Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christian Downie, Professor of Political Science, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University

There’s a reason political commentators refer to Australia’s “climate wars”. Every time a climate policy is put on the table, supporters and opponents come out in force and duke it out.

Last year, debates over Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions target led to a heated contest between various groups such as the Climate Council — arguing for strong action — and others such as the Business Council of Australia, which commissioned modelling to highlight the economic costs of a strong target.

This was not a one-off. Since at least the 1990s, emissions-intensive industries such as coal and gas and their lobby groups have had an outsized influence on climate policy. This includes groups such as the Minerals Council of Australia, which represents BHP, Rio Tinto and Whitehaven Coal, and Australian Energy Producers, which lobbies on behalf of BP, Shell and Woodside, among others.

Until now, we did not have a good understanding of who mobilises on climate policy in Australia, what side of the issue they fall on, and in which arenas they mobilise. In our new research, we found a core set of only 20 groups dominating climate policy debate in Australia, including gas corporations, industry lobby groups, environmental NGOs, and think tanks.

Who are these groups?

To find out which groups are most influential, we collected data on all organisations active on climate policy in Australia between 2017 and 2022. This included examining the number of groups as well as their volume of activity in the executive branch of government (responsible for implementing and enforcing laws, managing day-to-day administration and setting policy), the parliament and the media.

For example, we identified 700,000 mentions of groups in articles about climate change from 13 media outlets, including The Australian and the Sydney Morning Herald.

As well as media records, we also built a database of organisations who actively consulted with government departments and provided evidence to parliamentary inquiries.

We found 20 groups accounted for more than half (52%) of all activity.

They included a mix of mining and energy firms, such as AGL, BHP and Rio Tinto and their lobby groups, such as the Minerals Council of Australia. It also included high-profile NGOs, such as the Climate Council, and think tanks active on climate policy, including the Australia Institute and the Grattan Institute.

It’s important to note we didn’t look at the content of the messages in the media, the parliament or in departmental consultations, just the number of organisations and the frequency of their activity.

Where do these groups stand on climate action? tweaked

Among the 20 groups, some are strong supporters of climate action, such as the Climate Council. By contrast, the Minerals Council of Australia has a long history of opposing climate policies dating back to the Kyoto Protocol in the 2000s and the short-lived carbon price in the 2010s.

Interestingly, there are more pro-climate groups than anti-climate groups. Most NGOs in our study tended to support action on climate change, including the Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace and WWF.

Many of the business groups do not. But it’s not as black and white as this might suggest. Firms and business advocacy groups are not unified. A growing number of renewable energy companies now mobilise in support of climate policy, often through advocacy groups such as the Smart Energy Council.

Interestingly, many industries active on climate policy don’t have a hardwired position. Rather, they sometimes support and sometimes oppose climate policy. This is often because their commercial interests are only indirectly impacted by climate policies, such as firms in the technology or finance industries.

These somewhat “neutral” groups actually account for the majority of groups active on climate policy in Australia.

Does this vary by arena?

We also explored whether some groups dominate the media more than the parliament, or the parliament more than the executive. For example, are environmental NGOs more active in the media than in Senate hearings? Are business groups more active in consultations with the government departments that make up the executive branch of government?

Interestingly, we found the media is the only arena where fossil fuel interests dominate. For example, groups typically opposed to climate action represent 43% of all media mentions, compared to 20% in support and 36% neutral.

This begs the question – why does the media appear to have a strong bias for reporting pro-fossil fuel messages?

One explanation consistent with overseas studies
is simply that messages from business coalitions and very large businesses are more likely to receive media coverage than other types of organisations, such as environmental NGOs.

These organisations are likely to have high standing in the media because they are viewed as key players in policy debates with inside knowledge. Certainly in Australia, the largest firms and lobby groups mobilised on climate change are tied to? fossil fuel industries.

Do these groups matter?

As we sweat through another of the hottest summers on record, the federal government will rightly remain under pressure to put in place further policies to cut carbon pollution. In fact, recent polling shows one in two Australians want action on climate change “even if this involves significant costs”.

Who mobilises to support or oppose climate policies will likely have a big influence on policy outcomes such as increasing renewable electricity in the grid, phasing out petrol and diesel vehicles or stopping new coal and gas projects

Our research shows a core set of groups, including firms in the coal and gas industries, that are likely to have an outsized voice in such policy debates.

