Even in the political afterlife, Morrison departs from the norm

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, PhD Candidate, School of History, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University

In the past fortnight, former prime minister Scott Morrison has reemerged as a subject of public discussion. First, there was rumour about his interest in securing work with the Australian Rugby League Commission, which he promptly dismissed as “pub talk”.

Second, Morrison made his debut on the international lecture circuit with an address to the Asian Leadership Conference in Seoul. He seized that opportunity to criticise China and defend his own government’s pandemic legacy, suggesting “history would treat his government more kindly” than contemporaries have done.

Then the former prime minister went to Perth to deliver a sermon at the Victory Life Centre, the Pentecostal Church led by conservative former tennis star Margaret Court. In his 50-minute address, he stressed that Australians should put their trust in God rather than in governments or the United Nations. He also warned that prevailing feelings of anxiety – about the ongoing pandemic, the climate crisis or the cost of living – were part of “Satan’s plan”.

With that performance, Morrison has signalled that he will likely depart from the established conventions of post-prime ministerial life in Australia.

The leadership instability of recent years in both major parties has generated a relatively high number of ex-PMs. Their behaviour, and the reactions they receive, tell us much about our political culture.

Australia has never had more than eight former prime ministers alive at one time, and in the mid-20th century, three of them died in office. Today there are seven of them still with us, all of whom have seen their reputations rise and fall.

Australia’s most successful former leaders have been those who deliberately try to embody generosity, magnanimity and a degree of bipartisanship. The first former prime minister, Edmund Barton, set that standard in 1903 when he resigned from the top job to continue his public service on the newly created High Court. His biographer Geoffrey Bolton suggested Barton enjoyed his transformation in public opinion from “Tosspot Toby” to that of a “well-regarded elder statesman”.

Several of Australia’s postwar leaders have emulated that model. Gough Whitlam and Malcolm Fraser left the bitter politics of the dismissal behind them and dedicated themselves to humanitarian causes. Whitlam was Australia’s ambassador to UNESCO in Brussels, while Fraser campaigned against apartheid in South Africa before joining humanitarian group CARE Australia. Both were highly critical of their successors.

Kevin Rudd has spent the past decade immersing himself in the challenge of US-China bilateral relations, and campaigning against the impact of News Corp on Australian politics. In 2016, he unsuccessfully sought Australia’s nomination for the post of secretary-general of the United Nations.

In the recent past, Julia Gillard has similarly committed herself to causes such as the promotion of girls’ education in Africa, chairing mental health support service Beyond Blue, and helming the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London. Her erstwhile critics at The Australian newspaper admitted that this was no “miserable ghost”.

Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Paul Keating are three of the seven Australian ex-PMs still alive.
AAP/Lukas Coch

Conservatives have enjoyed their political afterlives too, albeit often in distinctly partisan ways. Earlier prime ministers such as George Reid and Stanley Melbourne Bruce were sent to London as Australia’s High Commissioner, working the British establishment. The aged Robert Menzies used his 12 years of retirement to write reminiscences, defend the British Empire from its inexorable decline, and enjoy the cricket. John Howard has studiously emulated Menzies (to the point of writing a book about him), although he remains a vigorous partisan campaigner during elections.

Even a highly unpopular leader can be rehabilitated in public opinion. Paul Keating’s “big picture” vision for Australia, which voters rejected heavily in 1996, looked more attractive after a decade of cultural division under the Howard government. By the same token, despite having lost his own seat in the landslide of 2007, Howard seemed a “byword for stability” during the leadership turmoil of the 2010s, and there was much nostalgia about him.

Under Gillard, Labor sank to new lows in the polls, but in the years since her removal in June 2013 her reputation recovered significantly, judged by some scholars to be the best prime minister post-Howard.

Despite losing his seat at the 2007 election, John Howard became a byword for stability in his post-parliamentary life.
AAP/Mick Tsikas

The public have had a little less tolerance for leaders who seem to be chasing money. John Gorton “raised a few eyebrows” with his whiskey advertisements, although Whitlam managed to get away with advertising spaghetti sauce because of his self-deprecating performance.

The popular Bob Hawke faced a fierce backlash in the 1990s following his explosive memoirs, his very public business investments, and his attempts to make money from short media appearances. It took time, some rewriting of history, and footage of beer consumption at the footy, to rekindle his love affair with the public.

Since Hawke, Australian politicians have followed their British and US counterparts by publishing memoirs in great volumes, but the lucrative international lecture circuit has been slightly less open to them.

It has been even more unseemly to be seen to act out of vengeance or bitterness. In the 1920s and 1930s, former prime minister Billy Hughes stayed in parliament and often caused significant headaches for his fellow non-Labor MPs, even voting to turf them out of office in 1929. Some felt him a “great statesman and patriot”, others a “renegade”.

Billy McMahon remained in parliament for ten years after his defeat in 1972, apparently with no aspiration to leadership. In the more recent past, Rudd and Tony Abbott both stayed in parliament after initially losing the confidence of their parties, yearning to retake the highest office.

Malcolm Turnbull left parliament immediately on being removed in August 2018, and as Aaron Patrick has recently argued, he was outwardly bitter at his removal and passionately critical of his successor at every turn. Bitterness is a public emotion that alienates former leaders from their supporters.

Malcolm Turnbull left parliament immediately after being deposed as leader, and has been highly critical of his predecessor since.
AAP/Mick Tsikas

The job of a former prime minister is awkward, defined by the past rather than the future, and by the absence of formal power. It is a role without a script. The awkwardness is embodied in Shaun Micallef’s The Ex-PM, an ABC satire about a former prime minister who hires a writer to draft his memoirs, but finds he has no real story to tell.

But former leaders still have a meaningful role to play if they wish. They enjoy private offices, staff, and travel privileges subsidised by the public. They retain their extensive high-level contacts and enjoy an enormous public platform from which to speak. Parting shots at colleagues and embittered book tours reflect a fractious political culture, but can be forgiven if the offender makes peace, finds a new calling, or develops a stately persona above the partisan din. In time, if they appear magnanimous, generous and “above” daily politics, they can become a reassuring and encouraging presence within their partisan community.

By urging his audience not to trust in the institution of government itself, and by taking his Pentecostal rhetoric to such heights, Morrison is parting with former prime ministerial convention. The congregation may have approved, but his fellow Liberal MPs appeared less enthused.

Such indulgences are unlikely to re-cultivate the respect of the electorate.

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

– ref. Even in the political afterlife, Morrison departs from the norm – https://theconversation.com/even-in-the-political-afterlife-morrison-departs-from-the-norm-187346

New research in Arnhem Land reveals why institutional fire management is inferior to cultural burning

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Bowman, Professor of Pyrogeography and Fire Science, University of Tasmania

One of the conclusions of this week’s shocking State of the Environment report is that climate change is lengthening Australia’s bushfire seasons and raising the number of days with a fire danger rating of “very high” or above. In New South Wales, for example, the season now extends to almost eight months.

It has never been more important for institutional bushfire management programs to apply the principles and practices of Indigenous fire management, or “cultural burning”. As the report notes, cultural burning reduces the risk of bushfires, supports habitat and improves Indigenous wellbeing. And yet, the report finds:

with significant funding gaps, tenure impediments and policy barriers, Indigenous cultural burning remains underused – it is currently applied over less than 1% of the land area of Australia’s south‐eastern states and territory.

Our recent research in Scientific Reports specifically addressed the question: how do the environmental outcomes from cultural burning compare to mainstream bushfire management practices?

Using the stone country of the Arnhem Land Plateau as a case study, we reveal why institutional fire management is inferior to cultural burning.

The few remaining landscapes where Aboriginal people continue an unbroken tradition of caring for Country are of international importance. They should be nationally recognised, valued and resourced like other protected cultural and historical places.

Ancient fire management

The rugged terrain of the Arnhem Plateau in Northern Territory has an ancient human history, with archaeological evidence dated at 65,000 years.

Arnhem Land is an ideal place to explore the effects of different fire regimes because fire is such an essential feature of the natural and cultural environment.

Australia’s monsoon tropics are particularly fire prone given the sharply contrasting wet and dry seasons. The wet season sees prolific growth of grasses and other flammable plants, and dry season has reliable hot, dry, windy conditions.

Millennia of skilful fire management by Indigenous people in these landscapes have allowed plants and animals needing infrequently burnt habitat to thrive.

This involves shifting “mosaic” burning, where small areas are burned regularly to create a patchwork of habitats with different fire histories. This gives wildlife a diversity of resources and places to shelter in.

Conservation biologists suspect that the loss of such patchy fires since colonisation has contributed to the calamitous demise of wildlife species across northern Australia, such as northern quolls, northern brown bandicoots and grassland melomys.

Collapse of the cypress pine

Our study was undertaken over 25 years, and wouldn’t have been possible without the generous support and close involvement of the Traditional Owners over this time.

It compared an area under near continuous Indigenous management by the Kune people of Western Arnhem Land with ecologically similar and unoccupied areas within Kakadu National Park.

