Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Valentin Christiaens, Research Fellow in Astrophysics, Monash University

When Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei first spotted four moons of Jupiter through a telescope, he realised that not everything goes around the Earth, as was the prevailing theory in 1610.

The presumed origin of the Galilean moons was in a swirling circumplanetary disc of gas and dust around the newborn Jupiter.

But evidence of a circumplanetary disc eluded astronomers, despite an intensive search. Until now.

Read more: How we found a white dwarf – a stellar corpse – by accident

We detected the first evidence for one of these discs in the form of an infrared glow around a baby planet called PDS 70 b, the details published in two papers this week.

It was not easy to find

The discovery required one of the largest telescopes on Earth (the creatively named Very Large Telescope in Chile), a sophisticated spectrograph (SINFONI) to acquire images at different wavelengths in the infrared, and new image-processing algorithms developed specifically for the dataset we gathered.

The newborn planet orbits a star called PDS 70, which is young and relatively close to us (a trifling 369 light years away) in what is known as the Upper Centaurus–Lupus star-forming region of the Milky Way.

The star is just a baby itself, less than 10 million years old. In stellar terms PDS 70 is barely out of nappies (our Sun is 4.6 billion years old).

Apart from its youth and proximity, the main reason we chose to study PDS 70 is that previous observations showed a large hole or gap in the disc of gas and dust surrounding the star.

This hole, covering an area almost the size of our Solar System, hints at the presence of planets orbiting the star, which are responsible for carving away the disc material.

The new images we gathered show that the gap is not entirely empty. They reveal an arc of gas, spirals and a bright blob, which had first been detected and interpreted as a baby planet in two studies published last year.

And it’s a whopper planet – about 10 times heavier than Jupiter.

In the infrared

What is new in our analysis is that we probed red light from the planet in more detail than previous studies. We were able to show for the first time that the planet’s infrared colours cannot be explained by its atmosphere alone.

Instead, this excess infrared excess suggests the presence of a circumplanetary disc, just like the one imagined as the birthplace of Jupiter’s four Galilean moons – Io, Europe, Ganymede and Callisto.

Decades ago, the same argument was used as evidence for the presence of protoplanetary discs, the dusty discs of gas around baby stars that are the birthplaces of planets themselves.

Now we can use the same techniques but on a smaller scale to see the birthplace of moons.

The tricky part is that spotting planets with a telescope is like staring into car headlights and trying to spot a firefly. We first had to model and subtract the bright glare of the star, to spot the feeble glow of the planet.

In our processed image (above) we carefully deleted the starlight (we show the location with an asterisk), revealing both the planet and faint structures in the disc surrounding the star.

Possible moons

The discovery of the four largest moons of Jupiter four centuries ago gave astronomers a first hint that giant planets must form surrounded by a circumplanetary disc.

Plenty of work has been done since to try to understand their properties, but we finally have direct confirmation that they exist. It’s the culmination of a long search.

Read more: Observing the invisible: the long journey to the first image of a black hole

It’s also exciting. Our work shows that theoretical models of giant planet formation were not too far off. There is now the possibility that moons could be forming right now in the circumplanetary disc around PDS 70 b.

It’s hoped the new algorithm we developed can now be used to attempt to extract faint signals from other complex datasets of planets forming in other star systems.

It blows the mind to think we might see other planets and even moons in the process of formation, using the biggest telescope in the world. It’s just another reminder of how small and insignificant we really are.

– ref. A disc of dust and gas found around a newborn planet could be the birthplace of moons – http://theconversation.com/a-disc-of-dust-and-gas-found-around-a-newborn-planet-could-be-the-birthplace-of-moons-118260

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By H. K. Colebatch, Visiting Professorial Fellow, UNSW

One thing we learned from the recent election campaign is that the political crisis over Section 44 of the Constitution has not gone away.

Many candidates in the election had their eligibility to stand for parliament questioned and some were even forced to withdraw from their races.

Despite all the attention given to this matter over the last couple of years, and the various procedures introduced to address it, Section 44 will only continue to be a problem until the parliament steps in to address it.

To do that, we first need to address seven myths about Section 44.

1. Everyone knows their citizenship, they just need to do their paperwork

Section 44 is about more than just citizenship – it covers a variety of restrictions on who can serve in parliament.

For instance, a GP who bulk-bills a patient could be considered to have a “pecuniary interest in an agreement with the Commonwealth.” And a postman or a nurse in a public hospital could be deemed to hold “an office of profit under the Crown.”

On citizenship, the section doesn’t just disqualify dual citizens, it also bars those “entitled” to citizenship elsewhere (even if they haven’t applied for it) and those “entitled to the rights and privileges” of citizenship (basically, the “right of abode”, or being entitled to enter a country and live there).

Such entitlements are not easy to discover and almost impossible to remove, because they’re embedded in foreign legislation.

Read more: How the Australian Constitution, and its custodians, ended up so wrong on dual citizenship

2. It doesn’t affect many people

On the contrary, the parliamentary committee investigating the matter estimated half the adult Australian population, or more, could be disqualified by law or impeded in practice from standing for parliament.

In the recent election, we saw one potential candidate withdraw because she was an Australia Post employee and another because she was entitled under Indian law to some privileges of Indian citizenship.

As a result, the Australian parliament becomes even less representative of the Australian people.

3. The constitution framers knew what they were doing

The original text agreed to at the constitutional convention in 1898 simply said anyone who had acquired foreign citizenship by their own act was disqualified from standing for parliament.

The text that eventually became Section 44 was inserted surreptitiously by one of the key architects of the constitution (and Australia’s first prime minister), Edmund Barton, as a drafting amendment. He introduced 400 amendments on the second-to-last day of the convention, but made no mention of this change, and expressly denied there had been any changes to Section 44 apart from a minor one to another subsection.

Read more: Could Section 44 exclude Tony Abbott and Barnaby Joyce from parliament?

4. The High Court has sorted it out

Far from it. Very few cases challenging Section 44 have made it that far, partly because the court has done everything possible to fend them off, including trashing the constitutional provision giving citizens the right to challenge the eligibility of parliamentarians. Politicians have also refused to refer cases to the court unless it’s advantageous to their party.

And when the court has heard a case, it has construed its task so narrowly as to give little guidance to future action on the section. In particular, it has said nothing about the disqualification of those MPs “entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship” in other countries.

In fact, when Senator Matthew Canavan’s eligibility was challenged because Italian laws had changed to permit citizenship to descendents of native Italians, the High Court noted that the law was fairly generous, but one had to apply. Canavan hadn’t applied, therefore couldn’t be an Italian citizen.

But if he had applied and then received Italian citizenship because he was eligible (as his brother had done), he would have been disqualified by Section 44.

This was all too much for the court to sort out. As a result, it offered no clarity on the large number of MPs whose eligibility hangs on what sorts of “entitlement” would disqualify them.

5. But there are administrative checks now, too

Well, yes, but nobody does anything about them. In 2017, all MPs were asked to fill out a form documenting their ancestry and citizenship, and the responses were then logged in a citizenship register. This showed some 15-20 MPs were entitled to foreign citizenship and a total of 59 had the “right of abode” in the UK, which the High Court has decided is the key to the “right and privilege” of citizenship.

But no action was taken on any of these cases. The register appears as a matter of record only.

Read more: Enough is enough on section 44: it’s time for reform

Similarly, although the Australian Electoral Commission is now requiring candidates to complete a similar form, it does not take action against those who refuse to submit it, or leave sections blank. One candidate was referred to the police, but this was clearly a pointless face-saving exercise.

6. We want our MPs to be unequivocally Australian

Having foreign ancestry does not make you un-Australian. Section 44 does nothing to establish the strength of identity or loyalty – it simply prevents an undefined, but potentially very large, slice of the population from standing for parliament.

One case illustrates the ludicrous reach of the present wording.

After Lithuania regained its independence in 1990, it passed a citizenship law that gave people born outside the country to Lithuanian parents the right to citizenship. In 2016, this provision was expanded to cover those with Lithuanian grandparents. As a result, Senator Doug Cameron, whose Scottish burr we are used to hearing on news broadcasts, became eligible for Lithuanian citizenship.

While Cameron could (and did) renounce his British citizenship to qualify for election to the Australian parliament, he cannot renounce his entitlement to Lithuanian citizenship. And while some people have very strong views about Cameron, I have never heard it suggested he was working to a Lithuanian agenda rather than an Australian one.

7. It’s too hard to change the Constitution

The same thing was said about amending the Marriage Act to permit same-sex couples to marry. The public recognises there’s a problem with Section 44 and it expects the politicians to fix it.

The best shot came with the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, which recommended adding the words “until the parliament otherwise provides” to Section 44. This would not change the law, just where the law is made.

Instead of disqualifications being defined by the laws in foreign countries, as the High Court has interpreted Section 44, they could be determined by the Australian parliament. This is how qualifications of senators and members are currently decided. It’s also how women got the vote in 1902.

If this proposal was strongly supported by all the parties and clearly explained to the electorate, it would likely pass in the next election.

So where does this leave us?

It all comes down to leadership. Up to now, both the Coalition and Labor have been primarily motivated by partisan advantage: how can we use Section 44 to score a political point?

The Joint Standing Committee showed that with a willingness to collaborate, there is a path forward to solving the problem. The best we can hope for is that after the trauma of the last few years, and the evidence of the continuing decline in support for the main parties, political leaders will see that acting constructively on Section 44 might actually be in the best interests of both parties.

– ref. The Section 44 soap opera: why more MPs could be in danger of being forced out – http://theconversation.com/the-section-44-soap-opera-why-more-mps-could-be-in-danger-of-being-forced-out-116955

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peta Stapleton, Associate Professor in Psychology, Bond University

Over half of Australian teachers suffer from anxiety and nearly one-fifth are depressed. These are the findings of our soon-to-be-published study assessing teachers’ well-being.

We examined the health and well-being of 166 Australian school teachers, aged 22-65, in an anonymous survey. Respondents revealed their work environment, workload and finances to be the most significant sources of stress.

Around 18% of respondents had symptoms that met the criteria for moderate to severe depression. Nearly 62% met criteria for moderate to severe anxiety while nearly 20% (19.75%) had severe anxiety. And 56% met criteria for medium to high severity of somatic symptoms. This is when the symptoms are physical and can include pain, nausea, dizziness and fainting.

Alarmingly, 17% screened positive for having probable alcohol abuse or dependence.

Read more: Are you burnt out at work? Ask yourself these 4 questions

These rates are higher than the national averages. Around 10% of Australians experience depression over their lifetime, 13% experience anxiety, 5% are diagnosed with substance use disorders, and 7% are diagnosed with somatic symptom disorder.

The findings are concerning for a number of reasons, including that teachers are required to foster the emotional well-being of students. The Australian Curriculum requires teachers to address students’ personal and social capabilities. This includes teaching students to recognise and identify their own emotions, teaching emotional awareness, and relationship exploration and understanding.

But if a teacher’s mental health is affected, this may undermine their capacity to promote well-being in students.

Why are teachers so stressed?

One-quarter of Australians report they suffer stress. Previous surveys show sales support workers suffer the highest stress levels out of all occupations. Other professions experiencing high stress include hospitality, legal, social, health and welfare support workers.

But our research adds school teachers to the mix. This is supported by other studies indicating teachers are more susceptible to work-related stress, burnout and general psychological distress when compared to other occupations.

Along with assessing respondents on several measures of well-being, our study asked them to identify the most stressful thing in their lives. The word cloud below illustrates the frequency of teachers’ main concerns – of which “work” was dominant. The larger the fonts, the more frequently these were cited.

Chronic stress has many negative consequences, including putting sufferers at risk of long-term mental health disorders.

Several features may contribute to a stressful teaching environment. Studies have pointed to a lack of educational resources, difficulties with staff and parents, work overload, time pressure and behavioural challenges with students as contributing to teacher stress and burnout. This could contribute to, or exacerbate, existing mental-health issues.

Read more: Almost every Australian teacher has been bullied by students or their parents, and it’s taking a toll

Teachers may also be drinking as a form of stress relief. Other countries have reported alcohol use to be two to three times higher in teachers than in the general population.

Research on work-related stress suggests high levels of work effort must be matched with high levels of rewards. According to this model, an imbalance between effort and reward leads to increased emotional reactions and risk of mental-health problems.

Rewards can be financial, the chance for regular professional development, job security, as well as praise, approval and esteem. Teachers could be experiencing mental distress and its associated health implications if the demands of their job seem to exceed the rewards.

We know employees perform better when they have more control over their daily work schedules, flexibility and access to support when they need it.

We might see improvements in teachers’ coping and performance abilities if they are offered well-being programs, whether that be as professional development, access to paid gym memberships, or childcare support.

Attending to the mental health of teachers should be paramount. They are at the forefront of the education system and vital to supporting student success.

Psychology student Sarah Garby was involved in the research paper discussed in this article.

– ref. Teachers are more depressed and anxious than the average Australian – http://theconversation.com/teachers-are-more-depressed-and-anxious-than-the-average-australian-117267

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

The facts are not in dispute.

Annual GDP growth has fallen to 1.8%. On a per-capita basis we have had three consecutive quarters of negative growth. The last time that happened was during the drought and recession of 1982, almost four decades years ago.

The most recent inflation reading was literally zero. Real wage growth has been stagnant for six years. Household debt is nearly double disposable income. And underemployment is more than 8%, on top of a 5.2% rate of unemployment.

What is in dispute is what to do about it.

We’ve entered secular stagnation

After being been told for years that the economy is in good shape and that we are “transitioning away from the mining boom”, it’s time to face the reality that, like most advanced economies, we are in a low-growth, low-interest rate, low-inflation trap.

Former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers has argued for some time that advanced economies, almost universally, are suffering from what he calls “secular stagnation” — a protracted period of low growth caused by too much savings chasing too few productive investment opportunities.

If the description applies to us, and it does, there are only two ways to escape it.

We’ve two options

One is unconventional monetary policy: measures that have the effect that pushing interest rates below zero would have.

The other is aggressive fiscal policy: either big (and if necessary, repeated) tax cuts or a big (and if necessary, repeated) boost in government spending, each of which would put the surplus at risk.

What would an aggressive-enough monetary policy look like?

The starting point is a concept known as the “equilibrium real interest rate”. It’s the real (inflation-adjusted) rate of interest consistent with stable macroeconomic performance (which means full employment without financial bubbles).

1: Aggressive monetary policy

There is compelling evidence that in advanced economies such as Australia the equilibrium real interest rate is negative.

But getting there in a low-inflation environment is hard. The Reserve Bank can, if it chooses, set the cash rate as low as 0% (this week it cut it to 1.25%) but it can’t safely move it much lower than zero. If it did, if people and firms found themselves having to pay money in order to keep money in banks, they might simply take their money out, giving the Reserve Bank even less control.

This problem is known as the “zero lower bound”. It means that if the bank needs to cut rates beyond than zero it’ll probably have to do something else that has a similar effect.

The most likely candidate is “quantitative easing” (QE), whereby the central bank buys long-term government bonds and other securities from investors that have them, effectively forcing cash into their hands, which the zero interest rate means they have little choice but to spend.

It shows up in lower longer-term interest rates (rates for borrowing 5, 10 or even 30 years into the future) and should boost spending and borrowing just as much as cutting short-term rates.

Read more: Secular stagnation: it’s time to admit that Larry Summers was right about this global economic growth trap

There are at least three difficulties with QE in Australia.

The first is that because the Reserve Bank has never done it before, there are questions about how it would mechanically execute on it. The United States and European experience is helpful in providing a template.

The second difficulty is getting out. Nobody, including the US Federal Reserve, really knows what happens when QE is unwound.

Third, if secular stagnation persists, then QE needs to be a long-term strategy. But is it possible for a central bank to expand its balance sheet buying bonds and securities indefinitely, even if it was buying them at a modest pace? Again, nobody knows.

2: Aggressive fiscal policy

If nothing else, the headaches with monetary policy suggest that fiscal policy might be an attractive alternative. It might also be more effective.

As Reserve Bank governor Philip Lowe noted in a speech on Tuesday, done in a good way government spending on infrastructure could both boost the economy and boost longer term productivity, giving a double benefit. It could be complemented by “structural policies that support firms expanding, investing, innovating and employing people”.

It’s hard to argue with Lowe’s logic. So hard in fact that some of us have been saying exactly what he just said for some time.

A quicker way to boost the economy would be to splash cash, either as Kevin Rudd did in the form of cash payments during the global financial crisis, or in the form of tax offsets of the kind the Morrison government announced in the 2018 and 2019 budgets.

Read more: It’s the budget cash splash that reaches back in time

Delivered straight into bank accounts, both have much the same effect, even though one is classified as spending and the other as cutting tax.

The obstacle to doing such things is this government’s – make that this country’s – obsession with balanced budgets.

The surplus can wait

I have argued strongly and still believe that debt and deficits do matter, but at the moment we are in serious danger of falling into recession. That makes it imperative to act.

Given the politics of budget deficits and the narratives around economic management it might be that the burden of action falls on the organisation the least able to pull it off in the present circumstances. That’s the Reserve Bank.

If Australia does dip into recession in the next year or two it will be an unforced error.

