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

University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and Director of the Institute for Governance & Policy Analysis Dr Laine Dare discuss the week in politics.

This week the pair discuss the outcome of the US elections, an explosive episode of Four Corners calling into question the culture of parliament house and Joel Fitzgibbon’s departure from the front bench. They also discuss the recently announced appointment of a special investigator, who will prepare a brief into allegations of war crimes committed by Australia soldiers in Afghanistan.

– ref. VIDEO: Michelle Grattan on Joel Fitzgibbon, Christian Porter and Australia special forces in Afghanistan – https://theconversation.com/video-michelle-grattan-on-joel-fitzgibbon-christian-porter-and-australia-special-forces-in-afghanistan-150076

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leon Gettler, PhD Candidate, RMIT University

Telstra’s plan to split into three entities is the most radical shake-up of Australia’s largest telecommunications company since the Howard government began privatising it in 1997.

But as David Hetherington, a senior fellow at progressive think tank Per Capita, has suggested, it comes 23 years too late.

In privatising a public monopoly – controlling the copper wires and other infrastructure – the Howard government created a perfect storm for imperfect competition. It meant Telsta competed against other telcos to which it provided critical infrastructure services – hardly an ideal situation.

With the politicised and botched roll-out of the National Broadband Network, the market has become even murkier.

The NBN model championed by the Labor governments of Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard – fully replacing the century-old copper-wire network connecting the nation’s homes and business with fibre optics – might have corrected the mistakes made in in the way Telstra was privatised, putting monopoly infrastructure back in public hands.

But the Abbott government neutered that by choosing to roll out a half-baked NBN, and now the federal government has its eyes on privatising the broadband network.

This is why Telstra wants to split into three entities. It is positioning to acquire NBN, putting itself back in a monopoly position. That might be good for shareholders. But it’s not good for competition and consumers.

Strategic sense – for shareholders

Telstra’s plan is this. Its existing infrastructure business, InfraCo, will continue to operate Telstra’s fixed-line assets. Mobile infrastructure will be hived off to form InfraCo Towers. The third entity, ServeCo, will own the active parts of Telstra’s mobile phone business, which includes its radio access network and spectrum assets that maintain the network’s coverage.

This makes strategic sense for Telstra.

In 2010, to make way for the National Broadband Network, the Australian parliament passed legislation requiring Telstra to split its retail and wholesale division, and sell its copper and cable broadband networks to the government-owned NBN Co.

Analysts at the time said it was a plus for Telstra as it would get a return on its ageing assets and free it up to focus on higher-margin revenue businesses such as its Next G Mobile and HFC Cable networks.

But it has lost an estimated A$3.5 billion in earnings from giving up control of its network.

Positioning for a privatised NBN

The split will give Telstra the opportunity to acquire a privatised NBN.

Federal Communications Minister Paul Fletcher last year ruled out any chance of Telstra acquiring the NBN. No entity delivering retail telecommunications could own the broadband network, he said. “NBN cannot be owned by a vertically integrated telco.”

The restructure answers that: it won’t be Telstra buying NBN but InfraCo.

As Telstra’s chief financial officer, Vicki Brady, told Dow Jones:

The government has indicated at some point their intention is to privatise NBN and we wanted to make sure we had the optionality at that point to make sure we are at the table.

Analysts now say Telstra is the most appropriate partner for a privatised NBN. It could potentially deliver a better service for NBN customers and create a more efficient Telstra.

Read more: What should be done with the NBN in the long run?

Certainly NBN Co isn’t doing very well. In February it reported a half-year net loss after tax of A$2.8 billion, adding to consecutive multibillion-dollar losses. It latest half-year result was a big improvement, but still a A$648 million loss.

The NBN’s biggest problem is that its creation has been muddied by politics.

The Abbott Coalition government (elected in 2013) proclaimed it could deliver the NBN for less money by cutting back from a purely fibre-optic network to a mixed bag of fibre, coaxial cable, a century-old copper network and second-rate technology.

Read more: Around 50% of homes in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane have the oldest NBN technology

It promised to deliver the NBN for $29.5 billion, rather the estimated A$50 billion for Labor’s plan. The result: costs have blown out fixing outdated technology and NBN Co has delivered an inferior product.

The NBN is way over budget, over deadline and is delivering a product that’s slow and expensive. Global rankings of download speeds show Australia in 62nd place. That puts it just ahead of Montenegro, Kosovo and Kazakhstan, but trailing Uruguay.

Cause for competition scepticism

Telstra’s chief executive, Andy Penn, says the split will improve efficiency post-NBN and ensure customers will get the best possible service. But its track record doesn’t necessarily support such confidence.

In 2011, for example, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission expressed concern about Telstra’s insufficient assurance its wholesale business would treat its former retail arm and its competitors equally during the rollout of the broadband network. The competition watchdog green-lighted the separation plan only after Telstra made changes including on pricing transparency.

Certainly Telstra is a technology leader in areas like mobile. But its customer service is notoriously bad. Just try calling Telstra. It is not an easy company to deal with compared to some of its competitors in the mobile and broadband retail market.

There should be scepticism about how effective the restructure will be and whether it can deliver a better NBN.

Private monopolies are rarely the best solution for customers.

– ref. Split decision: Telstra’s carve-up plan comes 23 years too late for competition and customers – https://theconversation.com/split-decision-telstras-carve-up-plan-comes-23-years-too-late-for-competition-and-customers-149991

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vanessa Pirotta, Wildlife scientist, Macquarie University

In recent months, three humpback whales were spotted in the East Alligator River in the Northern Territory’s Kakadu National Park. Contrary to its name, the river is full of not alligators but crocodiles. And its shallow waters are no place for a whale the size of a bus.

It was the first time humpback whales had been recorded in the river, and the story made international headlines. In recent days, one whale was spotted near the mouth of the river and scientists are watching it closely.

The whales’ strange detour threw up many questions. How did they end up in the river? What would they eat? Would they get stuck on the muddy river bank?

And of course, there was one big question I was repeatedly asked: in an encounter between a crocodile and a humpback whale, which animal would win?

Scientists double-take

The humpback whales were first spotted in September this year by marine ecologist Jason Fowler and fellow scientists, during a fishing trip. Fowler told the ABC:

I noticed a big spout, a big blow on the horizon and I thought that’s a big dolphin … We were madly arguing with each other about what we were actually seeing. After four hours of raging debate we agreed we were looking at humpback whales in a river.

The whales had swum about 20 kilometres upstream. Fowler photographed the humpback whales’ dorsal fins as evidence, and reported the unusual sighting to authorities and scientists.

Thankfully, two whales returned to sea on their own, leaving just one in need of help. There was concern it might become stranded in the shallow, murky tidal waters. If this happened, it might be attacked by crocodiles – more on this in a minute.

Read more: I measure whales with drones to find out if they’re fat enough to breed

Experts considered a variety of tactics to encourage the whale back out to sea. These included physical barriers such as nets or boats, and playing the sounds of killer whales – known predators of humpback whales.

But none of these these options was needed. After 17 days, the last whale swam back to sea on its own.

The whale that spent two weeks in the river has recently returned and been spotted swimming around the mouth of the river. It appears to have lost weight – most likely the result of migration. It is now being monitored nearby in Van Diemen Gulf.

Questions are now being raised about the health of the animal, and why it has not headed south for Antarctic feedings waters.

So why were whales in the river?

The whales are part of Australia’s west coast humpback whale population, which each year travels from cold feeding waters off Antarctica to warm waters in the Kimberley to breed.

There are various theories as to why they swam into the East Alligator River. Humpback whales are extremely curious, and may have entered the river to explore the area.

Alternatively, they may have made a navigation error – also the possible reason behind September’s mass stranding of pilot whales in Tasmania.

And the big question – what about the crocs?

Long-term, a humpback whale’s chances of surviving in the East Alligator River are slim. The lower salinity level may cause them skin problems, and they may become stranded in the shallow waters – unable to move off the muddy bank. Here the animal might die from overheating, or its organs may be crushed by the weight of its body. Or, of course, the whale may be attacked by crocodiles.

In this case, my bet would be on the whale – if it was in relatively good condition and could swim well. Humpback whales are incredible powerful creatures. One flick of their large tail would often be enough to send a crocodile away.

Read more: Sparkling dolphins swim off our coast, but humans are threatening these natural light shows

If a croc bit a whale, their teeth would likely penetrate the whale’s skin and thick blubber. But it would take a lot more to do serious harm. Whale skin has been shown to heal after traumatic events, including the case of a humpback whale cut by a boat propeller in Sydney 20 years ago. Dubbed Bladerunner, it survived but still bears deep scars.

What next?

The whale sighting continues to fascinate experts. Scientists are hoping to take poo samples from the whale in Van Diemen Gulf, and could also collect whale snot to learn more about its health. However, the best case scenario would be to see the whale swim willingly to offshore waters.

This unusual tale will no doubt go down in Australian whale history. If nothing else, it reminds us of the vulnerability – and resilience – of these marine giants.

The author would like to thank Northern Territory Government whale expert Dr Carol Palmer for her assistance with this article.

– ref. Humpback whales have been spotted in a Kakadu river. So in a fight with a crocodile, who would win? – https://theconversation.com/humpback-whales-have-been-spotted-in-a-kakadu-river-so-in-a-fight-with-a-crocodile-who-would-win-149897

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine (Kate) Power, Lecturer in Management, School of Business, The University of Queensland

Joe Biden made history this month as the first ever US president-elect to thank trans people in his victory speech. During his campaign, Biden promised to end legal discrimination against trans people, which had worsened under Donald Trump.

Globally, trans people are confronted by discrimination and violence, and young trans people experience depression at four times the rate of their peers.

Read more: Half of transgender and non-binary people hide their identity at work in fear of discrimination – here’s how you can help

However, while many universities have support services for lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) students, trans students often lack tailored support. Comparable data for universities aren’t available, but one Australian study found trans high school students lacking support from teachers are almost four times more likely to drop out than students receiving support.

How can university teachers support trans students? And what can researchers do to respect trans colleagues?

We can start with three simple steps.

1. Educate ourselves

Transgender (aka trans) is an umbrella term for various identity categories. Recognising this diversity is a critical starting point.

Read more: We need to count LGBTI communities in the next census – here’s why

Critically evaluating information about trans people is equally important.

Media interest in trans people has soared during the 2000s. Time magazine called 2014 “the transgender tipping point”.

Many of us know of Caitlyn Jenner’s Vanity Fair 2015 cover story and debates over trans people’s access to public bathrooms. Some might also have followed the online “turf war” between trans and cisgender (non-trans) feminists, prompted by J.K. Rowling’s tweets.

Television portrayals of trans people are becoming more diverse and can be educational and entertaining. Some media depictions have even improved attitudes towards trans people.

Read more: Explainer: what does it mean to be ‘cisgender’?

Yet, “any press” isn’t “good press” for transgender people.

Increased visibility brings increased vulnerability. Traditional media often reinforce negative stereotypes, entrenching ridicule, sensationalism and regulation of trans people. Mass media still demean and exploit trans people, reducing the complexity of their lives to a single dominant narrative of “transitioning”.

These misrepresentations are amplified online.

A recent study of 10 million online posts related to transgender issues found more than one in ten contain anti-trans messaging. Over 10% of Twitter comments about being transgender are abusive. Two-thirds of Facebook’s “high-performing content on trans topics” comes from right-leaning and anti-LGBTQ sources.

Academics need to choose our sources carefully. We should also take advantage of high-value opportunities to learn more about trans people’s experiences, such as Trans Awareness Week, November 13-19, and the international Transgender Day of Remembrance, November 20, which commemorates trans lives lost to violence.

2. Educate our students

With Australian universities facing deep financial problems, new courses are unlikely to be launched for some time. And, with fees for humanities subjects set to double, even students interested in transgender perspectives might not take such a course, if offered.

Including trans content in non-specialist courses is more feasible and impactful.

My forthcoming research shows a required first-year undergraduate research and writing course — taught through the lens of transgender studies — achieved the same learning outcomes as other iterations of the course. But students in the “transgender studies” class also learned about transgender people and their experiences:

[…] the topics discussed in class surrounding transgender people and the community itself was something that I had never really exposed myself to; actually learn and understand the issues that run in society about transgender people and how they face multiple obstacles along the way is very interesting.

Several students reported using this new knowledge outside class:

I am able to provide more insightful, unbiased comments when discussing about the LGBT community outside of class – oftentimes, the comments I use work to defend the community against uneducated people in this area.

Other simple ways educators can “transgender” classes are:

• select readings that address trans people’s experiences

• mention transgender examples in discussions about diverse topics

• use appropriate terminology about sex and gender

• invite students to identify their preferred name and pronoun usage.

3. Take care

Cisgender researchers can support transgender colleagues by recognising the ethical and relational aspects of citing their work.

Read more: Penny Whetton: A pioneering climate scientist skilled in the art of life

Although not always apparent on the surface of academic publications, an “ethics of care” characterises the field of trans studies.

First, avoid “outing” trans scholars via pronouns, dead names or other language that might reveal their identity.

Second, consider carefully whether or not to reference trans people’s experiences, to avoid inadvertently exposing them to harm.

Further basic guidelines for research writing are:

• use the term “transgender” only as an adjective, without the suffix “ed”

• use the acronym “LGBTQ” only when trans people are involved

• label all gender identities, not only those of LGBTQ individuals.

Finally, although the grammar buffs among us may hate it, it’s time to embrace the singular “they”. Merriam-Webster’s 2019 Word of the Year is controversial. But the Oxford English Dictionary traces it back to 1375. It has the American Psychological Association stamp of approval.

Read more: For linguists, it was the decade of the pronoun

As one copy editor with The New Yorker explains:

There are these two questions right now about pronouns and one of them is about grammatical number, and the other is gender. […] what I think is that you should call people what they want to be called.

Cisgender university teachers and researchers who take these steps can make a world of difference for our trans students and colleagues.

– ref. Supporting trans people: 3 simple things teachers and researchers can do – https://theconversation.com/supporting-trans-people-3-simple-things-teachers-and-researchers-can-do-149832

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jenny Graves, Distinguished Professor of Genetics and Vice Chancellor’s Fellow, La Trobe University

Moles live a tough life underground. As a result, they’ve evolved helpful adaptations, such as excavator-like claws. Female moles in particular have evolved an unusual strategy: high levels of the male hormone testosterone.

This is an evolutionary advantage. It produces stronger muscles for digging and foraging and aggression, to help mothers defend themselves and their young.

Most of the year, female moles look and behave like males. They have masculinised genitals, with no external vagina and an enlarged clitoris. But when mating season comes, testosterone levels drop and a vagina is formed; mating and birth follow.