We found populations of the cypress pine (Callitris intratropica) remained healthy under continual Aboriginal fire management. By contrast, cypress pine populations had collapsed in ecologically similar areas in Kakadu due to the loss of Indigenous fire management, as they have across much of northern Australia.

The population of dead and living pines is like a barcode that records fire regime change. The species is so long lived that older trees were well established before colonisation.

The timber is extremely durable and termite resistant, so a tree killed by fire remains in the landscape for many decades. And mature trees, but not juveniles, can tolerate low intensity fires, but intense fires kill both.

Cypress pine timber can remain in the landscape decades after the tree died.
Michael Hains/Atlas of Living Australia, CC BY-NC-SA

Since 2007, park rangers have attempted to emulate cultural burning outcomes. They’ve used aircraft to drop incendiaries to create a coarse patchwork of burned and unburned areas to improve biodiversity in the stone country within Kakadu.

Unfortunately, our research found Kakadu’s fire management interventions failed to restore landscapes to the healthier ecological condition under traditional Aboriginal fire management.

While the Kakadu aerial burning program increased the amount of unburnt vegetation, it didn’t reverse the population collapse of cypress pines. Searches of tens of kilometres failed to find a single seedling in Kakadu, whereas they were common in comparable areas under Aboriginal fire management.

Our study highlights that once the ecological benefits of cultural burning are lost, they cannot be simply restored with mainstream fire management approaches.

But that’s not to say the ecological impacts from the loss of Aboriginal fire management cannot be reversed. Rather, restoring fire regimes and ecosystem health will be slow, and require special care in where and how fires are set.

This requires teams on the ground with deep knowledge of the land, rather than simply spreading aerial incendiaries from helicopters.

There’s much to learn

There remains much for Western science to learn about traditional fire management.

Large-scale institutional fire management is based on concepts of efficiency and generality. It is controlled by bureaucracies, and achieved using machines and technologies.

Such an “industrial” approach cannot replace the placed-based knowledge, including close human relationships with Country, underpinning cultural burning.

Cultural burning and institutional fire management could be thought of as the differences between home cooking and fast food. Fast food is quick, cheap and produces the same product regardless of individual needs. Home cooking takes longer to prepare, can cater to individual needs, and can improve wellbeing.

But restoring sustainable fire regimes based on the wisdom and practices of Indigenous people cannot be achieved overnight. Reaping the benefits of cultural burning to landscapes where colonialism has disrupted ancient fire traditions take time, effort and resources.

It’s urgent remaining traditional fire practitioners are recognised for their invaluable knowledge and materially supported to continue caring for their Country. This includes:

actively supporting Indigenous people to reside on their Country
to pay them to undertake natural resource management including cultural burning
creating pathways enabling Indigenous people separated from their country by colonialism to re-engage with fire management.

Restoring landscapes with sustainable cultural burning traditions is a long-term project that will involve training and relearning ancient practices. There are extraordinary opportunities for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people alike to learn how to Care for Country.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Victor Steffensen, the Lead Fire Practitioner at the Firesticks Alliance Indigenous Corporation, who reviewed this article.

David Bowman has received funding to study fire ecology and management from the Australian Research Council (ARC), the NSW Bushfire Risk Management Research Hub, Bushfire and Natural Hazard CRC, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania.

Fay Johnston receives funding from the NHMRC, the Tasmanian and ACT Health Departments, Asthma Australia, and the Select Foundation of the Menzies Institute for Medical Research.

Christopher I. Roos 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. New research in Arnhem Land reveals why institutional fire management is inferior to cultural burning – https://theconversation.com/new-research-in-arnhem-land-reveals-why-institutional-fire-management-is-inferior-to-cultural-burning-184562

Keith Rankin Essay – The Economic Cost of War, especially World War

By Keith Rankin -

July 22, 2022

20201212_KeithRankin — Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Analysis by Keith Rankin.

Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

All wars incur economic costs, and not only to the directly belligerent countries. The biggest costs arise when a war becomes a prolonged stalemate. The present war in Ukraine can be characterised, differently, as a Russian Civil War (that’s the Russian view), as ‘just another’ Eastern European conflict that will go away by Christmas, or as a World War.

Civil War?

The civil war characterisation reflects the medium-long-term history of the lands between the Ural mountains and the Scandinavia/Prussia/Hungary/Romania frontier that historically demarks cultural Russia from western Europe. (And we note that Russia undertook an eastward expansion of settlement in the same years that the United States pursued its westward expansion of settlement. There was a Wild East to match the Wild West. As a result, both Russia and USA have realms that extend to the Pacific Ocean.) This civil war characterisation, which highlights comparisons with the United States’ Civil War, is very useful to help us understand the likely duration, outcome, and cost of the present war.

While the US Civil War officially lasted for four years (1861-65), significant echoes remain today. There is a schism in the political geography of the United States, with the fracture line today very much the same line as in those years. Whatever happens in Ukraine this year or this decade, a similar fracture line is likely to remain into the 22nd century at least.

To understand how useful the US Civil War may be in helping us to assess the present war in Ukraine, we have to see it in the terms of the political and economic assumptions of each time; and also as a purely military event, taking out the ‘goodies versus baddies’ sentiment. The passion in 1860s’ America was on the side of the secessionist south, just as it is on the side of Ukraine today. There was not a passionate abolitionist (ie anti-slavery) mass movement in the north, though there was a passionate and politically significant movement. The question of what motivated the working and farming men of the north to fight was not unlike today’s question of what motivates Russian men to fight in Ukraine today.

Abraham Lincoln, like Vladimir Putin, was passionate about ‘the Union’; willing to pay a huge price to reforge their respective political and cultural Unions. Less passionate contemporaries, in both cases, saw regime change as a possible end-of-the-war scenario.

In the United States the war followed a ‘phony war’ stage that lasted through most of 1861, and then descended into a brutal stalemate which lasted until the second half of 1864. Lincoln, elected in November 1860, faced re-election in November 1864. For all money, he would suffer a landslide defeat in 1864; that is, until the military situation turned in his favour (especially the capture of Atlanta) just months before the 1864 election. Fortunes turned, and Lincoln won in a landslide. He was helped by the non-participation of the south in that election. Indeed it would take more than a century before Lincoln’s Republican Party would gain electoral traction in those southern states; and then only when – in the late 20th century – the two parties swapped places. (It was only recently that, in the US, the party of the south became the party of the north; and vice versa.)

Abraham Lincoln’s ’emancipation proclamation’ on 1 January 1863 was a wonderful piece of political theatre, that proved to be a masterstroke that both enabled the abolitionist cause to be fulfilled in the event of a Union victory, and formed an important part of the basis for Lincoln’s subsequent legacy. At the time it had as much impact as Putin would have if, later this year say, he were to declare an end to people-trafficking in Ukraine; Lincoln in 1863 had no practical jurisdiction over the people whom he notionally emancipated.

An important parallel to note is that it was the southern side in the US Civil War that was then most connected to the world economy, and thus it was the loss of the southern economy that incurred the greatest economic costs to the interested European powers. The (southern) Confederacy looked to the United Kingdom and France to provide military support. In the end the military support given to the south was vastly less than hoped for. There was no expectation, in America or Europe, that the European powers would provide assistance to Lincoln and his armies.

The analogy between the Ukraine War and the US Civil War suggests that the present war will most likely be, for years, a costly stalemate. Deutsch Welle, in its ‘To the Point’ (16 July) listing, said: “After capturing large parts of Donbas, will Putin have an appetite for more?” This western perspective makes Putin seem like a Viking raider who has a ‘bit of fun’ in the borderlands, and then withdraws for a short or long while. The idea that Putin, this year, might simply ‘pack up his toys and bring his boys home’ represents a substantial misreading of the motivation of Putin and the many influential Russians who will continue to promote this fight for Russian prestige and territory. Like Lincoln, I don’t see Putin as a quitter. And it’s not clear that, if something happened to Putin – like dying of covid – the war in Ukraine would necessarily fold.

The popular western perspective is that the war in Ukraine will somehow fizzle out after a few more months, and that the costs of the war to the rest of the world will be short-lasting and reversible. A similar view also existed in 1861, in the north of the United States.

World War?

Has World War Three already started? It’s not really a silly question. (Before putting in my two cents worth, I would like to note that I am inclined to agree with those historians who see WW1 and WW2 and a single event with a 21-year interregnum. In that case, that would be the GWW [or GWW1], Great World War, and what we shall call WW3 might prove to be the GWW2 (or GWW3 if we designate the Cold War as a Great World War, as I think we should). We should also note that the timing of the beginning of most wars is subjective. A good case can be made for dating the beginning of WW2 to 1937, with Japan’s invasion of China.)

There is a case that the Cold War should be classed as a ‘World War’. It was a war lasting from July 1945 (with the Soviet Union’s declaration of war against Japan) until the final demise of the Soviet Union in 1991. The hottest components of the Cold War – Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan – continue to have repercussions today. So do many of the colder components of that war; especially the break-up of the Soviet Union.