While this does not always equate to influence, it is an important precondition. In the media in particular, it appears fossil fuel interests have the loudest voice.

This research was funded by the Climate Social Science Network.

– ref. These voices are the loudest in Australia’s ‘climate wars’ – https://theconversation.com/these-voices-are-the-loudest-in-australias-climate-wars-272347

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grant Duncan, Research associate, Public Policy Institute, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

With nine months to go, how much can opinion polls tell us about the general election on November 7? Short answer: not much.

Based solely on polls, no one could have predicted the past three elections this early in the year they were held. Trends shifted over the subsequent months, and events (especially COVID in 2020) intervened to shake things up.

Each poll is a snapshot of past public opinion – and it’s out of focus, due to statistically inevitable sampling error. A sample of 1,000 people won’t exactly resemble the whole eligible population, and the percentage of “undecided” voters often goes unreported.

Researchers have an incentive to produce results that are as accurate as possible, but statistical variance happens. Each poll is an estimate. And a small variation between two polls by one or two percentage points is “noise”, not “signal”.

We get a picture of how party preferences have shifted by looking at trends across a number of polls. But past trends aren’t a sound guide to future trends.

What are recent polls telling us?

The Research Association New Zealand’s Political Polling Code requires that projections of the numbers of seats for each party “should state that polls do not predict – they measure a point in time”.

I’d add that no one can “measure” opinions in the precise ways we measure distances and times. An opinion isn’t an object in space.

So, what can we say recent polls indicate, rather than measure?

They seem to show that if an election had been held recently, National would have won fewer party votes than in the 2023 election. Labour may have done better than National, but been let down by potential coalition partners the Greens and Te Pāti Māori.

It’s unclear whether or not that hypothetical election could have led to a change of government. Polls held in the weeks immediately before elections are normally pretty close to the election results. But voter turnout can upset that.

A representative sample of eligible people in a survey may not demographically match the population that actually casts their votes.

Unexpectedly high turnout in 2020, for instance, meant polls in the month before the election underestimated Labour and overestimated National.

All the same, political observers can use polls as indicators of where things have been heading. As I write, none of the parties, except NZ First, would be pleased with their recent polling, on average.

NZ First has had results of 9% or more, improving on its previous election result of 6.1%. Labour’s gradual rise over 2025 appeared to be at the expense of the two smaller left-wing parties, however.

Do polls influence election results?

Opinion polls can have self-fulfilling or “bandwagon” effects on people’s voting behaviour. But there’s no A-causes-B theory that allows us to predict whether, or by how much, that will happen. The effects could go in different directions for different people.

If polls show one candidate is way ahead, it may motivate me to vote for that person (to join the bandwagon). Or I might vote for another candidate (to support the underdog). Or I might not vote at all (as it’s a forgone conclusion).

In a Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) election, a party that’s been polling below the 5% threshold and isn’t likely to win an electorate seat may get caught in a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Reluctant to “waste” their votes on that party, people may choose another – making it even harder for that party.

People also ask: who will work with whom in government? They may reason that a vote for one party means effectively voting to help put another party into government as well – which may or may not seem desirable.

Because of the potential for polls to lead public opinion rather than follow it, New Zealand bans the publication of polls on election day itself but not during the two-week advance-voting period.

But blackout periods are common in Europe and Latin America, and may be for as long as two weeks, as in Italy.

There’s also a risk that an unscrupulous actor could publish a false poll result in an effort to shift choices or suppress turnout, and that’s one reason why the research industry has a (self-regulated) code of conduct.

Past trends or future outcomes?

In a free society, however, the state shouldn’t prohibit research firms from doing surveys, or media from reporting the results.

Polls can be informative for voters, and a useful part of the democratic process. They also give the parties feedback about their performance (or perceived performance) between elections.

But they can be unhelpful when framed by media in sensationalist or biased ways.

People should be left to make up their minds about which candidate or party best represents them, rather than view an election as a contest narrated in terms of who’s up and who’s down.

In the end, we should read the polls and the media critically, and not take things on trust. It always pays to check, for example, who’s done the survey, who’s sponsored it and what the methodology was.

Above all, remember that opinion polls only indicate past trends; they don’t predict future outcomes.

