Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

As well as the whole House of Representatives, 40 of the 76 Senate seats will be up for election on May 21. There are 12 senators per state and two per territory. At half-Senate elections, six senators for each state and the four territory senators are up for election. Unless there is a double dissolution, state senators have six-year terms and territory senators have three years.

The Senate is massively malapportioned, with Tasmania having the same number of senators as New South Wales, despite the latter’s population being more than 15 times greater. This was the price for the smaller states joining the Australian federation in 1901.

For elections to the Senate, all senators up for election in a state or territory are elected by statewide proportional representation with preferences. With six senators up in each state, a quota is one-seventh of the vote, or 14.3%. With two up in each territory, a quota is one-third or 33.3%.

Voters are instructed to number at least 1-6 above the line (to vote for parties), or 1-12 below the line (voting for candidates). However, a “1” only vote above the line is still a formal vote, but in that case there are no preferences beyond the party receiving that vote. Six preferences are required for a formal below the line vote.

In state upper houses like NSW and South Australia, voters are only told to give a first preference above the line, although they can give more preferences. This leads to a larger number of exhausted votes than in the federal Senate. There, candidates will need about 0.8 quotas after preferences to win, while it’s only about 0.5 quotas with optional preferences.

Read more:
Labor’s lead steady in Newspoll and gains in Resolve; how the polls moved during past campaigns

Impact of changes to electoral legislation

Last year, Labor and the Coalition combined to change legislation to require 1,500 members to register a party, up from the current 500, and to disallow parties with similar names to older parties. Owing to the first change, there will be less cluttering on Senate ballot papers, with most states seeing a fall in the number of above-the-line boxes from 2019.

The second change was aimed at the Liberal Democrats and the Democratic Labour Party. The DLP was deregistered under the 1,500 rule – see analyst Kevin Bonham – but the Liberal Democrats found a loophole that enabled them to keep their name for this election, as ABC election analyst Antony Green has explained.

However, Western Australia is the only state where the Liberal Democrats have drawn a box far enough to the left of the Liberals for name confusion to be an issue.

The Senate playing field

The Coalition currently holds 35 of the 76 Senate seats, Labor 26, the Greens nine, One Nation two, Centre Alliance one and Jacqui Lambie one. The remaining two seats are filled by party defectors: Rex Patrick from Centre Alliance and Sam McMahon, who quit the Northern Territory Country Liberal Party and is now a Liberal Democrat.

During the last term, the Coalition regained a seat from a defector when Cory Bernardi resigned from the Senate.

The table below shows the 2022 seats up for election in each state and territory.

The Coalition will be defending three senators in all states except SA, and that makes them vulnerable if Labor wins the election. Senate results are highly correlated with lower house results, although the major parties’ primary votes are typically a little lower in the Senate.

For Labor and the Greens combined to gain control, they would need to gain four seats in total at this election. The Coalition and One Nation combined could gain control via a two-seat gain, with the Coalition virtually certain to gain from a defector.

State analysis

For this analysis, I will use the Poll Bludger’s BludgerTrack for each mainland state. For translating poll percentages into quotas, one quota is 14.3%, two quotas are 28.6% and three quotas are 42.9%. It’s a pity Newspoll hasn’t yet published state data from its five polls taken since late March.

BludgerTrack is an analysis of lower house polling, and most data were taken before it was known that One Nation would contest 149 of the 151 House of Representatives seats. One Nation will be higher in the Senate, particularly in NSW, Victoria and SA.

In NSW, Labor has 38.5%, the Coalition 38.4%, the Greens 10.4% and One Nation 2.0%. One Nation and UAP preferences would help the Coalition to three seats, with the Greens likely gaining from Labor. Likely outcome: three Coalition, two Labor, one Green.

In Victoria, Labor has 38.1%, the Coalition 35.5%, the Greens 12.8% and One Nation 1.8%. I think this would be close between Labor and the Coalition for the final seat, so it would be either be three Coalition, two Labor, one Green; or three Labor, two Coalition, one Green.

In Queensland, the Coalition has 38.2%, Labor 31.9%, the Greens 14.0% and One Nation 6.9%. One Nation will be boosted in the Senate by Pauline Hanson’s candidacy. This result would be a Greens gain from the Coalition, with two Coalition, two Labor, one Green and one One Nation elected. But Labor has historically underperformed its polling in Queensland.

In WA, Labor has 38.7%, the Coalition 37.3%, the Greens 12.2% and One Nation 5.3%. One Nation and UAP preferences would likely lift the Coalition above Labor for a status quo result of three Coalition, two Labor, one Green.

In SA, Labor has 43.6%, the Coalition 39.3%, the Greens 10.5% and One Nation 2.2%. Nick Xenophon, a former independent SA senator, is contesting this election. But Bonham reported a Greens-commissioned SA Senate uComms poll gave Xenophon just 0.37 quotas – not enough to threaten.

Read more:
Will a continuing education divide eventually favour Labor electorally due to our big cities?

However, Xenophon is likely to draw votes from both major parties, allowing the Greens to win a seat. This is likely a Labor and Green gain from the two Centre Alliance (one former), with a SA result of three Labor, two Coalition, one Green.

Tasmania’s sub-samples are too small for a separate analysis, but it was easily the most Labor-leaning state at the 2019 election, with Labor winning by 56-44, compared with a national result of 51.5-48.5 to the Coalition.

If Labor and the Greens win a combined 4-2 split in any state, it’s likely to be in Tasmania. Lambie will not be up for election this year, but she’s trying to win a second seat for her party.

Bonham reported polling that would give independent ACT Senate candidate David Pocock a chance of defeating the Liberals’ Zed Seselja. But there’s been speculation at past elections that the Liberals could lose this seat, and it hasn’t happened yet.

In the NT, the CLP is virtually certain to regain its Senate seat from defector McMahon.

With two gains for Labor and the Greens likely in SA, one in Queensland and one in Tasmania, on current polling Labor and the Greens would likely have enough for a Senate majority. But polls can change, or be wrong, as they were in 2019.

Read more:
As the election campaign begins, what do the polls say, and can we trust them this time?

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.

– ref. Race for the Senate: could Labor and the Greens gain control? – https://theconversation.com/race-for-the-senate-could-labor-and-the-greens-gain-control-181350

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

While the recent legal challenges to elements of the government’s COVID-19 response have had mixed results in the courts, they have revealed something important – how the rule of law works in New Zealand.

In the past two years, a raft of laws have been passed or amended as the government put its response to COVID-19 on a legal footing.

Some of these laws have been subsequently challenged in the courts, starting with the Borrowdale case in May 2020. Plaintiff Andrew Borrowdale argued the government’s lockdown orders were based on an improper use of its powers under the Health Act and that a range of New Zealanders’ rights had been violated as a result.

Other cases have argued, with varying degrees of success, that the government’s requirement of mandatory vaccinations violated the rights of some New Zealanders.

At the end of April, the High Court found the border quarantine (MIQ) system did work well to protect public health and many of the resulting restrictions on rights were justifiable.

However, the court also found the allocation of space in MIQ through a virtual lobby system amounted to an unjustifiable limit on the right of New Zealand citizens to return because it did not prioritise citizens over non-citizens, and it did not prioritise on individual need or delays experienced.

What we see in these cases is the New Zealand constitution in action, operating as a system of checks and balances to protect individuals from arbitrary interference by the state.

As an aspect of that, the cases show the operation of the rule of law, which means any power exercised by the government has to be based on legal authority and that everyone is subject to the law, whether they are members of the public or politicians.

Bill of Rights has its limits

The Bill of Rights Act plays an important role in that regard, although its ability to protect our rights is not as strong as we might like to think.

There are four ways the Bill of Rights works in the creating of laws.

Firstly, the Bill of Rights Act states clearly that it does not affect all other laws passed before or after it simply because those laws are inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.

For example, New Zealanders have the right to protest but their protest actions cannot be unduly disorderly, violent or unsafe. Neither can the courts use the Bill of Rights Act to invalidate the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020.

Read more:
How far should compulsory proof of vaccination go — and what rights do New Zealanders have?

The Bill of Rights Act does, however, stipulate that wherever an act, such as the Health Act, can be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with the Bill of Rights, then that interpretation is to be preferred.

Thirdly, the Bill of Rights Act, on the whole, does not protect absolutely the rights of New Zealanders, but any restrictions on those rights must be justifiable.

This balancing act has been at the core of the COVID cases so far. The limitations on the right to refuse medical treatment, for example, have largely been justified on the grounds of public health.

Finally, the attorney-general is required to report to parliament when they find any proposed law appears to be
inconsistent with the Bill of Rights. Parliament is still free to pass the proposed law, thanks to the provision outlined above.

The point of the Bill of Rights

At this stage, we might be left wondering what the point of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act actually is.

The Act still operates as a mechanism by which New Zealanders can challenge the law in the courts, and the courts can scrutinise the law in question.

Even if they can’t force the government to change the law, judges can point out any problems and put the onus back on the government to respond.

One aspect of this part of the constitutional process is a “declaration of inconsistency”, which allows judges to signal to the government and parliament that a law has seriously problematic implications for the protection of rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights Act.

Read more:
Five ways New Zealanders’ lives and liberties will be heavily controlled, even after lockdown eases

Efforts to improve this part of the constitutional system of checks and balances are currently under further discussion, as the New Zealand Bill of Rights (Declarations of Inconsistency) Amendment Bill makes its way through parliament, providing another example of our constitution and our democracy at work.

Limited options for change

If New Zealanders are unhappy with the current state of play regarding their own rights and the powers of the government, they have two options. Both are based on a question of trust.

Disgruntled kiwis can leave things as they are and continue to trust our elected representatives to protect our rights and freedoms. Any perceived failures in that regard can be dealt with at the ballot box.

Alternatively, those dissatisfied with the situation can push to change the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act itself to allow judges to have greater powers to curb parliament’s law-making power.

Read more:
If border restrictions increase to combat new COVID-19 strains, what rights do returning New Zealanders have?

But changing the balance of law-making in favour of the courts involves a greater level of trust in those who are not so easily removed from power.

In a 2017 public talk, former prime minister and constitutional legal expert Geoffrey Palmer traversed these difficult issues. Somewhat presciently, however, he noted that such changes should not be undertaken in a time of crisis.

Trust in the rule of law to ensure the accountability of government – the structures of governance that stand aside the electoral ebbs and flows of political parties – is a core aspect of our democracy.

The “COVID cases” shine an important light on how the rule of law works in Aotearoa New Zealand; how the courts, the government and parliament must continue to work to ensure the rights of New Zealanders.

Even if now is not the time for change, as we emerge from this current crisis, it may well be the time to reflect on the importance of the rule of law as we continue to navigate uncertain seas.

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

– ref. Recent COVID-19 court cases show New Zealand’s Bill of Rights Act is not as strong as some might wish – https://theconversation.com/recent-covid-19-court-cases-show-new-zealands-bill-of-rights-act-is-not-as-strong-as-some-might-wish-182232

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Patrick Leslie, Research Fellow in Politics, Australian National University

The leaked Roe v Wade draft opinion this week has shown us the power of the legal system when it comes to facilitating (or winding back) social change.

Read more:
The end of Roe v. Wade would likely embolden global anti-abortion activists and politicians

This is why judicial appointments are so critical, and why there has been so much debate around the recent appointment of Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In April, Brown Jackson made history after being confirmed as the first black woman appointed to the US Supreme Court. She will take up her post in the middle of the year (and was not part of the Roe v Wade vote).

Despite Brown Jackson’s impressive background – she has been a judge of the US Court of Appeals – her appointment has been fraught with divisive racial politics and toxic partisan commentary.

In Australia, we rarely have debates of this sort. We don’t have much diversity in the judiciary, either.

Read more:
Ketanji Brown Jackson confirmed as Supreme Court justice: 4 essential reads

Every Justice of the High Court of Australia since Federation in 1901 has been white, and all but six have been men. This is reflected elsewhere in the judicial system, where the vast majority of senior judges are male and virtually all are from British and European ancestry. For any Indigenous person or person of colour who finds themselves charged with and convicted of a crime, it is almost certain their sentencing will be decided upon by a white judge.

With the mandatory retirement of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel and Justice Patrick Keane due in the next parliamentary term, there is a significant opportunity to make the seven-member High Court more diverse.

Labor hints at change

There are signs a prospective Labor government would at least consider this.

In a recent article for the Australian Financial Review, Labor MP Andrew Leigh (who is not the party’s shadow attorney-general) hinted Labor was thinking about how to improve the representation of women and other minorities on the bench.

As he wrote:

In 120 years, no judge of colour has ever been appointed to the High Court of Australia […] the demography of the bench will never perfectly match the nation, but people should be able to see themselves in the faces of those chosen to dispense justice.

In response to criticism about gender diversity in senior judicial positions, a spokesperson for Attorney-General Michaelia Cash has previously pointed to the Coalition appointing Jacqueline Gleeson to the High Court and Jennifer Howe to Melbourne’s Federal Circuit Court in 2021.

Read more:
No selection criteria, no transparency. Australia must reform the way it appoints judges

Ideological decision-making

Would it really make a difference? Given the lack of diversity on the Australian benches, it is difficult to answer this question directly. However, we do know Australia’s highly politicised selection process – it is decided by the prime minister and attorney-general – results in consistently ideological judicial decision-making.

In a recent study on the High Court, colleagues and I found a highly conservative High Court justice (such as Dyson Heydon) was around 30 percentage points less likely than a left-wing justice (such as Michael Kirby) to make an ideologically liberal decision. This includes being pro-civil liberties, Indigenous rights, freedom-of-information and the environment.

In a follow-up study, we also looked at whether justices vote in ways that demonstrate loyalty to the prime minister who appoints them. In some ways, this is a more serious question because it concerns judicial independence from government interference. We find that where the federal government is a party in High Court cases, justices are slightly more likely to rule in favour of the government who appointed them than subsequent governments.

These findings are not necessarily evidence of a malfunctioning justice system. After all, prime ministers are democratically elected and justices are not simply legal “robots” – they are people too. As such, it’s only natural their background and personal experience plays a part in the courtroom.

Judicial diversity outside Australia

We can also look to the experiences of other countries, who have found that increased judicial diversity positively affects case outcomes for minority litigants.

Research shows panels of US Federal Circuit Court Justices with one woman and two men (as opposed to all men) are significantly more likely to rule in favour of the plaintiff in cases regarding race, colour, religion and sex discrimination. Importantly, these results held for appointees of both Democratic and Republican parties, suggesting that women’s representation can cut across ideological divides.

Read more:
Meet Australia’s new High Court judges: a legal scholar’s take on the Morrison government’s appointees

Similarly, the presence of a black judge on a judicial panel was associated with a nearly 40 percentage point increase in the likelihood a court found in favour of policies that aim to increase the representation of black and other underrepresented people in government, universities, and private organisations.

In Israel, the presence of an Arab judge on panels (as opposed to all Jewish panels of judges) made a sizable improvement to the prospects of Arab defendants in criminal sentencing.

What happens now?

Whichever party wins the federal election, an emphasis on diverse appointments could make a lasting difference to justice for marginalised groups.

With two High Court appointments to be made in the next three years (and others on the Federal Court), this is a huge opportunity to recognise Australia’s diversity in one of the most important systems in our society.

Patrick Leslie receives funding from The Australian Research Council.

– ref. The federal election winner will get a big opportunity to change the face of the High Court – will they take it? – https://theconversation.com/the-federal-election-winner-will-get-a-big-opportunity-to-change-the-face-of-the-high-court-will-they-take-it-180864

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marina Yue Zhang, Associate Professor of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Swinburne University of Technology

China has had the world’s fastest growing economy since the 1980s. A key driver of this extraordinary growth has been the country’s pragmatic system of innovation, which balances government steering and market-oriented entrepreneurs.

Right now, this system is undergoing changes which may have profound implications for the global economic and political order.

The Chinese government is pushing for better research and development, “smart manufacturing” facilities, and a more sophisticated digital economy. At the same time, tensions between China and the west are straining international cooperation in industries such as semiconductor and biopharmaceutical manufacturing.

Taken together with the shocks of the Covid pandemic, and particularly China’s rapid and large-scale lockdowns, these developments could lead to a decoupling of China’s innovation system from the rest of the world.

Balancing government and market

China’s current “innovation machine” began developing during the economic reforms of the late 1970s, which lessened the role of state ownership and central planning. Instead, room was made for the market to try new ideas through trial and error.

Read more:
‘To get rich is glorious’: how Deng Xiaoping set China on a path to rule the world

The government sets regulations aligned to the state’s objectives, and may send signals to investors and entrepreneurs via its own investments or policy settings. But within this setting, private businesses pursue opportunities in their own interests.

However, freedom for businesses may be declining. Last year, the government cracked down on the fintech and private tutoring sectors, which were seen to be misaligned with government goals.

Building quality alongside quantity

China performs well on many measures of innovation performance, such as R&D expenditure, number of scientific and technological publications, numbers of STEM graduates and patents, and top university rankings.

Most of these indices, however, measure quantity rather than quality. So, for example, China has:

• produced a huge number of scientific and technological publications, but lags far behind the US in highly cited publications, which indicates the influence and originality of research

• substantially increased R&D expenditure. However, the proportion of its R&D expenditure on basic research, especially by enterprises, is still far lower than in many industrialised countries

• educated many more STEM graduates than any other country in recent decades, but still lacks top-tier talent in many areas such as AI and semiconductors

• has applied for the most international patents of any country, but the quality of these patents measured by scientific influence and potential commercial value still lags international competitors.

Adding “quality” alongside “quantity” will be crucial to China’s innovation ambitions.

In the past, policies have aimed to “catch up” with known technologies used elsewhere, but China will need to shift focus to develop unknown and emerging technologies. This will require greater investment in longer-term basic research and reform of research culture to tolerate failure.

Developing smart manufacturing

Chinese firms can already translate complex designs into mass production with high precision and unmatched speed and cost. As a result, Chinese manufacturing is appealing to high-tech companies such as Apple and Tesla.

The next step is upgrading towards “industry 4.0” smart manufacturing, aligned with the core industries listed in the government’s Made in China 2025 blueprint.

Read more:
A fourth industrial revolution is powering the rise of smart manufacturing

By 2020, China had built eleven “lighthouse factories” – benchmark smart manufacturers – the most of any country in the World Economic Forum’s “global lighthouse network”.

Building an advanced digital economy

China’s giant tech companies such as Alibaba, Tencent and Huawei are also using machine learning and big data analytics to innovate in other fields, including pharmaceutical research and autonomous driving.

In China the regulations for biotechnology, bioengineering and biopharmaceuticals are relatively relaxed. This has attracted researchers and investors to several leading biotechnology “clusters”.

China’s population of more than 1.4 billion people also means that, even for rare diseases, it has a large number of patients. Using large patient databases, companies are making advances in precision medicine (treatments tailored to an individual’s genes, environment, and lifestyle).

The rising power of China’s big tech firms has seen the government step in to maintain fair market competition. Regulations force digital firms to share user data and consolidate critical “platform goods”, such as mobile payments, across their ecosystems.

International collaboration is key

As we have seen in the recent triumph of COVID-19 vaccines, global collaboration in R&D is hugely valuable.

However, there are signs that such collaboration between China and the West may be under threat.

The semiconductor manufacturing industry – making the chips and circuits which drive modern electronics – is currently global, but at risk of fragmentation.

Making chips requires huge amounts of knowledge and capital investment, and while China is the world’s largest consumer of semiconductors it relies heavily on imports. However, US sanctions mean many global semiconductor companies cannot sell in China.

China is now investing vast sums in an attempt to be able to make all the semiconductors it needs.

If China succeeds in this, one consequence is that Chinese-made semiconductors will likely use different technical standards from the current ones.

Different standards

Diverging technical standards may seem like a minor issue, but it will make it more difficult for Chinese and Western technologies and products to work together. This in turn may reduce global trade and investment, with bad results for consumers.

Decoupling standards will increase the fracture between Chinese and Western digital innovation. This in turn will likely lead to further decoupling in finance, trade, and data.

At a time of heightened international tensions both China and the West need to be clear on the value of international collaboration in innovation.

From 2010–2014, while Vice President at Imperial College London, I collaborated with Huawei in forming the Data Science Institute, Imperial College London.

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

– ref. China’s ‘innovation machine’: how it works, how it’s changing and why it matters – https://theconversation.com/chinas-innovation-machine-how-it-works-how-its-changing-and-why-it-matters-180615

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Heidi Norman, Professor, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Technology Sydney

The New South Wales government’s roadmap to transition from coal-based electricity to renewable energy involves the creation of five “renewable energy zones” across the state.

These “modern-day power stations” will use solar, wind, batteries and new poles and wires to generate energy for the state. They’re part of a broader plan to meet a legislated target of 12 gigawatts of renewable energy and 2 gigawatts of storage by 2030.

These renewable energy zones include measures to deliver regional benefits such as engagement, jobs and benefit-sharing with local Aboriginal communities. This is a first for an Australian renewable energy program of this scale.

However, two things are needed to maximise this opportunity for Aboriginal people.

First, Aboriginal land councils need greater support and resources to participate effectively in delivery of the renewable energy zones.

Second, there should be a program to facilitate the development of renewable energy projects on Aboriginal-owned land.