How they accomplish this remained a mystery for a long time. But now, the complete sequencing of the mole genome has revealed the genetic tweaks underpinning this strange cycle in female moles, by which reproductive organs (gonads) develop and hormones are produced.

Gonads and hormones

Male development in humans and other mammals is determined by chromosomes (the structures within cells of living things that contain genes). Females have two copies of an X chromosome. Males have a single X and a male-specific Y chromosome.

In XY embryos, a gene called SRY on the Y chromosome intervenes in a network of another 60 genes. SRY turns on testis genes and turns off ovary genes to transform a ridge of cells into a testis.

In the testis, one cell type becomes specialised to make sperm and another (Leydig cells) makes male hormones, including testosterone.

Read more: What makes you a man or a woman? Geneticist Jenny Graves explains

Testosterone is responsible for the most visible sex differences in males, such as bigger bodies, more muscle mass, male genitalia and more aggression. In XX embryos, an alternate pathway makes an ovary, which pumps out oestrogen.

So in mammals, different genetic pathways drive the same patch of embryonic tissue to become either an ovary or a testis. Generally, there’s no in-between.

But female moles have a patch of testis within their ovaries.

An evolutionary balancing act

In 1993, it was discovered the basis for “intersex development” in female moles is a gonad with both ovarian and testicular tissue.

Like other male mammals, male moles have a Y chromosome, bearing the SRY gene which directs testis formation.

Also like other mammals, female moles lack a Y chromosome. Curiously, however, instead of developing ovaries they develop “ovotestes”, with ovarian tissue at one end and testicular tissue at the other.

The ovarian tissue makes eggs and gets larger during breeding, then regresses. The testicular tissue is full of Leydig cells that make testosterone (but not sperm). Outside of breeding season, it expands until it’s larger than the ovarian end.

This explains why female moles have male-like genitalia, and are muscular and aggressive. But how does a patch of testis form in female moles if they have no SRY gene to trigger the process?

Genetic tweaks behind ovotestis development

To look for genetic changes that could allow this to happen, a global consortium of scientists sequenced the entire mole genome.

They found no differences between moles and other mammals in the protein products of the 60-odd genes involved in sex determination. However, they did discover mutations that altered the regulation of two of these genes in female moles.

One difference was found in the DNA sequences of a gene that’s vital for developing testes: FGF9. In all mammals, this gene switches on testis growth in XY embryos and inhibits genes that determine ovarian development.

In females of other mammals, the FGF9 gene is turned off in the absence of SRY, but in female moles it stays on.

Genome sequencing revealed why: a big patch of DNA just upstream of FGF9 is flipped around in moles. This inversion removes the usual control sequences from the gene, allowing it to stay on for longer in XX embryos.

The other gene impacted in female moles is CYP17A1, which codes for an enzyme that’s key to producing androgens (male hormones). In female moles, this gene and its surrounds have two extra copies, which increases testosterone output.

To show these genomic changes were indeed responsible for masculinising female moles, the researchers introduced them into mice, causing sex reversal and higher testosterone levels.

It’s important to note these evolutionary changes are in the regulation of gene activity, rather than in the regulation of protein products — which could compromise other normal functions.

Read more: What we learn from a fish that can change sex in just 10 days

What this means for sex and evolution

Since mammals, including humans, develop as either males or females, we’ve been accustomed to regard testis or ovary development in the embryo as strict alternatives, depending on an on/off switch (the presence or absence of the Y chromosome and SRY gene).

But we now know there’s a complex gene network full of checks and balances that is the basis for alternate pathways of sexual development.

There are many studies of human babies born with mutations in one of these genes. This points to a more complex picture of the wiring behind the “switch” responsible for variation in human sexual development.

There are fierce females in other mammal species, too. Female spotted hyenas are bigger and more dominant than males and have male-like genitalia. We don’t know how this change works at a genetic level.

The downside of this is that mating is tricky. Cubs are birthed through the female’s narrow phallus. Mothers and/or cubs often die during this fraught process.

So while these larger, more aggressive females rule the hyena roost and get first pick at meals, like most things in nature, it seems this comes at a price.

Big fierce female moles and hyenas remind us the natural world, as always, features unique evolutionary differences — enlightening our view on human variation.

– ref. Fierce female moles have male-like hormones and genitals. We now know how this happens. – https://theconversation.com/fierce-female-moles-have-male-like-hormones-and-genitals-we-now-know-how-this-happens-149174

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Herrero, Research Leader in Virology and Infectious Disease, Griffith University

In the time of COVID, greetings are no longer by handshakes, hugs or kisses on the cheek. An “elbow bump” is the preferred pandemic greeting.

Although COVID transmission in Australia is now minimal and restrictions are easing, keeping 1.5 metres apart from people outside your household is still strongly encouraged — meaning hugging is therefore discouraged.

Some people who live alone may by now have gone months without touching or hugging another person.

While avoiding close contact with others is one of the key measures to prevent virus spread, the irony is we probably need a hug more in 2020 than ever before. So how dangerous is a hug really in the time of COVID?

Human contact is important

Our first contact in life is essentially the hug; newborn babies are constantly cradled, nursed and cuddled.

We are principally social creatures, and this need for human contact continues into childhood and adulthood.

Culturally, hugging plays an important role as an affectionate greeting in many countries.

Its value is clearly demonstrated in European countries such as Italy, France and Spain, where hugging is common. It’s little surprise many Europeans are finding the new way of living with COVID hard to accept.

Australians, too, tend to hug members of their families and close social circle.

Read more: Nice to meet you, now back off! How to socially distance without seeming rude

While the act of hugging may give us a feeling of happiness and security, there’s actually science behind the benefits of hugging for our mental health and well-being.

Research shows skin-to-skin contact from birth enables babies’ early ability to develop feelings and social skills, and reduces stress for both mother and baby.

When we hug someone, a hormone called oxytocin is released. This “cuddle hormone” fosters bonding, reduces stress and can lower blood pressure.

Positive touch, such as hugging, also releases the “happy chemical” serotonin. Low levels of serotonin, and of a related happy hormone called dopamine, can be associated with depression, anxiety and poor mental health.

“Touch deprivation” has become a serious consequence from the pandemic and may have affected many people’s mental health, particularly those living alone or in unstable relationships.

Not only are we missing out on the positive emotions a hug can provide, but we’re not getting the biochemical and physiological benefits either.

Can you hug wisely?

SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, is primarily spread from person to person through respiratory droplets emitted when an infectious person coughs, sneezes, talks or even breathes.

We know we can contract COVID through close contact with an infected person, so the act itself is quite risky if you, or the person you’re hugging, is infectious. But we can’t always identify who has the virus, making the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via a hug difficult to assess.

Given people who are asymptomatic and presymptomatic have been shown to be able to spread the virus, a simple hug may have serious consequences.

Ultimately, all experts agree: best practice is to avoid physical contact with people not in your own household.

If you absolutely must hug someone, there are some things you should keep in mind to minimise the risk of transmission.

Read more: Miss hugs? Touch forms bonds and boosts immune systems. Here’s how to cope without it during coronavirus

6 tips to limit the risk

• Don’t hug anyone showing COVID symptoms, or if you have any symptoms

• don’t hug a vulnerable person (the elderly, immunocompromised and those with other medical conditions), as these people will be at higher risk if they contract COVID

• when hugging another healthy person, avoid pressing your cheeks together; instead, turn your face in the opposite direction

• wear a mask

• hold your breath if you can. That way you can avoid transmitting or inhaling infectious respiratory droplets during the hug

• wash or sanitise your hands before and after the hug

Other ways to get your warm and fuzzies

Contact with animals can provide similar mental health benefits to hugging, and also increases oxytocin. These are among the reasons pet therapy is used for people who are elderly or sick.

Maintaining social interactions and connections in the absence of direct touch can help too. Virtual gatherings can have a positive effect on people’s well-being during isolation, and now we’re increasingly able to gather in person again.

The pandemic has made us all realise how important social and physical contact can be to our health and well-being. While we may now appreciate the humble hug more than we did before, for the time being it’s safer to seek emotional support in other ways.

Read more: ‘Kissing can be dangerous’: how old advice for TB seems strangely familiar today

– ref. No, a hug isn’t COVID-safe. But if you have to do it, here’s what to keep in mind – https://theconversation.com/no-a-hug-isnt-covid-safe-but-if-you-have-to-do-it-heres-what-to-keep-in-mind-149159

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Grose, Climate Projections Scientist, CSIRO

The Australian State of the Climate 2020 report reveals a picture of long-term climate trends and climate variability.

The biennial climate snapshot draws on the latest observations and climate research from the marine, atmospheric and terrestrial monitoring programs at CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology.

We are all still dealing with the lasting impacts of Australia’s hottest and driest year on record in 2019. It was a year of intensifying drought over eastern Australia, high temperature records and the devastating bushfires of summer 2019–2020.

State of the Climate 2020 puts all these events into the longer-term context of climate change trends and key climate drivers.

Australia’s hottest year on record

Using the best available data, the Bureau of Meteorology estimates Australia has warmed on average by 1.44℃ (±0.24℃) between 1910 and 2019.

Read more: Weather bureau says hottest, driest year on record led to extreme bushfire season

Global rates of warming are lower due to the inclusion of the oceans in the global average, with the oceans experiencing a relatively slower rate of warming than continental areas.

The long-term warming trend increases the likelihood of extreme events beyond our historical experience. In 2019, natural climate phenomena that drive our weather, including a strong Indian Ocean Dipole and a negative Southern Annular Mode, added to the local warming trend, setting a record for the Australian average annual temperature.

This annual temperature for Australia is similar to what we might expect in an average year if the world reaches the +1.5℃ warming since pre-industrial times.

The long-term warming trend is also increasing the frequency of extreme warm days. We have seen a rise in the number of days when the Australian average temperature is within the top 1% ever recorded.

The long-term temperature trend is also lowering the frequency of cooler years. The annual mean temperatures of Australia in the seven years from 2013 to 2019 all rank in the nine warmest years since national records began in 1910.

Barring unpredictable events such as major volcanic eruptions, projections show Australia’s average temperature of 2020-2040 is very likely to be warmer than the average in 2000-2020, as the climate system continues to warm in response to greenhouse gases that are already in the atmosphere.

What’s driving our changing climate?

Australia’s Cape Grim atmosphere monitoring station, in north-west Tasmania, is one of several critical global observing sites for detecting changes in the gas concentrations that make up our atmosphere.

The increase in greenhouse gas concentrations has been the predominant cause of global climate warming over the last 70 years.

In 2019 the global average CO₂ concentration reached 410ppm, while all greenhouse gases combined reached 508ppm CO₂-equivalent, levels not seen for at least 2 million years.

Emissions of CO₂ from burning fossil fuels are the major source of the increase, followed by emissions from changes to land use. While the ocean and land have absorbed more than half the extra CO₂ emitted, the rest remains in the atmosphere.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has reduced fossil fuel CO₂ emissions in many countries, including Australia.

Over the first three months of 2020, global CO₂ emissions declined by 8% compared to the same three months in 2019. But CO₂ is still increasing in the atmosphere.

Recent reductions in emissions due to COVID-19 have only marginally slowed the current rate of CO₂ accumulation in the atmosphere, and are barely distinguishable from natural variability in the records at sites such as Cape Grim.

Oceans warming and sea levels rising

Similar to surface temperatures over the continents, the State of the Climate report says sea surface temperatures are showing a warming trend that is contributing to an increase in marine heatwaves and the risk of coral bleaching.

Important changes are also happening below the ocean’s surface. The global oceans have a much higher heat capacity than either the land surface or atmosphere. This means they can absorb much more of the additional energy from the enhanced greenhouse effect, while warming at a relatively slower rate.

Currently, the oceans are absorbing around 90% of the excess energy in the Earth system associated with increasing greenhouse gases. The related increase in total heat content provides another important way to monitor long-term global warming.

Warmer temperatures cause the water in our global oceans to expand. This expansion, combined with the additional water from melting ice sheets and glaciers, is causing sea levels to rise.

Total global average sea level has now risen around 25cm since 1880, with half of this rise occurring since 1970. The rate of sea level rise varies around Australia, with larger increases observed in the north and the southeast.

The oceans are also acidifying due to changes in the chemistry of seawater, related to excess CO₂. The effect of this pH change is detectable in areas such as the Great Barrier Reef and the Southern Ocean.

The wetter and drier parts of Australia

The State of the Climate report shows the trend in recent decades has been for less rainfall over much of southern and eastern Australia, particularly in the cooler months of the year.

The longer-term drying trend is likely to continue, particularly in the southwest and southeast of the continent. Most areas of northern Australia have had an increase in average rainfall since the 1970s.

Natural variability has always been, and will continue to be, part of Australia’s rainfall patterns.

Fire seasons: longer and more intense

The fires of 2019-20 are still very much on everyone’s minds, and the State of the Climate report puts the weather component of fire risk into a longer-term perspective.

Since the middle of last century there has been a significant increase in extreme fire weather days, and longer fire seasons across many parts of Australia, especially in southern Australia.

The 2020 report highlights many recent changes in Australia’s climate. Most are expected to continue and include:

• warmer air and sea temperatures
• increased numbers of very hot days
• ongoing sea level rise
• more periods of dangerous fire weather
• longer and warmer marine heatwaves.

When these extremes occur consecutively within a short timeframe of each other, or when multiple types of extreme events coincide, the impacts can compound in severity.

Read more: Earth may temporarily pass dangerous 1.5℃ warming limit by 2024, major new report says

Understanding these climate risks and how they might affect us will help to ensure the future well-being of our Australian communities, ecosystems and economy.

State of the Climate 2020 can be read on either the Bureau of Meteorology or CSIRO websites. The online report includes an extensive list of references and useful links.

– ref. Prepare for hotter days, says the State of the Climate 2020 report for Australia – https://theconversation.com/prepare-for-hotter-days-says-the-state-of-the-climate-2020-report-for-australia-149430

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rong Zhu, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Flinders University

Low-achieving 12-13 year old students can significantly bring down the academic achievement of the rest of their class. But this negative effect largely vanishes in the next two years.

These are the findings of our recent study published in Journal of Population Economics, in which we examined the influence of low-achieving students on their peers in classrooms in China.

How we conducted our study

Social interactions at school are believed to be crucial for student learning. Peer influence among students is an important factor to consider for educators, governments and parents.

We used data from the China Education Panel Survey conducted during the 2013-14 academic year. The survey is a large-scale, nationally representative survey of students in China’s middle schools. Middle school in China comes after primary school, from grade 7 to grade 9 (the last year before high school).