Not only would the government be responsible for it by not having taken strong enough action on spending when it could, the bank would also be responsible by taking action too late and letting things get to the stage where it had to act while interest rates were near zero.

Read more: Expect weak economic growth for quite some time. What Wednesday’s national accounts tell us

– ref. Vital Signs. If we fall into a recession (and we might) we’ll have ourselves to blame – http://theconversation.com/vital-signs-if-we-fall-into-a-recession-and-we-might-well-have-ourselves-to-blame-118387

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Kinsella, Professor of Literature and Environment, Curtin University

I live in a vegan family situation. I have been a vegan for over 33 years and my partner, poet and novelist Tracy Ryan, has been a vegan for over a quarter of a century; our 16-year-old son Tim was conceived and born a vegan, and remains one.

If you ever doubt it’s his choice, ask him — he’s eloquent on his veganism, and has angles on it we don’t, neither Tracy nor I having been born vegans. Tracy has always had a deep interest in nutrition, and raising children vegan has been a deeply informed life-act — done with respect for their rights as well as animal rights. We don’t use animal products in any way we are aware of. Rather than seeing our food, clothes, shoes, working materials, as animal-product “alternatives”, they are our norms.

Over the decades we have seen and heard it all when it comes to the arguments and attacks on veganism. Really, people find their own way through such things as they do if they hold any committed ethical position that is about principle and not style.

One of the first that vegans encounter is the specious argument about denying children before a certain age a choice in the matter, that veganism is forced on them.

It’s such an obvious reply: Aren’t you forcing your carnivorism (or more accurately, omnivorism) on your children? They are also not given a choice — people make decisions for their children before they are empowered (informed enough) to make decisions for themselves. It is possible to have a balanced vegan diet, and even back in the mid-80s, vegan sources of B12 and other more complex nutritional requirements were available.

But the point of this article is not for the fors and againsts, because these are well attested, and even the most slipshod research skills will reveal what is and isn’t the case. Rather, this is an account of long-term veganism in the context of the recent increase (last five or so years) in vegan consciousness, and availability of vegan foods.

Actually, vegan food has always been available, of course, just in raw and rudimentary and unrefined ways — what we are talking about in the “now” is the mass replacement of mass slaughterhouse products with non-slaughterhouse products that “equate” and move from being “faux” meat (protein), or ersatz, to food definitions and realities in their own terms. That’s what has industry scared and reactive.

Personally, I have a problem with all industrialisations and capital processes of market — the fetishisation of products that increase wealth rather than answer needs — but it is this “mass” that so upsets animal-exploitation, agri-industrialism. Little of it is cultural, outside profit-making. Arguments about what’s best for the planet are placed far down the list of priorities, as the fossil-fuel desire shows.

Casting aside the gun

There are exceptions, and cultural beliefs that do need to be respected. When I began being a vegan, I was outwardly proselytising; now I am only so in my writing and via how I live. I have learnt that respecting others’ journeys is the only way that long-term change comes.

That’s an argument for all ethical issues, and it could be argued that all killing must be stopped immediately or we simply appease our own consciences at the expense of being concerned about our own behaviours — many mass murders have taken place as people let their nation’s military go about its business outside their personal scrutiny, as that scrutiny is confronting to undertake.

Ethical positions are not “cults”; cults are the control of others to remove their capacity for personal choice – but it is a paradox to see veganism called a cult by meat-eaters who have been part of an industrial slaughter-cult all their lives.

Ironically, I come from a background of fishing and hunting (and became a vegan while living in a house on a dairy farm: witnessing). I was obsessed with guns when I was a child and a teenager — I wanted to become an army officer. My turning away from these values was conscious and specific — by my late teens and early 20s, I was a committed vegan, anarchist, and pacifist. I found my way there via the paradox of loving animals (I always have) and exploiting them (to my mind).

My poetry was tracking my concern, so my poetry helped in the decision-making — that old argument of poetic language expressing the inexpressible. When I wrote of casting aside the gun, of leaving animals be, it was because I had – but also to articulate and mark it. To give a sign in word as well as thought and action. A constant reminder of how and why I’d got to that point of change.

This was not easily the case — as an alcoholic in former days, I was aggressive, often in trouble, and confrontational. I got sober 24 years ago so I could better hold the values I believed in. It wasn’t an easy journey, but one in which I knew I had to reduce my own hypocrisies. And that’s it; that’s where a lot of misunderstanding manifests between vegans and non-vegans — it’s not a holier-than-thou situation, but a move towards being less impacting, less damaging, and more respectful of life.

I’ve actually known vegans quite violent (towards people), and I have rejected their positions because of this unresolved hypocrisy; but this has been rare.

And even in these cases, in time if they stayed vegan (they often didn’t), they moved away from their own anger and aggression and lived a life more in tune with their values. I say this because veganism is both an ethical position, and a position that eventually calls on a variety of consistencies with regard to how we treat people, who are, after all, animals too.

Nutmeat, palm oil and an ethics of commitment

A lot of older vegans will talk about the 80s as being a time of Nutmeat, avocados, and bananas, of boiling pulses to make protein patties to add to the steamed veggies, of reading labels carefully because there wasn’t the vegan certification process (or “market” for that to be insisted on) back then.

Sure, it is nice to be able to go out and eat more “cheffed” foods from supermarkets and in restaurants, but it’s not the be-all and end-all, and you still weigh up issues such as processing, origins and cultivation methods, and air-miles.

If we fall into dependence on mass food production processes, then ultimately we will damage animals in other ways. A classic example is that of palm oil — so essential to many processed vegan foods (as indeed non-vegan). The destruction of habitat to increase palm oil production eventually led to a call for palm oil that’s non-exploitative (of people and ecologies) — a regulation.

People survive the best way they can, and as with so many raw food materials, those containing palm oil are sourced in less wealthy zones to feed wealthier ones — capitalist exploitation works fast to adjust to new markets.

So any veganism not in tune with these issues quickly becomes an appeasement of one’s own conscience while hiding from the potential for damaging impacts. The response has to be holistic — vegan food producers need to work with non-vegans and different cultural realities to ensure transitions that don’t damage in other ways.

This is not wisdom from on high; it’s just decades of seeing faddism and change, of people calling themselves vegan when they don’t closely consider what’s in a “product”, or deploying the terms as a social definition while allowing themselves “exceptions to the rule”, or, say, eating honey (an animal product!).

Point is, “vegan” means something, and of course be whatever you are, but let’s let a term represent a value we can share and understand. Play with language by all means (that’s what writers do!), but not with the ethics of commitment.

Mobile phones, whose raw materials destroy whole communities and habitats in their extraction and manufacture, are an example of a contradiction with the new spreading of the message of veganism — we have to find a way to a common understanding of cause and effect. It’s a big and complex picture that tussles with the obvious fact that an animal hurt or killed is an animal hurt or killed.

Mutual respect

Veganism intersects with many cultural attitudes, and diverges from many others, across the globe, but mutual respect is, in my experience, an unassailable value.

I have never tried to force anyone to eat vegan, yet attempts have been made to shame me into not eating vegan, in order not to offend my hosts. I have never compromised my ethical position, but I have gone to great effort to explain my position and my desire not to offend a host.

That was early on — now I carefully have discussions before, say, sharing an eating space with those who have invited me about how and why I eat (and don’t eat) what I do. An intercultural conversation needs to be had. Confronting? Surely, in a pluralistic society we have these conversations to ensure respectful co-awareness all the time? If not, then we probably should. I have no problem in being forward about who and what I am — in fact, I see saying so as a sign of respect for my hosts.

The bottom line in all this, for me, for my family, is animal rights. We live among animals but keep none — they are part of the world around us and we wish to have no control over them.

We deal with “pests” in non-invasive and non-damaging ways, and we work towards a consistency of respectful interaction. That’s to do with seeing no hierarchies of control, no speciesist superiority. Then you get the unthought-out attack-mode on saying such a thing (seriously): Are you saying if a lion was attacking your baby, you’d do nothing? Well, of course I would… What do you expect? Would I be cruel and seek to hurt and exploit the lion? No. Anyway!

Giving a minority report on UK TV

Living in the UK in the late 90s, we were invited to appear on the television program Susan Brooks’s Family Recipes. We went up to Manchester from Cambridge, and the chefs, Susan and her daughter, prepared us a vegan meal on set, and we sampled it and discussed what it was like being a vegan family. It was a fascinating experience because of the warm attitude to how we lived, coming from a “regular” cooking program.

Britain has long been more in tune with vegan living (the term comes from postwar UK), but in the 90s it was still very “minority”. If we were not part of the dissenting opinion, we were still giving a minority report. At the same time I spoke to the Vegan magazine about being a poet and a vegan, and how it informed my writing practice. There was a context. And it was broad in its conception — if you wanted medical research without vivisection or abuse of animals, you could support the Dr Hadwen Trust!

Such contexts are still being created in Australia — the aggressive response from some people to veganism accords with a macho public culture that seeks to manipulate markets to defend old colonial land usage and the machinery of animal pastoralism. In this, I am not commenting on individuals nor even communities, but on the machine of capitalism and its empowered defenders.

A stunning (I use no words carelessly, I think) example is the case of vegan activist James Warden who said he was was provided with no vegan food options while in a Perth prison — this is control, this is oppression, and this is the state protecting its ongoing colonial interests. There is a disconnect between traditional hunter-gatherer societies and the mass consumer, export-import underpinnings of colonial capital. It is the latter that concerns me because I have been part of it.

The New Veganism

There’s a new generation of vegan activists in Australia who have quickly been turned into public enemies — they are targeted by media, police, and government, and seen as interfering with what amounts to an ongoing sell of Australian values. As a poet, I’ve tried to speak through poetry in support of these activists, while also recognising that I come from a very different space through being older and longer-term in my activism.

I live in rural Australia, and co-exist with farmers and people who eat and use animals. Not in the house I share, and not on the Noongar land where I live, and which I acknowledge is not “mine”. But nearby. They know who we are and how we live, and we offer an alternative. Animals find refuge if they look for it. It’s their place, too.

The conversation is ongoing, persistent, and there’s no compromise in our position, but it’s also respectful of other people’s humanity, their free will, and their journeys. They are not us and we are not them. I will stand in front of a bulldozer to save bush, and I will live next to a bulldozer driver.

Each of us can only offer one another examples of alternatives. That’s how real change comes; that’s how fewer and fewer animals will suffer. But in this crisis mode of biospheric collapse, the reason there are more and more vegans is that the time has come to act. And people are acting. Others will too, because they see a need and want to, not because they are told to. Bullying happens in many directions at once.

If I see a problem with the New Veganism it’s a possible connection with presentation and social monitoring. Social media try to direct, but also dilute the commitment of person to person, person to animal, person to real place where animals live.

Veganism doesn’t need “influencers” — though if anything stops animals being exploited, it’s a good thing. But as we — Tracy and I and Tim — see each animal as an individual with their own intact rights, as we see people, we also see the collective, the community, the herd, the hive, the loner, the gregarious… all these “types”… we also see the interconnected fate of the biosphere.

Technology that promotes veganism that consumes the planet is, for us, an irresolvable contradiction. A lot of thinking needs to be done around this — and modes of presentation and discussion need to be considered as well. The slaughterhouse is obvious and hidden; it is literal and a metaphor that can become real for all life in sudden ways.

Just a positive to finish with. I have crossed Australia many times (though not recently) by train, as I avoid flying here (to lessen eco-damage impact), and I have done so with much pre-prepared vegan food.

But the train caterers were always willing to make “bespoke” food for me, to supplement my food stash. The door to a broader veganism in “Western” societies has actually long been open — and if Western capitalism could learn from many non-capitalist, non-Western cultures, not only would they find much precedent sometimes on a very large scale, but also much communal goodwill around the choice of what we eat, and why we do or don’t eat it.

And to reiterate my support for the new generation of vegan activists looking to intervene in non-violent ways to stop the pastoral-factory exploitation of animals, I wrote this poem which appeared through PETA. I am not on social media, but they took it into that realm, the realm of style, influence, but also loss and consumer endgame if people are not wary.

I am here now

for the young vegan activists saving animals from slaughter

I am here now
because a young human
interrupted my journey to the slaughtering,
hoisted me over their shoulders
and carried me towards animation.

I am here now
my eyes dilating fast
to take in this extension
to life — and the blood of my kin
is a river never divided.

I am here now
because an intervention
drew out the length of my days;
the things I have learnt we have taken —
we breathe the same air as our dead.

I am here now
because the young humans
are rising peacefully from their screens
to step into the killing zones,
to bend down and lift us back to the light.

– ref. Friday essay: on being an ethical vegan for 33 years – http://theconversation.com/friday-essay-on-being-an-ethical-vegan-for-33-years-118049

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bronwyn Orr, Veterinarian and PhD scholar, University of Sydney

If you think your dog looks stressed out, it might be your own stress levels that are affecting your pet pooch.

A study published on Thursday in Nature’s Scientific Reports shows pet dogs may synchronise their stress levels with those of their owners.

More than just being “man’s best friend”, it appears our pet dogs may be mirroring our mental state too, and that can be bad for their health.

It’s all in the hair

Swedish researchers studied 58 dogs – 33 Shetland Sheepdogs and 25 Border Collies – as well as their owners. The dogs selected were balanced for sex, breed and activity level.

Read more: Vets can do more to reduce the suffering of flat-faced dog breeds

Both dog and owner personality was assessed through standardised personality questionnaires, with owners filling out the Dog Personality Questionnaire on behalf of their pet.

The researchers also measured the hormone cortisol in the hair of dogs and their owners over a year-long period.

Cortisol is a measure of physiological stress, which can be raised during mental distress. But it’s also elevated for short periods such as during exercise and illness.

Hair cortisol is a good way of measuring long-term trends in stress levels, as hair grows slowly (about 1cm per month) and absorbs circulating substances from the blood.

Impact on dogs

The results showed a significant correlation between human and dog cortisol levels across the year. In 57 of the dogs in summer and 55 in winter, cortisol levels matched those of their owners. This means that for these dogs, their cortisol levels rose and fell in unison with their owner’s.

This correlation was not influenced by dog activity levels or dog personality. It was, however, influenced by owner personality. Owners with higher stress levels tended to have dogs with higher stress levels too.

Female dogs had a stronger connection with their owner’s stress levels compared with male dogs. Previous studies have shown that female dogs (as well as rats and chimpanzees) are more emotionally responsive than males.

There’s also evidence that increased oxytocin (the love and bonding hormone) in female dogs results in increased interactions with their owner, causing a corresponding increase in the owner’s oxytocin levels. This effect wasn’t seen in male dogs.

A limiting factor to the new study was that it did not identify any causes of elevated stress in the dog owners. But what it does show is that regardless of the cause of the stress, our reaction to it impacts our dogs.

Our relationship with dogs

Researchers have long discussed the concept of what is called the “human-dog dyad”, a close bond between humans and dogs. This relationship, developed over 15,000 years, is unique in the animal world.

There is evidence to suggest dogs evolved alongside us and consequently are in tune with our emotions and bond with us through eye contact.

Although many aspects of this inter-species relationship are positive (particularly for us), it’s likely there are some drawbacks to this close relationship with dogs.

Like many animals, we can share diseases with our dogs such as the superbug MRSA and Q Fever. What’s more, dog bites are an issue of increasing importance to society.

We know that failing to providing basic care like food and shelter is cruel, but we often overlook how disregarding the mental lives of our pets can also negatively impact their welfare.

Helping our dogs cope

Dogs are sentient animals. This means they can experience both positive and negative emotions, such as pleasure, comfort, fear, and anxiety.

A poor mental state, where a dog is regularly experiencing negative emotions such as anxiety, can lead to poor animal welfare. If owners have an impact on the stress levels of their dogs, it means we also play a role in protecting their welfare.

The impact we have on our dog’s stress levels goes both ways – positive and negative. If we reduce our own stress levels, it’s likely we will also reduce our dog’s stress levels.

Read more: Why a walk in the woods really does help your body and your soul

We know chronic stress is bad for both humans and dogs, increasing the likelihood we will get sick as well as decreasing our quality of life.

If you don’t work on decreasing your stress levels for your own sake, perhaps you will do it for your dog. There are great resources available for decreasing stress levels, and the good news is that some of them, such as getting out in nature, can be done with your dog right by your side.

– ref. Man’s stressed friend: how your mental health can affect your dog – http://theconversation.com/mans-stressed-friend-how-your-mental-health-can-affect-your-dog-118271

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ross Hollett, Lecturer, Edith Cowan University

Can a A$12 pill test prevent deaths from ecstasy? Our research, published today, finds pill testing provides no magic answer.

We found not everyone acts on the result of a pill test in the same way. It depends on the result, whether they have used ecstasy before and how willing they are to take risks.

Read more: How does MDMA kill?

Ecstasy users could end up in hospital or dying as they do not know the chemical composition of the substance they are taking. That’s because their pill could contain higher than expected doses of ecstasy or toxic contaminants, both of which could be fatal.

So identifying what’s in their pill, using a pill checking service at a festival or a club, is one option to reduce the risk.

It’s an option that Australian research suggests would be popular; some 95% of party-goers who used illicit drugs said they would use a pill checking service if it were available.