Through these actions, the government can help develop partnerships that can deliver revenue and jobs for Aboriginal communities as the state transitions to clean energy.

Read more:
Traditional land burning is declining – here’s why that’s a problem

Maximising opportunities for First Nations communities

There are some cases of renewable energy projects delivering for Aboriginal communities, such as solar farms engaging unemployed Aboriginal workers. But overall the benefits have been limited to date.

However, legislation requires the NSW government bodies and renewables projects in the renewable energy zones to comply with “First Nations Guidelines” currently under development.

The guidelines will require:

• regional reference groups
• an engagement framework for renewable energy projects, and
• a document reflecting community interests developed with the input of local Aboriginal organisations (land councils and Traditional Owners under Native Title) in each renewable energy zone.

Projects bidding for a “long-term energy supply agreement” from the NSW government – which will guarantee a minimum price for their output – have to comply with the Indigenous Procurement Policy. This includes ensuring a minimum 1.5% Aboriginal workforce and 1.5% of contract value to Aboriginal businesses.

These First Nations guidelines will form part of the tender evaluation, creating incentives for projects to increase benefits for First Nations communities.

The inclusion of these First Nations guidelines in the renewable energy projects is a first for Australian renewable energy. It’s likely to significantly improve economic outcomes for Aboriginal communities.

So far, so good.

However, there are also some missed opportunities.

First, if renewable energy projects and the First Nations guidelines are to work well, greater resourcing and capacity-building is needed for local Aboriginal land councils so they can participate effectively.

In addition, the NSW government should develop an Aboriginal-led local and regional level clean energy strategy so communities can identify what they want from this momentous change.

A study by the Indigenous Land and Justice Research Group, based at the University of Technology Sydney, revealed local Aboriginal land councils are eager for renewable energy. This would improve opportunities to live and work locally, boost energy security, lower costs, enable care of Country and create wealth.

However, the study found these communities had little or no knowledge about renewable energy options or how they could benefit.

Only one Local Aboriginal Land Council in the pilot renewable energy zone had prior dealings with renewable energy operators. All were uncertain about how their land assets could be mobilised.

Read more:
A history of destruction: why the WA Aboriginal cultural heritage bill will not prevent another Juukan Gorge-like disaster

More opportunities needed for Aboriginal-owned land in NSW

There are currently no measures to encourage and facilitate renewable energy projects on Aboriginal-owned land in NSW.

Work by Indigenous Energy Australia and the Institute for Sustainable Futures found the best outcomes often occur from “mid-sized” renewable energy projects on Indigenous-owned land.

Examples include:

• the Ramahyuck Solar Farm (Longford, Victoria), which is wholly owned and operated by the Ramahyuck District Aboriginal Corporation. Following government funding, debt financing was secured for construction. The profit generated from the development will be redirected to Aboriginal education and health programs

• the Tuaropaki Geothermal Power Station in New Zealand, which is 75% owned by the Māori, Tuaropaki Trust and 25% by Mercury Energy (a large energy company). The Tuaropaki Trust was developed through financial partnerships and government support. These developments produced long-term income for community programs and other commercial ventures

• the Atlin Hydro Project in Canada, a 100% Indigenous owned and operated project. Government support was critical in establishing the project. Once established, revenues were distributed based on joint clan meetings for health programs and a land guardian program.

Developing projects on Aboriginal-owned land would take more time to identify a workable model, ensure there is support within the land council and local community and develop local capacity. But done well, it can deliver greater benefits for Aboriginal communities.

A government program developed in parallel with the roll out of the renewable energy zones could develop opportunities for renewable energy developments in partnership with local Aboriginal land councils.

Support for meaningful, Aboriginal-led renewable energy projects on Aboriginal land has the potential to make real progress towards the long hoped for benefits of land restitution for First Peoples in NSW.

The time for action is now.

Heidi Norman is affiliated with the First Nations Clean Energy Network (FNCEN).

The Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Sydney received funding from the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for research into renewable energy employment, skills and supply-chains in NSW and with Indigenous Energy Australia to produce case studies of engagement with indigenous communities by renewable energy projects.

– ref. How can Aboriginal communities be part of the NSW renewable energy transition? – https://theconversation.com/how-can-aboriginal-communities-be-part-of-the-nsw-renewable-energy-transition-181171

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nafis Alam, Professor and Head, School of Business, Monash University

We are used to thinking of money as notes and coins, the kind most of us hold in our wallets. But most money – in Australia it’s 96.3% – is digital, held by financial institutions and moved around via bank transfers, debit cards and credit cards.

Late last year Treasurer Josh Frydenberg promised to consult about introducing a third type of currency, a central bank digital currency, and asked the treasury to come up with a position by the end of 2022.

A central bank digital currency (CBDC) would be an “e-dollar”, each one worth $1 dollar, but able to be held digitally without being put into a bank – such as on computers or in digital wallets on phones.

It could allow direct consumer-to-consumer and consumer-to-business payments without the intervention of financial institutions, and allow people who don’t want to use banks to hold funds in a form that’s safer than cash.

It could also head off attempts by private firms – such as Facebook, which proposed something called Libre – to do the same sort of thing.

For transactions, it would have a clear advantage over so-called cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, whose values fluctuate because they are not tied to a currency.

Many central banks are investigating the idea, but most say they are unlikely to issue a retail CBDC in the foreseeable future.

Read more:
Libra isn’t dead yet — the killer blow will come from governments issuing their own digital currencies

Australia’s Reserve is particularly unenthusiastic, declaring there is “currently no strong public policy case to introduce a CBDC for retail use”.

Whereas in much of the rest of the world the use of cash is shrinking, in Australia there are more banknotes in circulation as a proportion of the economy than at any time since the introduction of decimal currency in 1966.

Most of the cash appears to be used to store money rather than execute transactions. But if ever Australians could be weaned off cash, there would be savings for the Reserve Bank in the cost of printing and distributing cash, and also, most likely, fewer robberies.

But how the idea would work isn’t clear.

Like bus and train cards

One model would be to produce a digital token almost exactly the same as cash. Like a banknote, it could be passed from one person to another in anonymity, with no central authority involved.

The bus and train cards used in some parts of Australia are like this – unless an owner chooses to register ownership, there is no record of who used the card.

One downside is that, unlike cash, very large sums could be held on very small devices, which could be stolen or lost. A New Zealand study notes that cash is relatively bulky, “making it unlikely that consumers would carry
large amounts on their person or store large amounts in their homes”.

And it could facilitate illegal transactions. The current Coalition government is so concerned about the use of cash for illegal transactions that it introduced legislation – never enacted – which would have banned the use of cash for payments over A$10,000.

Banks and other organisations are already required to report transactions of $10,000 or more to the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre.

Or more like Bitcoin

An alternative, the one most often talked about as a consumer digital currency, would use blockchain technologies of the kind used in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to register and track ownership, and verify transactions.

With blockchain, every transfer is recordable and hard to delete. The central bank (in Australia’s case, the Reserve Bank) would be able to track transactions.

Read more:
Demystifying the blockchain: a basic user guide

It can be thought of as an account at a central bank, which could be used to transfer money to other accounts. In most models, the account would pay no interest.

And the central bank could limit transactions. Some, such as Bank of England Bank of England deputy governor Jon Cunliffe, see this as an advantage.

He says it could be like

giving your children pocket money but programming the money so that it couldn’t be used for sweets

In his book The Future of Money, Cornell University economist Eswar Prasad warns about societies in which central bank digital money becomes “an additional instrument of government control over citizens”.

China’s ‘programmable’ e-currency

China became the first major economy to pilot a digital currency in 2020.

The consulting firm Oliver Wyman says the digital Yuan will be “programmable” and could be set to only be used for payments after “activation” when certain predefined conditions are met.

China’s government, but not other users, would have the ability to monitor transactions in real time, in what China calls “controlled anonymity”.

This isn’t what much of the rest of the world seems to want. A survey of European consumers finds the thing they most want from an e-currency is privacy (43%) ahead of security (18%) and offline usability (8%).

The United States is continuing to investigate the idea, pointing to benefits including getting payments quickly to people in times of crisis (assuming there are working electricity and internet connections) and providing services to the unbanked.

Privacy is the roadblock

Privacy isn’t of concern in the other arena central banks are moving ahead with plans for a digital currency – wholesale money. Australia’s Reserve Bank is well advanced on Project Atom, which would allow financial institutions to transfer money between each other more quickly.

At the retail level, much of the world is moving slowly. Australia’s Reserve Bank says apart from the developed economies of Sweden and Canada, most of the economies advancing the idea are emerging, including the Bahamas, Cambodia, Eastern Caribbean, Ecuador, Nigeria and Ukraine.

They have weaker electronic banking infrastructure than Australia, and populations that can’t easily access physical banks.

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

– ref. Australia is investigating a digital currency, or e-dollar, but its benefits seem slight and the risks to privacy large – https://theconversation.com/australia-is-investigating-a-digital-currency-or-e-dollar-but-its-benefits-seem-slight-and-the-risks-to-privacy-large-180099

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Thorpe, Professor in Sociology of Sport and Physical Culture, University of Waikato

Last weekend’s LPGA event in California will likely be remembered as much for what was said as the golf that was played. Asked about some on-course treatment she’d needed for back pain, world number three Lydia Ko replied matter-of-factly, “It’s that time of the month.”

The candid reference to her menstrual cycle had Golf Channel commentator Jerry Foltz flummoxed. Ko joked, “I know you’re at a loss for words, Jerry. Honesty it is.”

Ko has been celebrated for breaking the stigma about menstruation in sport. But she is not the first elite athlete to talk to the topic. Chinese swimmer Fu Yuanhui made headlines for telling the world she was on her period during the 2016 Rio Olympics.

But even though more athletes are speaking out about a normal physiological experience, the words “period” and “menstruation” still tend to shock commentators and audiences.

A long silence

A brief look at the history of women in sport helps explain these longstanding silences and taboos. In fact, women in the 19th century were considered too “weak” and “fragile” to even participate in sport and vigorous physical activity.

Doctors and politicians – male, of course – warned women that running, cycling or playing tennis would compromise their ability to have children, including the threat that women’s wombs would fall out if they rode a bicycle.

We might seem to have come a long way, with modern women competing in almost every sport, demonstrating skill, competence, strength and courage. Yet discussion of many aspects of their female physiology – menstruation, menopause, pregnancy – has long been suppressed.

In many ways, the unruly, leaky female body continues to be seen as problematic and a weakness, both in sport and society more broadly.

Read more:
The pandemic’s disproportionate impact on women is derailing decades of progress on gender equality

Muting of menstruation in sport

In this context, the menstrual cycle has often been seen as a “problem” in women’s sport. Research has revealed how sportswomen view it as an unwanted complication for training and competition. Some athletes have resorted to working around it for big events by manipulating the oral contraceptive.

It has been shown the menstrual cycle not only affects female reproduction, but also regulates physiological, metabolic, thermoregulatory and cognitive functions. But even coaches well versed in sport science have trouble talking about the menstrual cycle.

Read more:
The Black Ferns review shows – again – why real change in women’s high performance sport is urgently overdue

Our own research has shown most elite sportswomen don’t feel comfortable talking about menstrual health matters with male coaches and support staff, preferring to talk to women instead. While some coaches have adopted a more progressive approach, they remain the minority.

With a persistent culture of stigma and taboo, conversations about menstruation often happen in code, or quietly and privately among fellow sportswomen and women support staff.

An evolving science

Over the past two decades, however, a new wave of women in sport science has been leading important initiatives in understanding how the menstrual cycle affects women’s training, performance and recovery.

Their research has examined an array of menstrual-health issues faced by sportswomen (and menstruating non-gender-conforming athletes), including conditions such as iron deficiency, menorrhagia (heavy bleeding), amenorrhea (chronic loss of menstruation), and RED-S (relative energy deficiency in sport). The work represents a real change, with more research by women, with women, for women.

Some are advocating applying new training techniques during the menstrual cycle, working with hormonal changes and the nuances of symptoms. Menstrual-tracking apps and technologies can help athletes and coaches better understand how the menstrual cycle effects an athlete’s health and performance.

Armed with such knowledge, athletes and teams are designing training, performance, recovery, injury prevention and rehabilitation, sleep, nutrition and well-being programmes around the menstrual cycle. In the process, menstruation is re-framed as a sign of health and power.

Read more:
Toxic sport cultures are damaging female athletes’ health, but we can do better

‘Women are not small men’

Recognising the opportunities for improved performance, some national sports organisations – including the English Institute of Sport, the Australian Institute of Sport and High Performance Sport New Zealand – are investing (to varying degrees) in education campaigns for emerging and elite sportswomen, coaches and support people.

By better understanding the menstrual cycle, they can work with it rather than against it. But there are still gaps and silences.

Read more:
Menstruation is not a taboo in women’s sport, period

For example, much of the research is conducted by white sports scientists on white sportswomen. Important cultural and religious ways of knowing menstruation are ignored or overlooked – although some athletes are drawing on Indigenous understandings of menstruation as a time and source of strength and power.

Lydia Ko has restarted an important conversation, one we must keep having publicly and privately. As physiology and nutrition expert Stacy Sims has put it, “women are not small men”, and their distinctive and varied physiologies are not weaknesses. Rather, they are strengths yet to be fully understood, harnessed and celebrated.

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

– ref. Lydia Ko’s ‘time of the month’ comment showed how far sportswomen have come – and how much still has to change – https://theconversation.com/lydia-kos-time-of-the-month-comment-showed-how-far-sportswomen-have-come-and-how-much-still-has-to-change-182421

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Florin, Research fellow, University of Cambridge

For 65,000 years, Bininj – the local Kundjeihmi word for Aboriginal people – have returned to Madjedbebe rock shelter on Mirarr Country in the Kakadu region (in the Northern Territory).

Over this immense span of time, the environment around the rock shelter has changed dramatically.

Our paper, published last week in Quaternary Science Reviews, uses ancient scraps of plant foods, once charred in the site’s fireplaces, to explore how Aboriginal communities camping at the site responded to these changes.

This cooking debris tells a story of resilience in the face of changing climate, sea levels and vegetation.

A changing environment

The 50-metre-long Madjedbebe rock shelter lies at the base of a huge sandstone outlier. The site has a dark, ashy floor from hundreds of past campfires and is littered with stone tools and grindstones.

The back wall is decorated with vibrant and colourful rock art. Some images – such as horsemen in broad-brimmed hats, ships, guns and decorated hands – are quite recent. Others are likely many thousands of years old.

Today, the site is situated on the edge of the Jabiluka wetlands. But 65,000 years ago, when sea levels were much lower, it sat on the edge of a vast savanna plain joining Australia and New Guinea in the supercontintent of Sahul.

At this time, the world was experiencing a glacial period (referred to as the Marine Isotope Stage 4, or MIS 4) . And while Kakadu would have been relatively well-watered compared with other parts of Australia, the monsoon vine forest vegetation, common at other points in time, would have retreated.

This glacial period would eventually ease, followed by an interglacial period, and then another glacial period, the Last Glacial Maximum (MIS 2).

Cut to the Holocene (10,000 years ago) and the weather became much warmer and wetter. Monsoon vine forest, open forest and woodland vegetation proliferated, and sea levels rose rapidly.

By 7,000 years ago, Australia and New Guinea were entirely severed from each other and the sea approached Madjedbebe to a high stand of just 5km away.

What followed was the rapid transformation of the Kakadu region. First the sea receded slightly, the river systems near the site became estuaries, and mangroves etched the lowlands.

By 4,000 years ago, these were partially replaced by patches of freshwater wetland. And by 2,000 years ago, the iconic Kakadu wetlands of today were formed.

Unlikely treasure

Our research team, composed of archaeologists and Mirarr Traditional Owners, wanted to learn how people lived within this changing environment.

To do this, we sought an unlikely archaeological treasure: charcoal. It’s not something that comes to mind for the average camper, but when a fireplace is lit many of its components – such as twigs and leaves, or food thrown in – can later transform into charcoal.

Under the right conditions, these charred remains will survive long after campers have moved on. This happened many times in the past. Bininj living at Madjedbebe left a range of food scraps behind, including charred and fragmented fruit, nuts, palm stem, seeds, roots and tubers.

Using high-powered microscopes, we compared the anatomy of these charcoal pieces to plant foods still harvested from Mirarr Country today. By doing so, we learned about the foods past people ate, the places they gathered them from, and even the seasons in which they visited the site.

Read more:
Burnt ancient nutshells reveal the story of climate change at Kakadu — now drier than ever before

Ancient anme

From the earliest days of camping at Madjedbebe, people gathered and ate a broad range of anme (the Kundjeihmi word for “plant foods”). This included plants such as pandanus nuts and palm heart, which require tools, labour and detailed traditional knowledge to collect and make edible.

The tools used included edge-ground axes and grinding stones. These were all found in the oldest layers at the site – making them the oldest axes and some of the earliest grinding stones in the world.

Our evidence shows that during the two drier glacial phases (MIS 4 and 2), communities at Madjedbebe relied more on these harder-to-process foods. As the climate was drier, and food was probably more dispersed and less abundant, people would have had to make do with foods that took longer to process.

Highly prized anme such as karrbarda (long yam, Dioscorea transvera) and annganj/ankanj (waterlily seeds, Nymphea spp.) were significant elements of the diet at times when the monsoon vine forest and freshwater vegetation got closer to Madjedbebe – such as during wetland formation in the last 4,000 years and earlier wet phases. But they were also sought from more distant places during drier times.

A change of seasons

The biggest shift in the plant diet eaten at Madjedbebe occurred with the formation of freshwater wetlands. About 4,000 years ago, Bininj didn’t just start to include more freshwater plants in their diet, they also began to return to Madjedbebe during a different season.

Rather than coming to the rock shelter when local fruit trees such as andudjmi (green plum, Buchanania obovata) were fruiting, from Kurrung to Kunumeleng (September to December), they began visiting from Bangkerrang to Wurrkeng (March to August).

Read more:
Explainer: the seasonal ‘calendars’ of Indigenous Australia

This is a time of year when resources found at the edge of the wetlands, now close to Madjedbebe, become available as floodwaters recede. With the emergence of patchy freshwater wetlands 4,000 years ago, communities changed their diet to make the best use of their environments.

Today, the wetlands are culturally and economically significant to the Mirarr and other Bininj. A range of seasonal animal and plant foods feature at dinner time, including magpie geese, turtles and waterlilies.

The burning question

It’s likely the First Australians not only responded to their environment but also shaped it. In the Kakadu region today, one of the main ways Bininj modify their landscape is through cultural burning.

Fire is a cultural tool with a multitude of functions – such as, hunting, generating vegetation growth, and cleaning up pathways and campsites.

One of its most important functions is the steady reduction of wet season biomass which, if left unchecked, becomes fuel for dangerous bushfires in Kurrung (September to October), at the end of the dry season.

Our data demonstrates the use of a range of plant foods at Madjedbebe during Kurrung, throughout most of the site’s occupation, from 65,000 to 4,000 years ago.

This points to an ongoing practice of cultural burning, as it suggests communities managed fire-sensitive plant varieties, and reduced the chance of high-intensity bushfires by practicing low-intensity cultural burns before the hottest time of the year.

Today, the Mirarr still return to Madjedbebe. Their knowledge of local anme is passed down to new generations, who continue to shape this incredible cultural legacy.

Acknowledgment: we would like to thank the Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation, the Mirrar, and especially our co-authors May Nango and Djaykuk Djandjomerr.

Anna Florin received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Wenner-Gren Foundation, the Australian Institute of Nuclear Science and Engineering, and the Dan David Foundation for this research.

Andrew Fairbairn receives funding from Wenner-Gren and AINSE for this research

Chris Clarkson has received funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO).

– ref. 65,000 years of food scraps found at Kakadu tell a story of resilience amid changing climate, sea levels and vegetation – https://theconversation.com/65-000-years-of-food-scraps-found-at-kakadu-tell-a-story-of-resilience-amid-changing-climate-sea-levels-and-vegetation-181240

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Glenn Kefford, Senior Lecturer (Political Science), The University of Queensland

Have you noticed your Facebook and Instagram feed filling up with political ads lately?

The social media strategies of many parties and candidates aim to bypass mainstream media to speak directly to voters, but they are often not as sophisticated as is assumed.

As part of a team studying the digital campaign, we have been tracking what the parties and candidates are doing with their Facebook and Instagram ad spend during the election campaign.

Using ads collected from the Facebook Ad Library API (containing sponsored posts declared by the advertiser as political), we are tracking the ad spend for close to 4,000 pages. We gather fresh data every six hours.

At the halfway point in the election campaign, some clear themes are emerging in the ways the parties and candidates are campaigning online.

Read more:
The Wentworth Project: Allegra Spender’s profile rises, but polarises

A big spend by ‘teals’ and Labor – and political fragmentation

The first is the really significant spend from the “teal” Independents. Historically, many successful federal Independents (such as Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott or Cathy McGowan) have come from regional areas.

But they rarely had the resources to execute a campaign of the scale we’re seeing from inner city “teals” like Monique Ryan (running in the seat of Kooyong against Treasurer Josh Frydenberg).

Some are spending A$4,000-$5,000 a week on Facebook and Instagram ads. That is enormous. Very few candidates from the major parties would normally spend that amount. Frydenberg is doing so to try to retain his seat.

