example, a recent study analysing 685 media articles and housing industry reports suggested build-to-rent may not be what it seems. It might be just another way for investors to make financial gains while masquerading as a solution to the critical shortage of affordable and social housing (available at below-market rents).
It’s not yet clear whether built-to-rent will be an effective solution for people who most need affordable housing. They include low-income and vulnerable households, and those with special needs.
With this in mind, we interviewed 26 leading practitioners (CEOs, chairs of boards, national directors and state government departmental directors) across the field of affordable housing and build-to-rent in Australia to collect their views on what it is.
We found the market perspective is at odds with the needs of lower-income households. It’s quite different to the welfare approach to housing, which focuses on the needs of those with lower incomes. Many households in the bottom 40% of incomes are suffering housing stress as a result of spending more than 30% of their income on housing (known as the 30:40 affordability indicator).
To make inroads into the housing affordability crisis, built-to-rent developments will need to provide homes to all, including those falling under the 30:40 indicator, not only to the relatively wealthy.
Can build-to-rent help solve the affordable housing crisis?
Participants agreed build-to-rent developments can ease the affordability crisis. To support lower-income households, however, they said incentives, via tax concessions and inclusionary zoning, will be needed.
Tax concessions provide incentives to develop affordable housing by, for example, offering land tax credits. Inclusionary zoning either mandates or creates incentives so a set proportion of a development is affordable housing. The incentives typically include changes to development controls and planning standards and processes to reduce costs and obstacles to build-to-rent developments.
How, then, can we ensure built-to-rent delivers housing that’s affordable for all households? Our analysis points towards two main conclusions.
First, a legal or statutory definition of “affordability” in relation to build-to-rent should be established. This will allow better framing of the sector’s role in a national housing strategy. As a CEO with 40 years of experience in policy development and the provision of social and affordable housing told us:
“[Build-to-rent] settings are acutely hampered by the fact that we don’t have a national housing strategy, therefore, nobody’s really bothered to resolve the difficult issues about the definition […] that will put housing costs basis into a frame that says, is it reasonable, is it suitable, is it affordable and, once you paid for it, can you afford a reasonably decent standard of living?”
A national housing strategy should allow development of tiers of build-to-rent housing. Each tier would match the level of risk and return within a given section of the spectrum of housing types and tenures. So, these tiers represent both levels of rent and a range of housing types – high-rise, low-rise, townhouses etc.
The aim is to deliver diverse housing options with a focus on affordability and universal housing (designed to meet residents’ changing needs over their lifetime).
A senior economist overseeing nation-wide research into housing and mixed-use development said:
“So we could potentially look at a grade A BtR [build-to-rent], grade B, grade C BtR asset classes and in different locations. We need to be working more towards different kinds of BtR asset classes, like they have in the USA, UK and Canada.”
This approach will help make build-to-rent developments more predictable, replicable and scalable to match varying levels of affordability. And that will help create the confidence and enthusiasm the sector needs to produce better affordable housing outcomes.
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.
The parents of a New Zealand baby at the centre of a legal dispute that has made global headlines will not be appealing against a judge’s decision to hand guardianship of the child to the High Court.
The four-month-old — known only as Baby W — requires urgent open heart surgery, with both blood and blood products required for the operation and potentially its aftermath.
Te Whatu Ora/Health New Zealand took the case to court because the parents refused to allow blood transfusions from anyone who might have had the Pfizer covid-19 vaccine.
A judge on Wednesday ruled in favour of Te Whatu Ora, allowing the surgery to go ahead with whatever product the NZ Blood Service provides. Doctors, having been made agents of the court for the surgery, said on Wednesday afternoon they would be ready to operate within 48 hours.
The family’s lawyer Sue Grey and high-profile media supporter Liz Gunn said this morning there was no time to appeal against the court’s decision, but they had confidence the child would “get the best possible care with the best, safest blood” because “the government cannot afford anything to go wrong for Baby W as the world is watching”.
“The priority for the family is to enjoy a peaceful time with their baby until the operation, and to support him through the operation,” the pair said in a post on the New Zealand Outdoors and Freedom Party Facebook page.
Grey co-leads the party.
The baby will be in intensive care for up to a week and under Te Whatu Ora’s guardianship possibly until the end of January, allowing time for their recovery. The doctors were told to keep the parents “informed at all reasonable times of the nature and progress of [the baby’s] condition and treatment”.
Te Whatu Ora has been approached for comment.
Judge’s ruling expected The ruling should not have come as a surprise, University of Otago bioethics lecturer Josephine Johnstone told Morning Report on Thursday.
“This may seem like a very 2022 case and it is in many ways, but it connects to lines of decision over time where there have been disputes about what’s in the best interests of a child that has very serious medical needs,” she said.
“So this is consistent with previous cases around the refusal of blood products for children whose parents are Jehovah’s Witnesses… or refusal of medical care for cancer treatment for children whose parents have alternative health and science[ views, which is sort of similar to this. In many ways it’s consistent with those decisions. It’s not really a break in that way.”
Johnstone said the parents’ authority over their child’s health and upbringing was being limited in only a very minor way.
“The parents still have all of the other decision-making authority that parents have. And parents do have enormous latitude to make decisions about how to raise their children — what religion to raise them, what kinds of beliefs, what kinds of home to create, what kind of traditions, they have enormous decision-making power about children’s [medical treatment], but it’s not unlimited.
“In very rare cases where it’s a life-and-death situation, we can expect the courts to step in — and that’s exactly what happened.”
Johnstone’s view was backed up by Rebecca Keenan, a former nurse who now works as a barrister, specialising in medical law.
Put child ‘firmly first’ “[The court has] put the child firmly first and have gone by the evidence and supported the health board,” she told Morning Report.
“From reading the judgment, you can see that the parents have been taking their baby out of hospital, against medical opinion, and there’s obviously been a real breakdown in the relationship between the parents and the medical staff.”
Wednesday’s judgment outlined a meeting in late November during which the parents’ support person “proceeded to pressurise the specialists with her theory about conspiracies in New Zealand and even said that deaths in infants getting transfusions were occurring in Starship Hospital”.
Johnstone said while having a support person in meetings with medical staff was a right, it was clear in this case they were not helpful.
“One has to imagine that the involvement of some of the anti-vaccine campaigners has escalated not just this case at the national level, but even the discussions between the family and their medical team, so that’s explicitly mentioned in the case and is definitely a factor in how things must have got to the point where a court order would be needed.”
While not an unexpected ruling, Johnstone fears it might further strain the relationship between parents with alternative views on medical matters and their doctors.