Read more: Here’s why doctors are backing pill testing at music festivals across Australia

But only two official services have been offered in Australia.

In 2018, the first government-supported pill testing trial took place at the Groovin’ the Moo music festival in Canberra. In 85 tests, two lethal substances were detected and five users disposed of their substance once told what they contained.

In 2019 at the same festival, a repeat trial detected seven dangerous substances, which were disposed of.

But what would someone do if they discovered their ecstasy was purer than average? Or the pill test was unable to identify the substance? Would this knowledge lead to safer behaviour? This is what our research tried to answer.

What we found

We presented almost 300 people at a music festival with different scenarios to find out who was most likely to continue to take risks after a pill test.

Almost 60% of people interviewed said they had used ecstasy before. These prior users said if the pill testing showed a high dose of ecstasy or the test was inconclusive, they would not necessarily take precautions, such as throwing away the pill or taking less of the pill.

But if they discovered their substance contained a toxic contaminant they would be very likely to take precautions.

These findings are important considering some of the recent ecstasy-related deaths at Australian festivals have been linked to high doses of ecstasy.

The people who said they had never used ecstasy before were more cautious, regardless of the outcome of the test. They said they would be more likely to take precautions in all the scenarios we presented.

Why don’t people always act?

Educating people generally gives them information to make choices. But, for some, simply giving more information about their substance won’t change their tendency to use it.

Our study showed that people who are risk takers in general (referred to as sensation seekers) would be more likely to take risks with a substance if a test was inconclusive or if the substance contained harmful contaminants.

Importantly, these risk takers would also be less likely to take precautions after finding out their pill contained a high dose of ecstasy.

Read more: Explainer: how our understanding of risk is changing

So, pill testing in itself is not the magic answer. This new research suggests that pill testing services at music festivals would be most effective for reducing harm in people who might be trying ecstasy for the first time.

Generally, people who had used before were only more likely to take precautions if the ecstasy contained a toxic contaminant.

And prior ecstasy users who are also risk takers are statistically at the greatest risk of harm even after taking a pill test.

Do ecstasy users already know what’s safe?

Could people who have used ecstasy before know more about ecstasy use?

Apparently not. We found people who use ecstasy need drug education to help reduce their risks of harm. They were no more knowledgeable about sensible ecstasy doses or the harmfulness of dangerous contaminants than people who have never used.

So, it is important that formal pill testing services also offer counselling and drug education alongside the test result to decrease the chance of harmful choices, hospitalisation and even death.

Because we found almost 50% of prior ecstasy users said they did not know or trust their supplier, it suggests some people are knowingly taking considerable risks. If these people had access to a pill checking service then their ability to manage these risks would be greatly improved.

Who pays for pill testing?

Political opponents to pill testing are wary of supporting or providing funds for quality-control services for illegal drugs.

However, the festival attendees we surveyed said they would contribute an average $12 towards the cost of such pill testing.

So, given the low knowledge levels in ecstasy users, let’s reframe pill testing as a gateway to engage with illicit drug users to provide other services, such as education and counselling.

This combined harm-minimisation approach could reduce the rates of harm to mostly ill-informed young people attending festivals.

– ref. Can a $12 pill test for ecstasy save lives? Well, it’s complicated – http://theconversation.com/can-a-12-pill-test-for-ecstasy-save-lives-well-its-complicated-108067

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zoe Loh, Research Scientist, CSIRO

This week brought news that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) levels at the Mauna Loa atmospheric observatory in Hawaii have risen steeply for the seventh year in a row, reaching a May 2019 average of 414.7 parts per million (ppm).

It was the highest monthly average in 61 years of measurements at that observatory, and comes five years after CO₂ concentrations first breached the 400ppm milestone.

But in truth, the amount of greenhouse gas in our atmosphere is higher still. If we factor in the presence of other greenhouse gases besides carbon dioxide, we find that the world has already ticked past yet another milestone: 500ppm of what we call “CO₂-equivalent”, or CO₂-e.

Read more: Forty years of measuring the world’s cleanest air reveals human fingerprints on the atmosphere

In July 2018, the combination of long-lived greenhouse gases measured in the “cleanest air in the world” at Cape Grim Baseline Atmospheric Pollution Station surpassed 500ppm CO₂-e.

As the atmosphere of the Southern Hemisphere contains less pollution than the north, this means the global average atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases is now well above this level.

What is CO₂-e?

Although CO₂ is the most abundant greenhouse gas, dozens of other gases – including methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O) and the synthetic greenhouse gases – also trap heat. Many of them are more powerful greenhouse gases than CO₂, and some linger for longer in the atmosphere. That means they have a significant influence on how much the planet is warming.

Atmospheric scientists use CO₂-e as a convenient way to aggregate the effect of all the long-lived greenhouse gases.

As all the major greenhouse gases (CO₂, CH₄ and N₂O) are rising in concentration, so too is CO₂-e. It has climbed at an average rate of 3.3ppm per year during this decade – faster than at any time in history. And it is showing no sign of slowing.

This milestone, like so many others, is symbolic. The difference between 499 and 500ppm CO₂-e is marginal in terms of the fate of the climate and the life it sustains. But the fact that the cleanest air on the planet has now breached this threshold should elicit deep concern.

Warming on the way

The Paris climate agreement is aimed at limiting global warming to less than 2℃ above pre-industrial levels, to avoid the most dangerous effects of climate change. But the task of predicting how human greenhouse emissions will perturb the climate system on a scale of decades to centuries is complex.

The best estimate of long-term global warming expected from 500ppm CO₂-e is about 2.5℃. But so far, since pre-industrial times, the global climate (including oceans) has warmed by only 0.7℃.

This is partly because industrial smog and other tiny particles (together called aerosols) reflect sunlight out to space, offsetting some of the expected warming. What’s more, the climate system responds slowly to rising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations because much of the excess heat is taken up by the oceans.

The amount of heat each greenhouse gas can trap depends on its absorption spectrum – how strongly it can absorb energy at different wavelengths, particularly in the infrared range. Despite its simple molecular structure, there is still much to learn about the heat-absorbing properties of methane, the second-biggest component of CO₂-e.

Studies published in 2016 and 2018 led to the estimate of methane’s warming potential being revised upwards by 15%, meaning methane is now considered to be 32 times more efficient at trapping heat in the atmosphere than CO₂, on a per-molecule basis over a 100-year time span.

Considering this new evidence, we calculate that greenhouse gas concentrations at Cape Grim crossed the 500ppm CO₂-e threshold in July 2018.

This is higher than the official estimate based on the previous formulation for calculating CO₂-e, which remains in widespread use. For instance, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is reporting 2018 CO₂-e as 496ppm.

The graph below shows the two curves for the time evolution of CO₂-e in the atmosphere as measured at Cape Grim, using the old and new formulae.

Some greenhouse gases, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), also deplete the ozone layer. CFCs are in decline thanks to the Montreal Protocol, which bans the production and use of these chemicals, despite reports that indicate some recent production of CFC-11 in China.

But unfortunately their ozone-safe replacements, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), are very potent greenhouse gases, and are on the rise. The recently enacted Kigali Amendment to the protocol means that consumption controls on HFCs are now in place, and this will see the growth rate of HFCs slow significantly and then reverse in the coming decades.

We can change

Australia is at the forefront of initiating measures to curb the impact of HFCs on climate change.

Methane is another low-hanging fruit for climate action, while we undertake the slower and more difficult transition away from CO₂-emitting energy sources.

The significant human methane emissions from leaks in reticulated gas systems, landfills, waste water treatment, and fugitive emissions from coal mining and oil and gas production can be monitored and reduced. We have the science and technology to do this now.

Both in the oil and gas sectors and in urban areas, there are many examples of how methane “hot spots” can be identified and tackled.

It’s a classic win-win that saves money and reduces climate change, and something we should be implementing in Australia in the near future.

– ref. Why there’s more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere than you may have realised – http://theconversation.com/why-theres-more-greenhouse-gas-in-the-atmosphere-than-you-may-have-realised-118336

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katrina Raynor, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Transforming Housing Project, University of Melbourne

Housing in Australia is broken. Across the country, only 2% of private rentals are affordable for a person on the minimum wage. Less than 1% are affordable for a single person on the pension. There are 650,000 households who can’t afford housing at market rates in Australia right now and this figure is projected to reach over a million by 2036.

The abject failure to meet the housing needs of lower-income households is partially due to decades of underfunded social housing by government. Since the 1960s, the proportion of public housing in Australia has almost halved from 8% to 4.6% of total housing stock.

Scott Morrison’s newly re-elected government made no election statements relevant to social housing. That suggests this situation is unlikely to change soon.

Read more: Australia needs to reboot affordable housing funding, not scrap it

Leaving it to the private sector

As governments have stepped away from directly delivering affordable housing, more emphasis has been placed on the private sector and market forces to deliver this social good. Internationally, policies like inclusionary zoning require developers to provide a portion of affordable housing in return for planning permission.

For example, in San Francisco inclusionary zoning has been in place since 1992. This policy has generated 4,600 permanently affordable units since 2002. Developers received no incentives in return for being required to deliver this housing.

In Vancouver, developers wishing to build above a 3:1 plot ratio (for example, three storeys on 100% of the site, or six storeys on 50% of the site) in the CBD must provide social housing or other community amenities.

Read more: Ten lessons from cities that have risen to the affordable housing challenge

In contrast, the state of Victoria has very few regulations that encourage or enforce affordable housing or other community benefits in return for development permissions. The rezoning of Fisherman’s Bend for development is one particularly egregious example in Melbourne.

Victoria’s plan for negotiations

In 2018, the Victorian government took some initial steps towards involving private developers in providing affordable housing. It changed the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to designate affordable housing as a valid planning objective and created a mechanism for negotiated affordable housing agreements.

Local councils can now ask for affordable housing as part of planning approval processes. While these negotiations will inevitably generate a wide range of outcomes through a variety of arrangements, one likely permutation is shown below.

The local council and developer will enter into a negotiation and decide on a “reasonable” affordable housing contribution. In this instance, the developer will sell, “gift” or lease a number of units to a not-for-profit housing provider, which will manage the units and ensure eligible, low-income households occupy the home.

The difference between many international examples and Victoria is that these negotiations are voluntary. The argument is that voluntary negotiations avoid a one-size-fits-all solution and allows for flexibility and creativity in negotiations.

On the other hand, international research suggests voluntary programs often generate uncertainty and inequitable outcomes. They tend to generate less affordable housing than mandated systems. And they do so in more opaque ways.

Think about it: why would a developer voluntarily give up potential profit by selling or renting a property at a below-market rate? Such contributions would need to be enforced and/or incentivised.

Read more: Build social and affordable housing to get us off the boom-and-bust roller coaster

What can negotiation theory tell us?

Negotiation research can help us to understand the likely outcomes of these arrangements. It offers insights into stakeholder interests, the potential for mutual gains, and access to knowledge.

Stakeholder interests

Interests are the underlying values and priorities that motivate stakeholders’ demands or positions in negotiations. Interests in this context relate to the degree to which state government, local councils, or developers feel it is their responsibility to provide affordable housing. It relates to views on “valid” profit margins for developers and concerns about reputation.

It also relates to the priorities and strategies of the community housing providers, who are most likely to own and manage the housing delivered through these negotiations.

We know most developers don’t feel it is their responsibility to deliver affordable housing. Similarly, while some councils have explicit statements on affordability, this is not the case across Victoria.

Mutual gains

In places like San Francisco where affordable housing is required in all developments over a certain size, these requirements are built into feasibility calculations from the outset. Therefore, no incentives are included.

This also creates an even playing field for all developers in the consideration of land and development. As there is no negotiation or incentive that could shift the profit margin, the required approach places everyone on the same starting line. Further, the cost considerations are the same for all, when considering the purchase of a site and undertaking an analysis of the feasibility of a proposed project.

Voluntary negotiations only work when the parties at the negotiating table are interdependent – they must have something to gain and something to contribute in the negotiation or they wouldn’t be there. In places where negotiations are voluntary, incentives are often “bundled together” as sweeteners to offer to developers in the negotiation process. Possible incentives include car park waivers, increases in permissible developable area (i.e height or density bonuses) and fee reductions or waivers.

In Victoria, key incentives like allowing an increase in the floor area of a development – so-called floor area uplift – are difficult to implement in most local government areas. And expedited planning approvals are politically contentious and have limited impact on developers.

Inconsistency between councils may also allow developers to “shop around”. They are likely to avoid local government areas with a reputation for pursuing contributions.

As negotiations take place across Victoria the capacity for mutual gains for local communities and developers will be a key component in deciding how much affordable housing is provided and at what cost.

Access to knowledge

In negotiations, money and knowledge is power. Stakeholders are likely to hide or manipulate information in negotiations to support their own arguments and interests. This is particularly likely when there is little established trust between parties. Not only does this lead to undemocratic decisions made in a “black box”, it also creates opportunity for exploitation.

Negotiations will centre on trade-offs to achieve economically feasible developments that also include affordable housing. To engage in such discussions, a high degree of knowledge about development economics is required to allow for informed debate. While this is the bread and butter for developers, local councils are often far less resourced to engage in these discussions. There is work to be done in building the capacity of local councils in this area.

Acknowledging this, the authors of this article have built a calculator to help communicate many of the basic premises behind development economics and affordable housing trade-offs.

Have your say on affordable housing

We don’t know yet enough about interests, mutual gains or access to knowledge to fully understand the landscape of this change to Victorian housing policy. And that is why we are surveying the affordable housing industry to gather this feedback.

If you are a private developer, local or state government representative with involvement in residential development or affordable housing policy, a not-for-profit housing provider, or consultant to the housing industry, then we want to hear from you.

Please click here to take the survey.

– ref. If it’s voluntary for developers to make affordable housing deals with councils, what can you expect? – http://theconversation.com/if-its-voluntary-for-developers-to-make-affordable-housing-deals-with-councils-what-can-you-expect-116829

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben White, Professor of Law, Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Queensland University of Technology

Voluntary assisted dying becomes a lawful choice for Victorians from June 19. To be eligible, two doctors must assess a person to have an incurable, advanced and progressive medical condition that will cause death within six months (or 12 months for neurodegenerative conditions).

With Victoria being the first state in Australia to allow voluntary assisted dying, this represents a major shift in end-of-life care. In the 18 months since the law was passed, an Implementation Taskforce has overseen the creation of new resources for the community, clinical guidance and training for health professionals, and policies to help health services decide what care they will provide.

While this preparation is critical, there are some questions we’ll only be able to answer once voluntary assisted dying becomes a clinical reality.

Read more: Voluntary assisted dying will soon be legal in Victoria, and this is what you need to know

Will people know about voluntary assisted dying?

Early media coverage is likely to ensure widespread awareness of the new laws, but that will not be universal. Some people will remain unaware of the law, or unaware that they may be eligible for voluntary assisted dying.

This could create access problems as health professionals are legally prohibited from raising voluntary assisted dying with their patients in the first instance.

Added to this, the Victorian law is complex. Once patients are aware of the legislation and want to utilise it, another question is whether terminally ill patients will be able to navigate through the process.

This includes being assessed by two different doctors, making three requests for voluntary assisted dying over time, and appointing a contact person.

Will doctors be willing to provide voluntary assisted dying?

The law depends on two willing doctors prepared to assist a patient. Both must assess the person and one doctor must be willing to provide voluntary assisted dying (typically by prescribing medication, or for patients who can’t take the medication themselves, administering it).

Some doctors may not want to participate because of their personal views, and the law protects this. Others might be deterred by the legislation’s complexity and the significant duties involved, especially for the doctor overseeing the process. This includes applying for a voluntary assisted dying permit from the government, as well as completing a number of forms for the Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board.

We don’t know how many doctors are going to be willing and able to provide voluntary assisted dying from June 19.

But even if few doctors are willing to provide voluntary assisted dying initially, we anticipate patient requests will encourage other doctors to consider taking on these roles.

Will people be able to find these doctors?

A challenge for a person seeking voluntary assisted dying, or for a doctor wishing to refer a patient, is to know which doctors may be willing to assist. The decision to provide voluntary assisted dying is understandably something many doctors will elect to keep private.

Aside from a few doctors who have stated their position in the media, it’s not widely known who might be willing to offer this service.

Read more: Want to better understand Victoria’s assisted dying laws? These five articles will help

The Victorian government has appointed two voluntary assisted dying care navigators, with two more to be appointed.

Their role includes connecting a person seeking voluntary assisted dying to a doctor who may be willing to assess eligibility. The navigators have been assessing interest from doctors across Victoria and will play a critical role in addressing access issues, particularly in the early days of the legislation.

Will health services permit voluntary assisted dying?

A person seeking voluntary assisted dying may be cared for in an institution like a hospital or residential aged care facility – and some of these may be opposed to voluntary assisted dying. Patient access in these cases will be affected by how institutions respond to any requests.

The government has developed three “pathways” to help health services consider their approach.

Some have stated they will adopt the pathway of not providing voluntary assisted dying (only information and support). Other health services are preparing either to partner with another health service to facilitate voluntary assisted dying, or provide voluntary assisted dying within their service.