The second theme emerging is that, so far, Labor is spending more than the Coalition. That’s a product of Labor’s post-2019 election review, which was damning of their digital campaign and emphasised a digital first strategy.

Thirdly, we’re seeing a real diversity of spending across a range of parties and candidates – Jacqui Lambie in Tasmania, Rex Patrick in South Australia, the Liberal Democrats and the United Australia Party in Queensland, for example.

That reflects the broader fragmentation of the political landscape in Australia. Federal elections in Australia are increasingly complex and multi-dimensional, the campaign online is indicative of this trajectory.

What are candidates and parties posting about?

In inner city seats where teal independents are running, the number one issue is overwhelmingly climate change. But “environment” or “climate” is not one of they key terms we have found for the major parties across Australia. Instead, jobs, Medicare and health are more prominent.

For those in outer metropolitan and regional areas, the data suggests the cost of living is the key issue parties have identified as determining their vote.

Negative campaigning is showing up, too. One of the top terms appearing in ads from the major parties is “lies”.

Take talk of ‘microtargeting’ with a grain of salt

While there is always talk of fine-grained and sophisticated microtargeting strategies, there is good reason to be wary of such claims.

There’s a perception we live in this incredible digital age where each message is tailored to our interests or our personalities. But the reality is quite different.

In fact, a great deal of digital campaigning isn’t that targeted at all. Clive Palmer’s campaign is an extreme example of this, “carpet bombing” the electorate with messages about “freedom”. (A reasonable rebuttal might be: can I be free to not receive these messages?)

The reality is that most political advertising online is little more than what I describe in my recent book as a form of “narrowcasting”, where targeting is based on a basic segmentation of voters into demographic or geographic groups.

While many of the techniques we see in Australian election campaigns have been used overseas, particularly in the US and the UK, our electoral system and electoral rules are different; a mixed electoral system and compulsory voting changes the dynamic enormously.

In the US and the UK, the primary focus is to “get out the vote” rather than persuade voters. But the evidence suggests the effects of digital campaigns on mobilisation are limited. For persuasion, it is even less.

Most parties also lack the resources to engage in highly differentiated and targeted campaign activity.

In research I recently completed with colleagues from six advanced democracies, we showed most campaign activity builds on pre-existing techniques and are far less sophisticated than is often assumed.

Digital campaigning matters, as voters are online. It educates, it informs, it drives the conversation and it can have effects on social cohesion.

But the idea digital campaigning is the canary in the coalmine of electoral manipulation in Australia is hyperbole.

Data privacy is the broader concern

Two significant digital campaigning issues we should be concerned about are data privacy and cybersecurity.

Australia is one of the few advanced democracies where political parties are completely exempt from privacy legislation.

They are able to acquire all sorts of data about you, from the Australian Electoral Commission, from data they collect when they speak to voters and from digital tracking data.

Should we be comfortable with parties collecting this information about us, especially when much of it provides limited campaigning or educational value to parties?

The privacy concerns are significant but so is the broader risk of domestic or foreign actors seeking to acquire this data to sow discord.

Since 2016, political parties in countries such as Australia, the UK, the US, Germany, Italy and Canada have been the targets of cybersecurity attacks. Many see political parties as the weak link in the election security of democracy.

That represents a broader risk for all of us.

It is important for us to track what parties and candidates are doing online during a campaign.

But we also need to identify where the real vulnerabilities are, as the threats online are only likely to increase.

Read more:
Below the Line: Will different cultural groups favour one side of politics this federal election? – podcast

Glenn Kefford receives funding from the ARC.

– ref. We tracked election ad spending for 4,000 Facebook pages. Here’s what they’re posting about – and why cybersecurity is the bigger concern – https://theconversation.com/we-tracked-election-ad-spending-for-4-000-facebook-pages-heres-what-theyre-posting-about-and-why-cybersecurity-is-the-bigger-concern-182286

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University

When pre-poll voting starts on Monday May 9, it will signal the denouement of one of the least compelling streaming series ever to secure repeat funding: #AusVotes2022.

I guess it helps if your ratings are locked in by law.

As community organisations like the Country Fire Service, Lions Club and Rotary gear up for Australia’s triennial feast of ballot-marking and sausage-eating, it is timely to ask who on each side has risen through the campaign period so far, and who hasn’t. This in turn tells us something about the government we might install.

First, let’s consider the Coalition.

Obviously, it is only actual votes that can settle this argument. Or, to put it in political-speak, “there is only one poll that counts”.

That was the standout lesson of the 2019 election. Despite negative reviews of the popularity of the Coalition’s one-man show, Australian audiences actually liked what they heard.

However, in 2022 that one-man approach seems less fit for purpose. Partly this is because the one man is Scott Morrison, who, after boldly explaining he doesn’t hold a hose, may now struggle to hold the house.

It’s also partly because in 2019, Morrison had a persuasive script written for him by his opponents’ plans for tax increases. In 2022, Labor has given him much less to work with, meaning the spotlight has stayed on his own performance.

Complicating things further is that Morrison’s party is trailing in the polls and fighting on three separate fronts: in the regions against Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party; in the middle and outer suburbs against a unified Labor Party; and in its affluent capital city strongholds, against lifelong Liberal voters attracted to centrist independents.

In only one of these distinct battlegrounds, the outer suburbs, is the Prime Minister considered the clear asset he was in 2019. Indeed, in some Liberal heartland electorates, sitting moderate MPs have quietly asked that he stay away.

These differential demands have forced the Liberals to tailor their messaging, and diversify their messengers too.

Tellingly, Morrison has so far not accepted multiple interview requests to appear on the ABC’s flagship political and current affairs programs, including 7.30, Insiders and Radio National Breakfast. He has done just one interview on AM, and that was on the very first day of the campaign when almost all the main broadcasters got an interview.

Much of the burden for these and other interviews has fallen to deputy Liberal leader Josh Frydenberg. Affable, media-savvy and relentless, Frydenberg is probably the most popular politician on the conservative side, and with the economy central to the government’s re-election pitch, has rightly done his share of the heavy lifting.

But he has been distracted back at base by the existential threat he faces in his Melbourne seat of Kooyong. Defending a margin of just 6.4%, Frydenberg is locked in a ferocious local battle to hold off a highly credentialed “teal” independent, Monique Ryan.

It is a real dilemma. Frydenberg might be his party’s friendly face and leadership future, but he needs to stay in parliament for that to mean anything. At times, the stress has shown.

This has placed an even bigger burden on Senator Simon Birmingham. The doughty finance minister is the safest pair of hands on the government side, able to deliver a message, handle tricky interviews, and do it all with an even temper. It helps also that as an upper house member, he is not fighting for his career.

However, after Birmingham, the Coalition’s communications talent becomes noticeably less reliable. The Liberals’ official campaign spokesperson and incoming health minister (if the Coalition survives) is another South Australian senator, Anne Ruston.

She has struggled to cut through with the same command as Birmingham – a situation not helped by Labor’s suggestion she presents a risk to Medicare.

Among the other frontbench voices asked to step forward is Victorian-based Minister for Superannuation and Women’s Economic Security Jane Hume. Again, she has not made a lasting impression.

Others, such as the usually effective communicator Peter Dutton, are problematic. Dutton has probably done more harm than good outside his home state of Queensland – particularly in the seats under threat from climate-conscious “teal” independents.

Ditto outspoken Nationals Barnaby Joyce and Matt Canavan. Even Foreign Minister Marise Payne has not lifted the team after coming across as supine early in the campaign, when Beijing signed a security agreement with Australia’s close Pacific neighbour, the Solomon Islands.

The secretive Sino-Solomons pact was a body blow to the Coalition’s claimed vigilance against a strategically expansive China and against national security threats generally.

So what about Labor?

It sounded trite at the time, but when news broke of Anthony Albanese’s forced COVID isolation for week three of the campaign, Labor spinners insisted the leader’s absence would allow other frontbench talent to shine.

Albanese had suffered a rocky start to the campaign and may have benefited from the circuit-breaker brought by his seven-day isolation. Labor’s reconfiguration may have been an attempt to make a virtue of necessity, but arguably it worked.

In his place, established names such as Penny Wong, Jim Chalmers, Kristina Keneally and, to a lesser extent, Labor’s deputy leader Richard Marles took more public profiles. Marles subsequently had his own isolation experience after contracting COVID.

Also prominent were the official campaign spokespeople, Jason Clare and Katy Gallagher. Clare in particular has demonstrated an ability to land a political blow, and played a strong supporting role as warm-up man and attack dog at Labor’s campaign launch in Perth last weekend.

However, one of Labor’s most popular and senior figures, Tanya Plibersek, has been much less prominent in the campaign so far. Her absence has not escaped the attention of the Coalition, nor the media. As an effective communicator, Plibersek has clearly been under-used so far in this campaign – especially given her popularity and profile.

At the time of publication, that looked to be changing as Plibersek attended a campaign function with Albanese. But she remain under-utilised.

Within the minor parties and independents, the leaders – such as Adam Bandt, Pauline Hanson, and Clive Palmer – tend to be the only ones garnering much of the national media spotlight. To some extent, this reflects the fact they are not prospective parties of government. And with the exception of Bandt, are they also not realistic propositions for seats in the House of Representatives, where government is formed.

Clearly the 2022 election could change that to a degree if some of the “teal” independents are successful, although by definition, independents speak only for themselves.

Just over a fortnight from now, the effects of these wider frontbench contributions – good and bad – will be matters for the voters to decide.

For voters, getting a better sense of the people and capabilities being offered by each of the prospective parties of government remains an important, if under-appreciated, aspect of our election contests.

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

– ref. Half-time results are in: who’s having a good election campaign, and who isn’t? – https://theconversation.com/half-time-results-are-in-whos-having-a-good-election-campaign-and-who-isnt-182122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Willis, Professor, Public Health, Victoria University, Victoria University

Throughout the pandemic, we’ve heard much about health-care worker burnout. But what we haven’t heard much about is its effects on patients.

Even before the pandemic, health workers were grappling with long hours, high workplace demands, staff shortages, and limited resources. The culture of health-care values selfless dedication and around-the-clock availability, yet this risks both health-care workers’ health and the quality and safety of patient care. The pre-existing cracks in the system have widened during the pandemic.

Our survey of more than 9,000 health-care workers during 2020 found 71% experienced moderate to severe burnout. And the workforce continues to experience the pressures of the pandemic.

Read more:
Burnout in healthcare staff is common — and can make empathising with patients difficult

What exactly is burnout?

The World Health Organisation says burnout results from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed, and is characterised by:

• feelings of energy depletion or exhaustion

• increased mental distance from one’s job, or feelings of negativity or cynicism related to one’s job

• reduced professional efficacy.

Burnout is linked to moral distress, which occurs when health-care workers feel they cannot deliver the care they are trained to provide. Our participants talked about the emotional distress they experienced as patients died alone, the deficiencies in aged care, and their worries about whether health-care resources would be rationed.

What are its consequences?

The sustained and prolonged stress of the pandemic is taking its toll. Clinician burnout and workforce shortages are linked, and they have been listed as the biggest threats to patient safety in the United States in 2022.

Staffing shortages lead to patients having to wait longer for health care, even in life-threatening emergencies with potentially fatal outcomes, or being turned away. Patients have long wait times just to be triaged in emergency departments, with some deciding to leave instead of wait.

A review of nursing studies reveals burnout, particularly emotional exhaustion, is associated with poorer quality and safety of care. This review cites studies finding nurses and patients negatively rate the care provided when nurses are burnt out; along with adverse outcomes including medication errors, patient falls, increased infections, and even increased mortality in one study.

A participant in our survey said:

I’m burnt out. The impact of COVID has affected my empathy. I feel like best practice is unachievable and that there are so many barriers to providing care.

Read more:
Doctors look after our mental health but who looks after theirs?

Burnout has implications for the whole workforce. Health-care workers who are burnt out may reduce their hours of work, quit their jobs, or retire early. These unnecessary staff reductions contribute to workforce shortages, meaning less staff available to provide care to the patients and increased pressure on those clinicians left behind.

Health-care workers are not easily replaced and the education and training of our highly skilled workforce is a substantial investment in quality patient care. This is why we must ensure health-care organisations have strategies to support and promote staff well-being and retain their staff.

What has to happen to reduce burnout?

Even during times of crisis, burnout is not inevitable. Through our research we heard from health-care workers who felt connected, engaged, and able to do their jobs well despite the increased demands of the pandemic. The secret to avoiding burnout was not “individual resilience” – health-care workers are already a highly resilient group – nor tokenistic gestures of support.

One emergency department nurse in our survey told us her managers told staff to “watch [their] mental health” and threw them a pizza party, which she described as “the equivalent of throwing a Band-Aid over a haemorrhaging artery”.

Burnout is an occupational issue needing organisational change.
It requires a commitment from organisations and leaders to deliver safe, healthy and caring workplaces.

Practical supports to improve staff well-being include proactive strategies that ensure a work culture of respect and kindness, removal of stigma and feelings of guilt if staff need to take time off to support their mental health, and debriefing and peer support programs.

Frontline health-care workers in our survey asked for workload management strategies to reduce burnout, such as:

• “compulsory leave days to prevent burnout” or “burnout leave”

• sufficient staffing with “workload flexible hours to prevent burnout”

• “prioritising leaving on time/taking leave to ensure health-care workers are well rested and avoid burnout”.

Staff also need workplaces free from patient and visitor abuse, so hospitals need to have good policies for preventing occupational violence.

The pandemic is not over yet, and it won’t be the last health crisis we face. We can’t afford to lose caring and dedicated health-care workers to burnout. Investing in safe and healthy workplaces is an investment in the quality of patient care.

Read more:
You should care about your doctor’s health, because it matters to yours

Karen Willis receives funding from the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation for the project: Future-Proofing the Frontline: Strategies to support healthcare workers during times of crisis.

Jaimie-Lee Maple receives funding from the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation for the project: Future-Proofing the Frontline: Strategies to support healthcare workers during times of crisis.

Marie Bismark receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is a Board Director of The Royal Women’s Hospital and GMHBA health insurance.

Natasha Smallwood receives funding from the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation for the project: Future-Proofing the Frontline: Strategies to support healthcare workers during times of crisis. She is a Board Director for the Victorian Doctors’ Health Program.

– ref. A burnt-out health workforce impacts patient care – https://theconversation.com/a-burnt-out-health-workforce-impacts-patient-care-180021

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Euan Ritchie, Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University

Australia’s remarkable animals, plants and ecosystems are world-renowned, and rightly so.

Unfortunately, our famous ecosystems are not OK. Many are hurtling towards collapse, threatening even iconic species like the koala, platypus and the numbat. More and more species are going extinct, with over 100 since British colonisation. That means Australia has one of the worst conservation records in the world.

This represents a monumental government failure. Our leaders are failing in their duty of care to the environment. Yet so far, the election campaign has been unsettlingly silent on threatened species.

Here are five steps our next government should take.

1. Strengthen, enforce and align policy and laws

Australia’s environmental laws and policies are failing to safeguard our unique biodiversity from extinction. This has been established by a series of independent reviews, Auditor-General reports and Senate inquiries over the past decade.

The 2020 review of our main environmental protection laws offered 38 recommendations. To date, no major party has clearly committed to introducing and funding these recommendations.

Read more:
‘Existential threat to our survival’: see the 19 Australian ecosystems already collapsing

To actually make a difference to the environment, it’s vital we achieve policy alignment. That means, for instance, ruling out new coal mines if we would like to keep the world’s largest coral reef system alive. Similarly, widespread land clearing in Queensland and New South Wales makes tree planting initiatives pointless on an emissions front.

Despite Australia’s wealth of species, our laws protecting biodiversity are much laxer than in other developed nations like the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. These nations have mandatory monitoring of all threatened species, which means they can detect species decline early and step in before it’s too late.

2. Invest in the environment

How much do you think the federal government spends on helping our threatened species recover? The answer is shockingly low: Around $50 million per year across the entire country. That’s less than $2 a year per Australian. The government spent the same amount on supporting the business events industry through the pandemic.

Our overall environmental spending, too, is woefully inadequate. In an age of mounting environmental threats, federal funding has fallen sharply over the past nine years.

For conservationists, this means distressing decisions. With a tiny amount of funding, you can’t save every species. That means ongoing neglect and more extinctions looming.

This investment is far less than what is needed to recover threatened species or to reduce the very real financial risks from biodiversity loss. If the government doesn’t see the environment as a serious investment, why should the private sector?

Read more:
Taking care of business: the private sector is waking up to nature’s value

The next government should fix this nature finance gap. It’s not as if there isn’t money. The estimated annual cost of recovering every one of Australia’s ~1,800 threatened species is roughly a mere 7% of the Coalition’s $23 billion of projects promised in the month since the budget was released in late March.

3. Tackle the threats

We already have detailed knowledge of the major threats facing our species and ecosystems: the ongoing destruction or alteration of vital habitat, the damage done by invasive species like foxes, rabbits and cats, as well as pollution, disease and climate change. To protect our species from these threats requires laws and policies with teeth, as well as investment.

If we protect threatened species habitat by stopping clearing of native vegetation, mineral extraction, or changing fishing practices, we will not only get better outcomes for biodiversity but also save money in many cases. Why? Because it’s vastly cheaper to conserve ecosystems and species in good health than attempt recovery when they’re already in decline or flatlining.

Phasing out coal, oil and gas will also be vital to stem the damage done by climate change, as well as boosting support for green infrastructure and energy.

Any actions taken to protect our environment and recover species must be evidence-based and have robust monitoring in place, so we can figure out if these actions actually work in a cost-effective manner against specific objectives. This is done routinely in the US.

Salvaging our damaged environment is going to take time. That means in many cases, we’ll need firm, multi-partisan commitments to sustained actions, sometimes even across electoral cycles. Piecemeal, short-term or politicised conservation will not help Australia’s biodiversity long-term and do not represent best use of public money.

4.: Look to Indigenous leadership to heal Country

For millennia, First Nations people have cared for Australia’s species and shaped ecosystems.

In many areas, their forced displacement and disconnection with longstanding cultural practices is linked to further damage to the environment, such as more severe fires.

Read more:
Indigenous knowledge and the persistence of the ‘wilderness’ myth

Focusing on Indigenous management of Country can deliver environmental, cultural and social benefits. This means increasing representation of Indigenous people and communities in ecosystem policy and management decisions.

5. Work with communities and across boundaries

We must urgently engage and empower local communities and landowners to look after the species on their land. Almost half of Australia’s threatened species can be found on private land, including farms and pastoral properties. We already have good examples of what this can look like.

The next government should radically scale up investment in biodiversity on farms, through rebates and tax incentives for conservation covenants and sustainable agriculture. In many cases, caring for species can improve farming outcomes.

Conservation is good for humans and all other species

To care for the environment and the other species we live alongside is good for us as people. Tending to nature in our cities makes people happier and healthier.

Protecting key plants and animals ensures key “services” like pollination and the cycling of soil nutrients continues.

Read more:
A lone tree makes it easier for birds and bees to navigate farmland, like a stepping stone between habitats

We’re lucky to live in a land of such rich biodiversity, from the ancient Wollemi pine to remarkable Lord Howe island stick insects and striking corroboree frogs. But we are not looking after these species and their homes properly. The next government must take serious and swift action to save our species.

Euan G. Ritchie is the Chair of the Media Working Group of the Ecological Society of Australia, Deputy Convenor (Communication and Outreach) for the Deakin Science and Society Network, and a member of the Australian Mammal Society.

Ayesha Tulloch receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is the Vice President of Public Policy and Outreach and co-convenes the Science Communication Chapter for the Ecological Society of Australia, and sits on Birdlife Australia’s Research and Conservation Committee. She is a member of eBird Australia, the Society for Conservation Biology and the University of Sydney’s Charles Perkins Centre Citizen Science Node.

Megan C Evans receives funding from the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Research Award and has previously been funded by WWF Australia and the National Environmental Science Program’s Threatened Species Recovery Hub.

– ref. Australia’s next government must tackle our collapsing ecosystems and extinction crisis – https://theconversation.com/australias-next-government-must-tackle-our-collapsing-ecosystems-and-extinction-crisis-182048

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Will Mackey, Senior Associate, Grattan Institute

COVID-19 travel restrictions brought migration to Australia to a virtual standstill, and over the course of the pandemic about 500,000 temporary migrants have left our shores. Now many Australian businesses are screaming out for more workers.

So, who are Australia’s missing migrants, where did they work, and when might they come back?

Which migrants are missing?

The Grattan Institute’s new report, Migrants in the workforce, shows there were about 1.5 million temporary migrants in Australia as of January 2022, compared with almost 2 million in 2019.

The 500,000 “missing migrants” are mainly international students and working holiday makers.

There are roughly 335,000 international students in Australia now – about half as many as in 2019 – and only 19,000 working holiday makers – about 85% fewer.

The number of temporary skilled workers is down by about 20%. Almost all of the 660,000 New Zealand citizens living in Australia on temporary visas remained throughout the pandemic.

This shortfall of migrants from the uncapped temporary migration program is hurting some businesses more than others. Before the pandemic about 17% of workers employers hospitality were here on temporary visas. These temporary migrants were overwhelmingly international students earning some money as waiters, kitchen hands and bar attendants.

