The federal government has announced a new “safeguard” around how funding is spent to support school students with disabilities.

The budget papers say there is an issue with “inaccurate claiming” by schools and new controls are needed to prevent “fraud and non-compliance”.

This is more than a technical measure. It is about how disability support is recognised, documented and resourced in Australian schools.

How does school funding work at the moment?

The way school funding works is that all schools receive a base amount for each student. There are extra loadings if the student is Indigenous, has socioeconomic disadvantage, low levels of English or a disability.

The new measure aims to “increase compliance” around the disability loading part. According to estimates in the budget fact sheet, the loading is worth about A$5.1 billion in 2026.

The government now aims to save about $463 million over four years by cutting out what is described as “inappropriate allocation” of the disability loading to schools.

The federal Education Department will also get $40.4 million to strengthen compliance around disability loadings. This includes clearer guidelines around how disability data is collected from schools.

How does disability funding work in schools?

Schools are required to provide reasonable adjustments so students with disability can participate in their education and learn on the same basis as students without disability. This requirement is set out in the Disability Standards for Education.

Schools decide what adjustments are needed. This should be done in consultation with students and their parents and caregivers.

This can include changes to timetables, assessments and learning materials. It can also include communication supports, behaviour plans, specialist programs, environmental modifications and health or personal care plans. Teachers’ professional judgement is crucial to the whole process.

Schools are then required to report how many of their students need adjustments and what adjustments they need through a national reporting system.

The government’s disability loading is based on this national data.

Students or their families do not personally receive any funds. The disability loading gets added to overall government funding to “approved authorities”.

For government schools, the authority is the relevant state or territory government. For non-government schools, it is the approved body corporate for the school. Approved authorities responsible for more than one school can redistribute Commonwealth funding across their schools using their own needs-based arrangements, and can pool funding from government and private sources.

Schools are not required to spend a particular loading amount on a particular student. Schools have the flexibility to determine how to best use their overall funding allocation for their school community. For example, funding might be used to hire a classroom assistant or it might be used to develop new teaching resources.

What’s the problem?

The concern appears to be about how the disability loading is calculated and distributed.

A 2019 review noted the national data around students’ with disabilities relies on teachers’ professional judgement and self-reporting. It found linking this to funding can create risks of “manipulation and perverse outcomes”.

The government says compliance work will look for funding that has been “over-allocated or accumulated”. Given federal funding is paid to approved authorities, which can pool and redistribute funding across schools, this may refer to money sitting within systems rather than clearly flowing to areas of student need.

The public documents do not clarify whether the concern is inaccurate claims from schools about student disability, retained or pooled funding, or a lack of transparency about whether disability loading is translating into classroom support.

Numbers are growing

In 2024, more than one million Australian school students received an educational adjustment due to disability. This represented 25.7% of total enrolments, up from 24.2% in 2023 and 18% in 2015.

This increase should not be read automatically as evidence of over-claiming. It may reflect improvements in the recognition of students’ needs.

The national regulations do not require a medical diagnosis for a student to be counted as having a disability.

The school, in consultation with the student and their parent or carer, determines an adjustment is needed for that student to learn and participate in their education. This approach is in keeping with the Disability Standards for Education.

Why are we talking about ‘compliance’?

The government says this new measure will mean adjustments for students are “targeted, effective” and meet both disability law and funding requirements.

The government also says funding should be “based on need”. This is of course very important.

But the risk here is in how the issues are framed. The budget announcement is explicit about “inaccurate claiming” and “regulatory loopholes”, and funding that may be “over-allocated”.

It does not acknowledge ongoing issues about under-recognition and unmet need in the community when it comes to disability support.

There is also little detail on how governments will work out whether or not students are getting appropriate support at the classroom level.

The school funding measure also sits within a wider shift in disability policy. In the same budget, the government is seeking to slow NDIS cost growth. The reforms are expected to save $37.8 billion over four years, even as the scheme continues to grow each year.

What now?

Existing government guidance says the national reporting on students with disability should be drawn from what happens in classrooms and existing school records. Schools are not required to create new or additional evidence.

If “integrity” is interpreted mainly as tighter surveillance of claims, the practical effect may be more paperwork and more pressure on teachers and families to prove what should already be understood as an educational right.

In that scenario, compliance will not protect inclusion. It can crowd it out.

– ref. The government wants to save $463m by tightening disability support to school students. What’s going on? – https://theconversation.com/the-government-wants-to-save-463m-by-tightening-disability-support-to-school-students-whats-going-on-282852

Senator Tammy Tyrrell, who started her parliamentary career as part of the Jacqui Lambie Network before turning independent, has now joined Labor.

“I’m very proud to be a Labor girl,” she declared at a news conference with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

While this gives the government an improved buffer it does not change the basic situation in the Senate – Labor will still need either the Greens or the opposition to pass legislation.

Albanese heaped praise on his new recruit, saying she had been “a good-faith negotiator, making a difference for Tasmania as an independent”.

Tyrrell entered the Senate in 2022 under the Jacqui Lambie Network banner. She became an independent in 2024, saying Lambie had indicated she was not happy about how Tyrrell was representing the party.

Tyrrell told the news conference: “I’m not going to apologise to anybody for joining Labor. It’s a good fit. I have supported Labor very regularly over the last four years. But I’ve also pushed back when things for Tasmania [are] important, and I will still do that, but I will do it respectfully and calmly within caucus”.

Mid last year, the Nationals approached Tyrrell (and other crossbenchers) about joining them after they lost their Senate party status at the election.

Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Senator Tammy Tyrrell on wild days in Tasmania

Tyrrell told the Conversation’s Politics podcast at the time the approach was “a big compliment”, although she declined the invitation

“The Nats represent rural and regional Australia beautifully, by speaking their voice and for them to see that I am representing the people of Tasmania in a good light – it was a huge compliment to be approached to join them. But I’d already been in a relationship and I’m quite happy being a single divorcee.

“It’s amazing being an independent, it means that I can say and do what my community wants me to in their voice without having to agree to broad-sweeping politics or legislative ideas that I don’t agree with fundamentally. So it was a compliment, but never tempted.”

Tyrrell said on Thursday she wanted to run for Labor at the next election. She will be up for re-election in 2028.

– ref. Crossbench senator Tammy Tyrrell joins government ranks, declaring she’s ‘proud to be a Labor girl’ – https://theconversation.com/crossbench-senator-tammy-tyrrell-joins-government-ranks-declaring-shes-proud-to-be-a-labor-girl-281638

The government’s plan to change the law to bar claims for harms from greenhouse gas emissions shuts down New Zealand’s most important climate tort case, meaning it will never be decided on its merits.

The move overrides a unanimous Supreme Court decision that Smith v Fonterra, a case against some of New Zealand’s major corporate emitters, should go to trial.

It also guts the future capacity of tort law – a branch of civil law allowing people to seek damages for harm caused by wrongful actions by others – to curb climate harms.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith justified it by saying climate change is best managed by the government at a national level, not through torts claims, and that shutting down these cases will “provide businesses with certainty around their obligations”.

As we explain, this argument is questionable on a number of fronts.

What the courts do that politics can’t

In New Zealand and elsewhere, tort law is being used to hold greenhouse gas emitters to account.

Tort claimants are also targeting governments for not doing enough to protect current and future generations. Leaving climate change regulation entirely to the government, then, is a little like putting the fox in charge of the hen house.

The minister is right to say the fight against climate change needs robust government action. But removing the role of the courts is the wrong way to go about it.

Courts do things governments cannot. They cannot be lobbied. They decide on evidence and law. They name specific actors and test their conduct against legal standards.

No one denies the complexities of fighting climate change. But tort law has always confronted new challenges.

It has been part of the fight against factory pollution, defective products, unsafe workplaces and corporate fraud. In the past year, tort law helped in the fight against online harm. Climate change is next in that sequence.