Time will resolve unanswered questions

We should anticipate the beginning of the voluntary assisted dying law will raise practical issues like the ones we’ve described in this article. This shouldn’t be a surprise or cause for alarm, but is the case with all major changes to health-care practice.

The extensive implementation work means there are already structures in place to address these issues. Alongside the care navigators, an overseeing body, the Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board, will also be key. Its initial work will likely involve reviewing early instances of voluntary assisted dying in practice to identify areas for improvement from a systems perspective.

Read more: From Oregon to Belgium to Victoria – the different ways suffering patients are allowed to die

We also suggest collecting real-time “on-the-ground” feedback including from patients, families and health professionals about how the law is working in practice, beyond the more formal oversight by the Review Board.

Implementation is an ongoing process. Review and continuous improvement of the law and how it works in practice should commence the moment the law begins.

– ref. We don’t know all the details of how voluntary assisted dying will work yet – but the system is ready – http://theconversation.com/we-dont-know-all-the-details-of-how-voluntary-assisted-dying-will-work-yet-but-the-system-is-ready-117827

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Baxter, Fellow – Melbourne Law School; Associate – Australian-German Climate and Energy College, University of Melbourne

Let me explain how to see through the spin on Australia’s rising greenhouse emissions figures.

With the release today of Australia’s emissions data for the December 2018 quarter, federal energy and emissions reduction minister Angus Taylor has been more forthcoming than usual about the rising trend in Australia’s emissions.

There’s one small issue, though. Despite Taylor’s comments in which he sought to explain away Australia’s 0.7% year-on-year rise in emissions as a product of increased gas investment, actual emissions in the December quarter were in fact down relative to the September 2018 quarter. This is due mainly to the fact that people use much more energy for heating in the July-September period than they do during the milder spring weather of October-December.

Taylor, meanwhile, was discussing the “adjusted” data, which reveals an 0.8% increase between the two quarters.

This might all sound like minor quibbling. But knowing the difference between quarterly and annual figures, and raw and adjusted data – and knowing what’s ultimately the most important metric – is crucial to understanding Australia’s emissions. And it might come in handy next time you’re listening to a politician discussing our progress (or lack thereof) towards tackling climate change.

Read more: Australia is not on track to reach 2030 Paris target (but the potential is there)

Highlighting the difference between quarters is problematic, because emissions data are what statisticians describe as “noisy”. Emissions levels jump around from period to period, which can obscure the overall trend.

Quarterly data is important for understanding how Australia is tracking more generally towards doing its fair share on reducing its emissions. But too much stock is put on the noise, and not enough on the underlying trend.

The charts below compare our estimated actual emissions on a quarterly basis (top) with the cumulative emissions for the year leading up to that quarter (here described as the “year-to-quarter emissions” and shown in the lower chart).

These charts, both built on today’s data, make a few things clear.

Quarterly emissions are noisy

The first thing to note is that saying that our emissions are down compared with the previous quarter is hardly remarkable, or worth patting ourselves on the back for. This is especially true if we are comparing the December quarter data, released today, with the data for the preceding quarter.

September quarter emissions are almost always higher than the rest of the year. This is because, while September itself is in spring, the September quarter also covers July and August.

Our winter heating needs are generally met using fossil fuels, whether through electric heaters or natural gas, which is why the September quarter has the highest emissions. In the December quarter, which covers most of spring, our need for heating drops, and so do our emissions.

But if you look beyond the difference between quarters, as in the second chart above, you can see the underlying rising trend in our greenhouse gas emissions.

Cherrypicking the best metric

Readers who follow climate politics may remember the spectacular moment in March when Taylor appeared on ABC’s Insiders opposite Barrie Cassidy.

Many journalists, including those on the Insiders panel that day, responded at the time that Taylor’s claim that emissions had dipped over the preceding three months was true but not meaningful, in the context of an annual rising trend.

But it was not even necessarily true. As is visible in the quarterly chart, emissions were not lower in the September quarter of 2018 than they were in the preceding quarter.

Specifically, Taylor claimed that “total emissions are coming down right now”. This is only true if we are talking about “seasonally adjusted, weather-normalised total emissions”. The adjusted data are shown above. While the adjusted data went down between quarters, the actual emissions went up.

The process of adjustment is not unprincipled, and is used to see through the noise of our emissions data. “Seasonal adjustment” and “weather normalisation” are two separate processes.

Seasonal adjustment refers to the process of adjusting the emissions figures to account for the predictable seasonal fluctuations described earlier. Weather normalisation does the same, but takes into account individual temperature extremes, both hot and cold, during any given period, and adjusts accordingly.

Much as a golf handicap lets us compare the performance of golfers of differing abilities, these data adjustments tell us whether our emissions are tracking higher or lower than we might expect.

But if a golfer with a handicap of 10 goes around the course in 82 shots, we don’t declare that they have actually hit the ball only 72 times.

This is essentially what Taylor did in his interview with Cassidy. It is not correct to refer to these adjusted emissions data as our “total emissions”.

What does data adjustment mean?

Building on this, it is important to note that the adjusted data and actual data often disagree on whether emissions have increased between quarters. Since the Coalition took office in 2013, there have been 21 quarterly emissions data releases.

The actual quarterly emissions have increased nine times between quarters. The adjusted data says there have been 12 of these increases. And they have only agreed on whether there was an increase six times.

When one form of the data shows an increase and the other does not, the minister has a choice about which figure to highlight.

In the September quarter, the actual emissions gave bad news (an increase), and the adjusted emissions gave good news (a reduction). Taylor chose to refer to the adjusted data, as did the then environment minister Melissa Price, who had portfolio responsibility for emissions reduction at the time.

Today, this was flipped. The actual emissions showed good news (a reduction) and the adjusted data showed bad news (an increase).

It’s refreshing, then, to see Taylor choose to focus on the adjusted emissions data this time around, when he could have chosen the spin route and focused on the fact that the raw data showed a decrease between quarters.

So what does it all mean?

What we can say without any equivocation at all is that since 2015, in the wake of the carbon price repeal the preceding July, Australia’s greenhouse emissions have increased. On the government’s own projections , this trend is not expected to change.

Even if the government’s Climate Solutions Package delivers the amount of emissions reductions that have been promised (and it is unclear that it will), the overall effect will be to stabilise emissions rather than bring them down. This is because the government intends to use Kyoto carryover credits to help meet its Paris Agreement goal, rather than using fresh carbon reductions to deliver in full.

Read more: Australia has two decades to avoid the most damaging impacts of climate change

Stabilisation is not enough. As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made clear in its Special Report on 1.5℃ last year, deep cuts are required to ensure a safe climate. The Paris Agreement, while calling on all nations to do their part, says rich countries such as Australia should take the lead.

The need to reduce emissions is pressing. And while the raw emissions figures may be down this quarter, this is not meaningful progress. Far more meaningful is the fact that Australia has no effective policy to limit our impact on the global climate.

– ref. Whichever way you spin it, Australia’s greenhouse emissions have been climbing since 2015 – http://theconversation.com/whichever-way-you-spin-it-australias-greenhouse-emissions-have-been-climbing-since-2015-118112

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marc C-Scott, Senior lecturer in Screen Media, Victoria University

Apple says it’s replacing iTunes with three dedicated entertainment applications as part of its new Mac operating system, Catalina, for desktop and laptop computers.

A key reason for the change is based around the way we now watch, listen to, download and stream media.

Recent years have seen immense shifts in consumer behaviour, plus new players, new media formats and an abundance of fresh content uploaded every day.

Read more: Facebook is now cleaner, faster and group-focused, but still all about your data

Young media services have quickly established themselves as market leaders, solely focused on a single media format, such as video for Netflix and audio for Spotify.

For Apple, separating music, TV and podcasts allows it to refine each app in a distinct way. The user interface, library and personalised recommendations can all be tailored to each of the particular media formats in the future.

A lot has changed in 18 years

The original iTunes is now clearly outdated.

iTunes was first launched 18 years ago by then Apple CEO and cofounder Steve Jobs. Jobs noted that other tech companies already had media platforms available to users, but they were too complicated.

Jobs said Apple was “late to this party and we are about to do a leapfrog” with a simpler system in iTunes for playing audio and video. Later that same year, Apple announced the missing piece to this puzzle, Apple’s own MP3 player, the iPod.

What Apple is doing now is another potential “leapfrog” in replacing iTunes with three dedicated applications.

This decision follows the company’s strategy for its portable devices, which already have individual applications for music, TV and podcasts.

Apple’s podcast platform

Podcasts are not a new media format, but the latest Reuters Institute Digital News Report says they have become more popular in recent years due to “better content and easier distribution”.

The report’s survey of how people get their news shows:

[…] podcasts tend to perform best in countries like the US (33%) and Australia (33%) where people spend a lot of time in their cars.

In addition, people under 35 listen to twice as many podcasts people over 45. The report says this is due to the younger demographic embracing smart phones and streaming services.

Anchor is a free service that helps people create and distribute podcasts. It named Apple Podcast as the most used application for listening to podcasts on its platform, at more than 50%. Second was Spotify at 19%, and other platforms less than 5%.

This indicates Apple’s dominance in the podcast space. In 2018, a report shows there were more than 525,000 active shows and more than 18.5 million episodes available on Apple’s podcast platform. That same year Apple had reached 50 billion all-time episode downloads and streams, more than a threefold increase on the total downloads as of 2017, 13.7 billion.

But despite Apple being the most used platform for podcast listening, it faces strong competition in the mobile market from companies using rival operating systems such as Android.

Last year Apple dropped to third for smart phone market share globally. Samsung remained the leader, with Huawei gaining a large increase in 2018 to overtake Apple.

The future for video

A major part of Apple’s recent decision to split iTunes is associated with the significant changes in the video-on-demand market, including an influx of new services. There are still more changes to come, and Apple clearly intends to be ready. Apple has announced it will launch its Apple TV+ streaming service later this year in the United States.

Apple will have to compete with streaming giant Netflix, which has 60 million subscribers in the US alone. But it will also be competing with Hulu, which has 28 million US subscribers.

Other new services in the US will also be launched in the near future, including Disney+, NBC Universal, and AT&T’s WarnerMedia.

Read more: Blocking Huawei’s 5G could isolate Australia from future economic opportunities

In Australia, we have seen a distinct change in video viewing behaviour since the launch of Netflix in 2015. Shifts in consumer preferences and the industry itself had immense impact on the Australian media landscape. You can expect this to continue as some of the services launching in the US this year expand to Australia.

It’s not known yet when the Apple TV+ service will launch in Australia, but Apple’s TV app is available to Australians. Through this, it seems clear the company plans to aggregate video content from a range of services, including broadcaster video-on-demand (BVoD) services such as ABC iView and TenPlay.

So Apple is now fighting on several fronts across TV, music and podcasts to sustain or achieve market leadership. By marketing the three media applications separately it can invest in the individual media areas as required, or remove itself entirely.

– ref. The end is nigh for Apple’s iTunes as the tech giant targets separate audio and video markets – http://theconversation.com/the-end-is-nigh-for-apples-itunes-as-the-tech-giant-targets-separate-audio-and-video-markets-118257

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sebastian Fastenrath, Research Fellow in Resilient Cities, University of Melbourne

It was no April fool’s joke when the Rockefeller Foundation announced it will phase out funding for the 100 Resilient Cities network. The foundation’s message was a surprise for many participating cities, including Melbourne and Sydney, and for its partnering non-governmental organisations, businesses and academics.

100 Resilient Cities is a global network designed to increase urban resilience, defined as:

the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.

Read more: Pacific island cities call for a rethink of climate resilience for the most vulnerable

Since 2013, the Rockefeller Foundation has invested more than US$150 million in 100 Resilient Cities to support cities in tackling environmental, social and economic challenges.

Each city receives funding for a chief resilience officer, a position located in councils to lead the city’s resilience efforts, and for drafting a resilience strategy. Member cities also gain access to knowledge and expertise through a network of partners from private, public and non-governmental sectors.

Where are these resilient cities?

The network has grown to 97 cities, including cities from the Global North and South. Prominent members include New York City, Rio de Janeiro, Singapore and London. In Australia, Melbourne and Sydney were among the first two groups of cities that joined in 2013 and 2014 respectively.

Even though the growing number of member cities is a success, representatives of 100 Resilient Cities made clear that the “task is far from complete”. Almost half (47) of the 97 cities are still developing their resilience strategies.

When the program stops in July, it is unclear what will happen to the knowledge gained through city strategy processes, the many positions created in local governments to support the program, and thousands of resilience actions started by cities under this banner.

How has Melbourne benefited?

Melbourne joined on the agreement that it would include all 32 of its metropolitan councils to challenge the divide between inner and outer urban areas.

Read more: Rapid growth is widening Melbourne’s social and economic divide

In 2016, Resilient Melbourne released Australia’s first resilience strategy. It identified shocks and stresses, and outlined strategies in fields such as urban greening, emergency management, transport, housing, social inequality and energy.

One of these is Living Melbourne: our metropolitan urban forest, a newly released strategy to increase vegetation cover in the city. This action links and extends existing urban greening initiatives. The core goals are: increased biodiversity; better air, soil and water quality; heat reduction; and improved physical and mental health.

Read more: How Melbourne’s west was greened

The Nature Conservancy, a non-profit environmental organisation and partner of 100 Resilient Cities, helps to develop this action, particularly with technical expertise.

Living Melbourne showcases how to bring together stakeholders from all levels of government, business, civil society and academia. Our research project found many stakeholders see Resilient Melbourne as a new platform for knowledge exchange and urban innovation.

These findings resonate with an Urban Institute study on the early achievements of 100 Resilient Cities. The study found many cities, after joining the network, show a stronger interest in collaboration across government agencies and between public and private sectors.

It also found ongoing challenges, including a lack of transparency and community participation. These aspects need closer attention in future resilience-building initiatives and city networks.

Read more: Has the 100 Resilient Cities Challenge benefited Melbourne?

What now?

Actions such as Living Melbourne are the result of collaboration and learning processes within and between cities. It shows that resilience actions must be implemented as ongoing and inclusive experiments that test new ways of urban development.

However, it is too early to review the success of the initiative in total. This applies particularly to the impacts of actions aimed at driving institutional and social change that might only become visible in 10 or 20 years.

The immediate value of these networked efforts, as Resilient Melbourne has proven, is to connect local experiences to international agendas, learn from other cities’ experiences, and access technical and financial inputs. They also support new conversations that involve “communities of practice” across the whole city, linking citizens, resilience practitioners, experts and businesses.

Yet the change of heart at Rockefeller and the relatively sudden shift in support illustrates a very tangible risk of privately funded philanthropic support for international initiatives on cities.

One solution is to diversify the funding mixes at the heart of these networks. Another global city network, C40 Cities, has pursued this in recent years.

Another solution is to allocate greater responsibility for cooperation across national, state and local governments. This should help with longevity, transparency and policy learning in city networks. The Swedish national Viable Cities program provides a model of this.

In the wake of these experiences, a more open and strategic conversation on the role of philanthropy in advancing urban resilience agendas should take place urgently.

– ref. What next after 100 Resilient Cities funding ends? – http://theconversation.com/what-next-after-100-resilient-cities-funding-ends-116734

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Robinson, Senior Research Fellow (Macroeconomics), Melbourne Institute, University of Melbourne

The Australian economy grew by just 0.4% in the March quarter. It was a pick up from 0.2% in the December quarter, but over the year the four quarters taken together amounted to only 1.8%.

It’s the first time Australia’s annual economic growth rate has had a “1” in front of it since 2013, and the lowest annual growth rate since the global financial crisis.

Economic growth begins with ‘1’

1.8% is a big step down from the decade average of 2.6% displayed by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg on a chart prepared by his office, and below most estimates of the potential growth rate of the economy.

Real GDP growth

And most of the 1.8% was the result of population growth.

GDP per capita fell marginally in the March quarter after slipping by 0.1% and 0.2% in the previous two quarters.

Growth per person is weak

It means GDP per capita has fallen for three consecutive quarters – the first time that has happened in almost four decades, since the early 1980s recession.

Over the year to March, GDP per person grew just 0.1%, a result that suggests living standards barely grew.

But actual living standards grew by more. The Bureau of Statistics says the best guide is “real net national disposable income per capita,” a measure that takes better account of prices paid and income received.

It grew by a more impressive 1% and 0.5% in the December and March quarters on the back of sharply higher commodity prices, suggesting that, for the moment at least, living standards are not going backwards.

Household spending growth is weak

Household spending climbed only 1.7% over the year, barely more than population growth. The treasurer’s graph shows it was and well below recent average growth of 2.7%.

Household consumption growth accounted for just 0.1 points of the 0.4 points of economic growth over the quarter, which is well down on its usual substantial contribution as it is the largest component of output – around 60%.

Growth in household consumption

Consumption of discretionary items such as restaurant meals and entertainment, fell while consumption of essentials such as electricity, health services and rent, continued to climb.

The treasurer’s chart showed that most of the items on which we cut spending were discretionary.

Growth in consumption by category

Home building is falling

Low wages growth and falling housing prices are factors dampening consumption growth. The downturn in the housing market is also weighing on output growth through falling construction. In the March quarter it declined 2.5%, and was 3.1% lower over the year, a far cry from 10% plus annual growth rates achieved as recently as three years ago.