“Any family who has these views and has a very sick child, their healthcare providers are going to have to work that much harder to keep them engaged and keep their trust … a big challenge,” she said.
Demodex are a family of eight-legged mites that live in the hair follicles and associated sebaceous or oil glands of many mammals.
Two species are known in humans – Demodex folliculorum, which lives mainly in hair follicles on our faces (especially eyelashes and eyebrows), and Demodex brevis, which sets up home in the oil glands on the face and elsewhere.
A Demodex mite under the microscope. Mohammed_Al_Ali/Shutterstock
Newborns don’t have Demodex mites. In a study looking for them on adult humans, researchers could detect them visually in only 14% of people.
However, once they used DNA analysis, they found signs of Demodex on 100% of the adult humans they tested, a finding supported by previous cadaver examinations.
If they live all over humanity, the question arises – are these mites parasites or commensal (harmless) organisms, living in harmony with their unwitting hosts? And which of our daily habits, such as face washing and make-up application, can assist or hinder the mites’ survival? This is where it gets tricky.
Disgusting companions with no anuses
Demodex mites are tiny. The larger of the two human species, D. folliculorum, is about a third of a millimetre long, while D. brevis spans less than a quarter of a millimetre. They also carry a range of bacterial species on their bodies.
A number of methods are used to directly detect mites. The best method is a skin biopsy involving a small amount of cyanoacrylate glue (superglue) on a microscope slide.
Cylindrical dandruff around infected hairs is characteristic of mites in residence due to their living habits. Mites can also be squeezed out of follicles with a zit extractor.
The mites feed on skin cells and sebaceous oils, which they predigest by secreting a range of enzymes. As they don’t have an anus, they regurgitate their waste products.
Ensconced in cosy follicle homes, the mites mate and lay eggs; after a lifespan of about 15 days, they die and decompose right there in the follicle.
These fairly disgusting habits may be one reason Demodex can cause allergic reactions in some people, and might also explain a number of associated clinical effects.
However, not all of us have negative reactions to these creatures. Humans mate randomly, and our genetics are thus highly variable – when we are infected, our genes determine our immune and other responses. Some of us don’t react at all, some of us get an itch for a while, and some get chronic debilitating conditions.
Similarly, mite numbers vary between people – if they reproduce in high levels, they are more likely to lead to issues.
Interestingly, the conditions named above and mite numbers seem to increase with age and in immune-compromised patients, suggesting a correlation with decreased immune function. It appears our immune system is key to understanding mite reproduction and their clinical effects.
Can you get rid of face mites? Or make them worse?
There are a number of therapeutic compounds that reduce mite numbers, but the consensus is that Demodex are a natural part of our skin flora, so it might be best not to eliminate them entirely.
When people suffer chronic disease, more robust treatment might be necessary against the mite population, although reinfection from human family members is highly likely.
Mites do not survive for long off their hosts. Other than direct contact, personal hygiene products probably present the main mechanism of cross-infection.
A close-up of Demodex brevis clearly shows the mouthparts they use to eat oils and skin cells off our faces. Austin Whittall/Wikimedia Commons
Sharing make-up brushes, tweezers, eyeliner and mascara is probably not a good idea, although avoiding infection in a shared bathroom might be difficult. In one study, the average survival time for Demodex in mascara was 21 hours.
Other aspects of make-up use, such as regular cleaning and washing of the face, may reduce mite numbers, although other studies suggest mites survive washing quite well.
Thus, it’s unclear how much you can affect your mite population. However, if you suffer any inflammation of the eyelids and nearby areas, avoiding make-up and seeking medical advice might be best.
Overall, as unpleasant as they might sound, Demodex appear to be a normal part of our skin flora. However, some of us do react negatively to their presence and suffer rashes and inflammation.
Controlling such reactions might be as easy as limiting mite numbers with a wash or treatment prescribed by a medical professional – just know that entirely getting rid of our mite friends is probably impossible.
Mark Sandeman 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Lindsey, Malcolm Smith Professor of Asian Law and Director of the Centre for Indonesian Law, Islam and Society, The University of Melbourne
Indonesia’s controversial new criminal code was passed into law on Tuesday, replacing a clunky old code dating back to at least 1918. Lawmakers have tried for decades to replace it. In fact, the last time legislators tried in 2019, it triggered the largest public protests in Indonesia since the 1998 fall of former president Soeharto.
This time, politicians rushed it through at short notice, despite widespread criticism and limited opportunities for public consultation. In the end, the code passed with the support of all but two small parties.
Many of its provisions are dangerously vague and wide in their scope – “rubber provisions”, as Indonesians say – that empower the state at the expense of citizens.
The provisions that have attracted the most criticism are those that impose conservative moral values about sexuality, and those that restrict rights to freedom of expression.
One positive change in the new code is the introduction of a probationary period for death sentences. A death row inmate who demonstrates good behaviour during this period and exhibits remorse can now have his or her sentence changed from death to a term of imprisonment.
This signals a welcome step away from the “no mercy” approach adopted under President Joko Widodo (known as Jokowi). If this provision had been in place in the past, it might have allowed Australian drug offenders Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan to escape the firing squad.
However, this reform is a lonely one. Too many of the changes introduced by the new code are highly regressive, removing or restricting freedoms previously won.
Extramarital sex and other ‘morality’ provisions
Two provisions have already attracted attention internationally. One punishes extramarital sex with up to a year in prison, and the other says couples who live together without being legally married also face jail. There are fears unmarried foreign couples visiting Bali, Indonesia’s holiday island, might be targeted.
However, these two offences are delik aduan, that is, complaint offences. This means they cannot apply unless a close member of the family – a husband or wife, a parent or child – report the matter to the police. That makes it unlikely the new provisions would ever be deployed against an unmarried foreign tourist couple (although it’s possible they could be used against a foreigner with an Indonesian partner if the Indonesian’s family reports them).
There is more concern about the impact of these provisions on Indonesians, especially young couples. They allow families to use the police and the courts to enforce their views about sexuality and choice of partner.
It is also feared the new law will be used to target gay and lesbian people, who cannot marry under Indonesian law. Homosexuality is not illegal in Indonesia (except in the province of Aceh) but opponents of the new code say it criminalises gay and lesbian people by stealth.
Gay and lesbian people are also likely to be targeted under another provision prohibiting “indecent acts”. This is only very vaguely defined and would probably catch public acts of affection between people of the same gender.