Demand for these services remains high, so it’s little wonder employers in the hospitality industry are screaming out for staff. The most recent data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows about 33% of hospitality businesses in February were advertising for extra staff, compared with 15% in February 2020.

Meanwhile farmers are struggling because working holiday makers, who have made up about 4% of the agricultural workforce, are almost entirely absent.

Border closures have boosted wages where temporary migrants typically work

Some commentators, such as Australian Council of Trade Unions head Sally McManus have attributed Australia’s historically low unemployment to the border closures.

Closed borders may well have boosted the employment prospects and wages of locals in sectors where temporary migrants – especially students and working holiday makers – have made up a large share of the workforce. That’s likely to have benefited younger Australians, especially those working in hospitality.

But the fact there are fewer migrants in Australia now than before the pandemic is unlikely to have had much impact on the employment prospects and wages of Australian workers overall.

When migrants come to Australia, they spend money – on groceries, housing, transport, hospitality and so on. Fewer migrants means less of that spending, which means less demand for labour to make those goods and provide those services.

Grattan Institute research published in Febuary shows government spending and the Reserve Bank’s stimulus policies, not border closures, are the main reason for the the low unemployment rate.

Our analysis shows the effect record low interest rates and unprecedented levels of government support for businesses and households is seven to eight times larger than the effect of the border closure.

Read more:
A myth that won’t die: stopping migration did not kickstart the economy

Whoever wins the federal election should resist the temptation to make permanent changes to visa policy

The federal government has implemented short-term measures to attract international students and working holiday makers back to Australia. It is refunding the application fee to those applying for such visas, and has removed the 40-hour per fortnight cap on working hours for international students.

But whichever party wins the election should avoid further changes to visa policy in response to what are short-term labour shortages.

Students and working holiday makers are likely to gradually return now that borders have reopened. Treasury expects the net overseas migration to increase from 41,000 people in 2021-22 to 180,000 in 2022-23 and 213,000 in 2023-24.

Read more:
More permanent skilled visas are a big deal. The government is heading in the right direction

History shows expanding pathways to lower-skill, lower-wage migrants risks putting downward pressure on the wages of workers now in those roles.

As we have seen in agriculture and hospitality sectors, once an industry relies on low-wage labour, it is hard to wind the clock back.

Temporary changes to migration policy to solve short-term problems have a habit of becoming permanent.

Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute’s activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities, as disclosed on its website. We would also like to thank the Scanlon Foundation for its generous support of this project.

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

– ref. Australia is missing 500,000 migrants, but we don’t need visa changes to lure them back – https://theconversation.com/australia-is-missing-500-000-migrants-but-we-dont-need-visa-changes-to-lure-them-back-182322

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Keating, Visiting Fellow, College of Business & Economics, Australian National University

In the midst of Labor’s campaign about the cost of living, the Coalition has zeroed in on one of those costs – taxes – and guaranteed to stop them rising. Its Lower Tax Guarantee promises:

• No new taxes on Australian workers.

• No new taxes on retirees.

• No new taxes on superannuation.

• No new taxes on small businesses.

• No new taxes on housing.

• No new taxes on electricity

In addition, the Coalition promises to continue to adhere to its taxation “speed limit” by keeping tax revenue below 23.9% of gross domestic product.

Labor, fearing its tax policies cost it the last election, isn’t mentioning tax much, and is backing the Coalition’s already-legislated Stage 3 tax cuts aimed at Australians on more than $90,000, and due to start in mid-2024.

As it happens, most Australians are due to pay a good deal more tax from mid next year when the Coalition’s Low and Middle Income Tax Offset ends.

This will give taxpayers with incomes between $48,001 and $90,000 a cut in their tax rebate of $1,500 next financial year.

Actually, we will need more tax

One of the problems with the pledge is that we are likely to need more tax.

Even on optimistic assumptions about productivity growth set out in the budget, the deficit – the extent to which revenue falls short of spending – is projected to be an usually high 3.4% of GDP next financial year, followed by 2.4%, 1.9%, 1.6% and then continuing without disappearing thereafter.

Budget deficits were an appropriate response to the pandemic.

But, as the Coalition keeps reminding us, unemployment is now just under 4% and set to fall lower, which means we might be at what the authorities call “full employment”, or so close to it the difference hardly matters.

The presumption that from now on Australia should aim for a balanced budget is baked into the budget fiscal strategy that targets “a budget balance, on average, over the course of the economic cycle”.

The continuing deficits the budget is forecasting risk aggregate demand (private and government spending) exceeding what the economy is able to produce.

In the coming year the budget forecasts an increase in aggregate demand of 4.5%, unmatched by the increase in Gross domestic product of 3½%.

The result is likely to be a budget-driven increase in inflation, at a time when the Reserve Bank is trying to ward off a surge in (largely foreign-produced) inflation.

Realistically, sound management requires the incoming government to balance the budget, if not straight away, then at least by 2023-24.

Failure to balance the budget will result in unacceptably high inflation and increasingly severe action by the Reserve Bank to restrain it, with damaging consequences for living standards.

Read more:
RBA Governor Philip Lowe is hiking interest rates. Worst case, it’ll mean an extra $600 per month on a $500,000 mortgage

There are only two ways to balance budgets: cut spending or increase revenue, and the biggest source of government revenue – by far – is tax.

The Morrison government has committed itself to an arbitrary tax ceiling that limits total taxation revenue to 23.9% of GDP, forevermore.

Labor is not committed to such a ceiling and nor does it talk much about appropriate levels of tax.

The reality is that according to the latest Treasury and Department of Finance projections, government spending will settle at 27.2% of GDP in ten years time, well above the tax ceiling.

Tax pays for services

The government is also guaranteeing essential services, but many are hugely underfunded, examples include:

• the promise to fully implement the recommendations of the aged care and disability services royal commissions

• tertiary education, which will be funded less in 2024-25 than it was pre-pandemic in 2018-19

• health funding – abstracting from the impact of the pandemic, the rate of increase in health funding is projected to be less than half the increase pre-pandemic

• defence, diplomacy, and foreign aid spending which will be needed to plug a massive capability gap over the next twenty years or so years

Certainly, there are opportunities for budget savings, starting with electorate giveaways and dodgy infrastructure projects that have no business case. But realistically, these savings will fall well short of what’s needed to fund the extra spending we are going to have to make.

In short, guarantees of both the provision of essential services and lower taxation are incompatible. No party can credibly promise both.

Read more:
Of the 4 economic wildcards between now and voting day, the first is CPI

What this election needs is a debate about the best way to raise the needed revenue, followed by a full-scale review of taxation after the election.

The starting point should be to work out how much extra revenue is required.

A rough estimate is an extra 4% of GDP. While that might seem like a lot, it would leave Australia as one of the lower taxing countries in the OECD. It hasn’t hurt the OECD’s prospects.

Michael Keating receives funding from the ARC more than ten years ago, but nothing more recently

– ref. The Coalition is guaranteeing essential services and lower tax. We can’t have both – https://theconversation.com/the-coalition-is-guaranteeing-essential-services-and-lower-tax-we-cant-have-both-182240

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Tuffley, Senior Lecturer in Applied Ethics & CyberSecurity, Griffith University

The human brain is said to be the most complex biological structure ever to have existed. And while science doesn’t fully understand the brain yet, researchers in the expanding field of neuroscience have been making progress.

Neuroscientists have made substantial inroads towards mapping the complex functions of the brain’s 85 billion or so neurons and the 100 trillion connections between them. (To put this astronomical number into perspective, there are upwards of 400 billion stars in the Milky Way galaxy.)

Enter Neuralink, a Silicon Valley start-up backed by Elon Musk that has developed a neuroprosthetic device known as a brain-computer interface. Among other things, Musk claims this chip could cure tinnitus, the neurological condition that causes ringing in your ears, within five years. But is this possible?

What is Neuralink?

The coin-sized Neuralink device, called a Link, is implanted flush with the skull by a precision surgical robot. The robot connects a thousand miniature threads from the Link to certain neurons. Each thread is a quarter the diameter of a human hair.

The device connects to an external computer by Bluetooth for continuous communication back and forth.

Read more:
An electronic chip that makes ‘memories’ is a step towards creating bionic brains

In future, Neuralink prostheses might help people with various kinds of neurological disorders where there is a disconnect or malfunction between the brain and the nerves that serve the body. That includes people with paraplegia, quadriplegia, Parkinson’s disease and epilepsy.

Since its establishment in 2016, Neuralink has been recruiting top-class neuroscientists from academia and the broader research community to develop the technology to treat these conditions.

Neuralink’s monkey can play Pong with his mind

In April 2021, the company released a remarkable proof-of-concept video. It showed a nine-year-old macaque monkey called Pager successfully playing a game of Pong with his mind, by having an implanted Neuralink device connected to a computer running the game.

Pager was shown how to play Pong using a joystick. When he made a correct move, he’d receive a sip of banana smoothie.

As he played, the Neuralink implant recorded the patterns of electrical activity in his brain. This identified which neurons controlled which movements.

When the joystick was disconnected, Pager was able to play the game and win using only his mind.

Human trials to further develop the Neuralink prototype are expected to commence towards the end of 2022, contingent on United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval.

Musk’s tinnitus claims

Elon Musk has claimed the Neuralink device could cure tinnitus by 2027.

Tinnitus is a neurological condition that manifests as a ringing or buzzing in the ears in the absence of an external source.

Tinnitus is a common problem, caused when the nerve that connects the inner ear with the brain, known as the vestibulocochlear nerve, is damaged due to prolonged loud noise, injury or deficiencies in blood supply.

A cure for tinnitus has proven elusive. Treatment currently centres on masking the sound or learning to ignore it.

At present, the Neuralink prosthesis connects to the cerebral cortex, the surface layer of the brain. This is where the device can remedy damage to the brain’s ability to process motor sensory input or output.

Are Musk’s claims credible?

These claims might appear grandiose. Yet the underlying science is not controversial.

Neural implants have been helping people since the early 1960s when the first cochlear implant was placed in a person with impaired hearing. There has been much progress in the 60 years since then.

Read more:
Neuralink put a chip in Gertrude the pig’s brain. It might be useful one day

Neuroscientists are broadly optimistic the device has potential to treat tinnitus. It may also be useful in treating obsessive compulsive disorder, repairing brain injuries, and treat conditions such as autism or degenerative diseases of the nervous system using deep brain stimulation.

As Paul Nuyujukian, director of the Brain Interfacing Laboratory at Stanford University, observes:

We are on the cusp of a complete paradigm shift. This type of technology has the potential to transform our treatments. Not just for stroke, paralysis, and motor degenerative disease, but also for pretty much every other type of brain disease.

What do we need to be cautious of?

The FDA categorises Neuralink as a class III medical device, the riskiest category. Before human trials start, Neuralink must successfully clear the rigorous FDA regulatory controls.

To be approved, the company must provide exhaustive clinical trial data from non-human test subjects (such as Pager the monkey) to conservatively justify moving to the next phase. Some monkeys have died during Neuralink’s tests, and critics have raised animal welfare concerns.

The approvals process for human testing could take some time.

The regulators will be looking for unintended negative consequences of the device, such as depression. Also of interest will be how practical it is to remove or repair a device should it malfunction, and how to manage the risk of brain injury or infection.

Read more:
How Theranos’ faulty blood tests got to market – and what that shows about gaps in FDA regulation

Once FDA-approved, Neuralink will enlist human volunteers and the next round of trials will proceed.

How long it will be until the device is commercially available and how much it will cost is anyone’s guess. It could be years and with a price tag that puts it out of reach for all but the wealthy.

So it’s wise to not hold out false hope for an affordable implant in the short term.

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

– ref. Elon Musk claims his Neuralink brain chip could ‘cure’ tinnitus in 5 years. But don’t hold your breath – https://theconversation.com/elon-musk-claims-his-neuralink-brain-chip-could-cure-tinnitus-in-5years-but-dont-hold-your-breath-182156

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

In the Wentworth Project, sponsored by the University of Canberra’s Centre for Change Governance and The Conversation, we are tapping into voters’ opinions in this seat, which appears to be on a knife edge.

In this podcast we talk with the two main candidates, Liberal incumbent Dave Sharma and “teal” independent Allegra Spender, as well as with Kerryn Phelps, the former independent member in the seat, who has mentored Spender and is on the advisory council of Climate 200, which is donating to her campaign.

Sharma says “Kerryn Phelps was a genuine independent candidate or a more traditional independent candidate. […] This independent candidate is really sort of a franchise or party operation.”

Sharma casts the teals, who are challenging Liberals in a range of city seats, as reflecting “populism as a political force”.

“People think populism only belongs to the right because of Donald Trump. I think the independents are basically harnessing a populist mood, which is similar to what Donald Trump did, which is ‘a curse on all your houses.’”

Morrison is not campaigning in the teal seats. Asked how much the Prime Minister is a drag on the vote, Sharma stresses the team. “Scott Morrison is the leader of our team and the spokesperson for the team. But it’s also got a range of ministers in there who control different portfolios and we’re putting ourselves forward, and I certainly am here, as a team.”

Spender says “there’s a feeling amongst the community that I hear, that they feel that the parties are looking after themselves first and the community after”.

On a possible hung parliament, she says, “I would be willing to work with either party, or major party on supply and confidence, because I want stable government”. She would talk first to whichever side had the greatest number of seats.

Wentworth is seeing enormous spending. Spender says her campaign will probably spend between $1.3 and $1.5 million (with something under 30% expected to come from Climate 200).

She favours caps on spending and donations. “I’d like to see a cap in what individuals or companies can give. I’d like to see real time information in terms of what has been given. And then I think at the same time, you need to look at political advertising and how that is used because the government just spent $30 million spruiking their clean energy credentials […] immediately before the election being called.”

Kerryn Phelps says of Wentworth: “I’ve had a medical practise in Double Bay for around two decades, and so I know the community well. It’s generally seen as an affluent community, but it’s actually quite diverse. There are clearly strong beliefs about the economy and business. And so a candidate would need to have business experience. But the people also have a very strong social conscience. They’re very environmentally aware. And I think that’s particularly highlighted by the fact that it’s bounded by the harbour and the ocean.”

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Dave Sharma, Allegra Spender, and Kerryn Phelps on the contest for Wentworth – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-dave-sharma-allegra-spender-and-kerryn-phelps-on-the-contest-for-wentworth-182422

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Prudence Flowers, Senior Lecturer in US History, College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Flinders University

A leaked United States Supreme Court draft opinion reveals it is poised to strike down Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that guaranteed abortion as a constitutional right.

The end of Roe v. Wade would dramatically impact reproductive rights in the US. It would also likely have symbolic consequences globally, shaping the strategies and tactics of the trans-national anti-abortion movement.

Overturning Roe v. Wade would put the US Supreme Court out of step with public sentiment.

Abortion is a routine and safe health-care procedure accessed by approximately one in four American women. 2021 polling indicated 80% of Americans support abortion in all or most cases, and at least 60% support Roe v Wade.

If Roe v. Wade falls, abortion will be returned to the states for regulation.

About half the states are expected to immediately ban abortion; 16 states plus the District of Columbia have laws protecting abortion rights.

In the short term, a patient’s ability to legally access abortion would effectively be a lottery, determined by geography or having the financial resources to travel significant distances.

In the longer term, opponents of abortion view this moment as a beginning rather than an end. Republican lawmakers are already strategising about legislation that would ban abortion nationwide after six weeks.

Read more:
How the US right-to-life movement is influencing the abortion debate in Australia

So what’s all this mean for Australia?

Although Australia is sometimes described as the 51st US state, when it comes to abortion our politics and laws are extremely different.

The Australian public is strongly pro-choice and has been for decades.

Abortion in Australia is regulated by state and territory legislation and the overall trend in the 21st century has been to enshrine abortion as a legal right. In 2021, South Australia became the last jurisdiction to decriminalise the procedure.

Politically, abortion is the subject of conscience votes. It normally does not function as a partisan issue for the major parties, with the notable exception of the 2020 Queensland election, when the LNP promised a review of the recently passed abortion decriminalisation law while One Nation pledged to roll it back.

But while legal abortion in Australia seems secure, we are still a long way from treating abortion as the routine health care it is.

Access is a key issue

In most of Australia, patients needing abortion care face significant barriers to access.

With the exception of South Australia and the Northern Territory, most public hospitals do not offer abortion care. Instead, private clinics provide abortion services and patients pay hundreds of dollars out-of-pocket.

Access to abortion services outside major cities is almost non-existent.

Regional patients face immense logistical barriers and travel and procedure costs. The pandemic inadvertently led to the permanent closure of regional abortion clinics in Queensland and New South Wales. Telehealth services for early medication abortion can sometimes help but shouldn’t be the only option.

Broadly, there is a significant shortage of trained surgical abortion providers. Although early medication abortion can be prescribed by GPs, very few are certified to do so. Until COVID, many private regional abortion clinics relied on doctors working on a fly-in-fly-out model.

Reproductive rights advocates have repeatedly called on governments to embed this essential reproductive health care into public health services.

In the 2019 federal election, Labor promised “free abortions” via a major sexual and reproductive health policy but has not revisited this proposal in the current campaign.

American tactics imported to Australia

While Australia does not share the US’ intense partisan politics over abortion, we also do not share the approach of Canada where abortion is normalised as reproductive health care.

There has also been a disturbing domestic trend towards the increasing political stigmatisation of abortion.

The tiny Australian right-to-life movement has direct links with the US movement.

In recent state decriminalisation debates, we witnessed the wholesale incorporation of American rhetoric and tactics into the Australian context.

Anti-abortion activists had an out-sized place in these state debates because of their vocal political and religious allies.

Minor parties such as One Nation now have a “pro-life platform”, while several federal Coalition politicians, including Barnaby Joyce, Alex Antic and Matt Canavan have spoken out against abortion.

Amanda Stoker, the assistant minister for women, recently addressed the annual Queensland anti-choice rally.

The end of Roe v. Wade will likely embolden our own anti-abortion activists and politicians, who can question public provision of abortion, push for additional legal and medical regulations, and seek to revise laws by emphasising US talking points such as “late-term” and “sex-selective” abortions.

Legislatively eroding abortion is a strategy that has proven immensely successful in the US.

It ensures abortion is not viewed as health care, that anti-choice rhetoric is amplified in mainstream media, and that abortion patients and providers are further stigmatised.

Cumulatively, these tactics have a chilling effect that will likely make access to abortion even harder.

If the US Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade this year, it will mean the end of a decision that has survived 49 years worth of hostile legal challenges.

It demonstrates the power and danger of long-term tactics relying on stigma and the gradual erosion of rights. It reminds us all that rights must be continually defended, never taken for granted.

Read more:
Will Roe v Wade be overturned, and what would this mean? The US abortion debate explained

Prudence Flowers has received funding from the South Australian Department of Human Services. She is a member of the South Australian Abortion Action Coalition.

– ref. The end of Roe v. Wade would likely embolden global anti-abortion activists and politicians – https://theconversation.com/the-end-of-roe-v-wade-would-likely-embolden-global-anti-abortion-activists-and-politicians-182345

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rajib Dasgupta, Chairperson, Centre of Social Medicine and Community Health, Jawaharlal Nehru University

In India in 2021, an estimated 504,000 people died from tuberculosis, or TB. That’s almost one per minute. More than a quarter of the estimated TB cases worldwide are in India.

In 2018, the UN committed to end the TB epidemic globally by 2030. The “End TB” strategy sought to reduce TB incidence by 80%, deaths by 90%, and eliminate catastrophic costs for TB-affected households.

India announced it would try to eliminate TB in India by 2025, five years ahead of the UN’s target.

However, the first TB survey since the 1950s was recently conducted, and it found rates in the Indian community are much higher than anticipated.

Read more:
TB’s stronghold in India: A tragedy there, and a grave concern for the rest of the world

What is TB?

Tuberculosis is a disease caused by infection with the bacteria Mycobacterium tuberculosis. It mainly affects the lungs, and the bacteria spreads when an infected person coughs or sneezes.

Some people are infected but do not get any symptoms, which is known as “latent TB”. In others, the infection begins to cause symptoms within weeks or months, which is known as “active TB”.

Up to 10% of those with latent TB eventually develop active TB years after the initial infection.

Antibiotics are the mainstay treatment of TB. However, the bacteria has been known to become resistant and find a way to beat these antibiotics. Drug-resistant strains of TB have become a global concern.

Read more:
Explainer: what is TB and am I at risk of getting it in Australia?

70 years of TB control in India

When India gained independence in 1947, there were about half a million TB deaths annually and an estimated 2.5 million Indians suffered from active tuberculosis.

In 1948, a TB vaccination program commenced. The BCG vaccine protects against the most severe forms of TB, such as TB meningitis in children, but it doesn’t protect against TB in adults.

Read more:
Model of new TB vaccine shows its potential impact and value in South Africa and India

India’s first national survey of TB, conducted from 1955 to 1958, found on average four of every 1,000 people in India had TB.

The National Tuberculosis Institute was established in 1959 and an interdisciplinary group of epidemiologists, tuberculosis specialists, microbiologists, biostatisticians, sociologists, public health nurses and X-ray engineers conducted a series of research studies that culminated in the National Tuberculosis Programme in 1963. The key strategy of the program was to use chemotherapy to treat TB.

What did the most recent survey find?