Courts overseas are already doing this work. In 2021, a Dutch court ordered a multinational company to align its activities with the Paris Agreement, the main international treaty combating climate change. However, this decision was appealed in 2024.

Last year, a German court held that major emitters can be liable for climate harm, even when the harm occurs abroad.

In Australia, torts claimants have attempted to hold the government to account for inadequate climate regulation. Some claims have been rejected, but one is ongoing.

The courts confirmed the climate science and increased public awareness. With the Smith v Fonterra case, we were about to see how New Zealand tort law can contribute to these efforts.

Why the government’s argument is wrong

We also call the government’s “certainty for business” argument into question.

Uncertainty is not effectively managed by extinguishing risks. Investors need risks to be priced. Legislating away tort liability does not eliminate the cost – it transfers it to others, just as lax regulation of flood risk has imposed severe costs on councils, insurers and households.

Under the government’s law change proposal, those who profit most from lax climate policy would be insulated from paying their share.

There is already a big gap in New Zealand’s current climate regulations. They do not allocate responsibility for damage. Tort law would do this.

The point the Supreme Court was making in its decision to allow Smith v Fonterra to go to trial was that even though there is regulation in an area, tort claims also have an important role.

Rule of law concerns

New Zealand’s parliament can legislate retrospectively, but the question is whether it should.

The traditions of the rule of law say it should not, unless there is compelling justification otherwise. The justification offered here is thin.

The government points to certainty for business investment and the integrity of its legislative regime. Neither comes close to a sufficient reason to bar an entire field of tort claims.

But the proposal fits a broader pattern. It follows a weakened methane target despite the Climate Change Commission’s recommendation it should have been strengthened, the return of offshore fossil fuel exploration, and the decoupling of New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme from its commitments under the Paris Agreement.

Against that backdrop, preventing climate-focused tort claims is not an outlier. We argue it is the next layer of a deliberate dismantling of a system of climate accountability.

This conflicts with constitutional and international legal recognition that governments have a duty to protect citizens from climate change.

Last year, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion which unanimously affirmed that states have legal obligations to protect the climate system, and that failing to prevent significant harm creates responsibility under international law.

The German Federal Constitutional Court also said Germany’s constitution requires the government to safeguard future generations from worsening impacts of climate change.

New Zealand’s current political process is not holding major emitters to account, and the regulatory framework is straining. The courts were the one part of the system still doing the work – until now.

– ref. Changing climate law to prevent civil cases removes a key protection for NZ citizens – https://theconversation.com/changing-climate-law-to-prevent-civil-cases-removes-a-key-protection-for-nz-citizens-282849

Menstruation is once again a hot topic on social media, thanks to a new health trend known as “cycle syncing”.

It involves aligning your diet and exercise habits to each phase of your menstrual cycle. For example, you may only do gentle exercises such as yoga or eat more fermented foods during the first phase of menstruation.

Social media influencers are spruiking cycle syncing as a more natural way for women to manage negative symptoms, such as period pain, and be more in tune with their bodies.

So how does it work? And is it supported by research?

The menstrual cycle

During menstruation, the body sheds the uterus lining to prepare for pregnancy. This usually happens every 28–35 days. But bleeding is only one part of the menstrual cycle. The menstrual cycle can be divided into three main phases:

1. follicular phase, where the body releases a hormone called the follicle-stimulating hormone to help follicles grow in the uterus

2. ovulation, where the ovary releases a mature egg that may or may not be fertilised

3. luteal phase, where the body releases a hormone known as progesterone that thickens the lining of the uterus, in preparation for pregnancy. But if the egg is not fertilised, the uterus will shed its lining and this cycle repeats.

Throughout the menstrual cycle, fluctuating hormone levels can cause symptoms such as fatigue, cramps, bloating, mood swings and changes in appetite.

Read more: Planning a baby? A fertility app won’t necessarily tell you the best time to try

Does ‘cycle syncing’ work?

Advocates of cycle syncing say it helps women manage period symptoms and meet the the body’s changing energy needs during menstruation.

However, specific claims often conflict with each other. For example, some who promote cycle syncing suggest eating fermented foods and fresh vegetables during the follicular phase, while others recommend eating lean proteins and wholegrains. Certain cycle syncing advocates emphasise doing cardio workouts and other high-intensity exercise in the follicular phase. Meanwhile, others say swimming or cycling are better options to manage period symptoms.

However, there is little evidence to support these claims.

Various systematic reviews – which summarise all the available research on a specific question – have found no evidence that doing exercise during certain phases of the menstrual cycle improves muscle development or performance. This is the case with both resistance training which aims to build strength, and aerobic exercise, which increases your heart rate.

It also does not appear to reduce your risk of muscle injuries. Research shows immune function may fluctuate throughout the menstrual cycle, but one systematic review found this variation is unlikely to impact exercise.

Read more: Can exercise reduce period pain? And what kind is best?

However, research suggests female athletes may feel less motivated or confident playing sport in the late luteal phase. They were also more likely to think they performed worse at the start and end of their period. This may be because symptoms such as cramping, back pain and tiredness make exercise seem much harder during menstruation.

But research suggests certain types of exercise, including strength training and relaxation-based exercises, may help relieve period pain.

There’s even less evidence examining the link between nutrition and different phases of the menstrual cycle. One 2024 study suggested women may be hungrier or eat more during their luteal phase, compared to the follicular phase. This may be because during the luteal phase, the body consumes more energy to prepare for a potential pregnancy.

However, one systematic review found no conclusive evidence that changing your diet reduces symptoms such as cramps, bloating and fatigue.

What to do instead

Existing studies looking at the relationship between diet, exercise and different menstrual phases have produced extremely varied results. And there are still many gaps in current research, including what the mechanism behind cycle syncing actually is and what its benefits may be.

So for those who want to manage period symptoms, the best approach is to be patient with yourself and listen to bodily cues. For example, if you slept badly because of night-time cramps, you don’t need to do a high-intensity workout the next morning. Consider going for a walk instead. And if you feel extra hungry near the end of your period – in the luteal phase – it’s fine to eat a little more.

The jury’s out as to whether cycle syncing actually works. But making small lifestyle tweaks could help make your time of the month that bit more manageable.

– ref. What is ‘cycle syncing’, and how might it affect menstruation? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-cycle-syncing-and-how-might-it-affect-menstruation-278073

Coles has been found to have misled its supermarket customers over discounts – and could now face hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties.

In a landmark case, Federal Court Justice Michael O’Bryan found 13 out of 14 sample sale tickets examined in the case had not offered genuine discounts, because Coles had not sold the products at a higher price for a reasonable period before promoting them with “Down Down” discounts.

In 2024, consumer watchdog the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) announced it was taking both of Australia’s biggest supermarkets, Coles and Woolworths, to court. It alleged they had each offered hundreds of discounts that an “ordinary customer” might think were genuine, but which were misleading.

Coles and the ACCC have been given until May 29 to agree on penalties and other orders, including a possible donation to Foodbank. A separate class action against Coles by customers will also be dealt with at the same time. If they can’t agree, they will head back to court.

The maximum penalty in this case could be A$50 million per breach of consumer law, or more, which is why the total could stretch into hundreds of millions.

However, an appeal from Coles is still possible. Coles has said it’s “reviewing the judgement”.

Justice O’Bryan is set to rule on the case against Woolworths at a later date. Around two thirds of all Australian supermarket sales are made at Woolworths or Coles. So most Australians are likely to have seen some of the disputed “discounts” being fought over in these two cases.

This was a genuinely difficult decision for the Federal Court. Here’s why it will have huge ripple effects right across Australian retail – and petrol retailers in particular should be paying close attention.