Growth in dwelling investment

Government spending has surged

By itself the government sector was responsible for half of the economic growth in the quarter, contributing 0.2 of the 0.4 percentage points.

Government spending surged more than 5% over year reflecting growth in spending on the National Disability Insurance Scheme and infrastructure.

Growth in new public final demand

Exports supported growth

Net exports contributed another 0.2 points to the 0.4 points of economic growth, with exports of rural goods, ores and minerals and services increasing.

Imports fell slightly, reflecting a weak economy.

Australia’s terms of trade – the ratio of export to import prices – jumped 3.1% as supply disruptions – including a dam burst in Brazil – boosted the spot price of iron ore.

Investment has flatlined

Although business investment was 1.3% lower over the year, it climbed 0.3% and 0.6% in the December and March quarters, suggesting that the worst of the slide might be over.

Treasurer Frydenberg said it was a tale of two sectors – investment in mining fell 1.8% over the quarter and was down 10.6% over the year as part of the transition from the investment in new facilities to production.

More encouragingly, non-mining investment grew by 2% in the quarter, reflecting commercial construction.

Growth in new business investment

Inflation is weak

Inflation is determined by productivity-adjusted wages (unit labour costs) and import prices.

Unit labour cost growth moderated to be up just 0.3% in the quarter. Labour productivity (GDP per hour) declined 0.5% in the quarter to be down 1% over the year.

Import prices fell slightly, although given the recent depreciation in the Australian dollar means they are likely to increase in the near term. For the moment it adds up to little inflationary pressure.

Households are less optimistic

Consumers’ expectations, as measured by the Westpac-Melbourne Institute Consumer Sentiment Expectations Index, have softened this year, but remain well above the lows reached during the global financial crisis and early 1990s recession.

The index is made up of answers to questions about expectations for family finances over the next 12 months, economic conditions over the next 12 months, and economic conditions over the next five years.

They are presented on a scale where 100 means expectations of improving conditions balance those of worsening conditions and greater than 100 means optimistic responses outweigh the pessimistic.

Westpac Melbourne Institute Consumer Sentiment Expectations Index

Further ahead, the signs aren’t good

Subdued economic growth may well continue for some time. This is suggested by the Westpac Melbourne Institute Leading Index for April which points to below-trend growth for the next 3 to 9 months.

The index combines a selection of economic variables whose movements typically point to movements in gross domestic product, including the S&P/ASX 200 stock index, dwelling approvals, US industrial production, the Reserve Bank Commodity Prices Index, aggregate monthly hours worked, the consumer sentiment expectations index the Westpac-Melbourne Institute Unemployment Expectations Index, and a financial market yield spread.

Westpac Melbourne Institute Leading Index

This week’s Reserve Bank rate cut and those that follow will provide some support. The important question is how much will be needed.

More sluggish world growth due to increased trade tensions is likely to weigh on export growth in the near term. The depreciation in the Australian dollar, however, will provide a buffer.

A positive aspect for the consumption outlook is that there are tentative signs that the pace in decline in house prices is moderating, although what will happen is highly uncertain.

Overall, consumption growth is likely to continue to be soft, with at best only modest improvements in the near term. The downturn in residential construction clearly has further to run, with dwelling approvals in April down 24% on a year ago.

Read more: The Reserve Bank will cut rates again and again, until we lift spending and push up prices

The government sector will have to continue to be an important source of growth in the near term. Whether non-mining investment growth will maintain its recent momentum is uncertain, as subdued consumption growth and the downturn in residential construction might dampen firms’ demand.

A problem faced by the Reserve Bank is that inflation has now undershot its target for so long that may be feeding into inflation expectations, making achieving the target more difficult.

Given the relative health of its budget, and Australia’s infrastructure needs, the government itself is in a position to step up and do more to boost the economy.

Look further ahead, the national accounts make clear that the government will have address Australia’s lacklustre productivity growth. It has been given a lot to work through.

– ref. Expect weak economic growth for quite some time. What Wednesday’s national accounts tell us – http://theconversation.com/expect-weak-economic-growth-for-quite-some-time-what-wednesdays-national-accounts-tell-us-118273

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Blyth, Paediatrician, Infectious Diseases Physician and Clinical Microbiologist, University of Western Australia

A ten-year-old Perth boy is the latest Australian child to die from suspected influenza so far this year. This follows the deaths of three Victorian children, and a teenager in South Australia.

Influenza-associated deaths in childhood are uncommon. Despite this, influenza is the most common cause of vaccine-preventable death – more common than meningococcal disease or pertussis (whooping cough).

On average, between five and ten Australian children are reported to die from influenza each year. Tragically, many flu deaths occur in previously healthy children.

These deaths can frequently be prevented through vaccination: analysis by Australian researchers determined that of the children who died from influenza in New South Wales in the ten years to 2014, none were vaccinated.

Read more: Thinking about getting your child the flu vaccine? Here’s what you need to know

More cases and greater harms

Influenza virus is predominantly spread in droplets created when people with flu cough and sneeze. The virus can also live on objects touched by those with flu, picked up by the hands of others.

Children are more likely to catch and spread influenza: they have large volumes of virus in their nasal secretions and, after infection, shed this for days. They also have poorer hygiene practices, often coughing and spluttering over those closest to them.

For many young children with flu, it is the first time they are exposed to the virus. Their immune system is naïve to influenza and therefore responds more slowly to the infection. This means the influenza virus can cause significant ill-effects before the immune system can bring it under control.

Read more: Flu vaccine won’t definitely stop you from getting the flu, but it’s more important than you think

Thousands of children who contract the flu are hospitalised every year; hospitalisation rates in children are much greater than in older people. Children younger than five years are the age group most likely to be hospitalised.

Although children with underlying medical conditions including chronic disorders of the heart, lungs, nervous and immune system are most susceptible, more than half of children admitted to hospital each year are healthy.

What should you look out for?

Influenza most commonly causes fever, cough, headache, a sore throat and a runny nose. The virus can also infect the lungs, causing pneumonia.

Some children react to the infection by developing vomiting, diarrhoea and muscle aches and pains.

Many parents aren’t aware that influenza can also cause damage to the brain, heart, kidneys and muscles. It is unclear why these complications occur in some children and not others, but they can be severe.

Young children get frequent infections and often develop symptoms that are difficult to distinguish from influenza. Testing on a nose or throat swab can be done to confirm if the illness is caused by influenza virus.

Parents should see medical attention if their child:

• has difficulty breathing (breathing rapidly or drawing in chest or neck muscles)
• is vomiting and refusing to drink
• is more sleepy than normal
• has pain that doesn’t get better with simple pain relief medication.

Most importantly, if you’re worried about your child during the flu season, see a doctor.

How does this year’s season compare?

Australia has had an unusual start to the 2019 influenza season, with higher numbers of cases during the warmer months than expected.

The number of cases of influenza diagnosed each week is currently greater than in 2017 and in the 2009 swine flu pandemic.

In 2017, Australia experienced its worst influenza season on record. More than 220,000 Australians were diagnosed with influenza, with health-care services and hospitals inundated with children, adults and the elderly suffering the effects of influenza.

Read more: Here’s why the 2017 flu season was so bad

The stories of healthy young people succumbing to flu were particularly heartbreaking.

Although it is never possible to predict what will happen in coming months, a number of measures point to a larger than average influenza season in 2019.

How can I protect my children?

Vaccination is recommended for all Australians from six months of age.

It’s free for all children aged from six months to under five years, those with certain medical risk factors including severe asthma and chronic heart, respiratory, neurological and immune conditions, all Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people, pregnant women, and people aged 65 years and over.

Those too young to be vaccinated (children five months and younger) are protected by their mothers being vaccinated during pregnancy.

You can get your family vaccinated at your local general practice, council or community health clinic, or Aboriginal Medical Service.

If you or your child are not eligible for a free flu vaccine, the usual vaccine cost is around A$20.

As the virus is constantly changing, the effectiveness of the vaccine can vary each year. Australian research has shown that the risk of flu is reduced, on average, by 50–60% in children who receive the vaccine.

This can mean that some children who get vaccinated will unfortunately still get the flu. However, some evidence suggests the disease will be milder if you catch it and have been vaccinated.

It’s not possible to predict who will catch the flu or develop complications, but vaccination remains the most effective and safest tool to protect children against influenza.

Read more: Should I get the flu shot if I’m pregnant?

Childhood flu vaccination programs have an added bonus of reducing flu in others in the community who are not vaccinated by reducing the spread of the virus. This is called “herd” or “community” immunity and particularly helps protect vulnerable people who may be at risk of becoming seriously ill with the flu.

– ref. Kids are more vulnerable to the flu – here’s what to look out for this winter – http://theconversation.com/kids-are-more-vulnerable-to-the-flu-heres-what-to-look-out-for-this-winter-117748

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shaun Molloy, Associate research scientist (Ecology), Edith Cowan University

When a threatened species is found only in one small area, conservationists often move some individuals to another suitable habitat. This practice, called “translocation”, makes the whole species less vulnerable to threats.

In the past, this approach has worked really well for some species, but climate change is creating new problems. Will the climate change at that location in the future, and will it remain suitable for the species of interest? On the other hand, some regions might become appropriate for a threatened species.

This fundamental question is important in a rapidly changing climate, yet it has seldom featured when picking new areas for translocations.

Saving the western ground parrot

Our recent research applied climate change modelling to translocation decisions for the critically endangered western ground parrot. This species is now restricted to a single population, with probably fewer than 150 birds, on the south coast of Western Australia.

It is enigmatic, in that it lives and nests entirely on the ground, unlike almost all other parrots except the closely related night parrot. And it is one of the many unique animals that make Australia so distinctive from all other parts of the world. But living on the ground has its drawbacks, as the parrot is very vulnerable to foxes and cats.

Its home near the south coast is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. As southwestern Australia becomes warmer and drier, the risk of fire to the parrot increases.

Understanding potential climate change impacts is essential when selecting reintroduction sites. We developed high-precision species distribution models and used these to investigate the effect of climate change on current and historical distributions, and identify locations that will remain, or become, suitable habitat in the future.

Our findings predict that some of the western ground parrot’s former south coast range will become increasingly unsuitable in the future, so reintroductions there may not be a good idea. Four out of 13 potential release sites are likely to become inhospitable to these threatened birds.

On the other hand, many of the former or future sites are likely to become important refuge habitats as the climate continues to warm, and would make an excellent choice for any translocations or reintroductions.

We have given this information to an expert panel, who will use these predictions identify and prioritise areas for management and translocation.

The parrot in the coal mine

Fire is already a significant threat which, combined with predation by feral cats, may have led to the loss of this species from its former home at Fitzgerald River National Park. Many of these threats act together, so they must all be considered and managed alongside climate change.

What’s more, the western ground parrot may be an important indicator for the fate of many other species it currently (or formerly) shares its range with. These include the western whipbird, noisy scrub-bird, and a carnivorous marsupial, the dibbler.

These species are all likely to face the same threats and may be equally affected by the changing climate. Future studies will attempt to model these species and to assess whether all will benefit from similar management.

Many challenges remain for the western ground parrot, including the possible negative genetic impacts of the current small population size, and the increasing risk of damaging fires in a drying and warming climate.

But locating “future-proofed” sites is giving us some hope we can ensure the long term persistence of this enigmatic species, and the myriad other unusual species that occur in the biodiversity hotspot of southwestern Australia.

The authors would like to thank Allan Burbidge and Sarah Comer from the WA Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions for their invaluable help and guidance in putting together this article.

– ref. How we’re helping the western ground parrot survive climate change – http://theconversation.com/how-were-helping-the-western-ground-parrot-survive-climate-change-117419

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Westrupp, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Deakin University

Many parents complain of difficulties in managing clingy children – whether it’s a baby who cries every time the parent is out of sight, a toddler who clings to their parent’s legs at social events, or a primary school kid who doesn’t want their parents to go out for dinner without them.

“Clinginess” refers to a child who has a strong emotional or behavioural reaction to being separated from their parent.

Children can show clingy behaviour at any stage up to late primary school. Infants may cry to let their parents know they don’t like being separated. Toddlers or older children may cry, cling or even have a full-blown meltdown if their parent is leaving them.

In most cases, these reactions are perfectly normal. Parents can help their children through periods of clinginess by acknowledging and accepting the feelings that come with this behaviour.

Why do children get clingy?

A child can show clinginess due to a fear of being away from their parents (separation anxiety) or because of stranger anxiety, where the fear is more about being around people the child doesn’t know.

Children also develop their own sense of self from an early age, as well as a will – the healthy desire to express themselves and impact their world. So, sometimes clingy behaviour isn’t due to children being truly afraid at being left by a parent but is instead about expressing a strong desire for their parent to stay.

And children are socially and biologically programmed to form strong attachments with their parents. Parents usually represent a safe, loving base from which children can explore the world and develop independence.

Clingy behaviour may intensify at certain times of development as children test out new-found independence, such as when they learn to walk, or during transitions such as starting preschool, kindergarten or primary school.

Clingy behaviour becomes less common as children get older but can still be present for primary-school-aged children.

Read more: Infancy and early childhood matter so much because of attachment

A child’s level of clinginess, and the way it is expressed, may be affected by:

• child temperament: some children are more socially shy or introverted; others are reactive and experience emotions intensely

• major events or changes in the child’s family, such as the birth of a new sibling, starting a new school or moving house – it’s normal for children to become more clingy with their parents while they’re getting used to change

• other family factors such as parent separation or divorce, parent stress or mental-health problems. Children can be very sensitive to changes in their parents, so if a parent is going through a hard time, their child may become clingy or show other challenging behaviours.

How can you help your child?

Be a safe base

Many children are clingy in a new situation or with new people. This is developmentally appropriate and has an evolutionary advantage, because children are less likely to run off by themselves in potentially dangerous situations.

But it’s also important for children to learn to separate from their parents and gain confidence in their own abilities.

Parents can help children get used to a new situation by supporting them through it. For example, if a child is starting at a new childcare centre, it may help for the parent to spend some time there with their child, so the child can become accustomed to the new environment with their trusted parent close by.

Acknowledge your child’s feelings

When children are being clingy, they’re communicating their feelings. Resisting the clinginess won’t usually help, because children’s feelings will not disappear if they’re ignored or downplayed.

Instead, research shows it’s important to acknowledge, label and normalise children’s feelings.

Parents may be afraid talking about their child’s feelings will make the situation worse, but this is rarely the case. Talking about feelings usually helps children let them go, by helping children to regulate their emotions.

This will happen in the child’s own time, which may mean accepting a tantrum at separation, or clingy behaviour at a social event, until the child adjusts.

Read more: Let them play! Kids need freedom from play restrictions to develop

Model calm confidence

Parents are important role models for children, which means they become their child’s working example of how to react to particular situations. The way parents respond to their child’s clingy behaviour can shape how children feel about a particular situation.

For example, if a child is clingy when they start primary school and their parent reacts with a high level of concern and anxiety, the child may be unsure of whether the new environment is safe. But if the parent demonstrates calm confidence in their child, that he or she will cope with separation and/or the new situation, the child is more likely to feel comfortable too.

Discuss the plan in advance

Humans are afraid of the unknown, so talking to children about an upcoming change or feared situation will help them cope with it.

For instance, before going to the doctor, it would help to talk about how you’ll prepare (what to take, how you’ll get there, where the doctor’s office is), what might happen when you arrive (report to reception, sit in waiting room with other patients), and what might happen on the visit (what you’ll talk about with the doctor, whether the doctor might need to touch the child).

Even when talking about future events, it’s important to acknowledge feelings and model calm confidence.

Read more: ‘It’s real to them, so adults should listen’: what children want you to know to help them feel safe

But what if my child is just too clingy?

There are a few factors to consider when making a judgment about whether a child’s clingy behaviour is of concern.

First, consider the context. Is the child coping with a significant change in their life, a new environment or new people? Some children are particularly sensitive to change and may need a number of weeks (or months) to adapt. So you may need to provide the child with a little extra support to get them through the transition.

Second, consider the intensity of the behaviour. Is the clingy behaviour interfering with the child’s regular life? For instance, is it interfering with their ability to go to kindergarten or school, or causing your child (and the parents) considerable upset and stress?

Third, consider the time frame. If the behaviour is occurring daily and lasting more than four weeks, and is interfering with the child’s life, it may be helpful to consult with a professional such as a GP, paediatrician, psychologist, or school counsellor.

– ref. Is my child being too clingy and how can I help? – http://theconversation.com/is-my-child-being-too-clingy-and-how-can-i-help-115372

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Lockrey, Senior Lecturer/ Research Fellow, RMIT University

Australian building owners face a bill that could run into billions of dollars to replace combustible cladding of the sort that fuelled the Greenfell tower fire in the UK, which killed 72 people, as well as fires in Australia and overseas. The cost estimate is based on our calculations for Victoria, which has had apartment building cladding fires in 2014 and 2019.

Nearly two years on from the Grenfell disaster, there is ongoing tension between policymakers, the building industry and owners about how to resolve the problem of combustible cladding. And little information is available about the scale of the issue for owners across Australia, particularly those living in apartments.