The results of the most recent national TB survey in India (2019–21) have just been released, and found just over three people per 1,000 had active TB cases. This is not a great improvement on the last survey from the 1950s (four per 1,000) and much higher than the WHO’s 2020 estimate of 1.8 per 1,000.

The highest prevalence was in Delhi, at over five per 1,000. Groups with higher prevalence included the elderly, malnourished, smokers, those with alcohol dependence and diabetics.

Despite the plan to eliminate catastrophic costs due to TB, an estimated 7-32% of TB sufferers and 68% of TB sufferers whose infection is resistant to frontline antibiotics experienced catastrophic costs. Catastrophic costs are said to be incurred when the total costs of treatment exceeds 20% of the annual household income.

What happened to TB during the catastrophic COVID outbreak in India?

The total number of TB patients recorded dropped by 25% in 2020, then rose 19% in 2021.

This probably indicates TB diagnoses were lost in 2020 during the COVID outbreak. Given hospitals were overwhelmed by COVID cases, people with TB symptoms would have been less able to get care, or would have been hesitant about going to hospital for fear of catching COVID. Even the National Institute of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases (NITRD) was converted into a designated COVID Care Centre in May 2021.

One might have thought lockdowns to stop the spread of COVID (which spreads person-to-person) would have seen a decrease in the incidence of TB (which also spreads person-to-person). This effect was certainly seen for infections such as influenza.

We can only speculate as to why TB cases didn’t decrease, but the fact TB was already endemic in India, and the fact lockdowns probably increased overcrowding for socioeconomically disadvantaged households, could have meant TB was able to more effectively spread in crowded households.

This was exacerbated by the healthcare system at time bordering on collapse as resources had to be allocated for COVID cases, and access to diagnostics and treatment were reduced during the lockdown periods.

Read more:
As India’s COVID crisis worsens, leaders play the blame game while the poor suffer once again

What has to happen now?

India’s National Strategic Plan for Tuberculosis Elimination has described four strategic pillars of “Detect – Treat – Prevent – Build” (DTPB) as the way forward.

• Detect refers to early identification of presumptive TB cases, at the first point of care, and prompt diagnosis using high sensitivity diagnostic tests

• treatment refers to initiating and sustaining all patients on first-line anti-tuberculosis drug treatment for drug-sensitive TB patients and appropriate antibiotics for drug resistant TB

• prevent refers to scaling up air-borne infection control measures at health care facilities, treatment for latent TB infection in contacts of confirmed cases, and addressing social determinants of TB including crowded housing and sanitation

• build refers to strengthening and building on the existing health service to prevent and treat TB and positioning TB high on the health and development agenda.

It is looking like we may be too late to reach the 2025 elimination goal. But if we follow these four steps, we might come closer to eliminating TB in India.

Read more:
India’s ambitious new plan to conquer TB needs cash and commitment

Jens Seeberg is the principal investigator and Rajib Dasgupta is the chair of the scientific advisory board of Antimicrobial resistance and labor migration across healthcare boundaries in Northern South Asia (AMR@LAB), funded by the Novo Nordisk Fonden.

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

– ref. India planned to eliminate TB by 2025, but it’s estimated half a million Indians are still dying from it every year – https://theconversation.com/india-planned-to-eliminate-tb-by-2025-but-its-estimated-half-a-million-indians-are-still-dying-from-it-every-year-180029

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harriette Richards, Research Associate, Cultural Studies, The University of Melbourne

In the course of her Met Gala attendances, Kim Kardashian has worn floral Givenchy (attending for the first time in 2013, pregnant with her first child), silver Balmain, gold Versace and latex “wet look” Thierry Mugler.

Last year, following the separation from her husband Ye (Kanye West) she wore head-to-toe black Balenciaga, an ensemble that rendered her a shadow, a silhouette, recognisable only by the familiar shape of her body.

This year, on the arm of new beau Pete Davidson, Kardashian has once again altered her body and reimagined her look. She lost 7kg in a matter of weeks and spent 14 hours bleaching her hair blonde: all to fit into a delicate, beaded Jean Louis dress, originally drawn by a young Bob Mackie and once worn by Marilyn Monroe.

This is not just any vintage gown. This is a piece of American history. Monroe wore the dress in 1962 for the 45th birthday celebrations for President John F. Kennedy, where she famously serenaded him with a sultry rendition of Happy Birthday, Mr President.

The ethics of wearing such a fragile piece of material history are one thing. The logistics required – beyond the crash diet and hair dye – are quite another.

The elaborate nature of this performance attests to Kardashian’s commitment to the event, her dedication to fashion and her desire to attract maximum attention.

Read more:
Why we all need to keep up with the Kardashians

Constructing an image

Vogue reports Kardashian wore the dress for only a matter of minutes, just as she walked the red carpet.

She was ushered out of her hotel through barricades against the paparazzi, fitted into the gown by a conservationist from the Ripley’s Believe It or Not Museum (who purchased the dress at auction in 2016 for a record US$4.8 million) in a small fitting room outside the museum, escorted up the steps by Davidson and hovering security guards, and then changed into a replica of the dress (also owned by Ripley’s) for the remainder of the party.

The interview in Vogue illustrates her reverence for Monroe, especially in that gown and at that historic event.

Monroe and Kardashian share much in common. They have recognisable bodies; famous for their sex appeal. They are petite women, 1.68cm and 1.57cm respectively. Both have been married three times. Kardashian, at 41, is just five years older than Monroe when she died, only three months after serenading the President at Madison Square Garden.

They are also vastly different. Monroe, a silver screen icon; an actor of remarkable talent. Kardashian, a reality TV star and icon of the modern celebrity age; famous for being famous.

Read more:
Would Marilyn Monroe’s career (and life) have been different if she had acted on stage?

By wearing this dress, radically (unhealthily) transforming her body into an approximation of Monroe, Kardashian attempted to reiterate their likeness.

Just as she has morphed herself into a facsimile of Cher or Naomi Campbell, or transformed her style under the tutelage of her ex-husband, Ye: Kardashian is nothing if not a fashion chameleon.

Reshaping the nature of celebrity

Kardashian is also irrefutably herself. She has constructed her own form of celebrity and has fought fiercely for its legitimacy. Her inclusion on the Met Gala guest list in the first place – initially only as Kanye’s plus-one – was hard won.

So, what does it mean for this peerless contemporary celebrity to appropriate the dress, the aura, the mythology of an historical Hollywood icon?

Some commentary has suggested Kardashian would be lucky to have half the charisma, the magic of Monroe. This may be correct, yet it also somewhat misses the point.

Regardless of your thoughts about Kardashian, it is undeniable she is an astute (albeit frequently tone deaf) business woman, who has made a living from her body and her ability to modify it.

For better or worse, she has altered the nature of celebrity and, along with her sisters, has reshaped American beauty ideals.

Of course, she is also a billionaire: one of the only women in the world with the financial means and cultural capital to acquire the rights to wear such a gown – extracted from its usual home in a temperature-controlled vault.

Other commentary decried the extravagance of the Met Gala itself. These familiar dissenting voices were perhaps louder than ever this year, as the event celebrated the so-called Gilded Age in American history (1870-1900) at a moment when political, economic, environmental and health crises the world over continue to proliferate.

However, that is the joy of fashion. It reminds us that, regardless of our differences, we are all bodies wrapped in garments. So, as women’s rights are brutally peeled back across the United States, I couldn’t help but revel in the extreme extravagance for a moment and savour this elaborate celebration of an iconic American woman.

Read more:
US supreme court poised to overturn abortion law: what the leaked opinion says and what happens next

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

– ref. Kim Kardashian’s Met Gala Marilyn moment shows how good she is at her job: being famous – https://theconversation.com/kim-kardashians-met-gala-marilyn-moment-shows-how-good-she-is-at-her-job-being-famous-182332

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Polari, Clinical Associate Professor, The University of Melbourne

It is common to hear people use stigmatising, discriminatory and hurtful labels such as “psycho”, “schizo” or “totally bipolar”. Others might minimise conditions by saying they too are “a bit OCD” because they value structure and organisation.

This kind of everyday use of pseudo-clinical terms can be upsetting for young people who are struggling with these conditions. Worse still, it can stop them seeking care.

Clinical terms can have the same effect. For our recent research, we worked with young patients, carers and clinicians to develop new mental health vocabulary that carries less stigma, but remains accurate.

Read more:
Youth anxiety and depression are at record levels. Mental health hubs could be the answer

Mental health labels have pros and cons

Labels can provide concise and understandable descriptions of clinical and theoretical ideas. Diagnoses enable patients and health professionals to follow evidence-based advice for effective care, because best practice guidelines are available for all labelled medical conditions.

In other words, naming a condition is the first step towards identifying the best treatment available. Labels can also help create communities of individuals who share a similar clinical description, and reassure individuals they are not alone.

On the other hand, labels can result in stigma and discrimination, poor engagement with services, increased anxiety and suicidal thoughts, and poorer mental health.

The process of posing a diagnosis, may treat an individual’s strengths or their vulnerabilities as abnormalities and pathologise them.

For example, a young person’s vivid imagination and artistic drive – strengths that allow them to produce wonderful artwork – might be recast as a sign of illness. Or their experience of growing up in poverty and disadvantage, could be seen as the cause of their mental illness, rather than environmental factors that may have merely contributed to it.

As such, clinicians should seek to understand a person’s difficulties through a holistic, humanistic and psychological perspective, prior to giving them a label.

Read more:
We’ve been tracking young people’s mental health since 2006. COVID has accelerated a worrying decline

New terms, changing approaches

In the past decade, there have been efforts to improve naming of psychiatric disorders. Attempts to update psychiatric terms and make them more culturally appropriate and less stigmatising have resulted in renaming schizophrenia in several countries.

Proposed terms such as Si Jue Shi Tiao (thought and perceptual dysregulation) in Hong Kong, and Johyenonbyung (attunement disorder) in South Korea, have been suggested as alternatives that carry less stigma and allow a more positive view of psychiatry.

These new terms, however, were generated by experts in the field. Consumers and clients within the mental health system have rarely been consulted, until now.

Thoughts from those ‘at risk’

Currently, “ultra-high risk (for psychosis)”, “at-risk mental state” and “attenuated psychosis syndrome” are used to describe young people at elevated risk of developing psychosis. But these labels can be stigmatising and damaging for the young people who receive them.

At Orygen, new, less stigmatising ways to describe the “risk for psychosis” concept were co-developed with young people with lived experience of mental ill-health.

During focus groups, former patients were asked how they would like their experiences to be termed if they were believed to be at risk for developing a mental illness.

This discussion resulted in them generating new terms such as “pre-diagnosis stage”, “potential for developing a mental illness” and “disposition for developing a mental illness”.

The terms were then presented to three groups: 46 young people identified as being at risk for psychosis and currently receiving care; 24 of their caregivers; and 52 clinicians caring for young people.

Most thought these new terms were less stigmatising than the current ones. The new terms were still judged as informative and illustrative of young people’s experiences.

Patients also told us they wanted terms like these to be fully disclosed and raised early in their care. This revealed a desire of transparency when dealing with mental ill-health and clinicians.

Read more:
Budget funding for Beyond Blue and Headspace is welcome. But it may not help those who need it most

Names have power

Labels can, and should, be revisited when stigma becomes associated with them.

Co-designing new diagnostic labels with patients, their carers and clinicians is empowering for all involved. Several similar projects are underway in Italy and Japan to include a cultural perspective in renaming terms related to young people at risk of developing serious mental ill health.

We hope to integrate and use more terms generated by young people in mainstream early intervention psychiatric services. We hope this will have a meaningful impact on young people’s mental health by allowing better access to care and less stigmatisation.

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

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

– ref. Labels like ‘psycho’ or ‘schizo’ can hurt. We’ve workshopped alternative clinical terms – https://theconversation.com/labels-like-psycho-or-schizo-can-hurt-weve-workshopped-alternative-clinical-terms-179756

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Vredenburg, Senior Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Marketing, Auckland University of Technology

From Nike to Ben & Jerry’s to Airbnb, more and more brands are taking a stand on sociopolitical issues (often called brand activism), to the point it’s arguably become a component of any brand’s strategy.

But as consumers grow more accustomed to such initiatives, they’ve also become increasingly critical. While its clear many consumers want brands to take a stand, it’s not always clear what that stand should be.

So weighing in on a divisive issue becomes a calculated risk. Customers may stop buying a brand if it supports the “wrong” side of an issue, or supports it in the wrong way.

If and when this happens, the door opens for rival brands to pick up those disgruntled customers purely by remaining neutral on an issue, gaining an edge simply by observing and reacting to what the first brand has done. This raises an important question: is there a second mover advantage when it comes to brand activism?

Bystander brands and free agents

Take Gillette’s now infamous 2019 “The Best Men Can Be” campaign, for example. The short film features images of violence between boys, sexism in movies and at work, as well as news clips of the #MeToo movement. A voice asks, “Is this the best a man can get?”.

The campaign went viral with more than four million YouTube views in 48 hours, generating both high praise and intense criticism.

The day after the Gillette ad was released, rival Dollar Shave Club tweeted a short and simple message: “Welcome to the Club”. Comments on the tweet suggest it resonated with a group of consumers seemingly offended by the Gillette ad.

Our research examines what we call “bystander brands” that appeal to disaffected consumers of rival brands, who are offended by an activist stance and now “free agents” with no fixed brand allegiances.

As second movers, these bystander brands can, at least in the short term, benefit from consumer scepticism (or cynicism) fuelled by a perceived overload of brand activism – some of it inauthentic, opportunistic, imitative or just “woke washing” – which devalues such activism overall.

Baca juga:
Brand activism is moving up the supply chain — corporate accountability or commercial censorship?

Targeting disaffected customers

Our findings suggest that deliberate bystander brand strategies – waiting for a competitor to take a stand then appealing to alienated or offended customers – can appeal to certain consumers.

So far, research in this area has tended to focus on how sociopolitical brand activism works, how it can be most effective, and how companies can avoid reputational damage in the process.

Baca juga:
Consumers are wise to ‘woke washing’ – but truly ‘transformative branding’ can still make a difference

But little has been said about brands that might be drawn into activist conversations simply through their competitors taking a stand. Rivals or bystander brands could remain silent on an issue, take a neutral stance, or announce an opposing position.

Appealing to a competitor’s customers is typically very challenging, given the strong psychological “contracts” that build brand loyalty. The fallout from brand activism represents a rare situation where market share is up for grabs.

For example, following Nike’s endorsement of Colin Kaepernick with its 2018 “Dream Crazy” campaign, many enraged customers looked for alternative athletic brands. What are the likes of Adidas and Under Armour to do in this position? Surprisingly, the research has yet to address this potential market share in limbo.

The conservative consumer

We find the desire to reject sociopolitical brand activism particularly true for customers who identify as “conservative”. While boycotting brands is a bipartisan affair, the way consumers engage in boycotts differs.

Past research finds conservatives can be quicker to seek punishment and want corrective action as a result of their moral outrage. Brand rivals are sometimes even viewed with hostility as the “enemy”. Switching from an offending brand to a rival satisfies a desire for retaliation, a pattern we observed across three studies.

Baca juga:
Nike, Colin Kaepernick and the pitfalls of ‘woke’ corporate branding

Furthermore, our work finds that intentionally mentioning such rivalries in brand advertising is more effective at attracting “free agent” conservatives, relative to their more liberal counterparts, who were less concerned with brand rivalry or persuaded by advertising based on it.

Strategically, then, remaining “activism adjacent” as a bystander brand represents a critical opportunity. As other brands risk losing customers with sociopolitical platitudes or inauthentic campaigns, rivals can maintain relevance in an increasingly nuanced marketing landscape. It can be as simple as a cheeky tweet.

Para penulis tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi di luar afiliasi akademis yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Brands can be rewarded for social activism – but they also risk losing customers to apolitical rivals – https://theconversation.com/brands-can-be-rewarded-for-social-activism-but-they-also-risk-losing-customers-to-apolitical-rivals-181468

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonti Horner, Professor (Astrophysics), University of Southern Queensland

There’s something wonderful about sitting under the night sky, watching a meteor shower play out overhead. However, observers in the southern hemisphere usually get the short end of the stick, with most of the best showers strongly favouring those north of the equator.

Every May, however, southern observers get a special treat – the Eta Aquariid meteor shower. This year conditions promise to be perfect, making it the ideal opportunity for some autumnal meteor observation.

The forecast peak for this year’s Eta Aquariids falls on the morning of Saturday, May 7. The Moon is well out of the way, so meteors won’t be lost in its glare.

But what if skies are cloudy? Well, if you miss the morning of the peak, don’t panic! The Eta Aquariids are famed for their broad peak, and meteor rates typically stay high for about a week around the peak (May 4–11). So if Saturday morning is cloudy, try looking again on Sunday, or even Monday.

To get the best view, you’ll want to get up in the early hours of the morning and be well away from any bright city lights. Give your eyes time to adjust to the darkness. Take a chair or recliner to get comfortable, relax and gaze skywards.

You won’t even need a telescope! To best observe meteor showers, you’ll want to watch as wide an area of sky as possible. Using a telescope or binoculars would make the spectacle almost impossible to observe.

Dust and debris from a famous comet

As the Earth orbits the Sun, it continually runs into dust and debris from comets and asteroids. Every April and May, the Earth spends about six weeks traversing a river of dust left behind by the famous Comet 1P/Halley.

Every 76 years or so, Comet Halley swings close to the Sun. Its icy surface heats up until the ices boil off into space in a process called “sublimation”. This shrouds the comet in a gaseous coma, which is blown away from the Sun to generate the comet’s tail.

The gas escaping Halley’s surface carries dust grains, which gradually spread around the comet’s orbit. Some move ahead of the comet, while others lag behind.

Over thousands of years, the space around Halley’s orbit has become thick with dust grains. The comet is essentially moving through a dirty snowstorm of its own making! And each year, the Earth runs through that broad river of dust – giving birth to the Eta Aquariid meteor shower.

Interestingly, the Earth runs into Halley’s debris again in October, producing the famous Orionid meteor shower. But we get a better show in May each year with the Eta Aquariids, as this is when we move closer to the centre of the dust stream.

Read more:
Thousands of satellites are polluting Australian skies, and threatening ancient Indigenous astronomy practices

Where should I look?

When dust left behind by a comet smashes into Earth’s atmosphere, it becomes a spectacular fiery streak of light high in the sky. This usually happens about 80km above the ground, although the largest bits of debris can penetrate pretty deep into the atmosphere before burning up entirely.

The dust grains in a meteor shower all move around the Sun at essentially the same speed and in the same direction. This means the grains are also travelling in the same direction as they hit the Earth.

But as they move towards an observer on the ground, that observer’s perspective will make their paths diverge, and they will seem to be radiating out from a single point in the sky. That point is known as a shower’s “radiant”.

Meteors showers are named for the constellation in which their radiant lies. So the Eta Aquariids have a radiant near the star Eta Aquarii – the tenth-brightest star in Aquarius.

To see the Eta Aquariids, you’ll need to wait until the radiant rises – before that, the body of the Earth gets in the way. We’re lucky here in the southern hemisphere, as the Eta Aquariid radiant rises in the east at around 1:30 to 2am, local time.

While the Eta Aquariid meteors can be seen anywhere in the sky, the ideal place to see the best number of meteors is about 45 degrees to the left or right of the radiant itself.

Fortunately, this year we have another spectacular sight in the morning sky. Four planets – Saturn, Mars, Jupiter and Venus – will all be in a line. To see the best meteor show, look about 45 degrees to the left or right of this line of planets.

To see how the planets and radiant will rise from your location, visit the Stellarium planetarium website, set your location and move the date and time forward to the morning of May 7. If you turn on the “constellations” and “constellations art” (at the bottom of the screen), you can watch Aquarius and the planets rising from the comfort of your computer.

How many meteors should I expect to see?

The Eta Aquariids are the second best shower of the year for people in Australia. They can put on a spectacular show – but don’t expect to see meteors falling like snowflakes.

When the radiant first rises above the horizon, at around 1.30am, meteors from the shower will be few and far between. If you see five or six Eta Aquariids in that first hour, you should probably count yourself lucky.

That said, these early meteors could be really spectacular. Known as “Earth grazers”, they often seem to streak from near one horizon all the way across the sky. Earth grazers are the result of meteors hitting our atmosphere at a very shallow angle, almost edge on. They’re rare, but incredible to witness!

As the night goes on, and the radiant climbs higher into the sky, the number of meteors should increase. In the hour before dawn, you could easily see 20 to 30 meteors per hour.

Oh, and a word of warning: meteors are like buses – if you’re expecting 30 per hour, you can easily wait ten minutes and see nothing, before three come along at once. Make sure you dress warm so you can stay under the stars for at least half an hour, if not more!

Read more:
Hunting galaxies far far away – here’s how anyone can explore the universe

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

– ref. The Eta Aquariid meteor shower is set to light up the skies. Here’s how to get the best seat in the house – https://theconversation.com/the-eta-aquariid-meteor-shower-is-set-to-light-up-the-skies-heres-how-to-get-the-best-seat-in-the-house-181727

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonti Horner, Professor (Astrophysics), University of Southern Queensland

There’s something wonderful about sitting under the night sky, watching a meteor shower play out overhead. However, observers in the southern hemisphere usually get the short end of the stick, with most of the best showers strongly favouring those north of the equator.