(Under this GWW perspective, both GWW1 and GWW2 were nuclear wars. This is because the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan represent both the end of GWW1 and the start of GWW2.)

Like the other world wars, the Cold War split the world into three: indeed, we came to talk about the ‘first world’, the ‘second world’, and the ‘third world’. In some contexts, China was ‘third world’; in other contexts, it was a recalcitrant part of the ‘second [“communist”] world’. Like GWW1, there was an interregnum in the Cold War; the early 1970s, essentially the later years of Richard Nixon, and the short presidency of Gerald Ford. The Cold War – GWW2 – was reheated during the Jimmy Carter presidency, especially due to the influence of cold warrior Zbigniew Brzezinski. 1980 was a particularly belligerent year.

The dramatic economic events of the 1970s were a consequence of both the Cold War; and of a regional war that goes back to biblical times and will probably continue until the end of time, the Arab-Israeli War. The first episode of the ‘Great Inflation’ can be attributed to the Vietnam War, the quintessential hot war of the Cold War. The second ‘stagflationary’ episode of that inflation is usually attributed to the 1973 episode of the Arab-Israeli War, and its consequence for world oil prices; though the political response that pushed the Great Inflation well into the 1980s was as much a result of a form of capitalist ideology – monetarist neoliberalism – that had its origins in the earlier years of the Cold War.

The War in Ukraine has already divided the world into three. Aotearoa New Zealand has unambiguously taken sides as a western non-combatant belligerent. It’s not a simple proxy war between Russia and Greater NATO. Türkiye, a NATO member, has taken a much more ambiguous position than New Zealand has. Even though the fighting, so far, has only taken place on the territory of Ukraine, the costs of the war so far have been substantial. And global. And, as in the first months of World War 2 or the US Civil War, we may have only experienced the ‘phony’ part so far.

This war sets the scene for a new economic crisis that will most likely last until at least 2050. Much was already in place before this Russian war started in 2022 (though some would argue that this war started in 2008 or in 2014). The Covid19 pandemic has revealed how brittle the world economy is, and how easily knowledge gives way to narrative. In particular, the pandemic has revealed how brittle ‘first world’ labour markets are, and how dependent the privileged are on an exploited pool of global labour.

In addition, we have the global environmental crisis, which is about global emissions induced climate change; and much more. Indeed, in order to manage the new climate extremes, we have to burn more fossil fuels than ever; to run our air conditioners, our heaters to manage the cold, and to construct the infrastructure which we need to, among other things, keep out the floodwater. We are in a dangerous positive feedback loop, which means we have to aggravate the crisis in order to mitigate it.

Also, in the west in particular, there have been what might best be called the ‘culture wars’. The result is that, within the west, there are two large politicised groups of people who see their adversary as tantamount to ‘evil’; this wickedness of the other side becomes the corrupted lens which makes it close to impossible to define and discuss the very real crises that humanity both faces and imposes. The latest round of the culture war is the resurfacing of the abortion issue. In the United States today, the culture war does have significant overtones which date back to the Civil War.

The pandemic (presented as a war between man and microbe), the 21st century labour crisis with all its cruelties, the culture wars, and climate change all set the scene. The war in Ukraine – already GWW3 by my reckoning – is the spark that is escalating the present conflict. The latest symptom of escalating warfare is the ‘cost of living’ crisis.

Global Inflation?

We are clearly facing global cost crises; rises in real costs due to pandemic and the political measures taken to deal with it, due to environmental change and its costs (including substantial and largely ineffective bureaucratic costs), rising labour costs arising from the massive disruptions to the pre-2020 globalisation of labour, and now war shortages which so far mainly impact the prices (and availability) of staple foods and fossil fuels. A big part of the problem is that, in the west, there have been no serious attempts to cost the Ukraine War. Instead, there has been the pretence that it will just go away; the equivalent to the ‘over by Christmas’ assumptions made in 1861 and 1914 (and 2003 for that matter).

As well as properly assessing the costs of the war, and of the other crisis, a rational response must be to find reasonably equitable ways to share this cost burden. It would have been so much easier if principled income distribution mechanisms had already been in place prior to this crisis decade. We do expect that, in a war, the direct belligerents will face particularly high costs; but we also understand that, in a world war, all of humanity must bear some of the cost.

Yet, when we see countries’ consumers price indexes rising (so far by no more than an annual ten percent in most western countries), we disembody our minds from the real and rising costs ‘out there’; and we expect our politicians to roll out some kind of magic solution. We want them to magic away real costs; in practice that means we expect them to shift the cost burden to other people, especially people in countries or continents other than our own (such as Africa). We, en masse, still expect the very real and substantial crises of the world to be costless to us in our daily lives. Too many of us still see these crises as akin to dramas that we watch on television; as being like multi-season Netflix drama series.

An inflationary spiral takes place when non-powerless people seek compensation from real costs. (Cost crises are not the only inflationary situation. Macroeconomists tend to follow a one-size-fits-all analysis of inflation, based on ‘excess demand’ rather than on ‘increased cost’. So they, in the role of central bankers, rush to increase costs in the form of higher interest rates; whatever the underlying problem. And once one country does it, others are forced to follow in order to stop their currencies’ exchange rates from falling; depreciating currencies make their countries’ inflation rates higher than the global average.)

The first law of holes is ‘stop digging’. But it’s very hard to stop digging when you are in a ‘race to the bottom’.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Russia says peace in Ukraine will be ‘on our terms’ – but what can the West accept and at what cost?

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Ukraine Tensions — President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin. Image released by Russian Presidential Press Service, Thursday, Feb. 24, 2022.

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

The recent assertion by Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia’s security council (and former president), that the invasion of Ukraine will “achieve all its goals” and that peace will be “on our terms” raises an obvious question: what are those terms?

History suggests the answer may be a hard one. Modern Russian wars have followed a pattern – victory is either total (Chechnya or Syria) or it involves the dismemberment of the other country (Georgia or Ukraine after the first Russian intervention in 2014).

Peace treaties are rare, and settlements – as Medvedev’s comments implied – have been Russia’s alone to approve. Opponents are expected to surrender, not negotiate.

And right now, Russian President Vladimir Putin may well believe he has the upper hand in Ukraine. Sanctions have hurt but not strangled the Russian economy. Western weapons and intelligence have slowed but not stopped the Russian advance, which grinds on with overwhelming and often indiscriminate use of force.

But with Russia now saying it will expand its war aims, and with the West continuing to pour arms into Ukraine, the risk of the invasion spilling into a larger conflict (by accident or design) slowly grows. Russian threats to European gas supplies during the coming winter suggest both sides are likely to escalate rather than accept defeat.

The only safe way out will be through negotiation. But given what we know about Russian strategies and expectations, how will that be achieved?

Russia’s terms: Vladimir Putin conferring with then-prime minister Dmitry Medvedev at a State Council meeting at the Kremlin in 2019.
Getty Images

What are the bottom lines?

Clearly there is significant uncertainty about what terms Putin might agree to. Given he has denied the existence of Ukrainian statehood at all, he may believe Russia is entitled to it all. Or he may only demand international recognition of Russian claims to territory already conquered.

Beyond that, he may really be looking for the disarmament of all parts of eastern Europe that were once part of the Soviet Union.

While Putin’s bottom lines remain unknown, the onus is now on Ukraine and its Western backers to set out their own terms for what is and isn’t negotiable. Although it may be Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s country at war, ultimately peace will have to be settled by Putin and US President Joe Biden.

There appear to be four main questions that will determine what the bottom lines for peace would look like:

Should Russia be economically liable for the restoration of the damage caused by its invasion?
Should those accused of war crimes be brought to justice?
Should Ukraine’s territorial integrity be retained, or should the country be divided and parts ceded to Russia (as former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger has recommended)?
What would ongoing security guarantees for the region look like?

What can the West live with?

The fourth question is particularly difficult, given the negligible respect currently shown for international law or treaty commitments.

Rulings by the International Court of Justice that Russia should desist from its invasion of Ukraine have been ignored.

Similarly, the treaties that had previously kept the peace in Europe by slowly building good faith and trust – governing the size of conventional military forces, the prohibition of missile defence shields, the illegality of certain classes of nuclear weapons – are now largely void.

And so we may need to add a final question to that list, perhaps the most significant of all: even if an agreement can be hammered out over Ukraine, will the precedents and perverse incentives it creates be tolerable?

Avoiding something worse

None of this is easy. Compromise, co-operation and peace are, in the end, much harder than war. And there are certainly still many with hawkish views on why Putin must be stopped and his veiled nuclear threats ignored.

But beyond Russia now being considered a significant and direct threat to the security, peace and stability of NATO countries, the wider global context cannot be ignored, either.

In 2021, world military expenditure surpassed US$2 trillion for the first time – 12% more than in 2012. Nuclear arsenals are expanding and upgrading, as are emerging and largely unregulated military technologies in space, cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence and autonomous weapons systems.