The survey aims to explain the links between students’ educational outcomes and multiple contexts of family, school processes, communities and the social structure of the school or classroom.

In each school covered in the survey, two classes were randomly chosen from grade 7 (when students are around 12-13 years old) and the grade 9 (when students are around 14-15). Then all students in the selected classes were surveyed to answer questions related to their learning, as well as some background information.

Read more: Don’t blame the teacher: student results are (mostly) out of their hands

We considered students who repeated a grade in primary school as low achievers. These students had a proven track record of academic failure. In our data, about 13% of students repeated a grade in primary school.

We based students’ academic performance on each middle school’s administrative records of mid-term test scores in three compulsory subjects (Chinese, maths and English).

When compared with non-repeaters, repeaters had lower performance in Chinese, maths and English.

To identify a relationship between low-achieving students and the academic outcomes of their classmates, we focused on middle schools that randomly assigned students to classrooms in grade 7 and did not rearrange classes in grades 8 and 9.

With random student assignment, we ruled out the possibility that peers in the classroom were the choice of students, their parents or schools.

We compared the academic performance of regular students (non repeaters) from two classes in the same grade of the same school. These students shared similar characteristics and the same school environment, except for one thing. One class had a relatively higher proportion of repeaters than the other, due to the randomness of classroom assignment.

What we found

We found the share of grade repeaters in the classroom reduced the academic performance of regular students in grade 7. This peer influence was largest when it came to Chinese and smallest with maths.

The negative effects were larger in big classrooms than in small ones. The lower performing but non-repeating (regular) students in grade 7 were most affected by repeaters. But there was no effect on high-performing students.

Repeaters did not affect their peers’ learning efforts nor the teachers’ pedagogical practices. Instead, they appeared to reduce the results of their peers in grade 7 in two ways.

First, in classes with repeaters, regular students were less likely to make friends with their high-ability and/or diligent classmates. Second, the classroom environments were worse with repeaters present. For example, regular students were less likely to report they regularly participated in class/school activities and that their classmates were friendly if more repeaters were in the class.

Read more: Should you hold your child back from starting school? Research shows it has little effect on their maths and reading skills

The story for students in grade 9 was different. We found no evidence the achievement of regular grade 9 students was impaired by their low-achieving classmates.

As classroom composition stayed unchanged from grade 7 to grade 9, our theory is that short-term negative peer effects found in grade 7 can fade out in the longer run.

By grade 9, academic pressure was piling on ahead of high school entrance exams.

We attributed the changes in the peer effects of low achievers from grade 7 to grade 9 to the adjustments students made to their friendship groups, and the change in the class learning environment under an enhanced level of academic stress.

Repeaters no longer seemed to affect their classmates’ propensity to form friendships with top academic performers and hardworking classmates in grade 9. Relative to repeaters in grade 7, repeaters in grade 9 reported improved class learning environment.

Implications for Australia

Low-achieving classmates in Australia may have a similar effect on their peers. But unlike in our study for China, the effect may not vanish in the year before high school. Australian students, culturally, generally do not face the same level of stress as in China — where academic success is a priority.

Read more: Why some migrant school students do better than their local peers (they’re not ‘just smarter’)

The most important implication for Australian educators is to provide more support to struggling students, which will likely lift the performance of their peers. Economists call this the “social multiplier” effect.

The benefits for low-achieving students will subsequently affect the performance of their peers, which in turn will affect the achievement of the former, and so on. Academic support such as a special tutoring program targeted towards struggling students can generate considerable educational benefits.

– ref. Our study in China found struggling students can bring down the rest of the class – https://theconversation.com/our-study-in-china-found-struggling-students-can-bring-down-the-rest-of-the-class-149917

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

As well as restoring dignity to the Oval Office, another thing that will definitely change under a Biden presidency is US policy on the environment.

Biden’s plan for “a clean energy revolution and environmental justice” includes rejoining the Paris Agreement on climate change, investing US$1.7 trillion over the next decade in “green energy” and achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

The European Union, Japan and South Korea have already committed to net-zero emissions by 2050. China’s net-zero target is 2060.

With the US joining the fold, the implications for Australia could be huge.

A carbon border tax coming our way

The European Union has already announced it is considering a carbon border tax. This would involve a tariff on imports from nations without a price on carbon similar to the EU. The tax would be proportional to the amount of carbon in the imports, and the relative difference in carbon price between Europe and the exporting country.

This type of “border-adjustment tax” is a smart way to protect domestic industries from being undercut by imports from other countries without a price on carbon.

It would make eminent sense for the US to follow suit.

If so, things get really interesting. It would make it even harder to challenge such taxes as trade restriction before the World Trade Organisation. It would trigger similar moves by other countries serious about tackling climate change.

In fact, a border-adjustment tax is part of the US Climate Leadership Council’s proposal for a carbon tax and “carbon dividend” – returning all net proceeds from the tax to the American people on an equal basis.

The carbon dividend idea is supported by 28 Nobel laureate economists, 15 former chairs of the US Council of Economic Advisers and four former chairs of the US Federal Reserve.

Read more: Carbon pricing works: the largest-ever study puts it beyond doubt

If most of our trading partners have a carbon border tax, then Australia will have a price on carbon – but only for exporters.

This will leave the Australian economy in a bad position.

With no price on carbon internally, no serious commitment to reduce emissions and a vain hope of meeting our Paris Agreement obligations through dodgy accounting tricks and future technological innovation, the rest of the world is unlikely to be sympathetic.

A carbon dividend plan

There is a better way: enact our own carbon dividend plan.

In 2018 law professor Rosalind Dixon and I proposed a plan for Australia similar to the Climate Leadership Council’s.

Our Australian Carbon Dividend Plan involves a price on carbon, with the proceeds being distributed as a dividend, equally, to every voting-age citizen.

It also allows for a border-adjustment rebate so exporters aren’t penalised if exporting to countries without a similar price on carbon.

This would see a significant majority of Australians better off financially, and help protect exporters while we transition to cleaner energy.

It would also give the Australian government’s Technology Investment Roadmap (to accelerate the use of low-emissions technology) a chance of working. It makes no sense to bet on technology without using market price mechanisms to give suppliers and buyers the right incentives to develop and adopt the most effective technologies.

Read more: Fresh thinking: the carbon tax that would leave households better off

The world is acting

The US just voted out a climate denier and is now going to take serious action on the environment. Europe is already acting. Our major trading partners are committing to net-zero targets.

We’re getting left behind. This ought to provide the impetus to put Australia’s climate wars to rest. Even if our elected politicians don’t want to do something serious about climate change for moral reasons, they now have little choice but to do so for practical reasons.

And that involves a price on carbon. Otherwise our exporters are going to be seriously disadvantaged. Using the proceeds from that price on carbon to pay it back as a dividend to Australians would be the best way forward.

– ref. Vital Signs: a global carbon price could soon be a reality – Australia should prepare – https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-a-global-carbon-price-could-soon-be-a-reality-australia-should-prepare-149919

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Woinarski, Professor (conservation biology), Charles Darwin University

I’ve spent more of my life with pardalotes than with most other acquaintances. They are an obscure and odd group of four species of small (thumb-sized) birds. They have little public profile, not helped by the awkward name. But they are quintessentially Australian, occurring nowhere else in the world.

As a boy, I chanced upon a pair of spotted pardalotes absorbed in constructing their nesting burrow, a long tunnel built into sloping earth. Whereas most of the bird’s existence is spent unobtrusively foraging in tree canopies, breeding brings this species to ground, allowing close observation by the quiet but inquisitive.

My interest was piqued by their industry, beauty and strangeness. The intrigue stayed with me. Later, a PhD in zoology gave me the opportunity to study them in detail.

Zoology is a charmed science. Done well, it offers the opportunity to escape the conformity, constraints and solipsism of the human perspective; to see and understand the world from the viewpoint of another species, where space and time differ from the conventions we’re used to, where the ordering of the importance of things is upended, where the elements of the natural world come far more sharply into focus and are imbued with different meanings.

Zoology offers shapeshifting, and the insights that brings. It has taken me to many places, and a little into the diverse minds of remarkable species.

Adapted to Australia

So, for three years I counted pardalotes at many sites and over many seasons. I caught thousands, with wire-mesh traps at the entrances to their nesting burrows or with carefully sited nets. I attached leg bands, so I knew the identity of individuals. I weighed them, measured them, described the subtle variations in their jewelled plumage.

I watched them for hours every day, recording the plant species in which they foraged, and what they ate. I studied their mating habits, their breeding success, their territoriality and social interactions.

I reassessed my initial conception of them as placid when my experiments with a dummy pardalote and call playback triggered violent responses from territorial males. I examined the factors that threatened and killed them.

I found that they have long adapted to and exemplify an Australian ecology: they fit this country well.

They forage almost entirely in eucalypts, that linchpin and defining feature of many Australian environments. Their diet is unusual, comprising mostly the sweet exudate (manna) that seeps from eucalypt foliage, and “lerp”, the sugary coating of psyllid insects (a specialised group of bugs) that suck the phloem (the “sap” in leaves) from within that foliage.

This strange resource is itself a consequence of the Australian environment – our soils are typically so poor that trees capturing nutrients must also drink up an excess of carbohydrates that they then need to secrete.

The eucalypt/lerp/pardalote web is an intricate arrangement, played out in kaleidoscopic variation in different regions, with varying eucalypt, psyllid and pardalote species.

Season adds a further dynamic to the landscape, with insect abundance diminishing in cooler areas in winter. So, like many other animal species, the pardalotes must track the ebb and flow of resources across our country, else stay put and starve.

Indeed, episodes of mass mortality of pardalotes have been recorded in some winters. Some populations of these tiny birds cross formidable Bass Strait each year, heading from Tasmanian summers to the mainland for winter. Others disperse in a less orderly manner, nomadically tracking more unpredictable booms and busts of psyllid populations.

Subverted pathways

Such nomadic movement is a distinctive feature of many Australian birds, contrasting markedly with the more rigid migration routes typical of birds on other continents – our seasonal patterning is more subtle and complex. But the ageless dispersal pathways of pardalotes have been subverted.

Clearing has broken the continuity of the forests, rendering dispersal more hazardous. In little more than 200 years, about 40% of their forest home has been destroyed, directly causing a comparable proportional loss in their population size.

Pardalotes have other threats. Around 10% of their habitat was burned in the severe wildfires of 2019–20, with those fires most likely killing the birds directly, and leaving burned habitat unsuitable for their re-establishment for at least several years.

Read more: A season in hell: bushfires push at least 20 threatened species closer to extinction

In many parts of their range, the manner in which we have degraded and fragmented their forest and woodland habitat has benefitted a small suite of aggressive honeyeaters – the native noisy miner and bell miner – and these miners can kill pardalotes and exclude them from otherwise suitable habitat.

Ecology is a complex network with many interwoven threads, and manipulation of one thread can have many reverberating impacts. We play with those threads at our peril.

From a human perspective, our land is mostly familiar, comforting.

But studying any Australian animal almost always leads to a crystallisation, a deciphering, of the destabilising manner in which we’ve contorted the ecology of this place. Purposefully, incompetently or haphazardly, we have rearranged the ecology of this land to suit our needs, and in doing so have rubbed away much that was integral to the existence of many other species.

We are corroding our nature and will pass on to our descendants a land that is less healthy, less diverse, less wonderful.

Notwithstanding the less secure life most pardalotes now face, three pardalote species remain reasonably abundant and widespread. However, one species – the forty-spotted pardalote (a charming and apt name) – has been particularly hard-hit by the changes we have wrought to its environment.

Now recognised as endangered, it has declined extensively and been reduced to a few populations (in beautiful locations) on some islands off Tasmania, with a fragile toehold at several small sites on the Tasmanian mainland. We still have the chance to save it, but that opportunity may soon be lost.

I no longer study pardalotes. But in the soundscape of my days, their intermittent call can still lure me away into lives that are not my own, into different ways of knowing our country and its workings, of the damage we’ve done and the healing we have yet to do.

This is an edited extract from Animals Make Us Human ed. Leah Kaminsky and Meg Keneally (Penguin Life, RRP $29.99), available now.

– ref. Friday essay: in praise of pardalotes, unique birds living in a damaged country – https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-in-praise-of-pardalotes-unique-birds-living-in-a-damaged-country-148921

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

The government is setting up a special investigator office to examine the findings of the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force’s inquiry into alleged misconduct by Australian special forces in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2016.

The office will assist and coordinate Australia Federal Police criminal investigations into matters raised by the inquiry, gather evidence and where appropriate refer briefs to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Ahead of next week’s release of the redacted report, prepared by Justice Paul Brereton, Scott Morrison warned it would be “difficult and hard news” for Australians to hear.

He said the Australian Defence Force had served in Afghanistan “with great sacrifice, while dealing with significant challenges”, and more generally, he was extremely thankful “to every Australian who chooses to put on our uniform”.

But “we need to ensure justice is truly served by illuminating the conduct of those who may have acted in ways that do not accord with the high standards expected of our ADF and those expectations held by the serving men and women of our ADF and their veterans community, past and present.”

Morrison said the conduct covered the time-span of three governments. “Our responsibility is to ensure now that we deal with this in a way that accords with our Australian standards of justice, that respects the rule of law, that provides the relevant checks and balances through this process, that upholds our values and standards and the respect that we have for our Defence Forces that they have earned and deserve”.

He stressed the need to “protect the vulnerable whether serving currently or who are in our veterans community who have no part in this ”.

While those accused of misconduct must be held accountable within the justice system and the Australian rule of law “responsibility must also be taken by leadership to ensure the lessons are learned and these events are never repeated”.

The inquiry has examined a raft of alleged breaches of the laws of armed conflict, including claims of murder and mistreatment, involving non-combatants and those being held prisoner.

The report covers not just specific allegations, but also the culture that allowed misbehaviour.

The government is also establishing a panel to oversee Defence’s broader response to the inquiry, covering cultural, organisational and leadership change. It will report to the defence minister.

Its members will be Vivienne Thom, a former inspector-general of intelligence and security, Robert Cornall, a former secretary of the attorney-general’s department, and Rufus Black, an ethicist and vice-chancellor of the University of Tasmania.

The special investigator will be a senior counsel or retired judge. The office will sit in the Home Affairs portfolio. It will have investigative staff from within the Australian Federal Police, state police experts and legal counsel.

The investigations would normally be handled by the AFP but the volume and complexity of the task is too great.

Morrison said it would operate as long as necessary.

Ben Roberts-Smith, a VC recipient in Afghanistan, who has been subject to allegations in the media, issued a statement on Thursday night.