Why it was a lineball decision

As Coles argued in defending itself, its “Down Down” discount tickets were strictly accurate in showing a “before” and “after” price.

However, the decision came down to whether “ordinary customers” might feel aggrieved that the discount did not really deliver the bargain they thought.

The case arose from the ACCC’s allegations that, between February 2022 and May 2023, Coles temporarily increased the price of at least 245 products, from toothpaste to cereal.

It then placed those products on “Down Down” promotions at prices that were the same – or higher – than the price of the products before the temporary price rise.

In his ruling, Justice O’Bryan recognised prices had also risen due to inflation. But he concluded that where the discount “Down Down” ticket referred to a previous price that had only recently been raised, shoppers would be misled about the bargain offered by the discount.

Effectively, this court decision accepts that ordinary customers would expect the “was” price to have been stable for a reasonable period – in this case, at least 12 weeks – for the advertised discount to be genuine and not misleading.

In the judge’s view, 12 weeks was an appropriate period to establish an ordinary price, as it matched Coles’ own internal policies in 2022.

The judge rejected Coles’ argument that inflation meant customers understood prices fluctuate. However, the judge did not find Coles had been shown to have artificially inflated prices. This matters, as it could potentially reduce how much the supermarket faces in future fines.

Read more: Coles accused of ‘utterly misleading’ discounts as major court case kicks off

Huge news for shoppers and retailers

This decision is really significant. It means Australian retailers – not just supermarkets – cannot play games with consumers’ expectations.

If consumers have been led to understand a marketing campaign is directing them to good deals, then that has to be a genuine deal, which takes into account the price customers have been paying over a longer period – not just a temporary discount right beforehand.

For retailers, the decision means they’ll need to take greater care in their marketing. They need to consider whether the overall impression created by a discount campaign matches the reality of what is being offered, and whether it could mislead an ordinary shopper.

Why it matters for Woolworths

The ACCC has also brought a case against Woolworths – Australia’s biggest supermarket – on very similar grounds.

It’s worth noting the Woolworths case in court is slightly different from Coles’ – so we can’t assume the same result.

But Woolworths must at this point be considering its options – including whether settling now, and agreeing on a penalty, may be a smarter choice than waiting for its day in court before the same judge, Justice O’Bryan.

Why it matters for consumer protection

This was a high-stakes case for the ACCC. And it’s a welcome confirmation of the Australian Consumer Law being “fundamental” protective legislation for all Australians.

Just this week, the watchdog was given another $67.7 million over four years in the federal budget to strengthen its competition and consumer law enforcement capabilities.

The ACCC is celebrating its win in court, with its chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb saying “this case has increased transparency and accountability in relation to Coles’ Down Down program”.

The watchdog will now be feeling more confident in its judgement about marketing practices that should not be tolerated.

Much of the new federal funding for the ACCC is to monitor petrol pricing. So petrol retailers in particular should take heed about truth in advertising tied to fuel price fluctuations.

All retailers are now on notice.

Read more: How court cases against Woolworths and Coles could change the future of shopping in Australia

– ref. Coles’ discounts misled shoppers, court rules. It could face hundreds of millions in fines – https://theconversation.com/coles-discounts-misled-shoppers-court-rules-it-could-face-hundreds-of-millions-in-fines-282855

Legendary 18-time major winner Jack Nicklaus once stated golf was “90% mental and 10% physical”.

That’s because unlike most other ball sports, a golfer spends most of the time thinking about their game instead of actually playing it: the contact time a player has with the ball is minuscule compared to the time spent planning the next shot, or frustratedly replaying a previous wonky hit.

This can take a toll on even the best players – who can forget Greg Norman’s 1996 US Masters collapse, considered one of the worst chokes in the history of sport?

But there can be times when these wobbles go next level: the yips.

Let’s unpack this rare, fascinating and occasionally devastating disorder, which can affect athletes in sports such as golf, tennis, archery, baseball, softball and darts.

What are the yips?

The yips is a movement disorder that involves involuntary muscle spasms that disrupt the normal execution of mostly small muscle movements, such as finger and hand movements.

It is likely a result of bad injuries, training these small muscle groups too much, and/or worrying excessively about an upcoming performance.

In that respect, it is largely a mental issue, but the causes can be physical, psychological, or both.

Athletes with the yips can struggle to hit a ball with another object (such as in golf or tennis) or accurately throw a ball or object toward a target (such as darts or baseball).

It is unclear how many athletes are affected by the yips, but some studies in golf (the most frequently yips-affected sport) estimate between 17% and even up to 50% of serious golfers have endured this problem.

Although more research is needed, golfers are probably more at risk due to a combination of the small motor movements that occur during a golf swing and the sport’s intense mental pressures.

There are different causes

Three causes can trigger the yips: something physical (a past injury), something psychological (anxiety experienced when performing the task), or combined (such as a previous traumatic sporting event like failing under pressure in an important moment).

Yips always involve involuntary muscle spasms: jerking and “freezing” of body parts crucial to perform a skill.

Athletes may experience these physical ailments with or without being nervous.

It’s not just ‘choking’

The yips is a term often used inaccurately by media and fans to explain why athletes miss an AFL set shot or a short putt in golf.

This is incorrect – the term “choking under pressure” should be used instead.

The yips are different from choking in several ways:

• the yips involve involuntary muscle movements; choking does not
• the yips may occur over a prolonged period (days, weeks, months); choking only occurs during one event or competition
• the yips occur with or without being nervous (they can happen during training or in competition); choking only occurs when an athlete is nervous (for example, during competition).

The yips can be a chronic, more severe form of choking where an increase in anxiety leads to the involuntary muscle movements, but chronic choking does not always lead to the yips.

Can athletes recover from them?

Some athletes can overcome them but others get defeated.

Jon Lester, a former professional baseball player, developed the yips and could not throw accurately to first base – a basic yet vital skill for elite pitchers.

Several throwing coaches suggested he change his technique, with no success. So Lester decided to purposely bounce the ball off the ground when throwing to first base instead of throwing it on the full. This is hardly ideal considering the importance of throwing quickly and accurately to bases.

He said at the time the new technique was an idea to:

[…] eliminate all tension and bounce it over there. I don’t really care what it looks like. I don’t care if it bounces 72 times.

Despite his woes throwing to first base, Lester still enjoyed a highly successful career.

But some yips-affected athletes have been forced to walk away from their sport.

Ian Baker-Finch, a professional golfer who won the British Open title in 1991, developed the yips and attempted to change his swing multiple times.

It didn’t work – at the 1997 British Open he played so poorly that he withdrew before the second round and retired with immediate effect.

The title of his biography is To Hell And Back, which delves into his battle with the yips and then finding fulfilment in golf commentary.

How can the yips be overcome?

There isn’t much research that has focused specifically on how to overcome the yips.

Interventions are usually based on the type of yips the athlete is experiencing.

For example, if the issue is more physical, medication is often used to reduce the likelihood of muscle spasms and jerking. Acupuncture can also help.

With psychological yips, pre-performance (or pre-shot) routines and solution-focused guided imagery may help yips-affected athletes (and performance generally).

If the athlete is battling the combined version of the yips, then eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (often shortened to EMDR) has been shown to improve symptoms and performance.

With all these interventions though, only a small sample of yips-affected athletes were tested, and long-term follow-up studies are needed.

Dealing with pressure

With golf’s next major, the 2026 PGA Championship, starting on Thursday, the best golfers in the world will descend on Aronimink Golf Club in Philadelphia.

Some will excel under the immense pressure but let’s hope none of them succumb to choking – or even worse, the yips.

– ref. The yips: when ‘choking’ in sport can go next level – https://theconversation.com/the-yips-when-choking-in-sport-can-go-next-level-278770

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor says a Coalition government would restrict access to welfare benefits to Australian citizens.