So what could the costs be? We looked at Victoria as a case study. Our modelling produced cost estimates of between A$250 million and A$1.6 billion. The ultimate figure will depend on the cost-efficiency of any rectification program and the risk level and size of the 629 buildings known to be affected – and many more could yet be identified.

Read more: Cladding fire risks have been known for years. Lives depend on acting now, with no more delays

How were costs estimated?

The 2018 Victorian Cladding Taskforce identified 354 low/moderate-risk buildings and 275 high/extreme-risk buildings in a statewide cladding audit update last October.

There is little data available on dwelling density for Victorian apartment building stock. Melbourne City Council (MCC) records show residential buildings with ten dwellings or more (medium-to-high-density buildings) have an average of 75 dwellings per building in the built-up municipality. Buildings of this density are known to be receiving notices from the Victorian government to act on cladding.

To model costs we have also used real quotes owners have received to rectify their properties, as well as quotes revealed in media reports. These quotes reveal a range of lower costs for low/moderate-risk buildings and higher costs for high/extreme-risk buildings, usually based on the work for varying levels of rectification.

Firstly, we conservatively applied lower rectification cost data, being A$2,500 per dwelling for low/moderate-risk buildings and A$20,000 per dwelling for high/extreme-risk buildings.

Secondly, we applied higher costs found in quotes and media reports. These are $15,000 per dwelling for low/moderate-risk buildings and A$60,000 per dwelling for high/extreme-risk buildings. These figures are still conservative, based on multiple sighted estimates approaching $100,000 per dwelling.

We have calculated costs for two scenarios for all 629 buildings identified by last October:

1. an average of 75 dwellings per building as per MCC data

2. an average of 37 dwellings per building, 50% less than MCC data to account for a higher proportion of lower-density developments affected (based on averages in municipalities significantly affected by the crisis such as Port Phillip, Stonington and Moreland).

Read more: Lacrosse fire ruling sends shudders through building industry consultants and governments

So how high could the bill be?

Our estimates show Victorian owners who are known to be affected may conservatively face a rectification bill of A$250-$500 million, if industry and government work with them to cap costs in economies-of-scale solutions. The bill may be as high as A$1.6 billion, if an inefficient approach is used and we have a higher proportion of larger buildings affected.

Cladding audits are ongoing. The number of identified affected properties is likely to rise. At the 2019 Building Surveyors’ Conference, the Victorian Building Authority appeared to categorise over 1,200 private Victorian buildings as moderately through to extreme risk for combustible cladding.

If this figure is correct, our cost estimates are conservative and will double.

Our estimates do not factor in the apartments yet to be identified or, more broadly, the issues in other states that have also been identified.

Read more: Cladding fires expose gaps in building material safety checks. Here’s a solution

Government and industry shun responsibility

To date, the response of the Victorian government and industry has been to push financial responsibility back onto home owners. A Victorian low-interest loan scheme was launched in October allowing owners to repay amounts over ten years. It has been reported, however, that no loans had been granted as recently as February.

The Victorian government’s May 27 budget papers stated that A$160 million would be spent on the crisis “on public safety grounds”. This including ongoing assessments of private buildings affected by combustible cladding and 15 evaluation projects to manage and improve rectification outcomes.

As yet no funding has been provided to help owners of private dwellings who bought supposedly compliant properties. While billions in revenue is recouped from stamp duty, owners are being told to rectify a problem for which they were not responsible – all at their own cost.

Many owners simply will not be able to pay. Some individual bills sighted are as much as a quarter of the owner’s property value. On top of this, some insurance premiums have quadrupled.

At the vast costs we have estimated, and based on the chain of events leading to the cladding crisis and the lack of support following, is it reasonable that sole responsibility falls on owners to pay? And will such a move not lead to thousands of costly actions through the courts as owners try to recoup costs?

Read more: Housing with buyer protection and no serious faults – is that too much to ask of builders and regulators?

Government and industry should provide substantial financial support to owners to help them recover from mass failures of policy, regulatory policing and industry practice. The UK government has to the tune of £200 million (A$364 million). It is time to support Australian owners in a billion-dollar crisis they were not responsible for creating.

Acknowledgments: We would like to thank Phil Dwyer from Builders Collective of Australia for working with us on the modelling for this article.

– ref. Flammable cladding costs could approach billions for building owners if authorities dither – http://theconversation.com/flammable-cladding-costs-could-approach-billions-for-building-owners-if-authorities-dither-118121

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Heather Goodall, Professor, Social and Political Change Group, University of Technology Sydney

In this series, we look at under-acknowledged women through the ages.

Like many other Aboriginal kids in 1938, Isabel Flick was denied an education because she was “too black” to be allowed into the segregated public school.

Her father, a returned serviceman, was disrespected by the nation he had fought for. She and her siblings faced the threat of being taken from their family. She was later called a “trouble maker” for demanding justice for Aboriginal women and children and Aboriginal rights to land.

Despite the formidable racism of rural Australia, Isabel, a Gamilaraay and Bigambul woman living in Collarenebri, did not give up on the bush. She returned again and again to the upper Darling River, demanding land for Aboriginal people (who in that area called themselves Murries) and protection of the river from the grazing and cotton industries.

It was an irony that amused Isabel that, in 1991, she was called on to be a spokesperson for the whole town, white and black, in its campaign for safe drinking water and decent river flows for everyone. The town of Collarenebri, which had resisted her calls for justice for most of her life, was now asking her to protect its very existence in the deep drought of the 1990s.

Read more: Hidden women of history: Kathleen McArthur, the wildflower woman who took on Joh Bjelke-Petersen

Born in 1929, Isabel had shown how tenacious she was from a young age – although denied access to the Collarenebri public school, she was determined to teach herself to read and write. And she did. On the veranda of the local manse as a child and then in every place she worked and lived, Isabel grabbed every shred of knowledge and skill she could, determined she would not be defeated by segregation and exclusion.

‘I was terrified when I stood up there’

By the 1950s, as a young mother, Isabel was working as a cleaner in the same school to which she had been denied access as a student. She was trying to hold her family together in the face of uncertainty in the pastoral work her partner did and a precarious existence on the edge of the town.

Murri kids were now allowed to go to the school, but they faced hostility from white students, parents and staff. Isabel used her time there to support them, demonstrating her formidable insight as well as her negotiating skills and keen sense of humour to disarm conflict with teachers and deflect contempt from white parents.

Still, the possibility of her flying under the radar could not last. Indeed it was over children that Isabel decided to take on the town. She and her sister-in-law, Isobelle Walford, had for years been angered by the discrimination their children were facing in the schools and in the main streets. The petty segregation of the town’s cinema, the “Liberty” Picture Show was the last straw.

Watching their kids being herded down to the front seats, where they were roped off and had to crane their necks to see the screen, Isabel and Isobelle made the decision in 1961 to challenge the unspoken rules.

They marched up to the ticket box and demanded seats that had been reserved for whites only. Their action made the women and their families vulnerable to retribution at work and on the streets. But this local activism, which happened much earlier than the celebrated 1965 Freedom Ride led by Charles Perkins, later drew the attention of the university campaigners in north west NSW. As Isabel remembered it:

…I stood in front of the ticket office and I said: ‘I want you to come and fix this. Take these ropes off! What do you think we are? Our money is as good as anyone else’s and we want to sit where we want to sit’ … I was terrified when I stood up there … my poor little heart, I don’t know how it stayed in my chest, but it did. Even though I said it as calmly as I could, I was so sick within myself.

Isobelle joined Isabel and the pair stood their ground in front of the ticket seller.

And then he could see I was just going to stand there and keep standing there. Sometimes I think if he’d waited just a little bit longer, I’d have gone away. But then he said: ‘Oh, alright, you can sit anywhere then!’

Still frustrated by the poor health care and education offered to her people in the bush, Isabel brought her family to Sydney in the late 1960s, hoping to escape the suffocating racism of rural towns. She worked in the kitchen at Prince Alfred Hospital in Newtown while her partner, Aubrey Weatherall, worked in factories, but Sydney offered little relief from the racism.

Read more: Hidden women of history: Mary Jane Cain, land rights activist, matriarch and community builder

What Isabel did find were allies. She got to know Aboriginal people from other places, with similar stories. And she met the city students and activists who were eager to learn about conditions in rural areas and to put their shiny new credentials as lawyers, archaeologists and doctors into effecting social change.

With these people, Isabel fostered strategies that could be put to work in rural areas to support and strengthen Aboriginal communities. And with some, Isabel built warm friendships of trust and confidence which lasted all her life. She had hoped to gain a better education for her children, but in the end, they felt that it had been Isabel who had learned the most from their time in Sydney.

Campaigning for a place of peace

By the time Isabel returned to Collarenebri, she had become a skilled and careful negotiator. After campaigning for Land Rights, she took up a job with Mangankali, the Aboriginal Housing company she helped found.

She was trying to achieve concrete outcomes – better housing, more equitable distribution of resources – but always had a recognition of the importance of the broader, symbolic issues. So, she paid a great deal of attention to the Aboriginal cemetery, in which many of the community had buried their loved ones, old and young.

The town cemetery was segregated – but the Aboriginal community had turned this into a strength, recording their family stories and carefully decorating, washing and caring for the graves in their cemetery over the years.

Many people, like Isabel, saw this tiny pocket of land as symbolic not only of community but of all the land they had lost. But the road to this cemetery was unreliable in wet weather, deepening the pain of loss when burials had to be delayed.

In one of the many extraordinary achievements of her life, Isabel developed a consensus among all the Collarenebri families that they would refuse government funding for any other project until it was available to upgrade this road. With so many families impoverished and suspicious of all government actions, it was terribly hard for Aboriginal people to refuse funds.

Their solid collective refusal to take funds for two funding rounds was astounding, demonstrating how deeply the community felt about the cemetery. The government relented, recognising the importance of the demand for reliable access – not only to this burial site but to this tiny corner of their land. The new and upgraded road was opened in 1983. Said Isabel:

The cemetery is a place where Murries can feel at peace, as we are surrounded by our loved ones in spirit and we are able to strengthen our affinity with our land.

After her retirement from the Land Council largely until her death in 2002, Isabel again took on wider roles, particularly focussing on the campaign to end Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and to recognise the right to safety of Aboriginal women and children. She was recognised in 1986 with an Order of Australia Medal. She was proud of this but her later recognition by the Collarenebri and Brewarrina communities with awards and then an Honorary Doctorate from Tranby, an Indigenous-controlled, post-secondary educational body, meant more to her.

The Order of Australia Medal was certainly useful in her continued campaigning. But when asked what OAM stood for, she would always joke, “It stands for ‘Old Aboriginal Moll’”.

Heather Goodall met Isabel in Sydney in the 1970s and worked with her in collaborative historical projects. Isabel asked Heather to assist in recording her life story, undertaken during the 1990s, then, after Isabel’s death in 2002, Isabel’s book was finished with assistance from her family.

– ref. Hidden women of history: Isabel Flick, the tenacious campaigner who fought segregation in Australia – http://theconversation.com/hidden-women-of-history-isabel-flick-the-tenacious-campaigner-who-fought-segregation-in-australia-114174

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Ananian-Welsh, Senior Lecturer, TC Beirne School of Law, The University of Queensland

The Australian Federal Police has this week conducted two high-profile raids on journalists who have exposed government secrets and their sources.

On Tuesday, seven AFP officers spent several hours searching News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst’s Canberra home, her mobile phone and computer. The AFP linked the raid to “the alleged publishing of information classified as an official secret”.

This stemmed from Smethurst’s 2018 article, which contained images of a “top secret” memo and reported that senior government officials were considering moves to empower the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) to covertly monitor Australian citizens for the first time.

Soon after, 2GB Radio Presenter Ben Fordham revealed he had been notified by the Department of Home Affairs that he was the subject of a similar investigation, aimed at identifying the source of classified information he had reported regarding intercepted boat arrivals.

And then on Wednesday, the AFP raided the ABC’s Sydney headquarters. This dramatic development was in connection with the 2017 “Afghan files” report based on “hundreds of pages of secret defence force documents leaked to the ABC”. These documents revealed disturbing allegations of misconduct by Australian special forces.

The reaction to the raids was immediate and widespread.

The New York Times quoted News Corp’s description of the Smethurst raid as “a dangerous act of intimidation towards those committed to telling uncomfortable truths”. The Prime Minister was quick to distance his government from the AFP’s actions, while opposition leader Anthony Albanese condemned the raids.

But to those familiar with the ever-expanding field of Australian national security law, these developments were unlikely to surprise. In particular, enhanced data surveillance powers and a new suite of secrecy offences introduced in late 2018 had sparked widespread concern over the future of public interest journalism in Australia.

The crackdown of the past few days reveals that at least two of the core fears expressed by lawyers and the media industry were well-founded: first, the demise of source confidentiality and, secondly, a chilling effect on public interest journalism.

Source confidentiality

Upon finding out he was the subject of an investigation aimed at uncovering his sources of government information, Ben Fordham declared

The chances of me revealing my sources is zero. Not today, not tomorrow, next week or next month. There is not a hope in hell of that happening.

Source confidentiality is one of journalists’ most central ethical principles. It is recognised by the United Nations and is vital to a functioning democracy and free, independent, robust and effective media.

One of the greatest threats to source confidentiality is Australia’s uniquely broad data surveillance framework. The 2015 metadata retention scheme requires that all metadata (that is, data about a device or communication but not, say, the communication itself) be retained for two years. It may then be covertly accessed by a wide array of government agencies without a warrant. Some reports suggest that by late 2018, some 350,000 requests for access to metadata were being received by telecommunications service providers each year.

Read more: Data retention plan amended for journalists, but is it enough?

The government was not blind to the potential impact of this scheme on source confidentiality. For example, obtaining metadata relating to a journalist’s mobile phone could reveal where they go and who they contact and easily point to their sources.

This led to the introduction of the “Journalist Information Warrant” (JIW). This warrant is required if an agency wishes to access retained metadata for the direct purpose of identifying a professional journalist’s source.

So, access to a professional journalist’s metadata in order to identify a confidential source is permitted, provided the access has a particular criminal investigation or enforcement purpose and the agency can show it is in the public interest and therefore obtain a JIW.

This week’s raids suggest that either JIWs could not be obtained in relation to Smethurst, Fordham or the ABC Journalists, or the journalists’ metadata did not reveal their sources, or the AFP did not attempt to access their metadata.

Alternatively, if metadata had identified the journalists’ sources, it is less clear why these dramatic developments took place.

After 2015, journalists were advised to avoid using their mobile devices in source communications. They were also encouraged, wherever possible, to encrypt communications.

But in 2018, the government went some way to closing down this option when it introduced the complex and highly controversial Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Act 2018.

As well as expanding computer access and network access warrants, the Act provided a means for government agencies to co-opt those in the telecommunications industry to assist agencies with their investigations. This could include covertly installing weaknesses and vulnerabilities in specific devices, circumventing passwords or allowing encrypted communications to be decrypted. A warrant would then be required to access the device and communication data.

It is impossible to know whether Australian journalists have been targeted under the Act or had weaknesses or spyware installed on their personal devices. This week’s raids suggest the AFP would be prepared to target journalists under this framework in order to identify journalists’ confidential sources.

However, this could only be done for some purposes, including in the investigation of a secrecy offence.

Secrecy offences

In June 2018, the government introduced a suite of new espionage, foreign interference and secrecy offences. This included an offence of current or former Commonwealth officers communicating information, obtained by virtue of their position, likely to cause harm to Australia’s interests. This offence is punishable by imprisonment for seven years. If the information is security classified or the person held a security classification, then they may have committed an “aggravated offence” and be subject to ten years’ imprisonment.

This week’s raids reveal just how common it is for public interest journalism to rely on secret material and government sources.

Read more: Government needs to slow down on changes to spying and foreign interference laws

But the journalists themselves may also be facing criminal prosecution. The 2018 changes include a “general secrecy offence”, whereby it is an offence (punishable by imprisonment for five years) to communicate classified information obtained from a Commonwealth public servant. Fordham’s radio broadcast about intercepted boat arrivals was, for example, a clear communication of classified information.

Again, journalists are offered some protection. If prosecuted, a journalist can seek to rely on the “journalism defence” by proving that they dealt with the information as a journalist, and that they reasonably believed the communication to be in the public interest. The meaning of “public interest” is unclear and, in this context, untested. However, it will take into account the public interest in national security and government integrity secrecy concerns as well as openness and accountability.

Protecting media freedom

Australia has more national security laws than any other nation. It is also the only liberal democracy lacking a Charter of Human Rights that would protect media freedom through, for example, rights to free speech and privacy.

In this context, journalists are in a precarious position – particularly journalists engaged in public interest journalism. This journalism is vital to government accountability and a vibrant democracy, but has a tense relationship with Australia’s national interests as conceived by government.

National security law has severely undercut source confidentiality by increasing and easing data surveillance. National security laws have also criminalised a wide array of conduct related to the handling of sensitive government information, both by government officers and the general public.

And these laws are just a few parts of a much larger national security framework that includes: control orders, preventative detention orders, ASIO questioning and detention warrants, secret evidence, and offences of espionage, foreign interference, advocating or supporting terrorism, and more.

JIWs, and the inclusion of a journalism defence to the secrecy offence, recognise the importance of a free press. However, each of these protections relies on a public interest test. When government claims of national security and the integrity of classifications is weighed into this balance, it is difficult to see how other interests might provide an effective counterbalance.