Ongoing tensions between China and the West, America, Israel and Iran, and webs of new military alliances (some visible, some opaque) on all sides, all contribute to a world that is becoming less peaceful according to the latest Global Peace Index.

Add to this the real threats to stability from climate change, a global food crisis, stretched supply chains and inflation, and the risk of Ukraine sparking or exacerbating something worse should be clear. Peace on the right terms must be the priority.

Alexander Gillespie 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. Russia says peace in Ukraine will be ‘on our terms’ – but what can the West accept and at what cost? – https://theconversation.com/russia-says-peace-in-ukraine-will-be-on-our-terms-but-what-can-the-west-accept-and-at-what-cost-187349

Is Australian rhyming slang in a bit of froth and bubble? Let’s take a Captain Cook (spoiler: the billy lids may hold the key)

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Howard Manns, Senior Lecturer in Linguistics, Monash University

Have you heard? Barry Crocker’s having a … well, Barry Crocker (“shocker”) of a time with those Reg Grundies (“undies”) people.

Karens everywhere can relate – they know it’s Jeffed up when your Danned name gets swept up in social parlance.

And sure, Crocker has a point. We’ve got to draw the line somewhere when these corporate Noahs (“sharks”, from “Noah’s Ark”) claim our names.

But we reckon having your name become part of the old Jack Lang (“slang”) – especially Aussie rhyming slang – is apples (“nice”, from “apples and spice”). So let’s take a Captain Cook (“look”) at what’s so special about rhyming slang.

Terces segaugnal: enter the world of secret languages

Over the years there have been many secret languages in English, and all of them distort words in some way, often with remarkable skill. Particularly impressive is the flip-flop of backslang, when words are said backwards — “secret languages” becomes “terces segaugnal” (yob “boy” is a rare survivor of Victorian-era backslang).

The disguise prevents bystanders or eavesdroppers from understanding what’s being said, but mainly it operates a bit like a “clique” or in-group recognition device. Being able to manipulate language in this way means you’re automatically part of the gang — it’s also a matter of identifying what’s become routine for those involved, much like slang and jargon generally.

There’s the fun of the game, too, and rhyming slang is a real lexical and etymological pass the parcel. Often we don’t even know we’re playing it. Sidney Baker gives a wonderful example: Melbourne (“back”) from Melbourne Grammar (“hammer”) from hammer and tack (“back”), which, it so happens, is also rhyming slang for zac (“sixpence”) — so Melbourne is also a “sixpence”!

The comic cuts (“guts”) of Aussie rhymin’ Jack Lang

There’s no sign of rhyming slang before the 1800s. Not a single example appears in the first edition of Captain Grose’s Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue (from 1785). Dating early slang is tricky, especially if it’s a secret language, but if rhyming slang had been around then, it would be among Grose’s 4,000 colloquialisms and vulgarisms.

The earliest reference to it occurs in John Camden Hotten’s 1859 slang dictionary. Hotten suggests this kind of slang “was introduced about twelve or fifteen years ago”.

People assume it began life within criminal language, and certainly this was where it was first discovered. But most likely it was the lexical invention of Cockney and Irish navvies (labourers in civil engineering projects). It later made its way into the “flash language” of the Victorian underworld.

These beginnings explain the presence of rhyming slang in early Australian English. The first recorded example (1844) is Jimmy Grant or jimmygrant for “immigrant”. Whoever he was, Jimmy Grant went on to inspire the Pom/Pommy, short for pomegranate (Pommy Grant, also “immigrant”). The Australian National Dictionary has a lovely account of the word play around the jimmies and the pommies.

Other early examples date from the late 1800s (like rubbity dub “pub”), although most of today’s survivors are from the 1900s, including favourites like dead horse (“sauce”) and she’s apples.

“Australian” rhyming slang in the USA

Our seppo chinas (“mates” from “china plates”) haven’t taken up rhyming slang as much as we Aussies. In the US, rhyming slang has largely stayed in the criminal underworld – it’s been popular among prisoners and white supremacists.

But it may surprise you to learn that rhyming slang in the US underworld was called “Australian slang”. This may be linked to the arrival of Australian criminals, the Sydney Ducks, on the US goldfields in the mid-19th century. The Ducks later did a Harold Holt (“bolt”) and left the US — they also may have left a word or two, and the label “Australian slang”.

Regardless, the Australian-ness of US rhyming slang is certainly in doubt. When a US expert on slang and argots, David W. Maurer, sent a list of 352 rhyming slang terms to Sidney Baker, the latter found fewer than 3% of these terms were Australian — just like many of our so-called Americanisms aren’t in fact American English.

Jimmy, Herby and Oscar: the grocer’s cart (“heart”) of Aussie rhyming slang

Rhyming slang is still much loved if the amount of talk is anything to go by.

As part of a wider project on Aussie slang, we examined articles from The Australian and The Age from 1996-2020 and found that, respectively, 7.32% and 10.70% of references to “slang” were to “rhyming slang”. We can compare this to combined references to “Australian slang” or “Aussie slang”, which clocked in at 7.01% and 9.05%.

But what is it about the old Jack Lang – this Aussie rhyming slang?

We reckon rhyming slang hits that sweet spot of secret, taboo and irreverent humour. For instance, every good Aussie knows that a seppo is full of shit (Yank->septic tank->septic->seppo) – but a seppo doesn’t necessarily.

However, whether it’s Jimmy Dancer (“cancer”), Herby de Groote (“root”) or Oscar Ache (“cash”), rhyming slang also gives us a way to discuss things that make us squeamish – like disease, sex and money.

Is the rhyming Jack Lang in for some froth and bubble?

Barry Crocker might be getting his Reg Grundies in a knot over the ad, but if our recent survey is an indicator, rhyming slang is in for some froth and bubble (“trouble”).

We surveyed more than 2,300 Australians on their use of Australian words. Most rhyming slang examples came from participants who were 60 or older.

What’s happening? It’s hard to know for sure, but slangs are like this – they don’t age well. We can’t expect those billy lids (“kids”) to love the same words as us.

In fact, billy’s a great example of this process – it might be giving way to a new slang homonym billy, referring to a “bong” (likely a play on billabong). (For those not in the know, a billy is a special kind of cherry ripe “pipe”.)

And, in closing, it is worth noting our survey shows another glimmer of hope for rhyming slang. One grandmother in the survey said:

“I taught Reg Grundies to my granddaughter. She thinks it’s funny. She is 7.”

Sidney Baker long ago pointed out that Australian rhyming slang’s popularity comes and goes in waves of vogue. Perhaps there’s a new generation of rhyming slang users on the horizon. And right now, we’re pinning our hope on the under-10 set.

Howard Manns receives funding from the ARC Special Research Initiative SR200200350 Metaphors and Identities in the Australian Vernacular.

Kate Burridge receives funding from the ARC Special Research Initiative SR200200350 Metaphors and Identities in the Australian Vernacular.

– ref. Is Australian rhyming slang in a bit of froth and bubble? Let’s take a Captain Cook (spoiler: the billy lids may hold the key) – https://theconversation.com/is-australian-rhyming-slang-in-a-bit-of-froth-and-bubble-lets-take-a-captain-cook-spoiler-the-billy-lids-may-hold-the-key-186731

Ambulance ramping is a signal the health system is floundering. Solutions need to extend beyond EDs

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Shannon, Senior Lecturer in Paramedicine, Registered Paramedic, Monash University

Health-care systems across Australia are buckling in the wake of COVID waves and the flu season. Pictures of ambulances piling up outside hospitals have become commonplace in the media. Known as “ramping”, it’s the canary in the coalmine of a health system.

As a major symptom of a health system under stress, state governments across Australia are investing unprecedented amounts into ambulance services, emergency departments (EDs) and hospitals. South Australia has committed to an increased recruitment of 350 new paramedics. Likewise, New South Wales has committed to 1,850 extra paramedics.

Victoria, meanwhile, has committed an additional A$162 million for system-wide solutions to counter paramedic wait times, on top of the A$12 billion already committed to the wider health system. This could begin to alleviate the system pressures that lead to ambulance ramping.

But what happens when the paramedics return yet again to ED with another patient? Will they simply end up ramped again?

We also need to consider better care in the community – and paramedics could play a role in this too.

Smoother transfers and discharges

The Victorian government initiative is based on a similar model used in Leeds, in the United Kingdom, which has resulted in decreased ramping times. The Leeds model has seen only 4.9% of paramedic attendances to ED having ramping delays over 30 minutes, compared to the UK average of 21%.

The model focuses on transferring the patient from the paramedic to the ED staff, discharging patients from hospital and coordinating the patient’s care in the community.

The aim is to improve patient flow in and out of the hospital. For patients requiring a hospital bed, they are admitted. For those not requiring admission, they are discharged home in a timely manner. Discharge coordinators will assist this process, coordinating the care patients need after an ED or hospital stay out in the community and in their homes.

The discharge process is complex. Often a well-done discharge is the difference between a patient returning to the community healthily versus a re-presentation to the hospital due to actual or perceived worsening of their condition.