The new code also contains provisions that impose jail terms for the dissemination of information about contraception – even explaining how to obtain it. There are exceptions for government family planning activities, but this provision clearly limits women’s freedom to choose.
Other provisions impose a four-year sentence on any woman who has an abortion, and longer terms for those who perform it (although there are exceptions for rape victims and medical emergencies).
Restrictions on freedom of expression
The new code contains provisions that criminalise insulting public officials, including the president and members of the government. There is no defence of truth. In other words, an offence is committed if the official is insulted, even if the allegations are true.
The chilling effect this would have on open debate and press freedom are obvious. In fact, equivalent provisions were struck out of the previous code by the Constitutional Court as unconstitutional. This is a flagrant attempt to reinstate those provisions, empowering the government to crack down on its opponents.
Other provisions ban the spreading of teachings that contradict the state ideology, Pancasila. This could also be deployed against government critics.
Human rights activists are also concerned about press freedom implications of two other provisions. The first prohibits the broadcasting and distribution of fake news (which is undefined) resulting in disturbance or unrest in the community and imposes a sentence of up to two years.
The second is even more dangerous for journalists. It states any person who broadcasts or distributes news that is unverified or exaggerated or incomplete (terms that are also not defined) will also face jail.
Other very controversial provisions deal with blasphemy. The code introduces increased restrictions on religion and religious life that will strengthen and expand the bases on which minority religious groups can be persecuted. This will aggravate a growing problem in post-Soeharto Indonesia.
Constitutional Court challenge
This deeply flawed new criminal code is likely to meet with stiff opposition from lawyers and activists, including protests, even though the new code bans “unannounced demonstrations”. And it’s inevitable it will end up in the Constitutional Court, which has certainly been willing to strike out legislation that contradicts the Constitution in the past.
However, activists are now worried the recent dismissal of a Constitutional Court judge by the national legislature may have changed this.
Lawmakers claimed Justice Aswanto, who had originally been nominated by them, had acted contrary to the legislature’s interests by doing his job and striking down unconstitutional laws. Without a clear legal basis, they had him “recalled” and President Jokowi swore in a replacement.
Some predict this will make the remaining judges much more cautious when the code comes before them.
A long campaign
Most Indonesia-watchers agree democratic regression has increased over the last decade. The new code certainly fits that pattern. But it may also be linked to the hugely important presidential and legislative elections scheduled for February 2024.
President Jokowi is in his second term and cannot run again, so the elections will likely result in a major recalibration of power and wealth in Indonesia that will last for five or even ten years (if the new president wins a second term).
Politicians are already jostling for position and some have begun campaigning. The identity politics of religion and morality have played a central role Indonesia’s bitterly fought electoral contests in recent years, and the new code reflects this.
It allows the politicians who backed it to claim a “law and order” success where others had failed for years, and to assert conservative morality “family values” they think will resonate with their voters. This is particularly important for nationalist politicians seeking to bolster their religious credentials.
And, of course, the new code also delivers the government potent new legal weapons it can deploy against its critics.
The question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) can invent is nearly 200 years old, going back to the very beginning of computing. Victorian mathematician Ada Lovelace wrote what’s generally considered the first computer program. As she did, she wondered about the limits of what computers could do.
The Analytical Engine has no pretensions to originate anything. It can do whatever we know how to order it to perform. It can follow analysis; but it has no power of anticipating any analytical relations or truths. Its province is to assist us in making available what we are already acquainted with.
And this assertion has haunted the field of AI ever since. As many critics will note, computers only do what we tell them to do.
Ada Lovelace worked alongside Charles Babbage, who designed and partly built (as pictured) the Analytical Engine – considered the first mechanical computer. Wikimedia Commons
A century after Lovelace argued against machine invention, Alan Turing, one of the inventors of the electronic computer, returned to the topic. In 1950 Turing wrote what’s generally considered the first scientific paper about AI. In it, he tried to refute Lovelace’s objection:
Who can be certain that ‘original work’ that he has done was not simply the growth of the seed planted in him by teaching, or the effect of following well-known general principles. A better variant of the objection says that a machine can never ‘take us by surprise’. This statement is a more direct challenge and can be met directly. Machines take me by surprise with great frequency.
This hasn’t changed. Today, machines are increasingly surprising us. Just take OpenAI’s new ChatGPT chatbot as an example. Indeed, there’s mounting evidence AI can help humans invent – and in some cases might even be considered the inventor itself.
The question of whether machines can invent has now started to tax courts around the world. Stephen Thaler, co-founder of Scentient.ai, has filed patent applications for two inventions in which a neural network is named the sole inventor.
These applications have been rejected in almost every jurisdiction, mostly on the legal grounds that an inventor should be a human. But none of the legal cases so far have tested Thaler’s claim that the computer is indeed the sole inventor.
In an article published today in Nature Machine Intelligence, we examine Thaler’s claim. While we uncover multiple technical reasons the computer isn’t the sole inventor in this case, we also record a long history of AI being used to help people invent – and in some cases inventing itself. Here are just some examples.
3D circuits
In the 1980s, AI researcher Douglas Lenat’s Eurisko system (eurisko is Greek for “I discover”) invented a number of novel 3D circuits. A provisional US patent application was even filed for one of these.
The X-Band Antenna of the ST5 Satellite was found with genetic programming, an AI-based automatic programming technique.
Strange aerials
Starting in the 1990s, computer scientist John Koza applied genetic programming to invent several novel devices, including some rather bizarre radio antennae that resembled bent paperclips. One of these aerials is likely the first AI invention in space, as it flew on NASA’s ST5 spacecraft.
More recently, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used a deep neural network to identify Halicin – a powerful new antibiotic compound. Halicin is named after HAL, the famous AI computer in Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. Multiple companies with billions of dollars of funding are using AI-based strategies for drug discovery and development.
It appears AI invention is here to stay.
But is AI ‘inventing’, or helping humans invent?
The abstract idea behind how AI programs can invent is relatively simple. You define some space of concepts, and the program explores this space. The space is typically very large, maybe even infinite. Therefore considerable effort must be invested in identifying whether a part of the space is worth exploring further, as well as to confirm any promise of a new concept.
As an example, the space of concepts might be all the possible ways to bend a straight aerial. The challenge is to find which of the infinite number of ways has the best electromagnetic properties.
We asked the Jurassic-1 chatbot, a cousin of ChatGPT, to come up with a patent along the lines of one of Thaler’s patent applications. Here’s what we got:
PVC, latex or silicone rubber gloves, especially disposable gloves. The invention provides a glove having a flexible gripping portion formed from a fractal pattern. The gripping portion is formed from a continuous fractal pattern. The flexible gripping portion is sufficiently strong and rigid to perform its intended function.