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

– ref. Polls are snapshots, not predictions: how to read them critically this election year – https://theconversation.com/polls-are-snapshots-not-predictions-how-to-read-them-critically-this-election-year-274531

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sara Webb, Lecturer, Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology

The mushrooms spread out on the chopping board seemed normal enough. They were rich and dense, and had a strong earthy aroma. In the saucepan, they melted – along with the cheese – to form a creamy pasta sauce.

A quick taste test proved they were delicious. The rich lion’s mane flavour immediately shone through.

This was the first meal we made with these unique mushrooms. They were gourmet, but not from any grocery store you can find on Earth.

These special fungi had travelled to space, lived aboard the International Space Station for more than a month, returned safely to Earth, and eventually came back to Australia in 2025.

Mushrooms launch into space

In August 2024, we launched a set of 36 small vials into space aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. In these vials were three edible fungi species in the form of mycelium – small file filaments that act like the root network of mushrooms.

The species we tested were lion’s mane (Hericium erinaceus), turkey’s tail (Trametes versicolor) and cordyceps (Cordyceps militaris). These have shown benefits for brain function, gut health, and immune health – all important areas for long term space flight.

This experiment was our sixth payload to the International Space Station (ISS), thanks to the microgravity experimentation program we lead at Swinburne University of Technology.

It was designed and prototyped with the help of 12 high school students from Haileybury College in Melbourne. And it was made possible thanks to professional mushroom growers and suppliers who ensured the fungal strains were not only food grade but healthy enough to survive the extreme environment of space.

Our fungi may have stayed on the ISS with astronauts. But the mushrooms’ experience was very different to the astronauts’. Science experiments have special storage areas depending on what is being done and how much time astronauts have to be involved. Our mycelium was sealed up tight in special packaging to help keep them at a stable temperature and to ensure they weren’t damaged.

They stayed like that for close to a month, before they returned with the change of crew on the ISS.

We didn’t get much in the way of updates while our mushrooms were travelling – just some pictures and videos from NASA of the outside of the safely sealed experiment.

On their return, we waited with bated breath to see if they would survive once opened.

Mushrooms return to Earth

When our mycelium returned to Earth, and eventually Australia, they got a new home in rich, nutritious substrate. We then moved it into grow kits so we could watch and see whether any fruiting bodies (that is, mushrooms) would appear.

We created several grow boxes and placed them in different environments to see what conditions were best – from kitchen benches, to staff room tables, to laboratory fridges.

To our delight, within a few days we saw signs of the mushrooms emerging and within a week we had beautiful lion’s mane ready to be cooked up and enjoyed. Once they were ready, we harvested them and tried different recipes.

As well as eating these mushrooms, we’re also in the process of analysing them closely. But we can say now that the reduced gravity environment did not negatively impact our mycelium. In fact, they seem to be so happy that they continued to produce several rounds of mushrooms.

Mushrooms for long-term space missions

Artemis II – NASA’s crewed mission to the moon – is right around the corner. But there is still a lot that we need to understand to provide the best conditions for astronauts as they venture further into space than ever before.

For example, how will we continue to nutritionally support astronauts for weeks to months on long duration missions?

We know that a low gravity environment has a profound impact on human bodies, and one of the best ways to support astronauts in orbit is with nutritional foods.

Another outstanding question we need to answer is whether food produced in space environments be affected by radiation and other stresses, rendering it less valuable.

Our work – and these special mushrooms – are helping to provide crucial answers.

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

– ref. We ate space mushrooms and survived to tell the tale – https://theconversation.com/we-ate-space-mushrooms-and-survived-to-tell-the-tale-274112

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vincent Ho, Associate Professor and Clinical Academic Gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University

If you’ve ever been constipated you may have tried laxatives. They’re easy to get without a prescription and often help get things moving.

Certainly a lot of people use laxatives and some older people are very reliant on them to help with bowel function.

But you might have heard it’s not a good idea to take them over the long term. Even though serious complications from chronic laxative use are rare, they do happen. That’s why, whenever possible, long-term laxative use should be guided and monitored by a doctor.

Types of laxatives

There are five main types of laxatives (all are oral):

1. bulk-forming laxatives (also known as fibre laxatives), which absorb water to form a soft, bulky stool and prompt normal contraction of bowel muscles. Common brands include Metamucil and Benefiber

2. osmotic laxatives, which draw water into the colon to allow easier passage of stool. Common brands include Osmolax, Actilax and Movicol

3. stool softeners such as docusate (brand name Coloxyl), which acts like a detergent and allows fat and water to mix in with hard stool – this makes it softer and easier to pass

4. stimulant laxatives, which trigger rhythmic contractions of the bowel muscle. Common brands include Dulcolax, Bisalax and Senna

5. lubricant laxatives, which coat the bowel and soften the stool. A common brand is Parachoc.