Every May, however, southern observers get a special treat – the Eta Aquariid meteor shower. This year conditions promise to be perfect, making it the ideal opportunity for some autumnal meteor observation.

The forecast peak for this year’s Eta Aquariids falls on the morning of Saturday, May 7. The Moon is well out of the way, so meteors won’t be lost in its glare.

But what if skies are cloudy? Well, if you miss the morning of the peak, don’t panic! The Eta Aquariids are famed for their broad peak, and meteor rates typically stay high for about a week around the peak (May 4–11). So if Saturday morning is cloudy, try looking again on Sunday, or even Monday.

To get the best view, you’ll want to get up in the early hours of the morning and be well away from any bright city lights. Give your eyes time to adjust to the darkness. Take a chair or recliner to get comfortable, relax and gaze skywards.

You won’t even need a telescope! To best observe meteor showers, you’ll want to watch as wide an area of sky as possible. Using a telescope or binoculars would make the spectacle almost impossible to observe.

Dust and debris from a famous comet

As the Earth orbits the Sun, it continually runs into dust and debris from comets and asteroids. Every April and May, the Earth spends about six weeks traversing a river of dust left behind by the famous Comet 1P/Halley.

Every 76 years or so, Comet Halley swings close to the Sun. Its icy surface heats up until the ices boil off into space in a process called “sublimation”. This shrouds the comet in a gaseous coma, which is blown away from the Sun to generate the comet’s tail.

The gas escaping Halley’s surface carries dust grains, which gradually spread around the comet’s orbit. Some move ahead of the comet, while others lag behind.

Over thousands of years, the space around Halley’s orbit has become thick with dust grains. The comet is essentially moving through a dirty snowstorm of its own making! And each year, the Earth runs through that broad river of dust – giving birth to the Eta Aquariid meteor shower.

Interestingly, the Earth runs into Halley’s debris again in October, producing the famous Orionid meteor shower. But we get a better show in May each year with the Eta Aquariids, as this is when we move closer to the centre of the dust stream.

Read more:
Thousands of satellites are polluting Australian skies, and threatening ancient Indigenous astronomy practices

Where should I look?

When dust left behind by a comet smashes into Earth’s atmosphere, it becomes a spectacular fiery streak of light high in the sky. This usually happens about 80km above the ground, although the largest bits of debris can penetrate pretty deep into the atmosphere before burning up entirely.

The dust grains in a meteor shower all move around the Sun at essentially the same speed and in the same direction. This means the grains are also travelling in the same direction as they hit the Earth.

But as they move towards an observer on the ground, that observer’s perspective will make their paths diverge, and they will seem to be radiating out from a single point in the sky. That point is known as a shower’s “radiant”.

Meteors showers are named for the constellation in which their radiant lies. So the Eta Aquariids have a radiant near the star Eta Aquarii – the tenth-brightest star in Aquarius.

To see the Eta Aquariids, you’ll need to wait until the radiant rises – before that, the body of the Earth gets in the way. We’re lucky here in the southern hemisphere, as the Eta Aquariid radiant rises in the east at around 1:30 to 2am, local time.

While the Eta Aquariid meteors can be seen anywhere in the sky, the ideal place to see the best number of meteors is about 45 degrees to the left or right of the radiant itself.

Fortunately, this year we have another spectacular sight in the morning sky. Four planets – Saturn, Mars, Jupiter and Venus – will all be in a line. To see the best meteor show, look about 45 degrees to the left or right of this line of planets.

To see how the planets and radiant will rise from your location, visit the Stellarium planetarium website, set your location and move the date and time forward to the morning of May 7. If you turn on the “constellations” and “constellations art” (at the bottom of the screen), you can watch Aquarius and the planets rising from the comfort of your computer.

How many meteors should I expect to see?

The Eta Aquariids are the second best shower of the year for people in Australia. They can put on a spectacular show – but don’t expect to see meteors falling like snowflakes.

When the radiant first rises above the horizon, at around 1.30am, meteors from the shower will be few and far between. If you see five or six Eta Aquariids in that first hour, you should probably count yourself lucky.

That said, these early meteors could be really spectacular. Known as “Earth grazers”, they often seem to streak from near one horizon all the way across the sky. Earth grazers are the result of meteors hitting our atmosphere at a very shallow angle, almost edge on. They’re rare, but incredible to witness!

As the night goes on, and the radiant climbs higher into the sky, the number of meteors should increase. In the hour before dawn, you could easily see 20 to 30 meteors per hour.

Oh, and a word of warning: meteors are like buses – if you’re expecting 30 per hour, you can easily wait ten minutes and see nothing, before three come along at once. Make sure you dress warm so you can stay under the stars for at least half an hour, if not more!

Read more:
Hunting galaxies far far away – here’s how anyone can explore the universe

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

– ref. The Eta Aquariids meteor shower is set to light up the skies. Here’s how to get the best seat in the house – https://theconversation.com/the-eta-aquariids-meteor-shower-is-set-to-light-up-the-skies-heres-how-to-get-the-best-seat-in-the-house-181727

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

Josh Frydenberg says they are fake independents, John Howard called them anti-Liberal groupies, Scott Morrison points out they are only standing in Liberal seats, and that a vote for them is in fact a vote for Labor.

Well, they would say this, wouldn’t they, as the Liberal heartland fractures, risking not only the return of the government but the careers of its more promising golden sons.

It is now clear Frydenberg is fighting for his future in Kooyong, against paediatric neurologist Monique Ryan. If he loses, he won’t be the next federal Liberal leader.

There are 15 teal candidates standing against incumbents in the lower house, but the ones to watch are in the once blue ribbon Liberal seats of the comfortable middle and upper middle class: Kooyong and Goldstein in Victoria, Wentworth, North Sydney and Bradfield in New South Wales, and Curtin in Western Australia.

The challengers are all well-educated, well-connected professional women, from a range of occupations – medicine, journalism, business, finance. Tellingly, none has been a political staffer. They would bring real life experience into the parliament, and they are backed by strong community campaigns.

The strength of support for these candidates in once blue ribbon Liberal seats reveals a fracturing of the Liberal Party’s traditional support among the upper middle class. Two of the women, Allegra Spender and Kate Chaney, are from families with deep connections to the Liberal Party. Both have the name recognition an independent needs to win.

These candidates have taken the “Voices of …” identity from Cathy McGowan’s successful 2013 campaign against Sophie Mirabella in the Victorian seat of Indi. McGowan has also been an important source of advice on how to organise a community-based campaign.

But these candidates are crucially different from McGowan, who was elected to make a noise about local issues in a rural electorate, such as an unreliable mobile phone network.

The teal candidates in these once safe Liberal seats are not campaigning for better local facilities. They are arguing instead for different national policies – on climate change, a federal integrity commission and the treatment of women, with climate change the most important. These are all matters of national policy on which the federal government has failed to lead. In terms of the history of the Liberal Party, these candidates represent a significant class defection.

Read more:
Why teal independents are seeking Liberal voters and spooking Liberal MPs

In the early 20th century, when it became clear Labor aspired to be a party of government, the established middle-class parties fought off the challenge with two core arguments: poorly educated working men and trade unionists did not have the skills or experience to provide competent government; and the party of the trade unions and the working class would be a sectional party that would govern on behalf of its supporters and not of the nation as a whole.

As Labor’s electoral support grew, these two claims buoyed the political self-confidence of the social formation I call “the moral middle class”. They were the people with the education and worldly experience to manage the nation’s affairs. They had the character, integrity and perspective to put the national interest before their own.

We hear weak echoes of these arguments in Morrison’s repeated refrain that only the Coalition can be trusted with the national government’s core responsibilities of economic management and national security. But that is all they are now, the weakest of echoes that Morrison barely understands.

Read more:
Final 2019 election results: education divide explains the Coalition’s upset victory

The plausibility of the Liberals’ claims to superior competence has been undermined both by its policy failures in government since 2013 and the poor calibre and performance of many of its ministers. The team Morrison is taking to this election cannot claim to be more competent than Labor’s. It is the B team of a tired government, with some spectacularly poor performers, such as the bumbling Richard Colbeck.

Likewise, the plausibility of the Liberals’ historic claim to a commitment to national rather than sectional interests has been undermined by the government’s failure to take climate change seriously and its capture by the fossil fuel lobby, the soft corruption of its electoral bribery, its refusal of an effective federal integrity commission, and its electoral strategy of largely ignoring the interests of those unlikely to vote Liberal in favour of men in hard hats.

Morrison thinks more like a campaign director than a prime minister, so if your vote is already locked in you are of little interest, no matter what contribution your work might be making to the nation.

Since John Howard, the Liberal Party has increased its support among less well-educated, suburban and regional manual workers, and argued Labor is the party of the inner-city elites. The culture wars morphing into the climate wars were crucial in this shift, as were election campaigns focused on the hip pockets of aspirational voters.

The relationship between tertiary education and voting has shifted, with higher levels of education increasingly correlating with voting for Labor or the Greens. The cost is the increasing alienation of the well-educated elites who once gave the Liberals their support.

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

– ref. How the Liberals lost the ‘moral middle class’ – and now the teal independents may well cash in – https://theconversation.com/how-the-liberals-lost-the-moral-middle-class-and-now-the-teal-independents-may-well-cash-in-182293

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Phillips, Antarctic Scientist, Monash University

It’s hard to survive in bitterly cold Antarctica. But the ice continent is home to more than 1,100 species who have adapted to life on land and in its lakes.

Penguins are the most well known, but Antarctica’s diversity lies in its microbes and species like mosses, lichens and tardigrades (water bears). Most of these survive in the few ice-free areas on the continent.

Our new research provides a comprehensive inventory of Antarctic species. We believe it will help the 54 nations who are party to the Antarctic Treaty fulfil one of its major conservation goals – the continent-wide protection of Antarctic species.

Despite their toughness, climate change, introduced species and human activities pose growing threats for these species. We need rapid and widespread protection for Antarctica’s biodiversity if these species are to survive.

How can so many species live in Antarctica?

Our inventory found 1,142 land and lake-dwelling species currently known to live on the Antarctic continent. This list is dominated by extraordinarily resilient groups, such as lichens, mosses and invertebrates, which have evolved to thrive under extreme conditions.

These species have developed unique adaptations to live in this frozen desert, where sub-zero temperatures are the norm and life sustaining water is often locked up as ice.

Read more:
Invasive species are threatening Antarctica’s fragile ecosystems as human activity grows and the world warms

Antarctic mosses have the incredible ability to freeze and almost completely dry out. They come back to life during the brief periods when it’s warm enough for ice to melt, and take advantage of liquid water to rehydrate and grow.

Tardigrades are, famously, masters of survival. During tough times, they can enter a frozen, inactive state very close to death. Some have remained frozen for over 30 years before recovering and resuming their normal lives as if nothing happened.

And then, of course, there are the penguins. Five of the world’s 18 species live in Antarctica, with another four species on sub-Antarctic islands. These birds are built for the cold with thick layers of insulating fat and feathers to keep warm.

Isn’t Antarctica already protected?

It’s a common belief that Antarctica is already highly protected. But, in practice, this is only true for specific areas.

In 1991, the nations party to the Antarctic Treaty agreed to conserve the unique continent through the Madrid Protocol. This agreement set the foundations for a network of 75 protected areas – those with outstanding environmental, scientific, historic, aesthetic and wilderness value.

This approach aided conservation, by restricting entry and limiting what people can do, safeguarding biodiversity from issues such as wildlife disturbance, pollution, and introduction of invasive species.

But there are still large gaps, leaving many species unprotected.

One solution is already outlined in the Madrid Protocol: protect the “type localities” of each species. This refers to the location where the very first specimen of a species was collected and described. These specimens are crucial for taxonomy, as they act as the point of reference to check against unknown or ambiguous specimens.

Importantly, protecting the type locality of a species ensures any species can be protected, even if we know little about their habitat or distribution. This is especially important for Antarctic species, because for many, the type locality is the only known location for that species.

To date, however, no Antarctic protected areas have been created specifically to conserve type localities. That’s where our research can help.

What needs to be done?

The reason there are no protected areas of this kind is because we haven’t had a comprehensive list of Antarctic species and their type localities. That’s why we undertook this research.

Once we had the list, we mapped the type localities across the continent to see how many of these sites are currently protected.

We found more than a quarter (28%) of all species already have their type localities protected for other reasons, such as scientific interest or wildlife colonies. That’s because they occur in the few and small ice free areas across the continent, where most of the existing protected areas have been created. The remaining 72% of the continent’s type localities are not protected in this way.

Read more:
Record-smashing heatwaves are hitting Antarctica and the Arctic simultaneously. Here’s what’s driving them, and how they’ll impact wildlife

There is now a great opportunity to protect these localities. If we focus first on areas with multiple type localities, we could get many more species protected.

Over time, we could expand this network. We estimate another 105 new protected areas would cover all remaining type localities.

We would also need to update the plans for existing protected areas to ensure the value of type localities are taken into account.

Longer term, we will need to embrace a systematic conservation framework across Antarctica to ensure the world’s last great wilderness remains full of life.

Laura Phillips is affiliated with Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

Rachel Leihy works for the Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research and is affiliated with Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

This research was done as a part of the Australian Research Council funded program Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future, and it was also funded by an Australian Antarctic Program grant.

– ref. Toughness has limits: over 1,100 species live in Antarctica – but they’re at risk from human activity – https://theconversation.com/toughness-has-limits-over-1-100-species-live-in-antarctica-but-theyre-at-risk-from-human-activity-181258

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa French, Professor & Dean, School of Media and Communication, RMIT University

Review: Gillian Wearing Editing Life, and Cindy Sherman Untitled Film Still #58, PHOTO 2022.

As we struggle to recover from the pandemic, “Being Human” – the theme of this year’s PHOTO 2022 international biennale in Melbourne – could not be more apt.

It is a recognition that interacting with other humans is the most cherished part of being alive, and one which we enthusiastically embrace.

This biennale has a wealth of outdoor experiences as well as indoor ones. Walks around Melbourne create surprise encounters in the city (or curated walks and cycle tours are available).

There are five stands: society, nature, history, mortality and self. The latter two are keenly addressed in works by Gillian Wearing at ACMI and Cindy Sherman outside the NGV Australia.

Through their close proximity, the PHOTO 2022 curators have effectively encouraged a conversation between artists.

Both adopt impressive scale. Sherman’s work is larger than most billboards at 20 metres high. Wearing’s giant floor-to-ceiling self-portraits wrap around the gallery.

Both artists use their own bodies and faces to communicate ideas beyond the self; they connect to human experience of the world, mortality and gender.

Read more:
On the intimate and character-revealing photographs of Linda McCartney – Paul’s wife, and a stunning artist

The masks of Gillian Wearing

British conceptual artist Gillian Wearing is on display at ACMI in a survey of four works.

In Rock ‘n’ Roll 70 Wallpaper, she asked collaborators to visualise how she might look when she is 70, creating 15 different imaginary photographic portraits.

Using age rendering tools created by artificial intelligence, her possible future selves are depicted.

The images’ size, as a collage of portraits extending floor to ceiling, create a dramatic experience while also illuminating the psychological dimension of the portraits.

On walking into the gallery, you are surrounded by the many kinds of expressions and gazes of a variously aged Wearing: vulnerable, defensive, benign.

The work asks us to question how we feel about and react to ageing. How we might respond to not knowing whether an image is a truthful depiction. And, emotionally, how we contemplate the unknown factor of what time will impose upon the human form.

A second work is a deep fake video made with collaborators Wieden+Kennedy, a global advertising agency best known for working with Nike.

In the video, a digital mask of Wearing’s face is disconcertingly mapped onto the faces of others, making them eerily familiar and yet unknown. The participants were strangers responding to an advertisement to be in the film. On watching this, I am struck by the question: what is the true self? Are you obedient to social norms, a fraud, an authentic or frustrated character?

A person is more than a name, or an image. We embody and reflect experiences. Can we be who we say we are, or the persona we offer to the world?

The work creates the impression we are all one, an idea undercut by knowing that these are all constructed portraits.

There are two self-portraits, one of Wearing at age 17, and another titled Self-Portrait of Me Now in A Mask. Together, they expand Wearing’s reflection on ageing. The latter explicitly picks up on Wearing’s extensive interest in masking, self-production and personas.

As the video work in the exhibition offers:

We all wear masks. We’re all actors. When you leave your front door in the morning, you’re putting on a performance for the world.

Cindy Sherman and women photographers

Sherman’s work conveys a similar sentiment.

All representation – even of real things – is selected and presented by someone. When we are photographed, we offer an idea of ourselves to the photographer, we perform ourselves. The photographer selects the frame, the tone, the style and which image is presented.

From this point of view, an image is never neutral.

The American artist Cindy Sherman has portrayed herself in her photographs as film stars, unhappy housewives, socialites and other iconic female roles — conveying commentary on gender and celebrity.

The image outside the NGV Australia on Flinders Street, Untitled Film Still #58, is one from a series of 69 self-portraits Sherman produced from 1977-80. All in black and white, they recall scenes from movies. In most of those images, a single female figure appears as if caught spontaneously.

The monumental presence in Flinders Street is spectacular. The woman looks at something beyond the frame – as many in this series do – and the averted gaze invites the viewer to contemplate both the woman and what is just out of frame.

Read more:
Here’s looking at: Cindy Sherman ‘Head Shots’

Perhaps she is aware of being looked at or objectified, concerned with being on the street and wary of the urban environment.

Wearing edits life while Sherman imitates it, but in all of these works, the images are not about the photographers themselves as people. They draw on their experience, but are about issues such as what women face in their lives, bodies and culture, and about how visual representations construct meaning.

Gillian Wearing: Editing Life and Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Still #58 are on display until 22 May.

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

– ref. How conceptual artist Gillian Wearing and photographer Cindy Sherman make us confront our performances to the world – https://theconversation.com/how-conceptual-artist-gillian-wearing-and-photographer-cindy-sherman-make-us-confront-our-performances-to-the-world-181245

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rob Manwaring, Associate Professor, Politics and Public Policy, Flinders University

With due caution about the (in)accuracy of opinion polls, Australian voters may bring in a Labor government on May 21. If so, what kind of government would they get?

One obstacle to answering this is that the Australian Labor Party (ALP) has been out of office for so long, having lost three elections since 2013. And it’s difficult to find comparable case studies, as the social-democratic left has generally not performed well in various elections over the past decade or more.

British Labour, for example, has lost four elections since 2010, although it’s showing signs of revival with Keir Starmer at the helm.

And the tide may be turning in the left’s favour. New Zealand Labour formed a coalition government after the 2017 election and then, following an election dominated by COVID-19 in 2020, hit a record high of 50% and won a single-party majority (virtually unheard of under the proportional MMP system).

And in Germany, social democrat Olaf Scholz now leads a coalition as federal chancellor following last year’s election.

Three brands of labour

The three labour parties (British, Australian and New Zealand) have converged around some key values and ideas, indicating how the ALP might govern. There’s always likely to be a gap between rhetoric and actual policy implementation, but examination of leaders’ speeches gives some evidence about where they’re heading.

Our comparative analysis of speeches by the three party leaders indicates a “thin” labourism in relation to the parties’ social-democratic traditions.

ALP leader Anthony Albanese’s key speeches since becoming leader in 2019 show he’s big on economic growth, with an emphasis on social mobility (“aspiration”), fairness and security.

Read more:
Could the 2022 election result in a hung parliament? History shows Australians have nothing to fear from it

Along with talk of jobs and wages – essential themes for any politician wishing to appeal to working people – there’s reference to nation-building and infrastructure. These themes are reflected in the approach being taken by shadow treasurer Jim Chalmers.

Albanese, Starmer and New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern are alike in that their speeches use the words “economy”, “growth” and “jobs” more than any others – although Ardern refers to the environment noticeably more frequently than the other two.

Like Starmer and Ardern, Albanese downplays traditional social-democratic vocabulary like “progressive”, “dignity”, “solidarity” and “equality”. These leaders also lack the enthusiasm of the third-way “soft neoliberals” who governed during an era of deregulation and downsizing and yet claimed they could “modernise” social democracy, as popularised by the UK’s former prime minister Tony Blair.

Safe centrism

Today’s labour leaders do, however, steer a “safe” centrist path between being pro-growth (or at least not anti-business) and seeking gains for low- and middle-income earners.

They normally avoid explicit talk of class, redistribution and trade unions. None of them critiques the market economy – they just want it to be fairer. Once in office, the gains for workers from a labour government will be incremental, not transformational.

Read more:
How much do mainstream media matter in an election campaign? (Spoiler: more than you might think)

One can see this in New Zealand. The pandemic has meant a major detour, but Ardern hasn’t made great progress towards her avowed social goals: getting everyone into an affordable home and reducing child poverty. The gains she can cite are incremental at best.

Under Albanese, the ALP removed some politically troublesome tax policies which had originally been intended to deliver greater fairness. Labor reversed its 2019 policy positions on negative gearing, capital gains tax and franking credits. Further, Albanese announced no lift in the unemployment benefit under Labor, and also signed up to the Coalition’s stage three tax cuts – in effect removing an entire income tax bracket.

In the campaign he presents himself as professional, “reasonable” and a safe pair of hands – but above all, not radical. There have been some “gaffes and stumbles” and then a positive COVID test, but the latest polls will be reassuring.