To see if this idea was indeed original, or at least not patented, we searched the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s online database and found no patent with the words “glove” and “fractal”. It’s therefore possible that a glove with a flexible fractal gripping pattern could be patented.
Importantly, this idea was independently generated by the computer, without human help or prompts.
Here’s a prototype of what fractal gloves might look like as imagined by the Stable Diffusion text to image AI generator. Author provided
So where does this leave us?
Just as AI is transforming other aspects of our lives, it appears likely it will soon transform how we invent. We need to give careful thought to how the innovation system adapts to these changes. AI could reduce the time and costs associated with inventing, while also increasing the technical depth of inventions.
Will we need a new form of intellectual property to protect inventions made by AI systems? Or will patent offices be inundated with new patent applications invented with the help of (or by) AI?
Put on your fractal gloves and expect to be surprised!
Toby Walsh receives funding from the ARC via a Laureate Fellowship.
Alexandra George 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.
At the icy northern tip of Greenland, far into the Artic Circle, a deep bed of sediment beneath the mouth of a fjord has lain frozen and undisturbed for 2 million years.
Known as the Kap København Formation, this relic of a vanished world dates to a period when Earth was much warmer than it is today. The sediment built up in a shallow bay over a period of 20,000 years, before being buried beneath ice and permafrost.
Our team, led by Kurt Kjær, Mikkel Winter Pedersen and Eske Willerslev at Copenhagen University, has extracted and analysed the oldest DNA ever recovered from samples of this Greenlandic sediment. It reveals the plants, animals and microorganisms that thrived in an ecosystem unlike anything in the modern world.
As we report today in Nature, this DNA is more than a million years older than the previous record. We can now recover and directly study molecules that were made inside plants and animals 2 million years ago, opening a new window into the history of life on Earth.
A snapshot of an extinct ecosystem
Two million years ago, northern Greenland was a very different place. Average winter temperatures were more than 10℃ warmer, and there was less carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere.
Our study, carried out by more than 40 scientists from Denmark, the UK, France, Sweden, Norway, the USA and Germany, pieced together minuscule fragments of DNA and matched them to sequences of known species. We found genetic traces of ancestors of modern reindeer, hares and lemmings, as well as mastodon – extinct elephant-like creatures which were not previously known to have lived in Greenland.
Layers of sediment retain traces of the rich flora and fauna that lived 2 million years ago in Kap København in North Greenland. Kurt H. Kjær
We also found DNA traces of plants including birch and poplar trees, as well as algae and other microorganisms – and a large proportion of DNA fragments we could not match to any known species.
But it is not just the specific species that are of interest but also how they co-existed in the same prehistoric ecosystem that was much warmer than today. This can tell us a lot about the possible impact on the biodiversity during warming periods and how it may drive their evolutionary response.
In essence, our study is similar to the “environmental DNA” (eDNA) research ecologists do today to understand biodiversity in modern ecosystems. The difference is that we are looking at an ecosystem that disappeared millions of years ago, which is why the recovery and bioinformatic analysis of these short, degraded molecules becomes a lot more challenging.
Watching evolution
We know that the DNA inside cells of all living organisms mutates slowly, as environmental changes drive adaptation and evolution over many generations. However, we very rarely have a “time machine” to go back and look directly at the old DNA molecules.
To understand how DNA has changed over time, we usually compare the genomes of modern species and work backwards to create an evolutionary family tree. However, the possibility of studying DNA that is millions of years old means we will be able to directly observe the deep-time process of molecular evolution, instead of being restricted to the current genetic “snapshot” in present-day species.
What’s more, the DNA of the ancestors of modern species may show how they adapted to conditions that are very different from the ones they face today. We don’t gain those insights in this study, but if we can study those prehistoric genetic adaptations in detail in the future, it may allow us to predict if species are able to adapt to changes such as the ongoing global warming.
How long can DNA survive?
Despite what the Jurassic Park movies may tell you, DNA doesn’t last forever. It decays steadily over time – though the rate of decay depends on circumstances like temperature.
About a decade ago, my colleagues and I published a study of moa fossils that calculated a “half-life” for long-term DNA decay in bones. We predicted that recognisable fragments of DNA should be able to last more than one million years under ideal conditions, such as the deep freeze of permafrost.
And, indeed, in 2021 researchers recovered DNA from the tooth of a mammoth that lived in Siberia approximately 1.2 million years ago.
However, the new research shows something quite surprising. It seems that DNA can actually survive much longer as free molecules in sediment than in the bones of the animal it originally belonged to.
Remains of wooden branches from the forest that grew at Kap København 2 million years ago. Svend Funder
DNA molecules can bind to the surface of particles of clay which somehow protect them from the ravages of time. We do not know exactly how long DNA can survive in sediment, but if the preservation conditions are ideal, there is no reason to believe that we have found the limit here at two million years.
Once we know more about what kinds of sediment preserve DNA best, we will be able to hunt for it all over the world – though we are unlikely ever to realise the dream of examing 65 million year–old sequences of dinosaur DNA. I would be very happy to be proven wrong though!
Morten Allentoft 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.
Treating people for long COVID – that is, symptoms that last longer than four weeks after COVID infection – can be extremely complex due to the wide variety of problems associated with the condition.
While there is no “one size fits all” treatment, there is increasing recognition of the importance of allied health professionals such as physiotherapists and occupational therapists in providing treatment for people throughout various stages of COVID.
We are still learning about long COVID, but these experts can tailor exercise training, breathing techniques and ways to manage fatigue safely, to help people get back to their normal roles and routines.
While the exact mechanism of why people develop long COVID remains unclear, current evidence suggest lingering COVID virus may trigger a cascade of ongoing inflammatory and immune responses in the body.
This results in signs and symptoms across multiple body systems, including the respiratory and autonomic system, which regulates functions such as heart rate, breathing and digestion. This could explain common symptoms of long COVID such as brain fog, fatigue, headaches, breathing difficulties and changes in taste and smell.
Estimates suggest somewhere between 5% and 50% of those infected with COVID go on to develop long COVID.
Allied health professionals – who are not doctors, dentists, nurses or midwives but provide specialised care – such as physiotherapists and occupational therapists can be particularly effective at managing the signs and symptoms of long COVID.
This might be partly because they are used to working with patients to develop strategies and work towards functional goals.
Exercise training
Exercise training is the most common treatment prescribed by physiotherapists to assist people with long COVID. Studies have found exercise programs can help people with long COVID to reverse the effects of fatigue, muscle weakness, shortness of breath and exercise intolerance.