Starting a laxative

Before starting a laxative you should try dietary and lifestyle changes such as:

• eating more foods with fibre in them, such as kiwifruit, corn, oats and brown rice
• drinking more water
• doing more exercise.

But if constipation persists, you might think about a laxative. Consider starting with gentler options, such as the bulk-forming laxatives or stool softeners, and implement those dietary and lifestyle changes listed above.

It’s a good idea to see your local doctor when starting a laxative; constipation may be a sign of something more concerning, especially if there are other symptoms such as rectal bleeding.

Your doctor can also advise whether laxatives might interact with any other medications you take.

Do laxatives cause a ‘lazy colon’?

Probably not. So where does this idea come from?

A case report published in the 1960s described bowel changes in a patient who had been taking stimulant laxatives for more than 40 years.

When the colon was examined, doctors noticed a reduced number of key cells in the colon. This sparked concern about whether long-term use of stimulant laxatives could result in damage to the gut, culminating in a “lazy colon” (also known as a cathartic colon). This is when the colon becomes an inert tube with no real muscle function to push along stool.

However, a later review of more than 70 publications describing 240 cases of stimulant laxative abuse found no cases of cathartic colon reported. Researchers concluded the prior cathartic colon cases might have been linked to a laxative called podophyllin that is now no longer recommended.

A review of 43 publications on the safety of stimulant laxatives discovered many of the studies were of poor quality, with small sample size. Confounding factors, such as medications and age, were often not being taken into account.

It found no good evidence chronic use of stimulant laxatives damages the gut.

That said, there are other good reasons not to take laxatives regularly and over the long term unless advised by a doctor who is monitoring your progress.

Gut symptoms and electrolytes

Laxative abuse is when someone takes laxatives to lose weight through frequent and repeated use of laxatives.

The most common symptom of laxative abuse is diarrhoea, which can mean abdominal cramps, nausea, vomiting and weight loss.

But laxative abuse can also disrupt the body’s electrolytes.

The main electrolyte in poo is potassium. As the body loses more and more potassium through diarrhoea, you can end up with lower blood potassium levels.

This can lead to:

• generalised muscle weakness
• heart complications
• changes in heart rhythm
• in extreme cases, stopping your heart beat, which can lead to death.

A 2020 systematic review of case reports found that laxative abuse can cause mild to severe cases of cardiac complications.

Laxative abuse can also lower other electrolytes, such as calcium and magnesium, leading to painful muscle contractions. Occasionally the kidney can be severely affected by chronic laxative abuse.

If you take just the recommended dose of laxatives, though, the risk of serious electrolyte complications is extremely low.

Depression, dementia and mental health

Two UK studies that examined a data set of approximately half a million participants found regular laxative use was associated with a higher risk of developing depression and dementia.

One theory is chronic laxative abuse could alter what’s known as the microbiome-gut-brain-axis (the way microbiota and the brain communicate) and lead to a higher risk of conditions such as depression and dementia.

Laxative abuse is commonly associated with eating disorders, so it’s important anyone found to be abusing laxatives also undergo a comprehensive mental health assessment. A plan might be needed to address the broader problem.

Safe when taken properly

Laxatives are obtained easily without a prescription and are very widely used in the community. They are certainly helpful for treating chronic constipation.

However, they can cause side effects such as diarrhoea and electrolyte imbalances. Long-term use and overuse can lead to problems.

It’s always a good idea to consult your doctor before starting laxatives, especially if you have other medical issues or are taking other medications.

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

– ref. Why regularly taking laxatives over the long term can be a bad idea – https://theconversation.com/why-regularly-taking-laxatives-over-the-long-term-can-be-a-bad-idea-269404

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alice Barratt, PhD Candidate, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University

In Sturt National Park, near Tibooburra in central Australia where temperatures can range from freezing to nearly 50°C, there lives a small bird with a white back, forked tail and – as we’ve just discovered – a very clever strategy to survive its extreme environment.

The white-backed swallow (Cheramoeca leucosterna) is a type of passerine – the largest group of birds, comprising 60% of all bird species.