– ref. Scott Morrison prepares Australians for shocking news out of report on misconduct in Afghanistan – https://theconversation.com/scott-morrison-prepares-australians-for-shocking-news-out-of-report-on-misconduct-in-afghanistan-150004

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

It’s unsurprising that Anthony Albanese is looking over his shoulder, because last term he was sitting on Bill Shorten’s shoulder, waiting for an opportunity to strike.

Parties might have put in place rules to prevent the rotating leadership that made our politics so dysfunctional a few years ago but those rules won’t ever be set in stone. They’ll always be vulnerable to ambition and desperation.

We’re heading towards the final parliamentary weeks of the year – cheerfully known as the “killing season” for leaders. Despite Labor’s turmoil and internal frustrations, however, Albanese will survive this one.

Nevertheless he and Labor are beset by divisions that have been on view for months but have now erupted spectacularly, with the resignation of resources spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon from the frontbench.

Most people out in the real word wouldn’t have heard of Joel. But they may have seen that TV advertisement for an insurance company in which a dog with a lightsaber demolishes half a house. Joel is waving a lightsaber; Albanese is looking at the insurance policy.

A veteran MP from the NSW coal seat of Hunter, convener of the NSW right faction, Fitzgibbon has a “project” – to bring Labor back “to what I describe as the sensible centre.”

In his mind, the “sensible centre” is where the opposition is more or less on the same page as the government on climate policy, and in better touch with, and more acutely attuned to, the needs and aspirations of the working class part of its base.

While Fitzgibbon professes loyalty to Albanese, the party remembers how in 2013 he agitated against Julia Gillard, to restore Kevin Rudd to the leadership. And he himself says, when asked whether he’d be willing to push for a change if he thought Labor in dire straights before the election, “I think senior people in the party have a responsibility to ensure that the party doesn’t go over the proverbial cliff”.

Meanwhile Fitzgibbon is certainly on a mission to get one person out of his job. He and climate spokesman Mark Butler have been at war for months, and now that he’s on the backbench, Fitzgibbon is openly declaring Butler should be shifted, in favour of someone who “doesn’t bring baggage” to the conversation.

Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Joel Fitzgibbon on Labor climate policy and leadership

Butler’s “baggage” is Labor’s climate policy of last term.

Many of Fitzgibbon’s colleagues are in a rage about him. Not least because they had hoped this week to embarrass Scott Morrison over climate policy off the back the victory of Joe Biden, who’s very forward-leaning on the issue.

But also, while accepting Labor has to pull back somewhat from its stance last term, many in the opposition want a robust stand on climate and emissions that’s firmly differentiated from the government’s.

On the other hand, Fitzgibbon has supporters for his position – including importantly – in sections of the union movement.

Albanese is somewhere in the middle, wanting to make climate an issue but not with a policy that will leave Labor vulnerable to the Coalition’s damaging attacks of 2019, and make it harder to win some regional seats.

Fitzgibbon is probably right that it would be desirable to move Butler, and Albanese has the chance to do so in the reshuffle he plans following Morrison’s pre-Christmas ministerial changes. A new face would make the transition to a revised policy easier.

But such a switch would also be fraught. Butler (who has been regarded as one of Albanese’s Praetorian guard) is very committed to his portfolio and believes a robust policy is a positive for Labor.

“Australians are ambitious for strong climate action,” he said in the wake of the Fitzgibbon comments. “Anthony Albanese is committed to climate action and the jobs it will create, and so am I as Labor’s shadow climate change and energy minister.”

While Albanese could force him to move, that would reinforce the impression of a divided house and could bring bad blood. And shifting Butler would be seen as a sign of the opposition going soft on the climate issue, angering many ALP supporters for whom climate is key.

Finally, Fitzgibbon may have given Butler the ultimate protection. If Albanese moved him – something he’d be disinclined to do against Butler’s wishes – it would look like capitulation to the dog with the lightsaber.

Meanwhile Albanese struggles to make headway against Morrison in the time of pandemic politics. This has led him to overreach: his suggestion last week that Morrison should contact Donald Trump and convey “Australia’s strong view that democratic processes must be respected” was bizarre.

This was a few days before the 45th anniversary of governor-general John Kerr’s dismissal of Gough Whitlam. Would anyone have thought the US president should have been in contact with one of the players in that crisis?

Read more: Grattan on Friday: Palace letters make great reading but leave a republic as far away as ever

Although Albanese’s leadership is under pressure it is not under threat at this point for multiple reasons.

The rules, instigated by Rudd, on leadership change don’t bring total safety but they inhibit potential challengers.

More important, at present there is no alternative candidate who, in objective terms, would have an interest in making a run. In contrast, Albanese had every incentive to stalk Shorten – there was a winnable election around the corner.

The most obvious alternative to Albanese is shadow treasurer Jim Chalmers. But it is doubtful Chalmers would do better against Morrison. He’d be a fresh face but is still inexperienced; the rigours of leadership are very different from the demands of even the toughest shadow portfolio, especially in the run up to an election..

And if the odds are on Labor going down at the election, why would Chalmers want to burn himself for the future?

There is no white knight in the wings that can transform Labor’s prospects. Its problems involve leadership but they are deeper and more complex, as the internal debate about climate policy indicates.

As a disheartened Labor party looks to 2021, it won’t see many positives. Its best course is to get its house in order and remember that, just sometimes, things change very quickly.

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Labor’s Joel Fitzgibbon waves the lightsaber – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-labors-joel-fitzgibbon-waves-the-lightsaber-149908

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bianca Fileborn, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, University of Melbourne

The introduction of ridesharing services has transformed the way many of us travel. Alongside traditional taxis, app-based ridesharing services have made it easier than ever to travel privately for those who can afford it.

But how safe are taxi and rideshare services? Anecdotally, experiences of harassment and violence appear to be common for passengers.

Last year, media reports drew attention to attempts by individuals posing as Uber drivers to lure women into their vehicles in Melbourne. Incidents of drivers sexually assaulting passengers periodically occur. Perhaps the most notorious is the case of the UK’s “Black Cab Rapist”, John Worboys, who drugged and raped at least 90 women.

Although concerns about safety and harassment have been well documented in relation to public transport, limited data are available on experiences of harassment among both drivers and passengers of taxi and rideshare services.

In 2019, rideshare service Uber released a safety report for the first time. It revealed the company had received more than 3,000 reports of sexual assault perpetrated by drivers or other passengers in the United States between 2017 and 2018.

While there is no evidence harassment and assault occur more frequently in taxis and rideshares compared to the wider community, the specific contexts of these services are important to investigate. For instance, passengers can be isolated while using these services, and some use them to travel after consuming drugs and alcohol – factors that can increase the risk of harm.

Our research – which is currently under way – aims to shed light on these issues by exploring Victorians’ perceptions and experiences of safety and harassment when using taxi and rideshare services.

Read more: The same but different: what passengers like about Uber

Perceptions of safety pre- and post-COVID

As we began our research, the COVID-19 pandemic emerged, fundamentally changing how, where and when people travelled.

Lockdown and working from home led to reduced use of taxi and rideshare services for some. For others, anxiety about COVID transmission on public transport likely made taxi and rideshare services a more appealing option.

As Melbourne and the rest of the country come out of lockdown, people are going out again and having to consider how they travel. There might be a dilemma for some people in terms of whether they feel safe using taxi and rideshare services due to the perceived risk of COVID transmission.

Early findings from our survey of 94 Victorians suggest participants felt safer using rideshare services compared to taxi services before COVID-19. While participants reported factors that potentially reduced feelings of safety when using taxis – such as travelling alone or being intoxicated – they tended to report factors that promoted feelings of safety when using rideshare services. For example, the ability to track drivers and send tracking on to friends or loved ones, the rating system, automatic payment, and information about drivers, passengers and the ride being held by the app were all reported to improve perceptions of safety.

Since the pandemic, about half of participants report they feel equally safe using taxi and rideshare services compared to before the pandemic. Small numbers report feeling safer. However, many of our participants report feeling less safe about using taxi (38%) and rideshare (43%) services.

Based on written comments from participants, it appears that, in addition to physical safety concerns, people are experiencing concerns about health safety. These concerns include being in an enclosed space with the driver or other passengers, whether the car has been cleaned between each passenger, and the risk of acquiring COVID-19 from the driver or previous passengers.

Although rideshare services have introduced a range of measures to prevent COVID-19 transmission, drivers have similarly reported concerns about their health.

Experiences of harassment in taxis and rideshares

We also asked participants about experiences of harassment when using taxi and rideshare services.

Uber’s 2019 safety report indicated 99.9% of rides in the United States in 2017-18 had been completed without incident.

Similarly, our preliminary findings suggest experiences of harassment are not common. Nonetheless, a minority of participants have reported verbal harassment relating to gender (35.6%), sexuality (19.8%), race (10%) and disability (13.5%).

Sexual harassment is by far the most common form of harassment experienced by participants so far. Half of survey respondents had experienced unwanted flirting, while 46% experienced unwanted comments about their physical appearance. Participants have described their experiences of harassment as including:

several experiences where taxi drivers have either tried to flirt, made aggressively sexual statements, or touched me, and one specific one where the driver made several comments about knowing where I lived and how he’d date me.

Honestly there are too many to recount. In one instance, a taxi driver […] kept telling me how lonely he was and parked far away from home and would not let me leave the cab, forcing kisses on me and unwanted groping […] I was terrified. It wasn’t the first time I’ve been terrified of cab drivers either.

Participants also discussed feeling unsafe because of factors related to race, sexuality and disability. One participant with a disability, for example, shared experiences of being:

left in scary situations by drivers not wanting to pick up my guide dog.

Harassment occurred more commonly in taxis, with drivers responsible for these behaviours in the vast majority (84%) of incidents. However, there is no evidence drivers are more likely to perpetrate harassment and violence than other members of society.

Drivers are themselves often subject to high levels of abuse, harassment and violence.

It is also difficult to know if harassment is actually more common in taxis, or if this finding reflects the fact taxi services have been in use longer than rideshare services.

Read more: FactCheck: are ridesharing services like Uber no safer than hitchhiking?

The impacts of these experiences have been varied, including emotional distress, anxiety, anger, embarrassment and fear for personal safety. While some participants have reported no impacts, others have said they now avoid using taxis or rideshare services, or are hypervigilant when using them.

They also report safety strategies such as minimising alcohol consumption, not using a taxi or rideshare alone, giving the driver a fake address, and sharing registration or journey details with a friend. A small number of women said they only used women-only ridesharing services such as Shebah.

Getting there safely

Experiences of harassment do not only occur in taxi and rideshare contexts. However, the harassment that does occur in these contexts requires a tailored response working alongside broader prevention efforts.

Our participants valued app-based features such as GPS tracking and the ability to rate drivers. Taxi companies could consider introducing similar measures to improve perceptions of safety.

Although rideshare services have introduced several features that can promote feelings of safety among drivers and riders, further measures are needed. These would include greater transparency from taxi and rideshare companies about reports of harassment by drivers and riders, and how they are responding to these reports.

Our emerging findings make it clear much more work is required to prevent and better respond to reports of harassment.

We are still recruiting people to take part in our study. We are interested in a wide range of experiences of harassment – including sexist/sexual, gender-based, racist, ableist, homophobic and transphobic harassment – without any particular legal definition in mind. You do not need to have used a taxi or rideshare service during COVID-19 to take part. You can participate in the anonymous online survey here or you can also contact Elena at elena.cama@unimelb.edu.au if you would prefer to participate in a confidential interview.

For help with any of the issues mentioned in this piece, contact the National Sexual Assault, Family & Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732).

– ref. From COVID anxiety to harassment, more needs to be done on safety in taxis and rideshare services – https://theconversation.com/from-covid-anxiety-to-harassment-more-needs-to-be-done-on-safety-in-taxis-and-rideshare-services-149911

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Noble, Education Policy Fellow, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University

This week, Victoria has pledged a $169.9 boost for preschool (called kinder in Victoria) to reduce fees for all four year olds and eligible three year olds in 2021. The announcement came a day after New South Wales pledged free community preschool for three to five year olds next year.

Unlike NSW, Victoria’s funding injection will apply to all preschool programs for four year olds, which includes those at daycare centres. While the premier said the funding was for “free kinder”, it’s not yet clear whether the “$2,000 per family” promise means some services with higher annual fees might still charge families a reduced amount to meet the gap.

Both the states’ announcements aim to support children’s access to early learning, while alleviating cost pressures to families as they cope with the fall-out of lockdowns and the economic downturn. It’s also hoped they’ll enable parents to take up work where they can.

But they’re also likely to increase the growing focus on early childhood education and care more broadly, which is shaping up to be a major issue leading into a possible federal election in 2021.

What’s happening with preschool in other states and territories?

While the latest funding announcements are most relevant to preschool, they also impact on childcare providers, as many of them embed preschool programs in their service. This means children take part in a structured, play-based program led by a qualified teacher for part of the time they’re at daycare.

Read more: Preschool benefits children and the economy. But the budget has left funding uncertain, again

The Australian government jointly funds preschool with the states and territories for one year per child — children attend around 600 hours per year. Preschool for four year olds is already free or very low cost in South Australia, Western Australia, the ACT, the NT and Tasmania.

Preschool isn’t free for most four-year-old children in Victoria, NSW and Queensland. While those governments subsidise preschool, most parents are still charged fees by providers to make up the gap between government funding and the cost of delivering services.

Fees vary, but can be in the region of $2,000 to $3,000 per year. Disadvantaged families can access additional subsidies so they don’t have to pay fees.

The past few years have seen some jurisdictions introduce funding for preschool for three-year-olds. In 2018, NSW announced subsidies for three-year-old community and mobile preschool (operating from multiple venues), with the subsidy rate increasing from 25-50% between 2019 and 2022.

Read more: Preschool benefits all children, but not all children get it. Here’s what the government can do about that

Victoria is rolling out subsidies for a second year of preschool over the next decade, and the ACT is working towards free preschool for three year olds over the coming years.

These initiatives were all in place before COVID hit. And while the pandemic’s impact on school students’ learning and mental health has been widely covered, the recession has also had a significant, albeit different, impact on preschoolers. These can include regression, disturbed sleep and anxiety. This can negatively affect social and emotional skills and school readiness.

Increasing funding to boost access to quality early education and care is an important tool for alleviating negative impacts on children and helping them to thrive before and in school. These measures can also support parents doing it tough, increase labour force participation and support economic recovery.

Where to from here?