Taylor will include the controversial policy in his Thursday night budget reply. It will be seen as an obvious pitch to those voters who are currently supporting One Nation. But the policy, which would hit permanent residents as well as other non-citizens, will be highly controversial.

The payments that would be affected range from the family tax benefit and carer payment to Austudy and the farm household allowance.

Under the plan, access to 17 welfare payments and benefits would be available only to Australian citizens.

At present, newly-arrived residents can obtain these benefits with either no wait or waits of up to four years.

Eligibility for the age pension and disability support pension would still need a ten year residency requirement, but be limited to citizens.

Future eligibility to the National Disability Insurance Scheme would also be restricted to them.

But there would be grandfathering arrangements for those already on welfare and the NDIS.

There would also be carve outs for humanitarian entrants, emergency assistance programs, and domestic violence and child protection services.

As well, there would be specific exemptions to cover for some defence, intelligence and law enforcement arrangements.

The opposition also says the Coalition would continue to honour existing international social security agreements.

Existing arrangements would be kept for eligible New Zealand Special Category visa holders currently covered under the NDIS framework.

Taylor told a Thursday news conference his budget reply would have a focus on “putting Australians first”.

He said the restricted access would not apply to health services.

“We’ve got, right now, a government that is slashing support for private health insurance for older Australians, and at the same time dishing out billions and billions of dollars to people in this country who are not citizens for welfare,” Taylor said.

“That’s not fair on hardworking Australian citizens. That’s not fair on people who have committed to this country for many years, and this is people who may well have come to this country and become citizens.

“And the simple principle is this: if you commit to this country, we’ll commit to you, and that’s how it should be.

“That’s the Australia I grew up in, and it’s the Australia I want to see again.”

Taylor said the changes would save billions over the forward esrtimates but did not give figures.

The Greens condemned the plan. David Shoebridge, immigration spokesman, said “Angus Taylor clearly has Pauline Hanson living rent-free in his head”.

– ref. A Coalition government would restrict access to welfare payments to Australian citizens – https://theconversation.com/a-coalition-government-would-restrict-access-to-welfare-payments-to-australian-citizens-282267

Treasurer Jim Chalmers has declared “no other budget in the 2000s has set out this much responsible budget repair and this much economic reform.”

Despite his claims, Tuesday night’s budget remains highly contentious – especially Labor abandoning its election commitments not to change capital gains tax discount and negative gearing.

The treasurer joined us on the podcast to explain and defend his fifth budget.

Expanding on his budget night statement about wanting to “rebalance a system which is more generous to assets than it is to labour”, Chalmers said he had deliberately created “new architecture” to give more options for providing future tax cuts.

The intention there is to give future governments the option to provide tax relief the usual way […] cutting rates and thresholds. Or cutting taxes specifically for workers via this new architecture, the [$250] Working Australians Tax Offset.

[…] I think I’ve demonstrated an enthusiasm to return bracket creep and cut income taxes where we can afford to do that. And this will provide another way in the future that governments can do that if they wish.

[…] Well, certainly we are in the cart for more tax relief when the budget can carry that, when the budget can afford that. We’ve made that really clear. Even in some of the budget documents we made it clear that one of the benefits of getting the medium-term fiscal position in much better condition is that it will provide room down the track for more tax relief.

‘Downward pressure on rents’

Asked about budget forecasts that the new housing tax changes will lead to a small rise in rent and a projected reduction in the number of new houses, Chalmers said the whole budget told a different story.

Some of those model outcomes that you’re referring to refer very specifically to and narrowly to the tax changes, and not the housing package in its entirety. And so once you look at the all of the housing policies in the budget that we released, we expect there to be about 30,000 additional homes. And when you’re building 30,000 additional homes, you will put downward pressure on rents.

In addition to that, there’s a lot of national competition policy and other policy that we’re doing with the states, which is about speeding up approvals and having more land release. So that could mean tens of thousands more homes as well. So all told, the budget in its entirety has a positive impact on housing supply.

Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Tim Wilson on the budget’s hidden hits on young Australians

Ongoing shocks from the Middle East

On the war in the Middle East, Chalmers said it still keeps him up at night.

I still lose a lot of sleep over developments in the Middle East is the truth of it. And that’s because, you know, we have no say in when the war will end or how long the consequences will linger for.

[…] I am extremely worried about it. The consequences in our economy from the war in the Middle East are already serious, and they still risk becoming severe.

Read more: At a glance: budget 2026

‘Paying a price’ for broken election promises

Chalmers acknowledged the government will pay a political price for breaking its pre-election pledges not to change negative gearing and capital gains tax. But he said he stands by the housing tax choices the government has just made.

The comments and commitments that we made at the election genuinely reflected the policy that we had, the overwhelming focus on [housing] supply. Now, the big choice that we have to make in the budget […] is the choice between doing something easier, which would have been to leave it untouched – but something which became increasingly clear to us wasn’t the right way to go. Because the longer we left it, the more people would be locked out of the market.

We didn’t want to leave to some future generation to fix this problem, which is intensifying. And so we took a decision which is hard in political terms. We will pay a price for it in political terms, I think. But what matters more than that is to get the substance of it right.

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Jim Chalmers says ‘we’re in the cart’ for more tax relief – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-jim-chalmers-says-were-in-the-cart-for-more-tax-relief-282861

For many in the West, China still feels hard to fully understand. Public debate and media coverage too often focus on the “China threat”. Critics highlight the flaws of China’s political system and limits on freedom, yet China has still managed to rise as a major power that can now compete with the United States.

One reason for this gap in understanding is that the media often interprets China through a Western-centric perspective.

US President Donald Trump’s summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping this week, for instance, will be analysed in the West very differently from the way it will be seen in China. Xi’s language will be parsed and scrutinised for couched messages, veiled threats and hidden meanings.

But analysts may be missing some of the tools China uses to explain and justify its actions.

My co-authored new research offers a new way to look at China’s grand strategy: by analysing the way the government uses storytelling. My research partners and I are part of a growing group of scholars looking at how geopolitics is becoming a contest of narratives – how states tell stories about themselves and each other.

To do this, we studied four major speeches by Xi from 2021–23. We read them as stories and dissected the narratives – as well as the characters and language – to better understand the meaning behind the words.

Why narrative in politics matters

The use of political narratives by leaders is not new.

In ancient Athens and Rome, politicians relied on strong public rhetoric to persuade people. Aristotle described three key elements of persuasion in rhetoric: logic (logos), emotional appeal (pathos), and the speaker’s credibility (ethos).

Modern theorists like Kenneth Burke argue rhetoric creates a sense of shared purpose between leaders and the public, but it can also create division between groups.

And communications scholar Michael Kent identifies 20 master “plots” that have been used by storytellers for thousands of years to craft effective narratives. These include: quest, adventure, pursuit, transformation, revenge, sacrifice, discovery and of course love.

My research partners and I used these plot devices to analyse Xi’s speeches to see how he communicates – and tells stories – about China’s strategies.

The plot devices in Xi’s speeches

We found several master plots that consistently shape China’s official stories:

Adventure

In the Chinese Communist Party’s 100th anniversary speech in 2021, Xi said:

To save the nation from peril, the Chinese people put up a courageous fight. As noble-minded patriots sought to pull the nation together.

This storyline frames China as a nation on a long journey towards strength and prosperity, marked by setbacks and breakthroughs. This is seen as a type of political adventure. This narrative also appeals to shared memories in China of hardship and endurance.

Quest

Xi’s speeches also described a quest – the nation’s striving towards a difficult goal, under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

In Xi’s 20th Party Congress report in 2022, he said:

There has never been an instruction manual or ready-made solution for the Chinese people and the Chinese nation to turn to […] as they moved on toward the bright future of rejuvenation.

The message is intended to inspire unity, patriotism and pride among Chinese listeners.