However, not all exercise programs are suitable for everyone with long COVID. For some people with ongoing fatigue issues, commencing with a graded exercise program that progresses through different positions can also be effective in improving exercise fitness and reducing levels of fatigue.
Repetitive movement exercises such as range of motion exercises may be prescribed for joint and/or muscle pain and stiffness. Other therapies such as falls prevention, muscle strengthening and balance training are also suitable for people with reduced mobility, deconditioning and muscle wastage due to long COVID.
It is important to seek advice from a physiotherapist before commencing exercises as over-exertion can set your recovery back. Thorough assessment of your heart function and fatigue symptoms before returning to exercise – and close monitoring during exercise – are essential because symptoms can fluctuate over time.
Breathing techniques and inspiratory muscle training
Apart from prescribing an exercise program, physiotherapists can provide strategies on how to manage shortness of breath, a common symptom of long COVID. For example, physiotherapists often teach people how to do relaxed controlled breathing to recover from episodes of breathlessness.
People with long COVID may also feel the ongoing need to cough or clear their chest. Secretion clearance techniques such as active cycle breathing technique can be useful.
Inspiratory muscle training involves specific exercises prescribed to strengthen respiratory (breathing) muscles. This often involves taking deep breathes through a device that provides resistance.
This form of training has proven useful to some people with long COVID, but is not beneficial to all sufferers.
It is important to consult a physiotherapist regarding the best breathing technique for your symptoms, as therapies for people with long COVID work best when they are tailored to the person.
Breathing exercises should be closely monitored, as they are not helpful for everyone with long COVID. Shutterstock
Fatigue management and other treatments
As well as rehabilitation exercises, both physiotherapists and occupational therapists can provide personalised strategies to manage symptoms and enhance participation in work and daily life for people with long COVID.
For example, they might develop strategies to enhance or compensate for poor attention and memory, or help plan a daily routine to deal with fatigue so people can re-engage in their usual roles and routines.
Other health professionals can also provide individualised treatment to assist with recovery. Psychologists may offer non-drug treatments to improve anxiety and depression. Speech pathologists may help someone who has an ongoing hoarse voice.
Functional goals and strategies might help people with long COVID get back to their usual routines. Shutterstock
How to get help for long COVID?
If you have long COVID, ask your doctor to refer you either to a multidisciplinary long COVID program where different types of health professionals work together, or to specific health professionals depending on your symptoms.
Multidisciplinary based programs have been found to be the most effective in managing people with long COVID. In Australia, there are some long COVID clinics providing monitoring and treatment. However, there is an urgent need to establish more of them across the nation.
While long COVID symptoms can be debilitating, it appears many symptoms improve with time. That said, you may be able to recover more quickly with the help of a physiotherapist or an occupational therapist.
The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of Kerrie Saliba, who is a senior physiotherapist in the intensive care unit at Liverpool Hospital, South Western Sydney Local Health District and a Western Sydney University masters student, to this article.
Clarice Tang receives funding from NSW Government, Department of Health and the Maridula Budyari Gumal association. She is affiliated with Western Sydney University, South-Western Sydney Local Health District and is a member of the Australian Physiotherapy Association, Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand and the American Thoracic Society.
Karen Liu is affiliated with Western Sydney University and South Western Sydney Local Health District.
International students are flooding back to Australian universities. Some predictions say 2023 could even see record numbers of overseas students in the country.
This is not only good news for universities, but potentially good news for Australian employers. Part of the Albanese government’s plan to boost skills in Australia is to try and ensure more students stay longer after they graduate and join the workforce.
Education Minister Jason Clare recently announced those with a bachelor’s degree could stay for four years, up from two, to “strengthen the pipeline of skilled labour”, particularly likely to include graduates in healthcare, teaching, hospitality and accounting.
But the government’s simple policy change is not enough. It assumes graduates will be able to get jobs in the areas they studied. There are four key reasons why getting more skilled international graduates into jobs needs more than just a visa extension.
1. Not all graduates secure a job
Up to one-third of international graduates who stay in Australia post-study are still unemployed six months after graduating. This is the case even with historically low unemployment rates.
Up to one third of international graduates who stay in Australia have no work at all, six months after graduating. Julian Smith/AAP
Full-time employment rates for international graduates are also consistently lower than for domestic graduates. For example, in 2021, the full-time employment rate for international graduates with an undergraduate degree was 43.0% compared with 68.9% for domestic graduates.
Many international students are self-funded and report feeling stressed and under pressure to financially support themselves and their families due to the increased cost-of-living.
2. Or if they do find a job, it pays less
Finding well-paying employment in occupations related to a student’s field of study also takes time.
Many students and graduates report they are taking jobs that are not related to what they have studied, often for low wages.
Studiesalso show that even if international students with an undergraduate degree find full-time employment, they earn 20% less than domestic graduates.
3. There are not enough work experience opportunities
Another reason it is difficult for international students to get a job after graduating is the limited opportunity to work while they study.
Due to COVID and the push towards more online learning, work placements or internships have become scarce. In 2022, many universities have begun to offer internships again, but some students completed their studies without practical workplace experience.
Very few international students have local networks to draw on for job opportunities. They also tend to be less familiar with Australian workplace contexts and cultures and rely on internships to get the experience they need to secure an ongoing job.
4. Employers are hesitant
A 2020 Deakin University report found employers were hesitant to hire international graduates on temporary visas. Other research also shows employers favour those with permanent residency because they see them as more likely to stay in Australia, and worth the investment in recruiting and training.
Research has also found employers think international graduates will be more expensive to hire, and they would require more on-the-job training to be able to understand Australian workplace cultures.
Some mistakenly think language will be an issue, not realising that all university graduates need to meet the minimum English language proficiency to gain entry into any university program.
Sometimes employers think international graduates are not considered to be a good “cultural fit”. While cultural fit is a consideration when hiring, there is a real danger some employers are using this reason to discriminate against international graduates for no other reason other than their ethnic background.
International students are a trustworthy and valuable source of productivity and workplace diversity – both of which are necessary to compete in a global economy. They have different skills sets, ideas, attitudes and cultural understandings that can expand how a business operates in a cultural diverse country.
What now?
So, giving international students more time in Australia is not the whole answer. They need better career support before and after graduation.
This includes work placements but also help preparing for job applications and interviews.
Employers also need to be better informed about graduates’ capabilities and the benefits of hiring international graduates.
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.