Increased state and territory funding for preschool means parts of Australia were already moving towards two years of funded (in some cases, free) preschool even before COVID-19 arrived. This is a major shift, backed by evidence that shows the importance of two years of preschool to children’s health, well-being and academic outcomes.

But with funding and timing being determined by state governments, this major reform is happening in fits and starts. What’s lacking is a national approach that would provide more consistency.

Access and affordability will remain uneven across the country. With around one-fifth of Australian children starting school with developmental vulnerabilities, this should be cause for concern.

The future of childcare policy is much less certain. What’s clear is childcare has been placed on the mainstream policy agenda, with Labor making childcare its budget reply centrepiece. Labor’s promise includes increasing the maximum childcare subsidy to 90% and scrapping the annual subsidy cap for families earning up to $353,680 a year.

The current government has signalled it doesn’t have an an appetite for further reform. From its perspective, the snap-back (from free childcare during COVID) to pre-COVID funding arrangements is largely working.

Read more: Childcare is critical for COVID-19 recovery. We can’t just snap back to ‘normal’ funding arrangements

A smart approach would bring governments from all levels together (including local governments, many of whom operate services) to look at the early childhood education and care system as whole.

This means creating a more unified and simpler system across different types of education and care, which would provide consistent quality and flexibilty for all children and families, and address legitimate concerns held by educators.

As well as promising benefits for children, a more integrated, universal system would deliver significant benefits to families and the economy.

– ref. Victoria and NSW have funded preschool for 2021. It’s shaping up to be a federal election issue – https://theconversation.com/victoria-and-nsw-have-funded-preschool-for-2021-its-shaping-up-to-be-a-federal-election-issue-149905

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Kirkwood, PhD Candidate, Queensland University of Technology

After 35 years in Australia, the last plates of cheese toast will soon be served at Sizzler’s nine remaining outlets across Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia.

The family-friendly restaurant, famous for the all-you-can-eat salad bar and cheesy TV ads, was once a suburban dining stalwart. But Sizzler’s closure on 15 November isn’t just another consequence of COVID-19.

Australia’s food values and tastes have changed since the chain’s heyday of the 1990s. Today, food is much more important in our everyday lives.

An era of casual dining

Sizzler began in the United States in the late 1950s, opening its first Australian restaurant in 1985 in the Brisbane suburb of Annerley. A novelty of the chain was its salad bar, which the Canberra Times in 1992 described as:

15 metres of salad choices, two soup choices and croutons and rolls, a potato casserole, savoury rice, two types of pasta (with the usual unfortunate consequences for pasta left sitting) with a meat, tomato and cream sauces, and four or five desserts.

Optional steak, seafood and chicken offerings could be served to your table. When the chain reached its Australian peak in the mid-1990s, our food culture was very different. Cuisine of the era was increasingly multicultural – as food author Cherry Ripe notes in her book Goodbye Culinary Cringe – but food was more often spoken about in utilitarian terms.

Sizzler positioned itself as food that was cheap and fast, but not “fast food”. Most of those who dined there, alongside the dine-in all-you-can eat Pizza Huts, earned under A$60,000 (approximately $110,000 today).

But over the past 25 years, the way Australian families dine has dramatically changed. Instead of a large “family friendly” diner, we are more likely to frequent a range of small, culturally diverse eateries.

The changing face of value

While Sizzler has attributed the shuttering of the final nine stores to the impact of COVID-19, the brand has experienced a slow death, with 19 outlets closing across Australia since 2015.

Its demise can be attributed to many factors.

Since Sizzler’s peak, Australian consumers have shown greater interest in food provenance, or understanding where their food comes from.

There are growing concerns about environmental impacts of the way we eat, particularly around food waste. These concerns become stark in buffet settings.

Other contemporary culinary interests include the ideals of “clean eating” and Instagrammable #foodporn – Sizzler isn’t entirely suited to either category.

Once considered “alternative” approaches to eating, vegetarianism and veganism are also on the rise. By 2019, more than 2.5 million Australians were vegan or vegetarian.

We have embraced movements like flexitarianism (a mostly plant-based diet, with animal products eaten in moderation) and Meat Free Mondays. Sizzler is known for its salad bar, but the prominent grill offerings of steak, seafood and chicken don’t necessarily align with these culinary values.

Pressure has been placed on Sizzler, too, as fast-casual dining chains gain popularity, with companies like Guzman y Gomez and Grill’d focusing on ethical and healthy choices.

The pressures faced by Sizzler can also be seen in the Australian fine-dining sector. There has been an explosion of mid-tier, casual but trendy venues opening to accommodate diners’ changing tastes. This has led to closures of both “value for money” sit-down restaurants, like Sizzler, at one end of the spectrum, and fine dining at the other end.

Our notion of what constitutes “good value” has also evolved.

Until Sunday, a standard Sizzler all-you-can-eat salad bar will cost you $27.95. You can add $4 and get a rump steak, or $2 for a “Malibu Chicken Supreme” (think parmy-meets-Chicken-Cordon-Bleu).

But “value” now lies in the quality rather than quantity of one’s meal. As Australians’ idea of value is shifting, we are inclined to pay more for food we consider to be good quality – so $30 for an average steak and salad now seems rather steep.

This isn’t to say Australians are a bunch of food snobs.

In my 2014 research into food and food media habits, I spoke to then 38-year-old food enthusiast Melanie, who enjoyed trips to Adriano Zumbo’s Sydney patisserie and celebrated her sister’s 40th birthday dinner at Tom Colicchio’s New York restaurant – but she was not opposed to more lowbrow or fast-food offerings.

I will say I love fine dining, but if you offered me up Sizzler on a Sunday, I’m right there.

I hope Melanie got a booking at Sizzler to enjoy one last Sunday indulgence.

– ref. Vale Sizzler: the cheese toast king couldn’t keep up with dining trends – https://theconversation.com/vale-sizzler-the-cheese-toast-king-couldnt-keep-up-with-dining-trends-148798

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Moscova, Senior Lecturer in Anatomy, UNSW

Hi I’m Miranda. I am ten years old and I live in California. My question is: why do older adults get shorter?

What an interesting question, Miranda!

Luckily, you don’t have to worry about this for some time. Until you are 30 or so (I know, it sounds old), you will continue to grow. However, after that, most people start to gradually shrink. So by the time you are 80 (yes, that seems really ancient), you would be 2-2.5 inches (5-6 centimetres) shorter.

Backs, muscles, joints

So, what exactly in your body shrinks this much? Ahh, this is another interesting question. The secret is in what keeps your body upright — your back. It is made up of 33 tiny little bones called vertebrae. Between most of these vertebrae are discs made of softer tissue.

The middle of these soft discs are like jelly, and are made mostly of water. These act like a shock absorber when you walk, run and jump.

As you get older, these discs slowly lose water and become a tiny bit flatter. But because there are usually 23 of these discs, they make up a quarter of the height of your back. When each of them shrinks a little bit, it all adds up and you get shorter.

Older people’s muscles also get smaller and weaker, their bones get thinner and the spaces between the bones in their joints get smaller. Together, this can also change your height.

People can shrink too much

While a small change in height in older people is normal, shrinking too much — more than 2 inches (5cm) — can be a bit of a problem. It may be a sign of a disease where your bones become too weak and brittle, and are easier to break.

As muscles get weaker, especially muscles that support your back, your back may get a curved “hunchback”, which makes you look even shorter. Weaker muscles can also cause a sore back and problems with balance.

So, is there anything you can do to stop getting shorter when you age? There certainly is. If you eat healthy food, exercise regularly and get outdoors to play in the sunshine from time to time, it will help keep your bones and muscles healthy and stop you getting too short when you are older.

Your height changes over the day

Another thing you may not realise is that even when you are young, your height changes throughout the day. You are actually tallest when you wake up in the morning, but you lose up to an inch (2.5cm) of your height within three hours of getting out of bed.

This is because when you sleep, your body rests and allows the water to get back into the jelly centres of the discs in your spine. But when you bounce out of bed, the pressure on these discs makes them lose water again and you get a little smaller.

So, if you really want to be the tallest you can be (getting picked for a basketball team, perhaps?), try to measure your height just after you get out of bed in the morning.

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au

– ref. Curious Kids: why do older adults get shorter? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-do-older-adults-get-shorter-146766

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Minchin, Executive Editor

How hopeful should Australians and New Zealanders be about COVID-19 vaccines becoming available in 2021? And what do we need to learn from 2020 and this pandemic as we speed towards the new year?

On November 5 2020, The Conversation and Avid Reader bookshop hosted a special trans-Tasman online event, giving our readers a chance to question two leading vaccine and virus experts.

The video below features the University of Queensland’s Professor Paul Young, one of Australia’s top virologists and co-leader of the UQ vaccine project, and the University of Otago’s Professor David Murdoch, a clinical microbiologist and infectious diseases physician, who has consulted for the World Health Organization.

They’re in conversation with Liz Minchin and an audience of Conversation readers. You also get to hear from Molly Glassey, the editor of The Conversation’s yearbook, 2020: The Year That Changed Us.

Too long, can’t watch it all? Jump to these highlights

8:15 When will the UQ vaccine be ready? — Paul Young’s response

10:08 The Australian Health Minister Greg Hunt has said “the expectation is that Australians who sought vaccination will be vaccinated within 2021”. Do you agree? — Paul Young

11:24 Will there be COVID-19 vaccines available for some New Zealanders in 2021? — David Murdoch

11:48 What are the lessons we need to learn from this pandemic? — Paul Young on the importance of discovery science.

16:57 David, you’ve said “COVID-19 is being referred to as a ‘once in a century event’ — but the next pandemic is likely to hit sooner than you think”. Why? — David Murdoch

18:53 A major new UN report warned up to 850,000 undiscovered viruses that could be transferred to humans are thought to exist in mammal and avian hosts. As co-director of One Health Aotearoa, can you quickly explain what a one health approach means, and why you argue Western countries like New Zealand and Australia need to adopt that approach? — David Murdoch

22:15 Paul Young on the risk of not having sovereign capacity to mass produce all types of vaccines in Australia, and how Australia and New Zealand are now talking about how to work together on producing future vaccines.

26:08 Audience Q&A: will there be different types of vaccines for different age groups? — Paul Young on how the UQ vaccine trial and others are working to include people aged 56 and over, the group most at risk of severe COVID.

27:24 Audience Q&A: Whatever happened to the Russian vaccine? — Paul Young

28:15 Audience Q&A: Is climate change the main cause of the spread of diseases like this one? — David Murdoch

29:52 Audience Q&A: Long COVID in young people hasn’t yet arrived in full. Are we prepared to deal with the coming chronic disease load? — David Murdoch and Paul Young

32:15 Audience Q&A: Have you got any idea what [COVID-19 treatments] they gave to Donald Trump and whether they made him well? — Paul Young

33:30 Audience Q&A: What’s the relevance of the CSIRO in all this [COVID] research? — Paul Young

35:30 Audience Q&A: Are there any reassurances about side effects for people who get the vaccine early? — Paul Young

36:40 Audience Q&A: What commitment have Australia and New Zealand given to helping poorer countries pay for vaccines? — Paul Young and David Murdoch

37:50 Audience Q&A: The spread of viruses from animals: is it purely from consuming meat, or can it be picked up in other ways? — Paul Young

39:00 Audience Q&A: The UN report was frightening […] Is it inevitable this will be the pandemic century? — David Murdoch and Paul Young

50:00 Audience Q&A: Why aren’t we implementing an area-based “traffic light system” to stop the spread of COVID-19? — Paul Young and David Murdoch

52:30 Audience Q&A: What do we do to combat the rise of conspiracy theories and anti-vaccination information? — David Murdoch and Paul Young

Want to read more? Extra links mentioned in the event

– ref. VIDEO: Two experts on the race for a COVID-19 vaccine and preparing Australia and New Zealand for the next pandemic – https://theconversation.com/video-two-experts-on-the-race-for-a-covid-19-vaccine-and-preparing-australia-and-new-zealand-for-the-next-pandemic-149726

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul McGreevy, Professor of Animal Behaviour and Animal Welfare Science, University of Sydney

Pressure is increasing on the global horse-racing industry to reconsider the use of whips in the sport.

Our research, published in the journal Animals, shows horses’ skin is very similar to humans’ in both thickness and the arrangement of nerve endings.

This adds to existing evidence that whipping is ineffective and unethical. Here we outline ten reasons why it’s time to drop the crop.

1. Horses’ skin appears just as sensitive as humans’

At the core of the debate is the question of whether horses experience pain when being whipped. A Sydney-based research team (of which one of us, Paul McGreevy, was a member) examined skin from 10 human cadavers and 20 euthanased horses under a microscope to explore any differences in their skin structure and nerve supply.

The results revealed no significant difference between humans and horses in the concentration of nerve endings in the outer, surface layer of skin.

2. Horses’ skin is no thicker than humans’

The new study also found no significant difference between humans and horses in the average thickness of this outer layer.

Horses need skin that is both robust and sensitive to touch, particularly from other horses or flying insects. The inner, base layer of skin in humans is significantly thinner than in horses, but this is not where the nerve endings lie.

3. Whip-free racing already exists

Norway outlawed the whipping of racehorses in 1982. In the United Kingdom, “hands and heels” races for apprentice jockeys have been part of the racing calendar since 1999. These events, in which the least experienced (and presumably most vulnerable) jockeys race without using the whip, is at complete odds with the industry’s contention that whips are essential for steering and safety. There are no reports from Norway or the UK of problems in the conduct of these races.

4. There’s no evidence whips make racing safer…

Whip use has been claimed to be essential for the safety of horses and jockeys. However, the impact of whip use on steering and safety had not been examined until a recent study compared “whipping-free” races, in which whips are held but not used, with “whipping-permitted” races.

Races of these two types were meticulously matched for racecourse, distance, number of runners, and “going” (turf conditions on the day). A detailed examination of stewards’ post-race reports revealed no difference between the two race types in movement of horses across the track and interference with other runners, and therefore no evidence whipping improves safety. This adds to evidence from jumps racing that whip use is associated with catastrophic falls.

Read more: Research shows whipping horses doesn’t make them run faster, straighter or safer — let’s cut it out

5. …or fairer…

The gambling industry has an interest in ensuring races are run with integrity, lest punters take their dollars elsewhere. Whip use is arguably the most visible sign that jockeys are indeed trying their hardest.

But the same study of stewards’ reports revealed no difference between “whipping-free” and conventional races in terms of the number of incidents related to jockey behaviour, such as careless riding or jockeys “dropping their hands” (indicative of not pushing the horse to run on).

The key to a fair race is not encouraging jockeys to use the whip, but rather ensuring all jockeys are subject to the same rules.