Transformation

In his 14th National People’s Congress speech in 2023, Xi said:

The Chinese nation has achieved the great transformation from standing up and growing prosperous to becoming strong, and China’s national rejuvenation has become a historical inevitability.

Transformation stories describe not just change, but growth and renewal. This narrative presents China’s rise as a natural evolution built on decades of reform and sacrifice.

Rivalry

Rivalry stories tend to feature internal and external threats.

In two of the speeches we studied, Xi refers to efforts by foreign powers to “blackmail, contain, blockade, and exert maximum pressure on China,” and recalls a past when foreign bullying caused “great suffering”.

In the CCP’s 100th anniversary speech, Xi also said:

Anyone who would attempt to do so will find themselves on a collision course with a great wall of steel forged by over 1.4 billion Chinese people.

These storylines reinforce the idea that China must remain vigilant and united against outside pressure.

Love

Xi doesn’t refer to a romantic-type of love story in his speeches; rather, he speaks of the dedication and loyalty of the Communist Party’s supporters.

In the 100th anniversary speech, for instance, Xi said:

And I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to people and friends from around the world who have shown friendship to the Chinese people and understanding and support for China’s endeavours in revolution, development and reform.

How audiences see these messages

The impact of this messaging is strong at home. It’s often reinforced through state media, cultural products and patriotic education to reach as wide an audience as possible.

The frequent contrast between past suffering and present strength encourages the public to see China as a peaceful but firm global actor.

For a foreign audience, this storytelling can help other countries interpret China’s actions and anticipate its responses.

For example, China’s narratives about past humiliation and the need to defend its sovereignty help explain its strong stance on Taiwan – and the Communist Party’s legitimacy on this issue in the eyes of the people.

But this does not mean a military conflict is inevitable. Any future military action over Taiwan would depend on a multitude of factors, including careful calculations of risk, China’s economic interdependence with the world, and the potentially catastrophic consequences for the region and its people.

This cannot be easily conveyed in storytelling, which is why we can’t rely on this device alone to explain China’s actions. But it does give us a window into leadership’s thinking – and in a political system like China’s, this is vital.

The author would like to acknowledge her co-researchers on the project: Mitchell Hobbs of the University of Sydney (project lead), and Zhao Alexandre Huang and Lucile Desmoulins of Gustave Eiffel University, France.

– ref. Love, quest, adventure: the storytelling behind Xi Jinping’s speeches and China’s grand strategy – https://theconversation.com/love-quest-adventure-the-storytelling-behind-xi-jinpings-speeches-and-chinas-grand-strategy-269510

In March, a major independent report commissioned by the federal government declared Australia’s research and innovation system was “broken”. The report, titled Ambitious Australia, recommended how to fix it.

The 2026 federal budget gives us the first concrete signal of how the federal government intends to act on the report’s recommendations.

This signal is a quiet one, despite there being some welcome commitments. It is not quite the kind of renewal many in the research sector might have hoped for after years of reviews, uncertainty and declining confidence in national research settings.

Let’s dig into the details.

Looks good at first glance

At first glance, some headline numbers in the budget look constructive.

For example, the government says it will “[strengthen] our science capabilities and institutions” via new investments. There is $387 million over four years for the CSIRO. There is also $273 million for the National Measurement Institute, $21.7 million for the Australian Space Agency, and $24.3 million over two years for the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

The government has also committed to establishing a National Resilience and Science Council. This was one of the main recommendations of the Ambitious Australia report. The council will provide coordinated advice on research, development and innovation investment. It will also help set priorities for $15 billion worth of funding in this area.

This is a logical policy direction. It may reduce fragmentation and help connect public research to national industrial capability.

The Medical Research Future Fund disbursement cap will progressively lift toward $1 billion per year by 2030–31. This removes an artificially imposed budget measure, which many have called for, and will allow significant extra funding to flow to health and medical researchers.

Subject to treaty negotiations, the government will also provide funding for Australia to join Horizon Europe as an associate member. Horizon Europe is the European Union’s flagship research funding scheme. Associate membership would allow Australian researchers to lead projects and directly access an additional tier of funding to complement our domestic funding schemes.

Not a broad expansion of research

These commitments are real and welcome. They support public science capability that Australia needs. But they are largely institutional life-support measures. They are not a broad expansion of competitive, investigator-led fundamental research.

For example, the Ambitious Australia report recommended that Australian Research Council and NHMRC funding allocations be returned to historical levels, reversing what it documented as a 19% real decline over 12 years, and properly indexed.

That recommendation is not yet adopted in this budget.

Some of the commitments in the budget are also, on closer reading, essentially a redistribution rather than an expansion of public investment in research.

Take the measure referred to as “Boosting Productivity – Promoting Research, Development and Innovation”. This is partially funded by returning $800 million of uncommitted funding from Australia’s Economic Accelerator over five years, with a further $1.4 billion in savings booked between 2030–31 and 2036–37.

Established in 2022, Australia’s Economic Accelerator was a program designed to bridge a gap between publicly funded university research and commercialisation. Scaling that back, in the same measure that funds science agencies within the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, is representative of the government’s apparent focus shift from competitive, university-administered research funding and toward agency-based applied science.

This strategic shift is further emphasised by the choice of instrument for stimulating private R&D investment.

The government seeks to unlock $400 million per year in additional R&D investment by young firms through increased tax offsets.

But that figure is a behavioural estimate, not a committed R&D outlay. It rests on assumptions about how Australian industry may respond to increased tax offsets. And historically, Australia’s business expenditure on R&D as a share of GDP has been persistently below the OECD average since at least the early 2000s.

There are many cultural and structural reasons for that. An offset adjustment is unlikely to be a silver-bullet resolution to them on its own.

Finally, one of the more low-key and curious inclusions in the budget notes that work is “progressing to reform registration requirements so that universities can achieve research specialisation in chosen areas of focus”.

It describes it as a process that will redirect non-research-intensive disciplines and/or institutions toward teaching. It seems to forecast consolidating R&D investment at fewer, larger institutions.

This could benefit Australia’s leading research intensive universities that form what’s known as the Group of Eight. But it could potentially harm mid-tier research active universities and their emerging academics building research programs across the country.

A holding pattern

This budget is a holding pattern for fundamental research in Australia. It keeps the lights on for agency-based science, doubles down on driving business R&D, and defers structural decisions about university research funding to a future date.

In a chaotic global environment being shaped daily by oil market shocks, none of these choices are unreasonable.

They do, however, leave Australia’s fundamental research system in a state of policy suspension at a moment when the report commissioned to examine it explicitly recommended decisive action.

The question is no longer what the Ambitious Australia report said. It is whether or when the government intends to act on it.

– ref. The federal budget will keep scientific research alive. But it’s unlikely to expand it – https://theconversation.com/the-federal-budget-will-keep-scientific-research-alive-but-its-unlikely-to-expand-it-282856

From live speech translation in video calls to auto-dubbing on TikTok, the technology to dissolve language barriers has arrived. Real-time translation powered by artificial intelligence (AI) is now embedded in everyday life.

Tools from OpenAI, Meta, Google and many others now offer near-instant translation across dozens of languages, and they keep improving.

All this raises a vital question. If machines can do this faster and more accurately than humans, is investing years in learning another language still worth it?

The logic is appealing. Humans have always offloaded cognitive work onto tools. Writing reduced demands on our memory. Calculators removed the burden of mental arithmetic. AI sits within this long tradition. Used well, it can support learning and expand access in ways that matter enormously.

But there’s a difference between using a tool to extend your capabilities and using it to avoid doing something altogether. That distinction becomes important when you are not just replacing a skill, but a form of cognitive and cultural engagement.

The effort is the point

Effort plays a central role in how we acquire knowledge.

Psychologists use the phrase “desirable difficulties” to describe challenges that may feel inefficient, but produce stronger long-term retention and understanding.