Scientists have long thought these birds incapable of deep torpor – a controlled state of reduced body temperature that saves energy and has been found in many animals in the northern hemisphere, where winters are more severe.

But our new paper, published today in the journal Current Biology, shows otherwise.

Understanding how animals cope with extreme conditions

Animal physiologists have long seen the value of studying animals in extreme conditions to understand their survival strategies.

In the past, however, field instruments were cumbersome or delicate and studies were mostly limited to artificial conditions in the laboratory.

This was a problem for several reasons.

First, in captivity wild animals are often stressed and don’t tend to exhibit their full capabilities. Exposing captive wild animals to extreme conditions is also logistically difficult and an animal welfare concern.

But more recently, technological advances allow us to measure the physiological responses of animals when they are exposed to extreme conditions in the wild.

Tracking birds to their burrows

Biologging involves attaching electronic devices to animals that can record key traits such as movement, body temperature and energy expenditure. It is providing a fascinating window into the natural lives of animals.

Technological advances have meant these devices have become miniature in recent years. This has greatly expanded the species scientists can study in the wild and provides an exciting opportunity to challenge long held assumptions based on lab-based studies – including about torpor.

Our team set out to investigate the white-backed swallow, which has been the subject of some intriguing reports over the years.

For example, during cold and wet winter periods, observations as old as 1936 have reported finding the birds in their sandy burrows during the daytime that appeared in a torpor-like state: “inert, nestling into each other as if to escape from the bleak winter’s day”.

Over the winters of 2023 and 2024, we used miniature (400 milligrams) temperature sensing radio transmitters to study the thermal physiology of these swallows in Sturt National Park – the traditional lands of the Wongkumara, Wadigali, and Malyangapa peoples.

We tracked tagged birds to their burrows at night and set up autonomous data logging units nearby to record their body temperature data.

Following a tenuous radio signal on foot across the desert was spectacular on a clear starry night. But sometimes it was also tiring and intimidating.

After that, we trusted our data logging units to collect the steady radio pulses emanating from the resting birds. From these we obtained their body temperature, and therefore their potential use of torpor.

We had two major inland rain events in winter 2024, leading to local flooding. This meant we were unable to access our field site. So we waited it out in the local campground, hoping our trusty loggers were still recording data while enduring the unusually chilly nights.

An extraordinary discovery

As the land dried out, we returned to find something extraordinary.

During and after these extreme rain events, the birds remained in their burrows even during the daytime. And they entered deep and long bouts of torpor – far exceeding what passerine birds were thought capable of.

Such torpor is presumably crucial for these in-flight foragers to survive when wet and cold conditions suppress the activity of flying insects.

More generally, our discovery of torpor use by a passerine bird suggests that this strategy is not limited to hummingbirds, nightjars and their relatives.

Instead, it could be a more widespread adaptation for survival across the diversity of birds.

A new wave of discoveries

Our finding adds to a growing number of recent discoveries revealed by biologging about the thermal adaptations of birds and mammals when faced with extreme conditions.

In 2024, for example, we found that even the largest of bats, the flying foxes (Pteropus species), are capable of using torpor during cold winter conditions that pose a risk of starvation.

In contrast, during summer, when flying foxes can be exposed to extreme heat events, our biologging data has shown they employ controlled increases in body temperature. This adaptation reduces the costs of shedding heat and helps to avoid lethal dehydration.

These data are essential for us to understand how animals survive extreme weather events, which are becoming increasingly common and severe with a warming climate.

The authors would like to acknowledge Justin Welbergen, Ben Moore and Anthony Hunt for their contribution to the research.

Alice Barratt receives funding from Western Sydney University, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment and the Australian Bird Study Association.

Christopher Turbill receives funding from the Australian Research Council, and the Australian Commonwealth and New South Wales government.

– ref. Tiny radio transmitters reveal a hidden survival tactic in birds – https://theconversation.com/tiny-radio-transmitters-reveal-a-hidden-survival-tactic-in-birds-274517

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Danusha Jayawardana, Research Fellow in Health Economics, Monash University

Where kids are born in a family can be important. But it is not just about who gets more grown-up privileges or parental pressure.

Research tells us firstborn children, on average, tend to do better on a range of outcomes. This includes doing better at school and being more likely to be top managers when compared to those born later.