However, patients often feel rushed when discharged from hospital and ill prepared to return home. Staff feel pressure to get patients discharged and out of beds to allow the next patient in.

The adoption of the Leeds model in Victoria aims to increase the flow in and out of the hospital. While this will get patients off ambulance stretchers, it may further exacerbate the feelings of being rushed.

Person lays in hospital bed — A good discharge reduces the likelihood of a patient returning to hospital.
Shutterstock

Discharge and transitional care services, which aim to guide patients from their time in hospital to living back at home, tend to be disconnected and misunderstood by the wider health service. We must overcome these disconnections if the proposed model is going to have success.

Otherwise, new initiatives may decrease ramping at the ED, but this may come at a cost to the most vulnerable of patients in our community, if they feel they’re discharged too soon, are unable to cope and end up going back to hospital.

Paramedics can provide care in the community, too

Poor access to primary care services, such as being able to see a GP and a lack of community services, are problems across the globe. This has led to the use of paramedics in non-traditional roles in the UK, Canada, the United States, Finland and Ireland. Here, paramedics are used in emergency departments, in primary care practice and in outreach community services. Paramedics working in these non-traditional roles are collectively known as community paramedics.

In Australia, paramedics are university educated and professionally registered, which maintains a high workforce standard. Paramedics can work independently within the community and are well situated to supplement or complement community services and primary care. Yet 80% of paramedics in Australia work solely in ambulance services.

State governments should consider new models of care, such as the introduction of community paramedics to support primary care services and other sectors across the health care system.

With further training, paramedics in Australia could be used beyond ambulance services. This could include working alongside other health professionals in emergency departments, supporting GPs and in hospital discharge teams. With a surplus of paramedic students graduating, there is a ready-made workforce ready to assist the wider health care system.

Community paramedicine programs overseas have resulted in improved patient health outcomes and quality of life, and have been found to be economically beneficial.

A Canadian report found community paramedics saved the health-care system $29 million by keeping the 2,300 patients involved in the study healthy and avoiding hospital. Most importantly, patients had positive experiences of having their care delivered in their home.

However, not all patients wish to have their care delivered in their home or community. One report found 2.2% of patients refused to be treated by community paramedics.

Investment solely in the acute sector of our health system fails to recognise the inter-connectedness of all parts of the system. We must also invest in community services and primary care. Without system-wide investment, our health services will continue to fail.

Brendan Shannon received funding from the Pre-hospital Emergency Care Council to provide evidence to support the introduction of Community Paramedicine across Ireland.

Kelly-Ann Bowles received funding from the Pre-hospital Emergency Care Council to provide evidence to support the introduction of Community Paramedicine across Ireland.

– ref. Ambulance ramping is a signal the health system is floundering. Solutions need to extend beyond EDs – https://theconversation.com/ambulance-ramping-is-a-signal-the-health-system-is-floundering-solutions-need-to-extend-beyond-eds-187270

Labor won’t overhaul environment laws until next year. Here are 5 easy wins it could aim for now

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Watson, Professor, The University of Queensland

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek this week acknowledged the grave state of Australia’s environment and pledged new laws to go before parliament next year.

But talk is cheap. The long-delayed State of the Environment report was not a surprise. Experts have sounded the alarm for years about the worsening plight of species and ecosystems. Labor had nine years in opposition to prepare policies. Where is the immediate action?

The new government has a tough job ahead. It took office as Australia faces overlapping and worsening environmental crises, due to more than two centuries of damage to the atmosphere, oceans, rivers and lands. And it must reverse nine years of Coalition neglect on environment policy.

The previous government sat on the State of the Environment report for months, squandering precious time. So while Labor works on its longer-term environmental reforms, here are five easy ways it can get started now.

farmland NSW — Giving farmers incentives to plant more trees offers quick wins.
Shutterstock

1. Restore degraded farmland with native vegetation

More than half of Australia’s farmland is now considered degraded. Degraded land reduces the farm’s productivity and can cause significant soil erosion and aridity. The fix? Bringing back native plants tackles all these issues, as well as making farms more resilient to damage from insects and fires and less likely to damage the water table.

Restoring native vegetation doesn’t mean turning farms into forests. Strategic planting along fence lines, waterways, dams and around intact shade trees can often be enough to bring back wildlife.

Native plants boost biodiversity. More than 70% of our endangered species need targeted restoration to recover populations decimated through land clearing. Ecosystem restoration will also significantly boost natural carbon storage.

The easy win for the government? Offer tax incentives to plant diverse native trees. We already have ways to measure the carbon and biodiversity benefits of such restoration efforts, like those used by Queensland’s land restoration fund. Rewarding landholders for good land stewardship is an easy win.

2. Coordinate how we manage vegetation across all lands

The greatest threat to Australia’s biodiversity is native vegetation clearing. Our greatest carbon source, other than direct fossil fuel emissions and selling coal and gas, comes from land clearing. Australia is a global deforestation hotspot, with destruction and degradation rates hundreds of times greater than conservation rates.

Even habitat crucial to the long-term survival of threatened species doesn’t escape the bulldozers. An area the size of Tasmania of critical habitat has been cleared since legislation designed to stop this was introduced in 2000.

In short, these laws aren’t working. That was the conclusion of former consumer watchdog chief Graeme Samuel, who reviewed the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act for the previous government.

The easy fix? Act on the most important recommendation put forward by Samuel and bring in a national Environment Protection Authority now – ahead of the full-scale legislative revamp Plibersek is promising for next year. This would give teeth to the laws as they stand.

3. Phase out logging of native forests

Logging our few remaining native forests is a bad idea. It destroys threatened species habitat, making these species more endangered. It worsens fire risk, endangering people’s lives. It threatens our water supplies. Native logging also accelerates climate change because old-growth intact forests store much more carbon than pine plantations.

Logging native forests no longer makes economic sense, given the enormous losses being run up by state forestry enterprises. There’s enough timber in plantations to provide the resources Australia needs.

The easy win? Phase out logging. Work with industry and set a clear time frame to exit native forest logging through revised and accelerated Regional Forest Agreements.

logging victoria — There are now enough plantations to end native logging operations like this in Victoria’s Wombat State Forest.
Shutterstock

4. Properly fund our protected areas

Australia’s protected areas listed in the National Reserve System are vital to our efforts to stop extinctions and biodiversity loss. Up to half of all of our endangered species live in protected areas like national parks and other reserves.

A well-managed national system of protected areas brings major climate benefits, due to the large land area under conservation management and avoiding losses that would otherwise occur through degradation and land clearing.

Australia now has 81 Indigenous Protected Areas, which play a crucial role in our national reserve system. These matter greatly, given their proven benefits to biodiversity, conservation and cultural connection to Country.

Unfortunately, our national reserves have been critically underfunded for many years. The rot started under the previous Labor government and continued through the Coalition’s nine years. Most protected areas now do not get enough funding to undertake any meaningful conservation.

The easy win? Fund our national reserve system better. These areas should be Australia’s jewels in the crown. But neglect has seen many reserves become hugely degraded. We cannot let cattle keep degrading endangered channel-country habitats of Diamintina National Park or let wild pigs keep trashing the lowland rainforests of Kutini-Payamu National Park.

5. Urgently boost threatened species recovery efforts

Australia’s threatened species crisis is getting worse. More and more species are going from to threatened to critically endangered to extinct in the wild. Previous government efforts have simply not been enough.

At present, less than 40% of our 1,700-plus threatened species has a recovery plan of any sort. Only 100 of these species get specific attention through the latest national threatened species strategy. Essentially, we’ve been picking a few winners to try to save from extinction. It’s not good enough for the rest.

The easy win? Launch an emergency national response to fight species extinction. Use the knowledge and expertise we have developed through efforts like the Threatened Species Hub to map out where and how to recover these species in the most cost-effective way.

The environment can do with some quick wins

Of course, these wins are not the entire solution. What they offer is a fresh start to turn around years of neglect and start taking the environment as seriously as it needs to be.

To tackle our looming biodiversity and climate crises properly will take sustained effort. As these crises emerge from modelled futures into our lived reality, our leaders must – at long last – heed the dire warnings from scientists and economists.

James Watson has received funding from the Australian Research Council and National Environmental Science Program. He serves on scientific committees for Bush Heritage Australia, SUBAK Australia, BirdLife Australia and has a long-term scientific relationship with the Wildlife Conservation Society. He serves on the Queensland Government’s Land Restoration Fund’s Investment Panel.

– ref. Labor won’t overhaul environment laws until next year. Here are 5 easy wins it could aim for now – https://theconversation.com/labor-wont-overhaul-environment-laws-until-next-year-here-are-5-easy-wins-it-could-aim-for-now-184565

Curious kids: why don’t whales have teeth like we do?

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

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

Why don’t whales have teeth like we do? asked by Henry, 6 years old.

Great question, Henry. Your teeth are an important part of your body. They help you chew your food so you can eat and grow strong. But if you ever thought about inviting a whale for dinner, think again!