One of the most disturbing outcomes is not prosecutions or even the raids themselves, but the chilling of public interest journalism. Sources are less likely to come forward, facing risk to themselves and a high likelihood of identification by government agencies. And journalists are less likely to run stories, knowing the risks posed to their sources and perhaps even to themselves.

Against this background, the calls for a Media Freedom Act, such as by the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, have gained significant traction. It may take this kind of bold statement to cut across the complexities of individual laws and both recognise and protect the basic freedom of the press and the future of public interest journalism in Australia.

– ref. Why the raids on Australian media present a clear threat to democracy – http://theconversation.com/why-the-raids-on-australian-media-present-a-clear-threat-to-democracy-118334

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lacey Schaefer, Senior Lecturer in Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University

The man arrested after a deadly gun attack in Darwin Tuesday night is reported to have been on parole and wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet.

This leads to the same reaction we see following any high-profile crime. How could such a thing happen?

People may speculate that the criminal justice agencies involved have somehow dropped the ball. The offender was on their radar, after all.

Read more: Online tools can help people in disasters, but do they represent everyone?

While this finger-pointing may serve a cathartic function, it is important we also question our expectations before assuming a failure occurred.

We need to understand what electronic monitoring intends to achieve, how it works, and what are its capabilities and limitations.

Electronic tagging

In the context of the corrections system, electronic monitoring refers to the tagging of a person as a form of surveillance, usually in the form of a GPS-enabled ankle bracelet.

In Australia, each state and territory uses electronic monitoring differently, guided by their own legislative frameworks.

Practices vary considerably between jurisdictions. For example, in some places, certain offenders are targeted (high-risk recidivists, those who repeatedly reoffend, for example). In others, specific types of offences are the focus (such as child sex offences).

The application of electronic monitoring even differs between offenders, as the supervising agency uses it for reasons specific to each person.

A police department might use electronic monitoring to ensure a domestic violence perpetrator does not visit the victim before a trial. A probation officer might require an offender to wear a bracelet for 12 months to ensure they are attending treatment and meeting their curfew. A parole officer could place the GPS tracking condition on an offender for the first three months following release from prison to better understand how the parolee spends his or her time.

Each of these experiences will be quite different, as each is intended to fulfil a unique aim.

Ordinarily, electronic monitoring is used as a tool of incapacitation and deterrence.

In the first instance, an offender may be told to follow a particular rule – for example, to be home by 8pm, to stay away from the victim, to attend a treatment program, or not to go within 1km of a school. Electronic monitoring allows authorities to monitor the person’s compliance with such a condition.

In the latter instance, an offender may be deterred from certain behaviour if they believe their actions are likely to be detected through electronic monitoring.

Monitoring actions

When an offender is subject to electronic monitoring, a computer database is updated with information about the rules he or she has been instructed to follow. Each jurisdiction and each agency may have their own database, so where the offender appears in the database will depend on who is supervising the electronic monitoring order.

The database is then monitored by enforcement authorities, although this is sometimes outsourced to private providers or overseas companies. While the data is generally sent from the offender’s GPS device to the monitoring agency in real time, there can be delays in how long it takes for that information to be passed to police or corrective services.

What occurs when an offender breaches one of the rules and a computer alert is generated depends on factors such as legislation and the priority of a case influencing the response. The database includes information about what to do in the event of specific kinds of breaches with specific offenders.

In some cases, an alarm on the device may go off or, very rarely, the police may be immediately notified.

Most often, for routine cases and ordinary breaches, the monitoring agency will notify the offender’s supervisor (such as a parole officer or a local police department), who will then determine how to proceed.

There may be a lag of several days during this process. For example, if a low-risk offender misses their home curfew on Friday night (as determined by the GPS bracelet), the parole officer will not receive notification of this breach until Monday morning.

The pros and cons of tagging

There are a range of benefits and disadvantages to the electronic monitoring of offenders.

It can be effective in holding offenders accountable, protecting victims and enhancing community safety and preventing crimes. These come with important cost savings, particularly when offenders can be safety monitored in the community in lieu of imprisonment or as a mechanism of early release from prison.

But some of the downfalls are that offenders can tamper with their devices, and there can be GPS dead zones – particularly in a geographically vast country such as Australia. There may also be human error in using the systems, such as improper monitoring or unreasonable decision-making after an alert.

Yet collectively, the research evidence highlights that electronic monitoring can be an effective tool for discouraging recidivism. But it is only that: a tool.

The most effective practices for supervising offenders in the community include those that identify and reduce a person’s risks for continued criminal behaviour.

Read more: AI can help in crime prevention, but we still need a human in charge

Electronic monitoring will be most effective when it is used to support supervision that limits a person’s access to chances to commit crime. Such supervision should help them redesign their routines so that any risky settings are avoided and are replaced with more positive influences.

Thus, rather than simply giving offenders a long list of rules for what not to do, effective probation and parole strategies help offenders lead productive lives.

More broadly, it is imperative that correctional authorities provide rehabilitative interventions that address the underlying factors that contribute toward a person’s criminal behaviour. The most effective approaches use cognitive-behavioural techniques to give offenders skills that encourage good decision-making.

Yet electronic monitoring cannot “fix” an offender’s impulsivity, lack of empathy, or any other underlying crime-conducive traits. Thus we should not confuse a technological aid with meaningful treatment.

– ref. Electronic monitoring bracelets are only crime deterrence tools, they can’t ‘fix’ offenders – http://theconversation.com/electronic-monitoring-bracelets-are-only-crime-deterrence-tools-they-cant-fix-offenders-118335

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Dwyer, Associate Professor, Department of Media and Communications, University of Sydney

In his first address to the caucus after Labor’s shock election loss, Bill Shorten pointed to conservative interests

spending unprecedented hundreds of millions of dollars advertising, telling lies, spreading fear … Powerful vested interests campaigned against us through sections of the media itself, and they got what they wanted.

He was, of course, talking about News Corp press and “Sky after dark”, which campaigned heavily against the ALP during the election and have shown no sign of letting up since.

Read more: Outrage, polls and bias: 2019 federal election showed Australian media need better regulation

Experts agree that this campaigning style’s impact is cumulative and broadly agenda-setting, shaping the party-political landscape. Importantly, it also influences political and business elites in shaping the parameters and tone of debates.

In his new book, former prime minister Kevin Rudd argues a royal commission is required to rein in the power abuse and unethical journalism practices at the Murdoch news brands.

What can be done about media bias?

This is more than simply an ethical matter for media. It goes beyond more vigilant application of self-regulatory codes of conduct administered by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) and the Australian Press Council (APC), or tightening political advertising rules. It requires tough legal and regulatory measures to prevent further structural damage at a time when media businesses are under threat from US platforms. Rules to stop further media concentration should be a priority for democratic governments.

The ACCC’s final report into Google and Facebook, due at the end of the month, may make some recommendations to assist this situation. Its preliminary report signals the need for stronger regulatory steps, recommending that:

… the regulatory authority could also monitor, investigate and report on the ranking of news and journalistic content by digital platforms and the provision of referral services to news media businesses.

It also recommends a wholesale review of the regulatory frameworks that offer patchwork oversight in relation to news consumption in Australia.

Increasing our understanding of the interaction between new and old media pluralism will require an assessment of the changing online news landscape. It will also need us to look more widely to understand the public mood. For example, the comments below articles and on social media are a neglected avenue for research.

Given the popularity of comment reading – about half of users read them and for longer than the article on average – comments’ potential contribution to pluralism matters.

While adding a new voice, comments onsite and on social media can also invite risk; comments on Chinese social media site WeChat played a key role in spreading misinformation that may have had a significant impact on the federal election. But there is little debate on how these spaces should be regulated.

Media ownership needs reform

The serious structural problem with media diversity in Australia will require more active regulation to avoid further damage to our democratic institutions. The removal of the two-out-of-three rule in 2017 led to the take-over of a major independent media company, Fairfax Media, by Nine Entertainment – a company known more for its tabloid style than independent journalism.

The 2018 merger was widely anticipated when the federal government repealed these anti-concentration laws. News Corp and Nine Entertainment now control the bulk of Australia’s newspaper sector.

Read more: A modern tragedy: Nine-Fairfax merger a disaster for quality media

Astonishingly, going into the federal election, only the Greens had elaborated media policies.

The UK government, through Ofcom, the main media regulator, has recognised that online news access is increasingly important as a news source, and plurality concerns continue in the online world. There is an ongoing debate about how current rules can be extended to online media, including the administration of the mergers public interest test and the national cross-media ownership rule.

In 2015, Ofcom updated its processes for assessing media pluralism. It has been required to review the UK’s ownership rules at least every three years since 2003. The restrictions in place include:

• a rule limiting cross-media ownership of newspapers and TV at a national level to 20% (the “20/20 rule”)

• a rule for administering a media public interest test in relation to mergers.

The secretary of state oversees the UK’s media-specific pluralism test and has the power to stop media mergers found to be against the public interest.

Ofcom is required to undertake a review of ownership patterns every three years. In its most recent statutory review in 2018, Ofcom concluded the rules needed to be retained to protect pluralism.

In response to the review, the key UK reform group MRC noted that media plurality concerns would require ongoing reassessment if the importance of TV news and newspapers continued to decline.

In this new framework, Ofcom has in place a range of indicators that are designed to assess the availability of news sources, their consumption and their impact on users. Australia is yet to even consider this approach, let alone investigate how a local version might be developed.

Keeping up with changing news consumption

As a source of news, Australian online (including social) news consumption now sits at 82%, according to recent research. Taking this changing consumption into account in policy is even more important when we know these platforms are not neutral: their algorithms manipulate what news content people are exposed to.

Under the UK approach, various aggregated metrics are necessary to allow regulatory agencies to track changes in patterns of news consumption and the diversity of available news sources.

Read more: Enough ‘gotcha’ campaign coverage. Here are five ways the media can better cover elections

Although it was an important first step to track the morphing consumption of news sources across platforms, Ofcom’s metric is still arguably incapable of assessing the operation of “real world” power and influence. That’s why regular reviews of shifting media power are so important for making policy.

Responsible policy-making obliges governments to monitor these developments, gathering the information needed to evaluate whether or not the current policy intent remains. Strong regulatory tools (including web traffic analysis software and news data analytics) are needed to do that.

Australia needs to develop a “thermometer” to measure media pluralism via an initial benchmark study followed by periodic reviews. We also need a robust, independent, public interest test that can be applied in merger environments.

– ref. Press, platforms and power: mapping out a stronger Australian media landscape – http://theconversation.com/press-platforms-and-power-mapping-out-a-stronger-australian-media-landscape-117987

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Louisa Gordon, Associate Professor – Health Economics, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute

Australia’s Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy will investigate how to better protect patients from doctors charging “really unjustifiable, excessive fees” of up to A$10,000 or more for medical procedures.

Murphy said it was potentially unethical for doctors to charge such high out-of-pocket fees that left families in severe financial pain, and that contrary to some patients’ hopes, paying more didn’t equate to better outcomes.

The call comes as desperate families increasingly turn to crowdfunding, remortgaging their homes and eating into their superannuation to raise tens of thousands of dollars for surgeries and other medical expenses.

Read more: We need more than a website to stop Australians paying exorbitant out-of-pocket health costs

It is perfectly legal for a doctor working in private practice to charge what they believe is fair and reasonable. It’s a private market, so buyers beware.

But that doesn’t mean it’s right, or that it should be allowed to continue.

Not everything is available in the public system

Some patients’ out-of-pocket costs are from the gap between what their private health insurance and/or Medicare will pay for a procedure or treatment.

But some treatments aren’t funded by Medicare or offered in public hospitals because their safety, efficacy and value for money have not yet been demonstrated.

Medical technologies, devices and surgical techniques need to be rigorously tested in clinical trials to demonstrate safety and clinical effectiveness. They will only be widely adopted when they have a strong evidence base.

When the government pays for a health service, value for money is also considered. For really expensive services and medicines that have the potential to greatly benefit patients, the government will try to negotiate prices down, to reduce the impact on the health budget.

While a lack of evidence of a benefit does not necessarily mean the procedure does not benefit patients, the outcomes need to be reviewed and demonstrated to justify its ongoing use.

Sometimes new technologies are adopted prematurely based on weak evidence and strong marketing which can lead to poor investment decisions. This was the case with robotic surgery for prostate cancer, offered early in private practice in Australia, only to find later it was no better than traditional surgery.

If a patient chooses to spend money on a high-risk surgery, is it really anyone’s business?

Sometimes patients will choose to undergo high-risk surgery, not covered under the public system, and are willing to pay out of their own pocket, or raise the funds through crowdsourcing or remortgaging their home.

Some will argue the value is whatever the patient is willing to pay for it and it’s up to the patient’s own risk-benefit preferences.

There are some major problems with this. Patients often make health decisions while distressed, ill and emotional. They may not be able to determine the best course of action or have all the information at hand. They must trust the doctor and his or her superior knowledge and experience.

Read more: Specialists are free to set their fees, but there are ways to ensure patients don’t get ripped off

Health economists call this “asymmetric information”. The doctor has extensive years of training, expertise and qualifications. The patient has Dr Google.

A key reason governments intervene in health care systems is to avoid market failure arising from unequal information and the profiteering of providers.

Our ‘fee-for-service’ system is failing

In the private system, doctors are paid a fee for each service they provide. This creates an incentive for doctors to provide more services: the more services they provide, the more they get paid.

But the high volumes of testing, consultations and fragmented services we’re currently seeing aren’t translating to a better quality of care. As such, economists are calling for major reforms of our fee-for-service private health system and the way that doctors are paid.

This could involve paying doctors for caring for a patient’s medical condition over a set period, rather than each time they see the patient, or charging private patients a “bundled fee” for all the scans, appointments and other costs associated with something like a hip replacement.

Read more: More visits to the doctor doesn’t mean better care – it’s time for a Medicare shake-up

Out-of-pocket costs are very high for some Australians with cancer. A quarter of Queenslanders diagnosed with cancer will pay provider fees of more than A$20,000 in the first two years after diagnosis.

While what constitutes “value” will be in the eye of the beholder, a well-functioning and sustainable health system is one that puts patients’ interests above all others and holds health providers accountable.

Australia’s universal health care system is one of the best in the world and we need to work hard to preserve it. Surgeries costing tens of thousands of dollars will continue unless the government regulates private medical practice or reforms the way doctors are remunerated.

It’s time to cap what physicians can charge for services and provide incentives for specialists to bulk-bill their patients.

Read more: Why do specialists get paid so much and does something need to be done about it?

– ref. It’s perfectly legal for doctors to charge huge amounts for surgery, but should it be allowed? – http://theconversation.com/its-perfectly-legal-for-doctors-to-charge-huge-amounts-for-surgery-but-should-it-be-allowed-118179

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hadeel Al-Alosi, Lecturer, School of Law, Western Sydney University

Contrary to popular belief, crimes against the environment are not “victimless”. They affect many people, animals, plants and landscapes. Crimes against the environment should not be taken lightly.

Broadly defined, environmental crimes are those that harm the environment. This includes acts such as polluting water or air, illegal fishing or trade in wildlife, and water theft. The international Environmental Investigation Agency reports environmental offending is “one of the most profitable forms of criminal activity”.

Australia is currently missing out on a hugely useful tool in the fight against environmental crime: restorative justice. This approach, which has been used successfully in New Zealand, deserves a nationwide commitment.

Read more: Why a narrow view of restorative justice blunts its impact

Restorative justice conferencing

Australia is a world leader in using restorative justice to deal with both adult and young offenders.

Simply defined, restorative justice is a process in which the victim, offender, and other parties affected by a crime come together to discuss the aftermath of the offence and its impact. Each party plays a role in resolving the dispute with the help of an impartial facilitator.

Restorative justice is all about restoring harm, preventing the crime from reoccurring, and fixing (or building) relationships.

Research has found that, compared with the traditional criminal court process, restorative justice can reduce the chances of reoffending, increase victim satisfaction, and prompt offenders to feel more responsibility for their actions.

During a conference, victims can explain the effect a crime had on them, and ask questions – giving them a voice in traditional proceedings. Offenders can give reasons why the crime happened, and apologise. A range of other outcomes may be agreed to in a conference, including compensation and community work.

However, our research reveals that conferencing is underused when it comes to environmental crimes in Australia.

New Zealand leads the way

New Zealand is leading the world in using restorative justice to deal with environmental crimes. This is largely a result of two pieces of legislation passed in 2002. First, the Victims’ Rights Act 2002 says that, if possible, the court (or other representative) must arrange a restorative justice conference at a victim’s request. Second, the Sentencing Act 2002 makes it mandatory for a judge to take into account any outcomes reached in a conference.

While more research focusing on the precise benefits is needed, anecdotal evidence from shows New Zealand’s approach is effective. Several judges, prosecutors and facilitators have praised environmental justice in addressing environmental crime.

Read more: Three rivers are now legally people – but that’s just the start of looking after them

Australia is failing to reap the benefits

Unlike New Zealand, Australian courts have not embraced restorative justice for environmental offending. In fact, Australia has only used restorative justice conferencing in two cases of environmental crime: Williams (2007) and Clarence Valley Council (2018).