A thin ideological platform

One impact of the pandemic has been a return of strong governmental action backed by borrowing. At the state level, premiers (notably Labor premiers) have gained credit for taking more decisive (or less indecisive) actions to prevent spread of the disease, reduce pressures on hospitals and save lives.

New Zealand Labour’s exemplary performance in disease control showed how a government can be rewarded electorally for this – although recent opinion polls show Ardern’s government could be beaten by a centre-right coalition next year.

Read more:
If Labor wins the election, he is set to become the next federal treasurer. So who is Jim Chalmers?

Ardern’s commitment to lift the minimum wage, and Starmer’s and Albanese’s focus on job security exemplify the incremental approach that’s focused on workers but doesn’t want to “frighten the horses” of capitalism.

Labour leaders have to work harder than their centre-right opponents to convince voters they’re not anti-business, that they understand macroeconomic policy and that they won’t get too tax-hungry – and yet also appeal to those for whom “economy” might mean how the next paycheck will cover rent and groceries.

Labour parties now find themselves on a thin ideological platform, anxious not to be an easy target for their pro-business opponents, especially during an election campaign.

An attenuated social-democratic value base is all that’s left now.

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

– ref. Centre-left parties worldwide have struggled to reinvent themselves – what kind of ALP is fighting this election? – https://theconversation.com/centre-left-parties-worldwide-have-struggled-to-reinvent-themselves-what-kind-of-alp-is-fighting-this-election-181601

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

The Reserve Bank, as expected, has thrown its wild card into the election campaign, but neither government nor opposition can be sure which side will be more damaged, or advantaged, by it.

Tuesday’s interest rate rise had been anticipated, was inevitable, and is the result substantially (though not entirely) of external forces. As to its timing: given the recent big inflation spike, the bank could not credibly have held off for another month.

Governor Philip Lowe made it clear the (independent) bank did not take into account any political considerations, in what is the first rise during a campaign since 2007, the election John Howard lost. “The election has no influence at all on today’s decision,” Lowe said.

But the decision feeds into this volatile battle, so will have political fallout. It will affect voters’ mood and anxieties. They may attribute blame.

It was obvious the extraordinarily low interest rates from the height of the pandemic could not and would not last. But many people (and, earlier, the Reserve Bank itself) had not expected rates to start to move up again as soon as this.

Indeed, at one stage the bank said it did not anticipate an increase before 2024. Not only was it wrong in that judgement, but some critics are now saying it should have acted earlier than now to raise rates.

The bank is starting on a road to “normalise” rates. The trouble is that the totally abnormal levels necessary in the COVID economy have become “normal” in the minds of many people, some of whom used them to bid up home prices in the expectation they would be able to afford the payments.

The rise of 25 basis points, taking the cash rate to 0.35%, was larger than the economic experts had been forecasting. But it is not just this one rise that will have an impact on voters’ calculations. Lowe made it plain more will follow, indicating the official rate will probably reach 2.5% at some unspecified time.

Some people are well placed at the moment to deal with this increase, having fixed rate mortgages and money put away. But others are not.

And, crucially, the rise comes on top of living costs going up on many other fronts. This will make it difficult for many people to cope. Some, even if not over-stretched immediately, will be anxious about how they will be placed in the future, such as when the fixed rate on their mortgage ends.

Politically, there will be cross currents.

The Essential poll, released on Tuesday, showed cost of living at the top of issues important to people “when it comes to voting at this year’s federal election”: 47% said it was “very important”, and 32% said was “important”.

Significantly, when people were asked which party they trusted more to manage various issues, on cost of living 40% said Labor, 30% said the Coalition, and 30% saw no difference.

That result is bad for the government. It suggests while polls usually give the Coalition the edge on economic management, when the economy issue gets down to the nitty gritty of household budgets, the government’s advantage may evaporate.

Morrison is also hoist on his own petard. On Monday, asked whether a rate rise would hurt the Coalition, the PM said, “It’s not about what it means for politics. I mean, sometimes you guys always think, see things, through a totally political lens.”

But of course Morrison mostly puts a political frame around economic data, extracting as much credit as possible when it’s good. So it would not be surprising if he cops a political backlash for something basically out of his control.

Morrison argued on Tuesday the government had provided a “shield” for Australians in the budget against cost of living pressures, just as it had provided them with an economic “shield” during the pandemic. (The government on Tuesday quickly announced that if re-elected it would freeze for two years the “deeming” rate used to determine the income earned by pensioners and beneficiaries from financial assets “to ensure payments are not reduced as earnings increase from deposit accounts held by social security recipients”. The PM described this as another “shield”.)

But Morrison’s basic pitch is that the rate rise reinforces the case for this not being a time for voters to risk switching to an alternative without an economic plan and an opposition leader who couldn’t remember some basic statistics.

The government will ramp up its “don’t risk it” warning even further in coming days. Negative messages are powerful in elections. But whether Morrison, himself viewed so negatively by voters, can drive this one home is another matter.

Michelle Grattan ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. View from The Hill: The interest rate rise is a political wild card – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-the-interest-rate-rise-is-a-political-wild-card-182342

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation politics team.

In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn canvass the Reserve Bank’s increase in interest rates, and which side wins or loses from it, as cost of living is centre stage in the election battle. They also discuss Anthony Albanese’s launch, and the implications for the Liberals if Josh Frydenberg were to lose in Kooyong.

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

– ref. Word from The Hill: On the rate rise, Albanese’s launch and what a Frydenberg loss would mean for the Liberals – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-on-the-rate-rise-albaneses-launch-and-what-a-frydenberg-loss-would-mean-for-the-liberals-182339

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Isaac Gross, Lecturer in Economics, Monash University

Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe has announced he will lift the cash rate for the first time in a decade, by 0.25 percentage points, taking it from 0.10% to 0.35%.

Most market economists thought the bank would raise rates, but they were divided as to whether the bank would start small by lifting rates from 0.10% to 0.25%, or jump all the way to 0.50%.

The bank seems to have been similarly torn, and come in halfway between.

Backtracking on previous guidance

The hike comes despite the bank’s previous statements that it was keen to wait until the latest data on wages, due in a fortnight (just before the election).

Last Wednesday’s inflation news, which showed prices climbing much faster than expected, forced the bank to revise its stance and act quickly to tap on the brakes.

With so-called “trimmed mean” inflation (the RBA’s preferred measure of underlying inflation) jumping to 3.7% in the March quarter, the bank’s goal of having underlying inflation back in its target band has been fulfilled.

Indeed it is now just above the target band.

The only question the Reserve Bank board had to consider was whether inflation was sustainably back in the target band, something it has said it would need to see before it lifted rates.

A sustainable increase in prices is only likely when wages are also growing faster, which is why the bank was initially planning to wait for the wage news.

But it says its business liaison program (the regular meetings it has with businesses) has told it businesses are expecting to lift wages by much more than they have so far, meaning the official wage growth figures should be about to climb.

These wage rises would be driven by the difficulty in finding staff, and greater demands from staff given what’s happening to the cost of living. Workers may be becoming keener to walk if they don’t get what they want.

Treasury analysis of Tax Office data finds that workers who move jobs typically get pay rises of 8-10%.

The higher inflation has been driven by a series of large, hopefully temporary, shocks, most notably Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Australia’s floods, and the COVID lockdowns in China.

We don’t know how long the foreign shocks will last, but if they quickly subside, it would take domestic price pressure to make high inflation sustainable.

That’s why news of higher “non-tradable” (domestically driven) inflation last Wednesday convinced the bank the current inflation is likely to last.

Non-tradable inflation was 4.2% over the year to March, suggesting much of Australia’s higher inflation was home-grown.

More hikes imminent

The Reserve Bank never lifts rates once. In his press conference, Lowe said it was “not unreasonable” to expect the cash rate to climb to 2.5%.

“How quickly we get there, and if we do get there, will be determined by how events unfold,” he added, pointing out that 2.5% is the middle of the bank’s target band for inflation, meaning that when the cash rate gets there it will be zero in inflation-adjusted terms, rather than negative as it is at the moment.

Read more:
Why the RBA should go easy on interest rate hikes: inflation may already be retreating and going too hard risks a recession

Financial markets are pricing in 2.5% by the end of the year. That implies another two percentage points of hikes over the next six meetings, something that would mean a hike each and every month for the rest of the year.

Many doubt that rates will rise that high that fast. However, over the past year the market pricing has proved more accurate than economists and the Reserve Bank’s own guidance, as the governor conceded in his press conference, describing his guidance as “embarrassing”.

A hike to 2.5% means an extra $600

“We were told thousands of Australians would die from the pandemic, hospitals will be full, that we would have double-digit unemployment, perhaps 15% unemployment, that deep scarring would last for years, perhaps decades,” he said, indicating things had turned out far better than government advisers expected.

If fully passed on, today’s increase will add around $65 to the monthly cost of servicing a $500,000 mortgage. If the cash rate gets to 2.5%, it’ll be an extra $600.

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

– ref. RBA Governor Philip Lowe is hiking interest rates. Worst case, it’ll mean an extra $600 per month on a $500,000 mortgage – https://theconversation.com/rba-governor-philip-lowe-is-hiking-interest-rates-worst-case-itll-mean-an-extra-600-per-month-on-a-500-000-mortgage-182241

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

One of the stranger things about the Reserve Bank’s announcement of why it’s lifting interest rates by 0.25 percentage points is that it suggests inflation will come down by itself.

“A further rise in inflation is expected in the near term,” the RBA says, “but as supply-side disruptions are resolved, inflation is expected to decline back towards the target range of 2-3%.

So why raise rates now, for the first time in more than a decade? The bank says it is about “withdrawing some of the extraordinary monetary support that was put in place to help the Australian economy during the pandemic”, which is fair enough.

But our latest burst of inflation is weird, and resistant to rate hikes. If the Reserve Bank isn’t careful, too many more rate hikes like this might help bring on a recession.

Labor’s Anthony Albanese is as good as correct when he says “everything is going up except your wages” – not completely correct, because wages are going up, by a minuscule 2.3% per year on the official figures; but essentially correct, because when it comes to prices, almost every single one is going up.

Every three months the Bureau of Statistics prices around 100,000 goods and services. They account for almost everything we buy, the exceptions including illegal drugs and prostitution, where pricing would be “difficult and dangerous”.

Read more:
What’s in the CPI and what does it actually measure?

Among the types of bread the bureau prices are rye, sliced white, and multigrain, from all sorts of stores in every capital city. Where the bureau doesn’t price a type of loaf, it is a fair bet its price moves in line with the loaves it does price.

Then it groups these 100,000 or so prices into “expenditure classes”, 87 of them. “Bread” is one, “breakfast cereals” is another. Furniture and rent are two others.

Rarely do the expenditure classes move as one. Typically, only 50 or so of the 87 climb in price. But in the March quarter just finished, an astounding 70 climbed in price; according to Deutsche Bank economist Phil O’Donaghoe, that’s the most ever in the 72-year history of the consumer price index.

And the prices that climbed most – by far – were the ones we had little choice but to pay.

Necessities up, treats not as much

The bureau divides the 87 classes of goods into “non-discretionary” and “discretionary”.

It classifies bread as non-discretionary, biscuits as discretionary; petrol as non-discretionary, new cars as discretionary, and so on.

In the year to March, non-discretionary inflation (the price rises we can’t avoid) was a gargantuan 6.6% – well above the official inflation rate of 5.1%, and the highest in records going back to 2006.

Discretionary inflation – the price rises on the treats we splurge on if we’ve got the money – was only 2.7%.

Not since 2011 has the gap been that wide, which makes this inflation unusual.

While price rises are extraordinarily widespread – because most things need diesel to move them, and we were hit with floods, COVID-linked supply problems and the invasion of Ukraine all at once – they don’t seem to be the result of splurging.

These price rises are more like a tax.

The usual response to the usual hike in inflation is to hike interest rates. It’s a way to take away access to cash and push up mortgage and other payments so people have less money to spend and push up prices.

But this hike in inflation is doing that by itself, as the government recognised in the budget by handing out $250 cash payments to compensate.

These price rises are like a tax

If the big price rises are beyond our control and making us poorer, hiking interest rates to make us poorer still, in the hope we will splurge less on things whose prices we can influence (and whose price rises are small) might not achieve much.

Done repeatedly, the Reserve Bank could push up interest rates because inflation is high, discover inflation is still high, push interest rates higher in response, notice inflation is still high, push interest rates even higher in response… and so on, until it had brought on a recession.

A recession is already a risk with these sorts of price rises. If big enough, they can force consumers to cut other spending to the point where the economy stagnates and creates unemployment in the face of inflation – so-called “stagflation”.

Inflation might have already fallen

Another response would have been to wait. Seriously. The floods, invasion and supply problems pushing up prices in recent months are likely to pass, pushing down inflation and pushing down a lot of prices.

It might have already happened. The oil price has fallen 11% from its peak, down 2.5% in the past two weeks alone. And inflation has fallen – on one measure, to zero.

Read more:
Inflation hits 5.1%. How long until mortgage rates climb?

The official Bureau of Statistics measure of inflation is produced every three months, but for 13 years now the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research has produced its own simpler monthly measure, which tracks the official rate pretty well.

Although missing a lot (tracking fewer types of bread, and a national rather than a city-by-city measure) it is produced quickly and more often, providing a better insight into prices in real time.

The latest, released on Monday, points to an inflation rate of zero in April.

Why rate hikes need only be mild

That’s right. While some prices continued to rise as always, enough prices fell to offset that. The high inflation in the lead-up to March stopped or paused in April.

It’s different in the United States. There, inflation is being supercharged by wage growth averaging 9% and the Federal Reserve is about to lift interest rates aggressively.

Here, wages growth in the year to December was just 2.3%. We’ll get the figures for the year to March in a fortnight. There’s a good case for future rate hikes to be a good deal less aggressive.

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

– ref. Why the RBA should go easy on interest rate hikes: inflation may already be retreating and going too hard risks a recession – https://theconversation.com/why-the-rba-should-go-easy-on-interest-rate-hikes-inflation-may-already-be-retreating-and-going-too-hard-risks-a-recession-182273

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Ascher Barnstone, Professor, Course Director Undergraduate Studies, School of Architecture, University of Technology Sydney

By 2030, climate change will make one in 25 Australian homes “uninsurable” if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated, with riverine flooding posing the greatest insurance risk, a new Climate Council analysis finds.

As a professor of architecture, I find this analysis grim, yet unsurprising. One reason is because Australian housing is largely unfit for the challenges of climate change.

In the past two years alone we’ve seen over 3,000 homes razed in the 2019-2020 megafires, and over 3,600 homes destroyed in New South Wales Northern Rivers region in the recent floods.

Building houses better at withstanding the impacts of climate change is one way we can protect ourselves in the face of future catastrophic conditions. I’m part of a research team that developed a novel, bushfire-resistant house design, which won an international award last month.

We hope its ability to withstand fires on its own will encourage owners – who would otherwise stay to defend their home – to flee when bushfires encroach. Let’s take a closer look at the risk of bushfires and why our housing design should one day become a new Australian norm.

Houses today are easy to burn

The Climate Council analysis reveals that across Australia’s 10 electorates most at risk of climate change impacts, one in seven houses will be uninsurable by 2030 under a high emissions scenario. This includes 25,801 properties (27%) in Victoria’s electorate of Nicholls, and 22,274 properties (20%) in Richmond, NSW.

Read more:
Properties under fire: why so many Australians are inadequately insured against disaster

Bushfires are among the worsening hazards causing homes to be uninsurable, and pose a particularly high risk to many thousands of homes across eastern Australia.

For example, the Climate Council found 55% of properties in the electorate of Macquarie, NSW, will be at risk of bushfires in 2030, if emissions do not fall. This jumps to 64% of properties by 2100.

The typical Australian house was not designed with bushfires in mind as most were built decades ago, before bushfire planning and construction regulations came into force.

This means they incorporate burnable materials, such as wood and plasterboard, and have features such as gutters which can trap embers.

What’s more, the gaps between building materials are often too large to keep embers out, which means spot fires can start on the inside of the house. And many houses are situated too close to fire-prone grasses and trees.

Indeed, at least 90% of houses currently in bushfire zones risk being destroyed in a bushfire.

How our new design can withstand fire

The prototypical bushfire resistant house we designed won first prize in the New Housing Division of the United States Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Solar Decathlon.

The house would be made from locally sourced, recycled steel frame. It would be mounted on reinforced concrete pilings to minimise its disturbance on the land, touching the ground only lightly. In this way, we help preserve the site’s biodiversity.

The primary building material is rammed earth – natural raw materials such as earth, chalk, lime, or gravel – which is not combustible.

The roof and some cladding are made of fire-resistant corrugated metal. Its glass facades have fire shutters made of fibre cement sheeting, a material that’s non-combustible and can be closed to seal the house.

Read more:
How a bushfire can destroy a home

Importantly, the gaps between these construction materials are 2 millimetres or less.

The sloped roofs tilt inwards to capture rainwater. And as the roofs are made of corrugated metal, which has channels in it, the house does not require gutters.

These channels guide rainwater into two open retention ponds either side of the entry, and into protected tanks beneath the house. This also helps protect the house in a bushfire, as it means the fire can’t penetrate from beneath.

When bushfires strike, the risk to life is highest when people stay and defend their homes. A design that can resist fire on its own encourages its owners to leave.

But it’s worth noting that it’s not a bunker for people to shelter in. No matter how well designed a house is, it always will be too dangerous to stay when a fire comes through, and particularly in the catastrophic and extreme fire conditions we’re increasingly experiencing.

It’s cost effective, too

The estimated cost of construction is between A$400,000 and $450,000. We deployed several strategies to keep costs down:

• the house is designed to be energy and water independent, so will not need city utilities

• it uses common construction techniques and is based on the construction industry standard for sheeting, so won’t require specialised builders and won’t waste any material

• rammed earth is relatively inexpensive because it can be sourced in many locations, often for free. We also envision using recycled materials wherever possible.

Aesthetically speaking, the design also presents an elegant domestic space, one that’s flexible enough it can easily be adapted to almost any site.

Read more:
12 simple ways you can reduce bushfire risk to older homes

The next stage is to build and test a prototype of the house so we can evaluate its performance and make improvements. We’re currently speaking to some potential funders to make this happen.

As climate change brings worsening disasters, Australia must brace for thousands more houses becoming destroyed. Innovative architecture like ours offers a chance for treasured homes and possessions to survive future catastrophes.

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

– ref. How our bushfire-proof house design could help people flee rather than risk fighting the flames – https://theconversation.com/how-our-bushfire-proof-house-design-could-help-people-flee-rather-than-risk-fighting-the-flames-182046

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jim Gillespie, Associate Professor in Health Policy, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney

Medicare has been mentioned a lot this election campaign but we’ve seen relatively few substantial policy announcements from the major parties.

Voters want improvements to Medicare and the health system. More than 13% of respondents to The Conversation’s #SetTheAgenda poll said health was one of the issues having the greatest impact on their life right now. Cost of living pressures were also a key concern.

As one respondent said, candidates should be talking about “increasing Medicare rebates to reduce gap payments” as they compete for votes, while another saw improving “rural and regional access to high quality care” as the key issue.

So what have the major parties committed to? And is this enough? We asked five experts to analyse and grade the major parties’ Medicare policies – from A for top marks to F for a failed effort.

Here are their detailed responses:

Coalition

Labor

Jim Gillespie receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Lesley Russell worked as a policy advisor on health and related issues for the federal Australian Labor Party from 2002 to 2007.

Richard Norman receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council, and the Medical Research Future Fund.

Rosemary V Calder has received funding from the Australian government Department of Health. She has worked for both the Coalition and Labor governments, and was head of the Office for the Status of Women under the Howard government.

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

– ref. How do the major parties rate on Medicare? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/how-do-the-major-parties-rate-on-medicare-we-asked-5-experts-182230

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Angus, Professor of Digital Communication, Queensland University of Technology

We’re halfway through the federal election campaign, and by now you’ve probably seen a significant amount of political advertising – much of it online.

Online political advertising is more pervasive than its analogue predecessors, it can cost less (per individual ad), be deployed more rapidly, and can be micro-targeted towards specific audiences. The targeting can be aimed at protected social categories such as race and gender, and has been used to amplify mis- and disinformation.

Unlike billboards or TV ads which can be widely seen, targeted ads may be invisible beyond their intended audience. Researchers like us try to get a handle on online advertising through projects like the Australian Ad Observatory.

Here’s what we know so far about the state of online advertising in the federal election.

Dashboards

The big dogs in the online advertising world are Meta and Google. Meta allows advertising across its products including Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Google allows ads in its search products, YouTube, and on Android.

Both companies have ad transparency dashboards. (Here is Meta’s, and here is Google’s.)

Read more:
Facebook ads have enabled discrimination based on gender, race and age. We need to know how ‘dark ads’ affect Australians

The dashboards detail the ads that are running, who is running them, and some basic aggregate data on targeting by geography, gender, and age.

For example, we can see the Australian Electoral Commission has spent around $383,000 on Facebook advertising in the past month, largely promoting election-related facts and voter registration information.

However, these tools are quite basic, and don’t offer all the information on how ads are targeted, nor insights into trends and patterns. To fill the void, researchers and journalists have been building their own.