It’s true, some whales are toothless – but not all of them. Did you know the world’s biggest animal, the blue whale, doesn’t have any teeth at all? Whales with no teeth are called baleen whales. Along with blue whales, these also include humpback whales, right whales and more.

Some other types of whales do have teeth. These include sperm whales, beluga whales, and narwhals (which are like chunky unicorns of the sea).

Beluga whales are a type of whale with teeth.
Shutterstock

So why don’t baleen whales have teeth?

It’s all based on their diet and how they capture their food. Unlike you and me, whales don’t eat veggies, which need lots of chewing. Their diet is mainly made up of small fish, prawn-like creatures called krill, and tiny creatures called plankton.

Krill from Antarctic waters. These are small, around 1-6 centimetres long.
Vanessa Pirotta

Krill are only a few centimetres in size, and can be found in large swarms in the ocean. A blue whale can eat up to 6,000 kilograms, or a bus-load, of krill a day.

Luckily, most baleen whales have very wide mouths – as wide as a car. The best way to eat these tiny animals all at once is to scoop them up in one giant mouthful. Yum!

Baleen whales open their mouths really wide and expand their throats, which have grooves all the way down to their stomachs.

This lets the whale make their mouth super big, like an expanding slinky, and scoop up lots of krill and seawater at the same time. In fact, some whale mouths are so big an elephant could fit inside!

Humpback whale throat grooves (pleats) from a whale in Antarctica. These expand during feeding, capturing both food and water. Photo: Dr Vanessa Pirotta.

But what happens to all that water?

Baleen whales all have long strands hanging from the top of their mouth – imagine lots of straw broom bristles. These strands are made of the same material as your nails and hair, called keratin.

The whale uses these bristles to trap the krill in their mouths, and push sea water out. This is like a sieve separating spaghetti from pasta water.

Here you can see the strands (called ‘baleen’) hanging off the whale’s mouth to filter its food.
Shutterstock

Some whales, like the humpback whale, are clever hunters, and may blow bubbles from their nose to
create nets around their food.

These bubbles pack fish into one area, letting the whale scoop them all up in one mouthful.

Can you see a circle of bubbles around these whales? These are ‘bubble nets’, and they trap whale food into a small area so whales can scoop them up all at once.
Shutterstock

So, what would happen if a baleen whale came to dinner?

Well, first of all, the whale wouldn’t fit in the kitchen, so dinner would have to be outside.

Mum or dad would need lots of krill and fish. Forget about knives, forks or any table manners, tonight you’ll be eating with your mouth only.

But here’s the crazy part. Once dinner is served, your whale friend would open its mouth and expand its throat. This would be so wide, it would probably cover the entire kitchen table, including you and your family.

Talk about a very impolite, smelly and blubbery dinner guest!

Watch a blue whale lunge towards krill and scoop them into its giant mouth.

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

– ref. Curious kids: why don’t whales have teeth like we do? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-dont-whales-have-teeth-like-we-do-186727

Growing numbers of unqualified teachers are being sent into classrooms – this is not the way to ‘fix’ the teacher shortage

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chad Morrison, Academic Director of Professional Experience, Murdoch University

Every few days there is another report about the teacher shortage across Australia. Last week, we learned one of Melbourne’s biggest schools is considering a return to home learning to cope with staff shortages.

But as we look at the causes and possible solutions, something we are not talking about is the risks around rushing student teachers into classrooms before they are fully trained and ready.

We are academics with a focus on teacher education and leaders of the Network of Academic Directors of Professional Experience. We are alarmed about the growing trend of sending unqualified teachers into classrooms.

Student teachers are teaching

Our colleagues around Australia are regularly telling us about their students being recruited into paid teaching roles with special permissions to teach. This can be as early as their first, second or third year of study.

In New South Wales, university staff tell us between 20% and 30% of their final year (fourth-year) students are employed in teaching roles. Prior to the pandemic, this only occurred in exceptional circumstances.

In Victoria, as of July, the Victorian Institute of Teaching (the teaching regulator) has approved 782 “permission-to-teach” applications for final-year education students. This is a category specifically established at the beginning of 2022 to help support schools with COVID-related workforce shortages.

In Queensland, we are seeing students teaching in classrooms before they have graduated in the hundreds, rather than handfuls. Industry partners are telling us they predict more than 600 “permissions to teach” for student teachers in Queensland in 2022. This is up from 320 in the state in 2021.

Children listening to a teacher in a classroom. — All states and territories have schemes that can allow student teachers into classrooms.
Dan Peled/AAP

Mixing work and study

All states and territories have schemes to allow student teachers into the classroom in a paid (non-studying) role. For example, in Tasmania, when a suitable registered teacher cannot be found, a school can apply to employ a student under a “limited authority to teach”. In the Northern Territory, a similar process allows schools to recruit people to teach in hard-to-fill or specialised teaching roles.

Western Australia has also opened up opportunities for final year students to work part-time in public high schools (with mentoring) and to register in the casual teacher pool.

The state also has uses an existing fast-track to put students into the classroom as paid teachers. The Teach for Australia program employs “associates” in a school after six-weeks of intensive training. From this point on, associates balance study in a master of teaching program with employment as a teacher, with support from mentor teachers and Teach for Australia.

WA currently has 175 full-time equivalent staff in public schools, who may be Teach for Australia associates, or working towards a teaching qualification. This is up from 112 in 2020. Taking into account casual and part-time workers, the actual number of students teaching in the system is likely to be higher.

A risky fix

Putting student teachers in the classroom to help deal with the teacher shortage seems logical. But it is a quick and risky fix.

Arguably, education students are already less prepared for the classroom than their pre-pandemic peers. Around the world, student teachers have experienced disrupted study because of the pandemic with shortened, simulated and irregular practical placements.

This is on top of interruptions to their regular coursework, thanks to disruption the pandemic has caused within and beyond their studies.

Additionally, student teachers are entering a stressed and depleted workforce.
COVID has added to teachers’ already demanding workloads, made them sick (and therefore absent at times) and seen some reach the end of their tether and leave.

When more experienced staff are stretched, under-prepared teachers cannot be well-supported by those around them.

While all this is happening, it is becoming harder for student teachers to get supervised practical experience as part of their teacher training – there are less teachers to supervise them.

These factors mean student teachers are less prepared than in previous years and are entering workplaces that are demanding more of them.

Graduates will burn out

From an administrative perspective, this situation is placing a huge strain on teacher registration bodies around Australia, who are not structured to assess and process masses of “special authority” applications.

We are alarmed about the potential fallout here. Under-prepared and fast-tracked teachers cannot be well-supported. Nor can they be expected to perform as highly effective graduate teachers when they are drawing on disrupted university preparation and limited placements.

Young woman speaking. — Students are taking on teaching roles in schools that will not be able to adquately support them.
www.shutterstock.com

This leaves them vulnerable to burnout and leaving the profession prematurely.

Importantly, these factors are also likely to exacerbate the impact of COVID on children’s learning and development.

The increased needs of many children and young people have increased the complex demands of teaching them. The training of future teachers needs to prepare them for the new realities and requirements of teaching.

This will not improve ‘quality’

The current approach contradicts the federal government’s talk about improving teacher “quality” and we fear universities will be blamed for the outcomes of putting under-prepared graduates into schools.

We need to put our focus back on preparing high-quality teaching graduates – even if this takes more time and resources to get them into the classroom.

Alongside other strategies and responses, employers need to prioritise placements for student teachers. This will allow them to progress through to career entry under conducive conditions. Good preparation is essential for teacher effectiveness and retention.

What we are doing at the moment is equivalent to giving student teachers an umbrella to go out into a raging thunder storm. This is not sensible, justifiable or sustainable.

This approach also has the potential to worsen teacher shortages in the coming years and risks seeing teacher attrition levels like we have never seen before.

Chad Morrison is part of the Network of Academic Directors of Professional Experience, which is part of The Australian Council of Deans of Education. The Council aims to ensure Australia produces teacher graduates of the “highest quality”.

Brendan Bentley is part of the Network of Academic Directors of Professional Experience.

Jennifer Clifton is part of the Network of Academic Directors of Professional Experience.

Susan Ledger is part of the Network of Academic Directors of Professional Experience.

– ref. Growing numbers of unqualified teachers are being sent into classrooms – this is not the way to ‘fix’ the teacher shortage – https://theconversation.com/growing-numbers-of-unqualified-teachers-are-being-sent-into-classrooms-this-is-not-the-way-to-fix-the-teacher-shortage-186379

Siege warfare, polygamy and sacrilege: meet history’s most outrageous king, Demetrius the Besieger

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charlotte Dunn, Lecturer in Classics, University of Tasmania

A fresco in Pompeii possibly depicting Demetrius I 50–40 BC. Wikimedia Commons

Alexander the Great was a successful conqueror, but a poor planner. He died without an acceptable heir to inherit the empire, just a soon-to-be-born baby son, and a half-brother not quite up to the task.