In our new study, we looked at what impact birth order might have on how children spend their time. Both on their own and with their parents.

This revealed differences in terms of screen use and time spent enriching their intellectual development.

Our research

In our study, we used survey data from around 5,500 Australian children aged two to 15. The data comes from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children, a nationally representative survey.

This included detailed 24-hour diaries, which recorded how children spent their time from waking up to going to sleep. They specified if activities were done with parents or independently.

We grouped activities into “sleep”, “school time”, “enrichment activities”, “screen time” and “physical activities”.

Enrichment activities are outside of school activities that help intellectual development. For example, reading, homework, playing board games or learning a musical instrument.

We then compared the diaries of firstborn children to later-born children from different families born in the same year, living in the same neighbourhoods, with similar socioeconomic backgrounds. All families had two or three children.

There is no similar data (such as time use records over years) available on siblings within the same family to capture and compare what siblings were doing at the same age.

Other studies looking at different outcomes (such as academic achievement) have shown birth order comparisons within a family are extremely similar to birth order comparisons across different families, once you adjust for family size, as we have done in our study.

So, it is likely our results would be similar to actual sibling comparisons within a family.

Younger kids get more screens

When compared to firstborn children, second- and thirdborn children spend an extra nine and 14 minutes, respectively, per day having screen time.

While this may sound modest, it represents a 7–10% increase compared to the average daily screen time of firstborns. Over the course of a week it is between about one and 1.5 hours.

This extra screen time also comes at the cost of other activities. In particular, later-born children spent 11 to 18 minutes less per day on enrichment activities, an 11–20% reduction compared to older siblings in the study.

We found no consistent differences between older and younger siblings when it came to time spent on other activities, such as school, physical activity or sleep.

Looking across age groups, the effects are generally greater for 10–14-year-old children. This suggests early adolescence is a period where particular attention is needed.

To check whether these patterns extend beyond Australia, we repeated the analysis using time-use diaries from a sample of children in the United States. The results were similar.

Why is this happening?

One common explanation for differences between first and subsequent children is parental time. As families grow, parents have less time and attention to foster subsequent children’s development.

However, this may not be the whole story. Our study showed later-born children did spend less time on enrichment activities with their parents. But about half of the difference comes from later-born children spending less time on enrichment activities on their own.

Screen time shows a similar pattern. The increase among later-born children is largely explained by activities they do alone, rather than with parents or siblings.

So this also reflects differences in children’s own choices or opportunities, not just direct parental involvement. For example, a younger sibling may have more freedom to choose to play video games rather than do their homework.

Of course parenting may still play an important role here. Our study shows later-born children face fewer rules around screen use, such as limits on programs or time, and are less likely to feel their parents expect them to follow rules. This may in part reflect parents’ desire for fairness in allowing similar use of screens for siblings at any given time, rather than at specific ages.

What does this mean?

The differences we find may seem small on any given day.

But they can add up over time. As our 2024 study showed, spending more time on screens and less time on reading, homework or other learning activities can lead to gaps in academic skill development over childhood, as measured by lower NAPLAN test scores.

The increase in solo screen time for later-born children is particularly concerning, because it may expose children to inappropriate content online.

What can we do?

First, recognising later-born children on average spend more time on screens and less time on enrichment activities than firstborns can be helpful for informing parenting strategies.

Second, it shows spending quality time with later-born children, actively encouraging enrichment activities, and keeping consistent rules around screen time all matter.

Finally, this suggests broader policies, such as the social media limits for under 16s, could help equalise opportunities for later-born children to learn and grow.

Gawain Heckley receives funding from the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (dnr 2023-01128).

Nicole Black receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

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

– ref. Our study shows younger siblings spend more time on screens than big sisters and brothers – https://theconversation.com/our-study-shows-younger-siblings-spend-more-time-on-screens-than-big-sisters-and-brothers-273904

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Mares, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, School of Media, Film and Journalism, Monash University

The Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme (PALM) is a crucial source of workers across regional Australia. About 32,000 people from nine Pacific nations and Timor-Leste work in Australia under PALM.

Over seven months of researching the scheme – interviewing workers, employers, country liaison officers, trade union organisers, community volunteers and academics, as well as digging into the data on it – I didn’t encounter anyone who thought it was a bad idea.

But there were many calls for change to make it work better for everyone. My , published today, suggests where we could start.