6. … or faster

The received wisdom is that whipping any horse makes it more likely to win. However, studies have shown increased whip use does not significantly affect speed at the finishing line, and the comparison study cited above found no difference in finishing times between whipping-free and conventional races.

What’s more, in “hands and heels” races, the jockey’s centre of mass is likely to remain directly above the horse’s centre of mass for more of the time, compared with when the jockeys are whipping the horses. So, the biomechanics of whip-free racing are arguably better for equine performance.

7. Whip rules are hard to police

The most prevalent breaches of the rules around whip use involve forehand strikes on more than five occasions before the 100-metre mark (44%), and the jockey’s arm being raised above shoulder height (24%). Studies of high-speed footage of 15 races revealed at least 28 rule breaches, involving nine horses, that were not recorded in stewards’ reports.

There are two reasons for this: the footage seen by racing stewards is filmed head-on, and is recorded at fewer frames per second than high-resolution video now provides. Head-on footage is preferred by stewards as it allows estimations of whip use on both sides of the horse, but it makes it harder to accurately police other aspects of whip use, such as the use of excessive force.

A separate study revealed more breaches are recorded at metropolitan than country or provincial racecourses, and by riders of horses that finished first, second, or third rather than in other positions. That said, horses that finished last were also worryingly vulnerable to whip-rule breaches.

What’s more, even legal whipping is likely to cause significant pain, given the similarity of human and horse skin.

8. The public supports a ban on whipping

In a recent independent poll of more than 1,500 Australian adults, 75% thought horses should not be hit with a whip in the normal course of a race. The survey also found men were more than twice as likely as women to support whipping racehorses. Even among respondents who attended races or gambled on them at least once a week, 30% disagreed with whipping.

9. Whip-free racing still allows betting

While the ethics of promoting gambling is a different debate entirely, whip-free races in Norway and the UK still allow people to bet. It may even be more attractive to sponsors seeking assurance their brand is only associated with ethical activities.

10. Whipping tired animals in the name of sport is hard to justify

Horses have evolved to run away from painful pressure on their hindquarters, given the most likely natural cause of such stimulation is contact from a predator. Repeatedly whipping tired horses in the closing stages of a race is likely to be distressing and cause suffering. The horse’s loss of agency as it undergoes repeated treatment of this sort is thought to lead to the state of “learned helplessness”, in which animals learn they can do nothing to end their distress.

Read more: Put the baking soda back in the bottle: banned sodium bicarbonate ‘milkshakes’ don’t make racehorses faster

Racing must reckon with two key questions: does whipping actually work as intended, and is it an ethical way to treat a horse in the name of sport?

If the answer to both of those is “no”, a third question arises: why are jockeys still doing it?

– ref. 10 reasons to stop whipping racehorses, including new research revealing the likely pain it causes – https://theconversation.com/10-reasons-to-stop-whipping-racehorses-including-new-research-revealing-the-likely-pain-it-causes-149271

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anita Foerster, Senior Lecturer, Monash University

The A$57 billion Rest super fund last week pledged to overhaul the way it manages climate risk, following a lawsuit by a 25-year-old member. The concession raises the bar for the way Australian superannuation funds respond to climate change.

The fact that Rest agreed to settle the case before a trial is significant. It indicates that the proposition behind the case – that super funds have a legal duty to identify, manage and disclose climate-related risks – is no longer disputed.

Rest has agreed to align its investments with net-zero emissions by 2050 and to publicly disclose its holdings, among other undertakings.

This is an ambitious and much-needed step up. It will influence how Australia’s A$3 trillion superannuation industry invests, and how our retirement savings are protected from climate risk.

Climate: a risky business

Brisbane man Mark McVeigh sued Rest for failing to disclose how the fund was managing the financial risks posed by climate change. These risks fall into two main categories:

• physical risks from extreme events such as bushfires, storms and floods, which can damage assets and disrupt operations

• risks arising from the transition to a low-carbon economy. These include new regulatory requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and associated market shifts.

Climate risks are directly relevant for companies in many sectors, particularly energy and mining. But super funds, which pool capital and invest in these companies, are also exposed via reduced asset values and investment returns.

Read more: Zali Steggall’s new climate change bill comes just as economic sectors step up

The legal claim alleged Rest’s trustee directors failed to act with care, skill and diligence when investing for McVeigh, by not properly considering the risks climate change poses to the fund’s investments.

In a statement as part of the settlement, Rest acknowledged climate change “could lead to catastrophic economic and social consequences … Accordingly, Rest, as a superannuation trustee, considers that it is important to actively identify and manage these issues.”

Rest also committed to significant changes to its investment practices. I analyse four of these pledges below, drawing on recent empirical research.

1. Net-zero emissions by 2050

Rest pledged to align its portfolio to the Paris Agreement. In doing so, it joins a small number of other Australian superfunds such as Hesta, as well as high-profile companies such as ANZ, that have made similar commitments.

Investors are still grappling with what it means to decarbonise and align portfolios with the Paris Agreement. The agreement doesn’t allocate specific emissions reductions to nations, but it does allow for calculation of a global “emissions budget”. This can be used to develop scenarios involving various mitigation measures over different time frames.

All Paris-aligned scenarios involve, at a minimum, very significant reductions in fossil fuel use. However, decarbonising existing portfolios is particularly challenging for Australian super funds. Many, including Rest, have substantial holdings in companies actively pursuing new fossil fuel projects such as Woodside Petroleum, Santos, Origin Energy, AGL and Caltex.

If Rest is serious about delivering on its pledge, it must divest from these companies, or secure a commitment to net-zero from these and the thousands of other companies in which it invests.

2. Publicly disclose portfolio holdings and climate risk exposure

The Australian superannuation industry is known for its poor transparency. One recent analysis found only a handful of Australian super funds publish a complete list of the companies in which they hold shares. Most only reported the top 10 or 20 holdings.

Disclosure of basic factual information, such as top holdings and assets under management, is highly variable between and within funds. It is very hard to find out which companies a super fund invests in, and to what extent. Funds’ disclosure of exposure to climate risks and their management is also patchy.

Rest has now committed to publicly disclose its full portfolio, as well as its approach to climate-related risks, in line with international best practice. This is a crucial step towards improvement across the industry.

3. Better consider climate-related risks

Super funds can address climate-related risks using a range of responsible investment approaches. These include negative screening, which involves excluding high-risk assets such as coal, oil or gas reserves.

Australian super funds already use this approach, but generally only apply it to “green” investment products which represent a tiny share of the overall portfolio.

Read more: Australia, the climate can’t wait for the next federal election. It’s time to take control

Unlike other large industry super funds, Rest does not appear to apply a climate-related screen, and it does not offer a green-labelled investment option. While these are not the only ways to manage climate risk, they are clear and highly visible approaches. There appears to be considerable scope for Rest to better address climate risk in its investment strategy and asset allocation. At the very least it has now committed to better disclose its approach.

4. Actively consider shareholder resolutions

Proposals by shareholders have recently emerged as a way to pressure Australian companies to disclose climate risks and commit to the clean energy transition. Super funds hold significant shareholdings in Australian companies, and how they vote can influence how a company responds.

Rest and others have a patchy record when it comes to supporting shareholder climate resolutions – even those simply asking for better climate risk disclosure. This underscores the considerable gap between Rest’s new commitment and recent practice.

Raising the bar

Rest’s new commitments are ambitious, and help consolidate an emerging “best practice” standard for superannuation funds on climate risk.

The commitments also underscore the key role super funds can play in society’s response to climate change. When climate is central to investment decision-making, funds can align capital and resources to the clean energy transition.

Because the case was settled out of court, Rest’s undertakings are not legally binding. However companies, regulators, interested members and NGOs will closely monitor whether the promises are implemented, and how the broader industry responds.

Read more: NSW has joined China, South Korea and Japan as climate leaders. Now it’s time for the rest of Australia to follow

– ref. An Australian man successfully sued his super fund over climate risk. Here’s what that means for your nest egg – https://theconversation.com/an-australian-man-successfully-sued-his-super-fund-over-climate-risk-heres-what-that-means-for-your-nest-egg-149918

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Laurenceson, Director and Professor, Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI), University of Technology Sydney

China’s increasingly belligerent threats to close its markets to Australian exports have excited talk of a full-blown trade war.

But let’s not panic. These threats are best understood as psychological warfare, not a statement of reality.

Last week Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post reported the Chinese government was set to ban Australian imports of timber, sugar, copper ore and copper concentrates, wool, lobsters, barley and wine. These markets are worth about A$6 billion a year.

The message from Chinese state media in the days before the mooted bans were supposed to take effect was loud and clear. The China Daily editorialised that “Canberra only has itself to blame” and warned the Morrison government to “steer clear of Washington’s brinkmanship with China before it is too late”.

Already this year China has taken punitive action against Australian barley, beef and possibly coal, and threatened the loss of Chinese tourists and students.

China has a history of using coercive economic pressure as a political weapon.

In 2011, for example, it restricted salmon imports from Norway after the awarding of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. In 2012 it banned bananas from the Philippines in the wake of territorial disputes in the South China Sea. And so on.

But such pressure has been narrowly focused, and China has been careful to maintain “plausible deniability”, using excuses like food safety concerns to avoid being taken to the World Trade Organisation for flouting international trade rules.

This action against Australian exports would be unprecedented in China’s economic statecraft. It would be impossible for China to deny its motives.

Politics by other means

Though the Chinese market for the seven threatened export products is valuable, it’s important to note they represent just 4% of the A$150 billion in Australia’s exports to China in 2019-20, and less than 2% of the value of all Australian exports.

The exports that are the backbone of the Australia-China trade relationship – such as iron ore – have avoided mention. That’s for good reason. In the first nine months of 2020, China relied on Australia for 60% of its imported iron ore – crucial to make the steel needed for building bridges, factories and high-rise apartment blocks.

Still, an argument could be made that the scale of aggregate economic damage isn’t the point.

Rather, by inflicting serious harm on lobster fisherman through to winemakers, the Chinese government is seeking to turn Australian producers into lobbyists that help it achieve its foreign policy objectives.

But if that’s the intention, there’s little evidence the plan is working.

With a few high-profile exceptions, Australian business groups have been conspicuously quiet as the bilateral political relationship has deteriorated since 2017.

Read more: Why the Australia-China relationship is unravelling faster than we could have imagined

Coercion can backfire

Indeed a key lesson from research on economic coercion is that success is difficult to achieve. One reason is that targets take steps to make themselves less vulnerable.

Chinese threats against Australia, for example, have led to calls for Australia to diversify its export markets.

With Australian public opinion towards China continuing to plummet, there is also the prospect of hardening the Australian government’s resistance to Chinese pressure.

As political scientist Greg McCarthy (a former BHP Billiton chair of Australian studies at Peking University) has argued, the “political ballast” for the Australian government’s China policy stems in large part from the “popularised perception of a China threat to national sovereignty”.

So it isn’t surprising China appears to have hesitated in moving from threat to action. Such moves would have hurt China too.

Read more: Australia depends less on Chinese trade than some might think

Leaving it to business

So far the Australian government is maintaining a steady approach to the trade relationship.

On Monday federal Trade Minister Simon Birmingham noted the “rumours” of an outright blanket did not “appear to have materialised”. While there were “areas of problem and concern” such as delays in live lobster shipments being cleared through Chinese customs, he said, “we will continue to work at an administrative and diplomatic level to try to understand and resolve those points of concern”.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has maintained that judgments on trading with China “are not decisions that governments make for businesses”.

The rationale would appear to be that China’s targets for punishment will vary from sector to sector and change over time. With their own money on the line and their industry knowledge, businesses are best placed to assess developments and manage risks.

The government can certainly support those assessments by, for example, partnering with industry bodies to fund research into the risks exporters face, providing businesses with clarity on where it sees foreign policy headed and sharing insights gleaned from its diplomatic network and national security agencies.

With China’s purchasing power over the next decade forecast to grow more than that of the US, Japan, India and Indonesia combined, expect Australian businesses to craft more sophisticated strategies to manage coercive risk, rather than just looking to sell more to other markets.

Either way, Australia has less to fear from China’s trade threats than some might think.

– ref. There’s no need for panic over China’s trade threats – https://theconversation.com/theres-no-need-for-panic-over-chinas-trade-threats-149828

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elise Klein, Senior Lecturer, Australian National University

Dystopic policy in Australia is often hidden in plain sight.

As Curtin University Professor Suvendrini Perera has written, systematic failures are not necessarily “spectacular acts” but the “decisions and indecisions of bureaucratic oversights and misplaced assumptions”. And these amount to a “slow violence” over time.

Read more: Australia has been stigmatising unemployed people for almost 100 years. COVID-19 is our big chance to change this

One such failure is the Cashless Debit Card, which has been trialled in Australia since 2016.

Yet, among all the measures in last month’s budget was the news the Morrison government will make the trial scheme “ongoing”.

What is the Cashless Debit Card?

The Cashless Debit Card scheme quarantines 80% of social security payments to a cashless card, which prevents spending on alcohol, illegal drugs and gambling products.

It is currently being trialled in Ceduna in South Australia, the East Kimberley in Western Australia, the Goldfields in WA and Hervey Bay region in Queensland, with about 12,000 people involved.

The card compulsorily includes a broad range of people receiving support for many reasons, including payments for disability, parenting, caring, unemployment and youth allowance. The Australian Human Rights Commission is among those who have pointed out the the card disproportionately impacts First Nations people.

Research shows it does not work

Peer-reviewed research has consistently shown the card, and income management more broadly, do not meet policy objectives. A 2020 academic study of multiple locations found compulsory income management “can do as much harm as good”.

Survey respondents reported not having enough cash for essential items, while the research found the card “can also stigmatise and infantilise users”.

My research examining the card in the East Kimberley shows it makes life more difficult for people subjected to it, including making it harder to manage money. People also reported the card made it more difficult to buy basic goods such as medicine and groceries.

Read more: ‘I don’t want anybody to see me using it’: cashless welfare cards do more harm than good

Other research from the Life Course Centre suggests compulsory income management has been linked to a reduction of birth weight and school attendance. The majority of these children are First Nations kids.

Bill before parliament

A bill to make the card permanent was introduced to parliament just a day after the budget was handed down.

If passed, it will also transfer about 25,000 people in the Northern Territory and Cape York who are on the Basics Card (an earlier version of income management) onto the Cashless Debit Card.

Introducing the bill to the House, Morrison government minister Trevor Evans said the card was delivering “significant benefits” in the trial communities.

The program has the objective of reducing immediate hardship and deprivation, helping welfare recipients with their budgeting strategies and reducing the likelihood that they will remain on welfare and out of the workforce for extended periods.