And as Game of Thrones fans will know, such circumstances can lead to quite the power struggle, with poisoning plots, dramatic marriages, incest and a whole lot of fighting. We find all this and more in the Hellenistic Age, which is what we call the time period 323 BCE-33 BCE, starting with Alexander’s death and ending with Cleopatra’s famous snake bite.

These circumstances began the career of Demetrius the Besieger, one of the more outrageous rulers of the time. Like many others who fought for a piece of Alexander the Great’s empire, Demetrius was never supposed to be king. But he and his father Antigonus the One-Eyed didn’t let a lack of royal blood get in the way of ambition. The two of them spent many years fighting, stealing territory, and eliminating rivals.

In 306 BCE, they both claimed the title King. They were trendsetters in this area, and soon self-made kings popped up all over the place, dividing Alexander’s empire into smaller kingdoms of their own. But even during this time of royally bad behaviour and a multitude of rival kings, Demetrius still managed to gain a standout reputation.

The Siege of Rhodes (305-304 BC), led by Demetrius. Painting by Edmund Ollier.
Wikimedia Commons

Work hard, play harder

Demetrius’ biographer, the ancient author Plutarch, tells us Demetrius had a policy akin to work hard and play harder. He was famous for his ingenuity and extravagance when it came to siege equipment and his skill in this type of warfare earned him the name Besieger.

His repertoire included the use of a monstrosity called the Helepolis (city-taker), a type of mobile tower block estimated to be between 30-40 metres tall, with a base of 21 metres.

Model of a Helepolis siege tower, at the Thessaloniki Science Center and Technology Museum.
Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

This terrifying creation was filled with soldiers, and would screech as it moved slowly towards its target city. This was such an amazing sight that, according to Plutarch, even those under siege had to admit they were impressed.

Coins and calendars

It can be difficult to tell fact from fiction in history, and the ancient writers certainly tell us some strange stories about Demetrius.

He is said to have manipulated time by changing around the calendar months, all so that he could complete his initiation into the Mysteries (a religious cult) faster than was legal.

He put his own portrait on his coins, and was probably the first living person to do so in the western world. Before this audacious move, the heads side of the coin had normally been reserved for images of gods or honouring important (deceased) individuals.

The Athenians even ended up addressing Demetrius as a living god in a special hymn, calling him the son of Poseidon and Aphrodite.

Parties and polygamy

Demetrius’ partying earned him an even more notorious reputation.

He had a handful of wives (Demetrius was a polygamous king, and ended up marrying at least five women), but his favourite companion was the courtesan Lamia, whose name refers to a flesh devouring monster.

There are plenty of tales of the two of them cavorting together, sometimes rather sacrilegiously. For example, the Athenians tried to honour Demetrius by allowing him a symbolic marriage to their patron goddess Athena – but the Besieger didn’t think too much of marrying a statue. Instead, he and Lamia went into the temple and committed various acts said to be rather shocking to the virgin goddess.

Demetrius is even accused of taxing the city 250 talents (about 6,000 kilos of silver or gold), only to turn it over to Lamia and his other mistresses so they could buy beauty products.

A Silver Coin (Tetradrachm) of Demetrius the Besieger.

Popularity and public relations

All this irreverent behaviour can only take you so far. Kingship, like many careers, requires a certain amount of admin work. Demetrius’ Macedonian subjects were dismayed by the disinterest of their king, but on one occasion they gained a little hope.

Demetrius actually took their petitions as though he intended to read them. They followed the king along on his walk in great excitement, only to watch in horror as Demetrius then dumped all of the petitions over a bridge, into the river below.

He was run out of Macedonia a little while later, ancient evidence of the importance of public relations. This sort of reversal of fortune was something Demetrius was well-versed in, having won and lost many times over throughout his career. So he simply went on with campaigning until he was deserted, broke, and fell into the hands of one of his enemies.

It was a sorry end for such a colourful character, but during his captivity Demetrius applied himself as vigorously to leisure and drinking as he once had to besieging and love affairs. He might not have kept his throne, but he certainly earned his place in history, an outrageous and fascinating individual, and truly a king.

Dr Charlotte Dunn is co-author (alongside Associate Professor Pat Wheatley, of the University of Otago, Dunedin, NZ) of ‘Demetrius the Besieger’, a historical biography published in 2020 by Oxford University Press.

– ref. Siege warfare, polygamy and sacrilege: meet history’s most outrageous king, Demetrius the Besieger – https://theconversation.com/siege-warfare-polygamy-and-sacrilege-meet-historys-most-outrageous-king-demetrius-the-besieger-185866

Grattan on Friday: Climate bill front and centre when parliament starts but it’s the least of Albanese’s problems

By The Conversation -

July 22, 2022

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

If you’re outside staring in, you’d probably say the Albanese government is looking good. If you’re inside gazing out, you’d likely think its challenges appear little short of dire.

Next week the new parliament will commence with a fortnight’s sitting. There’ll be focus on the government-Green negotiations on the legislation for Labor’s 43% climate target. But it’s the economy and COVID that will actually be the more immediately worrying issues.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers, perhaps with an eye to the politics, has been using a megaphone to say he’ll have bad news when he gives a state-of-the-economy address to the House of Representatives on Thursday – a day after the release of the latest inflation figure, expected to be a shocker.

The revised economic projections will be affected by a range of factors, including to an extent the current, still-worsening, COVID wave, which governments are trying to manage without the imposition of restrictions people would no longer accept.

As we confront this wave, it would be desirable for the new parliament to have a repeat of the COVID Senate committee that did good work in the last term in questioning officials and extracting information.

Determined to show it is serious about its promises, the government released on Wednesday a list of the first pieces of legislation it will introduce.

These are bills for aged care reform, a new jobs and skills statutory body, domestic violence leave, and the climate change target. The integrity commission legislation will wait for the September sitting.

Bringing in the bills is the easy bit. Take aged care. The government says its legislation “will put nurses back into nursing homes, it will put a stop to high administration and management fees for home care [ .. ] and it will improve integrity and accountability for residential aged care homes”.

But finding all the needed nurses – to say nothing of the increased number of other staff vital for effective reform – will be enormously difficult.

Those who might have seen Labor’s win as an end to our national climate wars were prematurely optimistic. Ironically, the early days of the new parliament will see another stage in this battle.

Labor doesn’t need to legislate its new target, but wants to do so to underline its intentions and send strong signals to investors and the world in general. To get the legislation through will require the support in the Senate of the Greens and one more senator.

The Greens party room on Wednesday reiterated its view that Labor’s policy is not ambitious enough, but gave leader Adam Bandt authority to negotiate.

After the meeting the Greens said: “Areas of concern remain the adequacy of the target, the need for targets to be ratcheted up and for the bill to operate as a floor not a ceiling, the lack of enforcement mechanisms, and new coal and gas projects that would lift pollution.”

One Greens source says “we’re at the diplomacy table, not in the trenches”.

Labor has indicated it is open to tinkering with detail but won’t budge on core substance. There will be no change in the target, no ban on new mines.

The government can’t afford to make sizeable concessions to the Greens, not least because that would cast doubt on the reliability of its word. It is also anxious to signal it is not hostage to the Greens, despite its dependence on them in the upper house when legislation is contested.

Can the Greens afford to give in to the government and not oppose the bill? They would disappoint their hard-line supporters. They too, in political terms, need differentiation. But if they were to sink the legislation, they’d be accused of putting purist ideology ahead of supporting progressive policy. The Greens have quite a lot on the line in their decision.

All this will take some time to play out. The legislation could go to a Senate committee. The final vote could be a way off.

The Coalition’s “internals” on the climate legislation will be interesting. Peter Dutton has flagged his opposition. “I’m making it very clear to the Labor Party now that we aren’t supporting the legislation,” he told the ABC in June. The much-reduced Liberal moderates are not happy with that “captain’s call” ahead of the party-room discussion. There is speculation one or two might cross the floor.

And what about the teals? Their votes are irrelevant in the lower house, but crossbencher David Pocock’s vote might be needed in the Senate. The government will want to be polite to the teals, but in the end it’s the numbers that count.

The parliamentary fortnight will be closely observed for its tone, its “vibe”, as well as its substance.

While the teals and other crossbenchers won’t be determining outcomes in the House of Representatives, the crossbench there, now numbering 16, will have a significant presence, including a reasonable opportunity to quiz and critique ministers.

When parliament is sitting an opposition has a platform, but the Coalition will be struggling to make the most of it, at least in the foreseeable future.

Dutton has a ragtag bunch to manage, with senior people having trouble finding their feet in their straitened political circumstances. There are still major arguments to be had about how the opposition positions itself.

This is not uncharted ground. Labor faced the same situation after its 2019 defeat when it was even more shattered, because the loss was unexpected. The lesson for Dutton (though it would go against the grain) should be to stay low-key for a while until he’s listened and thought things through. It’s a long road to the next election.

Presently the opposition is speaking with conflicting voices on current issues – for example, it has been divided over whether the border to Bali should be closed to keep out foot and mouth disease.