Struggling with grammar, searching for the right word, or constructing meaning across multiple languages engages brain networks that support memory, attention and cognitive flexibility. Over time, they consolidate knowledge far more deeply than passive exposure.

Sustained mental engagement contributes to what researchers call cognitive resilience – the brain’s capacity to maintain function as we age. Managing multiple languages is one form of this engagement. It requires the brain to resolve competition, monitor context and adapt dynamically.

These are not trivial demands. And they’re difficult to achieve if you just use translation tools passively, such as resolving the meaning of a foreign phrase with the click of a button.

What multilingualism research actually shows

The evidence on multilingualism is often presented as a simple “bilingual advantage”, a shorthand that obscures a more complicated picture. Some studies report benefits for attention or working memory, while others find no differences. The truth appears to be more selective.

Our recent study examined cognitive performance in 94 adults aged 18 to 83, using both visuospatial and auditory tasks across working memory, attention and inhibition. Put simply, we looked at how people process and respond to information they see or mentally map out in space (visuospatial) and information they hear (auditory). Examples include remembering sounds, focusing on visual patterns, or ignoring distractions.

Our study measured multilingualism as a spectrum, not a category. This allowed us to capture diverse language backgrounds and experiences. Multilingual participants spoke a range of languages with varying levels of proficiency and daily use, reflecting the linguistic diversity common within multicultural communities.

Across most tasks, multilinguals and monolinguals performed similarly. However, one pattern was striking. Individuals with richer, more diverse multilingual experience showed markedly better performance in visuospatial working memory. These effects were most pronounced in older people.

This suggests that multilingual experience doesn’t broadly enhance cognition, like some headlines claim. Instead, it may help preserve specific functions over time.

Separate population-level research has also linked multilingualism to later onset of Alzheimer’s disease and better overall ageing outcomes, though the mechanisms continue to be debated.

Overall, however, it appears that sustained use of multiple languages represents a form of mental activity with effects that accumulate across a lifetime.

What AI translation can’t replicate

AI translation excels at speed and accessibility. For many practical purposes, it works remarkably well. But it operates through pattern recognition, not lived understanding. It can struggle with cultural context, humour, register and emotionally embedded meaning, especially for languages with less representation in training data.

At best, AI captures literal dimensions of language while missing social ones. Consider the scene in the 2003 film Love Actually where Jamie, played by Colin Firth, delivers an awkward but sincere proposal to Aurelia in broken Portuguese.

It is moving because of the effort, vulnerability and intent his imperfect words carry. Resort to real-time translation software and what remains is information, not expression.

This is the deeper distinction: translation is not the same as participation. Learning a language involves understanding how people think, their values, and how meaning is shaped by context and history. This cultural literacy develops through interaction and experience. We can’t fully outsource that to systems that translate on demand.

The multilingual participants in our research spoke to this directly:

I definitely think in Telugu, but I remember numbers and count using English.

Afrikaans is the language of my heart and best used to express intense emotion. English is the language of business and used mostly in everyday life.

These are not descriptions of switching between translation modes. They are descriptions of inhabiting different selves.

AI will continue to change how we engage with language learning. It can personalise instruction, minimise barriers and provide feedback at scale. What it can’t do is replace the cognitive and cultural work that comes from learning a language. This work leads to a deeper relationship with how other people see the world, and with how you express yourself. And that difference still matters.

– ref. If AI can translate instantly, why learn another language? – https://theconversation.com/if-ai-can-translate-instantly-why-learn-another-language-280310

Paramedics face the threat of violence every day.

Just this past month, two Victorian paramedics were assaulted. One was stabbed and another pregnant paramedic punched after saving a patient’s life.

Authorities warn these incidents are part of an “appalling trend” of escalating violence against paramedics.

And they’re a reminder that violence against paramedics is not a rare or unpredictable event, but a routine occupational risk. And research suggests this risk is rising.

So what makes their job so dangerous? And how can we better protect them?

A dangerous profession

Research shows paramedics face some of the highest rates of workplace violence of any profession.

One Australian study found nearly 90% of paramedics have experienced workplace violence while delivering care. Verbal abuse is the most common kind, followed by intimidation, physical abuse, sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Paramedics may also be attacked with weapons, including knives and box cutters. Though less common, these acts of violence put paramedics at much greater risk of serious injury or even death.

Paramedics are frequently exposed to other risks, such as dog attacks and car accidents. They are also more likely to be trapped in unsafe private or public spaces, such as when attending domestic violence scenes.

Read more: Paramedics have one of Australia’s most dangerous jobs — and not just because of the trauma they witness

Research suggests violence against paramedics is becoming more common around the world. In Victoria, one paramedic is assaulted every 15 hours on average. And in 2024–25 alone, Ambulance Victoria recorded 1,045 occupational violence incidents — equivalent to almost 17 incidents for every 100 staff.

Research shows female paramedics experience higher rates of occupational violence, particularly sexual harassment and intimidation. Given female paramedics make up just over half of the ambulance workforce, this is an urgent safety issue.

What’s behind this trend?

Research suggests there are multiple factors driving the surge in violence against paramedics.

One is the high rate of alcohol and drug abuse. Researchers observe a strong link between substance abuse and violent incidents against paramedics, particularly in overdose and emergency mental health cases.

Another factor is system pressures, such as long ambulance response times and crowded emergency departments. These pressures can make patients, family members and bystanders more agitated, and more likely to lash out at paramedics. Due to workforce shortages in some areas, paramedics may also be forced to treat complex cases or arrive at volatile scenes alone. This leaves them even more vulnerable to assault and other acts of violence.

Read more: Bad for patients, bad for paramedics: ambulance ramping is a symptom of a health system in distress

Not just physical violence

These violent incidents take an immense psychological toll on paramedics. Research shows workplace violence is a key driver of burnout, anxiety and post traumatic stress disorder among paramedics.

Paramedics are also feeling less safe while on the job. A recent trial required New South Wales paramedics to wear body cameras while delivering care. It found frequent exposure to violence had a significant impact on how safe paramedics felt and how emotionally exhausted they were. Participants were also more likely to consider stepping back from frontline roles, or leaving the workforce altogether.

So protecting paramedics is not just about preventing harm, but also retaining a vital part of our emergency workforce.

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

So, what needs to change?

To keep our paramedics safe, governments should:

• strengthen legal protections for paramedics, by ensuring assaults carry meaningful, enforceable penalties and intoxication or mental health crises are not routinely used to excuse violence

• train paramedics to de-escalate volatile situations, assess risks and deliver trauma-informed care, and make this training continuous instead of a once-off

• improve communication between paramedics, police and hospitals, to ensure key information gets to ambulance crews before they arrive at a scene

• establish a national database recording the prevalence and patterns of violence against paramedics, including incidents targeting students and early-career staff.

Ambulance services must also:

• provide ambulance services with better lighting, real-time communication systems and security personnel particularly when transferring patients to hospital

• foster a workplace culture where reporting violence is encouraged and taken seriously, not dismissed as “part of the job”.

The public can also help protect our paramedics by:

• staying calm and giving paramedics space to do their job

• following instructions from paramedics

• discouraging aggressive behaviour from others

• calling triple-0 if violence is escalating, so police can be sent in to support paramedics.

Read more: The Bondi Beach terror attack mobilised a team of volunteer medics. Here’s what we learned

– ref. Paramedics are facing more danger on the job. Here’s how to protect them – https://theconversation.com/paramedics-are-facing-more-danger-on-the-job-heres-how-to-protect-them-282706

Images of the sleek keels, elegant planks, and dragon-headed prows of Viking longships have been reproduced countless times on postcards, book covers, souvenirs and in television shows and movies.

These vessels are, quite literally, the poster-ships for the Viking Age, which was between around 750 and 1100 CE.