Australia’s first criminal case over wage theft is under way, with charges laid against the owner of a Victorian restaurant that allegedly underpaid staff by thousands of dollars.
If found guilty, the owner of the Macedon Lounge, northwest of Melbourne, faces a fine of more than $1 million and potentially jail time under Victoria’s Wage Theft Act.
The law came into effect in July 2021. The Andrews Labor government promised it before the 2018 state election, as evidence mounted that existing civil penalty fines were not a sufficient deterrent.
This week Unions NSW called for national action in a report on underpayment of migrant workers. This was based on an audit of job advertisements on Chinese, Korean, Nepalese, Punjabi and Spanish websites. It found 70% offered less than minimum rates.
The Albanese government also made a pre-election promise to criminalise wage theft, as part of its Secure Australian Jobs Plan:
Wage theft rips more than $1 billion off Australian workers each year. The Morrison government doesn’t think it’s a problem, but Labor does, and we will make wage theft a crime at a national level.
This was left out of the omnibus amendments to the Fair Work Act passed last week. It’s unclear whether the government will pursue this further in its first term.
But criminalisation may not be the best approach. Other reforms are just as important.
Now a broad-scale problem
It is clear wage theft and other forms of non-compliance with minimum labour standards are a major problem in Australia.
The issue has been the focus of numerous public inquiries, reviews and consultations and media investigations.
A Senate committee inquiry into wage theft that reported in March 2022 noted wage theft goes back at least to the 1880s, with the rampant stealing of Indigenous wages.
But wage theft on a broad scale, the inquiry concluded, is a relatively new phenomenon:
The rate of unlawful underpayment complaints and media reporting increased markedly from around 2015, with mounting evidence that wage theft practices have become widespread in the hospitality, retail, horticulture, franchise-heavy and higher education sectors.
Workers most vulnerable
The workers most vulnerable are migrants on temporary visas, young people, those in “low-skilled” jobs, non-unionised employees, and those in casual and insecure work (the reason for its prevalence in higher education).
The problem is intensified by “fragmented” employment arrangements that obscure who profits from non-compliance, such as labour hire chains featuring multi-layered subcontracting and outsourcing arrangements, or on-demand platform “gig” work.
As Alan Fels, former chair of the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission, has pointed out, wage theft makes it hard for compliant employers to compete.
It also affects government revenue – for example, in cases where payroll tax is avoided by having staff “off the books”.
Call for criminalisation
The 2022 Senate inquiry made 19 recommendations. The first was that the federal government amend the Fair Work Act to make any form of remuneration theft – including failing to pay employees their rightful loadings, penalty rates, overtime, leave, allowances and superannuation – a criminal offence. (The second recommendation was that it increase civil penalties.)
Criminal sanctions may elevate awareness and provide another avenue for redress, but whether they would foster greater employer compliance is doubtful.
This is because these would only apply to deliberate breaches, when many cases of non-compliance involve genuine and unintentional mistakes.
Nor will criminal sanctions do anything to assist employees to easily seek redress, given they are about punishment and not compensation.
There are other, better approaches
A better approach is to focus on enhanced enforcement, expanding the role of the Fair Work Ombudsman and and other regulatory agencies to investigate, enforce and recover unpaid money, with significant extra resources to do so.
This a key part of the Victorian legislation, which has established the Work Inspectorate of Victoria with resources to investigate and enforce the law.
Another reform would be to oblige employers – particularly those in high-risk sectors – to have ongoing compliance regimes in place and to regularly review their payroll processes to ensure compliance.
Finally, as recommended by the Senate inquiry report, there should be a clear avenue for the Australian Securities and Investments Commission to disqualify directors of companies found to have engaged in systemic non-compliance.
Perhaps then the message will start to get through.
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.
Artists all over the world, regardless of their gender, earn considerably less than professionals in occupations requiring similar levels of education and qualifications.
But there’s an additional income penalty for artists who are female.
In an analysis of gender differences in the incomes of professional artists in Australia that we undertook in 2020, we found the creative incomes of women were 30% less than those of men.
This is true even after allowing for differences in such things as hours worked, education and training, time spent in childcare and so on. This income penalty on women artists was greater than the gender pay gap of 16% experienced in the overall Australian workforce at the time.
Some sectors of the arts have tried to redress this problem. However, women continue to suffer serious and unexplained gender-based discrimination in the artistic workplace.
Cultural differences are also known to influence pay gaps in many countries.
In new research out today, we considered whether cultural factors might also affect the gender pay gap of artists in Australia. In addition, we analysed the gender pay gap for remote Indigenous artists for the first time.
A larger gap for women from a non-English speaking background
In our 2016 survey of 826 professional artists working in metropolitan, regional and rural Australia, we asked participants if they came from a non-English speaking background.
Only a relatively small proportion of artists – 10% – came from a non-English-speaking background, compared to 18% for the Australian labour force as a whole.
A non-English-speaking background appears to carry an income penalty only for women artists, not for men.
We found the annual creative earnings of female artists from a non-English-speaking background are about 71% of the creative incomes of female artists whose first language is English. But there is little difference between the corresponding incomes of male artists.
Within the group of artists from language backgrounds other than English, the annual creative earnings of female artists are about half (53%) those of their male counterparts.
By contrast, the ratio of female to male creative earnings among English-speaking background artists is 73%.
These results suggest that women artists from a non-English-speaking background suffer a triple earnings penalty – from being an artist (and hence as a group earning less than comparable professionals), from their gender, and from their cultural background.
Despite this earnings disadvantage, 63% of artists who identified as having a first language other than English thought their background had a positive impact on their artistic practice. Only 16% thought it had a negative impact.
Both male and female artists from non-English speaking backgrounds saw their heritage as important to their art. Henrique Junior/Unsplash
When artists were asked whether being from a non-English speaking background was a restricting factor in their professional artistic development, 17% of women answered “yes”, compared to only 5% of men from a similar background.
Nevertheless, like their male colleagues, these women artists continue to celebrate their cultural background in their art. They contribute to the increasingly multicultural content of the arts in Australia, holding up a mirror to trends in Australian society at large.
The gender gap is not replicated among remotely practising First Nations artists.
There are some minor variations in this finding for subgroups in different regions, depending in part on differences in the mix of visual and performing artists in the population. But whatever other differentials may exist between female and male earnings, they do not appear to be attributable to the sorts of systemic gender-based discrimination that affects the residual gender gap for other Australian artists.
A possible reason relates to fundamental differences between the cultural norms, values and inherited traditions that apply in remote and very remote First Nations communities.