The government also says the card is used “just like an everyday bank card” and is seeing a reduction in drug and alcohol use and gambling.

Senate inquiry

But as highlighted above, the value of the scheme is heavily disputed by policy experts. People put on the card, community groups, lawyers and doctors also oppose any expansion of the card.

The card’s expansion has been the subject of a brief Senate inquiry, which is due to report on November 17.

This is the sixth Senate inquiry into the Cashless Debit Card. Each one has seen submissions from across the community which overwhelmingly reject the card.

First Nations groups have led the charge, stating income management is not in the spirit of self-determination and the current bill would “directly contradict the recent National Agreement on Closing the Gap”.

Smoke and mirrors

Trials of public policy programs require, by definition, research to examine their performance and to justify any continuation. Yet, the government continues to rely on anecdotes and the widely criticised 2017 evaluation by ORIMA Research as “proof” for the roll out of the Cashless Debit Card.

In 2018, the Australian National Audit Office found the ORIMA evaluation was methodologically flawed and unable to provide any credible conclusions regarding the real impact of the trial.

In the latest bill, the government also misrepresents the findings from a 2014 evaluation of compulsory income management into the Northern Territory, claiming the findings were supportive of income management. Yet this evaluation,

[did] not find any consistent evidence of income management having a significant systematic positive impact.

Compelled by the Senate, the government has since commissioned the University of Adelaide to evaluate the scheme. This research was due to be released by the end of 2019 but is yet to be made public.

When asked about the report in Senate estimates last month, Social Services Minister Anne Ruston said it was not about deciding whether the card would continue, but to give advice on “what what was working particularly well”.

Perversely, the current bill also removes any need to further evaluate the Cashless Debit Card, instead opting to rely on the department to undertake its own desk-based research.

Why is evidence being ignored?

The protracted life of the Cashless Debit Card in Australian public policy shows the ongoing disregard for evidence-based policy making.

It also shows the continued slow violence against thousands of Australians who deserve much better from elected officials and the structures set up to support them.

Whilst it is easy not to pay attention to the mundane details of policy, the Cashless Debit Card shows we must.

Read more: ‘An insult’ – politicians sing the praises of the cashless welfare card, but those forced to use it disagree

– ref. Why is the government trying to make the cashless debit card permanent? Research shows it does not work – https://theconversation.com/why-is-the-government-trying-to-make-the-cashless-debit-card-permanent-research-shows-it-does-not-work-149444

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harry Scheule, Professor, Finance, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

There’s a row brewing in the corridors of financial power. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) recently advised the trading banks that the official cash rate might move from the barely positive into the negative.

Right now the RBNZ is holding off such a move in favour of other monetary stimulus measures. But the big banks strongly oppose negative rates, arguing they’ve had limited success overseas and that the country’s banking technology isn’t up to it.

For the central bank, however, it remains an option to stimulate spending, investment and employment as part of the COVID-19 recovery. By reducing the cost of borrowing, economic activity picks up — or so the theory goes.

Those turning to unconventional monetary policy include Japan, Switzerland and the European Union. Negative rates range from –0.1% to –0.8% for selected tiers of central bank deposits.

In the past, cash rate changes have fed through to changes in loan and deposit rates. For example, a 25-basis-point drop in the cash rate may result in an annual interest saving of $2,500 on a NZ$1 million loan.

At the current low interest rates, however, these changes are no longer passed on — significantly limiting the powers of the RBNZ.

Yes, the bank pays you to borrow

It might sound crazy, but if the lending rate is negative and you borrow an amount on interest-only terms, the bank actually pays you interest every period. For example, Jyske Bank in Denmark is offering negative interest payments by effectively reducing the repayment period.

Banks should be comfortable offering negative rates to borrowers if, in turn, the banks themselves have savings and other funding at even lower rates.

Read more: With house prices soaring again the government must get ahead of the market and become a ‘customer of first resort’

But this is the issue: why would savers pay banks to accept deposits? First, they can hold their investments in cash at a zero-interest rate rather than pay a bank. Second, they can choose to invest in riskier assets with positive interest rates.

Because of this, only very large depositors (with limited ability to store cash) tend to leave their money in banks offering negative rates, while ordinary depositors receive a rate of zero or more.

But do negative rates work?

Arguably, the era of monetary policy as a tool for stimulating economic investment and activity has come to an end. Negative rates don’t necessarily translate into productive investment and growth.

Countries that have gone negative have not delivered the expected increases in spending and investment. Furthermore, the difficulty of passing negative rates on to depositors means lending and deposit rates no longer follow the cash rate.

This is also evident in Australia, where a cash rate drop from 0.25% to 0.15% has not been passed on to mortgage borrowers, except in isolated areas such as fixed-rate loans.

The chart below compares the average variable rate on mortgages with the New Zealand cash rate, with the gap growing over time. Charts for Australia and other developed economies would be comparable.

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has advised borrowers to change lenders if they don’t pass on rate cuts. But there is little central banks can do to offset what is a systemic problem.

What are the risks?

Negative interest rates are unlikely to be the right response to the current COVID shocks. Rather than leading to higher spending, we tend to see the opposite — more saving.

In the long run, however, depositors will seek greater returns and move their funds to riskier asset classes, including housing markets, which will push up prices and reduce affordability for new buyers.

Most economists agree inflation is not a concern for now. But what about the medium term? If interest rates climb again, highly leveraged mortgages may be difficult to service.

Read more: Explainer: why the government can’t simply cancel its pandemic debt by printing more money

Either way, negative rates are not a long-term solution to current economic challenges. We need to find ways to make the national economy more flexible, requiring fewer rescue interventions.

The fragility of supply chains and the still limited movement of labour, goods and services should be priorities. New technologies may become key — innovations that enable working from home and organising activities online have already saved whole industries.

Also, the banking system itself needs reform. Banks work on an assumption of once-in-a-thousand-year shocks — but we have seen two in the past 13 years!

After the 2008 global financial crisis, safety buffers in the financial systems were put in place. For example, bank capital requirements were set high, to be run down in economic downturns. Would now be the right time to run them down rather than insisting they be maintained?

Beyond reaching for negative rates, the need to rethink economic fundamentals and create systems that are more resilient to global shocks should be the lasting lessons of COVID-19.

– ref. Negative interest rates could be coming. What would this mean for borrowers and savers? – https://theconversation.com/negative-interest-rates-could-be-coming-what-would-this-mean-for-borrowers-and-savers-149898

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh MacIntosh, Research Associate, Marine Invertebrates, Museums Victoria

The mysterious bigfin squid has been spotted in Australia’s waters for the first time. My colleagues and I from the CSIRO and Museums Victoria detail the encounters in our new research, published today in Public Library of Sciences ONE.

There have only been about a dozen bigfin squid sightings worldwide over the past two decades. Ours happened more than two kilometres below the ocean’s surface in the Great Australian Bight, off the coast of South Australia.

For many people, the phrase “deep-sea squid” may conjure up images of the giant squid, Architeuthis dux, or krakens with huge tentacles swimming in inky black water.

But there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other species of deep-sea squid and octopus (both members of the class Cephalopoda) that are just as mysterious.

First encounters with a slippery individual

For years, one of the only ways to sample the deep sea was to trawl the sea floor with nets. This often damaged the soft bodies of deep-sea organisms beyond recognition. These mangled specimens are then difficult to identify and reveal little to nothing about the creatures.

Fortunately, newer technologies such as remotely-operated vehicles (ROVs) equipped with high-definition cameras are letting scientists see species as they’ve never seen before — offering deeper insight into their shapes, colours and behaviours in the wild.

The enigmatic bigfin squid, Magnapinna, is one case in point. When scientists first described the species in 1998, all they had to go by were some damaged specimens from Hawaii.

The most distinctive feature of these specimens were the large fins (at the very top of the body), which gave the squid its name. Years later, scientists exploring the deep Gulf of Mexico with ROVs realised they had come across Magnapinna in the wild.

They discovered that in addition to its distinctive fins, its arms had incredibly long filaments on the tips, making the bigfin squid unlike any other encountered.

These delicate filaments, which are mostly broken off in collected specimens, give Magnapinna an estimated total length of up to seven meters!

Mysterious critters and where to find them

But despite deep-sea ROV surveys becoming more common, Magnapinna has remained elusive.

The handful of sightings have been as far apart as the Central Pacific, North and South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico and Indian Ocean. This suggests a worldwide distribution.

Yet, the big fin squid had never been seen in Australian waters. That is, until recently, when our team took part in a major research project to better understand the biology and geology of the Great Australian Bight, through the Great Australian Bight Deepwater Marine Program.

On the CSIRO’s research vessel Investigator and charter vessel REM Etive, we surveyed as deep as five kilometres below the water’s surface. Using nets, ROVs and other camera equipment, we recorded hundreds of hours of video footage and uncovered thousands of species.

On one dive, as we watched the video feed from cameras far below us, a wispy shape emerged from the gloom. With large undulating fins, a small torpedo-shaped body and long stringy limbs, it was unmistakably Magnapinna. We yelled and brought the ROV to a halt to get a better look.

The meeting lasted about three minutes. During this time we managed to use parallel laser pointers to measure the squid’s length — about 1.8 meters — before it swam away into darkness.

Read more: Octopuses are super-smart … but are they conscious?

In total, we recorded five encounters with Magnapinna in the Great Australian Bight. Based on the animals’ measurements, we believe we recorded five different individuals: the most Magnapinna ever filmed in one place.

Most previous records have been of single Magnapinna, but our five squid were all found clustered close to each other. This might mean they like the habitat where they were found, but we’ll need more sightings to be sure.

Unexplained behaviours

The footage we captured has offered new information about Magnapinna’s ecology, behaviour and anatomy.

Previously, Magnapinna has been seen many meters off the sea floor in an upright posture, with arms held wide and filaments draping down. We’re not sure what the specific function of this behaviour is. It might be a way to find prey — akin to dangling sticky, sucker-covered fishing lines.

On our voyage, we saw the squid in a horizontal version of this pose, just centimetres off the sea floor, with its arms and filaments streaming behind. Again, we don’t know whether this behaviour is for travelling, avoiding predators or another method of searching for prey.

One near-miss with a camera gave us a very closeup image of Magnapinna which showed filaments that appeared to be coiled like springs. This may be a means for Magnapinna to retract its filaments when needed, perhaps if it wanted to avoid damage, or reel in something it caught.

Until now, only one other cephalopod, the vampire squid (Vampyroteuthis infernalis), has been known to coil its filamentous appendages this way.

We have learned more about the mysterious bigfin squid. But until we have more sightings, or even an intact specimen, questions still remain. One thing we do know is ROV surveying has great potential to enhance our understanding of deep-sea animals.

With so much of the ocean around Australia yet to be explored, who knows what we’ll see coming out of the gloom next time?

Read more: Curious Kids: have people ever seen a colossal squid?

– ref. This super rare squid is a deep-sea mystery. We recently spotted not 1, but 5, in the Great Australian Bight – https://theconversation.com/this-super-rare-squid-is-a-deep-sea-mystery-we-recently-spotted-not-1-but-5-in-the-great-australian-bight-149831

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Clare Corbould, Associate Professor, Contemporary Histories Research Group, Deakin University

During the northern summer, anti-Trump sentiment fused with anti-racist activism in the US, causing huge numbers of Americans to protest all around the country.

President Donald Trump has been voted out of office, but the issues at the heart of Black Lives Matter remain as critical as ever.

In fact, the high turnout for both sides in the election demonstrates two things: the power of the movement and the need for it to continue.

But where does Black Lives Matter go from here?

Decentralised organisation is key

If you can’t name the three Black women — Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi — who coined the phrase “Black Lives Matter” in 2013, there’s a good reason for that.

Seeking to avoid what they saw as the mistakes of the Civil Rights Movement, they stayed low-key and used social media to facilitate local activists taking responsibility.

The 2020 US election has decisively demonstrated the power of this strategy, because it took varied local organisations to activate important pockets of Black voters, Latino voters, and young voters.

During the summer’s large protests, hundreds of thousands of people registered to vote, including a surge in Black voter registration.

Activists learned their tactics from a long tradition. Decentralised organisation, often led by women, has always been integral to African Americans’ campaigns for rights. The Civil Rights Movement succeeded because of the work of women such as Ella Baker and Fannie Lou Hamer, which culminated in the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

But in 2013, a conservative-leaning Supreme Court ruled sections of the Voting Rights Act were unconstitutional. Nine states — including seven in the south, where voting had been closely supervised by the federal Department of Justice — were now able to limit the franchise.

In other words, those in power could resume discriminating against voters. So too could other states, now the threat of having such supervision imposed was removed. Voter suppression efforts, which were already a problem, have abounded since.

Black women lead the charge

African American women were the backbone of the Democratic Party’s 2020 electoral success.

Along with Kamala Harris successfully running for vice president, some 130 Black women ran for Congress — with almost 100 on the Democratic side.

Democratic politician and activist, Stacey Abrams, also led a new organisation, Fair Fight. Together with other organisers, it made Georgia a swing state by registering roughly one million additional voters since 2016. Nearly two-thirds are voters of colour.

Read more: Before Kamala Harris, many Black women aimed for the White House

In Atlanta and cities elsewhere, such as Detroit and Milwaukee, Black voters registered and turned out.

Not all African American voters favoured Democratic candidates, of course, but the proportion was high enough to deliver key states to the party. Importantly, the proportion of Black women who voted for Trump was small and, in Georgia for example, it was under half that of Black men.

Success beyond the election

The Black Lives Matter movement is much more expansive in its aims than either defeating Trump or putting a Democratic president in the White House.

Joe Biden has heeded those aims, noting during the campaign and in his first speech as president-elect that one of the nation’s major challenges is “systemic racism.”

Surveys this year have also shown unprecedented sympathy for Black Lives Matter causes among white Americans. While support has fallen in the months since protests following George Floyd’s death in May, unexpected groups of white people have demonstrated a concerted commitment to protesting.

Movement’s strength also brings out Republican vote

The record-breaking turnout for Trump, especially given the appalling failure to manage the COVID crisis, suggests the successes of Black Lives Matter have also generated a parallel backlash.

Trump certainly used the visibility of the protests to anchor his campaign around anti-Black Lives Matter rhetoric and sentiment. He tweeted “LAW AND ORDER!” many times, in his trademark all caps. When asked in the presidential debates about racism and racial inequality, he pivoted to this theme.

Read more: Republicans have used a ‘law and order’ message to win elections before. This is why Trump could do it again

Trump also railed against “critical race theory” and teaching history in schools that focused too heavily on racism.