So what made these ships so special? And why were these advanced shipbuilding techniques so crucial to the Vikings’ success?

What drove this shipbuilding boom?

In Old Norse, there are two words for Viking: víkingr refers to a person, while víking is an activity. Neither word is inherently negative nor associated with violence.

A víkingr is someone (who may or may not identify as a pirate) who undertakes víking expeditions (sometimes to pillage, sometimes not), and whose life and livelihood have strong connections to the sea.

By the mid-eighth century, these people were keen to expand their horizons and branch out from local economies.

This coincided with a number of large and lucrative mercantile towns springing up around north-west Europe in this period.

Among other factors, Vikings travelled further westward and eastward as part of an ongoing and complex power grab for portable wealth, territory, and control of trade routes.

From the 750s on, the Vikings’ advanced shipbuilding technology helped give them the edge.

Gamechanging technology

The unique design of Viking ships and their trademark square sails were absolute gamechangers in this period.

There are many different types of Viking ship, but the most relevant here are the langskip (longship) and knörr (cargo ship).

Like all Viking vessels, these are clinker built. That means the hull’s long, curved sides are assembled out of slightly overlapping planks, and are held together by iron nails (the “clinkers”).

Along with their strong but slender keels and stems, this innovative construction made for incredibly flexible, light, and sinuous vehicles that could be powered by oars or by sail and withstand wild ocean swells.

With their narrow silhouettes and their ability to gently twist and yield to the waves, it’s no wonder longships were called snekkja (serpents), dreki (dragons) and skeið (sliders).

Another small but significant improvement that made longer-distance travel possible was the oar-hole.

Until the early Viking Age, pegs called tholepins stuck up from the gunwales (upper rim of the boat) to hold oars in place and act as fulcrums for rowing. This meant ships’ sides could never be very high above the water. (Imagine trying to row with your oar at head height.)

But by cutting holes through the side planks, which could be plugged when the oars were shipped and the sail raised, it became possible to build taller, more seaworthy ships.

The boats had shallow drafts (meaning not much of it was under the waterline). This enabled these “sea-snakes” to slither further inland than ever before, since they could tackle riverways other boats simply couldn’t navigate. They could also be dragged across land.

Longships also had symmetrical prows (meaning the “back” of the boat was just as high as the “front”).

This design allowed Viking raiders to pull right up on the riverbank, then “hit and run” – without all the slow awkwardness of reversing and turning the whole boat around for the getaway.

Square sails also increased both the distance and speed of Viking travel. Norse explorers like Eirik rauða (“the Red”) and his son Leif (who went to North America nearly 500 years before Columbus) wouldn’t have taken a warship to Iceland or Greenland.

Instead, they probably kitted out a knörr, a heavy-bellied merchant ship much like the one described in an ancient Icelandic text called Egil’s saga

richly painted above the plumbline and fitted with a black-and-red sail […] loaded with stockfish, hides and ermine, and a great quantity of squirrel skins and other furs […] a very valuable cargo.

When powered by four oars, a modern reconstruction of just such a knörr reached a speed of 1.5 knots. With the sail raised it sped along at 13 knots (around 24 km an hour).

A much larger longship with 60 oars could row at 4.5 knots and reach a maximum sailing speed of 17 knots (31.5 km an hour)!

Crafted by hand

The most impressive stats about Viking ships aren’t about how fast or far they went, but rather how much time, effort, and natural resources went into building them. The sheer industry of it all is astonishing.

Every piece was crafted by hand. Axes shaped the floor timbers, planking, masts and beams.

Dozens of oak trees (8-10 metres long and at least a metre across) went into the hull. Dozens more pine trees were burnt to make tar for sealing the wood (600 litres for a 60-oar longship, which took more than 2,000 hours to produce).

More pine and alderwood went into the oars and mast.

Then there’s all the iron: 450kg of it to make the 8,000 nails needed for this same longship.

An average knörr’s sail was 90m² (smaller than the longship’s) and used the wool of 200 sheep, all of which had to be spun into thread and woven into continuous lengths of fabric, each 65cm wide.

This spinning and weaving work took experimental historians 7,850 hours to recreate (around 4.5 years for one person).

Another month was needed to sew the sail panels together, cut it to shape and reinforce its edges. Then there’s the ship’s cordage: so much horsehair, hemp and linden bast (a plant fibre) for 3,000 metres of rope.

This constant and large-scale manufacturing paints an evocative picture of the Vikings’ everyday, shipbuilding life.

It was all hands on deck, so to speak.

– ref. The high-tech shipbuilding methods that helped Vikings dominate the seas – https://theconversation.com/the-high-tech-shipbuilding-methods-that-helped-vikings-dominate-the-seas-280155

Whether you call it an Irish goodbye, French leave or filer à l’anglaise (leave in the English style), as the French prefer, the act of quietly slipping out of a party without fanfare is a familiar social impulse. The Brazilians called it sair à francesa (French style), the Germans a Polnischer Abgang (Polish departure), and Australians call it ninja bombing. Whatever name it goes by, the concept is the same: one moment you’re there, the next you’ve vanished into the night without a drawn-out round of explanations, hugs and promises to catch up soon.

The pattern is telling: every culture has a term for it, and every culture blames someone else. That collective deflection suggests we already know, on some level, that slipping out unannounced is a social transgression.

But for those of us with anxiety, that silent exit isn’t rudeness. While etiquette traditionalists will probably insist that leaving without saying goodbye is a social no-no, some psychologists argue that it’s a coping strategy. Here’s why sneaking out without saying goodbye might be the healthiest decision you make all evening.

When you break it down – and let’s be honest, those of us who are anxious, introverted, neurodivergent or dealing with chronic illness have all broken this down into agonising detailed steps – saying goodbye is a loaded cultural ritual. It’s a performance that demands a high degree of social skill, accuracy and nuance.

Goodbyes are high-demand situations and, sadly, by the end of a social occasion, many of us are already depleted and don’t have the energy to handle all the steps involved.

For many of us, socialising can mean feeling overwhelmed, constantly monitoring how we come across, trying to fit into other people’s expectations, comparing ourselves to others and worrying about rejection. It can be exhausting to feel like you’re constantly trying to act like your best version of normal.

When socialising means constantly adapting yourself to other people’s expectations, the healthy choice becomes using your last bit of energy to recharge and take care of yourself. Don’t leave the party completely drained with nothing left to recover with.

Sometimes we want to leave quietly because leaving loudly feels like shouting out: “I matter! Look at me, I’m leaving!” The fact is, many of us sit with the belief that we don’t really matter that much, so we don’t say goodbye because we don’t feel we are worth the performance.

Sometimes a silent exit is about self-respect, minding your energy reserves, even if you really enjoyed the evening. At other times, though, it’s an act of self-erasure. You leave without saying goodbye because you think no one will care, that you don’t matter enough to make a fuss when leaving.

Leaving quietly can become a way to protect yourself from the discomfort of saying goodbye. But the quiet exit cuts both ways. Ask yourself whether leaving without a word made your life bigger – you conserved enough energy to recover and you’re glad to go back next time – or whether it shrank it, adding another reason to avoid socialising altogether.

If you are going to pick apart your goodbye and negatively assess it, the next goodbye will feel even harder. Be careful to reality-test your post-event ruminations. It’s usually not as bad as you think, especially if you are assessing your performance through the distorting lens of anxiety.

The healthiest choice of all

There is always a tension between wanting to belong and wanting to be yourself. If saying goodbye starts to feel so pressured and so performed that you lose any sense of being authentic, then the connection is starting to cost more than it’s worth.

If you feel like you need to be a chameleon to survive the complexities of socialising, the healthiest choice is to find a way to be who you really are. Find a way to tell your friends and family that leaving quietly is something you need because of how your nervous system and psychology are made, and not a reflection of the relationship. Research shows that being your truest self and having the best social connections go hand in hand.