Both Williams and Clarence Valley Council involved offending against Aboriginal cultural heritage, in breach of New South Wales’s National Parks and Wildlife Act. The outcomes reached in the conferences went well beyond what a court could have imposed on the offenders.

For example, in Williams, where a mining company built exploratory pits and a private railway siding across areas of Indigenous significance, the maximum penalty at the time was a fine of A$5,500 and 6 months’ imprisonment. The judge suggested the parties engage in a restorative justice conference, during which Craig Williams donated A$32,200 worth of items to the local Aboriginal people.

In Clarence Valley Council, which concerned the council cutting down a protected tree, the council agreed in the conference to donate A$300,000 to the local Aboriginal community to fund research into cultural heritage. The council also agreed to create employment opportunities and youth initiatives for Aboriginal people.

These outcomes are far better in repairing the damage done than a mere fine or prison term.

Complementary to traditional prosecution

Despite these significant benefits, restorative justice conferencing is not a replacement for prosecution. It should be used only after the offender has been assessed as suitable, as in the cases of Williams and Clarence Valley Council.

Restorative justice conferencing can be suitable for all sorts of environmental crime, from water pollution to breaches of planning laws. In the case of offending against Aboriginal cultural heritage, conferencing may be appropriate given its ability to give a voice to members of the Aboriginal community who would otherwise be unable to participate in the formal court process.

The ideal time to integrate conferencing is after conviction but before sentencing, which we refer to as a “back-end model” of conferencing (the method most commonly used in New Zealand).

Typically, a back-end model involves the prosecution bringing charges before the court. The court then considers holding a restorative justice conference and, if appropriate, the proceedings are postponed to allow the conference to occur. The matter is later referred back to the court for sentencing.

This creates an opportunity for the sentencing judge to consider any results from the conference, but maintains a court’s essential oversight role by ensuring the outcomes reached are adequate, achievable and legally binding.

A more environmentally friendly response

Restorative justice conferencing can provide a more effective way of dealing with environmental harms because, according to Trevor Chandler, a facilitator in Canada, “punishment makes people bitter, whereas restorative solutions make people better”.

Of course, conferencing is not without limits. Just as restorative justice may not work for all young people, it may not work for all environmental offenders. Conferencing can require more time, money and energy than traditional court processes. However, this may be an investment well worth making for the environment.

Read more: Restorative justice may not work for all young offenders

It is time for Australia to follow New Zealand’s example by embracing a back-end model of restorative justice.

This would give victims a much-needed voice in the process, and create a better chance to heal ruptured relationships and restore the harm done to the environment as far as possible.

– ref. Australia should give victims a voice in tackling environmental crimes – http://theconversation.com/australia-should-give-victims-a-voice-in-tackling-environmental-crimes-115711

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Finkel, Vice-Chancellor’s Fellow, La Trobe University

This article is an edited extract from Elizabeth Finkel’s address Gene therapy: cure but at what cost? to the National Press Club June 5 2019.

We’re publishing it as part of our occasional series Zoom Out, where authors explore key ideas in science and technology in the broader context of society and humanity.

Gene therapy – for so long something that belonged to the future – has just hit the streets.

A couple of weeks back, you might have picked up a headline alerting us to the most expensive drug in history – a one off gene therapy cure for spinal muscular atrophy. Novartis have priced the drug Zolgensma at A$3 million (US$2.1 million).

Traditionally a parent of a baby with spinal muscular atrophy was told: take your baby home and love her or him. Have no false hope, the baby will die paralysed and unable to eat or talk by the age of two.

What’s the narrative going to be now? There is a cure but it costs A$3 million.

I think we are in for some poignant dilemmas.

Read more: Boyer Lectures: gene therapy is still in its infancy but the future looks promising

‘Heads up’ from a mother

The person who gave me a recent “heads up” on the gene therapy revolution was not a scientist. She is the mother of two sick children.

I met Megan Donnell last August 29th at a Melbourne startup conference called “Above All Human”.

Megan Donnell is a person who strikes you with her vibrancy and charisma. What you can’t immediately see is her life’s greatest tragedy and her life’s greatest mission.

Both of her children suffer from the rare genetic illness Sanfilippo syndrome. They lack a gene for breaking down heparin sulphate, a sugar that holds proteins in place in the matrix between cells. The high levels of the sugar poison the organs, particularly the brain. In the normal course of the disease, the children die in their teens, paralysed, unable to talk or eat.

When Megan Donnell’s kids were diagnosed at the ages of four and two, she was told “do not have false hope”. She didn’t listen.

The one time IT business manager started the Sanfilippo Childrens’ Foundation, raised a million dollars and invested in a start-up based in Ohio that was trialling gene therapy to treat the disease. Part of the deal was that the company would conduct trials in Australia as well as in the US and Spain. So far 14 children have been treated worldwide.

I’d missed a revolution

Megan Donnell’s story stunned me.

I’d written two books about coming medical revolutions: one on stem cells, the other on genomics. But when a medical revolution actually arrived, I’d missed it. It was all the more remarkable because for six years I’d been the editor of a popular science magazine – Cosmos.

We scanned the media releases for hot papers each week but gene therapy never came up on our radar.

Probably because we’d been dazzled by CRISPR – the powerful technique that can edit the DNA of everything from mosquitoes to man. But CRISPR has barely entered clinical trials.

Read more: What is CRISPR gene editing, and how does it work?

Meanwhile there are already five gene therapy products on the market. And with 750 working their way through the pipeline, the US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) predicts that by 2025 between 10-20 gene therapy treatments will be added to the market each year.

Some of the gene therapies are having incredible effects.

The star example is the Novartis treatment for spinal muscular atrophy. Untreated babies die paralysed by the age of two. But those treated with Zolgensma have now reached the age of four and some are walking and dancing.

In 2017, the FDA approved Luxturna, now marketed by Roche. This gene therapy can restore sight to children suffering from a form of retinal blindness that begins months after birth.

For the first time I can recall, medical researchers are using a four letter word for some diseases: cure.

These treatments appear to have fixed the underlying conditions. Especially when they are given early. Indeed spinal muscular atrophy treatment is being offered to babies a few month old – before their motor neurons have started to wither.

30 years in the making

These gene therapy treatments have been over thirty years in the making. And the saga of their journey to the clinic, I suspect, reveals some common plot lines.

The potential of gene therapy, was obvious as soon Marshall Nirenberg cracked the genetic code back in the 1960s.

The New York Times opined: “The science of biology has reached a new frontier”, leading to “a revolution far greater in its potential significance than the atomic or hydrogen bomb.”

In a 1967 editorial for Science, Nirenberg wrote:

This knowledge will greatly influence man’s future, for man then will have the power to shape his own biological destiny.

But if the end goal was obvious, the pitfalls were not.

What made the dream of gene therapy possible was viruses. They’ve evolved to invade our cells and sneak their DNA in next to our own, so they can be propagated by our cellular machinery.

Throughout the 1980s, genetic engineers learned to splice human DNA into the viruses.

Like tiny space ships, they carried the human DNA as part of their payload.

By 1990, researchers attempted the first gene therapy trial in a human. It was to treat two children with a dysfunctional immune system, a disease known as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID).

The results were hardly miraculous but they were promising. Researchers raced to bring more potent viruses to the clinic.

Children have died

In 1999, 18 year old Jesse Gelsinger paid the price.

He had volunteered to try gene therapy for his inherited condition: ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency. It meant he couldn’t break down ammonia, a waste product of dietary protein. But his condition was largely under control through medication and watching his diet.

Four days after his treatment at the University of Pennsylvania, Jesse was dead – a result of a massive immune reaction to the trillions of adenovirus particles introduced into his body. These are the same viruses that cause the common cold.

Tragedy struck again in 2003. This one involved so-called “bubble boys”.

They too carried an immune deficiency, X-SCID, which saw them confined to sterile bubble; a common cold can be fatal. This time round the gene therapy appeared far more effective. But within a few years of treatment, five of 20 boys developed leukaemia. The virus (gamma retrovirus) had activated a cancer-causing gene.

The two tragedies set the field back. Many researchers found it very hard to get funding.

But the huge clinical potential kept others going.

The key was to keep re-engineering the viral vectors.

It was a project that reminds me of the evolution of powered flight. From the biplanes that the Wright brothers flew in 1903 to the epic Apollo 11 flight in 1963, took 60 years.

The virus engineers have been a lot faster.

Use engineered viruses

Ten years after the disaster of the leukaemia-causing viruses, researchers had re-engineered so-called lenti viruses not to activate cancer genes. They had also found other viruses that did not provoke catastrophic immune responses.

Instead of the adenovirus, they discovered its mild-mannered partner – known as adeno associated virus (AAV). There’s a whole zoo of these AAVs and some species are particularly good at targeting specific organs.

It is this new generation of vectors that are responsible for the results we are witnessing now. The AAV 9 vector for instance can cross into the brain, and that’s the one used to treat spinal muscular atrophy.

Turning the table on viruses, and hacking into their code: this is the bit that particularly fascinates me in telling the story of gene therapy.

But another intriguing aspect is that, contrary to long held wisdom, we are seeing big pharma galloping in to treat rare diseases.

In the US, the spinal muscular atrophy market is probably around 400 babies per year. Luxturna might treat 2,000 cases of blindness a year.

It’s not the sort of market size that would bring joy to investors. But clearly the companies think it’s worth their while.

For one thing, the FDA has provided incentives for rare, so-called “orphan diseases” – fast-tracking their passage thought the tangled regulatory maze.

And there is a convincing business case. If gene therapy is a one shot cure then it really may end up saving health systems money.

That justifies, they say, some of the most extraordinary prices for a drug you’ve ever heard of.

Of course, all this relies on the treatments being one time cures.

And though the patients seem to be cured, whether or not the treatments last a lifetime remains to be seen.

The situation in Australia

Historically, this country has been a world leader when it comes to bargaining down exorbitantly priced cures.

In 2013 when the drugs for curing Hepatitis C first came out, the price was around A$100,000 for a 12 week course. But in Australia, all 230,000 of those living with Hepatitis C will be treated for the lowest price in the world. Prices are much higher in the US.

Read more: Australia leads the world in hepatitis C treatment – what’s behind its success?

Greg Dore at the Kirby Institute of NSW participated in Australia’s Hepatitis C pricing discussions, and believes our model will work for the new gene therapy drugs – notwithstanding their eye-popping price tags – and the fact that the patient populations for these rare genetic diseases will be tiny.

However, the real reason companies are getting into gene therapy is not just to treat rare disease. It’s because they realise this technology will be a game changer for medicine.

They have already entered the field of cancer with a gene therapy approved for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia – CAR-T cells. Health Minister Greg Hunt announced this year the government will pay the cost (around A$500,000 per treatment).

But after cancer, what then?

If you have a vector than can take a gene to the brain and cure spinal muscular atrophy, what else could you cure. Alzheimer’s disease, strokes?

Australian researchers are jostling to be part of the gene therapy revolution.

Paediatrician Ian Alexander together with virologist Leszek Lisowksi are engineering the next generation of vectors in their labs at The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney. They are designing them to home efficiently to specific organs and produce therapeutic levels of proteins.

Curiously it turns out that a major bottleneck is scaling up the production of these exquisitely engineered viruses. Who’d have thought there’d be a problem churning out the most abundant organism on the planet?

Read more: Explainer: how do drugs get from the point of discovery to the pharmacy shelf?

Researcher David Parsons in Adelaide is refining methods to deliver vectors across the viscous mucus of children with cystic fibrosis.

Scientist John Rasco in Sydney is a pioneer when it comes to treating patients with gene therapy, having been a part of international trials treating patients with beta thalassemia.

Medical researcher Elizabeth Rakoczy in Perth is developing a treatment for macular degeneration.

And Alan Trounson, who spent six years at the helm of the world biggest stem cell institute, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, is advancing a technology to develop off the shelf, universally compatible, CAR-T cells, to attack ovarian cancer.

One thing is for sure: medicine is set for a major disruption from the arrival of gene therapy.

As we enter an era, where once incurable diseases become curable; be prepared for some challenging debates about how to pay for gene therapy and the value of a human life.

– ref. The gene therapy revolution is here. Medicine is scrambling to keep pace – http://theconversation.com/the-gene-therapy-revolution-is-here-medicine-is-scrambling-to-keep-pace-118329

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scarlett Howard, Postdoctoral research fellow, Université de Toulouse III – Paul Sabatier

Most children learn that written numbers represent quantities in pre-school or junior primary school.

Now our new study shows that honeybees too can learn to match symbols and numerosities, much like we humans do with Arabic and Roman numerals.

Read more: Can bees do maths? Yes – new research shows they can add and subtract

Human language and mathematics

Language is the ability to learn and use a system of symbolic representations for communication. This includes a capacity to relate signs to abstract information.

For example, letters grouped together make a word which we can read, and sounded words put together in the correct order allow us to have a conversation. Human language can incorporate spoken, written, visually signed, or tactile forms like braile.

Around the world humans have developed many different spoken and written languages. However, mathematics in particular is often regarded as a “universal language” since the mathematical concepts that describe values and equations do not depend on cultural or other frameworks.

We are interested in the question of whether numerical symbols are truly universal – that is, whether they also work for species that are not human.

The language of honeybees

The honeybee is a super organism for the study of comparative information processing in a brain. In 1973 Karl von Frisch was awarded a Nobel Prize in the field of Physiology and Medicine for his demonstrations that the honeybee can communicate with hive mates via a symbolic dance language.

von Frisch showed that a foraging bee which locates rewarding flowers can fly back to a hive and signal both the direction and distance of the nutritious flowers via a “waggle dance”. Other bees can interpret the dance language to know where to fly to collect nectar.

We wondered if such an impressive communication system meant that honeybees could learn another type of symbolic language, a basic symbolic number system.

Interestingly, chimpanzees, Rhesus monkeys, pigeons, and a single African grey parrot named Alex have demonstrated the skill to learn either Arabic numerals or English names for numbers. This shows us that while no non-human species appear to have developed a symbolic representation of number, it is not because they lack the brain capacity to understand such representations.

Our work has already shown honeybees can learn and apply challenging numerical concepts such as greater vs. lesser items, a quantitative valuation of “zero”, and simple arithmetic.

We took this knowledge a step further with our latest research.

Read more: Bees join an elite group of species that understands the concept of zero as a number

How do bees learn?

To train honeybees to match symbols (called “signs”) and number amounts (called “numerosities”), we used a subset of the symbols previously used to train pigeons on a similar task.

Bees were trained to fly into a Y-shaped maze. Inside the maze the bee would view a stimulus. The bee would then fly into the decision chamber were it would view two options, one correct and one incorrect.

One group of bees was trained to match a sign to a numerosity, while a second group was trained to match a numerosity to a sign.

If bees were learning to match a sign to a numerosity, they would first see the sign and then have the option to choose two or three shapes. If bees were learning to match a numerosity to a sign, they would first see a number of items, such as three squares, and then have the option to choose from two signs.

For example, if a bee viewed an N-shaped sign, she would need to choose a display presenting two items. She would need to be able to do this regardless of the shape, pattern, or colour of the items presented.

If the bee chose correctly she would receive a sugar solution, but if she chose incorrectly, she would taste bitter quinine (which does not hurt the bee but is not pleasant for her). Importantly, neither the quinine nor the sugar can be smelled by the bee, so the only cue for decision making is the visual one.

Matching symbol to number

Bees were trained for 50 trials to match an N-shape sign with the number “two”, and an inverted T-shape sign with the number “three”, and achieved an accuracy of about 75%. This is the first time symbol matching to number has been shown in an invertebrate.

After training was completed bees were tested in several conditions with completely novel patterns, colours and shapes and continued to prefer to match the sign with the numerosity, or the numerosity with the sign.

Interestingly, however, we found bees were unable to reverse their learnt tasks. If a bee had learnt to match a sign to a numerosity, she could not then match a numerosity to a sign, or vice versa. It appears the association between the number and the symbolic representation was only learnt in one direction and was unable to be reversed.

Interestingly, these kinds of learning outcomes – referred to as “operational schemas” – are sometimes applicable to how humans learn too.

What does this mean?

While no other species besides humans has spontaneously developed a language for numbers, our research suggests an insect can understand and learn basic representation of numbers through symbols.

The system we taught to bees was limited in several ways. For example, we trained bees to link just two quantities and two symbols. Also we do not yet know if bees gave quantitative value to the symbols; we simply know that they can link the symbol and quantity together.

Read more: Our ‘bee-eye camera’ helps us support bees, grow food and protect the environment

And yet it is remarkable bees displayed some capacity to understand numbers through symbols.

We’re left wondering whether we as humans are so very special after all – that perhaps the ability to learn mathematics could be universal.

Despite the limitations of the current research, we have demonstrated, to a small extent, symbolic communication with an insect species, which we have been separated from by over 600 million years of evolution.

Our research is laying the foundations for developing a communication system with very different animal species, and shows the differences between human and non-human animals are not as great in some regards as we might previously have thought.

– ref. We taught bees a simple number language – and they got it – http://theconversation.com/we-taught-bees-a-simple-number-language-and-they-got-it-117816