Gender roles in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have been described by researchers as distinctively different, rather than superior or inferior. The importance of both women and men as bearers of culture has been clearly articulated.
The unique cultural content of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander music, dance, visual art and literature is an essential feature of the work of these artists. These characteristics pass through to the marketplace, and there does not appear to be any obvious gender gap in the way the art from these remote communities is received.
There is always differentiation between the art produced in different remote regions of Australia which varies depending on the complexities of different inherited cultural traditions. But there is no indication of any gender-based discrimination associated with these regional differences.
David Throsby receives funding from the Australia Council for the Arts , Australian Research Council (ARC), and from the Commonwealth, WA, NT, SA and QLD governments.
Katya Petetskaya receives funding from the Australia Council for the Arts, Australian Research Council (ARC), and from the Commonwealth, WA, NT and QLD governments. She is affiliated with NAVA.
Sunny Y. Shin receives funding from the Australia Council for the Arts.
NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet is pleased that a Sydney magistrate jailed protester Deanna “Violet” Coco on Friday. But he is out of step with international and Australian human rights and climate change groups and activists, who have quickly mobilised to show solidarity.
On Monday, protests were held in Sydney, Canberra and Perth calling for the release of Coco who blocked one lane of the Sydney Harbour Bridge for half an hour during a morning peak hour in April.
She climbed onto the roof of a truck holding a flare to draw attention to the global climate emergency and Australia’s lack of preparedness for bushfires. Three other members of the group Fireproof Australia, who have not been jailed, held a banner and glued themselves to the road.
“Free Coco” protesters at Sydney’s Downing Centre. Image: Zebedee Parkes/City Hub
Coco pleaded guilty to seven charges, including disrupting vehicles, possessing a flare distress signal in a public place and failing to comply with police direction.
Magistrate Allison Hawkins sentenced Coco to 15 months in prison, with a non-parole period of eight months and fined her $2500. Her lawyer Mark Davis has lodged an appeal which will be heard on March 2, 2023.
Unusually for a non-violent offender, Hawkins refused bail pending an appeal against the sentence. Davis, who will again apply for bail in the District Court next week, said refusal of bail pending appeal was “outrageous”.
Climate change protester sentenced to jail over Sydney Harbour Bridge protest. Video: News 24
‘People shouldn’t be jailed for peaceful protest’ In Sydney, about 100 protesters gathered outside NSW Parliament House and then marched to the Downing Centre. The crowd included members of climate action groups Extinction Rebellion, Knitting Nannas and Fireproof Australia but also others who, while they might not conduct a similar protest themselves, believe in the right of others to do so.
One of the protest organisers, Knitting Nanna Marie Flood, was unable to attend due to illness. Her message called for the release of Coco and an end to the criminalisation and intimidation of climate activists.
It was read by another Knitting Nanna, Eurydice Aroney:
“Nannas have been on Sydney streets protesting about gas and coal mines for about 8 years now. Over that time we’ve had lots of interactions with the Sydney Events police, and not a lot of trouble.
“You could say we are known to the police. We were amused and surprised at the recent climate emergency rally at town hall, when one of the police said to some Nannas that he thought we’d fallen in with the wrong crowd!
“Looks like we better clear some things up.”
Knitting Nannas protesters Helen and Dom at a previous protest. Image: Environmental Defenders Office/City Hub
“We ARE the crowd who knows that climate action is urgent and it starts with stopping new gas and coal. We know the importance of public protests to bringing about social and political change.
“We will stand up against any move to take away the democratic right to protest. What is happening to Violet Coco is a direct result of the actions of the NSW government with the support of the ALP opposition.”
The message ended with a call to all climate activists: “Now is the time to BE THE CROWD — we can’t afford to fall for attempts to divide the climate movement. We all want to save the climate, and to do that we need to protect democracy.”
The Knitting Nannas have launched a challenge to the validity of the protest laws through the Environmental Defenders’ Office.
Snap rally at NSW Parliament and a march to the courts at the Downing Centre where climate activist Violet Coco was sentenced to 15 months in prison last week.
We demand repeal of the draconian anti-protest laws, an end to new fossil fuel projects and serious climate action now! pic.twitter.com/F1Yxs8L0DG
One of those attending the protest was Josh Pallas, president of NSW Council for Civil Liberties. Civil Liberties has been defending the right to protest in NSW for more than half a century.
In a media release, he said: “Peaceful protest should never result in jail time. It’s outrageous that the state wastes its resources seeking jail time and housing peaceful protesters in custody at the expense of taxpayers.
“Protesters from Fireproof Australia and other groups have engaged in peaceful protest in support of stronger action on climate change, a proposition that is widely supported by many Australians across the political divide and now finding themselves ending up in prison.
“Peaceful protest sometimes involves inconvenience to the public. But inconvenience is not a sufficient reason to prohibit it. It’s immoral and unjust.”
Deputy Lord Mayor and Greens Councillor Sylvie Ellsmore told the crowd that they had the support of the City of Sydney which recently passed a unanimous motion calling for the repeal of the NSW government’s draconian anti-protest laws.
“If you are a group of businesses in the City of Sydney and you want to close the street for a street party, this state government will give you $50,000. If you are a non-violent protester who cares about climate change and you are blocking one lane of traffic for 25 minutes, they will give you two years [in jail].
“We know these laws are designed to intimidate you… Thank you for being the front line in the fight. you are the ones to put your bodies on the line to protest about issues we all care about, ” she said.
Amnesty International support for democracy Amnesty International spokesperson Veronica Koman emphasised how important it was to see the defence of democratic rights from a regional perspective. She said that Amnesty was concerned that severe repression of pro-independence activists in West Papua was spreading across to other parts of Indonesia.
She fears the same pattern of increasing repression taking hold in NSW.
Human Rights Watch researcher Sophie McNeil, who has won many awards for her journalism, was another person who was quick to respond.
“Outrageous. Climate activist who blocked traffic on Sydney Harbour Bridge jailed for at least eight months” she tweeted on Friday.
Since then she has followed the issue closely, criticising the ABC for failing to quote a human rights source in its coverage of the court case and speaking at a protest in Perth on Monday.
Today she posted this tweet with a short campaigning #FreeVioletCoco video that has already attracted nearly 13,000 views:
Authorities in #Australia are disproportionately punishing climate activists in violation of their basic rights to peaceful protest
Violet Coco has been sentenced to 15 months in prison
‘If you’re reading this, you’ll know I am in prison’ In jailing Coco, Magistrate Hawkins went out of her way to diminish and delegitimise her protest. She described it as a “childish stunt’ that let an “entire city suffer” through her “selfish emotional action”.