And if you are neurodivergent, being open about what you need can feel like a risk, but it can also be a way to find acceptance, support and understanding when you let people know what you need and like.

If you’re anxious, it’s worth letting your host know in advance that you might need to slip away quietly. Otherwise, there’s a risk that people will read it the wrong way, as coldness or indifference, say.

Get ahead of it by letting people know you’ll leave without saying goodbye, and that you’re grateful to have been invited. Anxious people aren’t bad at relationships. Relationships just work better when everyone understands the other person’s needs.

Less is more

There’s a growing idea that being choosy about your social life isn’t antisocial – some psychologists call it “selective sociality”. Picking your moments carefully means you have more to give when it counts. The goal isn’t to retreat, but to invest in deeper relationships and in real presence, rather than the hollow churn of online contact – unless it supports meaningful connection.

In a world where being seen to do the right thing has begun to outweigh doing the right thing, selective sociality offers a way forward. Knowing our limits and being open about them, when possible, doesn’t weaken connection – it helps create relationships that feel real and sustainable.

If sneaking out without a fuss makes it more likely you will go to the next party, then it’s a choice for more social connection and therefore your health.

– ref. From ‘French leave’ to ‘Irish goodbyes’: why you may be right to exit a party without saying goodbye – https://theconversation.com/from-french-leave-to-irish-goodbyes-why-you-may-be-right-to-exit-a-party-without-saying-goodbye-281994

Every four years, the men’s World Cup delivers some certainties. The pitch dimensions are tightly regulated, offside is signaled with a flag, and referees end the match with a blast of a whistle. But one key piece of equipment is changed on purpose: the ball.

Adidas, which has supplied World Cup soccer balls since 1970, introduces a new match ball for every tournament, and with that comes fresh aerodynamic calculations for players. How will it fly through the air, weave and dip?

For the past 20 years, my engineering colleagues in Japan and England and I have put the new balls through their paces, investigating soccer ball aerodynamics. Our work begins by putting balls in wind tunnels to measure drag, side and lift forces. We use the measurements from these tests in trajectory simulations that tell us how the ball will behave in a real-game setting.

That may all sound a little academic, and we do produce an academic paper on our findings. But what our data indicates could mean the difference between a goal or a miss for strikers, a save or a blunder for goalkeepers, and jubilation or heartache for fans.

At the World Cup, the ball is the most important piece of equipment in the biggest tournament of the world’s most popular sport.

This year’s ball, the Trionda, is especially interesting. When FIFA and Adidas unveiled it in fall 2025, the first thing many people noticed was the color and the paneling.

The ball’s red, blue and green graphics correspond to the three host countries, with maple leaf, star and eagle motifs representing Canada, the United States and Mexico. And for the first time in men’s World Cup history, matches will be played with a four-panel ball.

But with so few panels, has Adidas made the ball too smooth? That is the trap engineers fell into with the Jabulani ball used at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa that became notorious for sudden dips and swerves, which made goalkeepers’ lives far trickier.

You do not want the World Cup ball to feel like the start of a science experiment once it is in the air. And if it behaves strangely, players and goalkeepers notice immediately.

The evolution of soccer balls

World Cup balls have come a long way over the decades. If you go back to 1930, the ball looked very different. The first World Cup final used two different leather balls: Argentina’s Tiento in the first half and Uruguay’s T-Model in the second. Both were hand-sewn, multipaneled balls, inflated through a bladder opening that had to be tied off and tucked back beneath the laces. In damp conditions, the leather absorbed water, making the ball heavier and less predictable in play.

By 1994 – when the United States last hosted the men’s tournament – the official ball, Adidas’ Questra, had evolved into a foam-based design. The modern World Cup ball is no longer just stitched leather. It is an engineered aerodynamic surface.

Trionda pushes that evolution further. It has only four panels, the fewest in men’s World Cup history, which have been thermally bonded – melded together using heat and adhesive.

Fewer panels might suggest less total seam length and therefore a smoother ball. And smoothness matters because the thin boundary layer of air clinging to the ball determines where the flow separates, how large a wake forms, and how much drag the ball experiences.

The Trionda has intentionally deep seams, three pronounced grooves on each panel and fine surface texturing.

But will these textures and grooves do the trick? To find that out, my colleagues and I measured the ball’s seam geometry and overall aerodynamic behavior. We compared it with Trionda’s four predecessors: 2022’s Al Rihla, 2018’s Telstar 18, the Brazuca used in 2014 and the Jabulani in 2010.

What the measurements show

In our wind tunnel tests at the University of Tsukuba, we measured something called the drag coefficient, which is a way of describing how much air resistance a ball experiences as it moves.

Using this data, we gained insights into how the airflow changes around the ball after it is kicked. The tests helped identify the drag crisis, the speed range in which changes in the boundary layer and flow separation produce a sharp change in drag, which can alter the ball’s acceleration, trajectory and range.

We found that the Trionda is effectively rougher than those predecessors.

Trionda reaches its drag crisis at a lower speed, at about 27 mph (43 kph). That is below the roughly 31-40 mph (50-65 kph) range for Al Rihla, Telstar 18 and Brazuca, and far below Jabulani’s roughly 49-60 mph (79-97 kph) range, depending on orientation.

Why does all that matter? Because a ball can feel ordinary off the boot and still behave differently in flight. When the drag crisis occurs in the middle of game-relevant speeds, small changes in launch speed, orientation or spin can shift the ball from one aerodynamic regime to another.

That was Jabulani’s problem. Once kicked with little spin, it had a tendency to slow down too much as it passed through its critical-speed range.

Trionda does not look like that kind of ball. It has a more steady and consistent drag coefficient in the range of speeds associated with corner kicks and free kicks.

But there is a trade-off. Our measurements also showed that once Trionda enters the higher-speed, turbulent-flow regime, its drag coefficients are somewhat larger than those of Brazuca, Telstar 18 and Al Rihla.

In plain language, that suggests a hard-hit long ball may lose a little range.

In our simulations, the difference is not huge. But it is large enough that players may notice long kicks coming up a few meters short.

It is also important to note that we tested a nonspinning ball. As such, our results do not provide a prediction of every pass, clearance or free kick fans will see this summer. Balls in flight often spin due to off-center kicks. That, along with altitude, humidity, temperature and air pressure all influence how a ball flies through the air once kicked.

The big test yet to come

Fewer panels and more texturing aren’t the only differences with the new ball.

Trionda also carries technology that has little to do with its flight and a great deal to do with officiating. Like Al Rihla, Trionda includes “connected-ball technology” that lets computers know when the ball is kicked, helping with offside decisions.

But the architecture has changed. In 2022, the measurement unit was suspended at the center of the ball. With Trionda, it sits in a specially created layer inside one panel, with counterbalancing weights in the other three panels. The chip sends data to the video assistant referee, or VAR, system and the tournament’s semi-automated offside system.

That tweak will help referees, but will the new ball in general help or hinder players?

The evidence from our tests suggests that the ball won’t be behaving in a way that leads to baffling and erratic flight.

But the more intriguing possibilities are subtler and outside the scope of our tests. Will the grooves on Trionda help players generate more backspin on the ball, generating more lift and possibly offsetting Trionda’s somewhat larger high-speed drag coefficient?

That is why I keep studying World Cup balls both in the lab and through their behavior in play. Every four years, a new design offers a fresh way to watch physics enter the game, not in theory, but in the movement of an object in which every player on the soccer field must place their trust.

– ref. We tested the new World Cup ball – this is what you need to know about how it will fly, dip and swerve – https://theconversation.com/we-tested-the-new-world-cup-ball-this-is-what-you-need-to-know-about-how-it-will-fly-dip-and-swerve-280781