For Facebook, we have partnered with colleagues at Ryerson University in Canada to extend their PoliDashboard to Australia. Colleagues at The University of Queensland have also released an excellent Facebook ad spend tracker.

For Google, The Guardian Australia has released data visualisations extending Google’s transparency dashboard with more useful data aggregation and geo-visual elements.

So what have we seen so far in this campaign?

Facebook focus

Analysing spending data from April 1 2022 onward, we can already see differences in how particular parties are strategically purchasing ads on platforms like Facebook.

In the lower house, the traditional Liberal stronghold of Kooyong has been an early standout. Polling suggests the incumbent, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, is under threat from “teal” independent Dr Monique Ryan.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Warring within Coalition over 2050 target brings some gold dust for ‘teals’

Since the start of April Frydenberg has tipped around $80,000 into Facebook advertising in his own seat, while Ryan has spent around $41,000. Altogether, more than twice as much has been spent in Kooyong as in the next highest spending seats of Maribyrnong, North Sydney, and Wentworth.

In the senate, Queensland has so far attracted the most spending at around $110,000. Here, a rogues’ gallery of former LNP and other far-right candidates are scrambling to win one of the two seats that are likely to be up for grabs.

Beyond Facebook

We have also seen significant spending from political parties and registered organisations on Google ads. The total amount has been $17.7 million since 15 November 2021, of which United Australia Party’s ads account for a whopping $15 million, which includes many YouTube ads.

Over the past two years, Google has also introduced more advertising products and services in Android mobile games.

Ads in this gaming ecosystem are very difficult to track. The Google transparency dashboard doens’t include data that enables us to determine which ads appear in this specific ecosystem. However, users of our Ad Observatory have sent us photos and screenshots of UAP ads appearing within their mobile games. It seems some of that $15 million is finding its way into mobile in-game advertising.

Perhaps the most creative use of online advertising so far has come from Stephen Bates, the Greens candidate for Brisbane. Bates took out a series of ads on Grindr, a social networking and dating app for gay, bi, trans, and queer people, and men who have sex with men.

Bates’ tongue-in-cheek ads have slogans like “Spice up Canberra with a third” and “The best parliaments are hung”. Unlike other sometimes cringe-worthy attempts by politicians to appeal to specific communities, Bates has leaned into his own identity as an openly gay candidate in selecting this platform and developing ads using Grindr’s platform-specific vernacular.

What about Twitter, TikTok and the other big platforms?

Meanwhile, if you spend your time on Twitter or TikTok you won’t see any political advertising during this campaign.

Why not? It’s complicated, but it mainly goes back to the Cambridge Analytica scandal of the mid 2010s, in which personal profile data of more than 50 million Facebook users was siphoned from the platform and used to build a profiling tool that was then leveraged for political gain.

Mass-scale online ad microtargeting using this tool may have played a significant role in the success of Donald Trump’s 2016 US presidential campaign and the Brexit “leave” campaign the same year.

These events thrust online political advertising into the spotlight. In its wake lawmakers and civil society groups around the globe have steadily ramped up pressure on the platforms regarding online political advertising.

Read more:
Twitter is banning political ads – but the real battle for democracy is with Facebook and Google

In response, Twitter and TikTok have decided political ads aren’t worth the trouble, and banned them outright.

Facebook instead shut access to third-party data gathering – which had the side effect of making genuine, ethical scholarly research more difficult.

Does any of this work, though?

Online political advertising is but one part of an overall campaign, but it can be used to tip the balance in one party’s favour.

In other countries, online advertising may focus on encouraging supporters to vote and discouraging opponents. However, Australia’s compulsory voting means campaigns are likely to focus on persuading a relatively small number of swinging voters. This is turn means specific highly contested seats (such as Kooyong) may play an amplified role within our elections.

One thing to watch in this election and beyond are the growing calls for truth in political advertising. Online election advertising will only become more intense, so we will need ways to reign in mis- and disinformation.

Read more:
Few restrictions, no spending limit, and almost no oversight: welcome to political advertising in Australia

Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Discovery Projects DP200100519 ‘Using machine vision to explore Instagram’s everyday promotional cultures’, DP200101317 ‘Evaluating the Challenge of ‘Fake News’ and Other Malinformation’, and Linkage Project LP190101051 ‘Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media’. He is an Associate Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society, CE200100005.

Axel Bruns receives funding from the Australian Research Council through Discovery project DP200101317 Evaluating the Challenge of ‘Fake News’ and Other Malinformation, Laureate Fellowship FL210100051 Dynamics of Partisanship and Polarisation in Online Public Debate, and the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S).

Ehsan Dehghan receives funding from the Digital Society Project, for a project to create a dataset of candidates in the 2022 Australian federal elections

– ref. Facebook, YouTube, games & Grindr: what we know about online ads in the federal election – https://theconversation.com/facebook-youtube-games-and-grindr-what-we-know-about-online-ads-in-the-federal-election-182137

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amy Nethery, Senior Lecturer in Politics and Policy Studies, Deakin University

One of the Morrison government’s biggest challenges in this election campaign is the rise of the “teals”, a group of 22 independents who have received funding from Climate 200.

Running on platforms of science-backed climate action, integrity reform and real progress on gender equality, they are challenging Liberal MPs in urban electorates traditionally considered Liberal party heartland.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, who is facing a serious threat from medical doctor Monique Ryan in the inner-Melbourne seat of Kooyong, has repeatedly used the term “fake” independents to describe these challengers. Former Prime Minister John Howard has similarly accused them of “posing” as independents. Prime Minister Scott Morrison says they are the “voices of” Labor and the Greens.

Read more:
Below the Line: Former independent Cathy McGowan hits back at John Howard’s ‘anti-Liberal groupies’ jibe – podcast

This strategy of playing the woman and not the ball – as well as the advertising spend in electorates like Kooyong – suggests the Liberals are concerned. They have some good reasons to be.

The teal appeal

It is certainly true these independents are running in Liberal, not Labor seats. But as Climate 200 convener Simon Holmes a Court argues, they are running with the goal of dislodging government MPs (which of course, happen to be Liberal).

It is worth noting that not all the Climate 200-backed independents use the teal colour for their campaigns. North Sydney’s Kylea Tink uses pink, while Indi’s Helen Haines uses orange. Yet, the choice of teal for most campaigns – a colour between blue and green – does give an indication of their message to the moderate Liberal voters they are trying to attract.

The teal independents are speaking directly to moderate Liberal constituents who are frustrated with the (blue) Liberal Party’s positioning on social and environmental issues.

While these same voters may never vote Labor or Greens, many are alienated by Morrison and his government, particularly on climate change and women’s issues.

It is significant that 19 of the 22 Climate 200 candidates are women, all of whom have had highly successful careers in their own right. High-profile candidates include Ryan (Kooyong), a professor and head of neurology at the Royal Children’s Hospital, Zoe Daniel (Goldstein) a former ABC foreign correspondent, and Allegra Spender (Wentworth) the chief executive of the Australian Business and Community Network.

The teal independents are not political staffers taking the next step towards inevitable political careers. These are professional women making a radical sideways leap because, they say, this is what the times require. It’s a compelling story.

Climate 200

To receive Climate 200 funding and campaign support, teal independents have agreed to run on three key policies – climate, integrity, and gender equality – and have demonstrated they have the backing of their communities.

Holmes a Court has been at pains to argue his organisation is not a political party – it is a platform to support independents based on their commitment to the three main goals. As he told the National Press Club in February:

The movement is nothing like a party – there is no hierarchy, no leader, no head office. No coordinated policy platforms.

Policy comparison

So, how do the independent candidates measure against the Coalition, Labor and the Greens? I have reviewed the policy platforms of Spender, Ryan and Daniel as three of the most high profile new independent candidates.

On climate, Spender proposes to cut emissions by “at least 50% by 2030”, while Daniel and Ryan want 60% by 2030, and Daniel adds an 80% renewable energy target by 2030.

Read more:
What’s going on with independent candidates and the federal election?

These targets are more ambitious than both the Coalition and Labor, but less ambitious than the Greens, who want 75% emissions reduction by 2030, and net zero by 2035.

On integrity in politics, all three independents variously demand a “strong”, “effective” anti-corruption body “with teeth”, greater transparency around tax-payer funded programs, reform of political campaign funding rules, and truth in political advertising. These policies largely align with Labor’s integrity policies, which include a National Anti-Corruption Commission by the end of 2022. They also align with those of the Greens, who add a role for the National Audit Office to audit all government programs.

Finally, all the teal independents have a range of policies to increase women’s safety and equality, including childcare, parental leave, better pay for caring professions, women’s rights at work and programs to end family violence. On these policies, and simply the way they recognise the urgency of this issue, the independents are also more aligned with Labor and the Greens than the Coalition.

The Liberal response

The Liberal Party is certainly taking this challenge seriously, diverting campaign funding and resources to seats that it would otherwise consider safe.

For example, it is spending up big on nine-metre-wide billboards to “sandbag” Kooyong, a seat that has been held by that party since Federation. In Wentworth, Dave Sharma’s posters use the same colour teal as his challenger, Spender, and have no Liberal party logo. In Goldstein, a stoush over election signs ended up in court.

Another way they are taking it seriously is by trying to undermine the authenticity of the independents. If voters are seeking something different from the major parties, what better way to sway them away from changing their vote than suggesting their local independent isn’t really independent?

On this, the Liberal party is incorrect. It is better to locate these candidates within a lineage of independents that includes Tony Windsor, Cathy McGowan, and Kerryn Phelps. Their goal is to use the power of the cross-benches in a hung parliament. A Labor majority would, in fact, diminish their power if elected, and work against their ambitions.

The power of independents

Major polls are suggesting a tight race between the major parties. A hung parliament, with independents holding the balance of power, is a highly possible outcome post May 21.

Despite fear campaigns from both major parties, it is worth remembering that Australia’s last minority government was one of the most successful, passing more legislation than any modern government before or since.

Windsor and Rob Oakeshott have both said they decided to support Julia Gillard’s government because she treated them with respect during negotiations in 2013, unlike her opponent, Tony Abbott.

This is a lesson that the Liberal party would do well to heed again.

Read more:
Could the 2022 election result in a hung parliament? History shows Australians have nothing to fear from it

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

– ref. Why teal independents are seeking Liberal voters and spooking Liberal MPs – https://theconversation.com/why-teal-independents-are-seeking-liberal-voters-and-spooking-liberal-mps-182133

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Martin, Senior Research Fellow, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

“Going home” is a classic metaphor for exiting prison. But most people exiting prison in Australia either expect to be homeless, or don’t know where they will be staying when released.

Our recent research for AHURI (the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute) shows post-release housing assistance is a potentially powerful lever in arresting the imprisonment–homelessness cycle.

We found ex-prisoners who get public housing have significantly better criminal justice outcomes than those who receive private rental assistance only.

The benefit, in dollars terms, of public housing outweighs the cost.

Read more:
How we can put a stop to the revolving door between homelessness and imprisonment

The imprisonment-homelessness connection

There is strong evidence linking imprisonment and homelessness. Post-release homelessness and unstable housing is a predictor of reincarceration. And prior imprisonment is a known predictor of homelessness. It is a vicious cycle.

People in prison often contend with:

• mental health conditions (40%)
• cognitive disability (33%)
• problematic alcohol or other drug use (up to 66%) and
• past homelessness (33%).

People with such complex support needs are often deemed “too difficult” for community-based support services and so end up entangled in the criminal justice system.

Also, prisons are themselves places of stress and suffering. So people leaving prison a high-needs group for housing assistance and support.

There are about 43,000 people in prison in Australia. Over the year there will be even more prison releases (because some people exit and enter multiple times).

According to the latest published data:

• only 46% of releasees expect to go to their own home (owned or rented) on release
• more expect to be in short-term or emergency accommodation (44%) or sleeping rough (2%), or
• they don’t know where they will stay.

Ex-prisoners are the fastest growing client group for Australia’s Specialist Homelessness Services.

Over the past decade, imprisonment rates in Australia have been rising.

Meanwhile, funding for social housing – public housing provided by state governments, and the community housing provided by non-profit community organisations – has been declining in real terms.

We must turn both those trends around.

The difference public housing makes

In our research, we investigated the effect of public housing on post-release pathways. We analysed data about a sample of people with complex support needs who had been in prison in NSW.

The de-identified data show peoples’ contacts before and after prison with various NSW government agencies, including criminal justice institutions and DCJ Housing, the state public housing provider.

We compared 623 people who received a public housing tenancy at some point after prison with a similar number of people who were eligible for public housing but received private rental assistance only (such as bond money).

On a range of measures, the public housing group had better criminal justice outcomes.

The charts below compare the number of police incidents for each group.

The first chart shows recorded police incidents for the private rental assistance group, which gradually rose over the period for which we have data.

The second chart shows police incidents for the public housing group: they also had a rising trend, until they received public housing (year 0 on the x-axis), after which police incidents went down 8.9% per year.

For the housed group:

• court appearances were down 7.6% per year
• proven offences (being found guilty of something at trial) were down 7.6% per year
• time in custody was down 11.2% per year
• time on supervised orders (court orders served in the community, including parole) initially increased, then went down 7.8% per year
• justice costs per person, following an initial decrease of A$4,996, went down a further $2,040 per year per person.

When we put a dollar value on these benefits, providing a public housing tenancy is less costly than paying Rent Assistance in private rental (net benefit $5,000) or assisting through Specialist Homelessness Services (net benefit $35,000).

Unfortunately, public housing is in very short supply.

For our public housing group, the average time between release and public housing was five years. Others are never housed.

Post-release pathways are fraught

We interviewed corrections officers, reintegration support workers, housing workers, and people who had been in prison, across three states.

They were unanimous: there is a dearth of housing options for people exiting prison.

A Tasmanian ex-prisoner, who lived in a roof-top tent on his car on release, said:

You basically get kicked out the door and kicked in the guts and they say, ‘Go do whatever you need to do, see ya’.

Planning for release is often last-minute. A NSW reintegration support worker told us:

It’s not coordinated. We’ll get a prison ringing up on the day of release saying, ‘Can you pick this woman up?’ on the day of release, when they knew it was coming months in advance. There’s no planning.

A housing worker in Victoria described those next steps as a series of unstable, short-term arrangements, beset by pitfalls:

They could easily be waiting a couple of years, realistically. And for them that’s a long time, and so far off in the distance it’s difficult to conceive of. And a long time in which for things could go wrong in their lives – to be homeless or back in prison, all sorts of things … What they do in the meantime: they couch surf, stay with family, stay in motels, stay in cars/stolen cars, stay with friends, sleep rough, all those things.

A Tasmanian corrections officer told us:

People want to come back to custody because they’ve then got a roof over their head. They don’t have to worry; they’re getting fed, they can stay warm.

It’s not just about housing support

Community sector organisations specialising in supporting people in contact with the criminal justice system, such as the Community Restorative Centre (CRC) in NSW, do extraordinary work providing services and support that aim to break entrenched cycles of disadvantage and imprisonment.

However, this sector’s funding has been turbulent, marked by short-term programs.

In another project by some members of this research team, we saw the difference CRC made to 275 of its clients over a number of years. This evaluation found supported clients had 63% fewer custody episodes than a comparison group – a net cost saving to government of $10-16 million.

These support services would be even more effective if clients had more stable housing. As it is, specialist alcohol and other drug case workers are often spending their time dealing with clients’ housing crises.

Secure, affordable public housing is an anchor for people exiting prison as they work to build lives outside of the criminal justice system.

It is also a stable base from which to receive and engage with support services. It pays to invest in both.

Read more:
Caring for ex-prisoners under the NDIS would save money and lives

Chris Martin receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) and the ACOSS-UNSW Poverty and Inequality Partnership. This story is part of The Conversation’s Breaking the Cycle series, which is about escaping cycles of disadvantage. It is supported by a philanthropic grant from the Paul Ramsay Foundation.

Eileen Baldry receives funding from the ARC, the NHMRC and AHURI. She is affiliated with the Justice Reform Initiative, the NSW Ageing and Disability Commission, the Noffs Foundation and the Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

Patrick Burton is funded by the AHURI and is affiliated with the Justice Reform Initiative, Brain Injury Association of Tasmania and JusTas.

Rebecca Reeve receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation. She is affiliated with the Social Outcomes Lab.

Rob White receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute and is affiliated with the Justice Reform Initiative, Just Desserts (drug court support group) and the Brain Injury Association of Tasmania (criminal justice steering group).

Ruth McCausland receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation, NHMRC, AHURI and Australian Partnership Prevention Centre, and is affiliated with the Community Restorative Centre.

Stuart Thomas receives funding from the ARC, Department of Health, National Mental Health Commission, Mental Health Victoria, Mind Australia, AHURI and ACEM. He is affiliated with the Law Enforcement and Mental Health Special Interest Group of the Global Law Enforcement and Public Health Association. .

– ref. Giving ex-prisoners public housing cuts crime and re-incarceration – and saves money – https://theconversation.com/giving-ex-prisoners-public-housing-cuts-crime-and-re-incarceration-and-saves-money-180027

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wilfred Yang Wang, Lecturer in Media & Communications Studies, The University of Melbourne

Concerns about fake news and misinformation spreading on social media among Chinese communities are once again emerging, as they were during the 2019 election campaign.

There have been allegations against both major parties in recent weeks. The ABC reported a group of Liberal Party supporters systematically spread fake news about prominent Labor supporters in the Chinese community via WeChat.

At the same time, a local Labor branch in Queensland is accused of spreading a conspiracy meme against Gladys Liu, the incumbent Liberal candidate of the ultra-marginal Victorian seat of Chisholm and the first ethnic Chinese woman to serve in the House of Representatives.

Liu’s supporters are also not free from controversy. Some were accused of spreading misinformation in Chinese communities during the last federal election.

Drawing on my research on Chinese language media and Chinese communities in Australia, here are are some ways we can tackle fake news in non-English speaking communities.

Fake news and CALD Australians

Fake news is often systematically arranged by interest groups (such as political organisations) to achieve certain goals. This contradicts the popular assumption it’s fragmented or emerges spontaneously.

While every section of the society is subjected to fake news, culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities are often more vulnerable to misinformation.

Read more:
Here’s how disinformation could disrupt the Australian election

It is widely acknowledged mainstream media outlets don’t do a good job of representing or communicating with CALD communities.

We know CALD communities often seek online and informal sources for information – as they did during COVID.

The information gap

Poor English skills can also make it hard for some non-English speakers to access credible authority sources directly.

Even when media outlets translate certain articles, they can lack the nuance to convey critical details.

My as yet unpublished research suggests many Chinese Australians who cannot understand English haven’t been accessing public health messages from government or health authorities during the COVID pandemic.

Instead, they tend to rely on community leaders, friends and family members to make sense of important public messaging, via apps like WhatsApp and WeChat.

This aligns with previous findings that Chinese Australians trust political news on Chinese platforms such as WeChat not because of the platform itself, but because of the people from the similar cultural and linguistic communities they share the platform with.

My research

In my as yet unpublished research, only two of 31 older Chinese Australians I interviewed read English mainstream Australians news daily. The vast majority obtained most of their news about COVID from instant messenger groups, social media platforms such as WeChat, and from sources outside Australia.

None of the participants were aware of the Chinese language version of ABC news. Only around half of the interviewees knew about the SBS Mandarin and Cantonese services, but none were aware of their social media accounts and smartphone apps.

The participants’ feedback shows the failure of mainstream media to engage non-English speaking CALD Australians. This can create a breeding ground for the spread of misinformation, which can potentially distort voters’ decisions and influence election outcomes.

What can we do?

There are several things governments should do in collaboration with communities to help CALD Australians gain direct access to credible news and to become more aware of misinformation.

Promote the ABC and SBS

Both federal and state governments should promote ABC and SBS in-language news, such as SBS Mandarin, especially during important public conversations such as pandemic management and elections.

A good example is SBS’s COVID myth buster portal, which is available in more than 60 languages. This collates culturally appropriate news and information to help CALD communities stay informed about COVID, and serves as a good model for other important topics and events such as an election.

Promoting the ABC and SBS requires a strategic approach. Instead of governments running a mass campaign, which can be costly and ineffective, a better approach would be to co-develop resources and information with the language teams of the respective services. These resources can then be promoted to community leaders for them to disseminate to their communities.

More resources and training should be devoted to support journalists’ cultural literacy.

Digital literacy training

Federal and state governments do fund digital literacy initiatives, such as BeConnected.

But typically these don’t have specific resources and training to support CALD communities.

They’re often too general and lack systematic programs to help CALD Australians learn how to download, operate, and access credible news and information and to improve their political literacy.

Read more:
Chinese social media platform WeChat could be a key battleground in the federal election

Tackling fake news in CALD communities requires partnerships between governments, community groups and media organisations.

There should be a particular focus on digital literacy of community leaders.

And more resources should be devoted to improve journalists’ cultural competence in communicating with CALD Australians.

Wilfred Yang Wang is affiliated with the Centre for Holistic Health, Victorian Multicultural Commission and Knox City Council’s Multicultural Advisory Committee on voluntary basis.

– ref. How can we stop fake election news spreading in migrant communities? – https://theconversation.com/how-can-we-stop-fake-election-news-spreading-in-migrant-communities-182119