The government will spruik its own plans in parliament but it will also keep reminding the public of criticisms of the Morrison government. This will complicate the opposition’s attempts to pursue ministers. For instance, it would be logical for the opposition to home in on Minister for Aged Care Anika Wells, given the COVID crisis in residential facilities. But Labor would quickly hark back to the record of former minister Richard Colbeck.

In various areas, the government will be arguing “we can’t turn around a decade of neglect immediately”. That’s true enough although this crutch will reach its use-by date with many voters fairly soon. And it’s not just neglect the Albanese government is grappling with – fresh problems are emerging all the time.

Once Albanese sits in the PM’s chair at the parliamentary dispatch box, the reality of “accepting responsibility” will take on a new intensity.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Climate bill front and centre when parliament starts but it’s the least of Albanese’s problems – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-climate-bill-front-and-centre-when-parliament-starts-but-its-the-least-of-albaneses-problems-187439

18 people hacked to death in Porgera in under an hour amid PNG elections

By Asia Pacific Report -

July 21, 2022

By Miriam Zarriga of the PNG Post-Courier

A brutal massacre in Porgera town yesterday afternoon in which 18 innocent people were killed has rocked Enga province and shocked Papua New Guinea.

Local police chief acting Superintendent George Kakas was shocked by the act of violence in the wake of the country’s national elections — he was left speechless when told by field officers about the killings.

Last night, caretaker Prime Minister James Marape said Porgera was now in a state of emergency.

“We have called out additional manpower from both the military and police, not just for Porgera but for other areas that need special assistance as well,” he said.

“We will beef up security as election requirements have diluted normal police work and the present killing is related to an ongoing tribal fight.”

In his policing career, Kakas has seen worse but yesterday’s act was one he thought was the work of a deranged mob who had no respect for the sanctity of life.

Of the 18 dead, 13 were men and 5 were women. They were going about their normal lives when men armed with machetes and axes hacked them to death.

Hour of wanton destruction
It was an hour of wanton destruction in which no one in the path of the rampaging tribesmen was spared, Kakas said.

Pictures of the dead posted online showed a trail of destruction with murderous intent. It seemed none of the dead had any chance of escaping.

PNG police Superintendent George Kakas — Local acting police commander Superintendent George Kakas … “We will beef up security as election requirements have diluted normal police work and the present killing is related to an ongoing tribal fight.” Image: RNZ

In one picture, a woman clad in a PNG meri blouse lay next to a young girl, probably her daughter.

In another, a man and a woman lie side by side, having fallen where they were attacked.

The woman is on her knees, cowering in a foetal position, probably having begged for mercy — a futile attempt to evade the inevitable.

Men examining the scene looking for relatives were shown carrying bush knives and axes.

In turbulent Enga these are normal weapons.

Disputed gold mine
Porgera is the site of the disputed giant gold mine which has been closed for almost two years.

A violent tribal fight between the Aiyala and Nomali tribes has been raging, which has severely affected the elections in that part of the region.

The 18 deaths brings to 70 the number of people killed in Porgera in the past four months.

Although an emergency was declared in Porgera, the fighting between Aiyala and Nomali has continued, Superintendent Kakas said.

RNZ Pacific's report today of the Porgera killings — RNZ Pacific’s report today of the Porgera killings. Image: RNZ

Security forces are present in Porgera Town. Together with local police, there are about 150 police and army personnel, however they are outnumbered by the tribal warriors, who are heavily armed.

“The 13 men and 5 women were killed in Paiam and Upper Porgera on Wednesday afternoon,” Kakas said.

Of the 18, five people were killed in Upper Porgera Station and 13 people killed at Paiam.

“Out of the 18 deaths, 3 men from Porgera town area were killed by Kandeps. This killing related to the ongoing tribal fight at Paiam has now escalated to Pogera Town.”

Troops moving in
“Police Commissioner David Manning said last night the PNG Defence Force (PNGDF) contribution troops for the task force were in the process of moving into Enga.

“There is no SOE declared, 120 soldiers from the 2nd PIR Bravo Company were sent in yesterday afternoon. They are based in Wabag and once all logistics are in place, they will further deploy to the electorates of Porgera, Laiagam, and Kompiam and join their RPNGC MS counterparts who are currently on the ground.”

Manning said the task force had 60 days to restore the rule of law in the electorates, secure the mine and provide protection for repairs to be done on damaged bridges –– especially on the Wabag-Kompiam road.

“We received reports of continuous killings in Porgera that began over the weekend. Priority deployment is to the Porgera valley, to quell the fighting between the local Porgereans and settlers from other parts of Enga Province,” he said.

“We have received urgent pleas to also evacuate non-Engans who currently work up there — for them to be escorted to safety.

“The 3 meter wide, 4-5 meter deep trench that was dug across the Surinki stretch of Wabag-Porgera road is still undergoing repairs. However, a temporary bypass has been constructed to allow traffic.”

Miriam Zarriga is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Australia and New Zealand’s ‘deafening silence’ on Pacific democracy and human rights

By Asia Pacific Report -

July 21, 2022

ANALYSIS: By Biman Chand Prasad in Suva

The Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting has ended and what is intriguing is the deafening silence on declining standards of democracy, governance, human rights, media freedom and freedom of speech issues, despite the serious and arguably worsening situation in some regional countries.

The emphasis on climate change is necessary and welcome. However, to deal effectively with climate adaptation and build climate-resilient infrastructure, countries have to mobilise large amounts of resources.

Whether these resources are effectively used will depend on standards of governance, transparency and accountability. Without these, efforts to deal with the climate change emergency will be fraught with difficulties and wastage of resources.

In any case, not everything can be reduced to climate change, which too often becomes a convenient way of avoiding other hard issues and diverting attention from domestic issues. And we do have other important pressing issues, such as media rights and freedom of expression, that deserve a hearing at the highest levels of this august body, but these were conveniently swept under the “sensitive topic” carpet, or so it seems.

Human rights — including freedom of speech — underpin all other rights, and it is unfortunate that this Forum failed in its moral obligation to send out a strong message of its commitment to upholding these rights.

Australia and New Zealand are regarded as the doyens of human rights and media freedom in the region, and their leaders’ presence at the Forum presented an opportunity to send a strong signal to member countries about the sanctity of these values — but the moment passed without any statement.

Anthony Albanese and Jacinda Ardern could have taken the initiative and spoken out about these issues of their own accord, but they didn’t, thus giving some credence to voices that claim that when it comes to the Forum, Australia and New Zealand are preoccupied with their own strategic interests first, and the interests of Pacific Island countries second.

Avoiding ‘unpalatable topics’
Towards this end, the two leaders from the Western world seemed at pains to avoid topics deemed unpalatable to their Pacific Island counterparts, seemingly over fears of pushing them further into the arms of China.

This includes an apparent fear of upsetting Fiji, which has had a draconian and punitive Media Act in place since 2010. There are also concerns in Fiji about the independence of important offices, such as the Electoral Commission, which are especially pressing in an election year.

The Fiji government is also denying the rights of thousands of tertiary students to access good quality education by withholding more than FJ$80 million (NZ$50 million) in grants to the University of the South Pacific.

Reportedly, during the meetings last week only the Prime Minister of Samoa, Fiamē Naomi Mata’afa, called on the Fiji government to release the grant.

Australia and New Zealand’s silence has given rise to criticism that they are practising the politics of convenience rather than principle and have lost moral ground in the Pacific region.

Appeasing autocratic leaders in our region as a strategy against China is not only unconscionable, it is also short-sighted and counterproductive.

A restrictive and undemocratic environment, where the media are suppressed and the people are denied a voice, is advantageous for China. It is thus in Australia and New Zealand’s best interests to fight against such trends by being vocal about them, instead of silent.

Appeasement not best strategy
The sooner Australia and New Zealand realise that appeasement is not the best strategy, the better it will be for them and for the region. If we are vuvale (one family) as Australia says, then we should look at our collective interest, rather than individual interests only.

Unfortunately, the Forum Secretariat chose not to invite the parliamentary opposition leaders in Fiji to any of the meeting’s events, even though they represent a sizable proportion of the country’s population.

This was another missed opportunity to get a fuller picture of the situation in Fiji instead of the official version only. It leads to a partial and poor understanding of what is happening, which is hardly the basis for sound decision-making.

As leaders of democracies, Australia and New Zealand need to move away from a self-centred approach, and adopt a more conscientious, long-term outlook in the region.

As it stands, in their preoccupation with and fear of China they seem to be losing sight of the goal. Australia and New Zealand should never compromise on governance and human rights and freedom of speech, the building blocks of democracy in the region.

Dr Biman Prasad is an adjunct professor at James Cook University and Punjabi University, and is currently a Member of Parliament and leader of the National Federation Party in Fiji. He is a former professor of economics and dean of the Faculty of Business and Economics at the University of the South Pacific. This article was first published by DevPolicy Blog and is republished under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Climate bill front and centre when parliament starts but it’s the least of Albanese’s problems