Republicans joined Trump in attempting to frighten voters, by claiming Biden would heed the vision of Black Lives Matter activists to defund and abolish the police.

More than 70 million voters seem to have been persuaded or at least not dissuaded by Trump and Republicans’ racist dog-whistling.

Much more work to do

Anti-racist organisers knew long before Biden was even picked as the Democratic candidate it wouldn’t matter who won the White House, because true change comes only from grassroots activity.

The mission will be helped if the broad anti-racist coalition that seemed to emerge mid-year can be sustained, even without the galvanising presence of Trump in the White House.

In electoral terms, all eyes now move to Georgia, where it is likely that two “run-off” ballots will determine the balance of the federal Senate.

The boost to Abrams’ profile in the past week will be a boon for fundraising. Black Lives Matter organisers and Democrats will hope national attention also brings out reluctant voters and sustains the interest of first-time voters.

By the same token, Republicans will hope their own successful “All Lives Matter” rhetoric and tactics can provide sufficient ballast to win the two seats and retain control of the Senate.

In the medium-term, activists nationwide will continue to work to mitigate the varied forms of voter suppression, because these disproportionately affect voters of colour. The apparent closeness of the presidential election — a mirage produced by Republican state legislatures’ decision not to count mail-in ballots until election day — drew a great deal of attention to this widespread disenfranchisement.

Read more: Joe Biden wins the election, and now has to fight the one thing Americans agree on: the nation’s deep division

The long-term targets of Black Lives Matter activists are harder to pinpoint. But they include police violence, incarceration levels, and the many other injustices that stem from systemic racism, whether in the United States or other countries, including Australia.

In all arenas, the dispersed nature of the organising and the key role played by African American women will remain absolutely vital.

– ref. What now for Black Lives Matter? Whatever happens under Biden, the role of African American women will be vital – https://theconversation.com/what-now-for-black-lives-matter-whatever-happens-under-biden-the-role-of-african-american-women-will-be-vital-148248

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Herrero, Research Leader in Virology and Infectious Disease, Griffith University

After a devastating second wave, Victoria yesterday recorded its twelfth straight day of zero new COVID cases.

In light of the state’s progress, Premier Daniel Andrews announced the easing of several COVID restrictions on Sunday, including removing travel limits within Victoria, reopening gyms and cinemas, and allowing greater numbers in hospitality venues. Restrictions are set to ease further on November 23.

But one of the notable measures to remain is face masks. Every Victorian must still wear a mask in public — whether indoors or outdoors — and they risk a A$200 fine if they don’t.

Is it time this rule was relaxed? After all, Victoria’s COVID situation is beginning to look more and more like other Australian states and territories, which have seen prolonged stretches of zero community transmission. Yet it remains the only state where mask-wearing is compulsory.

What does a mask do anyway?

A highly contagious virus called SARS-CoV-2 causes COVID-19. We believe the virus most commonly spreads when we breathe in tiny contaminated droplets which a person infected with SARS-CoV-2 has released into the air when coughing, sneezing, or talking.

The virus may also spread when we touch our eyes, nose or mouth after coming into contact with surfaces viral droplets have settled onto.

Face masks primarily target that first route of transmission, appreciating many people with COVID-19 won’t display symptoms. By preventing both inward and outward flow of virus-carrying droplets, masks can protect both the wearer and other people.

It’s also possible that if our hands become contaminated with the virus, wearing a mask may stop us touching our face and becoming infected that way.

Read more: Which mask works best? We filmed people coughing and sneezing to find out

The effectiveness of any mask depends not just on its type, but also on wearing it correctly — so it covers your mouth and nose — and handling it carefully to avoid cross-contamination.

Widespread use of masks, together with sticking to other COVID-safe strategies, very likely helped Victoria to control its second wave. The use of similar approaches has been effective in other parts of the world, such as China, Italy and the United States, where the burden of COVID has been high.

Are masks as important outside as they are inside?

Wearing masks inside, or outside where physical distancing is difficult, helps to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2. It’s especially important in areas where many people congregate including in shops, elevators, public transport, or at outdoor sporting venues.

There are a couple of factors that make wearing masks less important outdoors, particularly when we’re not near other people. First, the high airflow outside means any virus-carrying droplets are more readily dispersed, and so we’re less likely to breathe them in, compared with poorly ventilated indoor environments.

Second, evidence suggests outdoor environmental conditions such as higher heat or humidity can reduce the survival of SARS-CoV-2.

Taken together, the risk of transmission outdoors where physical distancing is in place remains low.

Read more: How to talk to someone who doesn’t wear a mask, and actually change their mind

Is it time to change the rules?

Victoria is one of numerous states and jurisdictions around the world that have mandated masks during the pandemic. Of course, many of these places are experiencing significant community transmission, which Victoria isn’t.

Other Australian states recommend masks — particularly where it’s difficult to maintain physical distancing — but don’t mandate them.

While the continuation of the mask rule may be confusing and disappointing for many Victorians, the rationale is to keep the population safe and to safeguard the state’s strong progress.

That said, if Victoria’s zero community transmission streak continues for more than 14 days altogether (which is enough time for most people to develop symptoms if infected) the state should start considering transition to an “indoors only” mask strategy.

This approach would require masks to be worn indoors, particularly in crowded and possibly poorly ventilated environments like shops and restaurants, and in transit, such as on public transport or in taxis.

Wearing masks outdoors would be recommended if physical distancing is difficult or if a person is more vulnerable to COVID. But the decision would be up to the individual.

Hopefully in time for summer

Masks become less tolerable as the weather gets warmer. There’s little doubt Victorians would be glad to be free from masks when going out walking, or for a picnic, or to the beach.

If Victoria remains on the path of no new cases — or at least none with an unknown source — we would think, and hope, that the current mask rules will be eased in time for the summer holiday period.

The challenge for Victoria’s health department will be to ensure the transition occurs safely. Venues need to maintain strong COVID-safe plans, including hand hygiene, distancing, regular sanitising, and “check ins” for easy contact tracing.

The success of an “indoors only” strategy or any relaxing of mask rules would likely depend on both residents and visitors to Victoria strictly adhering to remaining COVID restrictions. It would be important for people to use their judgement, and if they’re in a crowded place where it’s difficult to maintain physical distancing, to put on a mask.

Read more: Melbourne is almost out of lockdown. It’s time to trust Melburnians to make their own COVID-safe decisions

– ref. As Victoria’s COVID-free streak continues, it’s probably time to consider changing the rules around masks – https://theconversation.com/as-victorias-covid-free-streak-continues-its-probably-time-to-consider-changing-the-rules-around-masks-149541

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Sawyer, Lecturer in Paramedicine, Australian Catholic University

Allegations of widespread sex discrimination and gender-based bullying among Ambulance Victoria staff have highlighted just some of the problems faced by paramedics.

Since the allegations came to light last month, Ambulance Victoria has engaged the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission to investigate.

While these reports are reason enough for drastic action, they are just part of a broader pattern of poor physical and mental health among Australian paramedics. The profession needs to change, and rapidly.

Paramedicine is one of the most dangerous jobs in Australia, according to epidemiologist Brian Maguire, who has researched violence against paramedics.

Researchers at Flinders University, led by Sharon Lawn (one of this article’s co-authors), published in July a systematic review of research on paramedics’ health. They found that, compared with other professions, paramedics have far higher rates of mental health disorders, workplace violence, workplace injuries, fatigue, sleep disorders and suicide.

There is a pervasive myth the impact of a career in paramedicine stems from unavoidable exposure to traumatic events. However, the researchers found paramedics say workplace culture — and how state and territory ambulance service management treat their staff — may play an even bigger role in the link between paramedicine and poor health.

Before looking at the changes needed, here are five key reasons why Australian paramedics often have poor health:

1. They are at the highest risk for workplace violence

According to Ambulance Victoria, a paramedic is assaulted in Victoria every 50 hours.

And it’s getting worse. A 2018 study by Maguire found reports of assaults against paramedics tripled between 2001 and 2014.

One study of 400 Australian health-care workers in 2003 found paramedics were at the highest risk of experiencing workplace violence.

Another study, led by Malcolm Boyle (another of this article’s co-authors), found many paramedic students undertaking clinical placements experience workplace violence, including sexual harassment by colleagues.

2. They are twice as likely to develop PTSD and to suicide

A national Australian study of emergency service workers found two out of five paramedics had been diagnosed with a mental health condition.

Just over 8% of paramedics suffer post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is double the national average, while 21% have anxiety and 27% depression.

A 2016 study showed paramedics are twice as likely to suicide compared with the general public.

Read more: Paramedics need more support to deal with daily trauma

3. They have significantly poorer sleep

Most paramedics work a mixture of day and night shifts in a single block, which is known to be one of the most damaging work patterns.

Researchers from RMIT surveyed 136 Australian paramedics and found they have significantly poorer sleep quality than the general population, and a significantly increased chance of developing sleeping disorders, which contribute to their already poor mental health.

4. They have the highest risk of workplace injury

Paramedics have the highest injury rate of any profession in Australia, double that of police, and are seven times more likely to be seriously injured at work than the national average.

Alarmingly, the fatality rate for paramedics is six times higher than the general population.

5. More than half of paramedics have ‘total burnout’

Burnout refers to a state of physical, emotional and mental exhaustion. It’s linked to an increased intention to leave one’s career, poorer patient care, and developing depression and anxiety.

One study of 893 Australian paramedics found two-thirds had “work-related burnout”, and more than half had “total burnout”, meaning the burnout was impacting both their personal and work lives.

What has to change?

The evidence paints a bleak picture of paramedicine in Australia. If anything is clear from the recent bullying revelations, it’s that ambulance services are not being proactive enough about their staff’s health and well-being.

Research is showing that potentially the largest threat to paramedics’ well-being is not the traumatic scenes they encounter at work, but rather a workplace culture that undermines their physical and mental health. A fundamental change is needed to how ambulance services management support and treat their staff.

There is a clear need for an independent review into the management of state and territory ambulance services. What has occurred in Victoria is just the tip of the iceberg nationally. These cultural issues have existed for a long time. The decision by Ambulance Victoria to engage the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission to investigate the allegations of bullying indicates removing decision-making power from the ambulance services is needed and more independent oversight is required nationally.

High on the agenda for reform should be building ways of working that encourage healthy work-life balances. We need to address the impact of the career on all aspects of paramedic well-being, including mental health, healthy eating, quality exercise, better sleep, and access to support services. Some ambulance services have created positive change over recent years, but it’s clear this hasn’t been enough.

All forms of workplace violence, which includes bullying and harassment, must stop. There is a need to dismantle the punitive culture that punishes paramedics for speaking out. It’s clear many paramedics don’t feel supported or respected by their management.

Changing the culture is imperative

We also need to acknowledge and address the gender bias in paramedicine and create inclusive workplaces. Female paramedics are at more risk of workplace violence, burnout, and bullying and harassment. Ambulance services need to ensure the safety of all paramedics, as well as fair and open recruitment and development opportunities that don’t disadvantage women.

Most importantly, a drastic change in culture is needed. Ambulance culture is often centred on meeting productivity goals, without acknowledging the human cost. A key performance indicator in ambulance services has long been incident response times, and paramedics are held to account for every delay.

We need to have indicators on workforce health, and chief executives and boards need to be held just as accountable.

We shouldn’t have to sacrifice the health of our paramedic workforce to meet productivity targets.

– ref. Paramedics have one of Australia’s most dangerous jobs — and not just because of the trauma they witness – https://theconversation.com/paramedics-have-one-of-australias-most-dangerous-jobs-and-not-just-because-of-the-trauma-they-witness-149540

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Sandeman, Honorary Professor, Federation University Australia

Do worms have blood, and if they do, what colour is it? Momo Bice, aged 9, Carlton

Hi Momo. Well, the short answer to your question is: yes. Many worms do have blood, and it is either colourless or pink, or red, or even green! But to answer your question properly, first we need to decide what type of worm we are talking about.

There are lots of different sorts of worms. Generally, a worm is any long, thin animal that does not have a backbone, but scientifically we recognise three types of worms: flatworms, roundworms and segmented worms. Worms live in the sea, in sand and soil. Some live inside plants or animals, and we call them parasites.

So let’s look at what blood you might find inside these different types of worms.

The three worm types

Flatworms: These include tapeworms, which are parasites (meaning they live on a host organism), and planaria, which live in ponds and lakes. These animals are so flat they don’t even need blood. They absorb oxygen through their skin and it spreads directly to every cell in their body. As a result they are pretty much colourless, or whitish.

Roundworms: Also called nematodes, these worms are mainly found in soil. Roundworms can also live as parasites in humans, causing really nasty effects such as blindness and brain defects. One large roundworm that lives in the intestines of humans can grow to more than 35 centimetres – that’s longer than a standard ruler!

As the name suggests, roundworms are tube-shaped. Their body cavity contains fluid that delivers oxygen to its organs. But this fluid is not called blood, because it does not circulate around the body.

Read more: What are parasites and how do they make us sick?

Most roundworm species are very small, and so can diffuse oxygen through their skin to all parts of their body. But very large roundworms can’t do this as easily, especially when they live inside animals where there is not much oxygen. These large worms use an oxygen-carrying molecule called haemoglobin – more on that in a minute.

Segmented worms: These worms include earthworms, leeches and marine worms. Also known as annelids, the bodies of segmented worms are divided by grooves into a series of segments. Most have circulatory systems – that is, blood vessels and a heart that pumps blood around the body.

So what colour is the blood?

The colour of blood in any animal is determined by the molecule that carries oxygen and other gases in and out of the body. If the molecule uses iron to carry the oxygen, then the blood is usually red. If it uses copper, the blood is usually blue. But these molecules can also be green and pink.

All these colours except blue are found in worms. Haemoglobin is the most common oxygen-carrying molecule, including in worms. Haemoglobin contains iron, which means most worm blood – including that of earthworms and leeches – is red.

Read more: Curious Kids: why do leeches suck our blood?

Some segmented worms use a different oxygen-carrying molecule called chlorocruorin. The blood of these worms can be either green or red.

One group of segmented marine worms has pink blood. This is because the molecule that carries the oxygen is a type of blood pigment, known as hemerythrin, which is described as pink or purple.

A few species of segmented worms don’t have any oxygen-carrying molecules at all, so their blood is colourless.

So, the answer to your question is that all segmented worms have blood, while roundworms and flatworms do not. The blood colour depends on the molecule that carries oxygen in that worm. And most worms have red blood, just like us!

– ref. Curious Kids: Do worms have blood? And if so, what colour is it? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-do-worms-have-blood-and-if-so-what-colour-is-it-147578