Who benefits from PALM now?

PALM has short- and long-term streams. Under the short-term stream, operating since 2012, workers can stay for nine months to do seasonal jobs such as fruit picking.

The long-term stream, introduced in 2018, allows for a four-year stay. Most long-term workers are employed in meat processing.

PALM is widely credited with delivering a triple win.

The first win is for Pacific participants and their communities.

In 2024-25 PALM workers remitted A$450 million to their home countries, an average of $1,500 each per person per month. The money bought food, paid school fees, upgraded housing and financed small enterprises.

Benefits flow beyond immediate families. After working in an Australian abattoir, Devid John Suma returned to Vanuatu and invested $30,000 to supply clean drinking water to his remote village.

The second win is for Australia’s economy. PALM workers make a significant contribution to regional businesses that struggle to attract local workers, from farms to abattoirs.

The third win is that PALM advances Australia’s strategic interests, not least by providing a counter to China’s wooing of Pacific nations.

Pacific leaders might wish for more aid from Canberra and be frustrated by the government’s tepid action on climate change. But well-paid work is something Australia offers that China does not.

Persistent problems

Yet the wins of the PALM scheme have countervailing costs in the pain of separated families, loneliness and broken marriages.

PALM is dogged by reports of workers being abused, underpaid or housed in substandard, overpriced or overcrowded accommodation.

Thousands of PALM workers have quit their approved jobs, “disengaging” from the scheme. This breaches their visa conditions and leaves them vulnerable to exploitation.

Drifting from its original mission

PALM has profoundly changed migration between the Pacific and Australia.

It brings workers to Australia from countries that have seen minimal migration to Australia since Federation, despite their geographic proximity — particularly the Melanesian countries Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu that were sources of labour in the late 19th century, when indentured South Sea Islanders built Queensland’s plantation economy.

But the future of PALM is not guaranteed.

Some Pacific countries, including Papua New Guinea, would like more of their nationals engaged under the scheme, while others worry it creates workforce shortages and disrupts community life.

Participation peaked at 34,830 workers in September 2023 and was at 32,365 in November 2025. Numbers in the long-term stream are steady, but fewer short-term workers are being recruited as employers revert to using backpackers — a cheaper, less regulated workforce — for seasonal jobs.

So, PALM has drifted from its original mission of filling seasonal gaps in the rural economy through annual circular migration, to become a labour program for sectors like meat processing and aged care with a constant demand for workers.

In April 2022, three-quarters of all PALM workers were in the short-term stream and a quarter were long-term. Now, more than half of all PALM workers hold long-term visas.

How to make the scheme work better

The PALM scheme changes lives and communities in the Pacific and Australia, often for the better. But its problems must be addressed to realise its potential.

Australian employers will turn away from a scheme that is too bureaucratic, expensive or cumbersome. PALM’s future won’t be secured by burying it under layers of rules and reporting.

has ten recommendations to improve PALM. These include:

• making it easier for PALM workers to change jobs, rather than tying them to a single employer
• simplifying PALM scheme rules for employers
• regulating labour hire at the national level
• giving workers access to Medicare while they’re in Australia to stop them missing out on medical attention
• and reforming working holiday programs by phasing out the second and third visas offered to backpackers who do work like fruit picking in regional areas.

Australia’s interest in fostering Pacific development and rivalry with China are added reasons to limiting working holidays and expanding the PALM scheme instead.

PALM is a work in progress and will never be perfect. The scheme is shaped by the power differential between Australia and its Pacific partners. And there are tensions between three priorities: being a development program enhancing Pacific wellbeing, being a labour market program benefiting Australia’s economy, and serving a strategic purpose in Australia’s rivalry with China.

Yet when it operates well, PALM is far more than transactional.

Beyond wages earned, jobs filled and diplomatic points scored, it also fosters cultural exchange and personal engagement, binding the peoples of Australia and the region more fully into a “Pacific family”.

Peter Mares received funding from The Scanlon Foundation Research Institute to research and write “Improving PALM: Pacific Australia Labour Mobility”, but the views in this article are the views of the author alone and do not represent the position of the Scanlon Foundation. Peter Mares is a fellow at the Centre for Policy Development and a sessional moderator with Cranlana Centre for Ethical Leadership. He is a regular contributor to Inside Story magazine. He has also received past Australian Research Council funding.