Coco has been involved with climate change protests for more than four years and has been arrested in several other protests. On one occasion, she set light to an empty pram outside Parliament House.
Rather than fight on technicalities, she chosen to plead guilty, knowing that if the magistrate was hostile, she could be taken into custody at the end of Friday’s hearing.
Several steps ahead of her critics, she made a video and wrote a long piece to be published if she went to prison.
The piece begins: ”If you are reading this, then I have been sentenced to prison for peaceful environmental protest. I do not want to break the law. But when regular political procedure has proven incapable of enacting justice, it falls to ordinary people taking a stand to bring about change.”
She describes how her understanding of the facts of climate science and the inadequacy of the current response led her to decide to give up her studies and devote herself to actions that would draw attention to the climate emergency.
“Liberal political philosopher John Rawls asserted that a healthy democracy must have room for this kind of action. Especially in the face of such a threat as billions of lives lost and possibly the collapse of our liveable planet.
“But make no mistake — I do not want to be protesting. Protest work is not fun — it’s stressful, resource-intensive, scary and the police are violent. They refuse to feed me, refused to give me toilet paper and have threatened me with sexual violence.
Jailed Australian climate protester Deanna “Violet” Coco . . . “Protest work is not fun — it’s stressful, resource-intensive, scary and the police are violent.” Image: APR screenshot
“I spent three days in the remand centre, which is a disgusting place full of sad people. I do not enjoy breaking the law. I wish that there was another way to address this issue with the gravitas that it deserves.”
She describes how she has already been forced to comply with onerous bail conditions:
“I was under 24 hour curfew conditions for 20 days in a small apartment with no garden. After 20 days effectively under house arrest, my curfew hours changed — at first I could leave the house for only 5 hours a day for the following 58 days, then 6 hours a day under house arrest for the following 68 days.
“This totalled 2017 hours imprisoned in my home for non-violent political engagement in the prevention of many deaths. Cumulatively, that is 84 days or 12 weeks of my freedom.”
Premier Perrottet says he does not object to protest so long as it does not interfere with “our way of life”.
If it does, individuals should have the “book thrown at them.”
His “way of life” is one in which commuters are never held up in traffic by a protest while endlessly sitting in traffic because of governments’ poor transport planning.
A way of life in which it is fine for governments to take years to house people whose lives are destroyed by fires and floods induced by climate change, to allow people to risk death from heat because they cannot afford air conditioners, open more coal and gas operations that will increase carbon emissions and turn a blind eye to millions of climate refugees in the Asia Pacific region.
It involves only protesting when you have permission and in tightly policed zones where passers-by ignore you.
Labor still backs anti-protest laws Leader of the Opposition Chris Minns also says he has no regrets for supporting the laws which he says were necessary to stop multiple protests.
But laws don’t target multiple actions, they target individuals. He has not raised his voice to condemn police harassment of individual activists even before they protest and bail conditions that breach democratic rights to freedom of assembly.
There was no visible Labor presence at Sydney’s rally.
Perrottet and Minns may be making right wing shock jocks happy but they are out of line with international principles of human rights.
They also fail to acknowledge that many of Australia’s most famous protest movements around land rights, apartheid, Green Bans, womens’ rights, prison reform and environment often involved actions that would have led to arrest under current anti-protest laws.
They display an ignorance of traditions of civil disobedience. As UNSW Professor Luke Macnamara told SBS News: “[V]isibility and disruption have long been the hallmarks of effective protest.”
He believes disruption and protest need to go hand in hand in order to result in tangible change.
“There’s an inherent contradiction in governments telling protesters what are acceptable, passive, non-disruptive means of engaging in protests, when the evidence may well be that those methods have been attempted and have proven to be ineffective,” he said.
“It’s not realistic on the one hand to support the so-called ‘right to protest’, and on the other hand, expect the protest has no disruptive effects. The two go together.”
Wendy Bacon was previously a professor of journalism at the University of Technology Sydney and is an editorial board member of Pacific Journalism Review. She joined the protest. This article was first published by City Hub and is republished with the author’s permission.
With the Fiji general election just days away, a major political party has condemned the arrests of its deputy leaders on charges of vote buying.
People’s Alliance deputy party leaders Lynda Tabuya and Dan Lobendhan appeared in court on Tuesday after being questioned by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC).
It is alleged that Tabuya tried to gain or influence votes for the December 14 election by soliciting $1000 to the Rock the Vote Volleyball tournament in May this year.
On the alternative count of breach of campaign rule, it is alleged that she also induced the participants to vote for Lobendhan.
Lobendhan is also alleged to have offered $1000 prize money to the tournament during the campaign period to gain or influence votes.
On the alternative count, he allegedly offered a monetary inducement to the participants.
In September, a complaint was lodged by the FijiFirst Party to the Fijian Elections Office (FEO) and then referred the allegations of vote buying were referred to the anti-corruption body.
Party leader claims ‘democracy hindered’ People’s Alliance Party leader Sitiveni Rabuka has labelled the arrests as an attempt to derail their election campaign and muzzle candidates.
Rabuka said the arrest was “outrageous to democratic good governance principles” and “a ridiculous assault on our individual constitutional rights to take part in political campaign activities”.
He said after a month and a half delay, and on the eve of the election, for FICAC to move on the FijiFirst complaint was “blatant and a deliberate interference” in the country’s electoral process.
The People’s Alliance has called on the FICAC Commissioner to respect the electoral system and not hinder democracy.
“It comes as a shock considering that in his reply to the FEO letter dated September 26th 2022, Lobendahn denied having paid Rock the Vote Volleyball to exclusively invite him to events to impress his presence on social media,” said Rabuka.
“Lobendahn stated that he was invited by a colleague, working towards creating awareness to attract youths and encourage them to register to vote for the upcoming elections.”
Rabuka questioned what was unlawful about enlightening and encouraging youths to register to vote?
The matter has been adjourned to February 10.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The university has announced that 170 academic positions are being cut, but there are concerns about whether the criteria by which staff were selected to lose their jobs was fair.
Legal proceedings have been launched by the Tertiary Education Union (TEU), which says the university has truncated the processes for dismissal set out in the collective agreement.
It argues staff were selected because they failed to meet teaching and research requirements they did not know they were subject to.
Presenter Kathryn Ryan spoke to Professor Damon Salesa, who is vice-chancellor of AUT.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Former Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, long used to Papua New Guinea and its talkative politicians, did not mince words.