– ref. Australia’s Pacific worker scheme is far from perfect – but we can make it better – https://theconversation.com/australias-pacific-worker-scheme-is-far-from-perfect-but-we-can-make-it-better-274618

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Waye-Harris, Early Career Researcher in History, Adelaide University

There are few dynasties in history as well-known as the Tudors. From Henry VIII’s six wives to Elizabeth I’s defeat of the Spanish Armada, the Tudors continue to capture imaginations.

While sex, power and public execution provide endless entertainment, if you ask me, the enduring popularity of the Tudors is down to one factor – their magnificent fashion.

Dress was serious business in Tudor England. Clothing was its own language with each textile, colour and style carrying a different meaning. This allowed people to display their identity, status, and even send political messages.

From the Elizabethan Ruff to Henry VIII’s codpiece, here are five Tudor fashions which should make a comeback.

1. The linen shift

Sounds like a boring place to start, but the linen shift was a staple in every Tudor wardrobe.

Linen was inexpensive, breathable and could be laundered daily. Contrary to popular belief, the Tudors were obsessed with cleanliness and hygiene. Linen absorbs sweat, bodily fluids and was believed to protect the skin from diseases such as the plague. Wearing and changing your linen shift daily was the best way to stay clean and protected from infection.

A fashionable trend of the Tudor period saw the collar on the linen shift become larger so it could be seen under the outer garments. A clean collar demonstrated that you could afford to change your shift and therefore had good hygiene.

You know what they say, cleanliness is close to godliness.

2. The ruff

If there is a single item of clothing that is most redolent of the Tudors, it’s the ruff.

The ruff was a pleated collar made from linen or lace and given its iconic stiff shape with starch. During the reign of Elizabeth I, large lace ruffs became an elaborate status symbol because they were difficult to set and impractical to wear which meant you had to have a lot of servants helping you.

For Elizabeth I, the ruff was a significant source of power. The queen’s opulent ruffs commanded deference and situated her as the ultimate object in any room. In Elizabeth’s court, people came to her, not the other way around.

Dior gave the ruff a modern twist in their 2025 Fall–Winter collection, so it looks like they are already making a comeback.

3. Statement sleeves

In the Tudor period, sleeves were a separate garment that were attached while getting dressed in the morning. This allowed the wearer to pair them with different outfits and play around with fabrics, colours and styles.

The most popular style was the trumpet sleeve. This sleeve was narrow at the top of the arm and dramatically expanded in a cone shape over the elbow. A second sleeve would then appear underneath at the forearm.

This gave any outfit a dramatic and voluminous appearance with layers of luxurious textiles. See how this beautiful design looked on a young Elizabeth I.

A modern take on statement sleeves would be a great way to spice up any outfit.

4. Decorative techniques

Tudor tailors used a range of decorative techniques when making clothes. Paning, pinking and cutwork were just some of the more elaborate modes of garment construction but the most common was slashing.

Slashing involved cutting small slits into outer garments of velvet to reveal an inner layer of white silk. The layering and contrast of different colours not only created a striking and vibrant image but showed off your ownership of expensive textiles.

You can see slashing on Henry VIII’s doublet (jacket) and sleeves in his famous portrait.

In 1991, this technique inspired Vivienne Westwood to produce the collection Cut and Slash, so it definitely has a place in the modern era.

5. The codpiece

Ok, this one is a bit of fun… but for Henry VIII the codpiece was no laughing matter. Starting out as a small triangular piece of material, by the early 16th century the codpiece had evolved into a padded, stiff and bejewelled item symbolic of virility and fertility.

Toxic masculinity was all the rage during the Tudor period, and Henry VIII was under immense pressure to maintain absolute control through his superior machismo.

As the king aged, his vigour waned and his failure to produce a male heir sent him into a crisis of masculinity. The display and exaggeration of his manhood through the codpiece was Henry’s only means of reasserting his masculine identity and fecundity.

Henry’s 1540 tournament armour gives a clear indication of just how exaggerated the codpiece became.

One thing is for sure, fashion in Tudor England was not a flippant pursuit. If the ever-enduring legacy of the Tudors can teach us anything, it’s that we should always dress to impress.

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

– ref. From statement sleeves to the codpiece: 5 fashions which should come back from Tudor England – https://theconversation.com/from-statement-sleeves-to-the-codpiece-5-fashions-which-should-come-back-from-tudor-england-271507